Vets refuse to forgive Kerry for antiwar acts

"If I got three Purple Hearts for three scratches, I'd be embarrassed," said Ted Sampley, who fought in Vietnam and publishes U.S. Veteran Dispatch. He remembers soldiers turning away awards for minor injuries.

Mr. Kerry has said none of his Purple Heart injuries, only one of which removed him from the field for two days, was critical.

After his third Purple Heart, Mr. Kerry requested and was granted permission to return to the United States to work behind a desk in New York. Even while still a Navy man, he began traveling to antiwar rallies with leading war protesters such as Adam Walinsky, a former speechwriter for Robert F. Kennedy.

Mr. Walinsky recalled that Mr. Kerry flew him around the state of New York for several Vietnam Moratorium protests in October 1969.

"He was a guy who had been in the war," he said. "We spent a lot of time talking about the campaign, the presidential campaign and the Vietnam War."

Mr. Kerry has said he did not take part in the protests, but was intrigued by Mr. Walinsky's views about the war. The two men stayed in contact and "became reasonably good friends," Mr. Walinsky said.

Others were shocked by the Naval officer's association with the antiwar movement.

"He gets this cushy job in his hometown, goes around protesting the war, then asks to get out six months early," Mr. Sampley said. "What regulations were busted when Kerry — as a Naval officer and still on the payroll — was flying around protesting the war? And who had to stand in and fight for John Kerry after he left six months early?"

>>>>We tried to warn the nation in '92 but would they listen? No we were vilafied.

In '92, I was in college.

Thankfully, I will hide behind Leonard Magruder here.

HE explains about the infiltration of higher education.

See, REMOVE history at the public school level. DON'T tell students what really happened...

No publically accessable internet....

Spin your own story...

Don't forget, media was already infiltrated, see Leonard Magruder again for that.

http://www.i-served.com/v-v-a-r.org/051603_HigherEducation.html

Leonard Magruder, President of Vietnam Veterans for Academic Reform, today sent a letter of congratulations to Sara Russo, president of the latest student organization calling for academic reform, Students for Academic Freedom. The following is from “About Us” at their website:

“Students for Academic Freedom is a clearing house and communications center whose goal is to end the political abuse of the university and to restore integrity to the academic mission as a disinterested pursuit of knowledge.”

They now have fifty students at major universities building chapters.

There are now a dozen or more major new organization dedicated to university reform. Said Mr. Magruder, “As founder of the first organization of this kind, I find it very gratifying to find that so many others now recognize the same problems that we did in 1982, and are also speaking out. However, it is important to remember that all these totalitarian trends on campus today have their roots far earlier in the rise of the Left in the campus war protests of the early 60’s.”

The second such organization, Accuracy in Academia, began about 1984. Reed Irvine, the founder, invited Mr. Magruder to become President of the organization in 1985 but because of prior committments he could not accept. Mr. Michael Capel, however, Editor of th AIA’s magazine Campus Report, later served on the Board of Advisors of V.V.A.R.

Another major organization to appear around this time was the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, founded by the former 60’s radical David Horowitz, with probably the nation’s most brilliant and most read group of writers. Mr. Magruder met Mr. Horowitz when both spoke at the Vietnam Symposium in 1986, following former Senator Eugene McCarthy on the platform. Mr. Horowitz also served for a while on the V.V.A.R. Board of Advisors.

Mr. Horowitz, having been there at the time, often writes about the connection between the new totalitarianism on campus and the 60’s. Recently he wrote:

... you quickly realize that something is terribly wrong at our institutions of higher learning. Beginning in the mid-1960s, the left made a concerted effort to take over our colleges and universities. The turmoil surrounding the Vietnam War made our schools ripe for leftist pickings, and they did—they methodically took over our campuses. Now, four decades later, they have a stranglehold on hiring, teaching and administrating most of our schools in all 50 states. As they’ve taken control, they’ve trampled free speech, virtually banished all conservative professors, and turned our schools into little more than huge megaphones for anti-American rhetoric from coast to coast.

And then he goes on to tell about his new National Campaign to Take Back our Campuses.

[Note: the full article is archived at this link: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Content/read.asp?ID=10]

More recently this type of organization is being started by the students themselves, rather than older activists such as Magruder or Horowitz, and the writing is being done by students. For example, Campus Watch, which presents criticism of academics written by young people. Noindoctrination is another new website that presents reports by students about the indoctrination going on at their school. Professor Watch will present profiles of professors reported to be using their classrooms for propaganda purposes rather than education.

