A Ho Chi Minh City museum that honors Vietnam war protesters features a photograph of Sen. John Kerry being greeted by the general secretary of the Communist Party, Comrade Do Muoi.
A snapshot of the display in the Vietnamese Communist War Remnants Museum – formerly known as the "War Crimes Museum" – was acquired over the weekend by Jeffrey M. Epstein of Vietnam Vets for the Truth, a group opposing Kerry's campaign for the presidency.
Kerry's national campaign spokesman was not immediately available for comment.
The snapshot of the display, which depicts a July 1993 meeting, was forwarded to Epstein by Bob Shirley, one of more than 200 members of Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth who signed an open letter questioning Kerry's fitness to serve as commander in chief.
Epstein said the picture of the display was taken by Bill Lupetti, a Swift Boat Veteran who currently is visiting Vietnam.
Epstein said the display photograph's "unquestionable significance lies in its placement in the American protesters' section of the War Crimes Museum" in Ho Chi Minh City, the former Saigon.
"The Vietnamese communists clearly recognize John Kerry's contributions to their victory," he said. "This find can be compared to the discovery of a painting of Neville Chamberlain hanging in a place of honor in Hitler's Eagle's Nest in 1945."
Below the display photograph are explanatory placards in English, French, Vietnamese and Chinese.
The English placard reads: "Mr. Do Muoi, Secretary General of the Vietnamese Communist Party met with Congressman and Veterans Delegation in Vietnam (July 15-18, 1993)."
Epstein's group says the exhibit refutes Kerry's insistence his anti-war protests did not render support to the enemy in time of war.
"The Vietnamese communists clearly feel that the American anti-war protesters were a very important force in undermining support in the United States for American war efforts, a force that contributed materially to ultimate communist victory in 1975," the group said in a statement.
Vietnam Vets for the Truth says it was established to organize a rally publicizing "Kerry's lies" during the "Winter Soldier" hearings in the U.S. Senate in 1971. The rally, called "Kerry Lied," will be held on Capitol Hill Sept. 12.
The Swift Boat Veterans also have called on Kerry to stop unauthorized use of their images in national campaign advertising.The group says only two of the 20 officers in one photo support him and 11 have signed the letter condemning the candidate.
One veteran in the photo, William Shumadine, said Kerry's use of the photo "is a complete misrepresentation to the public and a total fraud."
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 1, 2004 01:45:08 PM new
More right wing #*!@. Get over it. There is a reason we lost the Vietnam War, we were wrong. File the domino theory theory next to the WOMD of this administration.
Friends don't let friends vote Republican!
posted on June 1, 2004 02:19:01 PM new
Time for you to refill your lithium prescription Dave.
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 1, 2004 02:46:38 PM newI understand the military @#$%$#
Because thats what the voices tell you to say?
Kerry spoke of meeting negotiators on Vietnam
By Michael Kranish and Patrick Healy, Globe Staff, 3/25/2004
WASHINGTON -- In a question-and-answer session before a Senate committee in 1971, John F. Kerry, who was a leading antiwar activist at the time, asserted that 200,000 Vietnamese per year were being "murdered by the United States of America" and said he had gone to Paris and "talked with both delegations at the peace talks" and met with communist representatives.
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 1, 2004 02:54:54 PM new
Yes, Bear I know republicans have difficulty with this concept but try to grasp this. In order to negotiate you speak to both sides not one side.
posted on June 1, 2004 03:01:20 PM new
Must be why you demo's speak out of both sides of you mouth.
-------------
How North Vietnam Won The War
By Grunt.com
Grunt.com | April 26, 2004
What did the North Vietnamese leadership think of the American antiwar movement? What was the purpose of the Tet Offensive? How could the U.S. have been more successful in fighting the Vietnam War? Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, answers these questions in the following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist [in The Wall Street Journal, 3 August 1995]. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army, received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. He later became editor of the People's Daily, the official newspaper of Vietnam. He now lives in Paris, where he immigrated after becoming disillusioned with the fruits of Vietnamese communism.
Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?
Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said,
"We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."
Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?
A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.
Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?
A: Keenly.
Q: Why?
A: Those people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.
Q: How could the Americans have won the war?
A: Cut the Ho Chi Minh trail inside Laos. If Johnson had granted [Gen. William] Westmoreland's requests to enter Laos and block the Ho Chi Minh trail, Hanoi could not have won the war.
Q: Anything else?
