John Kerry's great quotes on the war

Senator Kerry just returned from a fact-finding trip to Iraq ... let's hope that his public statements run along the same lines as the following observations he previously shared with the nation ... the following excerpts are from a speech Kerry gave when his country needed him to tell the truth and show the courage to fight against the insanity ... why am i not confident this is the same John Kerry we'll see this time? i hope i'm wrong ... i really do ...

Time and tide... they either erode or add onto a person. Nelson Mandela got only better as time and tide moved on.

The Kerry I knew in 1972 could pick up a megaphone and make a speech, off the cuff, so full of fire and inspiration, you could never imagine him NOT going on to bigger and better things, and taking this country with him.

Sadly, that is not the Kerry of today. That Kerry was smothered by ambition. I mourn his loss periodically. But, I no longer wait for his return. Time and tide have taken him away forever.

Maybe that's why divine providence or fate or whatever takes the brightest stars from us at an early age. What would JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, Ann Frank or Abraham Lincoln have been like in later life? We are left to wonder, and only be disappointed that they didn't remain here with us longer (instead of disappointed in what they became after the "fire" went out.)

Mandela may be an abberation. Either that, or Kerry is not the bright star he seemed back in the day. I have yet to figure which.

TC

in our lives, how often do we look back and realize we've lost parts of ourselves as we bump along the trail? at times, we are able to reawaken those lost elements ...

the sufis have a saying about making all things new ... i like to believe that those who once were ablaze with passion can be rekindled ...

i see a great power within Kerry ... i watched him in last year's debates and thought he did an excellent job ... he's quick, he can be articulate (at times) and he can make a powerful case for his beliefs ... so i still hold out hope that he will come back to us rekindled as he once was ...

whatever his past, whatever our disappointments, i will welcome all warriors ablaze with a passion for our cause ... no questions asked ...

To me, he is now a lost cause. Too much water over the dam, too much distance between then and now. He's lost me forever. And, it's non-negotiable.

But, he seems to have gotten to you. Maybe someday you can get to ask him your litmus test question about corruption and see how he does.

Your fellow warrior in "the cause",

TC

no, i'm sorry to say that he has not ... and i think it's extremely unlikely that his light will be rekindled ...

and i'm sure he would not tell the truth about WHY our military is in Iraq or anywhere else on this globe ... as i said, i would welcome his comments if he did ...

I love to see you awash in hope. :( (One of us has to be!)

TC

i'm afraid it's more like a damp cloth or a sponge-bath ...

the reality is that ALL will join our cause at some point in the "cycle of decline" ... my endless warnings are issued ad nauseum to "the awakened ones" in the hope of trying to build a more pro-active movement ...

my criticisms of various Democrats is nothing more than my plea to have them join the struggle against "the evil ones" before it is too late to avoid unimagined suffering on a global scale ... i am not "anti" any candidate ... i am "anti" the fact that they refuse to join what i see as "THE" struggle ... many of them are very gifted ... we need their power, their experience and their national voices ... but until they fight for "THE TRUTH", the battles they choose, while critically important, are ultimately distractions ... often i think that very few agree with me here ...

and we are in a period of rapid decline ... it's so much more than bush and the neo-cons ... in some twisted way, bush is so obvious that it may help others awaken to the tragedy that lies before us ... and as things get worse and worse, and they surely will, more will awaken and join us ... pro-active is better but re-active is better than nothing ...

eventually all Americans will be united in a fight for survival ... it's too bad we have to wait for "the desperate times" before we change the path we're on ... so, if I sound dark and pessimistic, perhaps i am ... but i do long for the days where we are all together in struggle fighting for the same goals ... and in that sense, i hold out some hope ...

Would you accept the last 30 years of your favorite leader's life and work be editted out to make a case against him/her?

an opinion about the man. It is MY opinion. At this point, I am asking no one else to join me in it.

I am abstaining from Kerry threads as much as possible, out of respect to Mass and Little Clarkie. I joined this one because my pal, wT2 started it, and for once I felt I had a positive thing to say about the Senator.

Besides, I have bigger fish to fry right now. We all do.

Peace (sincerely),

TC

Feelings based on inaccuracies should be adjusted, or risk being categorized as irrational.

My feelings are mine. And they are based on my experiences. Nothing inaccurate in that.

Maybe you've never had my experiences, and that makes them foreign to you, but not inaccurate.

Peace.

TC

are clearly inaccurate for ANYONE concerned with historic fact.

In fact, you'd be hard pressed to name ONE other lawmaker who has effected this nation more positively with their efforts over the last 35 years than John Kerry has.

