|
SwiftVets.com Service to Country
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
fortdixlover Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 12 May 2004 Posts: 1476
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:29 pm Post subject: The full cultural legacy of Kerry and his VVAW |
|
|
Veterans have focused on Kerry's stealing of their honor and reputations as defenders of America and of liberty.
Would it be unreasonable to suggest a much more widepread, damaging legacy of Kerry's 1970's propaganda and hissy fits in front of the U.S. Congress and media regarding his VVAW activities?
I submit that John Kerry played a major role in the severe damage inflicted upon our culture in the 1970's. He aided and abetted the respectability of utter contempt for authority, respectability of contempt for cultural norms of past centuries that predated the U.S., and respectability of "dictator worship" and "communism worship" by our youth. The effect became pervasive, and is promulgated in our schools and universities even today.
The cornucopia of benefits besides Stolen Honor? How about breakdown of the family, increased drug abuse and addiction, AIDS, and other social ills due to habits that became 'fashionable'?
Could Kerry could be rightly described as a person who promoted not just "Stolen Honor" but far worse, a Stolen Culture?
I think vets sense this, and that is why they despise him far more than their stolen reputations might account for.
-- FDL _________________ "Millions For Defense, Not One Cent For Tribute" - Thomas Jefferson on paying ransom to Muslim corsairs (pirates).
Last edited by fortdixlover on Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:41 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
neverforget Vice Admiral
Joined: 18 Jul 2004 Posts: 875
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Amen. He is an enemy of our country and culture. However, there were a number of the same types who began at Berkeley in early 60's and branched out much too quickly. _________________ US Army Security Agency
1965-1971 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Barbie2004 Commander
Joined: 18 Sep 2004 Posts: 338
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
neverforget wrote:
Quote: | However, there were a number of the same types who began at Berkeley in early 60's and branched out much too quickly. |
Certainly Kerry played a major part of that distruction, and undoubtedly I agree that he was a "useful idiot" and certainly a "knowing" useful idiot. But I have a few questions that have been plauging me.
How do you think that happened, the "branch[ing] much too quickly"?
What was behind it? What exactly facilitated that "branching"?
And, how did they "organize" their effort? They certainly didn't have the internet back then. So how did they get their "useful idiots"? How did they know who to target? Certainly they weren't right all the time, so why didn't anyone ever snitch on what was going on? How have they kept those "in the know" quiet as to what was going on?
I would really like to get to the bottom of what was behind all of that. I know that they were certainly the "communist" behind it, but that is too nonspecific for me.
I would really like to know specifically who and how they "branched", for I fear that if we don't figure it out, we may be doomed for a repeat of history.
Please understand that I agree with what you have said, I just would like to get ideas on exactly who, what, and how in more specific terms.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Beatrice1000 Resource Specialist
Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 1179 Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Barbie2004 wrote: | ..I would really like to get to the bottom of what was behind all of that. I know that they were certainly the "communist" behind it, but that is too nonspecific for me. |
Barbie2004: Don’t know if you’ve seen this: ** SHADOW PARTY PROJECT **
Also, in David Horowitz’s new book, he talks about exactly what you are questioning - who and how they “branched.” I’m halfway thru the book; it’s a slim volume, but so packed with information - a really good beginning place to get a grip on who these people are, what they believe in and what they are currently up to .....check it out. ** UNHOLY ALLIANCE **
Horowitz: “In a long section called "The Mind of the Left" I attempt to describe its evolution from the Communist heyday to the present. ...The analysis of America that drives the left today -- even leftists as otherwise sensible and "democratic" as Todd Gitlin -- is remarkably similar to the views of America held by Stalinists fifty years ago (and of Hamas and al-Qaeda as expressed in their manifestos) ....." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JimRobson Lieutenant
Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 242 Location: Jacksonville FL
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good topic.
The Berkley thing seems to have focused on the "Free Speech Movement" but I believe that there were sleeper cells of Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and Socialist Workers Party (SWP) that sprung in to action politicize the activities.
