Posted on 10/15/2004 10:26:07 AM PDT by notkerry
In the early 1990s, Kerry headed a Senate committee that was supposed to determine whatever became of American troops in the Vietnam War whose whereabouts were not recorded. Under his leadership, the panel concluded there was “no evidence” that any Americans left behind in Vietnam were still alive.
Shortly after Kerry declared to the world, “President Bush should reward Vietnam within a month for its increased cooperation in accounting for American MIAs.”
Hanoi then announced that it had awarded a fat contract to Boston real estate firm Colliers International, then headed by the senator’s cousin Stuart Forbes. Colliers International was awarded the exclusive real estate agent representing Vietnam.
The communist regime positioned the company to rake in tens of millions of dollars in future contracts to upgrade Vietnam’s ports, railroads and other infrastructure.
Coincidence? And was there really “no evidence” that American fighting men left behind in Vietnam were alive? Experts who have examined the issue ridicule the former or vehemently reject the latter.
NOT TO MENTION THAT KERRY IS CONSIDERED A WAR HERO BY THE VIETCON!!
SEE EVIDENCE BELOW OF KERRY'S POW COVERUP BY DOCUMENT SHREDDING!!!
http://www.aiipowmia.com/ssc/mccreary.html
Memos of John F. McCreary April 27, 1992
Memorandum for: Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Prisoners of War and Missing in Action
From:John F. McCreary
Subject:Legal Misconduct and Possible Malpractice in the Select Committee
1. As a member of the Virginia State Bar, I am obliged by Disciplinary Rule DR-1-103(a) to report knowledge of misconduct by an attorney "to a tribunal or other authority empowered to investigate or act upon such violations." Under Rule IV, Paragraph 13, of the Rules for the integration of the Virginia State Bar, this obligation follows me as a member of the Bar, regardless of the location of my employment, for as long as I remain a member of the Virginia State Bar. Therefore, I am obliged, as a matter of law and under pain of discipline by the Virginia State Bar, to report to you my knowledge of misconduct and possible prima facie malpractice by attorneys on the Select Committee in ordering the destruction of Staff documents containing Staff intelligence findings on 9 April 1992 and in statements in meetings on 15 and 16 April to justify the destruction.
2. The attached Memoranda For the Record, one by myself and another by Mr. Jon D. Holstine, describe the relevant facts, which I summarize herein:
a. On 9 April 1992, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, in response to a protest by other members of the Select Committee, told the Select Committee members that "all copies" would be destroyed. This statement was made in the presence of the undersigned and of the Staff Chief Counsel who offered no protest.
b. Later on 9 April 1992, the Staff Director, Frances Zwenig, an attorney, repeated and insured the execution of Senator Kerry's order for the destruction of the Staff intelligence briefing text. I personally delivered to Mr. Barry Valentine, the Security Manager for SRB-78, the original printed version of the intelligence briefing text. I also verified that the original was destroyed by shredding in the Office of Senate Security on 10 April 1992, along with 14 copies.
c. On 15 April 1992, the Staff Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha of Massachusetts, when advised by members if the Staff about their concerns over the possible criminal consequences of destroying documents, minimized the significance of the act of destruction; ridiculed the Staff members for expressing their concerns; and replied, in response to questions about the potential consequences, "Who's the injured party," and "How are they going to find out because its classified." Mr. Codinha repeatedly defended the destruction of the documents and gave no assurances or indications that any copies of the intelligence briefing text existed.
d. On 16 April, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry, stated that he gave the order to destroy "extraneous copies of the documents" and that no one objected. Moreover, he stated that the issue was "moot" because the original remained in the Office of Senate Security "all along."
e. I subsequently learned that the Staff Director had deposited a copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security at 1307 on 16 April.
3. The foregoing facts establish potentially a prima facie violation of criminal law and a pattern of violations of legal ethics by attorneys in acts of commission and omission.
a. It is hornbook law that an attorney may not direct the commission of a crime. In this incident two attorneys, one by his own admission, ordered the destruction of documents, which could be violation of criminal law.
b. Neither the Staff Chief Counsel nor any member of the Select Committee made a protest or uttered words of caution against the destruction of documents, by admission of the Chairman, Senator Kerry. The Chief Counsel has an affirmative duty to advise the Staff about the legality of its actions, and, in fact, had earlier issued the general prohibition to the Staff against document destruction.
c. The Chief Counsel's statements during the 15 April meeting to discuss the document destruction showed no regard for the legality of the action and displayed to the Staff only a concern about getting caught. By his words and actions, he presented to the Staff investigators an interpretation of the confidentiality and security rules that the rules of the Select Committee may be used to cover-up potentially unethical or illegal activity.
d. The Staff Director's action in placing an unaccounted for copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security on 16 April constitutes an act to cover-up the destruction. Throughout the 16 April meeting, all three attorneys persisted in stating that the document had been on file since 9 April. This is simply not true.
4. I believe that the foregoing facts establish a pattern of grave legal misconduct - possibly including orders to commit a crime, followed by acts to justify and then to cover-up that crime. Even absent criminal liability, the behavioral pattern of the attorneys involved plays fast and loose with the Canons of Legal Ethics and establishes that one or more of the attorneys on the Select Committee are unfit to practice law. I am obliged to recommend that this report be filed with the appropriate disciplinary authorities of the State Bars in which these attorneys are members.
(Signed) John F. McCreary, Esquire
Like John O Neill said "Why did you travel all the way over here to interview the enemy?"
"Like John O Neill said "Why did you travel all the way over here to interview the enemy?"
I do not believe most of the MSM believe they interviewed the enemy. To them John O'Neill is the enemy and hence We are the enemy.
comrade Ho Chi Koppel......another media slut POS
They are HUGH!!!
ABC and Koppel weren't had. They were a participant to a fraud. More so than Dan Rather and CBS.
The Viet Namese Government at first refused and then several months later they agreed....Time for ABC to prepare a list of questions they'd ask and the Viet Namese to develop answers and teach the villagers how to respond.
Koppel said they had to have a minder with them at all times. When he discussed the other men who came, one with a camera, there was no mention of a minder with them. He said they did not know who the men were or where they went. But did know they were critical of Kerry.
Would the Viet Namese goverment allow someone else other than ABC into the area without knowing who they were and what questions they asked and where they went?
This was all too pat. Answers where you'd expect a fuzzy response, lack of memory at the appropriate time. All of the right answers. Always someone who remember the specifics of one battle after 30+ years. They remember exact locations. How many people can remember things on their own property 10 years ago. Memories fade. There was to me too many specifics and too little real journalims. It was a Kerry Whitewash. It was planned and executed between ABC and the Viet Namese. Why wouldn't they make Kerry out to be something he wasn't. To them he is a hero.
Need to redouble the Swift Vets....I don't think this'll gain any traction...it's not like it's a new story that he was in Vietnam.
No media bias...no, none at all.
There are many Kerry connections to the VVAW who are in Vietnam. Jean-Andre Sauvagoet (aka andre sauvagoet) was the interpreter during the 1980 POW hearings....supporter of Kerry living in Vietnam. Bobby Muller (aka Bobby Mueller) was a part of the VVAW movement and started the VVA. He is the person who arranges tours in Vietnam and has an influence in who is and who isn't allowed to go there (influence with the Vietnameze). He is a Kerry supporter. Both of these men were in Vietnam to pay their respects to Ho Chi Mihn. There are very lucrative contracts in Vietnam which seem to have ties to Kerry and our MIA/POW's were traded off so those contracts could be pursued, imo. None of this is an accident. The MSM should be held accountable for being a part of this farce.
McCain was the one who was spearheading the MIA search. Kerry didn't give a &%$$@! when he was IN Vietname so his tagging along with McCain on this MIA investigation is pure grandstanding. Why would Kerry want to go find the 'baby killers' and 'war criminals?'
he did lie about it - well known he shredded all the evidence.
Also, Andre Sauvageot resides in Hanoi and is the chief representative of General Electric.
Of course Kerry lied about the POW's in Vietnam... what MUST not be forgotten is John McLaim was his willing partner... the dynamic duo, partner in crime, and never forget he was offered a VeeP position by Kerry ihn this election... A telling offer..
Nightline report was such a joke and Mr. O'Neil did good in frustrating Koppell's attempt to discredit the SwiftBoat Vets. Viewed from the military perspective and considering publish information on subject, the ABC Nightline analysis is bogus.
The VC statements given on Nightline and ABC's website do not materially vary from published accounts of the action, and actually support SwiftBoat Vet claims. ABC conveniently summarized the action in a way to meet their need to support Kerry by discrediting the SwiftBoat Vets. No justification or factual information was given by ABC to reasonably conclude that Ba Thang was the "loin clothed teenager" from Kerry's memory of the battle. Yet ABC tries to conclude that because VC state Ba Thang was 27 years old and may have worn black PJs, the SwiftBoat Vets are liars.
Now let me get this straight, ABC and the Kerry citation:
He "personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy," the citation says, before commending Kerry's "extraordinary daring and personal courage" for "attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire."
Nightline claims that 20 VC were in fact a numerically superior force in the citation that attacked three heavily armed SwiftBoats with 15+ Americans and 30 some Viet Allies? Maybe my understanding of which was group was a numerically superior military force needs to change to the ABC model.
Is ABC Nightline is worse than CBS Rather, or just dumber? And they can't claim they were victims of a fraud, Nightline is the fraud
This is a certainty, imo.
I talked to someone who works very closely with the POW issue and they HATE Kerry.
Not just that, but according to someone who was trying to work to get POW records regarding WW2 and Vietnam through Poland, Kerry did nothing to get the massive files available to them. The files in Poland were also subsequently destroyed. I don't want to wrongly state the record on that, but NavyChief from the Swiftvets board was there at the time and submitted quite an expose on what happened. It was posted here too.
Tonkin probably has that link available.
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.