Exposing government corruption may seem like nothing to you, but, those of us who concern ourselves with good, honest governance DO take note.

Only with me, it's more like "going Scarface".

"Fuck you you, fucking fuck" and the like.

blm just raised his voice a touch. That ain't shit. She's about as level headed as I've ever seen a Kerry supporter be. Most of the rest of us get all red and blue and such (really kinda patriotic if you think about it.

Cemtral America, and working on Kyoto Protocol, unmasking terror funding, advocating for gays in the military, and crafting the SCHIP bill and the Hate Crimes legislation are all the accomplishments of a failed politician.

I swear some of you sound like you only started getting involved after Bush invaded Iraq.

hi blm ...

do you have any links where i could read more about comments Kerry may have made about things like US imperialism, the overthrowing (or assassination) of leaders of other countries, the corruption of our democracy by the infesting corporatists and the illegal use of the American military to act as nothing more than agents for big oil ...

if you've got history to cite, i'm interested in learning more ... and if it's recent history, since bush took office, so much the better ...

I'm also making dinner. ;)

He was, even then, too moderate for most folks in the movement. That's why they never took to him all that well. He didn't look or talk like them. Perhaps others in the VVAW talked about corporatists and imperialists and other ists, but I don't think John Kerry ever did.

Perhaps he's said things along the same lines and with the same intentions (Benedict Arnold corporations and the like)

But you know more about his various statements, so I shall leave it to you.

it during the campaign.

i'm not at all interested in finding out whether Kerry and I use the same words to describe the evils that we see ... i don't care if he calls those who control our foreign policy "imperialists" or "corporatists" ... those are just words i prefer to use ...

what i'm looking for is an acknowledgement that Kerry believes "special interests" are being catered to at the highest levels of our government ... what i'm looking for is a recognition that we have assassinated heads of state and their subordinates to enrich powerful, multi-national oil companies ...

the jargon is of no consequence ... the willingness to fight against this corruption is more than everything ...

and one last comment on Kerry's line about "Benedict Arnold" corporations ... if my recollection is correct, this would NOT be indicative of the kinds of corruption i'm referring to ... i recall Kerry using that phrase in reference to companies that establish their headquarters offshore to evade paying taxes in the US ... while i agree with Kerry on the issue, that is NOT at all the hideous conduct and sabotage of our democracy, and other democracies, that i'm referring to ...

From the moment I take office, I will stand up to the special interests and stand with hardworking families so that we can give America back its future and its ideals.
John F. Kerry

This is from the BCCI Report. (Well, Kerry's name is on it. He investigated it. The thing is still chilling.)

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/24appendic.htm

1. The extent of BCCI's involvement in Pakistan's nuclear program. As set forth in the chapter on BCCI in foreign countries, there is good reason to conclude that BCCI did finance Pakistan's nuclear program through the BCCI Foundation in Pakistan, as well as through BCCI-Canada in the Parvez case. However, details on BCCI's involvement remain unavailable. Further investigation is needed to understand the extent to which BCCI and Pakistan were able to evade U.S. and international nuclear non-proliferation regimes to acquire nuclear technologies.


The whole report is about the interconnectedness of world banking and terrorism and how governments, including ours, turned a blind eye to find this corruption and stopping it. The above link is just to the conclusion and even that is awful and had implications that, in light of history, are still chilling.

I think someone who alleged that the US government was allowing dangerous, addictive drugs to be sold in the US so that the money from the sales could be used to buy illegal weapons for a para-military group in a right wing revolt knows that there are bad things going on that are funded by our government. Kerry friggin knows.

I once posted elsewhere that it would interesting to imagine if Kerry had been elected Pres. Knowing what he knows, knowing how bad the US foreign policy has been since the 1950's, I wonder which file he would call up and ask to be delivered to him to read first. Just for the hell of it. And to confirm some long held suspicions (And I wonder if he would get the file or a big pile of shredded paper.)