I believe that one of the prime movers in the swing to the left was Saul Alinsky. Here is a very brief summary of his organizing principles. He claimed to be non-socialist but I'm thinking that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... It's a DUCK! His techniques were amazingly similar to those advocated by Leon Trotsky and embodied in the 60's by the Socialist Workers Party. That is to take existing popular movements and to politicize and radicalize the ordinary citizens who were active in each area. (Civil Rights, Womens Rights, Free Speech, Urban Renewal etc., and of course Anti-War. ) Based on FBI files and the Winter Soldier information it is proven that VVAW was taken over by SWP.
http://www.e911.com/exacts/EA051.html
Quote: | Saul D. Alinsky (1909 - 1967) is the father of modern American radicalism. He developed strategies and tactics that convert the enormous emotional energy of grassroots groups into effective anti-government, anti-institutional, and anti-corporate activism. His ideas are widely taught today as a set of model behaviors and actions, and used with an emotional commitment to victory that goes well beyond those who become his targets.
Grassroots pressure on large organizations will grow. Studying Alinsky's rules and developing empathetic counteractive strategies can level the playing field, especially during high-profile public debate and decision making.
Here are eight of Alinsky's 13 Rules for Radicals. They take advantage of the patterns of weakness, arrogance, repeated mistakes, and miscalculations large organizations and their leadership make:
1. Power is not only what you have, but what the target thinks you have.
2. Never go outside the expertise of your people. Feeling secure stiffens the backbone.
3. Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the target. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety, and uncertainty.
4. Make the target live up to its own book of rules. If the rule is that every letter or E-mail gets a reply, send thousands.
5. Ridicule, especially against organizational leaders, is a potent weapon. There's no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force concessions.
6. A good tactic is one your people enjoy. They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They'll even suggest better ones.
7. Keep the pressure on. Never let up. Keep trying new tactics to keep the opposition off balance. As the target masters one approach, hit them with something new.
8. Pick the target. Target an individual, personalize the attack, polarize and demoralize his/her supporters. Go after people, not institutions. Hurting, harassing, and humiliating individuals, especially leaders, causes more rapid organizational change.
This sampling of Alinsky's rules illustrates why opposition groups enjoy opposing and why corporations and institutions fail to win. Simply put, large organizations are never as committed to victory as their opposition is committed to defeating them. There are few surprises here, just unprepared organizations.
* Adapted from Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals by Saul D. Alinsky, copyright 1971, revised edition 1989, Vintage Books, New York |
One of the modern day proponents of Alinsky's principles is the "Midwest Academy." Sounds innocent enough by name, but check the content.
http://www.midwestacademy.com/
This info is just for openers. I don't have time to elaborate right now. _________________ ETN2 PTF2 (Littlecreek Underwater Demolition Unit 2 1963)
http://www.thewebplace.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
USAFE5 PO2
Joined: 23 Aug 2004 Posts: 362 Location: Reno Nevada
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another great book is "Treason" by Ann Coulter.
She shows how the Communist party infiltrated our government in the 30' and how high up this went and how long it lasted. _________________ "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I’m here to help." Ronald Reagan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anker-Klanker Admiral
Joined: 04 Sep 2004 Posts: 1033 Location: Richardson, TX
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not to be planting grand conspiracy theories, BUT...
I believe I remember General Giap stating in his memoirs that the NVM Communists spent several times the amount of money on anti-war protestors in the US than they did in their own prosecution of the war. I've seen no amount mentioned, but this sum must have been HUGE. Does it look to you that the anti-war protests, Winter Soldiers, Kerry's testimony before the Senate, etc., consumed vast amounts of money? Do you think that maybe that money might have been invested in planting moles who would reemerge at some future propituous time?
I also believe the fact that the Rumanian(?) Colonel(?) who stated his agency was responsible for writing much of the anti-war propaganda for the VVAW and others is an indicator that the real organizer behind this whole effort was none other than the Soviet Union. Which is probably where the NVM Communist funding came from, as well.
Added: Then there's George Soros - Hungarian multi-millionaire (or billionaire?). Everybody knows he made big money in the international currency exchange market. But to make money in that market you have to have money to make money. Where did he get his "seed" money to start with. George Soros, from the not-so-distantly USSR-dominated country of Hungary.
Put it all together, and what do you get? Especially when all the old VVAW characters emerge just when the "most liberal" Senator seeks election as President - with the backing of the socialist elements of Europe? Yep, there are lots of very strange and unique things about this past election - things, events and coincidences we've not seen in any other election.
There may be a whole lot more to the story and the election that just occured than any of us imagine.
