SwiftVets.com

KeithNolan · Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2004 7:08 pm Post subject:

TO FORTDIXLOVER: I might suggest that General Westmoreland (who put the search-and-destroy strategy into effect during the war) and the officers and men of Task Force Barker (who took that strategy to its most brutal extreme in My Lai and My Khe) had a lot more to do with damaging the reputation of Vietnam veterans than Kerry and the VVAW. Everybody knew who Medina and Calley were back in 1971. Who really noticed a talking head named John Kerry back then? A few viewers of the Dick Cavett show?

KWN

coldwarvet · Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2004 7:16 pm Post subject:

Mr. Nolan if you are so big on defending the VVAW here is the link where you can join. http://www.vvaw.org/ Or are you already a member? If Kerry is so proud of this chapter in his life why doesn't he post his winter soldier testimony on his web site.
_________________
Defender of the honor of those in harms way keeping us out of harms way.

"Peace is our Profession"
Strategic Air Command - Motto

USAF 75-79 Security Police

ASPB · Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2004 7:38 pm Post subject:

GoophyDog · Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2004 7:49 pm Post subject:

KeithNolan: If I thought you were a liar, I would most certainly say it straight up. I used prevaricate intentionally for the word, only in simplistic views indicates or refers to lies. The definition and intention in my response was "To stray from or evade the truth; equivocate." and that sir was the point I was making.

You make statements phrased in a manner to indicate they are fact yet have failed to provide any background or source material substantiating them. A case in point is this behind closed door, backroom fight between Kerry and Hubbard. Will you please provide the applicable references? To date I'm not able to locate any source documentation referring to this nor have I been able to locate any public condemnation by Kerry in regards to Hubbard. Would you please cite any of the detailed history of the VVAW that supports this disagreement?

When one candidate in, as you say, "a closely contested" election has gone on record regarding war atrocities occurring on a "daily basis" and is then found to have based some of his testimony on skewed, fabricated or otherwise unproven incidents, it behooves any responsible citizen to explore the issue to its fullest. Since the end decision will dramatically effect how our country conducts itself in the years to come, basing that decision on one person's say so would be irresponsibility taken to its greatest height.

What I have found, and those source documents are cited in several places within this web site, is that John Kerry, while still in the military, made broad sweeping statements in congressional testimony based on incomplete, skewed and even fabricated information. In the 30 years following that testimony Kerry has yet to address this issue publicly other than to say the statements were made "by an angry 27 year old" [sic].

Further, as a commissioned officer in the Armed Forces, Kerry failed to report any such incidents nor has he provided any documentation to substantiate his claims. (See Cavett debate, offer of providing depositions). Rather, his testimony and other activities after returning stateside and while still in the armed forces were used on several occasions to demoralize then POW's in North Vietnam (see Gap's statements re; assistance to their cause).

Were there atrocities in Vietnam? Yes, without a doubt and as has been recorded. This does not dismiss the false accusations by Kerry regarding his fellow service members in the Swift Boats, nor the millions of other vets he painted with the same broad brush of dishonor.

No, SBVT should not change its emphasis. Kerry's senate position is founded on these false and exaggerated statements and he's now trying to bootstrap a presidency on the same. Until Kerry publicly acknowledges this and apologizes to the countless vets he has maligned there should be no let up.

Edited for clarification, added:
I neglected to explain the use of this name. Goophy was my personal call sign for several years. Became a K9 handler which is why the Dog was added. Call was abbreviated to G_Dog long ago. As you can see by my signature, I do use my real name.
_________________
Why ask? Because it needs asking.

Me#1You#10 · Site Admin Joined: 06 May 2004 Posts: 6503

carpro · Admin Joined: 10 May 2004 Posts: 1176 Location: Texas

KeithNolan · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 1:53 am Post subject:

edited by Moderator - Mr. Nolan, clean up your act, and stop with the insults and degrading comments. If you do not understand the purpose of this site, maybe you should read more of the threads here. As for members here not responding as you want them to, or not reading your comments, maybe it's because they find your posts offensive and not worth commenting towards. Bottom line here is that this is a site devoted to making sure that the truth gets out about John F. Kerry and that he does not get elected as the next President and CIC of this nation.

If you do not like the way things are run here, or what the other members say to you, or towards you, you are more than free to leave and go back to where you came from.

