John F. Kerry Ended his Military Career by lying ...

[SuperScout]

.... and dishonoring the reputation and integrity of Vietnam veterans. "He burst into public prominence with testimony in April 1971 when he testified [under oath, in case anybody's forgotten] that it was routine practice for GI's to have cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks and generally ravaged the countryside of Vietnam." [Did anybody bother to ask where the facts are about the heinous charges?] According to Kerry, he had been told that Americans had "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals" and other atrocities, yet he failed to report these alleged atrocities to the authorities? Isn't this failure just another manifestation of a lack of leadership on his part, a lack of manhood, or did he know that what he was testifiying about was just a big lie? The truth is, that Kerry knew it was a lie then, he knows it is still a lie, and he doesn't have, and probably never had the balls to tell the truth.

New and photos of his anti-war activities were later used to torment some of remaining POW's in that wonderful workers' paradise of North Vietnam, as if our POW's conditions and treatment wasn't bad enough. And remember, Kerry is a philosophical soulmate of our favorite target, Jane Hanoi Fonda.

After fighting in Vietnam, he returned to lead the protests against that war and urge the U.S. withdrawal that turned Indochina over to Communist rule for a generation. He was in favor of the nuclear freeze movement in the 1980s that would have frozen the Cold War in place with a Soviet advantage.

Kerry is an opportunisitic and grandstanding hypocrite, who would stand on the shoulders of dead troops to make himself look taller. Personally, I wouldn't urinate on him if he was on fire.

[Seascamp]

Most folks wouldn?t recognize the significance of Kerry?s Swiftboat adventures and what a show stopper that would have been for the politically non anointed/favored sons. An average USNR Junior Officer would have been keel hauled and cashiered for anything close to those behaviors and stunts, big time. But apparently a political King?s X kept him at the helm for a few months and there was undoubtedly a collective sigh of relief when he was shipped out. Adm. Zumwalt was our boss also as we were in the same operation as Kerry, only in I Corps., and I didn?t see any free for all, Dodge City Shoot em up going on with the Swiftboats or the faster USN hydro foils or with the fast US Coast Guard units or with any of the aircraft that were being used. So the Kerry saga has me somewhat astounded to say the least. Given his subsequent ?give your local friendly Commie a break? behavior kind of begs the question as to what we really have on the plate for selection.

All I see is a very loose cannon with some very intense history of making very dangerous decisions, leaving his command in the face of fire/emanate threat and then subsequently running interference plays for the USSR and PRC. And in more current times, being an intense advocate for human rights abuses going on in today?s Vietnam. So we want to make this guy the most powerful military man in the world eh. Maybe he?s an acceptable Sen. for Massachusetts but the USA and the world at large is not a commonwealth of Ma. last I checked, and what is acceptable there most certainly will not play out anywhere else.

Scamp

[melody1181]

Well what I find funny is that so many look past the mistakes Bush made as a young man. Either that or make excuses for what things he did. Not saying they match up exactly.

We gotta fac the facts....Politicians on the whole stink. Bush is a sorry excuse for a president but God knows what it would be like with Kerry. Its a very SUCKY choice we have this year.

[Seascamp]

Mel, I think you are among the growing sector of the population that has grown sick of all the political bashing and crashing going on. And the bad news is we have only seen the start of the beginning, just the very tip of the icebergs that are coming up fast and furious.
The apparent objective of the drill is to convince the voting public what a rotten hound each candidate is. The Bush bashing premo-extravangza-spectacular we have seen here on this very site for a very long time now is stark evidence of the storm to come, and the storm clouds are gathering for sure.
So the question that bothers me is how much will and unity is going to be left when the gory blood letting is done. We are a Nation that is bitterly divided right now and that makes us exceptionally vulnerable and a price will be paid, that is a mathematical certainty.
On the other hand, I for one will not stand still and let stand the Kerry insults and ravaging of VN Vets, and especially USN VN Vets, go without a challenge and the clear light of day. Maybe that makes me part of the problem, but let?s get to reality and see all the real warts on all the aspiring princes and then judge who is best fit to protect our land and who is not.

Scamp

[skeeter]

I personally would like to see the "bashing" and all the glory that goes with it. Let's see who can come up with the greatest lies on each candiate, where it be personal, past war records, their do's, don't, and will I, and I can, and you can't, and see who comes out with the best.

Let's have a knock down and drag out political war, and the day before the November election, we have one of those famous pistol duels.

Who wins is the next President of the United States. No election, no votes from the people.. (save a lot of money)

Two pistols in a nice walnut gun case, with one shot in each.
Back to back, step forward to count of ten and turn and fire.

The night before, the president had some of that "texas pekoke" and is now seeing double images.

Oh! I think who the winner will be.

[skeeter]

Give the president the F-102, as he has qualified to fly this aircraft, and Kerry get his pick of the F-18 Super Hornet.

One has the flight training in a older aircraft, and other lacks the training, but has the latest super fighter aircraft.

We will give them the Pacific Ocean as the playing field, and they play each is the enemy..

Survival of the fitness is the term.

[reconeil]

Even though despising politicos more than most, I think quite differently about President Bush, than you and some others do. Hell,...compared to the previous bum in office (re. Clinton) Bush comes off as a great Commander-In-Chief, and the best man at the right time for what needs doing (ie. fighting the war DECLARED ON US by our 2nd: "Pearl Harbor" and/or "9/11").

Regarding Kerry, I never thought I'd say such. But, the truth of the matter is that to this Honorable Veteran,...Kerry actually makes Fonda look good in comparison. After all, she was better looking and young and pretty-much stupid and clueless about aiding and abetting the enemy.

Whereas Kerry, looking to politically get ahead being his goal in life,...knew exactly what he was doing at the expense of America's Military, and no doubt quite differently to our enemy's great satisfaction. Partial quote from Vietnamese General Giap: "...America's Protestors were BETTER for The North than having 20 more divisions in The Field".

Neil :d: :b:

[SuperScout]

An interesting play on words: bashing = reciting historical facts? Hopefully, that's not what you were referring to. And I might counsel a wee bit of caution about "blank in the president's gun," as the Secret Servcie takes a rather dim view of such thinly veiled remarks.

As Kerry was getting ready to embark upon his political career, he asked for duty as a personal aide in Boston, New York or Washington, and came home to be an admiral's aide. Eight months later, he asked for an early discharge to run for Congress. Oh, GASP, and early discharge?

Thinking they have a solution to their litany of losers, Democrats are counting on Sen. John Kerry's military credentials to convince voters that he can be trusted with America's national security.
But documents that surfaced recently raise serious questions about whether Kerry was duped in the 1990s into helping the Chinese military perfect its ability to strike the U.S. with nuclear weapons. In 1996 Kerry met with Liu Chaoying, the daughter of a powerful Chinese military official who also doubled as vice president of a subsidiary of the state-owned China Aerospace Corp.

Before the meeting, held in Kerry's Senate office, Liu's sponsor, Johnny Chung, made clear she was interested in getting her company listed on the U.S. Stock Exchange.

The Democratic presidential front-runner was only too happy to oblige and ordered his aides to contact the Securities and Exchange Commission. "The next day," reports Newsweek, "Liu and Chung were ushered into a private briefing with a senior SEC official." Within weeks, Chung returned the favor, staging a Kerry fund raiser at a Beverly Hills hotel that raked in $10,000 for the senator's re-election campaign.

Oh yes, this is the man that the Democrats want to put in the White House, a man with his hand in the deep pockets of the Red Chinese. Be careful what you pray for.

[melody1181]

Neil....

I will be honest here. I am not up to date with everything that went on with either of these men. As much as I dislike Bush it is purely political. So many people "hate" these men because of the public face. I don't hate either or anyone for that matter.

Anyone who had been in office during 9/11 would of had to do the same things. My problem with Bush is in other areas..including Iraq(Now don't jump on me for that...its not the reason ya'll think) and other things.

Now for Kerry......I have ALOT of respect for McCain and the fact that he isn't against Kerry AS much makes me rethink Kerry. Now I don't like what he did but if we look at Bush's past with a magnifying glass we'd prob think he was pretty stupid and lousy. Its easy to judge others off the bat. Yes Kerry did some stupid things that I don't really blame others for not liking him. I don't know who I am voting for. I might write in my Grandpa's dog's name. I think he'd do a better job it seems than either would do.

Don't think you could convince me Bush has been a "great" president and i'm not talking about Clinton at all.

[skeeter]

Melody;

The man (president) has a heart, but it takes something like brains to maintain life in this world.

His own Mother said some months before he was elected, she had him to look at show cards when he was in the 8th grade.
To me, that could be called "show and tell" type of education.

I would like to know what he made on his (AFOQT) Air Force Officer Qualifying Test..
A person that has a problem with "understanding" logic, will not past the AFOQT.
Besides only the top 10% of the highest scores get to become pilots. 80% is a real score on the test.

Here is one of those little questions on the test.

FLY is to AIRPLANE as;
__ rod is to hook
__ push is to fall
__ drive is to stake
__ skate is to slide
__ swim is to float.

Which one do you think he selected?

[reconeil]

We're talkin apples and oranges here.

You're political and/or My Party right or wrong. I'm anything but that, and simply wouldn't herdlike follow ANY PARTY off a cliff,...just so I could say I picked the winner.

For me, it's all about whom is more trustworthy and believable. I trust Bush and believe Bush means well for ALL American Citizens.

Whereas, I could never in a million years trust or believe Clintons, Kennedy or Kerry and the like,...since all historically proven liars (Clintons more so than most).
Then too, I'm not all that religious a person, blindly obedient and easily manipulated by zealots,...some of the prime prerequisites for being an absolutely faithful Democrat and/or Democrat in good standing.

Hell, I think that people NOT "Connected" or NOT winning themselves a nice cushy and high paying jobs after some election,...AND STILL dance around with straw hats singing: "Happy Days Are Here Again"...are fools.

So then, I guess you can sort of say we see things quite differently. Besides, recently I believe that America stands a better chance at SURVIVAL with Republicans/Conservatives calling-the-shots. Dems/Libs seem intent on politically-correcting US/WE to death, literally and figuratively, or at minimum turning America into A Hong Kong West.

Guess it's fair saying that you probably won't see me at your next political fund raiser, Mel? ;)

Neil ;) ;)

[melody1181]

Neil,

For me I guess you could say I don't feel Bush or Kerry give a rats you know what about me. I'm 23, single and don't have a "real" job. All I do is take care of my grandparents. I am no one to them.

I think part of my dislike of Bush comes from when he was the gov here. I know some of the other fellow Texas would dissagree with me though! Depends on where ya are though.

I don't like any of em really at all. The both have major pitfals in the political world. And trust???? None of em deserve my trust.

Giving money to any politician is like throwing money into a DEEP deep deep hole!!!

[SuperScout]

This is what Kerry said back in 2002:

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

... of course, this is now a different month, and he's probably addressing a different political audience, so his position probably has changed. In fact, with all the differenct positions Kerry has taken on practically every issue, it might be accurate to describe him as the author of the "The Kama Sutra Political Handbook on Positions."