Last edited by Anker-Klanker on Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
I B Squidly Vice Admiral
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 879 Location: Cactus Patch
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Damn if that doesn't read like the sylabus for DNC101 at the Carville & McAuliff School of Public Mendacity. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10 Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004 Posts: 6503
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think, perhaps, this might well be one of the more intriguing and important topics I have yet to read that have arisen from post-election analysis in this forum. I certainly agree with what appears to be a consensus that understanding the nature of the "enemy within" is critical to combating the influence that they now historically bring to bear on any contemporary socio-political issue. It was the mechanism of employing this influence that, after all, led to the invention of John Kerry, VVAW champion.
The piece on Alinsky was almost scary in it's revelations yet, oddly enough, perhaps suggested a roadmap for countering the "counter-culture", a concept that should be almost irresistable to forum members looking to continue in the pro-active mode that the Swiftees employed. At first glance, I see elements already being employed by such groups as "Protest Warrior" and "Communists for Kerry".
Likewise the work of David Horowitz is an excellent primer and introduction to the "intellectual" underpinnings of the contemporary left. I have "The Anti Chomsky Reader" at the ready and "Unholy Alliance" will be ordered post-haste.
Excellent thread...compliments to all contributors. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
depotoo Seaman
Joined: 22 Aug 2004 Posts: 150 Location: WPB FL
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
i, having grown up during that era have always felt it was a time of such turmoil that i have mostly bad memories of it - which is sad, as i was a teen and feel as though an important part of my life was stolen from me. _________________ May God Bless us all and let truth reign. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Beatrice1000 Resource Specialist
Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 1179 Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
JimRobson wrote: | One of the modern day proponents of Alinsky's principles is the "Midwest Academy." Sounds innocent enough by name, but check the content. http://www.midwestacademy.com/ |
This is interesting. They list all sorts of ways to have social change (i.e., people helping people) and then toss out everything except “direct action organizing” which appears at a scan to be aggressive and manipulative. In reading about some organizing methods, I immediately thought of Jesse Jackson (“The key lies in figuring out the cost to the Decision Maker of various actions that your organization can take in the public arena, so that you can get concessions for not taking them.”). Then in the promotion of a book in another area, lo and behold, who else but Jesse Jackson as one of the endorsers!
Then there’s the little slide show: “The Right Wing Attacks Democracy Itself”: ..undermines the constitution (“The Patriot Act”), rigs elections, preemptive war, pack federal judgships with extremists...”
The photos of classes are of very young kids. They end with a commentary about the election -- which seems odd and not associated with the other information here, but shows who they are quite clearly:
(excerpts/emphasis mine)
Quote: | “Weekly Commentary -- Stand and Fight” by the editor of “The Nation” (Horowitz notes that “The Nation” is the flagship of American radicalism.”):
One thing we can say for certain at this point, after the grieving, the anger, is that the country is still bitterly divided. We saw two turnouts and Two Nations last night.... The extremism and incompetence of this rightwing cabal has sharpened our focus to a razor's edge... Kerry... failed to use the moral message of "Two Americas" to erode Bush's edge.
Lessons:
1) People really are confused and manipulated (we have a mainstream media that continues to focus on irrelevant stories--Swift Boat, Rathergate...) This makes an expansion of the progressive media echo chamber all the more important; And,
2) Neoliberalism is broken beyond repair and people need to be offered a real alternative not just despair at this point. This is truly a non-violent Civil War between those who think government is basically screwed up and that they're on their own, and those who believe....what exactly? We've got to be much clearer on the latter. ...As America fights Islamic fundamentalism abroad, progressives are re-fighting the Enlightenment here at home. (The two new Senators from Oklahoma and South Carolina are leaders of our homegrown Taliban.)...
We need to start thinking along the lines of how to resist, delay, deflect, oppose and ultimately defeat the assault on our freedoms. As progressives, we will need to marshal at least as much dedication, purpose, strategic focus and tactical ruthlessness, ....And we should be thinking about the indispensable work of resistance. We need to identify legislative and administrative choke points where Bush's initiatives can be blocked, and make clear to both legislators and their constituents that the days of go-along in the interest of non-partisan comity have to stop.....