He friggin knows. It beggars belief that after all that investigation, he wouldn't.

i've always assumed that pretty much everyone in the Congress "knows" ... so, given Kerry's background, let's run with the idea that he "knows" ...

that leads to two lines of questions ... one, what should the Democratic Party do about this knowing? in fact, what should anyone who knows do about it? and two, what can or should Kerry do about knowing? and what has he done since bush took office?

now to answer any of these questions, we first have to either accept or reject certain beliefs ... my belief is that the US has been going around the world knocking off foreign leaders for more than a hundred years ... and they've been doing that largely to benefit favored commercial interests ... whether you agree with my stated timeframe or not, let's say you accept that it's only been going on since bush took office ... should this be put before the American people?

let's also warn about other "policy controls" imposed by Big Oil ... so beyond assassination and the disruption of certain regimes for oil or other resource considerations, we have the very real risk of obliterating all life on the planet by destroying the ozone layer and promoting global warming ... the US withdrew from Kyoto and bush is now pushing more lax air pollution regs ...

or if that doesn't get your attention, we have the very real likelihood of peak oil in the very near future ... solar, wind, geothermal? dirty words ... let's just drill in ANWR, drill up and down our coastlines, subvert the governments in the oil rich southern states of the old Soviet Union, invade Venezuela and cause many of the problems we see in Darfur ... oil profits after all this? way up !!! all time records ... somebody's getting rich here ... it's really not kept a secret ...

so we face an immoral, alienating the rest of the world foreign policy designed for the sole benefit of Big Oil ... we pump billions into our military to procure the fields they need ... we face peak oil and an economy that is likely to totally collapse in the very near-term ... it will really be ugly when it does ... our failure to plan for these drastic drops in oil supply, e.g. conservation, mass transit, local food production and much, much more is going to leave us defenseless when the dark days arrive ... and why haven't we planned for these dark days? you got it ... big oil ... they are making billions from our fossil fuel dependent society ...

to recap, war, peak oil, a collapsed economy and the devastation of global warming ... we're not talking about a hundred years or even 50 years ... there are lots of horses in the race but many of them think we are on the brink of many of these horrors either right now or in the very near-term ...

so, as i said above, you either dismiss these concerns as some form of raving madness, a beatnik's "the end is near" syndrome, or you accept many of the basics described above ... that's where i'm at ... i accept this view ...

now, if that is what's facing the country, bush or no bush (although he's made things much, much worse), what should we do as a party and what should we demand of our candidates?

some believe if we only could get Democrats elected, or at least as a first step, we'd be on our way to addressing many of the above issues ... to that i say: fine ... i'm all for getting Democrats elected ... there's certainly more likelihood having them address these issues pro-actively than the republicans ...

but is that enough? ... i say: no, not even close ... it is our job, if we believe the tragedies that await us are real, to awaken America ... it is our job to speak with our best "leaders" and tell them what we see and ask for their support and offer them ours ... it is our job to save not only our own country but all life on earth ... is this exaggeration? hysteria? not based on what i read ... skeptical of all this? comfort me ... make your case ...

so my campaign is to speak out on these issues ... my campaign is to work both inside and outside the Party to raise awareness of these concerns ... what's most disturbing to me, almost befuddling, is that those who know, e.g. Kerry, do not seem to be speaking out or showing any leadership ...

it is NOT enough for our "leaders" to call for alternative sources of energy ... it is not enough for our leaders to even vote against the war in Iraq ... it is not enough for our leaders to call for a commission on global warming ...

what is missing in all of these excellent and critically important approaches is the telling of the truth of what they "know" to the American people ... what kind of un-democratic paternalism is at play that the public is kept in the dark on issues of such critical national importance? and what kind of political strategy is that anyway? if we are ever to take a run at these great challenges, we will need the total commitment, a mandate if you prefer, from those we are able to educate ...

so i ask for the support of all candidate supporters ... i expect nothing back from the hardcore DLC types ... i see them as political opportunists ... i doubt they'll ever tell the American people the truth ... but i still hold out hope for the Deans, the Kerrys, the Clarks and others throughout the Party ... if you support Kerry and see the dangers we face, tell him you want him to speak out on them ... tell him to go beyond lists of wonky policies and take seriously the issue of educating our citizenry about the incredible dangers we face ... if he "knows" and refuses to do this, ask him why ...

as i said above, i am not "anti" anyone ... i am just trying to wake people up ... i am trying to tell people that we can no longer view the world through the narrow lens of electoral politics ... we're out of time here ... we can't wait until Democrats are in office to start building a case for the desperately needed change in course ... we need to start immediately ...

those with access to power and the national stage must be won over to this vision and to this political strategy as well ... if they refuse, no matter their other qualities or issues, we have to look elsewhere ... too much is on the line to keep pretending ...

main policy goal.

He wanted a 10 year plan FULLY FUNDED to research alternative fuels and to set course to full independence from mideastern oil. He outlined it before and during the primaries, similar in many ways to the goal Kennedy set for space exploration.