[deltamedic]

Kerry served in my domain in Nam although he was Navy and I was Army and don't recall him I have found he was there ta the time. Some of the items he mentioned on cut off ears, shooting animals, rape did happen in the Nam. There were a lot of things that went on in Nam that became somewhat staus-quo & the higher ups knew it was going on but could care less. The prime directive was body counts! I'm in favor of Kerry on in that he at least seems in veterans benefits anf health care whereas our current excuse for a leader at 1600 Pennsylvania wants to cut 2.5 billion from veterans health care and the VA but wants to spend that and more on MARS!!! U r right folks the choice's this year yet again for President are down there with the dog dung

[BLUEHAWK]

a. Everyone knows, or should know, that the President only proposes budgets. Congress amends, edits and approves all budgets, and has the right of override anytime they please. Vets are included in budgets, eh?

b. Kerry, just like the last Democrat, is saying that what America wants and needs is "Change". Kerry does not speak for America. Nobody who claims to know what "American's want" could possibly know anything more than what THEY think our country needs or wants. It sorta ticks me off when politicians say that, any of them... pretty arrogant basically. America is run by what happens at the POLLS, not by what pollSTERS tell us to think.

c. Ears being cut off, rape, murder, torture, tragedy, chaos, destruction. = war... pretty much since the dawn of warfare, no? Does this surprise anyone? We have been over and over the ear necklace topic; it possibly did occur, maybe not, maybe so, someone knows or has exaggerated. It does not matter. Very very bad things happen to EVERYONE when violence is unleashed, without fail. Fact is, ears and other body parts get cut off with a fair amount of regularity just on the streets of this world as it is in peacetime. A warrior, on any side, who is basically a psychopathic murdering torturer, whether congenitally or because they are just plain temporarily insanely angry is predictably bound to exist. Drop the subject.

d. When a man of ColMurph's standing questions the validity of 3 PHs for Kerry without a day in hospital, then I'd say there's a reason for that. As I understand it, the PH is not awarded for nicks and bruises, hang nails and paper cuts. The definition of the word "hero" has gotten a bit distorted as presently misused.

e. Most questions about Bush's performance in service are coulda beens mighta possiblys. The DOD is not generally known for handing out Honorable Discharges if there is any reason not to. Were they to do so, chances are they'd have a mutiny they couldn't stop and a demonstration on their Capital Mall out there maybe twenty times bigger than the "I Have A Dream" day crowd. There are about 16,000,000 living vets.

Stick with the CINC in time of war, it is fundamental to the welfare of they who have been sent to do the fighting. There is nothing else I need to know, and what is far more important, it is a lesson America should have learned unanimously by 1968.

Oh, and by the way, will those who never did a single thing during their service to slough off or slack just a tad please come forward and get your halo.
While we're at it, those who got more credit than they deserved for the sacrifices and achievements of other people... give the medals back, gently... or at least don't wear them nor include them on your resume.

[SuperScout]

Well stated! As usual.
Kerry never did, and never will speak for me, and the thousands of Vietnam veterans that I either know personally or cyberlly. He lied back when he started his political career, he knew it was a lie, and he lacks the cajones to admit that he was wrong. Personally, he can promise the moon, but it ain't gonna happen, as too pols will not believe him. And why should they?

[Seascamp]

Well Doc., I proudly served under Mark W. Woods, Captain, USN, USNA, (And a fine Texan) and I disallow Kerry or anyone else to slander that man or any of my shipmates with broad brush allegations. I?d guess that I spent 90+ % of my VN time in a ?free fire zone? and in the same operation Kerry was in. When we cranked up the guns we had a military target, period, and if any civilians were in the area we put up high altitude air bursts to let all know ?here we are?, in business to do business so get clear, then waited so that people could get clear. If I did my job right a lot of people got to have another birthday, friend and foe alike, and it was a good day when we got a huge secondary explosion as that meant we hit a storage bunker full of ammo and it was no more. So yes, Captain Woods taught us how to fight to win but wasn?t of the opinion that killing was always necessary and practiced what he preached everyday. As well, Captain Woods said, ?If we get hit, I don?t want to hear anything but hitting back but fire to the sound and sight of the incoming?, and we did that as well.

Apparently Kerry was a different kind of Naval Officer with a totally different philosophy and leadership style that he wishes to put on all Naval Officers for his own reasons.

Scamp

[exlrrp]

Don't blame me, I voted for Edwards
But anybody who came back from Vietnam and thought it sucked enough to protest it gets my vote. I never saw anything there I thought was good for the US or Vietnam.
Thanks for sharing all this, I find your posts very illuminating
Have a nice day!
James

[BLUEHAWK]

What if GW thought it sucked...too, and for all the right reasons, eh?

Jus' IS that he handled his post-realization conduct differently, no?

[reconeil]

Re. "...current excuse for a leader (truly odd, especially after Clinton) at 1600 Pensylvania wants to cut 2.5 billion from veterans health care".......isn't exactly true.

After all, no politicos of whatever BENT ever ACTUALLY make cut$ to any beaurocracies. "They" just haggle back and forth about THE BILLIONS in yearly INCREA$E$,...strictly for political oneupsmanship purposes.

A good example being when Dems/Libs want the standard 10% yearly increase for some beaurocracy, and Conservatives only believe that 6% is actually nececessary,...Conservatives are wrongfully accused of wanting to cut 4% from the beaurocracy in question, which just isn't so. Hey,...only a 6% increase is still an increase,...and most certainly ISN'T A CUT.

Regardless, and no matter which BENT has their way,...the truth of the matter is that NO BEAUROCRACY EVER GETS CUT. Whether the Press/Media reports such as A CUT over and over and over,...it's still not true.

Neil :d: :b:

[melody1181]

Wow, there Clintons name pops up again! What I find odd is that his name keeps getting thrown up. His term is over! Get over him! whats done is done and yes he isn't a good person in my opinion either.

I do think Bush hasn't been the best president...in ANY terms but do I think Kerry will either? NO

I will be honest here, and part of this comes from experience here in the Panhandle of TX. This is a heavly conservative area. If you say anything that is not conservative you get jumped on and pretty much called stupid. Well thats one reason I'm not a huge fan of MOST republicans. SOME are to quick to say how stupid one is for beleiving differently. Not that the Dems don't do it either but MY experience is with the Cons.

I'm am neither. I refuse to stick to party lines just cause. Yes I am a fence sitter and proud of it!!!!

[reconeil]

That's basically just how it works.

A Democrat amongst predominantly Republicans: "Gets jumped on" by Republicans.

A Republican amongst predominantly Democrats: "Gets jumped on" by Democrats. The only difference being that Democrats are infinitely more pack-like vicious and merciless while doing "Their" "Jumping-on" Republicans.

Just out of curiosity Mel? If truly: "A Fence Sitter",...why does it bother you so much when I low rate the most despicable and worst President (re. Clinton) America has ever had, with the possible exception of Johnson??? Somehow related? :D

Neil :cd:

[melody1181]

Well Neil it bothers me because I think its living in the past. It would bother me if someone was berating Bush Sr or Reagon that way. And I can bet you there are people who think that about them as well.

The reason I hate politics is because it doesn't hve to be that way. LIke I said, I know libs are no better. I once got verbally jumped on by my uncle(the one thats living) because I made some off the wall comment about something I don't even remember. Made me feel like S*&% oh yeah...I was 12. So I guess I do have a little more against the Republican party than the Dems.

I think both parties are equally bad. No one is better than the other.

You see I respect your opinion as I do with everyone. I may disagree with people on occasion but its never personal with me. Every single one of us has the right to think what we think without fear of being made fun of and such.

Its just my pet peeve with the Clinton thing. Past is the past, need to look forward to the future.

[SuperScout]

Jane Fonda
Jan Crumb
Bella Abzug
Ramsey Clark
The Socialist Workers' Party
The Communist Party USA
Vo Nguyen Giap
Al Hubbard, the VVAG wannabee
Angela Davis


... what wonderful company to be associated with....

[Ironside]

Originally posted by SuperScout .... and dishonoring the reputation and integrity of Vietnam veterans. "He burst into public prominence with testimony in April 1971 when he testified [under oath, in case anybody's forgotten] that it was routine practice for GI's to have cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks and generally ravaged the countryside of Vietnam." [Did anybody bother to ask where the facts are about the heinous charges?] According to Kerry, he had been told that Americans had "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals" and other atrocities, yet he failed to report these alleged atrocities to the authorities? Isn't this failure just another manifestation of a lack of leadership on his part, a lack of manhood, or did he know that what he was testifiying about was just a big lie? The truth is, that Kerry knew it was a lie then, he knows it is still a lie, and he doesn't have, and probably never had the balls to tell the truth.

New and photos of his anti-war activities were later used to torment some of remaining POW's in that wonderful workers' paradise of North Vietnam, as if our POW's conditions and treatment wasn't bad enough. And remember, Kerry is a philosophical soulmate of our favorite target, Jane Hanoi Fonda.

After fighting in Vietnam, he returned to lead the protests against that war and urge the U.S. withdrawal that turned Indochina over to Communist rule for a generation. He was in favor of the nuclear freeze movement in the 1980s that would have frozen the Cold War in place with a Soviet advantage.

Kerry is an opportunisitic and grandstanding hypocrite, who would stand on the shoulders of dead troops to make himself look taller. Personally, I wouldn't urinate on him if he was on fire.

It looks like, somebody has been spending too much at the BIASED Vietnam Veterans Against Kerry, web site.

Senator John McCain came to the defense of a fellow Vietnam War Veteran and War Hero, Senator John Kerry, by attacking the credibility of a North Carolina veteran, Ted Sampley, who has dedicated himself to defeating Mr. Kerry in his campaign for President.

Sampley is the founder of the Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry.

McCain, an Arizona Republican, called the man, Sampley, "one of the most despicable people I have ever had the misfortune to encounter."

[Seascamp]

Seems to me that you Kerryite folks need some new script material. What you have put up has been put up here time and again, almost word for word. So what?s new that we can discuss and kick around, eh?
Oh, the ?someone? you refer to is a highly decorated Vietnam combat Officer and is fully capable of doing original reasearch and doesn?t need to crutch along with any organization if he chooses to go on his own research results. Just thought you?d like to know that before you proceed in making diminutive suggestions and assumptions. His citations are on the VN forum if ya care to go back and have a look see.

Scamp

[David]

Here is the reply from Ted Sampley.


When Republican Senator John McCain, on February 13, 2004, distributed a press release personally attacking me and Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry (V.V.A.J.K), it was no surprise. The New York Times printed McCain's attack the following day.

McCain's smear is predicated on lies, innuendo and misinformation printed in Prisoners of Hope, a book written and published in 1994. McCain and his fellow senator John Kerry, a liberal Democrat, teamed up and secretly helped ghost write the book as part of their post Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs campaign to discredit and shutdown the leading POW/MIA activists.

In the February 13, release, McCain instructed reporters to be "cautious" of Ted Sampley or any organization to which he belongs and to thoroughly investigate "Sampley's background and history of spreading outrageous slander and other disreputable behavior before inadvertently lending him or his allegations any credibility."