A: Train South Vietnam's generals. The junior South Vietnamese officers were good, competent and courageous, but the commanding general officers were inept.
Q: Did Hanoi expect that the National Liberation Front would win power in South Vietnam?
A: No. Gen. [Vo Nguyen] Giap [commander of the North Vietnamese army] believed that guerrilla warfare was important but not sufficient for victory. Regular military divisions with artillery and armor would be needed. The Chinese believed in fighting only with guerrillas, but we had a different approach. The Chinese were reluctant to help us. Soviet aid made the war possible. Le Duan [secretary general of the Vietnamese Communist Party] once told Mao Tse-tung that if you help us, we are sure to win; if you don't, we will still win, but we will have to sacrifice one or two million more soldiers to do so.
Q: Was the National Liberation Front an independent political movement of South Vietnamese?
A: No. It was set up by our Communist Party to implement a decision of the Third Party Congress of September 1960. We always said there was only one party, only one army in the war to liberate the South and unify the nation. At all times there was only one party commissar in command of the South.
Q: Why was the Ho Chi Minh trail so important?
A: It was the only way to bring sufficient military power to bear on the fighting in the South. Building and maintaining the trail was a huge effort, involving tens of thousands of soldiers, drivers, repair teams, medical stations, communication units.
Q: What of American bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail?
A: Not very effective. Our operations were never compromised by attacks on the trail. At times, accurate B-52 strikes would cause real damage, but we put so much in at the top of the trail that enough men and weapons to prolong the war always came out the bottom. Bombing by smaller planes rarely hit significant targets.
Q: What of American bombing of North Vietnam?
A: If all the bombing had been concentrated at one time, it would have hurt our efforts. But the bombing was expanded in slow stages under Johnson and it didn't worry us. We had plenty of times to prepare alternative routes and facilities. We always had stockpiles of rice ready to feed the people for months if a harvest were damaged. The Soviets bought rice from Thailand for us.
Q: What was the purpose of the 1968 Tet Offensive?
A: To relieve the pressure Gen. Westmoreland was putting on us in late 1966 and 1967 and to weaken American resolve during a presidential election year.
Q: What about Gen. Westmoreland's strategy and tactics caused you concern?
A: Our senior commander in the South, Gen. Nguyen Chi Thanh, knew that we were losing base areas, control of the rural population and that his main forces were being pushed out to the borders of South Vietnam. He also worried that Westmoreland might receive permission to enter Laos and cut the Ho Chi Minh Trail.
In January 1967, after discussions with Le Duan, Thanh proposed the Tet Offensive. Thanh was the senior member of the Politburo in South Vietnam. He supervised the entire war effort. Thanh's struggle philosophy was that "America is wealthy but not resolute," and "squeeze tight to the American chest and attack." He was invited up to Hanoi for further discussions. He went on commercial flights with a false passport from Cambodia to Hong Kong and then to Hanoi. Only in July was his plan adopted by the leadership. Then Johnson had rejected Westmoreland's request for 200,000 more troops. We realized that America had made its maximum military commitment to the war. Vietnam was not sufficiently important for the United States to call up its reserves. We had stretched American power to a breaking point. When more frustration set in, all the Americans could do would be to withdraw; they had no more troops to send over.
Tet was designed to influence American public opinion. We would attack poorly defended parts of South Vietnam cities during a holiday and a truce when few South Vietnamese troops would be on duty. Before the main attack, we would entice American units to advance close to the borders, away from the cities. By attacking all South Vietnam's major cities, we would spread out our forces and neutralize the impact of American firepower. Attacking on a broad front, we would lose some battles but win others. We used local forces nearby each target to frustrate discovery of our plans. Small teams, like the one which attacked the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, would be sufficient. It was a guerrilla strategy of hit-and-run raids. [lloks like a re-writing of history with the benefit of hindsight]
Q: What about the results?
A: Our losses were staggering and a complete surprise;. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for re-election. The second and third waves in May and September were, in retrospect, mistakes. Our forces in the South were nearly wiped out by all the fighting in 1968. It took us until 1971 to re-establish our presence, but we had to use North Vietnamese troops as local guerrillas. If the American forces had not begun to withdraw under Nixon in 1969, they could have punished us severely. We suffered badly in 1969 and 1970 as it was.
Q: What of Nixon?
A: Well, when Nixon stepped down because of Watergate we knew we would win. Pham Van Dong [prime minister of North Vietnam] said of Gerald Ford, the new president, "he's the weakest president in U.S. history; the people didn't elect him; even if you gave him candy, he doesn't dare to intervene in Vietnam again." We tested Ford's resolve by attacking Phuoc Long in January 1975. When Ford kept American B-52's in their hangers, our leadership decided on a big offensive against South Vietnam.
Q: What else?
A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 1, 2004 05:57:48 PM newThe snapshot of the display, which depicts a July 1993 meeting
And the war had been over for HOW long at that point?
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on June 1, 2004 10:49:47 PM newWhat Former POWs Have to Say About John Kerry
Comments of former POW, MIKE BENGE
I keep hearing Vietnam Veteran everytime this joker makes a speech. Below adds some perspective.
As Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, considers a bid for the White House, Americans should know a few things about him that he might prefer go unmentioned - and I don't mean his $75 haircuts.
When Mr. Kerry pontificated at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on Veterans Day, a group of veterans turned their backs on him and walked away.
They remembered Mr. Kerry as the anti-war activist who testified before Congress during the war, accusing veterans of being war criminals. The dust jacket of Mr. Kerry's pro-Hanoi book, "The New Soldier," features a photograph of his ragged band of radicals mocking the U.S. Marine Corps Memorial, which depicts the flag-raising on Iwo Jima, with an upside-down American flag.
Retired Gen. George S. Patton III charged that Mr. Kerry's actions as an anti-war activist had "given aid and comfort to the enemy," as had the actions of Ramsey Clark and Jane Fonda. Also, Mr. Kerry lied when he threw what he claimed were his war medals over the White House fence; he later admitted they weren't his. Now they are displayed on his office wall.
Long after he changed sides in congressional hearings, Mr. Kerry lobbied for renewed trade relations with Hanoi. At the same time, his cousin C. Stewart Forbes, chief executive for Colliers International, assisted in brokering a $905 million deal to develop a deep-sea port at Vung Tau, Vietnam ??? an odd coincidence.
As noted in the Inside Politics column of Nov. 14 (Nation), historian Douglas Brinkley is writing Mr. Kerry's biography. Hopefully, he'll include the senator's latest ignominious feat: preventing the Vietnam Human Rights Act (HR2833) from coming to a vote in the Senate, claiming human rights would deteriorate as a result. His actions sent a clear signal to Hanoi that Congress cares little about the human rights for which so many Americans fought and died.
The State Department ranked Vietnam among the 10 regimes worldwide least tolerant of religious freedom. Recently, 354 churches of the Montagnards, a Christian ethnic minority, were forcibly disbanded, and by mid-October, more than 50 Christian pastors and elders had been arrested in Dak Lak province alone. On Oct. 29, the secret police executed three Montagnards by lethal injection simply for protesting religious repression. The communists are conducting a pogrom against the Montagnards, forcing Christians to drink a mixture of goat's blood and alcohol and renounce Christianity. Thousands have been killed or imprisoned or have just "disappeared." The Montagnards lost one-half of their adult male population fighting for the United States, and without them, there might be thousands more American names on that somber black granite wall at the Vietnam memorial.
As Mr. Kerry contemplates a run for the presidency, people must remember that he has fought harder for Hanoi as an anti-war activist and a senator than he did against the Vietnamese communists while serving in the Navy in Vietnam.
MICHAEL BENGE Foreign Service officer and former Vietnam POW (1968 to 1973)
Comments of former POW Joe Crecca
Seattle Post Intelligencger
February 8, 2004
Kerry doesn't deserve veterans' support
By JOE CRECCA
GUEST COLUMNIST
The rigors and hardships of being a POW aside, I remember the so-called "peace movement" and peace marches and rallies that were taking place back home in the United States.
Our captors were more than willing, within their means, to provide us with any and all anti-U.S. and anti-Vietnam War propaganda. Without a choice in the matter, we listened to the "Voice of Vietnam" broadcasts by "Hanoi Hannah" and were shown newspaper and magazine photos and articles about those opposing the war back in the states.
One of the peace marchers' standard slogans was, "Bring our boys home now and alive." The warped thinking of such people was that by demonstrating against U.S. involvement in Vietnam, they'd be shortening the war and reducing the number of American casualties.
These demonstrators would also try to make one believe that their efforts would bring POWs like me home sooner. They were utterly wrong on both counts, not to mention the detrimental effect their actions had on the morale of our troops and our POWs.
John F. Kerry was not just one of these demonstrators. He was leading them.
