Posted on 11/06/2004 9:24:53 AM PST by kellynla
I noticed they misrepresented McCain's position again...he only opposed the ONE commercial (the first I think)...but not the ones on Senate Testimony...at least, that is what I recall.
Still..fascinating read
The very sympathetic article certain highlights defining character traits of Mr. Kerry, indecisiveness and bad judgment.
I have a pro-Kerry VietNam Vet neighbor who denied that Kerry implicated all VN Vets in his statements.
I read quickly through Kerry Senate statement and was struck by the very general nature of Kerry's claims insofar as the identity of the perpetrators is concerned.
Kerry referred to "millions" of VN Vets who suffered from guilt after returning to the US. This could only mean that they regretted actions which they took while there.
Kerry also stated that commanders at all levels were complicit in encouraging outrageous conduct. This would presumably include the commanding general of my brigade, thus suggesting that I was being encouraged to commit atrocities.
If someone more familiar with all of Kerry's history could put together about 400 words explaining why ANY VN Vet should be justified in holding Kerry responsible for attacking them personally, I would see to it that my neighbor is informed. Such an account should be very specific with respect to Kerry's actual words, actions, and context.
Astonishing. But the truly astonishing thing? The person that wrote this does not notice the obvious contradiction.
The mask came off long ago, Newsweek, and America did not like the face it saw behind it.
God bless you Swiftees, welcome home.
What is still gnawing at me through all this is that Kerry refused to open his full record to public scrutiny, he and the media were allowed to write off the Swift Vets as liars, and so many people continued to openly refer to Kerry as a "war hero". This amazes me on several fronts:
1) If Kerry had the truth on his side, wouldn't he have opened up all his record to scrutiny to bury the Swift Vets? (answer: Of course. Therefore he must not have had the truth on his side--is this too far a reach, or simply a logical conclusion based on knowing human nature).
2) How is it that Kerry was said to serve 2 tours of duty in Viet Nam within the span of 4 months, while there were soldiers who served single tours in 18 months?
3) Does a hero leave his 'Band of Brothers' behind after serving alongside them for only 4 months on, what amounts to, a technicality?
4) Why didn't the US Navy ever investigate the multiple citations for his Silver Star (given that it was apparent that a bogus 'V' was attached to this medal...given that the paper trail indicated, at the least, "extraordinary" circumstances surrounding this award--an award put forth by a candidate for the highest office in the land as proof of his worthiness for the office). In my view, the US Navy needs to come forward and clear this matter up (given this and Kerry's own testimony regarding the late Admiral Boorda's falsified record, which, it could be argued helped foster the mental state that led to Boorda's suicide.)
5) How come all this mattered so little to so few on the Left. Their response to the war on terror was to put forth John Kerry, whom they claimed to be a war hero. They said that this was, in fact, proof that he was a superior candidate to Bush, whose National Guard record seemed "tainted". How come their guys "tainted-ness" mattered so little? (Answer: Because the Left is intellectually dishonest. Period.) How come the press didn't press Kerry on this? (Answer: Because the media is intellectually dishonest. Period.) The truth about all this must come out, if for no other reason than to shout back at the Left, "You were, either wittingly or unwittingly, responsible for perpetrating one the greatest hoaxes in the history of American politics--and that is proof you care less about your country than you do about your own egos and beliefs. Shame on you. Next time, before you act, or even speak, check your level of emotionalism and hatred at the door before it leads to our nation's demise.
I could go on and on. I hope that there is pressure to pursue this outrageous charade that nearly succeeded. Kerry was, is, and always will be a phony, a hollow man, an empty suit. He is a lie made from whole cloth. He is a fantasy cooked up by the 60's-entrenched Left who loved his anti-Americanism more than their own country (will they ever leave Woodstock, go home and live purpose-filled lives?--Answer: Not likely). The truth of this matter has to be revealed so that a charlatan like John Kerry will never rise to within 30 or so electoral votes of becoming president.
It's like reading a German history of World War II. The troops and officers were all valiant and capable. They did well in all battles, winning some and doing well in all others. Yet at the end, they (surprisingly) lost. Yet even in this propaganda, the stench of impending defeat leaks through.
And by listing the Swift Vet ads as the first great hurdle, the article manages to show, but not notice, the fundamental reason why Kerry was exposed for what he was, and wasn't, and therefore went down to defeat.
For a more honest review, that skips all the personalities and gets to the heart of the matter, click below.
Congressman Billybob
Click for latest, "Roosting Chickens, and Results of the 2004 Election"
Which airing of the Cavett debate did you see? February's or September's? C-SPAN CAVED! After the February airing, which was to have been 5 times over the course of a single weekend, it pulled the 5th show. When I called to request re-airing, they said the "license" was too expensive (from ABC & Cavett), I said C-Span wouldn't have to pay for the license, and C-Span said they "couldn't get it back" (meaning, I suppose, the license). They had no intention--once they discovered how valuable a Bush-asset it was--to air it again--until WELL AFTER the Swifties' ads came out.
Give your neighbor a transcript of the testimony!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!!
"finally exonerated"
NO - not yet!
We have received thousands of inquiries about the "Petition for Investigation and Indictment" of John Kerry. According to our legal scholars, John Kerry's meetings with enemy agents from Communist North Vietnam on multiple occasions between 1970 and 1972 are not covered under Jimmy Carter's amnesty as outlined in EO 4483. For that reason, on Monday, 22 October, we delivered (and confirmed delivery) to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft a "Petition for Investigation and Indictment" calling on the Department of Justice to determine conclusively whether Kerry's actions, in direct violation of UCMJ (Article 104 part 904), U.S. Code (18 USC Sec. 2381 and 18 USC Sec. 953) and other applicable laws and acts of Congress, constitute treason and disqualify him from any future campaign for any national office. (To read the text of the petitioners' request, link to -- http://patriotpetitions.us/kerry/letter.asp)
As of this date, we have not heard anything from
No one in the MSM, or O'Reilly either, found any necessity for evidence. Evidence is for you peasants.
> Edwards was flabbergasted. "Let me get this straight,"
> the senator said. "He met with terrorists? Oh, that's good."
This is another amazing revelation.
The ignorance of Edwards is just breathtaking.
All presidential candidates should release their records. Failure to do so means they're hiding something. Hiding something makes you blackmail bait for foreign intelligence services.
No, John. That's not good.
The Swiftees deserve our heartfelt thanks. Let's also not forget Sean Hannity, who had them on both his radio and tv show, and gave them national exposure.
Admirable mention also go to Laura Ingraham, Larry Elder and Michael Savage, who repeatedly had John O'Neil on their shows.
That was a horribly biased article making Kerry look like a hero and the SBVs as liars. It never did say anything about the charges being true. Thank God for the SBVs. This was just another hit piece on their honor.
During production of "Stolen Honor", Carlton Sherwood approached CSPAN for archived information and film clips. They refused to cooperate.
They would not allow him access to very damaging clips of Kerry.
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.