And there are other new groups. It is very clear that a revolution has started on campus, but one of the first things that will have to happen is to demonstrate once and for all how the Left lied about Vietnam in the 60’s.That is why in September [2003], V.V.A.R. will present a five-night series of new, far more objective and truthful films on the Vietnam War to help students see the connection.

That many could see the connection between the campus war protests of the 60’s and a growing corruption in academia as early as 20 years ago should be very clear from the following presentation of selections from the Manifesto of our organization, delivered by appointment to the White House by Professor Magruder in Jan. of 1982. Although copies were distributed throughout the National Press Building, the Washington press never mentioned the students’ protest.

MANIFESTO President Ronald Reagan The White House Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. President,

Over the past year 300 of my students in 10 sections of Psychology and Sociology were assigned the task of studying the Vietnam War to answer two questions that had been asked of President Carter by Vietnam Veterans of America: Why had they been sent to war, and what lessons had the nation learned from the experience ?

In every section the students concluded that the answer as to why we were there was now even more clear than when President Kennedy first explained the matter. We were there because of our relationship to the South Vietnamese through SEATO, they had asked for our help in defending their freedom against Communist aggression originating from North Vietnam and supported by Russia and China. He warned that should South Vietnam fall, it would have a domino effect and threaten the balance of power in Southeast Asia in favor of Communist totalitarianism.

Kennedy, and every president who followewd him, the students agreed, had told the nation the truth. The campus “peace” movement, which said that the war was “immoral,” that the motive was “imperialism,” that the domino theory was “absurd,” that the war was only a “civil war,” that Ho Chi Mihn was only a “nationalist,” and that America was engaged in “aggression,” and “genocide,” was wrong.

[note: At the end of this exercise, Professor Magruder, after giving the students their grades to insure objectivity, asked them to vote on whether the war was justified. 85% said that it was justified, a legitimate struggle for freedom for others. We challenge all universites to repeat this experiment, using the more objective, up-to-date materials now available on the war.]

Puzzled as to why the students of this generation could see the truth so clearly, whereas those of the 60’s could not, the students concluded that faculties, to serve their own ideological purposes, had misinformed their students, who in turn used the misinformation to serve their own purposes. Some of the students admitted that had they been in college at the time and were subject to the draft, they would have viewed this issue differently.

The najor lesson of Vietnam, the students concluded, was that American foreign policy would henceforth have to take into consideration that left-liberals in our universities and media, hostile towards traditional American values, have created within our society a large and dangerous bloc lacking in the intellectual and moral foundations necessary to defend freedom. The lesson of Vietnam is epitomized in the title of a recent book by Congressman John Leboutieller, “Harvard Hates America.”

The role of the campus “peace” movement is seen in President Johnson’s telling General Westmoreland shortly after the Tet Offensive that to pursue the war more aggressively was politically unfeasible, that he had “no choice but to calm the protestors lest they precipitate an abject American pull-out.” (Lewy, 1978) The role of the media is seen in the conclusion of Peter Braestrup, the noted journalist who researched in detail the reporting of the war by the news media. “Rarely has contemporary crisis journalism turned out, in retrospect, to have veered so widely from reality.” As Senator Margaret Chase Smith said at the time, the press “had become more sympathetic to the enemy than to our own national interest.” (Congressional Record, June 16, 19721)

The “peace” movement, my students concluded, was never really concerned for peace. Although it cloaked itself in an aura of great moral purpose, it in fact gave aid and comfort to the enemy, marched under the flag of the Viet Cong, allowed Hanoi to dictate its agenda, and turned its back on the American soldier. Rejecting the democratic principle of majority rule, it set out to intimidate the nation through violence. So dangerous did it become that it paralyzed national will and drove a President from office. By ascribing the basest possible motives to the government and the American people it in fact played out the role of a Hanoi lobby in enemy territory.

Said Guenter Lewy, in “America in Vietnam,” the most comprehensive and best balanced study to date of the war “... it was obvious that many of these men and the organizations and committees they spawned were not so much for peace and against the war as they were partisans of Hanoi, whose victory they sought to hasten through achieving an American withdrawal from Vietnam.”

It was this support for Hanoi and the desire to humiliate America that caused my students to decide that the anti-war movement was not an authentic domestic peace force. They agreed with General Westmoreland who said, “I can make no accommodation for those who burned draft cards and their country’s flag, besieged the Pentagon, paraded the enemy’s flag in the streets, encouraged others to break the law, fled their responsibility, and in general went beyond the bounds of reasonable debate and fair discussion. None should escape the reality that his or her actions helped to prolong the war.”

Particularly disturbing to my students was the fact that the university had spawned, in the very heart of academia, two totalitarian movements, the New Left and the S.D.S., behind which tens of thousands of students rallied to defeat the sacrifices for freedom of their own countrymen. Based largely on Marxism, these two groups advocated authoritarian repression of opposing opinion, political violence, and ultimately class murder and dictatorship, all with the encouragement of liberals in the university. This tendency to encourage totalitarianism, the students concurred, still lies latent within the profound contradictions of contemporary liberal thought. Unless immediate university reform begins, the university and the media, they fear, could prove instrumental in the destruction of America, by again polarizing, and then paralyzing the nation in a time of crisis.

The American soldier, with few exceptions, fought bravely and honorably. He did what the nation asked of him and in no sense was the war lost on the bttlefield. Even though American resolve fell short in the end, few nations in history have ever engaged in such sacrifices for others, and no gain, or attempted gain for human freedom can be discounted. Those who fought for freedom for South Vietnam not only deserve to be honored, they deserve that the nation start facing the truth.

The aspects of the war that most need clarifying, in TV documentries, film, movies, books, debates, courses, etc., are: the idealistic motives for our involvement, the subversive nature of the “peace” movement, the true intentions of Communist North Vietnam to conquer all Indochina, the barbaric tactics of the Viet Cong, the use of the media to influence public opinion, the manipulation of American journalists and intellectuals by Hanoi propaganda, the true bravery and victorious record of our fighting men, the genuine thrust for freedom of South Vietham, and the truth about liberals in Congress in their final abandoment of South Vietnam.

But to tell the truth about Vietnam, the students realized, would necessarily involve challenging the reigning philosophies on campus. Out of this could come, however, not only freedom for the Vietnam veteran from a false image, but a profound intellectual and moral revolution on campus. They decided they wanted to do something to start this reform.

Mr. President, the problem and the cure are both touched upon in this petition my students have asked me to bring to you. It begins, “We, the undersigned, students in Professor Magruder’s classes in psychology, wish to protest the news blackout by the liberal press, particularly “Newsday,” of our rally to honor the Vietnam veteran on Thursday, April 10, 1981. We also wish to protest the tyranny of naturalistic and deterministic views on the nature of man in contemporary education, particularly in the social sciences. We would like to see a reformation of the American university through renewed dialogue between psychology, theology, and philosophy.”

There is unquestionably a growing resentment against the suppression of their right to be exposed to the full spectrum of intellectual debate. Minor secular philophies have become institutionalized on campus as ultimate truth. These positions are protected by the simple expedience of refusing debate and running major challengers, such as theism, off campus. The insights of centuries of Western experience and thought have simply disappeared, from curricuum, bookstores, and textbooks. The impact of this on students who raise such basic existential questions as “Why do I exist,” “What should I do,” and “Is there a God,” is to make them feel that it is wrong to raise such questions, that there is even something strange about themselves.

Amongst the symptoms of the suppression of open dialogue are: a deterioration in the intellectual quality of textbooks, a profusion of covert philosophical assumptions in the social sciences masking as scientific fact, a steady nation-wide deterioration in academic standards, the inability of the social sciences to understand or cope with rising social pathology, the capitulation of philosophy to scientism, and a breakdown in moral standards by faculty and students alike in the name of “life style.”

That those most priviledged in terms of education are not ony those most likely to abandon America in times of crisis, but also those most likely to be in the forefront of moral decline, is a contradiction this nation can no longer afford.

The time has unquestionably come for the American people to demand the liberation of their educational systems from the defensive, hypocritical, and potentially treasonous confines into which they have been betrayed.

End of Manifesto

So it was that my students came to realize that something terrible had happend to our universities in the 60’s, something that not only helped to destroy our efforts for freedom in South Vietnam, but would compound itself in the years ahead in terrible conflict with everything American, leading to further totalitarian movements as we see now in multiculturalism, political correctness, speech codes, gender feminism, postmodernism, etc. And so began the first student organization to call for university reform, Vietnam Veterans for Academic Reform.

Thank you for the link.

http://www.bannerofliberty.com/OS5-99MQC/5-4-1999.1.html

KLA are Terrorists and Drug-dealers, The
Washington Media Finally Admits

Why is Bill Clinton so Determined to Force Yugoslavia to allow the KLA to Control Kosovo?

By Mary Mostert, Analyst, Original Sources
(http://www.originalsources.com)

May 4, 1999

Yesterday the Washington Times reported: "WASHINGTON, May 3 -
The Kosovo Liberation Army, which the Clinton administration has
embraced and some members of Congress want to arm as part of the
NATO bombing campaign, is a terrorist organization that has financed
much of its war effort with profits from the sale of heroin.

Then Jesse Jackson called NATO "arrogant" for intensifying air strikes
after the prisoners of war were released and then tried to get Mr.
Clinton to offer the Serbs an overture of good faith instead. He
suggested that Clinton thank Milosevic for releasing the prisoners, a
scenario which White House aides called "unlikely."

After putting the full force of his spin machine behind an effort to
demonize Milosevic and basically the entire Serb population of the
world, while glorifying the KLA as "freedom fighters," for Clinton to
thank Milosevic for sending those three young Americans back home
to their families in good health might have made some people wonder.

Jesse Jackson remarked: "Those little steps in the right direction can
spare all of us a long and bloody war. We are strong enough to
express courtesy."

Clinton, who tried to keep Jesse Jackson from going to Belgrade,
said, "Let me say how very pleased I am that our three servicemen
are coming home from Serbia and to express my thanks to Reverend
Jackson and his entire delegation for their hard work in securing their
freedom."

Now, I ask you. Would it really have damaged Clinton’s ego to have
added to his comment, "And I also appreciate Milosevic allowing these
young men to return to their families - and will send back the Serb
prisoners we are holding as a reciprocal gesture."

Instead Clinton said he was concerned that the prisoner release was
at least in part a propaganda ploy by Mr. Milosevic to sow dissension
among NATO members. "We have to have some indication, other than
the uprooting of another 10,000 people, that the release of the pilots
is somehow related to a general change in the human attitude toward
the people of Kosovo," Mr. Clinton said. "And we don't have that yet."

Now if you have been reading this column for the last couple of
months you already know that the KLA is funding much of its terrorist
activities in Kosovo with proceeds from its lucrative sale of heroin
throughout Europe. (See:
http://originalsources.com/OS3-99MQC/3-11-1999.1.shtml, and
http://originalsources.com/OS3-99MQC/3-15-1999.1.shtml) The real
battle that is going on has been between the KLA and the police, who
finding themselves out-gunned by the well-armed drug dealers in the
KLA, called for the Yugoslavian army to help them fight the KLA
terrorist-drug-dealers.

Somehow, the U.S. Air Force, a scant two weeks after I wrote those
columns, found itself, at Bill Clinton’s PERSONAL command, without
Congress or the United Nations, being used as the air defense for the
KLA. It now appears that Bill Clinton is determined that the KLA
forces, a group composed of terrorists and drug-dealers, and
associated with another terrorist we know, Osama bin Laden, credited
with blowing up a couple of US Embassies, will be allowed to operate
freely, just as they are in Northern Albania.

It’s to Jesse Jackson’s credit that he returned from his successful
efforts in getting the three prisoners of war released with a rational
and reasonable, and I might add, Christian, approach to the current
war. He also appears to recognize that the Serbs have not yet begun
to fight - but, they will once Bill Clinton sends in ground troops. So
far, this war has largely been somewhat akin to shooting fish in a
barrel. The Serbs are the fish and NATO, with 90% US Air support, are
shooting them in a way that the Serbs have only limited capability of
returning meaningful fire.

It is obvious even to non-military types like me at this point that the
supposed Clinton objectives in this war cannot be won with air power
alone - any more than they could in North Vietnam. On the ground, it
appears, and has been so reported by the Europeans, the Yugoslav
army has decimated the KLA terrorists who controlled about
30%-40% of Kosovo a year ago. They have been driven back across
the border into their native state of Albania.

I am still puzzled as to how the United States of America has become
allied with an Albanian terrorist drug dealing gang like the KLA. But,
here we are and we Americans so far have allowed a president whom
we believed lied under oath to a grand jury to lead the world into a
war that will, at a minimum, rekindle the global arms race.