"I am well familiar with Mr. Sampley, and I know him to be one of the most despicable people I have ever had the misfortune to encounter," McCain (of Charles F. Keating fame) warned the media. " I consider him a fraud who preys on the hopes of family members of missing servicemen for his own profit. He is dishonorable, an enemy of the truth, and despite his claims, he does not speak for or represent the views of all but a few veterans. The many veterans I know would think it a disgrace to be considered a comrade or supporter of Ted Sampley."

Back in 1972, while stationed at Fort Bragg, I volunteered my off duty time to a small POW/MIA group (Americans Who Care) which helped Joe McCain when he traveled through North Carolina seeking to raise public awareness about his brother POW John McCain. Joe, like so many other citizens was concerned about Hanoi's atrocious abuse of U.S. prisoners of war and wanted to ensure that POW McCain would be released when the war was over.

Yet, McCain categorizes me as "one of the most despicable people" he "ever had the misfortune to encounter?" What does that say about his relationship with the Vietnamese prison guards whom he claims brutally tortured him daily?

Even though McCain's slanderous attack on me has been repeated in the worldwide media, no reporter, journalist, or columnist explained exactly what McCain meant and I am not sure they knew. Apparently all they needed to know was that a "bonafide POW war hero" said it, whatever it meant, so it must be creditable enough to publish.

McCain's press release is classic black propaganda defined as an attack on a person or group using "lies, misrepresentations and innuendo fashioned to injure, impede or destroy the activity of another person or group." The lies are usually issued from contrived sources removed from the actual author. Its overall objective is to cause another person or a group to be labeled despicable, evil, frauds and non-creditable.

In this case, the method used to deliver the lies is "Prisoners of Hope." The removed sources were Sen. John Kerry, Sen. John McCain and Army Col. Joe Schlatter of the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

McCain and Kerry used such tactics very effectively against POW/MIA families and activists during the 1991-92 Senate Select Committee on POW and MIA Affairs. Kerry was co-chairman and McCain, a committee member.

The Select Committee, established August 1991, was tasked with the mission of resolving the lingering POW/MIA issue by either gaining the release of American prisoners of war believed to be alive under the control of Hanoi, but never released, or explaining what happened to the missing prisoners.

In hindsight, it is obvious that McCain and Kerry were more interested in using the Select Committee as a means to justify lifting the U.S. imposed trade embargo against Vietnam than resolving the issue of missing U.S. servicemen.

From the onset of the hearings, Kerry and McCain's obvious bias for Vietnam were the source of many confrontations between the Select Committee and the POW/MIA activists.

At one point during the Select Committee hearings, the Kerry/McCain team were caught coaching DIA witnesses on how to discredit satellite imagery that showed the presence of living U.S. POWs in both Vietnam and Laos. When the activists found out about the witness tampering, they confronted Kerry and demanded his resignation. Numerous letters were written to the Select Committee demanding an outside investigation of the incident.

To deflect attention from their many clearly unethical acts, Kerry and McCain teamed up again and turned on the activist, managing to divert the entire Select Committee away from investigating Vietnam focusing instead on investigating the POW/MIA families and activist for alleged fraudulent fund raising.

The Kerry/McCain team disguised their investigation of the POW/MIA families and activists and the subpoenaing of private and organizational financial records by claiming they only wanted "to get to the truth." Kerry and McCain explained that they were looking for "professional predators" who were at work within the POW/MIA issue "feeding on the false hopes of the POW/MIA families."

In actuality, Kerry and McCain adopted the presumption that anyone or organization who raised funds based the assertion that Vietnam was still holding living American POWs was committing fraudulent fund-raising and deserved to be publicly chastised and prosecuted in court.

The Select Committee was formed because of the volumes of intelligence pointing to the existence of live POWs still in captivity.

McCain, the "former POW hero," wasted no time making headlines by alleging that most of the activist involved in POW/MIA issue were only in it for the money. He stated in front of a room full of cameras, "the people who have done these things are not zealots in a good cause. They are criminals and some of the most craven, most cynical and most despicable human beings to ever run a scam."

In two sentences McCain effectively branded nearly all the activist POW/MIA families and Vietnam veteran activists as "despicable" and "criminals."

Now you know what McCain was talking about when he referred to me as "despicable" and a "fraud who preys on the hopes of family members of missing servicemen for his own profit."

Another activist whom Kerry and McCain attempted to malign was former POW, Navy Capt. Eugene "Red" McDaniel (Ret.).

McDaniel, who journalist Monika Jensen-Stevenson characterized as "one of the most tortured Americans in the history of war" was lumped into the fraud category because he had committed the unpardonable offense, in Kerry's and McCain's eyes, of drafting a letter signed by fifty of his fellow POWs urging that the Vietnam trade embargo not be lifted until Hanoi provided a full and honest accounting of all American POW/MIAs.

Nearing the end of the Select Committee, the Kerry/McCain team announced to the press that they had turned their findings over to the Justice Department and assured them that multiple indictments would follow.

Much later, after the national media had lost interest, a Justice Department official quietly acknowledged that the investigation had been completed and they had found no illegal activities and no reason to indict anyone.

I was one of the leading activists who demanded Kerry's resignation for witness tampering and one of the first the Kerry/McCain tag team singled out for investigation. They subpoenaed my personal financial records, those of the US Veteran Dispatch ( my privately owned veteran's newspaper) and Homecoming II Project, a now defunct non-profit POW/MIA organization which I had been appointed to chair.

After dissecting all of the seized records, the best the Kerry/McCain fraud investigators could deliver was an accusation that over the period of a couple of years Homecoming II had paid Ted Sampley $300,000.00 for t-shirts. I was not aware of the accusation until after it had been printed in the Select Committee Final Report. That accusation is an unadulterated lie.

It was manufactured to impugn me personally by implying that my motive for demanding an honest accounting of U.S. POW/MIAs is greed. Kerry and McCain could not document that accusation then, or can they now. They lied.

At the time of the Select Committee, Homecoming II was the most active POW/MIA organization in the country. We had office's in Washington, Thailand and in North Carolina, where I live. The U.S. Veteran Dispatch is a newspaper that I have been publishing since 1986. We were printing up to 20,000 copies per month which were distributed free to the public unless it was received by mail. The newspaper was funded through the sale of veteran related materials.

By causing the activists to be investigated for fraud, Kerry and McCain not only drew attention away from their unethical acts, but also away from findings the Select Committee was finally being forced to acknowledge - "there is evidence, moreover that indicates the possibility of survival, at least for a small number [U.S. POW's held captive by Vietnam] after Operation Homecoming," (quoted from page 7 of the Select Committee January 13, 1993 report).

From the beginning it had been Kerry and McCain's objective to discredit all evidence pointing to the possibility of living US POW's left behind in Vietnam. Instead of giving the POW's the benefit of the doubt by trying to prove that they were still alive, the Kerry/McCain team took the position that there was no proof that POW's were still alive.

Both Kerry and McCain continued to work hard to normalize diplomatic and trade relations with communist Vietnam. Kerry and McCain knew that President Bill Clinton was being pressured to lift the embargo and that he needed their help because candidate Clinton had promised, in an April 27, 1992 campaign letter, not to normalize relations or offer any assistance to Vietnam until it had fully assisted in solving the live POW issue.

"Before I would normalize relations or provide assistance to any of the countries involved, they would be required to open their files and actively assist in solving this issue. I firmly believe that America should never leave its warriors on the battlefield. This is not a political issue; it is a moral test of those values and traits that made America great," Clinton said in the letter.

POW/MIA family organizations remained adamantly opposed to removing the embargo. They believed, rightfully so, that the embargo was the only leverage powerful enough to force Vietnam to come clean.

By 1994, the way was clear for Kerry and McCain to provide political cover for President Clinton with his efforts to lift the U.S. trade embargo against Vietnam.

In a smoothly choreographed political maneuver, Clinton used the two "Vietnam War heroes" and their "no POWs are left alive conclusion" as justification to lift the trade embargo...having them stand side by side with him when he made the announcement.

At the same time, to ensure that the POW issue could be not be resurrected by the POW/MIA families and activist, Kerry and McCain consummated their deceit by spoon feeding tainted and false data to Susan Katz Keating, an ambitious Washington Times reporter who was hoping to write a bestseller book - Prisoners of Hope..

Kerry and McCain also relied heavily on their secret Pentagon collaborator, Army Col. Joe Schlatter who from 1986 to 1995, was tasked with running the Defense Intelligence Agency Special Office for POW-MIA Affairs.

Schlatter's job while heading the POW/MIA office was to correlate and interpret the hundreds of intelligence reports about living American POWs left in Southeast Asia that were pouring into the Pentagon.

Schlatter had actually early on in his assignment begun to systematically kill on paper the several hundred U.S. servicemen described as prisoners in the intelligence reports.

Later when called upon by the Kerry/McCain team, Schlatter joined in attempting to discredit (killing the messenger) any individual or group that got in the way of plans to normalize U.S. trade relations with Vietnam.

Schlatter made sure that Keating was issued a special Pentagon identification card giving her extensive access to his office, thoughts and opinions. Schlatter often acted as a private conduit between the Kerry/McCain team and Keating.

By November 1994, Keating had written and published Prisoners of Hope; Exploiting the POW Myth in America (Random House). In her acknowledgments, Keating makes mention of her indebtedness to "contacts within the Department of Defense." In addition, she gave "special mention" to "POW hero, Senator John McCain, who graciously returned every phone call and answered every question."

It did not take the POW families long to learn that Keating's Prisoners of Hope was a foul regurgitation of Kerry and McCain's allegations against the activists who had diligently kept the POW/MIA issue before the American people for years, people Keating labeled as "phonies and unscrupulous."

Keating wrote that the POW/MIA issue was a "destructive national myth" and that President Clinton should immediately get rid of it by declaring dead all servicemen listed as missing in action. He did shortly afterward.

Prisoners of Hope is sloppy, plagued by lies, and gross errors. Using innuendos, lies and scrambled facts, along with the help of Kerry and McCain, Keating, attacked all the leading POW/MIA activists. She hoped to convince her readers "that for more than 20 years POW/MIA families, veterans, and concerned citizens, faked the issue of American servicemen still missing from the Vietnam War to "scam the American public of millions of dollars" in donations.

Keating accused former Vietnam POWs "Red" McDaniel and Mark Smith, Senator Bob Smith, R-NH, former Congressman Billy Hendon, R-NC, former Congressman John LeBoutillier, R-NY, former Army Lieutenant Colonel James "Bo" Gritz, former Army Green Beret Ted Sampley and others of being "charlatans and frauds" who were helping to "further" the POW/MIA "conspiracy myth" for "profit."

Even after many victims of Keating's poison pen offered factual evidence of her misrepresentations and negligence, the establishment press still took Keating's work at face value.

Instead of recognizing Prisoners of Hope as undocumented literary garbage, they gave it "rave" reviews, adding that it was time for POW families to move on and forget the "ghosts" of Vietnam.

