Brinkley Details Kerry's Meetings with 'Hanoi Jane' (Hanoi John and Jane are both liars!)

Newsmax ^ | 2/15/04

[Condor51]

No, don't think so as none is mentioned.

And it should be pretty easy to locate these records as I can't imagine more than one; Kerry, John, Forbes being born in Denver, Colorado on Dec. 11, 1943.

[secretagent]

This is critical: Kerry must be made to answer for his words! If he refutes his testimony, then he is a fraud and liar or a dupe. If he upholds his testimony, then he is saying that an untold number of living veterans are war criminals.

Yes. Kerry said:

"I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group of 1,000 which is a small representation of a very much larger group of veterans in this country, and were it possible for all of them to sit at this table they would be here and have the same kind of testimony...."

He can refuse to say anything, but this was Senate Testimony about the affairs of state, about public policy, not some rumored liaison or unseemly personal matter. He essentially has to answer or withdraw. November is too far away. They can't run a scam that long. This is not like covering up a bimbo.

Never underestimate how much interviewers like Tim Russert want Kerry to beat Bush. They've thrown him softballs up until now.

By now surely even the DNC has worked the equation and figured out that this guy is totally unelectable. They'll have to sink him and they have to do it pretty soon.

Not really. Kerry has built his whole career on an easily proven lie.

Kerry made the "Winter Soldier Investigation" the foundation of his 1971 testimony, and cited it at the beginning of that testimony. Burkett (Stolen Valor) says several of those "witnesses" lied, and he can easily prove they lied, because Burkett can prove they couldn't have witnessed what they said they witnessed.

And yet no one has found Burkett and put him on t.v. An easy ratings coup, but nothing. For whatever reason, no one with media power wants to challenge Kerry. The DNC counts on this, apparently with good reason.

A puzzle to me.

[hoosiermama]

Is it true that Kerry wrote himself up for his own awards?

[El Gato]

So Kerry meet with Jane before she was Hanoi Jane-before her trip to Hanoi

That's actually irrelevant. By the time of the meetings, she was very visibly active as an "antiwar" (meaning pro communist) organizer. The trips to Hanoi were merely the culmination of her traitorous activities.

[El Gato]

LBJ is the only war criminal that I can identify

I think you'd have to add Robert Strange McNamara as well. His "by the numbers", "like we did it at FoMoCo" way of managing the war probably prolonged it years, and thus contributed to the final loss of South Vietnam by playing directly to the strengths of a totalitarian dictatorship and the weaknesses of a free, but highly politicized, society.

[hosepipe]

[ I find myself wondering what we are doing nation-building in a region who clearly hates us. ]

You mean here in the United States ?... Trying to build a republic in a nation clearly that is a democracy.. ain't easy, is it.?. Democrats ARE THE ENEMY... The muslims are 1400th century fanatics... chump change by comparison..

[Destro]

Beiong antiwar is not treasonous by itself.

[freekitty]

Don't most injured get Purple Hearts?

[HIDEK6]

John Kerry may well have shown physical courage in combat some 35 years ago but has been nothing but a shameless opportunist ever since."

I hear the Silver star was for running down an unarmed, wounded gook (wounded by someone else), taking him behind a bush and killing him.

[satchmodog9]

Politicians have always been like this and worse. Look at old history books and you will see how even in the early part of American history politics and political reporting was a savage business. Every generation wants you to beleive they are the first to sustain such attacks.

[happygrl]

Win or lose, he will split America like nothing since the Civil War

I agree.

It's going to be the revenge for the losses of 1972 and 2000 rolled into one.

[Tall_Texan]

Well, true but unless somebody kills, robs or rapes, I just don't see that much relevance in what somebody did 30 years ago. It insults my intelligence to say that an ounce of our time should be spent on this when a candidate has more than a decade of public voting records and position papers which are far more relveant.

These wouldn't be an issue at all except for the passions that are inflamed when you start throwing around words like "AWOL". "deserter", "draft-dodger", "traitor", etc. So much easier to tar someone with those sort of words than to actually tell about the votes they had cast or quotes from their speeches.

[secretagent]

We have Kerry's own considered and rehearsed words in his 1971 testimony. Either he lied or he repeated others' lies in describing war crimes as the norm for American soldiers.

He has never renounced those charges, and maintains to this day the rightness and correctness of those charges.

This issue goes to the heart of his character, the character behind his votes. Perhaps the most important thing to consider when voting for President.

[WarrenC]

Read some of Mark Steyn's recent columns and you'll understand the pertinence to this election of Kerry's anti-war activity 33 years ago.

[El Gato]

Beiong antiwar is not treasonous by itself.

But being pro your nations enemies is. In fact it's the Consitutional definition of treason.

Article 3 Section. 3: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

Hanoi Jane was giving the enemies of the US Aid and Comfort long before she went to Hanoi. So was Senator Kerrey.

[Destro]

Give example beyond they went to an anti-war rally. From whee I sit Kerry killed more Viet communists then Bush did.

[Tall_Texan]

I know it is not true of Kerry but how would you feel if someone was an anti-war protestor 30 years ago, marched with Jane Fonda at rallies and then turned into a Newt Gingrich-like conservative and ran as a Republican for the presidency? Would you say being in a photo with Jane Fonda was relevant and refuse to vote for him based on his distant past?

All I'm saying is that we all change over the course of that much time. G.W. Bush certainly has. I'd rather weigh Kerry on what he believes today, including what he thinks *now* of his time as a soldier and a protestor, than dig up dirt that only reveals what a man once was.

Otherwise, I'd have to conclude that Bush is an unworthy candidate because he was once a drunk driver. I'd have to conclude Reagan was unworthy because he was once a union boss and a Democrat. I'd have to conclude Buchanan is unworthy because he once was employed by CNN. I'm not concerned if they smoked dope a quarter-century ago. I'm concerned if they still smoke dope.

Unless they've been found guilty of a major criminal offense, I really can't hold against someone politically for what they did a long time ago. Now if the views they held then are still what they hold now, that's another issue but *that* is what should be the issue not what they did back when gasoline was under 30 cents a gallon.

Come into this century and talk about what the candidates stand for today. That's all I ask.

[Bonaparte]

Kerry confessed to committing war crimes. He did that in his congressional testimony and at his rallies. That is the question that should be pursued. Either he's a war criminal or he's a liar. If he's what he's said he is, he should be brought to account. If he isn't, then he's a liar and the voters should know about that.

[ravingnutter]

Simple, your first cousin C. Stewart Forbes, CEO, of Colliers International, recently signed a contract with Hanoi, worth BILLIONS of dollars for Collier's International to become the exclusive real estate representative for the country of Vietnam.

Ummm....they should have inserted the words "who manages Kerry's trust" behind "International". Also, we need to find this tape:

And it was reported that Frances Zwenig, Senator John Kerry's chief of staff for the now defunct Senate Select Committee on POW/MIAs, served for a short-time in the Vietnam interests section of Commerce until someone figured this might be viewed as a conflict of interest. As Kerry's aide, Zwenig, according to documents, coached the North Vietnamese to concoct plausible stories on the fate of POW/MIAs in order to show that Hanoi was cooperating to resolve the POW/MIA issue, a hurdle in the diplomatic dance to lift the trade embargo and renew relations with Vietnam.

Senator Kerry was caught on camera making a promise to the North Vietnamese communists that he would ensure that they weren't embarrassed by their concocted stories.

Zwenig went on to serve with Madeleine Albright at the UN. Zwenig is now reportedly working with the Washington-based U.S.-Vietnam Trade Council, a group that lobbied heavily for lifting the trade embargo and renewing relations with Vietnam. Now their focus is to win most-favored nation (MFN) for the draconian communist regime in Vietnam, which recently burned a Buddhist Monastery in Hue and jailed the monks and nuns for advocating improved human rights, freedom of religion and democracy.

The question may be raised, who pays Zwenig's salary? Although campaign contributions from the Trade Council and associated companies are legal, one should follow the money trail to see if any was "laundered." Also, Senator Kerry's cousin, Forbes, who manages Kerry's trust, reportedly received multi-million dollar "sweet- heart" deal from the Vietnamese communists in real-estate concessions and port renovations in Vietnam. How much did he donate to the various campaigns?

Congress Should Investigate: Did Foreign Contributions Sway Policy Toward Vietnam?