I believe that difference alone would be a giant first step in drawing down our too large NEGATIVE impact on the world.

your answer was excellent, blm ... it's exactly what the visionary Democrats are calling for ... i agree 110% with building a 10-year plan ... i haven't read Kerry's plan but i'm more than confident it contains all sorts of good ideas ...

but that's exactly the problem i see with the Democrats ... first, we're not in power ... so all our little helpful legislative recommendations never see the light of day ... and waiting for electoral success postpones any program Kerry has by at least 3.5 years and perhaps more if he doesn't win in 2008 ... but second, and i think more importantly, Kerry would have a hell of a time, as any Democrat would, changing the direction of our energy policy ...

why?

because even a president would not likely have sufficient power to take on Big Oil and corporate America ... i believe the bad guys have infested every aspect of our government ... it is they who control all three branches, not the republicans ... it seems to me that the only way to change the balance of power is to educate the American people and have them demand change ... relying on one candidate with no mandate who doesn't explicitly run against those who have defined our energy and foreign policy probably for more than 100 years is unrealistic ...

so, the fact that Kerry has demonstrated an understanding of the energy crisis is a great starting point ... it's why i target him and you and other supporters with my message ... i do so because i believe there is at least some hope that he, and you, will be receptive to my concerns ... but if his qualities and programs stop at position papers with no plan to make progress even while out of power, i'm afraid there won't be enough time to have Kerry become the hero ...

the problems we face and the imminent impact of their effects require something more pro-active than that ...

Most Americans couldn't even accept the obvious - Bush is a light weight incompetent. That would have been easier tha accepting that 50% of the country voted for 2 men who have goals totally at odds with what we are told our values are. To take it a step further and note that it's not just Bush but EVERY leader from both parties for decades or even a century, is something that few will have the honesty to accept.

Kerry could not have said any of this and won the presidency. I do think that Kerry is different - because he fought this at least 3 times. I doubt he suddenly changed his values. I think he may have thought that as President he could turn some of this around, just as he talked of wanting Vietnam to be the point where America turned - to paraphase his words. This is why I almost felt Kerry was a "stealth" candidate - the part of Kerry shown was that of an intelligent, sometime eloquent, mostly liberal candidate - the tougher side of Kerry (not the VN sailor) that persisted investigating contra/drug and BCCI, with nothing to gain and much to lose, was not mostly hidden.

I think the reason was not that they were too hard to understand, but the majority of people in this country would reject the messanger rather than accept that the concept that the US is a uniquely good country, a benign super power, is fake. I do think that Kerry is unlikely to speak to this in the next few years if he thinks he can be President. He may think that as President, he could make changes and let people see these things as they are being changed.

I agree that their are now many candidates that I don't want as our nominee because I can see them following in the same old mode. The hard thing about accepting this myself, is that the easy acceptance of the Democratic candidate and voting happily is gone. I do trust Kerry - though he's not perfect. Dean as governor was a pretty standard politician, but I'm willing to think he has changed. Clark sounds good on many things - but he was military for a long time - I don't know what he said or thought or did about the Contras or Vietnam. That's not to fault him or accuse him - but to say I would hope to see the type of consistency Kerry had. (Or if he's the nominee I would be more concerned he speak out on this -if there's no record of actions that show it.)

excellent analysis, karynnj ... i am often almost overwhelmed by some of the very solid thinkers we have on DU ... compliments to the chef !!

i guess a have a variety of responses to what you wrote ...

first, i see the world in a certain way, as we all do, and i'm not sure how to respond to those who point out my ideas are not politically viable ... i worry about this very deeply ... what if, no matter how it's packaged and who the candidate is, "it won't play in Peoria?" ... then what ??? so i don't necessarily agree or disagree with your premise ...

second, suppose i pose to you this hypothetical (that might be the real situation we're in) ... suppose you came to believe that "peak oil" and/or severe climate change was likely to occur in, say, 2 to five years ... let's further suggest that the US economy would grind to a dead stop ... let's say that food distribution would become almost impossible ... droughts in food production areas, floods and storms in others ... rising coastlines ... no gasoline ... no home heating or air conditioning ... all this in 2 to 5 years and getting progressively worse after that ... or even take a 5 to 10 year horizon ...

now, what is the best thing someone knowing this could do? i ask because i believe the hypothetical is at least somewhat real ...

personally, i start with the premise that we already have run out of time ... we already have started to see the preliminary effects of our wasteful energy policies and our failure to plan for the future ... so what should i do?

some advise a political solution ... if we only had Democrats, we'd be fine ... i like Democrats ... i think we should fight hard to elect Democrats or at least some Democrats ... OK, so i'm onboard with that ... but i don't think they will change very much ... to impose great sacrifices, and perhaps great suffering and inconvenience, on the American people, as i believe we need to do to implement emergency conservation measures, will require a mandate from the people ...