In 1995, not long after Keating's Prisoners of Hope hit the book stores and the discount table, Col. Schlatter retired.

From the safety of his retirement, Col. Schlatter finally admitted his true colors on the Internet, "I am a retired Army colonel and my politics are somewhat to the left; I am a yellow-dog Democrat and voted for Bill Clinton twice. I favor serious gun control."

Col. Schlatter's admittance that he is a "leftist," a Clinton loyalist who favors "serious gun control," and a "Yellow Dog Democrat, (meaning he would vote for a yellow dog before he would a Republican)" might explain why he so vigorously defends the communist Vietnamese?

Forever the loyal partisan collaborator, Co. Joe Schlatter has kept the lies in Keating's failed book alive by posting it's contents on the Internet on news groups such as alt.war.vietnam.

By 1997, he created a "MIA Facts" web domain miafacts.org. Any time information or comments pertaining to the POW/MIA issue or information critical of McCain and Kerry appear on the Internet, Col. Schlatter will jump in suggesting that the poster should visit his web pages to read "the real truth" about what he calls the "POW/MIA myth." Miafacts.org is peppered with twisted facts, lies, and distortions, pure black propaganda.

By Ted Sampley
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
February 29, 2004

[Arrow]

Thank you David.The"establishment" has tried to pull downThe Last Firebase on theWashington Malltrying to remove the POW-MIA issue out of the sight of the visiting public. I'm not sure it is still there.This is what I know. The Last Firebasehad on handblack ring binders filled with pageafter page of newspapers clippings ofVietnam Veterans that had died from cancerway before their time. Page after page of reports of ptsd related suicide, death by cop, single car accidents.There was not enough time for me to go through all of them.They have been keeping the cause of the Vietnam Veteran in the public's face for years on the mall.This long and most won't read it butit's for the record.
<CENTER>The Unrelenting Effort to Silence The Last Firebase </CENTER>

By Donna Long
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
September/October 1994 issue

Some of the same Washington, D. C. elitist snobs who, in 1981, helped Jan Scruggs, president of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, stop the American flag from being permanently flown directly over the National Vietnam Veterans Memorial have now joined his new and unrelenting effort to evict POW/MIA activists from vigils near the memorial.

Scruggs, who does not believe Vietnam held live POWs back after 1973, has made no secret of his contempt for POW activists whom he has publicly categorized as "vendors exploiting the POW/MIA issue for personal gain."

In commenting about POW/MIA families, Scruggs told the Morning News Tribune of Seattle, WA, "I'm kind of sorry for them, that they don't have normal lives."

Since the dedication of the memorial in 1982, Vietnam veterans and POW/MIA family members have maintained POW/MIA vigils adjacent to sidewalks leading to the Wall "to remind politicians of the abandonment of American Vietnam War veterans who were left behind against their will in Southeast Asia."

The activities of the POW/MIA activists who operate the vigils, which are set-up on "demonstration sites" designated by the National Park Service, are supposed to be protected by the First Amendment. Under that free speech amendment, activists demonstrating on federal land can offer for sale to the public printed materials that display messages directly related to their cause and activity.

Last year, the Commission on Fine Arts, a presidentially appointed group of bureaucrats who have a say in what Washington, D.C.'s memorials should look like and represent, jumped in to help Scruggs' rid the area near the Wall of those "disgusting non-artistic" POW/MIA vigils they claim are cluttering up the sidewalks.

Members of that commission are lobbying Congress for new laws which they hope can be used against the POW vigils. The Commission on Fine Arts said publicly in 1982, while opposing the placement of the American flag over the Wall, that there was no need to "adorn the memorial with patriotic claptrap."

The primary target of Scruggs and his federal government bureaucrat friends is The Last Firebase Veteran's Archives Project which has maintained a 24-hour POW/MIA vigil near the Lincoln Memorial since 1986.

The Last Firebase is a non-profit veteran's organization whose leadership is made up of Vietnam veterans and POW/MIA family members. It has the full endorsement of the National Alliance of POW/MIA Families. Outside of the U.S. and Vietnamese governments, The Last Firebase holds the largest database of POW/MIA information in the world.

Activists who man The Last Firebase raise funds by selling printed materials, including POW/MIA related t-shirts, bracelets, and books, which are used to finance national and international campaigns designed to focus public attention on the POW/MIA issue.

Once Washington's elite have cleansed "their monument" of the "embarrassing" Last Firebase vigil, then the "long-haired, booney, hat-wearing, over-the-hill wannabes" won't have any place to "hang around," swapping stories about "a war they lost." Most importantly, they will not be there cluttering up Washington's most visited "tourist attraction" with their unsightly presence.

This type of in house contempt for Vietnam vets who don't wear a "three-piece" suit and eat sushi for lunch is typical among the Washington bureaucrats who view the Vietnam Veterans Memorial as nothing more than military art and a tourist attraction.

The following is a documented chronology of how upper-crust politically motivated "Beltway Insiders", a multi-million dollar corporation, and an equally greedy, pompous, self-serving former folk-hero Vietnam vet, have joined forces in an attempt to shut down The Last Firebase and rid themselves of "undesirables."

SCRUGGS SUED THE POW/MIA ACTIVISTS

November, 1991 - Jan Scruggs, president of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund and Frederick Hart, a Vietnam War protestor and the designer of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial "Three Servicemen Statue" in Washington, filed a copyright infringement suit against Homecoming II Project (former keeper of The Last Firebase), Red Hawk, Inc. (former publisher of U.S. Veteran News and Report), and Ted Sampley, a highly decorated Vietnam veteran who was chairman of Homecoming II and president of Red Hawk, Inc.

The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. sought to stop Homecoming II, the U.S. Veteran News and Report, and Ted Sampley from using the image of the "Three Servicemen Statue" on POW/MIA t-shirts and the payment of back royalties.

In the lawsuit, Scruggs and Hart, who paid their attorneys over $100,000 from money the public had donated to the memorial fund, alleged that their ownership of the copyright and charging royalties are important to provide a source of income needed to maintain the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and to protect the statue's artistic integrity.

Sampley's lawyer argued that under copyright law, a national symbol could not be copyrighted. He maintained the "Three Servicemen Statue" was a national symbol for all Vietnam veterans and their families.

Scruggs and Hart's lawyers told the judge that the copyright was valid because the statue was nothing more than "a piece of art with no function or symbolic meaning.

SAMPLEY ARRESTED--THE LAST FIREBASE IMPOUNDED

February 1, 1992 - Several trucks carrying an estimated dozen United Stated Park Police made a morning raid on The Last Firebase demanding that Sampley order The Last Firebase dismantled and removed from federal land.

Sampley refused and was arrested. The police then dismantled and impounded The Last Fire Base charging Sampley with demonstrating without a permit.

Charges against Sampley were later thrown out of court and The Last Firebase property was returned to the activists and their permit to demonstrate reissued.

FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERED ACTIVISTS TO STOP USING IMAGES OF STATUE

February 4, 1992 - Rejecting Sampley's argument that the "Three Servicemen Statue" could not be copyrighted because it belongs to the people, Judge John Garrett Penn ruled that the Scruggs/Hart copyright was valid. He ordered the POW/MIA activists to stop making and selling "unauthorized images" of the statue and that all items the activists possessed containing the image be impounded.

In his ruling, Judge Penn said the activists had attempted to justify their unauthorized use of the images by "wrapping themselves in the flag of patriotism." He said the public is served by the enforcement of the copyright.

SCRUGGS WON AN UNPRECEDENTED JUDGEMENT AGAINST ACTIVIST

December 10, 1992 - Federal Judge Charles R. Richey rejected Sampley's documented argument that activists at The Last Firebase had grossed, in a 3 year period, less than $72,000 in sales of printed material featuring the "Three Servicemen Statue." Judge Richey awarded Scruggs' memorial fund and Hart $300,000 in damages and $59,000 in attorney fees saying he had based the $300,000 damages, in part, on an affidavit from Walt Sides, president of Warriors Inc. In the affidavit, Sides, who operates a booth adjacent to The Last Firebase, said that he pays Scruggs' memorial fund 10 percent of his booth's gross sales of t-shirts with the copyrighted image of the statue, which tabulates to approximately $10,000 per year.

SEVERELY WOUNDED, HOMECOMING II PROJECT AND THE U.S. VETERAN NEWS ARE DISSOLVED

March 1993 - As a result of the judgement and with their finances depleted, Homecoming II and the U.S. Veteran News and Report, which had occupied The Last Firebase since the mid-80s, were forced to dissolve. During its tenure of The Last Firebase, Homecoming II had diligently distributed millions of pieces of literature explaining the plight of American POWs and MIAs and had given away nearly 700,000 issues of the U.S. Veteran.

The activists quickly reorganized and The Last Firebase Veterans Archives Project and the U.S. Veteran Dispatch became the new occupants of The Last Firebase.

SCRUGGS TRIED TO DEFEND JUDGEMENT AGAINST ACTIVISTS

March 1993 - Scruggs, responding to thousands of faxes, calls and letters demanding an explanation as to why Scruggs' organization holds a copyright on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, which is supposed to be a public monument, began a counterattack.

He wrote to one activist, "The courts have spoken on the issue [copyright] for several hundred years. Patents protect inventors from those who steal their ideas and line their own pockets. Copyrights do the same for authors and artists."

To another he wrote, "We initiated this lawsuit only after being forced to do so. Now that we have won we will take measures to get the money which could have been used to help the Memorial rather than go to a for profit enterprise such as REDHAWK [U.S. VETERAN NEWS AND REPORT]. The money is available. Sales are brisk at the Memorial. Thousands of dollars in cold hard cash from tourists is changing hands every day."

Scruggs wrote, "The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund is not involved with Agent Orange, POWs, or other veterans issues. We are involved in protecting the memorial from those who misuse it and we are cooperating with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in protecting the memorial from those who threaten to use explosives to destroy it."

April 4, 1993 - Scruggs answered the complaint of the brother of a man who is still missing in action as a result of the Vietnam War, "Personally I would like to settle this entire affair and become friends. Each time we try we have been rebuffed. Believe me, we will continue aggressive tactics to get the money owed to us from those who can clearly afford it. After all our legal fees are being paid by Homecoming II. And I have no sympathy for t-shirt vendors."

SCRUGGS - THE CATALYST IN A NEW ATTACK

April 14, 1993 - Scruggs wrote a letter to J. Carter Brown, chairman of the Commission on Fine Arts. In the letter, Scruggs told Brown that "groups claiming to help American POWs" and "others who claim to be helping the Vietnam Veterans Memorial" are "retail operations making a small fortune." He suggested that because "structures" being used on some First Amendment demonstration sites have been there for a long period of time, they have achieved "a degree of permanency as to merit design approval" by the arts commission.

APRIL 15, 1993 - Brown answered Scruggs with a three paragraph letter thanking him for his continuing concern for the memorial and telling Scruggs that he had passed his letter on to the National Park Service.

APRIL 26, 1993 - Scruggs, an attorney, wrote Brown back, informing him that the National Park Service is "powerless to take corrective action" against the POW/MIA activists, "because of the First Amendment there is a right to demonstrate" and "a part of one's demonstration can consist of selling items with one's First Amendment message emblazoned upon merchandise." Scruggs added, "allowable merchandise includes tourist souvenirs such as t-shirts, buttons and other items."

Scruggs wrote, because the demonstrations "are perfectly legal," the National Park Service "has no authority to deny anyone a permit to demonstrate and sell merchandise as part of their demonstration." He added, "I have researched the law in great detail, believe me" and ended his letter by calling upon Brown to "exercise your authority under the law to halt all sales activities at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial until such time as the demonstrator's structures have met the high architectural standards for which our city is famous."

MAY 27, 1993 - Brown wrote to Robert G. Stanton, Regional Director of the National Park Service. Brown called the area between the Vietnam and Lincoln Memorials a "mess" and lamented over why "one or two" groups should be allowed to spoil the beauty of "one of our great monuments" (obviously referring to the Lincoln Memorial, since he suggested that the groups be moved out of the main visual axis connecting the Lincoln Memorial, Washington Monument and the Capitol).

SCRUGGS BEGAN MEDIA PRESSURE

JUNE 20, 1993 - WASHINGTON POST - Scruggs, described as the Vietnam veteran who "conceived" the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, attacked POW/MIA activists on First Amendment demonstration sites near the Wall, saying they had created a "K-Mart on the Mall". Scruggs said the activists should only be allowed to pass out brochures and "things like that." The Post quoted National Parks Service spokesman Sandra Alley as saying the Park Service is "concerned about the carnival atmosphere" and is studying regulations to "better control" the area.

NOW THAT I'VE GOT YOUR ATTENTION

JUNE 21, 1993 - Scruggs wrote Sandra Alley telling her that demonstrators near the Wall are selling pins, sweatshirts, videos, patches and other items in violation of their permits. In addition, Scruggs said that he learned from an (unnamed) appointee of President Clinton that one of the demonstrators had set a gas can next to a generator. Scruggs called the latter alleged incident "a clear and present danger" to the public and reminded Ms. Alley that the Park Service had the right to immediately revoke permits for both alleged violations.

ENTER SEN. KERRY---THE PRO-HANOI POLITICIAN

JUNE 30, 1993 - A call was logged in at the Park Ranger Kiosk, located at the entrance to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, from the office of Senator John Kerry (D-MA). According to the log book, Kerry's office asked about the "vendors" near the Wall and was told to contact the Park Service Public Affairs office.

Kerry, who was chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, and Senator John McCain (R-AZ), a member of the committee, led the fight on the U.S. Senate floor to lift the trade embargo against Vietnam.

(POW/MIA activists at The Last Firebase have publicly accused both senators of suppressing evidence during the committee's investigation that American POWs were held years after the end of the Vietnam War).

THE SECOND COMING

JULY 13, 1993 - An article written by Scruggs, headlined "Seedy side of the memorial," is published in USA TODAY. In that article, Scruggs compared his crusade against POW activists who demonstrate near the Wall to Jesus chasing the "money-changers" out of the temple. He ended his sanctimonious posturing by declaring that "real" demonstrators should "only be allowed to give away pamphlets and brochures."

(What Scruggs failed to include in his "holier than thou" tirade against "making money at a sacred place" was that his memorial fund has received thousands of dollars in royalties from the sale of t-shirts and other items that bear the image of the copyrighted "Three Servicemen Statue" generated at First Amendment demonstration sites near The Wall).

SORRY I DIDN'T ANSWER SOONER

JULY 16, 1993 - Sandra Alley answered Scruggs' June 21 letter. Ms. Alley told Scruggs the Park Service is doing its best to enforce permit regulations and is considering changing the regulations.

WHAT'S SO HARD ABOUT DENYING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS?

DECEMBER 17, 1993 - Scruggs sent a memorandum to Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt.

"For quite a while I have been unsuccessful in persuading your agency that the vendors at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial are simply that ....they are not demonstrators ...they are vendors selling souvenirs to tourists," Scruggs wrote. Scruggs told Babbitt that the Park Service plans to "eventually somehow get around to issuing regulations" to get rid of the demonstrators and expressed his "utter amazement" at the Park Service's "inability to accomplish this small task." Scruggs ended his letter by offering to give Babbitt's department a tour of the memorial.

OH, MY GOD - EVEN THE WORST WINTER OF THE CENTURY CAN'T SHUT THEM DOWN!

JANUARY 31, 1994 - Brown wrote to National Park Service Director Roger Kennedy telling the director that he had driven by the Lincoln Memorial during the snow, which had shut down the U.S. government, and regretted to report that despite the "severity of the weather," the "vendors" in front of the Lincoln Memorial were still there.

(The Last Firebase, which is located across from the Lincoln Memorial, near the Reflecting Pool, maintained its 24-hour vigil for POW/MIAs that day, as it has every day, 365 days a year, regardless of the weather).

Saying that the commission's lawyers were "very nervous" about taking any steps that might be "construed as an abridgment" of the demonstrator's rights, Brown suggested relocating the demonstration sites to a "less conspicuous spot" as an alternative.

I'LL GET RID OF THEM!

FEBRUARY 27, 1994 - Senator Kerry visited the Park Ranger Kiosk at the Wall and wanted to know what was being done about the POW/MIA demonstration sites. According to the daily log book, after Park Ranger Oates explained the permit process to Kerry, the senator asked, "Aren't the memorial people doing anything about it?" Oates told Kerry that there is a controversy about the POW/MIA vigils. To this Kerry replied, "They are disgusting. We'll do something about it tomorrow."

PITTING "BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER"

MARCH 1994 - BRAVO VETERANS OUTLOOK published a vicious attack by Scruggs on fellow Vietnam veterans who man POW/MIA vigils near the Wall. In that article, Scruggs called upon Vietnam veterans to protect their "sacred" Wall from the greedy "money-changers" by writing a letter to Stanton asking him to change sales regulations on First Amendment demonstration sites.

(Again Scruggs failed to mention the thousands of dollars his organization had received and the money it continues to receive to this date from some of the demonstration sites he so vehemently attacks. The Last Firebase, which refuses to recognize the copyright on the "Three Servicemen Statue," is not among the groups that pays copyright royalties to Scruggs' organization).

"BELTWAY MEDIA" SILENT ON MAIL FRAUD INVESTIGATION OF SCRUGGS's FUND RAISING

APRIL 20, 1994 - CBS THIS MORNING reported that Pennsylvania Attorney General Ernie Preate was investigating the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund's direct mail fund-raising activities.

"This organization raised over $4.6 million over the last three years on claims that it is going to use that money to maintain the Wall. In fact, under our conservative estimates, we can say that only about $230,000, or only 5 percent, has actually gone into events and maintenance of the wall area," Preate said. Calling Scruggs' direct-mail letters "misleading and fraudulent," Preate added that according to VVMF's tax returns, Scruggs' organization raised over $2 million in 1992.

"Only $180,000 was spent on taking care of the Wall, while $630,000 was spent on fund-raising. The remaining money went to public education and ceremonies to commemorate the Wall," Preate said.

"The National Park Service and the American taxpayers are already spending more than $750,000 a year to take care of the Wall, it's a sum the Park Service says adequately covers the needs of the monument," said CBS THIS MORNING reporter Hattie Kauffman.

(There's something perversely evil about someone who calls upon Vietnam veterans to "protect their sacred Wall" from POW/MIA activists who fund their cause by offering tangible items to the public, while raising millions of dollars in donations under the fraudulent pretext of maintaining the Wall).

SCRUGGS' MEMORIAL FUND TRIED TO COLLECT JUDGEMENT BY ATTEMPTING TO SEIZE SAMPLEY'S PROPERTY

April 27, 1994 - The Kinston Daily Free Press reported that a sheriff's deputy had called Sampley to inform him that the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund was ordering his property seized as partial payment of the $359,000 judgment. The date of June 3 was set for the public auctioning of Sampley's property.

THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS COSTING US MONEY

MAY 4, 1994 - S.J. DiMeglio, president and CEO of Guest Services, a multi-million dollar corporation that operates the Park Service marinas, kiosks and vending operations on the Mall, met with Stanton and complained about his company losing money to First Amendment demonstration sites.

TO PROTECT THE PARK VISITOR

MAY 18, 1994 - The Park Service published a proposed regulation change in the Federal Register that would limit sales on First Amendment demonstration sites to books, newspapers and traditional printed material, such as pamphlets and leaflets. Stanton claimed the demonstration sites near the Vietnam Memorial, which are the only ones attacked in the proposed regulation change, "have severely disrupted the quality of the park visitor experience." The public was given a 60-day period to comment on the proposed regulation change.

ACTIVISTS FORCE SCRUGGS TO CANCEL AUCTION

June 3, 1994 - The Kinston Free Press reported that Scruggs had backed down from auctioning Sampley's property.

"The whole idea behind the memorial was to help heal the wounds of the whole Vietnam War and to help the vets recover," Scruggs told The Free Press. Scruggs said that the memorial fund had been told that "The only thing Sampley really wants is for us to foreclose on his property in order to become what he considers a martyr. But, we're not going to make him a martyr. That's not really what we're about anyway."

Although the auction was canceled, the memorial fund can still foreclose on Sampley anytime within the next 10 years.

GEE, THANK YOU FOR ASKING ME TO COMMENT ON YOUR PROPOSED CHANGES

JUNE 9, 1994 - Scruggs wrote a letter to Stanton saying he is "pleased to respond" to Stanton's request for public comments on the proposed regulation change concerning "vendors at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial."

(Scruggs' invitation to comment on a regulation change that he worked over a year to put into motion is so incestuous that it warrants no comment).

JUNE 16, 1994 - Brown wrote Stanton praising him for his "courageous leadership" in taking action against the "vendors."

TO HELL WITH FREE SPEECH - WE'RE LOSING MONEY

JUNE 30, 1994 - DiMeglio wrote Stanton about the increased number of First Amendment "vendors" on the Mall since their May 4th meeting. Saying Guest Services had lost over $300,000 in sales in June alone and expected to lose about $750,000 in July, he told Stanton that the Park Service must either tighten policy regarding First Amendment demonstrators or grant Guest Services relief by a reduction in its franchise fee.

(The dramatic increase in the number of groups getting permits for First Amendment Demonstration sites on the Mall in June was deliberately created by the Park Service. On Memorial Day weekend, a Park Service employee, sympathetic to the POW/MIA cause, told The Last Firebase that he had overheard his superiors talking about how they were going to "flood the Mall with so many t-shirt vendors that Congress would become involved because that's all they would see when they drove by the Mall."

The employee said his superiors "joked" about how they were going to issue permits to "everyone and everyone's brother." The Park Service "created a forest in order to cut down a tree," by telling people in a June Washington Post article how easy it was to get a "free speech" permit. By September 1, the Park Service had succeeded in "flooding the Mall" with 200 t-shirt vendors.

GET RID OF THEM OR ELSE

JULY 11, 1994 - DiMeglio wrote Stanton and threatened to "indefinitely postpone" scheduled construction on the Mall of four new kiosks by Guest Services unless the Park Service enacted a "speedy adoption" of regulation changes to limit "competing free speech" vendors.

JULY 18, 1994 - The 60-day public comment ended. The Park Service said the response from the public was "about even" in its comments "for and against" the proposed regulation change.

FRAUDULENT LETTERS EXPOSED IN PUBLIC COMMENT

SEPTEMBER 4, 1994 - THE STARS AND STRIPES veteran's newspaper reported that hundreds of form letters supporting the Park Service's proposed regulation change were fakes, raising the "specter of mail fraud." Someone it seemed, signed the computer generated letters with the names and addresses of people without their permission. Most of the names affixed to the approximately 1,300 letters were either those of slip holders at Park Service-owned marinas (operated by Guest Services) or temporary or past employees of Guest Services.

Guest Services at first told STARS AND STRIPES that they had nothing to do with any of the fraudulent letters, but later admitted that their company had printed a form letter with the names of employees of Ameritemps, a company that supplied Guest Services with temporary workers. The company said it contacted "95 percent of the employees" to let them know their names had been used. Guest Services, however, denied that it sent in letters with the names and addresses of people who were slip holders at the Park Service owned marinas that are administrated by their company.

"I believe that we probably did the text (of the fraudulently signed form letter)," Andrew Normandeau, secretary of Guest Services told STARS AND STRIPES in a follow up article, adding that he was going to write a letter to the Park Service with the "findings" of an initial, internal investigation.

The Park Service, which also denied any connection to the fraudulent letters, said the 1,300 form letters would not be considered in their assessment of the public comment.

HO, HUM, YAWNS--THE POSTAL SERVICE

SEPTEMBER 11, 1994 - STARS AND STRIPES. An Inspector General's official told the veterans newspaper, "We're checking it out," but added that the case (of the fraudulent letters) was probably more within the jurisdiction of the Post Office.

"It's not clear that the mail fraud statute has been violated here, but we will look into it," said John Brugger, a Post Office spokesman. A long-time postal inspector, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told the STARS AND STRIPES that he doubted mail fraud had been committed because "no money or property was involved."

(EXCUSE ME! Money isn't involved? What about the one million dollars Guest Services complained to the Park Service about losing because of "unconscionable proliferation of these First Amendment vendors." What about Guest Services' threat to delay construction on the Mall unless new regulations are enacted to get rid of the "free speech" vendors? And just what is involved when someone signs the name of someone else to a letter without their permission and mails that letter to a government agency supporting a regulation that would deny POW/MIA activists the right to raise money for their cause?)

PUBLIC COMMENT 4-1 AGAINST REGULATION CHANGE

After removing the 1,300 fraudulent letters from consideration, the "almost even" count of people for and against the proposed new sales regulations on First Amendment demonstration sites dramatically changed to approximately 3,035 against the regulation change and 774 in favor. Of the 774 in favor, 241 were form letters and petitions signed by Guest Services employees. Some 2,500 park visitors to the Wall - the very people the Park Service claimed were having the "quality" of their park visit experience "severely disrupted" by First Amendment demonstrators - signed cards during their visit to the Wall against the regulation change.

In addition, a private poll of visitors at the Wall by Jacobs, Jenner and Kenton, revealed that 55 percent of those polled felt the First Amendment activists had "little or no effect" on their experience, while 24 percent found them to have a "positive effect."

It should also be noted that about 160 million people (20 million a year) have visited the Wall since The Last Firebase began its POW/MIA vigil in 1986. Prior to the May 18, 1994 60-day public comment period, the Park Service had received less than 50 complaints about activists on First Amendment demonstration sites.

(That should be the end of the story, right? Wrong. It appears that the Park Service doesn't give a damn about how the public really feels. The call for public comment was nothing more than a technicality required by law, the results of which Park Service officials said they were not obligated to act upon. The Park Service is going to get rid of the POW/MIA activists, by hook or crook, and the only question left now is when and how).

BELTWAY MEDIA IGNORED FRAUD
Not one news organization, with the exception of the STARS AND STRIPES (which put the story out on the wire service), reported the mail fraud scandal. Instead, the Washington Post and CNN produced one-sided reports on the terrible "T-shirt Pollution" on the Mall, never bothering to look below the surface for the real story of the who, what, when and how behind the regulation change and damage such a change will do to the right of free speech.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Money, politics and greed - that same unholy alliance which caused the abandonment of Vietnam veterans during and after the war in Southeast Asia, is the motivation behind the effort to evict The Last Firebase. If that alliance succeeds, Scruggs will be praised by the pro-Hanoi Kerry crowd for silencing the voice of the POW/MIAs, lauded by the uppity arts commission and the Park Service for making the memorial a "pretty tourist attraction." He will no doubt be thanked by Guest Services (perhaps with a "donation" for his "maintenance" of The Wall charity?) for getting rid of "competing free-speech" demonstrators.

Then, unless he's in jail for fraudulent fund raising, Scruggs will continue to smile all the way to the bank and a Guest Services employee with a foreign accent will be selling Scruggs' copyrighted "Three Servicemen Statue" t-shirts, coffee mugs, statues, pins, patches and other Vietnam "military art" items out of a brand new kiosk located - you guessed it - on The Last Firebase's First Amendment demonstration site.

[SuperScout]

For doing the research, and posting this eye-opening expose of those that have harmed the efforts of the POW/MIA groups. An unconscionable crime has been commited by John Kerry, aided and abetted by John McCain; both men deserve our contempt and utter disdain.

[Seascamp]

I was working in Vietnam during the April 2000 25th celebrations when the Honorable Sen. McCain was there and totally slam-dunking the current Stalinist regime for POW abuses. It got the Red Party Bubbas all riled up, in total denial, and the crap was hitting the fan, big time. So much so that I felt it best to go back to Singapore and wait out the crap-storm. Good idea I think because some of the southern VN population was stirring a bit, but stirring not over abuse of US POWs, no, but stirring about the tens and tens of thousands of Vietnamese who have simply gone poof into thin air.

So the fact that Sen. McCain finds common cause with Sen. Kerry; who is an intense advocate of the current VN Stalinist regime and their attendant human rights abuses, seems to be more than a bit unusual. But politics renders some strange bedfellows I suppose and the McCain-Kerry link-up has to be one of the strangest.
There is also an elected representative out of Texas who was also a Hanoi POW and he calls the Kerry positioning as it is. But his thoughts are purely back page stuff and don?t see the light of day very much at all. Too bad, as it certainly contrasts with Sen. McCain?s political allegiances and publicly professed positions that, in turn, seem to be opposite of what he himself was hollering about in Vietnam.

So who knows about all of this, I certainly don?t and don?t pretend to. I salute to all former POWs that suffered and died at the hands of the Stalinists.

Scamp

[SuperScout]

"I'm running to free our government from the grip of lobbyists," so stated John Kerry in his victory speech in Iowa. Later in the primary campaign, in his New Hampshire victory speech, he delivered a message to the "influence peddlers" and other "special interests" who, he asserted, now call the White House home: "We're coming. You're going. And don't let the door hit you on the way out."

As it turns out, the senator who has raised the most money from lobbyists over the past 15 years is none other than Mr. Kerry, according to a study by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). In fact, he's the only senator to break the $600,000 barrier in individual campaign donations from those he calls "influence peddlers."

OK, OK, maybe it isn't technically a lie, but simply a gigantic example of his boundless hypocrisy.

[Ironside]

Originally posted by SuperScout "I'm running to free our government from the grip of lobbyists," so stated John Kerry in his victory speech in Iowa. Later in the primary campaign, in his New Hampshire victory speech, he delivered a message to the "influence peddlers" and other "special interests" who, he asserted, now call the White House home: "We're coming. You're going. And don't let the door hit you on the way out."

As it turns out, the senator who has raised the most money from lobbyists over the past 15 years is none other than Mr. Kerry, according to a study by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). In fact, he's the only senator to break the $600,000 barrier in individual campaign donations from those he calls "influence peddlers."

OK, OK, maybe it isn't technically a lie, but simply a gigantic example of his boundless hypocrisy.

That's true. More than any other Senator, only to be outdone by who?

Yup, George Bush! ;)

I'm not happy with Kerry for that either, but looking at the BUG picture he blows Bush outta the water. ;)

You could find a few more things about Kerry, not to like. But, for every one, there's 3 for Bush. :D

[Seascamp]

Ok, I?ll bite. Exactly how many times has Bush slam-dunked a unanimous congressional vote that would have called on the current Vietnamese Government to be accountable for their human rights abuses? As a matter of record, Kerry acted to trash out a 411-1 congressional vote calling on the Vietnamese to do just that.
Subsequently Kerry?s cousin got a huge and financially lucrative deal from the Vietnamese Gvt. That?s all a matter of record as well and there was a subsequent investigation of Kerry and of course he was as pure as driven snow, as usual. No connects, right?

Scamp

[BLUEHAWK]

Wonder how a President McCain might've handled 9/11... pretty much the same I'd reckon.

[Ironside]

Originally posted by BLUEHAWK Wonder how a President McCain might've handled 9/11... pretty much the same I'd reckon.

That's a GREAT question, beings he was my pick for President. I ended up voting for Gore. At first I thought Bush handled better than Gore would have. Now with this quagmire in Iraq, I think Gore would have handled it better and would have held off, on Iraq.

This time around I wanted Bob Graham. I didn't jump on the Kerry bandwagon until that Vietnam Veteran stood by him saying he owed Kerry for saving his life in Vietnam.

Now, do we want to compare active service between Bush and Kerry? ;)

[SuperScout]

Ah, the wispy winds of deep political convictions! First it's McCain, then it's Gore, then it's Graham, then it's Kerry. Absolutely laughable.

Here's a little info on what some of Kerry's wartime shipmates think of him: The Sun obtained reactions from two of Kerry's Swift Boat mates in Vietnam, who told the paper they were deeply disturbed by his anti-war activities. Kerry crewman James Wasser said he was "absolutely upset" over his former commanding officer's claims that the U.S. committed wartime atrocities as a matter of course. Saying he recalled no such war crimes, Wasser said of Kerry, "I felt betrayed." Shipmate Bill Zaladonis was also offended by Kerry's claims. "I didn't like the idea [of Kerry condemning his fellow servicemen]," he told the Sun. "I certainly didn't believe that all Vietnam veterans were baby-killing women rapers. Most people I know agree with me - they didn't see it." If you sell out your shipmates, you're unfit for office.

And thank you for sharing your opinion that the current situation in Iraq is a quagmire. I served in Vietnam for two years, and I know a quagmire when I see one, and frankly, Iraq ain't one.

[Ironside]

Originally posted by SuperScout Ah, the wispy winds of deep political convictions! First it's McCain, then it's Gore, then it's Graham, then it's Kerry. Absolutely laughable.

Here's a little info on what some of Kerry's wartime shipmates think of him: The Sun obtained reactions from two of Kerry's Swift Boat mates in Vietnam, who told the paper they were deeply disturbed by his anti-war activities. Kerry crewman James Wasser said he was "absolutely upset" over his former commanding officer's claims that the U.S. committed wartime atrocities as a matter of course. Saying he recalled no such war crimes, Wasser said of Kerry, "I felt betrayed." Shipmate Bill Zaladonis was also offended by Kerry's claims. "I didn't like the idea [of Kerry condemning his fellow servicemen]," he told the Sun. "I certainly didn't believe that all Vietnam veterans were baby-killing women rapers. Most people I know agree with me - they didn't see it." If you sell out your shipmates, you're unfit for office.

And thank you for sharing your opinion that the current situation in Iraq is a quagmire. I served in Vietnam for two years, and I know a quagmire when I see one, and frankly, Iraq ain't one.

Looks like you're being a little selective in your story. Here's what another shipmate say's about John Kerry.

On March 13, 1969, Rassmann, a Green Beret, was traveling down the Bay Hap river in a boat behind Kerry?s when both were ambushed by exploding land mines and enemy fire coming from the shore. Kerry was hit in the arm, while a mine blew Rassmann?s boat out of the water. With enemy fire coming from both sides of the river and swift boats evacuating from the area, Kerry?s crew chose to turn their boat toward the ambush to save Rassmann.
?We were still under fire, and he was wounded at the time?,? recalled Rassmann. And with his boat?s gunners providing suppressing fire, Kerry extended his wounded arm into the water and the two lieutenants locked arms.

Kerry and Rassmann have not seen each other since 1969. Yesterday, Jim Rassmann called John Kerry?s campaign headquarters and said: ?I saw that John is in another tough fight, and I want to lend a hand.?

Rassmann, a retired Los Angeles county sheriff who now lives in Florence, Oregon, flew to Iowa this morning to reunite with Kerry. Kerry, with fellow veterans around him, said he was moved by Rassmann?s decision to come to Iowa.

?I remember the day and the moment we last met; the lingering bond between us comes from the shared experience of our service,? Kerry said. ?I told Jim what I tell the thousands of veterans I have met in Iowa: As president, I will never?ever?forget your service.? Kerry added.

For Kerry?s bravery, Rassmann recommended that he be recognized, and Kerry was awarded the Bronze Star with Combat V. The citation that followed the award read as follows:

?The man was receiving sniper fire from both banks. Lt. Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain, with disregard for his personal safety, he pulled the man aboard.

Lt. Kerry then directed his boat to return and assist the other damaged craft and towed the boat to safety. Lt. Kerry's calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the US Naval Service.?

It's a shame nobody can tell us stories about Bush's service, but nobody saw him doing his National Guard Duty in Alabama at the time over 300 Americans were being brought home in boxes, from Vietnam.

[catman]

well that's one for 500 against.

[Ironside]

Originally posted by catman well that's one for 500 against.

I see the more Veteran Groups supporting Kerry. Firefighters, too.

Imagine that! http://www.ragereport.com//phpbb/nfphpbb/images/smiles/headbang.gif

[BLUEHAWK]

Nice graphics.

If his arm was bleeding with pain to a degree warranting the Bronze with V, then why did he not find himself in hospital, soon, or ever.

[Ironside]

Originally posted by BLUEHAWK Nice graphics.

If his arm was bleeding with pain to a degree warranting the Bronze with V, then why did he not find himself in hospital, soon, or ever.

The Bronze Star wasn't for a wound. That would be the Purple Heart. I believe the Bronze Star was for the action itself, whether he was wounded or not made no difference.

[BLUEHAWK]

How did he earn the Purple Hearts.

[Ironside]

Originally posted by BLUEHAWK How did he earn the Purple Hearts.

I don't know, I wasn't there. Were you? ;)

[catman]

I assure you sir, this veteran and firefighter will never vote for a man who stands against the government of the United States and milks money from the families he marries into.

Good strong moral values being represented there.

Check his voting record, this man has done more to hurt the military you claim to honor than any other elected official. He has voted against every new weapon that has been proposed since he took office. What do you think he will do once he gets in office?

Trav

[BLUEHAWK]

Ironside, I've come as far with you on this trail as I can. My unit is movin' off the other way, and I am honored to carry their flag smartly.

Godspeed you safe, we'll be watching your six.

Gotta go now.

:j:

[Ironside]

Originally posted by catman I assure you sir, this veteran and firefighter will never vote for a man who stands against the government of the United States and milks money from the families he marries into.

Good strong moral values being represented there.

Check his voting record, this man has done more to hurt the military you claim to honor than any other elected official. He has voted against every new weapon that has been proposed since he took office. What do you think he will do once he gets in office?

Trav

Then you ARE voting for Kerry! http://www.ragereport.com//phpbb/nfphpbb/images/smiles/usa1.gif

[catman]

Hold your breath.

I can get these same responses from my five year old.

As bluehawk said, you are on your own.

Trav

[catman]

From a friend who served in 3 corps


I was in the Delta shortly after he left. I know that area well. I know the operations he was involved in well. I know the tactics and the doctrine used. I know the equipment. Although I was attached to CTF-116 (PBRs) I spent a fair amount of time with CTF-115 (Swift Boats), Kerry's command.

Here are my problems and suspicions:

(1)Kerry was in-country less than four months and collected, a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and three purple hearts. I never heard of anybody with any outfit I worked with (including SEAL One, the Sea Wolves, Riverines and the River Patrol Force) collecting that much hardware so fast, and for such pedestrian actions. The Swifts did a commendable job. But that duty wasn't the worst you could draw. They operated only along the coast and in the major rivers (Bassac and Mekong). The rough stuff in the hot areas was mainly handled by the smaller, faster PBRs.

(2) Three Purple Hearts but no limp. All injuries so minor that no time lost from duty. Amazing luck.Or he was putting himself in for medals every time he bumped his head on the wheel house hatch? Combat on the boats was almost always at close range.You didn't have minor wounds. At least not often. Not three times in a row. Then he used the three purple hearts to request a trip home eight months before the end of his tour. Fishy.

(3) The details of the event for which he was given the Silver Star make no sense at all. Supposedly, a B-40 was fired at the boat and missed. Charlie jumps up with the launcher in his hand, the bow gunner knocks him down with the twin 50, Kerry beaches the boat, jumps off, shoots Charlie, and retrieves the launcher. If true, he did everything wrong.

(a) Standard procedure when you took rocket fire was to put your stern to the action and go balls to the wall. A B-40 has the ballistic integrity of a Frisbee after about 25 yards, so you put 50 yards or so between you and the beach and begin raking it with your 50's.

(b) Did you ever see anybody get knocked down with a .50 caliber round and get up? The guy was dead or dying. The rocket launcher was empty. There was no reason to go after him (except if you knew he was no danger to you just flopping around in the dust during his last few seconds on earth, and you wanted some daring do in your after-action report). And we didn't shoot wounded people. We had rules against that, too.

(c) Kerry got off the boat. This was a major breach of standing procedures. Nobody on a boat crew ever got off a boat in a hot area. EVER! The reason was simple. If you had somebody on the beach your boat was defenseless. It coudn't run and it couldn' t return fire. It was stupid and it put his crew in danger. He should have been relieved and reprimanded. I never heard of any boat crewman ever leaving a boat during or after a firefight.

Something is fishy.

Here we have a JFK wannabe(the guy Halsey wanted to court martial for carelessly losing his boat and getting a couple people killed by running across the bow of a Jap destroyer) who is hardly in Vietnam long enough to get good tan, collects medals faster than Audie Murphy in a job where lots of medals weren't common, gets sent home eight months early, requests separation from active duty a few months after that so he can run for Congress, finds out war heros don't sell well in Massachusetts in 1970 so reinvents himself as Jane Fonda, throws his ribbons in the dirt with the cameras running to jump start his political career, gets Stillborn Pell to invite him to address Congress and Bobby Kennedy's speech writer to do the heavy lifting, winds up in the Senate himself a few years later, votes against every major defense bill, says the CIA is irrelevant after the Wall came down, votes against the Gulf War, a big mistake since that turned out well, decides not to make the same mistake twice so votes for invading Iraq, but oops, that didn't turn out so well so he now says he really didn't mean for Bush to go to war when he voted to allow him to go to war.

I'm real glad you or I never had this guy covering our flanks in Vietnam. I sure don't want him as Commander in Chief. I hope that somebody from CTF-115 shows up with some facts challenging Kerry's Vietnam record. I know in my gut it's wildly inflated. And fishy.

[Ironside]

Originally posted by catman From a friend who served in 3 corps


I was in the Delta shortly after he left. I know that area well. I know the operations he was involved in well. I know the tactics and the doctrine used. I know the equipment. Although I was attached to CTF-116 (PBRs) I spent a fair amount of time with CTF-115 (Swift Boats), Kerry's command.

Here are my problems and suspicions:

(1)Kerry was in-country less than four months and collected, a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and three purple hearts. I never heard of anybody with any outfit I worked with (including SEAL One, the Sea Wolves, Riverines and the River Patrol Force) collecting that much hardware so fast, and for such pedestrian actions. The Swifts did a commendable job. But that duty wasn't the worst you could draw. They operated only along the coast and in the major rivers (Bassac and Mekong). The rough stuff in the hot areas was mainly handled by the smaller, faster PBRs.

(2) Three Purple Hearts but no limp. All injuries so minor that no time lost from duty. Amazing luck.Or he was putting himself in for medals every time he bumped his head on the wheel house hatch? Combat on the boats was almost always at close range.You didn't have minor wounds. At least not often. Not three times in a row. Then he used the three purple hearts to request a trip home eight months before the end of his tour. Fishy.

(3) The details of the event for which he was given the Silver Star make no sense at all. Supposedly, a B-40 was fired at the boat and missed. Charlie jumps up with the launcher in his hand, the bow gunner knocks him down with the twin 50, Kerry beaches the boat, jumps off, shoots Charlie, and retrieves the launcher. If true, he did everything wrong.

(a) Standard procedure when you took rocket fire was to put your stern to the action and go balls to the wall. A B-40 has the ballistic integrity of a Frisbee after about 25 yards, so you put 50 yards or so between you and the beach and begin raking it with your 50's.

(b) Did you ever see anybody get knocked down with a .50 caliber round and get up? The guy was dead or dying. The rocket launcher was empty. There was no reason to go after him (except if you knew he was no danger to you just flopping around in the dust during his last few seconds on earth, and you wanted some daring do in your after-action report). And we didn't shoot wounded people. We had rules against that, too.

(c) Kerry got off the boat. This was a major breach of standing procedures. Nobody on a boat crew ever got off a boat in a hot area. EVER! The reason was simple. If you had somebody on the beach your boat was defenseless. It coudn't run and it couldn' t return fire. It was stupid and it put his crew in danger. He should have been relieved and reprimanded. I never heard of any boat crewman ever leaving a boat during or after a firefight.

Something is fishy.