KeithNolan · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:25 am Post subject:

Okay, let me try again in a manner which does not result in editing by the moderator. . . .

The claim is made that the VVAW was stuffed with phonies and liars. No one can name these phonies and liars. Who are they? What were they lying about? What was said in Detroit that hasn't been confirmed by the court-martial record of the war, memoirs by veterans, and historical accounts written by journalists, academics, and historians?

Why was it wrong for veterans who were haunted by brutality and atrocities they had seen---or who just thought the war was a senseless waste of lives---to join the VVAW?

Why are Kerry's wounds and valor awards mocked because he joined the VVAW? What does one have to do with the other?

Why no direct responses to the comments about Camill, Caputo, Ehrhart, and Anderson?

Well, that's the short version of what I wanted to say.

KWN

Theresa Alwood · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:36 am Post subject:

Hey Keith....

We told you one:

KERRY LIED WHILE GOOD MEN DIED!!!!

Enough said!

War Dog · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:45 am Post subject:

Mr. Nolan, your questions have been answered over and over and over again by many here. You just refuse to believe what you have been told about the VVAW, John Kerry, the Winter Soldier Investigations, etc...

You are wrong, and you are beating your head against a blank wall here. Maybe you should think about changing your outlook, or find somewhere else to haunt!

Friggin War Woof!
_________________
"When people are in trouble, they call the cops.

When cops need help, they call the K-9 unit."

KeithNolan · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:48 am Post subject:

TO MS. ALWOOD: a humble suggestion; go and read MARKING TIME by W.D. Ehrhart, a 1967-68 veteran of the 1/1 Marines, 1st MarDiv, I Corps, Vietnam.

Perhaps Ehrhart's story will help you understand why some Vietnam veterans felt compelled to join the VVAW.

If it makes you feel comfortable saying that Kerry (and, by extension, veterans like Ehrhart) were liars, so be it.

KWN

hist/student · Lieutenant Joined: 09 May 2004 Posts: 243

Kieth Nolan wrote:

Theresa Alwood · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 3:06 am Post subject:

Well Keith every time JOhn "f" Kerry opens his mouth we can just about say something coming out of it will not be quite the whole truth. Because it will change in the next few days depending on who or where he is talking to. One of these days Keith you will wake up and realize how wrong you are. There is a reason there is sooooo many vets against John Kerry. Some who used to be democrats. Maybe you should do some research and talk to those guys. But be nice. Otherwise they will just clam up.

George F. Thompson · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 4:36 am Post subject: Conason SWBFT.

Nolan, you just don't get it. For a person to claim they're not for Kerry, you certainly champion his cause. This forum is not just about kerry's military service. It's about his reprehensible behavior after he came back and betrayed his " band of brothers." Just for the sake of arguement. Does his military service in Viet Nam give him carte blanche to villify the American service person with his lies and innuendo. I for one despise the leadership of the VVAW. Do you for one moment think they didn't have a hidden agenda? Of course they did. Do you not think Kerry used the VVAW as his springboard into politics. Of course he did. Kerry is a methodical, manipulating SOB who saw the usefullness of a bunch of angry veterans. The leadership of the VVAW exploited this to their own ends. Why don't you check out www.winterslodier.com and read the Special feature section's title, To my Dad on Fathers day 2004. It's a letter from a former VVAW member. Perhaps this may shine some light on this issue. Kerry's people choose to deify him. are they mis-informed or are they just naturally obtuse. I for one personally do not like George W. Bush, I like John Kerry even less. I've learned from my past experiences not to trust politicians especially when it concerns veterans. Perhaps my animosity comes from serving in the military for a thankless and apathetic society who found it easier to blame the service person rather than the politicans who put us in harms way. Rather than squander my vote for Ralph Nader. I'll vote for Bush instead. I posted you in another thread about your search for the truth as an author. I've said before it's not about Kerry's military service or his decorations. It's about how Kerry stole our honor. If you. don't support Kerry, just what is your agenda? Why try and convince these honorable and decent people that Kerry shares our attributes when we know full well he dosen't. Put your talents to use as an author, write the truth about Kerry and title it " Stolen Honor."

George F. Thompson

coldwarvet · Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2004 7:16 pm Post subject: