Posted on 08/14/2004 2:24:55 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Pls see post 22, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1191399/posts?page=22#22
re Kerry.
I think I posted that #22 ping twice - pc glitches.
I don't know how you can maintain that when his testimony was used in torture sessions by the Viet Cong to intimidate and get our POW's to "think right," when it was played over and over in the Viet Cong POW camps, and used to demoralize our POW's, etc. If that is not giving aid and comfort to the enemy, then what on earth is? When a Naval officer speaks or lies in sworn testimony against his fellow military members before the US Senate and the world, it encompasses a higher standard of accountability than in normal public speech. Nevertheless, even if Kerry had said these things to others on the street, it would fall into the category of giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
We don't need to know or understand Kerry's motives here (as liberals put the case when there is wrongdoing). We need just his words. In this case, the effect also shouts down through the decades.
I read a thread on FR about some dude at ABC who actually did a rather unbiased review of it. Can't recall his name (Mark somebody?).
What is this law and where does one find a copy of it?
Kerry's "testimony" also demoralized armed forces (who were not POW's) still fighting the war he protested. How is that not giving aid and comfort to the enemy?
Guess that's why he's backed down when he's been pressed to support his previous comments about what he claimed to have seen. Kerry is a liar and a fraud.
I wonder if anyone knows the status of his security clearance. I could imagine that meeting N Vietnamese officials in Paris would have been grounds for immediate revocation of said clearance if he had it.
We get more than that, but I haven't got time to publish and answer them all, so I just pick off a few I find particularly interesting now and then.
In fact, I just added one about half an hour ago.
Understand, there weren't any atrocities to report. He and his commie buddies made them up out of whole cloth. Then they all point around to each other as the sources and nod their heads. Then they claim they can't be questioned because they were there - when on detailed examination they don't claim any different witness status to the acts in question than you or me.
Kerry says whatever he thinks sounds good to the people in front of him at the time, fitting their expectations to his political imagination of where the white and black hats are - or where he'd like the audience to think they are. He is unconstrained in this process by any actual facts. He continually gets into trouble because of it, if and when anyone tracks down said facts. Then he hides in "nuance" - sophistic deconstructionist hair splitting.
I can't agree. I'll bet Calley's group didn't commit the only atrocities. Whether any true whistleblowers made it to the "Winter Soldier Investigation", I don't know.
He and his commie buddies made them up out of whole cloth.
I tend to agree with you, but have no debunking evidence at hand, other than a letter to wintersoldier.com that looks pretty convincing about WSI witness Joe Bangert.
A beginning there, with one WSI witness. Much more work to do.
Kerry says whatever he thinks sounds good to the people in front of him at the time, fitting their expectations to his political imagination of where the white and black hats are - or where he'd like the audience to think they are. He is unconstrained in this process by any actual facts.
He does feel threatened by losing his hero reputation, both as a warrior and an "anti-warrior. If facts get known that threaten his rep, then he feels constrained by them, and:
Then he hides in "nuance" - sophistic deconstructionist hair splitting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.