 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:45 am Post subject: Seth Lipsky: "John Kerry, Secretary of What?" |
 |
|
For those of us who closely followed the evolution of the media war surrounding the Swiftee's 2004 campaign, Seth Lipsky should be a familiar name. Here he is once again with a reprise of his dogged pursuit of the truth about John Kerry. Enjoy...
| Quote: | John Kerry, Secretary of What?
A vilifier of Vietnam vets taking over the Pentagon or the State Department would be astonishing.
by Seth Lipsky
December 6, 2012
One of the curious—and admirable—things about President Obama is how he has sought to correct the narrative of Vietnam. The way Vietnam veterans were blamed for the "misdeeds of a few" GIs when "the honorable service of the many should have been praised," the president said on the 50th anniversary of the start of the war, was "a national shame, a disgrace that should have never happened."
So why in the world is Mr. Obama floating the name of John Kerry for secretary of either state or defense? It is hard to think of anyone who did more to besmirch the name of the GIs who fought in Vietnam than Sen. Kerry. He did so in 1971, in testimony before the very Senate Foreign Relations Committee that he chairs today. And he did so after meeting in Paris with envoys of our communist foe and then echoing in the debate here their calls for an immediate withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam.
For all the controversy over Ambassador Susan Rice—National Journal reports that the president is "genuinely conflicted" over the choice between Ms. Rice and Mr. Kerry—the prospect that Mr. Kerry might head state or defense is more shocking. Mr. Kerry "is well qualified to be the Secretary of Defense . . . of Cuba or Venezuela" is how the leader of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, John O'Neill, reacted in an email last week. "He [is] certainly an expert on surrender and can run up a white flag with the best of them."
Mr. O'Neill and fellow officers who served on Swift Boats in the war in Vietnam's Mekong Delta torpedoed Mr. Kerry's campaign for president in 2004. The Swift Vets exposed his libels against American GIs and debunked his claims to heroism in the Mekong Delta. They recalled how, when the war in Vietnam was still being fought, Mr. Kerry met in Paris with Madame Binh of the Viet Cong and later endorsed the Viet Cong's peace proposal.
In 1971 Mr. Kerry related to the Senate accusations that he said had been made by veterans testifying before an antiwar group called the Winter Soldier Investigation. Mr. Kerry quoted them as saying they "had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
The conviction of Lt. William Calley for his role in the massacre at My Lai is a reminder that our side did commit some war crimes in Vietnam. But they were, as Mr. Obama suggested, the misdeeds of a few. According to the website wintersoldier.com, which is sympathetic to Mr. O'Neill and the Swift Vets, the allegations raised by the Winter Soldier investigation were examined by the Defense Department and either did not hold up or could not be proved and no one was ever prosecuted for the allegations made by Mr. Kerry's group. Allies of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, sponsor of the antiwar hearings at which veterans testified, dispute critics of the investigation.
Separately, in an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," Mr. Kerry confessed to committing war crimes himself. Crosby Noyes of the Evening Star newspaper in Washington put the question this way: "Do you consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed atrocities in Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this country?" Here's how Mr. Kerry answered:
"There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free-fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50-caliber machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages."
Mr. Kerry tried to blame others for what he confessed to: "All of this," he said, "is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals."
Thirty years later, in a retrospective interview on "Meet the Press," Mr. Kerry brushed off his remarks, saying "those were the words of an angry young man." He has sought to position himself as a spokesman for Vietnam veterans. He has been befriended in the Senate by no less than John McCain, a Navy flier held for more than five years as a prisoner of war in Hanoi and who condemned the attacks on Mr. Kerry by the Swift Vets.
All the more reason to open up these questions in hearings if Mr. Kerry is nominated to head either the State Department or the Pentagon. My view is that it is not, and never was, unpatriotic or dishonorable to take a dovish position on the war in Vietnam. There were millions of honorable people on both sides of the debate. But there were not many, if there are any, Navy officers who, after leaving active duty, showed up in meetings with enemy envoys in Paris or went on TV and confessed to war crimes.