Here we have a JFK wannabe(the guy Halsey wanted to court martial for carelessly losing his boat and getting a couple people killed by running across the bow of a Jap destroyer) who is hardly in Vietnam long enough to get good tan, collects medals faster than Audie Murphy in a job where lots of medals weren't common, gets sent home eight months early, requests separation from active duty a few months after that so he can run for Congress, finds out war heros don't sell well in Massachusetts in 1970 so reinvents himself as Jane Fonda, throws his ribbons in the dirt with the cameras running to jump start his political career, gets Stillborn Pell to invite him to address Congress and Bobby Kennedy's speech writer to do the heavy lifting, winds up in the Senate himself a few years later, votes against every major defense bill, says the CIA is irrelevant after the Wall came down, votes against the Gulf War, a big mistake since that turned out well, decides not to make the same mistake twice so votes for invading Iraq, but oops, that didn't turn out so well so he now says he really didn't mean for Bush to go to war when he voted to allow him to go to war.

I'm real glad you or I never had this guy covering our flanks in Vietnam. I sure don't want him as Commander in Chief. I hope that somebody from CTF-115 shows up with some facts challenging Kerry's Vietnam record. I know in my gut it's wildly inflated. And fishy.

And Bush played AWOL Chickenhawk, ducking out of Vietnam?
That's ok?

I really doubt you wanna compare Military Services here.

Just imagine how the spin would be with the Veterans of the Right had these two switched Military Records and Kerry was the chickenhawk, while Bush the Vietnam War Hero.

Just imagine! ;)

[SuperScout]

Get your facts straight, for once in your young life, Bush was not an AWOL chickenhawk. The records prove it, but apparently your transparent and pathological hatred has your vision occluded.

We not comparing military records of Bush and Kerry, and what they did during the 60's and 70's. But just to set your mind at ease, if the roles were reversed, I'd be questioning the wisdom of Bush in leaving his boat, of shooting unarmed enemy, of killing civilians, and of writing himself up for valorous awards. But since it's your boy Kerry, I'll confine my criticism of him and his questionable actions. Here's the bottom line, if you're man enough to admit it: Kerry was an inept junior officer, a bungling excuse for a real warrior, and a grandstanding self-promoter. If I had been his CO, I would have relieved him, and brought him up on charges with enough specifications that would have landed him in the brig for 15 years to life.

[Ironside]

I didn't say he was a chickenhawk. NOTE the "?". ;)

[skeeter]

Hold on Ironsides:

The Navy has arrived to lend a helping hand.

This old Navy flyer knows how to eliminate the enemy.
I'll come in at 300 feet, hit the front with four rockets, followed with these four fire (napalm)bombs, no AWOL-Chickenhawk will survive. (toasted)...

Ironside, you counter-punch, hit them below the belt(you know where). I will cut them at the knees, sort of on the lower level..

Are we talking WAR or Politices here?

[Ironside]

Originally posted by skeeter Hold on Ironsides:

The Navy has arrived to lend a helping hand.

This old Navy flyer knows how to eliminate the enemy.
I'll come in at 300 feet, hit the front with four rockets, followed with these four fire (napalm)bombs, no AWOL-Chickenhawk will survive. (toasted)...

Ironside, you counter-punch, hit them below the belt(you know where). I will cut them at the knees, sort of on the lower level..

Are we talking WAR or Politices here?

Thanks brah! http://ragereport.com/phpbb/nfphpbb/images/smiles/shakehands.gif

Skeeter, I am from and live in Naples! :D

[Seascamp]

Maybe the issue is reality and not fantasyland. A Swiftboat was a 50 ft. long high-speed, lightly armed and non armored pursuit, intercept/ surveillance craft, not an armored landing assault craft. Sailors were not trained as armored landing assault craft Marines. Thats all a matter of record and Navy history.

Scamp

[SuperScout]

In his "Let's Adopt a New Position Today" campaign, our wonder boy Johnnie Kerry has been reported as straddling both sides of the fence surrounding the Elian Gonzalez story. Not surprisingly, Kerry says he was opposed to and in favor of returning Elian Gonzalez to Cuba in 2000.

The presidential candidate took both sides of the issue when asked about the Clinton Justice Department sending the little boy back to Cuba, which angered Cuban-Americans and may have cost Al Gore the White House.

A reporter from the Miami Herald wrote in the Sunday edition asked about sending Elian back to Cuba, Kerry was blunt: 'I didn't agree with that.'

Asked to elaborate, Kerry acknowledged that he agreed the boy should have been with his father [in Cuba]. So let's see: The Official Kerry Position: "I'm opposed to sending Elian back to Cuba, but he belongs with his father." That's brings an old song of the 60's back to mind: "Both Sides Now." Maybe that should be adopted as the official theme song of the FenceSitters, aka Kerry supporters

[Ironside]

Originally posted by SuperScout In his "Let's Adopt a New Position Today" campaign, our wonder boy Johnnie Kerry has been reported as straddling both sides of the fence surrounding the Elian Gonzalez story. Not surprisingly, Kerry says he was opposed to and in favor of returning Elian Gonzalez to Cuba in 2000.

The presidential candidate took both sides of the issue when asked about the Clinton Justice Department sending the little boy back to Cuba, which angered Cuban-Americans and may have cost Al Gore the White House.

A reporter from the Miami Herald wrote in the Sunday edition asked about sending Elian back to Cuba, Kerry was blunt: 'I didn't agree with that.'

Asked to elaborate, Kerry acknowledged that he agreed the boy should have been with his father [in Cuba]. So let's see: The Official Kerry Position: "I'm opposed to sending Elian back to Cuba, but he belongs with his father." That's brings an old song of the 60's back to mind: "Both Sides Now." Maybe that should be adopted as the official theme song of the FenceSitters, aka Kerry supporters

Yup, and I flip flopped on that one too. At first I was against sending him back. Then I had to put myself in a father's shoes. I don't think it's up to our Government to decide that child's political affiliation.

Wanna talk immigration now? You're kinda touching on that subject.
Dude, open an "Immigration" Thread, I'll join ya! ;)
(pssst....I'll open it now)

[SuperScout]

Go play on the Immigration thread. I started this thread to post what will probably be daily examples of Johnnie Kerry's lies.

[reconeil]

It truly doesn't matter what you all say to those Kerry like-minded types, since they too actually believe that if America's Leadership were changed and "THEY" RULED, and more so like their allies and supporters (re. The French, Germans, Russians and UN) and caved-into foreign concerns and demands (of whatever nature),... such is what's best for America. And besides, if you or anyone don't exactly mimic such Party Line NONSENSE as "THEY" MUST & "THEY" much prefer,..."THEY" come-off like The Three Monkeys (without the: "Speak" part) and just tune you out, and start-off on another diversionary tangent.

So, don't waste too much time with such,....UNLESS given too good an opening. Still watch it. "They" are masters at that: "Side-step, bob and weave".

That's all I have to say,...plus get to move a good topic praising :D :D :D Kerry cronies, phonies and foreigners up.

Neil :d: :b:

[SuperScout]

Roger your last! As I indicated, I started this thread to post what appears to be a daily lie from Kerry or from his little encampment.
and now the latest:

"I voted both for and against the $87 Billion." - John Kerry

BACKGROUND: as the Congress was debating passage of the supplemental appropriations to fund our military operations in both Afghansitan and Iraq, Sen. Kerry attempted to attach an amendment that would repeal some of the tax refunds already enacted. By logical extension, a repeal of a previously granted tax refund is in fact and in reality a tax INCREASE. By an overwhelming majority, the Senate rejected Kerry's ill-advised ploy, and brought up the supplemental without his amendment.

TRANSLATION: He voted against the supplemental, which was designed to help our armed forces do their job better. Kerry voted AGAINST our armed forces, thereby placing his personal political agenda ahead of the welfare of our warriors. In other words, or those in Rio Linda or other intellectually challenged areas, Kerry would rather have a tax increase than support our troops. His decision to abandon our warriors is perfectly indicative of his complete unfitness, and is yet another example of what a gutless wonder is really is.

[reconeil]

Regarding the Kerryism brought up, while no disrespect intended a differently honest type (re. Yogi Berra) and his Yogi-isms,...in fairness to Kerry, AT LEAST THAT TIME (re. only one of his MANY flip-flops) HE WAS BEING HONEST. Shouldn't that count for something?

Still, how anyone in their right mind (naturally: "UN-Connected") could trust such of suspect and questionable allegiances,...is truly midboggling??? :cd: :cd: :cd: Don't you think?

Neil :d: :b:

[SuperScout]

No, Kerry was NOT being honest, but he was practicing political duplicity of the highest order. Not that this behavior is surprising, but is entirely predictable. Any promise he's made about improving veterans' benefits, any promise he's made about supporting our warriors, and any promise he's made about solving any problem of the world must be weighed against his voting record of the past, will be demonstarte empirically that he cannot and must not be trusted.

[SuperScout]

Picking up on an idea long held dear by conservatives and libertarians alike, Kerry called for abolishing the double tax of dividends in a speech on December 2, 2002. Soon after, President Bush proposed the same initiative; Kerry quickly denounced the proposal and voted against it 7 times in 2003. The legislation passed, however, and companies are now returning more cash to shareholders, earnings are more transparent thus improving governance and shareholders have been re-empowered in the companies they invest. Kerry is now proposing to reinstitute the double tax on dividends that will reverse the historic gains.

To summarize Kerry's flipping and flopping, in just four weeks time he went from calling to abolish the double tax to calling the proposal a giveaway to rich. He never bothered, apparently, to check the facts that the vast majority of shareholders are not "rich," but are retirees and mutual funds managers, who are charged with maximizing shareholder value.

[reconeil]

Wow(!),...The Evening News gets funnier and funnier, and much less believable every night, and especially during campaign times. Tonight's was a great example, when Kerry was welcoming his new best friend Dean at the podium of some political rally and vote getter from the mentally challenged.

While pointing to Dean, Kerry SERIOUSLY STATED (even though quite unbelievable to any sane people): "It's not about us or Party". "It's about the future of America". Yeah,...sure? And,...I'm Mother Theresa.

And besides, isn't there some FCC Regulation against boobs also flat-out lying on Nationwide TV? Or, is it just that boobs cannot display other boobs on TV? Whatever,...in this instance I believe that both criteria were met. Vas thinks du?

Neil :d: :b:

[BLUEHAWK]

Recon & Scout -

I think I heard Dean saying a few months back that John Kerry is not the kind of man who can "turn America around" or "do what America needs doing" or some such... circular firing squad again looks like :)

[SuperScout]

If it's about the future of America, I for one, don't like the shape, definition, purpose, of exposure of the country as being proposed by either of the Demcrat pretenders. Lying, even on nationwide TV, has never been a proibited action, and in fact, appears to be a national pastime practiced by multiple participants!! :re:

Sir Blue, if the circular firing squad is being ramped up again, as you suggest, then I think it incumbent upon active observers to keep the supply of ammo at an appropriate level. :af:

Here's an interesting little chuckle: "John Kerry said today that he wants to get rid of tax cuts for the rich and his wife said, 'Hey, shut up! What's the matter with you?! Are you nuts?!'" :D