 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Son of a VET
Master Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 791
Location: TN
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:32 am Post subject: Kerry's Integrity Questioned - Questions surround Dem's 1970 |
 |
|
Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132799,00.html
Kerry's Integrity Questioned - Questions surround Dem's 1970 Vietnam peace talks in Paris
| Quote: | Kerry Visited Vietnam Peace Talks
WASHINGTON — John Kerry's opposition to the Vietnam War led him to many places, including Paris, where he met with the North Vietnamese in 1970. Kerry said then, and says now, that the meeting was a part of an effort to learn more about U.S. POWs. But some question the propriety of a commissioned Naval officer meeting with the enemy at a time of war.
When Kerry testified before the Senate in 1971, he pushed for an immediate, unilateral withdrawal of U.S. forces. If that happened, he said he knew the North Vietnamese would return all U.S. POWs.
"I have been to Paris. I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government," Kerry said.
Kerry referred to an eight-point withdrawal plan that was offered to the U.S. by Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, then-foreign minister of the Provisional Revolutionary Government. While on his honeymoon in Paris with his first wife Julia Thorne, Kerry met with Madame Binh at a meeting that included members of both delegations to the peace talks, according to Kerry spokesman Michael Meehan.
Explaining Kerry's trip, Meehan said in a statement, "Senator Kerry had no role whatsoever in the Paris peace talks or negotiations. He did not engage in any negotiations and did not attend any session of the talks. Prior to his Senate testimony, he went to Paris on a private trip, where he had one brief meeting with Madame Binh and others. In an effort to find facts, he learned the status of the peace talks from their point of view and about any progress in resolving the conflict, particularly as it related to the fate of the POWs."
|
_________________
Stolen Honor |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nccjones
Ensign
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 62
Location: Virginia Beach
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Some critics have suggested Kerry's meeting might have violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice (search), which prohibits members of the armed services from meeting with the enemy at a time of war. Meehan told FOX News the code of military justice did not apply to inactive reserve officers and that Kerry "did nothing wrong." Meehan also said that Kerry met with the North Vietnamese only once.
|
First, hello. I've been a lurker for over a month and have now decided to come out of the internet...so to speak...lol.
Whoever Meehan is...he's WRONG.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice:
802. ART. 2. PERSONS SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER
(a) The following persons are subject to this chapter:
(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.
(2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipman.
(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service.
It goes on to say that inactive personnel can be called up to active service...so on so on.
I can't believe that people believe these lies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flagreen
Seaman
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 175
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 11:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
The rest of the article;
| Quote: | Kerry's meeting with Binh occurred while he remained a commissioned officer with the U.S. Navy. Kerry was, by then, a member of the Navy Reserve and not on active duty.
"We've had presidents who have served in the military. We've had presidents who have never served in the military. But we've never had an American president who met with the enemy in a time of war while a naval officer in reserve status. Inconceivable," said John O'Neill, a key member of the anti-Kerry Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (search).
Some critics have suggested Kerry's meeting might have violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice (search), which prohibits members of the armed services from meeting with the enemy at a time of war. Meehan told FOX News the code of military justice did not apply to inactive reserve officers and that Kerry "did nothing wrong." Meehan also said that Kerry met with the North Vietnamese only once.
But historian Gerald Nicosia has written that Kerry met with the North Vietnamese twice.
Citing redacted FBI files, Nicosia said, "The files record that Kerry made a second trip to Paris that summer to learn how the North Vietnamese might release prisoners."
Nicosia told FOX News that the FBI files contained a newspaper clipping about a speech Kerry gave in August 1971saying that he had just returned from a Paris meeting with the North Vietnamese. Nicosia told FOX he discussed the article with Kerry's authorized biographer, Douglas Brinkley, who told him that Kerry had confirmed he'd met with the Vietnamese in 1970 and 1971.
Fox News' Major Garrett contributed to this report. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Son of a VET
Master Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 791
Location: TN
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I hope this is what the next ad is about.
_________________
Stolen Honor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sun Tzu
Seaman
Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 169
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Son of a VET wrote: | | I hope this is what the next ad is about. |
I would definitely make an ad about this.
The Paris meeting with info about his aide (Joe Bangert) singing the "The Ballad of Ho Chi Minh."
_________________
"Courage is not the lack of fear. It is acting in spite of it." - Mark Twain |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ohanakat
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 80
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | (3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal Service. |
It's been explained to me (by a former military lawyer) that inactive-duty training is weekend drills (or other duty periods). At other times, inactive reservists are NOT subject to the UCMJ.
A number of elected officials are reservists without violating the "no politics" rule. Politicians have the ability to cover themselves 
So, the Kerry campaign is correct on the one point, that while in inactive status, he was not subject to UCMJ.
Kat |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Since when is being a traitor "Politics"? What about the Logan Act and the Constitution?
_________________
 On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MACVJOE
Ensign
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Posts: 73
Location: Texan in Michigan
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Proably correct on UMCJ on Paris. However, he was still on Active duty as Aid when he started attending ANTIwar meeting. Thats UMCJ materiel. Paris (twice) is agaiinst Federal Law.
_________________
Retired 86 Army
MACV Upper Delta 68-69 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmackto
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 719
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ASPB wrote: | | Since when is being a traitor "Politics"? What about the Logan Act and the Constitution? |
Has anyone emailed Major Garret with those questions?
_________________
Deborah
The FROZEN CHICKEN Journal
This is no time for ease and comfort. It is the time to dare and endure.
- Winston Churchill |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RMalloy
PO3
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 280
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe someone could point out that Kerry's official bio - Tour Of
Duty says he went to Jamaica on his honeymoon, no mention of
Europe or France. This is another attempt of Kerry's to change
his version of the past, the first visit with Madame Binh. And maybe someone could ask Kerry why he was on the Dick Cavett show on May 7, 1970, this is before he joined the VVAW, showing his Vietnam films on TV, again before he joined the VVAW. It didn't take him long after he got
out of Vietnam to get attention from the media. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To all participants...
As this topic relates directly to John Kerry's VVAW activity, I'm moving this topic to our "Wintersoldier" forum.
We strongly encourage all of our forum members to assist us in energizing our newest forum by placing relevant topics within that forum when you post.
Thanks in advance for everyone's attention to and support of this effort. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ohanakat
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 80
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ASPB wrote: | | Since when is being a traitor "Politics"? What about the Logan Act and the Constitution? |
It seems you're mixing apples and oranges here and creating argument where none exists.
The ban on political activity contained in UCMJ is an example, and given the confusion surrounding when UCMJ applies and to whom, I think it's a good example that might help to clarify.
I never suggested that he wasn't subject to U.S. laws as all citizens are. Injecting that does not seem contribute to illuminating discussion.
My statement stands. Inactive reserves are only subject to UCMJ when they are drilling. So, it's probably pointless to pursue that line of attack. That does not rule out other lines of attack.
Kat |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
homesteader
PO3
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 294
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is important that Kerry's post-war activities in the early '70s and their tragic consequences be linked to what has happened and is happening in Iraq.
I know the Arab world. I grew up there as a missionary kid, I have a formal education (MA) in International Law. I spent 23 years in the AF, much of it in Middle East, initially flying in host nation squadrons. Subsequently I was assigned in the AOR with DIA and then at the HQ advisory level of a major host nation. I speak the language and my experiences are recent ('80s and '90s).
Before the engines had cooled on the jet that landed President Bush on the carrier, the Dems began sniping. There can be long discussions about why the Dems had to do this to dilute the political impact of the swift and relatively low cost (in lives). But the tragic consequence of that criticism was the hope it gave the enemy in Iraq that US resolve would crumble as it did in Vietnam and Somalia in the face of domestic political infighting. The enemy (the old Baath regime, whatever assortment of terrorist organizations were present) in Iraq at that point were in the same position that the enemy was in Vietnam after the Tet offensive, militarily defeated and disoriented.
Middle Eastern culture is still very tribal and loyalties easily flow to the "Zaeem" (chief, warlord, godfather, bully, benifactor, protector, champion) of the moment. For a few weeks, the US and President Bush were the Zaeems of Iraq. There would have been and always will be resistance to the Zaeem but in the case of that moment in time in Iraq, it was the very public second quessing and political manuevering by the Dems in the US that encouraged Zaeem wannabees like Muqtada al Sadr to come out their holes. Almost like clockwork, phrases used by Dems in the US (quagmire, occupation, popular risistance, freedom fighters) were picked up by the likes of al Sadr and then broadcast by the media as coming from "the patriots" of Iraq. (Anicdote: It took exactly six hours from the time Sen. Kennedy called Iraq Bush's Vietnam until al Jazeera repeated it as coming from al Sadr. I had a stop watch on it).
There has been great discussion on the forum already about the catastrophy that occured after our capitulation in SE Asia. That capitulation was due in large part to the betrayal of the cause by the likes of Kerry. He (and the Dems) are doing it again.
All this said, I am not saying that the US was fully ready for the anarchy that occured after the quick victory but the guick and viscious assault on the President by the Left helped close a great window of opportunity for rapid reconstruction and stability in Iraq.
Gotta go right now. More later hopefully. I've been reading this forum since ad#1. What talent, what wit, what passion, creativity and discipline.
Thank you Swifties! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dusty
Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 1264
Location: East Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2004 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good post homesteader. You are exactly right in your assesment of the anti-war sentiment by the dems being responsible for a lot of the problems we are having today.
They have this down pat now. We are watching an instant replay of what happened in Vietnam.
And communism is our real enemy in this thing. We were fighting it then, we're fighting it now.
What an insidious bunch snakes these people are. Masters of deceit and half truths.
Who's going to step up and be our Sen. Joe McCarthy this time?
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1996/vo12no18/vo12no18_mccarthy.htm
A snippet from this article:
| Quote: | 1. The Soviet international organization has carried on a successful and important penetration of the United States Government and this penetration has not been fully exposed.
2. This penetration has extended from the lower ranks to top level policy and operating positions in our government.
3. The agents of this penetration have operated in accordance with a distinct design fashioned by their Soviet superiors.
4. Members of this conspiracy helped to get each other into government, helped each other to rise in government, and protected each other from exposure. |
Another one:
| Quote: | | Was it unreasonable of McCarthy to want government positions filled with persons who were loyal to America, instead of those with communist-tainted backgrounds? "A government job is a privilege, not a right," McCarthy said on more than one occasion. "There is no reason why men who chum with communists, who refuse to turn their backs on traitors, and who are consistently found at the time and place where disaster strikes America and success comes to international communism, should be given positions of power in government." The motivation of these people really doesn't matter. If the policies they advocate continually result in gains for communism and losses for the Free World, then they should be replaced by persons with a more realistic understanding of the evil conspiracy that has subjugated more than one-third of the world. That's not McCarthyism, that's common sense. |
Dusty |
|
| 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