So if Mr. Obama hands up Mr. Kerry for secretary of state or defense, these questions beg for answers. It may be unlikely that the Senate would reject the nomination of Mr. Kerry. The last time it turned down one of its own for such a post was President George H.W. Bush's nomination of Texas Sen. John Tower to head the Pentagon. It was a spectacularly bitter fight.
It did not, however, involve anything so serious as the questions that dog Sen. Kerry, who did so much to tarnish the reputation of American GIs and exploit the misdeeds of a few for the benefit of the antiwar movement. If Mr. Obama wants to correct the narrative of Vietnam, if the vilification of our veterans is to be finally addressed, as Mr. Obama has so eloquently sought, hearings on Mr. Kerry's own role would be a good place to start. Absent such a hearing, what kind of message would his elevation to state or defense send?
Mr. Lipsky, formerly a member of the Journal's editorial board, covered combat in Vietnam for the GI daily Pacific Stars and Stripes.
The Wall Street Journal |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TEWSPilot
Admiral
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1235
Location: Kansas (Transplanted Texan)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
My only question on Mr. Lipsky's assessment is where he claims, | Quote: | | "But there were not many, if there are any, Navy officers who, after leaving active duty, showed up in meetings with enemy envoys in Paris or went on TV and confessed to war crimes." |
Since Kerry presented a DD 214 dated 1978, years after that treasonous trip to Paris, was he really off active duty?
Or is he lying today to cover up a less than honorable discharge?
We pursued that back in 2004 and never could get strong evidence of the truth.
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TEWSPilot
Admiral
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1235
Location: Kansas (Transplanted Texan)
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Someone with some clout needs to make sure at least ONE Senator asks Kerry UNDER OATH if he (fill in the blanks about his meetings with the Communists while on active duty or while still in the Reserves). It needs to be done, and that would be the last chance we have of forcing the truth out of him. Another good question would be did he ever receive a less than honorable discharge and did he have his discharge upgraded at any time....I think there are lots more, but these come to mind without doing a lot of think about exactly what all needs to be exposed. They could REALLY put him on the spot by forcing him to release his entire record even if only to the Senators. They would then be forced to decide if he was fit for the position.
_________________
Find the perfect babysitter, petsitter, or tutor -- today! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TEWSPilot wrote: | | Someone with some clout needs to make sure at least ONE Senator asks Kerry UNDER OATH... |
The prospect of Kerry actually under oath in a cabinet appointment vetting is an enticing one indeed. I don't, however, think there's a legislator out there with integrity enough to hold Kerry's feet to the fire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TEWSPilot
Admiral
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1235
Location: Kansas (Transplanted Texan)
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
John Kerry, call on the RED phone.....
| Quote: | Taliban to Send Representatives to Peace Conference in Paris
Posted by Jim Hoft on Monday, December 10, 2012, 7:56 PM
Taliban spokesman Zabihollah Mojahed released a statement saying the terror group will send two of its representatives to a peace conference in Paris.
Iranian Press TV reported:
Taliban Spokesman Zabihollah Mojahed says the representatives of the political branch of the group have been invited to attend an international conference in the French capital, Paris, Press TV reports.
In a new statement, Mojahed said that the Taliban will send two of its representatives to the conference.
The group says the Paris meeting is a research event and the Taliban representatives have no plans to hold talks with the Afghan officials and international envoys.
Taliban has hailed the invitation as the sign of the group’s kudos and pointed out that they will use the event as an opportunity to convey their views to the international community.
This is reportedly the first time that Taliban is invited to attend an international conference in Europe.
No formal negotiations have been held with the Taliban so far, but several informal contacts have been established.
They ought to love the indoor plumbing. |
_________________
Find the perfect babysitter, petsitter, or tutor -- today! |
|
| 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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