These demonstrations for peace had the exact opposite effect of what they purported to accomplish. Instead of shortening the war the "peace movement" served only to protract the conflict, resulting in a vastly greater number of Americans killed and wounded, greater economic burdens and longer periods of incarceration for Americans held captive in Vietnam. The war would have been over much sooner and with a much more favorable result if those in the "peace movement" would have rallied behind the commander in chief to accomplish our mission and then withdraw.
Many fewer names would be engraved into the black granite of the Vietnam Memorial if these people had supported our efforts instead of trying to derail them. After all, fighting against a political regime that up to that time had murdered more than a hundred million people couldn't have been all bad. But Kerry thought and acted differently. How many more names on the wall can he take credit for?
After the war ended, some of the war protesters hung on to their anti-war postures for a while. Some of them realized the errors of their ways almost immediately, but it took others 20 to 25 years.
Some, like Kerry, have not realized there was anything wrong with what he did. Instead, he hopes we will see him as a courageous Vietnam veteran. I do not. He hopes we will admire his bravery. I do not. I remember him more for his misdeeds upon his return from Vietnam.
However, in the present political arena, he evidently has succeeded in gaining the support of some well-meaning but misled Americans. Given his past record, it is just astonishing that he has garnered any support from our nation's veterans.
I hope people will reconsider their support for Kerry in light of his actions, which were so detrimental to our Vietnam combat soldiers, sailors and airmen, many of whom are not here today to tell you themselves.
Joe Crecca
Vietnam POW
22NOV66-18FEB73
Comments of former POW Jack Van Loan, Col., USAF (Ret.)
The State (Columbia, SC)
Thursday, January 22, 2004
Letters to the Editor
Throughout all the rhetoric in Iowa, it has been troubling to me that Sen. John Kerry's affiliation with the anti-war group, The Vietnam Veterans Against the War, has received almost no mention.
I believe it is important for all to remember that this group, by its very existence, gave comfort to the North Vietnamese leadership and by so doing lengthened the war, thereby causing more American casualties and, not incidentally, lengthened my stay as a POW in the Hanoi Hilton.
Though I have attempted through a mutual confidant to obtain an explanation from Sen. Kerry, none has been forthcoming. Thus I have concluded he clearly lacks the judgment and credibility to represent his party in our national election, much less be our president.
JACK VAN LOAN
Col., USAF (Ret.)
Comments of Former POW Sam Johnson, as reported by the Washington Times Feburary 11, 2004
"Rep. Sam Johnson, Texas Republican, who spent nearly seven years in a prisoner-of-war camp in Vietnam, said yesterday the photograph of Mr. Kerry and Miss Fonda will hurt him nevertheless.
"I think it symbolizes how two-faced he is, talking about his war reputation, which is questionable on the one hand, and then coming out against our veterans who were fighting over the other," Mr. Johnson said.
Mr. Johnson recalled that his North Vietnamese captors played recordings of Miss Fonda telling U.S. troops to give up the war. "Seeing this picture of Kerry with her at antiwar demonstrations in the United States makes me want to throw up".
Comments of former POW Paul Galanti, as reported by John M. Gilonne of the Los Angeles Times, Feb. 17, 2004
"Paul Galanti learned of Kerry's speech while held captive inside North Vietnam's infamous "Hanoi Hilton" prison. The Navy pilot had been shot down in June 1966 and spent nearly seven years as a prisoner of war.
During torture sessions, he said, his captors citied the antiwar speeches as "an example of why we should cross over to (their) side."
"The Viet Cong didn't think they had to win the war on the battlefield."Galanti said, "because thanks to these protesters they were going to win it on the streets of San Francisco and Washington."
He says Kerry broke a covenant among servicemen never to make public criticisms that might jeopardize those still in battle or in the hands of the enemy.
Because he did, Galanti said, "John Kerry was a traitor to the men he served with."
Now retired and living in Richmond, VA., Galanti, 64, refuses to cool his ire toward Kerry. "I don't plan to set it aside. I don't know anyone who does," he said. "The Vietnam memorial has thousands of additional names due to John Kerry and others like him."
Comments of former POW Mark Smith
WHO IS JOHN KERRY?
"John Kerry Vietnam War hero." Everyday the media tiptoes around John Kerry as if he is an icon of service to the Nation. But why is his service to the nation in war not balanced against his return to longhaired freakdom to march against his fellow veterans still in the war, including myself? I was especially incensed when my communist captors quoted him in propaganda.