We all need to remember, and remind ourselves, and everyone else that there are two Nations--not Bush's America and some dissenters-- especially since I'd be willing to bet that numerically there are more of us. ...in 2004 there is an emerging progressive infrastructure capable of standing and fighting. Progressives should build on those structures put in place in this last cycle.... ** Commentary--Stand and Fight ** |
Neoliberalism is “broken beyond repair” -- (yes, I believe we call it neo-communism now, heh?); they don’t know what the “other side” believes but they don’t like it -- days of non-partisanship have to stop -- need to marshal “tactical ruthlessness”... I like the part about their focus sharpened to a “razor’s edge” -- the New Enlightenment.. yeegads!! The best part is that they need to remind themselves that there are two nations, not just Bush’s America and some dissenters.
“Midwest Academy” - what’s in a name.... seems like so many rocks you pick up these days you find something like this under it.
Last edited by Beatrice1000 on Sun Nov 28, 2004 9:19 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tiptie Lt.Jg.
Joined: 19 Aug 2004 Posts: 138 Location: Colorado
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
For the younger crowd (and others that were swayed by the MSM) this series is incredible listening:
Michael Medved did a wonderful show about the Vietnam war. It is available on audio cassette if you missed the original transcript.
Quote: | Three Big Lies About the Vietnam War
Speaker: Michael Medved
The Vietnam War ~ America's longest, most polarizing conflict ~ continues to divide Americans and to cast its shadow on contemporary policy debates. In the Presidential race between Bush and Kerry questions about the candidates' record during the Vietnam era (the President's National Guard service, Kerry's strident protests as leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War) often overshadowed discussion of more timely issues. These impassioned arguments about the Indochina conflict often confuse young people with no personal recollection or knowledge of Vietnam. This closely argued presentation makes clear the essential elements separating those who fought proudly (and bravely) in Southeast Asia from those who self-righteously opposed the war here at home. Michael Medved designates the "three big lies" that continue to poison our understanding and analysis of the war, arguing against common contentions: 1. That the Vietnam War represented an unconstituional conflict based upon American imperialism and a desire for world dominance 2. That the military lost the war on the battlefield, and in the process committed horrendous atrocities 3. That anti-war protestors became the true heroes of that turbulent era, and their efforts ultimately brought peace to both the US and Indochina Each of these three claims is a lie and a slander on America and her military. In this all new presentation, Michael Medved exposes the truth that's often hidden by the lies, and shows why and how distortions and outright falsehoods still wield their malevolent influence on too many of our fellow citizens. |
https://www.treefarmtapes.com/catalog/product.asp?productid=14142 _________________ "A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can put on his shoes." Mark Twain
USCG
61-69 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Barbie2004 Commander
Joined: 18 Sep 2004 Posts: 338
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks to everyone who has posted here.
I will be going through all of the links posted here as I have time, but I began with Beatrice's post containing FrontPage Magazine and David Horowitz's interview.
There are numerous intriguing quotes that I believe are worthy of repeating here (although there are certainly more, but I don't want to overload anyone).
Quoting David Horowitz
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15316
(emphasis mine in all cases):
Quote: | Everyone knows there is something strange going on when large numbers of individuals are protesting a war that liberated 25 million people from a sadistic monster, and when the Democratic Party has opted out of a war that we are winning and that we have to win. |
Quote: | But a decade of low profile organizing in the Clinton era, and then the assault of 9/11 which they saw as the revenge of the Third World and the Iraq War (and which they as an Imperialist strike) and the fact that they then got away with attacking their own country under attack has emboldened and inspired them. |
I wonder what he means by "low profile organizing"? Who organizing what?
Quote: | In Indo-china when Kennedy, Kerry, Dean and the other antiwar activists (myself included) were able to prevail in the political argument, and America cut and ran, the result was a bloodbath in Southeast Asia in which the Communists slaughtered two and a half million people. If we were to lose in Iraq and be forced to withdraw, there would be a bloodbath of all those who fought with us, and who resisted the terrorists, and then all those in the terrorists’ path. It would not probably reach the proportions of the Vietnam and Cambodian catastrophes immediately, but it would spread to other Muslim states whose governments the radicals are seeking to overthrow and eventually come home to the United States, something that did not happen in the Cold War with Communism. |
Apparently, Mr. Horowitz was an "anti-war" activist like "Kennedy, Kerry, and Dean." He was able to change and admit that he was wrong, what is Kennedy, Kerry, and Dean's excuse??
