SwiftVets.com

[shawa]

On Rush today, in answer to a hostile caller, credits Swiftvets
telling the truth about Kerry:

"What I don't want to happen from this is the entire U.S. military to get tarred and feathered because this one guy has a story to tell. And I think it is only appropriate and accurate to point out the historical similarities between this guy's story and John Kerry's. And when the swift boat vets came along people on the left didn't want to hear about them because they were telling the truth. Kerry had to revise a bunch of stories that were in his own autobiography or biography written by the Boston Globe. So we've got historical evidence, we've got historical perspective on our side and we know that the left in this country is populated by a bunch of people who have no regard for the U.S. military, and in fact love it when the military takes a hit, some of them even like it when the military loses. When the military loses, it gives them the ammo to say, "See, military action is not the solution. We need peace conferences, we need diplomacy, we need doctors, nurses, clean water." Well, we gotta lone wolf here that's standing up and saying all this went on. How many millions, hundreds of thousands have been in Iraq, and how many have come back and told this story, and yet here's this one guy, everybody wants to jump on it, and I'm just not going to allow that to happen. I'm not going to allow the whole U.S. military to be tarred and feathered like people on the left want it to be simply because some deserter goes to Canada and tells a wild tale. I remember, as I say, some of these incidents, I have no doubt they happened. The idea that we're going to create this impression the U.S. military is a bunch of blood-thirsty Jen-giss khans is something that I am not going to allow to happen on this program, pure and simple. Go get your own if you want to try to pass it off as something else."

Whole transcript at:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_120804/content/rush_is_right.guest.html

[MrJapan]

It has an excellent audio version too! Not to mention that the deserter was actually Army and NOT a Marine... and that he joined the Army prior to 9/11

It's funny that the minute that I read this story, that I was thinking EXACTLY what some of the others are thinking... 'JFK II'

MJ

[tony54]

I think he wants to run for the Senate in Massachusetts, and is just priming his campaign.

[Snipe]

Naw. This guy's a no-load. JF'nK did his thing before Congress.
This idiot is doing his thing before the Canadian Imigration Board
to get himself into the country. Just a deserter thinking that the
grass is greener in Canada. Just another quiter.
_________________
Tin Can Sailor

[scotty61]

Just goes to show that the MSM will play up anyone who shares their viewpoint, no matter how bad his credibility is.
_________________
John Kerry. A Neville Chamberlain for our times.

[MSeeger]

Shawa,

I tried to access the link to Rush's website, and it seems it's one of the members only pages. Any chance you can print the whole transcript on here?

Maria
_________________
Be not deceived, God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Gal. 6:7

[shawa]

Here it is, Maria

Jeremy Hinzman: New John Kerry in Making

December 8, 2004

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

Folks, I think we may have a new John Kerry in the making out there. A former U.S. Marine told a refugee hearing in Canada, he's an American war dodger, (story) "that trigger-happy U.S. soldiers in Iraq routinely killed unarmed woman and children, and murdered other Iraqis in violation of international law. In chilling testimony intended to bolster the asylum claim of compatriot Jeremy Hinzman, former staff sergeant Jimmy Massey recounted how nervous soldiers trained to believe that all Iraqis were potential terrorists often opened fire indiscriminately. 'I was never clear on who the enemy was,' Massey, 33, told the hearing. 'If you have no enemy or you do not know who the enemy is, what are you doing there?' On several occasions, his soldiers pumped hundreds of bullets into cars that failed to stop at U.S. military checkpoints, killing all occupants - who were later found to be unarmed, Massey said." We heard about that story. "On another occasion, marines reacted to a stray bullet by killing a small group of unarmed protesters and bystanders, said Massey, who said he suffers from nightmares and post-traumatic stress disorder. 'I was deeply concerned about the civilian casualties,' he said. 'What they were doing was committing murder.'"

Now, next to come will be the interviews on all the network prime-time news magazine shows like 60 Minutes II, Prime Time Live, 20/20, whatever else this guy will do. The book deal will then be followed and soon he'll be testifying before a committee of Democrats either in the Senate or the House. Jeremy Hinzman, keep a sharp eye on the name, the new John Kerry, be touted as a presidential candidate before the end of 2005. I mean not soon, but I mean he'll have to run for office, he'll become a prosecutor, he'll become a lieutenant governor, he'll become a senator or something. But he'll be touted as a future presidential candidate on the Democratic Party side. Well, I don't know who he's going to marry, Mr. Snerdley, we're not going to make predictions here as to his social life, but I'm just saying, this is the stuff that launched John Kerry's career, folks, this launched his career. He came out of Vietnam, he started describing all these atrocities that he committed and other people committed but he didn't report them when he was there, made him a hero in the Democratic Party in the early 1970s, and he almost won the White House, and so interesting how history repeats itself.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Brian in Wilmington, North Carolina, nice to have you on the EIB Network, sir, hello.

CALLER: How's it going?

RUSH: Good. Thank you.

CALLER: I don't know, your comment about that soldier and his claims just seemed -- it doesn't seem fair -- I don't know why -- to me you didn't say he was lying, but that's totally what I felt like you were implying.

RUSH: No --

CALLER: You totally discredited this guy.

RUSH: It's the tone.

CALLER: Why don't you wait to hear what the guy has to say? Let it be proven before you go on the air and make it sound and let your audience buy into the idea that this guy is a crack. That's what your audience is going to think, because your audience trusts you because I cannot understand how your audience trusts you so much.

RUSH: Because they believe the truth. I have credibility with this audience built up over 16 years. I mean, if I were everything that the critics on the left have said of this show it wouldn't have lasted a year and a half, but here it is number one. It's been number one for 15 or 14 years, and even with all the other conservative shows we've just grown. We haven't been cannibalized and we haven't lost our dominant influence. It's because the program is trusted. Now, as to this specific thing, I could ask you the same thing, why are you so prone to believe it? Why are you so eager to believe that the U.S. military is out there wiping out innocent civilians in murderous rages? I don't doubt the incidents happened, but when some guy deserts and then goes to Canada for his hearing, I'm a little dubious. He's deserting and he's applying for asylum in Canada and he wants to go up there and of course they're going to love the story. I remember some of these incidents that he's talking about. Many of them were early on in the war. These vehicles were driving by, being ordered to stop at checkpoints and they didn't. You know, the purpose of the U.S. military is not Meals on Wheels. It's not a social program. They're not going over there to sacrifice themselves. They're going over there to win a war. And, you know, this is the kind of stuff that happens in war, and he's making it out here to be purposeful, he's making it out here that the U.S. military was blood-thirsty, they were ordered to do this kind of thing. It's just a continuing of what we had with the Abu Ghraib scandal that the media won't let go of, now they're trying to do the same thing in G'itmo.

It doesn't take much, Brian, for people on my side of the aisle to know when people don't like the U.S. military. I've known it all my life that the American left doesn't like the military, and they are too quick and eager to jump on people that may have stress disorder, they may have a bunch of trauma over what happened. They're willing to take their word for it just like they took John Kerry's word for it back in 1971, because their instinct and their bias is to think the U.S. military is a bunch of thugs and murderous killers, and the U.S. military is the focus of evil in the modern world. I happen to respect and love the U.S. military. I happen to think that they are a cut above. I think they are unique people. I think they need to be supported. In every group of people you're going to have a bad apple or two, you're going to have renegades, not everybody is an angel, not everybody follows orders.

What I don't want to happen from this is the entire U.S. military to get tarred and feathered because this one guy has a story to tell. And I think it is only appropriate and accurate to point out the historical similarities between this guy's story and John Kerry's. And when the swift boat vets came along people on the left didn't want to hear about them because they were telling the truth. Kerry had to revise a bunch of stories that were in his own autobiography or biography written by the Boston Globe. So we've got historical evidence, we've got historical perspective on our side and we know that the left in this country is populated by a bunch of people who have no regard for the U.S. military, and in fact love it when the military takes a hit, some of them even like it when the military loses. When the military loses, it gives them the ammo to say, "See, military action is not the solution. We need peace conferences, we need diplomacy, we need doctors, nurses, clean water." Well, we gotta lone wolf here that's standing up and saying all this went on. How many millions, hundreds of thousands have been in Iraq, and how many have come back and told this story, and yet here's this one guy, everybody wants to jump on it, and I'm just not going to allow that to happen. I'm not going to allow the whole U.S. military to be tarred and feathered like people on the left want it to be simply because some deserter goes to Canada and tells a wild tale. I remember, as I say, some of these incidents, I have no doubt they happened. The idea that we're going to create this impression the U.S. military is a bunch of blood-thirsty Jen-giss khans is something that I am not going to allow to happen on this program, pure and simple. Go get your own if you want to try to pass it off as something else.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT


RUSH: Mr. Snerdley asked, since when do liberal callers know what my audience thinks anyway? That's not what he was saying. Liberals don't think my audience thinks, or think. Liberals think that my audience is a bunch of brainwashed boobs, mind-numbed robots believing everything I say, and that's what his call -- I mean that's why I say 16 years, Brian, doesn't happen that way. But you know what's interesting, I'll bet Brian believed every word in the Dan Rather forged document story, and I'll bet he didn't want to sit around and wait for any objective analysis or truth, whatever Dan Rather said it was gospel, Bush had to go, Bush was a fraud in the National Guard and this sort of stuff.

