Kerry won Vietnam vets' wrath describing what he couldn't see (Jane Fonda mentioned)

Omaha World-Herald ^ | 8/22/04 | HAROLD W. ANDERSEN

[Libloather]

Kerry won Vietnam vets' wrath describing what he couldn't see
BY HAROLD W. ANDERSEN
Published Sunday, August 22, 2004
WORLD-HERALD CONTRIBUTING EDITOR

It is one of the bigger gambles of the presidential campaign. But with most of the news media looking the other way, John Kerry has been getting away with it so far.

I refer to Kerry's gamble that the news media won't finally take a hard look at his anti-war activities instead of concentrating on his four-plus months of combat-zone experience as a decorated, wounded veteran of the Vietnam War - experience that Kerry incessantly promotes as qualifying him to be president and commander in chief of the armed forces.

There have been occasional, brief news-media references to, but no details of, Kerry's controversial testimony to a U.S. Senate committee. It took place after he opted out of the customary one-year tour of duty under a Navy policy that allowed such an early out if a serviceman so elected after receiving his third Purple Heart.

(The Marines stopped awarding a Purple Heart for a minor wound, even if the Marine received medical treatment. None of Kerry's wounds was serious enough to require hospitalization.)

Let's take a detailed look at Kerry's Capitol Hill testimony. It will, I think, help explain why many Vietnam veterans oppose Kerry's presidential bid.

On April 23, 1971, John Kerry appeared before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, dressed in what appeared to be military fatigues, displaying the ribbons representing his Vietnam War medals (ribbons which he subsequently said he threw over a wire fence onto the Capitol grounds).

Kerry's testimony, widely publicized at the time, included the following allegations, which he offered as facts:

A "Winter Soldier Investigation" (largely financed by actress Jane Fonda) meeting in Detroit a few months earlier heard statements from men who represented themselves to be Vietnam veterans.

Kerry said that "they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam . . . ."

Kerry described such incidents as "crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with a full awareness of officers at all levels of command." Such conduct, he testified, reflected "the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do" and was "accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam."

Kerry's four-plus months of combat-zone experience involved his commanding half a dozen men in a "swift boat" crew as a naval lieutenant, junior grade. Yet, his testimony purported to describe atrocities committed by Army and Marine units serving in the jungles of Vietnam.

"The Army says they never leave their wounded," Kerry said. "The Marines say they never even leave their dead. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude. They've left the real stuff of their reputations bleaching behind them in the sun . . . ."

Is it any wonder that outraged Vietnam veterans have formed organizations like "Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry"?

Kerry could not possibly have seen the things that he repeatedly said "we" had seen. Apparently, he relied on the statements of some of the supposed veterans who attended the "Winter Soldier Investigation" rally in Detroit.

But later research confirmed that in five or more cases, those testifying at the Detroit rally lied about serving in Vietnam and/or about witnessing examples of brutal war crimes.

Enough today about the largely ignored story of John Kerry's testimony to a committee of the U.S. Congress. Next Sunday: the angry reaction of other Vietnam veterans who were as well situated as Kerry, if not better, to know how American forces conducted themselves in the Vietnam War.

[lowercoloradoriver]

If the system would have worked right, people like Kerry would have been put in prison for treason and cooperating with Communists like Jane Fonda. All these Communist turncoats that came back and joined the anti-American protesters were mental peabrains used by the Communists to bring their propaganda to the USA. Little SISSY boys like Kerry don't know what war is and what you have to do to win wars.

[Use It Or Lose It]

Marc Morano, CNSNews.com

Wednesday, March 24, 2004

Five days after CNSNews.com reported that Democrat John Kerry had attended a 1971 anti-war meeting at which the possible assassination of U.S. senators was discussed, the presidential hopeful is still backpedaling on statements regarding his whereabouts during that meeting.

Kerry at first denied attending the November 1971 meeting of Vietnam Veterans Against the War in Kansas City, Mo. According to FBI files obtained by CNSNews.com, that 1971 meeting included talk of possibly assassinating U.S. senators. VVAW members discussed targeting then-Sens. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, John Tower of Texas and John Stennis of Mississippi because of their support for the Vietnam War.

[Joe Boucher]

I'm not advocating this in any way,(don't care to have the f.b.i. visit me) but if you or i were to be found to be at any meeting where we discussed the murder of a senator we would be in jail real quick. And not to sober up overnight.
Why weren't these folks brought up on charges of conspiracy?

[BunnySlippers]

OH ... this would make a nice Swift Vets ad.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

I'm not a subscriber to the Wall Street Journal, but I know the quote you're referring to. Giap has been quoted as saying comething to the effect that if the U.S. had continued saturation bombing and continued push toward the North into 1974 that the NVA would likely have surrendered. I will try to find the article and get back to you.

[Dog]

Yes......until 1978 I understand.

[Defiant1]

If Kerry signed up in 1966 he would have a 6 year commitment ending in 1972. Furthermore he was a commissioned officer. When he went to Paris, protested the war, helped form the VVAW, attended their meetings, and testified before congress he was an officer in the US Navy Reserves on inactive status. He would maintain that status until he resigned his commission. The only evidence I have seen that he did this is sometime in 1978. He was not a "private individual".