I had a discussion with Senator Kerry in Bangkok Thailand. He made some surprising statements during that exchange. He stated emphatically that I should provide him with any information I had on missing Americans. This he stated he would take to Hanoi to discuss with the Communists. He didn't seem to understand the Communists knew where the POWs were and needed no help from him to "find them." Expert on war? Hardly! He then stated that no matter what I had there would be no military operation to rescue them. In other words, Senator Kerry felt that Americans were worth talking about, but not worth fighting for.
Kerry brought up his service on patrol boats in Vietnam in a very defensive way with me, "you weren't the only one in that war, I was on those patrol boats"; My answer, "Surely you are not attempting to compare anything you did in that war to my contribution to that endeavor!" I did not say that to belittle the Senator, but to only give him a reality check. He said he had an important appointment. The insinuation was it dealt with the MIAs.
I was invited to lunch by his staffer Francis. She stated in an adoring manner that John Kerry would someday be the President of the United States. My answer was short and succinct, "Based on what?" She said, "He's a war hero." I said, "But he then marched in a filthy uniform and threw his medals over the White House fence." She then told me the medals were someone else's. I merely stated it showed disrespect to honors received on the battlefield by "Someone." End of discussion on that.
Someone in the Asian customs stated a rumor that Senator Kerry purchased a tiger skin in Vietnam and officials were told to ignore it. Somehow Vietnam Veterans got the story and as far as I know, there has never been a denial from the great "environmentalist" John Kerry. But true or not it gives a good look at how Kerry operates.
Take the "war hero" the next. Take the "Champion of MIAs" one day and the "we aren't going to war for them" the next day and you have John Kerry.
Senator Kerry threatened to order me before his committee unless I gave him intelligence to carry to Hanoi. My answer? "you do not have to order me before your committee, I'll be there." I waited but, when I called Francis and said I was in America and ready to put the record straight on the rumor about Ross Perot being spread by committee staff, she said. "I'm sorry Mark we have run out of money to bring you here." I said; "I have miles to burn and will pay my own way." She said she would discuss it with Kerry and get back to me. I never heard from her or the "War Hero" again. Vietnam Veterans beware.
The best way to describe John Kerry's attempts to be all things to all people is, "Heinz 57."
There has been much sniping at President Bush for being a fighter pilot in the Air National Guard. Liberals who seem to believe September Eleventh was somehow our fault and most surely the President's, laugh at his flying to an aircraft carrier to welcome home U.S. Troops. They said he looked silly dressed as a pilot. No candidate for President had more right to dress like that, than George Bush; he is a fighter pilot. Where were these people, when the draft dodging Clinton wore a "Tanker Jacket" when visiting the troops? A part of a uniform he evaded wearing in time of war.
I hope Kerry does not show up to see the troops, if elected, in the ragged field jacket and head band, he wore in the peace marches.
When time to honor a battlefield hero, I hope he does not have a "flashback" and throw our Nation's highest award over the White House fence. After all, he does think throwing other people's medals over that fence is all right.
Lastly, as Guard and Reserve Troops fight and die for our freedom, I don't want any Commander In Chief who would think their service a joke. Further, if the big time Vietnam Veteran Kerry knew a thing about the Vietnam War, other than how deep the river was, he would know Guard and Reserve Pilots regularly flew combat missions in Vietnam. I for one appreciated the support.
"War Hero?" O.K., he received the Silver Star. But, "Expert" on war? No John, but those of us who are, will take the honest leadership of President Bush anytime over you. You have not changed a bit from the time of the Vietnam War. Your wet finger is still in the air checking the political winds, before making any decision or changing one already made. We are at war and I know war. Your brand of equivocation on every issue costs lives in a war and I don't want more dead and wounded here and abroad. You went to war and then marched against it and those of us who still fought.
I know you as "Springtime Patriot" and then as a "Winter Soldier." People should look up what you said during your "Winter Soldier" days. You voted for the present war and now you condemn it. You may be an Ivy League graduate, but, your war record is minor league and your leadership is straight out of the "Waffle House." If being President is going to be based on medals earned in battle, there are a whole lot of us in front of you, John Kerry.
There is one last thing that places all of your fellow veterans ahead of you in the honor department, with the exception of a few of your fellow Solders. We had too much respect for our fellow warriors, who fell on the field of battle, to throw even our lowest award over the White House fence.
