| BeltFed wrote:|
I guess my first sentence didn't go far enough with my concerns. It's just the way the article started out sounded like we should be alarmed just because Kerry's daughter married an Iranian. It just struck me as racist. Now as for the rest of the story of who's who, yeah I'm outraged, but that's normal for this bunch of potential rope stretchers.
I agree the article is poorly written, but the title is "You will NOT BELIEVE who was best man at John Kerry's daughter's wedding," indicating the focus of the article is on who the "best man" was, not the man who married his daughter. The article is in no way racist because it isn't focusing on nationalities but instead on troubling relationships to people who openly state they want to kill us and our allies and who actively finance terrorists who kill our troops and overseas diplomats.
The first part of the article is merely providing background for how it came to be that the best man at Kerry's daughter's wedding is the son of Iran's Minister of Foreign Affairs. The fact that this guy was selected as "best man" in the wedding indicates the family thinks highly of him...and he just happens
to be the son of the very man representing Iran that John Kerry was negotiating with on matters vital to stability in the Middle East and our national security.
The fact that Iran is getting everything it wanted out of this idiotic "deal" -- lifted economic sanctions and ability to continue working on nuclear weapons development -- and the fact we got no concessions from Iran of any significance further raises concern that Kerry's ability to take a hard line with Iran was greatly compromised by his close relationship to the guy he's "negotiating" with. Kerry should have recused himself from these negotiations because he has a major conflict of interest...and he's a shockingly inept fool.