[kabar]

The trolls must be out. Kerry requested the support of fellow veterans to defend him against charges that Kerry committed war crimes. The veterans correctly stated that he didn't commit war crimes. Subsquently, Kerry appeared on MTP and in his biography "Tour of Duty" and reversed his position and asserted that war crimes were committed by him and his colleagues. It is Kerry who is being inconsistent.

[GraceCoolidge]

Thank you for the clarification, but I have to admit I am still confused. Perhaps I didn't pay close enough attention to what the Fox clips purported to be showing. I am pretty sure that Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony included those horrible statements about all the atrocities committed "in a style reminiscent of Genghis Khan" and with the awareness of all levels of command. I still cannot understand why these veterans would support him in 1996, given that fact. Did Kerry recant in some way between 1971 and 1996? I understand the position of these veterans that Kerry did not commit war crimes, but the fact remains (I think) that Kerry had already been out there since 1971 trying to build a record that he and his fellow servicemen did commit war crimes in Vietnam (as part of his liberal anti-war activist pandering phase). Certainly Kerry being inconsistent is no surprise, but I continue to think that the past support of these veterans for Kerry, well subsequent to Kerry's own bashing of the military and his fellow veterans, is going to dilute the power of this story. Is there a mistake in my timeline? Did I misunderstand the date of the video clips on Fox? I really wanted this story to have legs, but I'm concerned that its effect is going to be easily blunted by the Kerry camp.