This guy, Hinzman, this deserter, you know, we're talking about Maureen Dowd and so forth. I wonder if this guy could make her happy. Jeremy Hinzman. The deserter. I just wonder if that could happen. You never know. Bruce in Fort Stewart, Georgia. You're next. Welcome, sir, to the EIB Network.

CALLER: Hi, Rush, how you doing? Thanks for taking my call.

RUSH: You bet.

CALLER: Listen, I was in Iraq, actually we were all down on the 21st of March and set up operations on the 23rd of March outside of Nasiriyah while the Marines were trying to take that city and the 3rd Infantry Division was moving on through. I'm an Army medical department officer, and so our main mission was to treat EPWs, enemy prisoners of war and civilian casualties as well as U.S. casualties.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: And we received individuals who were injured who failed to stop at checkpoints. Now, we didn't indiscriminately mow them down. They did everything they can to try to stop those vehicles, but the orders were that vehicle did not get past the checkpoint, I don't care what it was. Let me tell you what Saddam was doing. There's a group of individuals called the Fedayeen. They're also known as "the soulless ones," that were the orphans from the first war--

RUSH: You know something, hang on just a second, Bruce. We had a guy when this story was hot, we had a great caller, where was he from? Oklahoma. He was living in Kansas at the time and he called from Oklahoma. He was between tours over there and he was talking about this story and what you're saying is almost identical to what he said. He was explaining, you know, who some of these people are, some of these supposedly innocent citizens that are in fact organized enemy and insurgents, that's basically what you're saying, right?

CALLER: Let me tell you what happened. The Fedayeen would hold families hostage and load up cars with other family members and force them to drive towards American lines and draw fire so they'd know where our positions were and whether we were going to be resolute about stopping vehicles at checkpoints. Now, we had casualties in our unit that were interviewed by civil affairs officers who said, "We don't hold Americans responsible for what happened because of the Fedayeen. They're the ones that made us do this, made us drive."

RUSH: I remember this now that you mention it.

CALLER: They loaded up ambulances and made them drive towards American lines. They gave civilians broken weapons and forced them by holding family hostages, families hostage, to walk towards American lines in order to draw fire, and we treated the ones who survived and did what we could to take care of them and to repatriate them back into their communities.

RUSH: Now, what stage of the war was this kind of thing happening?

CALLER: Well, Rush, we rolled out at ground war plus one day. We were operational the third day of the ground war, and we operated from March all the way through June in Nasiriyah Kahlil air base --


RUSH: You're talking 2003, though, right?

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: So this is the early stages of the war. Everybody --

CALLER: That's correct.

RUSH: -- yeah, you don't know who the enemy is and who's not.

CALLER: Well, I'll tell you --

RUSH: It's your life on the line, and then you've got people playing games like this.

CALLER: Sir, and even today, if somebody's going to run a checkpoint, those soldiers or Marines are going to do what they have to do to stop that vehicle from running that check point because we don't know what's in it explosive-wise or what's going on with that.

RUSH: Yeah. Totally understandable.

CALLER: The rules of engagement.

RUSH: Well, you know, I'll tell you what, look, Bruce, thanks for the call. I appreciate it. What do you expect? When we have the news story the other day that the Pentagon is putting out false information on our assault in Fallujah to find out what the enemy will do, you know, we put out a false date and we used CNN and some of the other networks to get that information out because we wanted to find out what the insurgents' plan was. So false date, they came out, saw what they were doing, we went in three weeks later and everybody in this country, press side, left side, got mad, "We're lying to the enemy! We're using an American network to lie to the enemy, can you believe we're lying to the enemy?! And we're going to suffer great morality and credibility losses because we're doing that." Well, now, any bunch of people that will have that view of a brilliantly strategic move to get the enemy to commit itself so that they can be the ones blown away instead of our guys you've got to expect them to want to take the words of a deserter who flees to Canada, and starts telling all these stories, out of context.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

I got an e-mail on the Rush subscriber side. Dear Rush: As a former Marine, I ask you to please set the record straight. This Canadian news story is wrong. This Hinzman guy was never a U.S. Marine. He joined the Army in 2001, and after September 11th he starts Attending Quaker meetings and discovers he's a Quaker and thus can't serve in combat.

Now, the implication is the guy joins the Army in 2001 prior to September 11th. September 11th happens, everybody is going to go, you know, perhaps be dispatched to combat and this Hinzman guy discovers that's not for him. So he then begins his quest to get out of the Army which has led him to Canada. You can read all about him on his website, and I have that link, it's www.JeremyHinzman.net. It's a whole website devoted to this guy's story and his attempt to find asylum in Canada and so forth and so on. It's www.JeremyHinzman, and that's H-i-n-z-m-a-n, dot-net. But I can understand a bunch of Marines being offended that this guy was being cast as a former Marine. He never was. He was in the U.S. Army.

END TRANSCRIPT