If you keep running on the "warrior ticket," you will lose sailor! For on that ticket, you are who you have always been.......NOBODY.
Mark A. Smith - DSC
Major, USA, Retired
Member, The Legion of Valor
Returned Prisoner of War
Torrance, CA 90504
posted on June 2, 2004 03:46:41 AM new
Oh, just keep supporting your boy Bush. Although, you know, I don't blame this whole mess we are in totally on Bush. He's too damned stupid to have thought of it himself. More than one article has been quoted calling him a puppet. Puppets are for children people. Grow up.
dave
Don't let bear get your dander up. Just ignore his comments. Remember that conservatives are experts at slinging propaganda. November will be here soon enough and the country will be back in capable hands once again. Although, it will take years upon years to undo the damage Bush has done.
Edited to add: What you all fail to understand is that it's better to NOT pizz off your enemies and the political structure of other countries is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS. Vietnam was not a threat to us, just as Iraq was not. Besides the fact that there is no true COMMUNISM in this world. It's SOCIALISM. Vietnam is a wound on this country that will never heal. Now we can add Iraq.
Cheryl
[ edited by cblev65252 on Jun 2, 2004 03:50 AM ]
posted on June 2, 2004 04:39:24 AM new
Bear and Linda_K, I was near Washington this past weekend and was able to talk with 12 to 15 Vets that were riding motorcycles to the wall. All but one want to get rid of your failed leader Bush. Your republican lies are not working any longer. Bringing up 10 year old stuff is just a bunch of republican lies. If you really want to know what is happening TODAY!!!! You need to get away from your computer and go out and talk to real people in the real world.
posted on June 2, 2004 06:30:37 AM new
Duhsquirrel sees a few disgruntled guys and calls it an overwhelming majority. The truth is that Kerry distinguished himself by representing the overwhelming majority of Vietnam vets. His testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee helped to end that losing battle.
"What infuriated John Kerry the most was the fact that Vietnam veterans had to fight for recognition and legitimacy in America After all, the combat, pain, suffering, loneliness, cold nights, hot days and heartache were the same as they'd been in Lexington, Concord, Iwo Jima, or Normandy. And in many ways, it was far worse."
Douglas Brinkley
posted on June 2, 2004 10:04:34 AM new
No wonder you dems are voting for kerry...you obviously don't know what you're talking about - and haven't read your history books. Communism was spreading.
cheryl's re-writing history with 'there were no communists' LOL better read what J.F. Kennedy had to say about communism IF you'd even believe what a democrat says - rather than what you choose to make up - or revise.
------------
bigpeepa - According to you this happened 10 years ago? You too had better read some history books. And here's a link about the motorcycle group that visited the WH over Memorial Day. http://us.cnn.com/2004/US/05/30/bush.motorcyclists.ap/
posted on June 2, 2004 10:11:48 AM new
Cheryl, I don't. Generally I am laughing when I post in response to his and Linda's "well" thougt out reactionary comments.
posted on June 2, 2004 11:39:48 AM newRemember that conservatives are experts at slinging propaganda.
Propaganda no, Fact yes.
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 2, 2004 12:24:50 PM new
Conservatives don't use facts except as fodder to spin into lies... just as they use kids as fodder to fight their nasty illegal battles.
posted on June 2, 2004 01:37:25 PM new
Well, bear - it's GOT to give you a good laugh to read that during our generation there was no threat/worry about the spread of communism. I suppose the cold war and Russia, Cuba, etc. didn't exist either, according to them too. It was all a figment of our country's imagination.
Pretty darn sad. And exactly why democrats can't be trusted to defend this country....they see no threats from anywhere...because they have their heads stuck in the sand.
posted on June 2, 2004 05:56:05 PM new
Yes Linda, it is a sad fact about the demo gogs, they will not accept the facts even when it hits them in the face.
Like my favorite, in your face columinst writes:
"Liberals always claim to know exactly what to do as soon as it's too late. After Muslims attack with airplanes, they want to investigate flight schools. After Muslims attack with shoe-bombs, they want to
investigate shoes. After a Muslim introduces E. coli into New York's water supply, liberals will be enraged that Muslim immigrants taking pictures of New York water treatment plants weren't investigated more aggressively -- as soon as they are done blaming Bush for not stopping the attack
amid their caterwauling about the detention of Muslim immigrants. Liberals are the only known species whose powers of reasoning are not improved by the benefit of hindsight." --Ann Coulter
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