[Viet-Boat-Rider]

Upon my return from Vietnam in 1970, I arrived at LAX. When I exited the terminal, I was standing on the sidewalk and a group of "long hairs" walked by and one of them spat on me while others called me a "Baby Killer".

A similar thing happened to my brother on his return from Vietnam also.

We have lived with that for 34 years. It is time for Kerry to get what he deserves, and that is to be exposed for the lying piece of crap that he is.

[No_Outcome_But_Victory]

You know folks, I still can't figure out why John Kerry was even allowed to run for Senate. The Senate should have refused to seat him, as he was guilty of perjury and other crimes.

Best I can guess is that the times were on Kerry's side. After Nixon was toppled, the Republicans were in no position to get even with Kerry.

NOW is that time.

[VadeRetro]

I refer to Kerry's gamble that the news media won't finally take a hard look at his anti-war activities...

Do you mean the Vietnam War, the Cold War, or something called "Reagan's Illegal War in Central America?" Kerry was "anti-" all of them.

[Viet-Boat-Rider]

thank you Cracker

[tet68]

On April 23, 1971, John Kerry appeared before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,

"I realize that even my visits in Paris . . . in a sense are on the borderline of private individuals negotiating, et cetera. I understand these things." The prohibition against private individuals negotiating--which has been on the criminal statute books since John Adams was President--is contained in 18 U.S.C. Section 953 and is a felony.)

Only he wasn't a private individual at that time but was in the Naval reserve...

[JoeSixPack1]

To Hanoi John, medal's are like credit cards. How he got them is of no concern. How he uses them, is everything.

Those medals got him out of Vietnam early. They got him his VVAW notoriety. They got him a seat in the Senate.

And they are going to derail his current ambition.

[Balding_Eagle]

Go to Hell John Kerry!

The SBV's are at least sending him to a politcal hell.

I didn't serve in the military, but the SBV ads are a catharsis for me, helping set the record right in regards traitors like JK. I can only imagine what a relief it must be for all those who where slimed by Kerry and others.

[Mi-kha-el]

There have been occasional, brief news-media references to, but no details of, Kerry's controversial testimony to a U.S. Senate committee.

There is nothing "controversial" about corrupting the troops in time of war. Same tactics the bolshevics used during WW1, whose main slogan was "Defeat of our own government". They sent propagandists to the frontlines to agitate among the troops aimed at bringing down the morale. Their activities were not considered "controversial", when caught they were shot on site. However, they achieved their goal. Everybody knows what came next.

[Soul Seeker]

As a child of a vet I would never dishonor my father by voting for Kerry.

Damn straight.

Even if I hadn't intended to vote for G.W., I would upon this information.

My father, and yours, and all Vietnam vets and even vets of the era were cast as murderers and rapists. That will not be forgotton by our veterans and it will not be forgotton by their families.

[hershey]

It's amazing Kerry got away with his lies for so long, but he had well funded celebrities like Haydon and Fonda behind him, plus a compliant press....sound familiar? Don't worry. Times have changed, and Kerry's lies have caught up with him.

[upchuck]

I refer to Kerry's gamble that the news media won't finally take a hard look at his anti-war activities instead of concentrating on his four-plus months of combat-zone experience as a decorated, wounded veteran of the Vietnam War - experience that Kerry incessantly promotes as qualifying him to be president and commander in chief of the armed forces.

Given the just-released second Swiftie commercial (watch it here), which zeros in on his congressional testimony, IMHO, the media will soon be forced to look at his anti-war activities. Just like they were forced to look at his commendations when the first Swifty commercial was released.

More true every day...

[Lovergirl]

I can't wait to see him crash and burn. My late husband went thru the same thing. He went to his grave angry at jfk and fonda. So did some of his vet buddies. I wish they were here now to enjoy the payback.

[schaketo]

Here’s a Letter to the Editor I just sent to our local rag:

Dear Sir or Madam,

Below is a Letter to the Editor on which I would appreciate your consideration. Please call me if you have questions concerning this submission. Thank you for your consideration.

Also, should you elect to print this letter, please use my email address with my name so anyone that would like to comment may via email.

=======

Kerry Can’t Stand the Heat

Wasn't it John Kerry who recently said "Bring it on" if anyone wanted to scrutinize his often repeated exploits during and after the Vietnam War? That brings to mind a schoolboy picking a fight in school yard and hoping the target doesn’t take him up on it.

Now, 254 of his former Swift Boat crewmates who have signed affidavits and are appearing in Television ads against him took him up on his call out. Former POWs are speaking out stating the congressional testimony John Kerry gave was fodder for the Vietnamese as they were tortured. They took Sen. Kerry up on his attempted intimidation.

Now Mr. Kerry would like them to back off. Using the same analogy he is begging for someone, anyone to make them stop. However, Kerry's actions during and upon his return from Vietnam should not be beyond reproach. His anti-war actions and allegations against veterans should not be shielded from scrutiny.

Instead of taking the “positive approach” that he said he would, Kerry (as most liberals) sees all manner of conspiracies in the opposition. President Bush on the other hand has endured a year of daily lambasting by Kerry surrogates and a willing media partner. I don’t recall President Bush once asking someone, anyone to pull them off.

As a veteran, which type of individual do I want in my foxhole?

=======

Thank you for your consideration. We enjoy and rely on your paper!

Respectfully yours,
Me