I beg to differ with Mr. Horowitz on the "communism" not "happening" in the United States. We have been battling communism via this election cycle! (and further, unfortunately)
Quote: | Why am I no longer part of the totalitarian cult (even though I never for a second would have conceded that I was a part of it at the time)? Ultimately, I don't really know. What broke my faith, however, is that I could not close my eyes to the practical results of our efforts. We -- the anti-Vietnam left -- helped to kill two and a half million people in Indo-China. We supported (however "critically") a bankrupt socialist system or an impossible socialist future without regard for the consequences of the destructive acts we committed to make it possible. I don't know why it disturbed me that our efforts led to a slaughter in Southeast Asia and did not disturb others -- John Kerry for example. |
He hits the nail on the head! John Kerry is indeed still part of the "totalitarian cult"!!
Quote: | As you have shown in your work, Conservatives are extremely weak in fighting political war. |
I noticed this myself and have always wondered why this is the case. They don't seem to articulate their position well, even though they are on the "right" side of the debate. Obviously having a "progressive" MSM doesn't help.
Quote: | A year and a half ago the Democratic Leadership began undermining the credibility of the commander-in-chief by calling him a liar over 16 perfectly true and relatively unimportant (if untrue) words in the State of the Union address. This assault was unconscionable and unjustified and has cost many American lives. It was a political war declared that the Democratic Party leaders on the President in the midst of a war, and it should have been fought as such. Instead, the White House apologized for the innocent words thinking that this would discourage the saboteurs. Since their agenda was to derail the war effort and unseat the President it did not discourage them. In fact it inflamed them. And we are paying the price with an election that should not have been this close and with a commander-in-chief gravely weakened in handling the threats not only in Iraq but from Iran and Syria as well. |
I never understood why the Bush camp, or even Bush himself, was too "gracious" for me. And the part about not challenging John Kerry's patriotism just infuriated me! I can't tell you how many letter I sent to the RNC and B-C Campaign to take off the gloves and reminded them that the MSM is NOT going to help, they have bring up these issues themselves. Kerry, Kennedy, Gore, & Krowd were nothing short of treasonous by these actions and they should have been called on the carpet!
Quote: | Democrats pretend to be appalled that patriotism would be an issue. But of course patriotism -- understood as rallying to the defense of America's security -- is an issue. Al Gore understands that -- which is why he attacked the President as unpatriotic -- as betraying Americans. So does John Kerry and the Democratic political apparatus which is accusing Bush of encouraging the terrorists and making the world a more dangerous place. There is no way to avoid this issue. The task is to put the shoe on the foot that it fits. |
Kerry and Krowd are evil, devious, teasonous, b@$t*^@$ (sorry, I most definately don't use this type of language, but no other word fits, except those that are worse!) and should have been and should be treated as such! They are undermining our soldiers in Iraq, not to mention this country if we should somehow not be successful in the middle east!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
BuffaloJack Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 1637 Location: Buffalo, New York
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nobody could ever take our honor away from us, but ourselves. John Kerry chose to abandon his honor and in doing so made it difficult for others to see the honor within the rest of us. The honor has always been there, untarnished and solid. It has taken 33 years to dust the dirt and debris from the honor we all hold, but it once again shines and will never again be allowed to be covered over. John Kerry's honor, though, cannot be recovered, he chose to throw it away. That was his choice, not ours, all we did was brush aside the tinsel and glitter that John chose to show instead of true honor. _________________ Swift Boats - Qui Nhon (12/69-4/70), Cat Lo (4/70-5/70), Vung Tau (5/70-12/71) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Beatrice1000 Resource Specialist
Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 1179 Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Barbie2004 wrote: | I beg to differ with Mr. Horowitz on the "communism" not "happening" in the United States. We have been battling communism via this election cycle! (and further, unfortunately) |
Where is the quote for the above comment regarding communism not happening in the U.S.? I'm a bit lost here... David's book is all about how the communist ideology has infiltrated the dem party and that "the Left is allied with Islamic radicals and influencing the dems approach to the War on Terror," yet I missed the part where he says that communism is not happening in the U.S. ??
FYI: David was more than just an anti-war activist, but was one of the founders of the New Left movement in the 1960s. As you quoted above, he had a change in thinking after we pulled out of Vietnam and 2-1/2 million people were slaughtered. Because of his historical knowledge and his knowing the Left from within, he offers a huge contribution to our country by informing the populace about these people and this movement. On the book jacket it says he is "feared and loathed by his enemies on the Left" -- and that was cause enough for me to get the book! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|