Juan Pablo Cordoba Elias wrote in an article I quoted in early March of
this year, "Kosovo represents a strategic zone for terrorism and drug
trade. Terrorists are trained in Albania in Ljabinot and Kuks as well
as in the military schools in the municipality of Bayram Curri, that
borders on Yugoslavia. It is also known that the training camps exist
in Libane, near Elbasan, Surca on the mountain Dajti, and some other
on Kosovo itself, for example Prizren, but also outside Kosovo, as well
as in Montenegro, Macedonia and Sweden. From the ideological point
of view, Albanian terroristic organizations arose from the military
ultra-left wing. For example, the oldest movement, so-called "National
liberation of Kosovo" originated from four previously separate secret
organizations: "National liberation movement", "Marxian-Leninist
organization of Kosovo", "Communist Marxian-Leninist party of
Albanians in Yugoslavia" and "National red front".

"It is well known that this terroristic internal structure was supported
by Albanian communist leader Enver Hoxha - died in 1985 - and
former Albanian president Sali Berisa. Most of people recruited in
Balkans are conservative villagers - descendants of 'balists', famous
Albanian fascists who, together with Italians, fought against Serbs
during World War II. Editor's Note: This is the same group who were
responsible for the Serb Holocaust, the slaughter of almost 1,000,000
Serbs during the German occupation of Yugoslavia "If we add to all
this the fact that the terrorists are mostly Moslems, it seems that
things are getting quite another dimension.

"The Commanding center of the so-called 'Kosovo Liberation Army'
(KLA) is consisted of military and police forces that self proclaimed
republic of Kosovo tried to create until 1992 as its own constitutional
forces. Both organizations, "National Kosovo liberation movement"
and "Liberation Army" are typical terroristic organization by their
organized structure, with leaders outside Kosovo and Metohia.

"It is considered that there are around 6.000 trained terrorists on
Kosovo and Metohia, and that 3.000 more are on the training courses
in Albania, Turkey and western part of Germany. The Intelligence
center of the "liberation army" - located somewhere in the region near
Pristina - is not only in charge of Kosovo and Metohia but also all the
places in Former Yugoslavia inhabited by Albanians."

Apparently quite a few of this group have now been driven out of
Kosovo by the Serbian forces, or killed. Yet, the Washington based
media, until this week, has been remarkably silent about just who the
KLA is and why the Serbs are so determined to send them packing
back to Albania.

I find it a little hard to believe that, if I can ferret out the real story
through my limited sources, the real story is unknown in both
government and network media sources. Yet, it is only just beginning
to come out, and the opposition to it being told to the American
people is astounding. The angry e-mail I have received for telling the
story that the Washington Times is finally telling leads me to believe a
lot of people know that the war in Yugoslavia is not at all what it is
being reported to be.

However, little by little the real story IS coming out. Just today I
received the following information from Bob Dejurdjevic at Truth in
Media: (www.truthinmedia.com) "Recently obtained intelligence
documents show that drug agents in five countries, including the
United States, believe the KLA has aligned itself with an extensive
organized crime network centered in Albania that smuggles heroin and
some cocaine to buyers throughout Western Europe and, to a lesser
extent, the United States.

"The documents tie members of the Albanian Mafia to a drug
smuggling cartel based in Kosovo's provincial capital, Pristina. The
cartel is manned by ethic Albanians who are members of the Kosovo
National Front, whose armed wing is the KLA. The documents show it
is one of the most powerful heroin smuggling organizations in the
world, with much of its profits being diverted to the KLA to buy
weapons.

"The clandestine movement of drugs over a collection of land and sea
routes from Turkey through Bulgaria, Greece and Yugoslavia to
Western Europe and elsewhere is so frequent and massive that
intelligence officials have dubbed the circuit the "Balkan Route."

The American people, and most of Europe, have been deceived. Have
the heads of government - Bill Clinton and Tony Blair - been
deceived? Or, is some other agenda being advanced, under the cover
of a dropping bombs on civilian targets for "humanitarian" purposes?
The stock market is going through the roof - especially for some
stocks - such as those pertaining to the arms race.

To comment: mmostert@originalsources.com

If you like Mary's daily column, you'll LOVE her monthly
in-depth column and issue research in the REAGAN MONITOR
monthly newsletter. Start your subscription with the April
edition which explores the Y2K Problem in Russia, with a guest
article by a Russian computer expert. Also, what are the
qualities needed in the next President and WHICH OF THE
ANNOUNCED CANDIDATES BEST FITS THE JOB DESCRIPTION!
The print version is $34.95 and e-mail edition is $16.95. Click
Here to Order Online. Or call toll free: 877-821-6244.

To E-mail Original Sources - Click Here

Website: http://www.originalsources.com
To E-Mail Mary Mostert, Analyst - mmostert@originalsources.com
Fax # (530) 642-8710

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.