perhaps President Kerry could speak to the nation and have them respond ... of course, one might consider it a bit deceptive and un-democratic to seek office with such a significant hidden agenda ... but let's look past that ... the question becomes would such a call be well received by the American people at that future time? i have no idea ... furthermore, this scenario, by definition, can't occur until January, 2009 ... that violates the timeframe of our hypothetical ...

that's still something like 3.5 years away ... and that implies that nothing has been implemented up until that point ... programs would first have to be deployed and who knows how long it would take to start to yield significant returns ...

so, at least for me, the political solution does not seem like a viable one if we can't begin our campaign immediately ... waiting for President Kerry requires time i don't think we have ... nor is there a guarantee he, or any Democrat for that matter, is going to win ...

so what else can we do?

i have no particular skill when it comes to political strategy ... but it seems to me the concerns i'm raising are very real and will soon do great harm to the country and the cause of global cooperation ... and it seems to me Democrats have a higher calling here than merely winning campaigns ... this is not to dismiss trying to win ... i'm hopeful that in treating Americans like adults instead of children, by taking some risks to "make the case", Democrats will be fighting for their convictions and demonstrating their strength and passion for the issues they raise ... what the hell do i know about it but i think that's exactly what the voters are looking for from the "opposition" party ...

now the language i use in presenting my views may be a great political liability ... i use terms like American imperialism, "peak oil" and dark, cold, jobless winters ... i would leave the jargon and the presentation to those more qualified than I ... but the underlying message, and it is widely supported by very reputable scientists, is the truth that the American people need to hear ... and they need to understand that without a partnership between Democrats and the American people, powerful "special interests" will continue to define our foreign policy ... look at their profits and look at the US budget deficit and you'll have all the facts you'll need about who benefits from the policy and who picks up the tab ... anyway, phrasing, and politicking and presentation is an issue very worthy of analysis ...

the truth is that whether Democrats win or not, the coming oil wars and global warming crises are going to soon reach the consciousness of America ... our choices are not whether Democrats would or wouldn't be hurt by telling the truth ... the real choice is whether they start talking about it now, before America awakens to the problem (i call that leadership) or after America awakens when every American will be pleading for solutions (i.e. reactive not pro-active) ... only one of those approaches is in the best interests of the country ...

and provocative, which is why I tried to answer it seriously. I was mainly answering about American imperialism. Here, I think most Americans were deceived, hearing of actions only after they happened. I still find it hard to believe that to support the contras, Reagan/Bush allowed cocaine free passage into this country.

I think it's possible that imperialism will become a major issue in the primaries, as it seems as though Clinton, Bayh, Warner and Biden are in agreement with "spreading democracy" aka imperialism. I think Feingold, Kerry and Clark seem against it. A litmus test might be permanent bases. An argument over that will touch the tip of the iceberg on the question of imperialism. What scares me is that I have heard people say that we deserve to have bases after our "sacrifice" or because we need to be able to get oil.

I actually think that Kerry has been close to raising the issue of peak oil - without (to my knowledge) using the word. He has referred to the growing international demand and the constrained supply, also pointing out that God only gave the US 3% of the world's supply. This is all in the present time frame - but he has to know scientists are saying that we may be at peak oil production and then the available oil will become progressively less. His solutions were as specific as any I've heard, but I don't think he's acknowledged that even with conservation, alternative fuels, better technology etc we probably will face a future which over all has less energy. It may be that he describes the present situation because it is logical to do the same thing under both scenarios. His July 28th energy speech in the Senate had extremely vivid and scary language on global warming. I really don't understand the Republicans on this.

I do understand what you are saying and see your concern. Last year, Kerry would definitely have avoided issues that could cost him the election - and in spite of a hostile media he almost won. The media would likely have not given him a chance to speak of those issues without tearing him apart. The sad thing to me is that Kerry may be as close as we get to a nominee who actually cares about these issues. Certainly not Hillary. (Maybe if Hillary gets the nomination - Kerry will give up on being President and realize that he can speak out as a MA Senator on these things.)

no time to respond right now but i wanted to post a link to the speech you referenced in your post: http://www.vote-smart.org/speech_detail.php?speech_id=116275&keyword=&phrase=&contain=

take all the time you need ...

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/johnfkerr168743.html

looks like I can spend some time there, but, I'm not sure how far back it goes or how thorough they were in their collecting process.

i'll read the link a little later ...

you're cooking dinner; i'm building my own wood-frame screens ...