Posted on 08/02/2004 5:29:48 PM PDT by USMCVIETVET
John Kerry Does Not Speak For Vietnam Veterans
By Bruce N. Kesler Aug 2, 2004
In April 1971, John Kerry and a small group of purported and real Vietnam veterans camped out in Washington to protest the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. They received extensive publicity to their vastly overblown charges of pervasive brutality and war crimes by U.S. forces. The antiwar Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Fulbright, featured Kerry at a televised hearing. This one-sided protest and publicity demoralized many citizens, and lastingly blackened the reputation and sacrifices of other Vietnam vets that made our reentry into peaceful civilian life unwelcome and harsh.
At the time, I had recently returned to civilian life after service with the Marine Corps in Vietnam. I was outraged and hurt by Kerry’s grandstanding falsehoods. I wrote a long letter of protest about it to the then editor of the New York Times op-ed page, Harrison Salisbury (a respected journalist and historian, and an opponent of the war). Mr. Salisbury edited my letter and published it as a New York Times op-ed on May 13, 1971. In it, I wrote: “…the overwhelming majority of Vietnam veterans and Americans bitterly resent the charge from the left that they are all war criminals….It is not a crime to be American and young, but it is if one adds to that ignorant, foolish or irrational dialogue as citizens of a democratic government. The antiwar veterans are not ignorant of the facts; they merely use them to form an army of young people marching to their drums, exploiting issues, fears and people for their own ends. That is the crime.”
I received supportive calls from many other Vietnam vets, saying let’s do more to clear our reputations. One of the callers was a Vietnam veteran who had been a river boat commander at about the same time as John Kerry, John O’Neill, who was to soon leave the Navy and who had been denied an opportunity by Senator Fulbright to rebut Kerry. Other Vietnam veterans represented hundreds of thousands of Vietnam veterans in student and local veterans clubs around the country. We formed the Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace. I borrowed money for airline tickets, some double-up rooms at the YMCA in Washington, rented a space at the National Press Club, sent out amateurish press conference invitations and sat in a phone booth at the Y for 24-hours begging newspaper and TV reporters to come to our meeting on June 1, 1971. Many did. We received national press for our rebuttal to Kerry and his gang. John O’Neill effectively debated and rebutted Kerry on Dick Cavett’s late night TV show.
Kerry’s launching pad to a political career now has him contending for President. Kerry never recanted his slurs of 33-years ago. Instead, he asserts his military service makes him more qualified than President Bush to lead the nation in war. We, who proudly served must serve again, to demand honesty.
Kerry denies calling us war criminals. Kerry did, testifying before Congress in April 1971: “Several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents, but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.”
The publicity to Kerry’s charges permanently scarred the reputation of those who served in Vietnam. Studies statistically rebut his claim: American “atrocities” in Vietnam did not differ from any other American war. Yes, bad things happen in war, which is why we hate war. But, Kerry did not stop with that, then or now. Kerry accused all Americans who served in Vietnam of being war criminals, led by war criminals, and Kerry continues that lie. The U.S. prosecuted the exception of My Lai perpetrators, and has done so when atrocities have come to light.
Kerry’s fellow Vietnam Veterans Against the War, like the 150 he praised, refused to prove their claims attacking the honor of Vietnam veterans. Exhaustive studies exposed their stories as bogus, and many were imposters who had not served in Vietnam. Even Kerry’s favorable biographer recently said: “The chickens are coming home to roost, and unfortunately he is starting to backtrack.”
Kerry testified in 1971, “We are angry because we feel that we have been used in the worst fashion by the administration of this country.” In his testimony, Kerry boasted of meeting in Paris with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong delegations at the peace talks, and that he supported their proposals. It seems Kerry was more useful to our enemies than used by the U.S. administration. Former POW Senator McCain complained in 1973 that Kerry’s testimony was “the most effective propaganda [my North Vietnamese captors] had to use against us.” Senator McCain, a nice guy, has lately forgiven Kerry. What about other POW’s, like Paul Galanti who last February said that Kerry’s charges, repeated by his captors during his torture, “jeopardize[d] those still in battle or in the hands of the enemy.” Galanti went on to say, “The Vietnam memorial has thousands of additional names due to John Kerry and others like him.” Sydney Schanberg, exposer of Cambodia’s Killing Fields and critic of Bush, documents that in the early ‘90’s Kerry’s U.S. Senate special committee squelched evidence of POW’s not released by the North Vietnamese.
In April 2001, Kerry wrote, “We returned home to an America that was indifferent, even hostile. There were no parades, only nightmares.” Yet, Kerry takes no responsibility for creating a negative atmosphere against Vietnam veterans. The truth of how Vietnam veterans felt emerged from a comprehensive 1980 survey by the Veterans’ Administration which reported 91% of those who had seen combat in Vietnam were “glad they had served their country;” 80% disagreed with the statement that “the U.S. took advantage of me;” and nearly 2/3rds would go to Vietnam again, even knowing the outcome of the war. The overwhelming majority of Vietnam veterans are proud of their service, not of Kerry’s treachery and lies.
John Kerry served in Vietnam for several months as a Navy Lieutenant, over 35-years ago. After three “band-aid” Purple Hearts (veritable scratches), he opted to leave Vietnam. That brief service, and his record since, hardly qualifies him as a hero or military expert qualified to run a world-wide war against terrorists. Indeed, his perfidity then, his refusal to apologize or recant since, and his many other areas of flip-flops and evasions, hardly qualifies him to lead the world or be depended upon to be steadfast in protecting Americans, our interest in a terror-free world, or American soldiers.
------------
About the author: Bruce Kesler volunteered for the Marine Corps after graduating college in 1968, served as an enlisted man and was honorably discharged after serving in Vietnam. Since, Kesler has been a financial executive for Fortune 100 companies, and currently owns an employee benefits firm.
Kerry is letting his ass do the talking for him. He should have been awarded the VC medal of honor for his traitorous actions. Kerry a disgrace to every, Real American Veteran. A gigilo living off his med-head spouse and should back up to the payline when drawing his senate pay check. Bush/Cheney 2004
Is there a transcript of the Buckley/Kerry debate?
Great article. The several months you refer is actually 4 months an 12 days. I was serving in Nam while Kerry was committing his treasonous acts and spewing his stories about atrocities. When returning to my hometown in upstate NY, I was labeled a baby killer by many. I didn't know JF'n by name, but knew of his close friend and associate Hanoi Jane. That was a very perplexing time for the Viet vets, but after learning the true role that Kerry and Hanoi Jane played, it's hard to "forgive and forget" with these folks. I find it difficult to understand how McCain was able to do it.
FOFL!
ping #39!
Kerry should stop whining about his war record, get a hairlcut and tell his stupid wife to shutup. Maybe then he could gain some ground but I doubt it.
Perhaps it's better if he keeps on about his war record and his wife keeps babbling. If the lefty media would talk about his sham medals and his wife keeps sputing off in tirades, maybe some of the dim dimocrats will actually figure these folks out for what they really are, charletons, whores traitors and socialists.
I was trying to think of an expletive for John SKerry and couldn't come up with one vile enough. Traitor, murderer, commie, gigolo, leech...?
" One of the callers was a Vietnam veteran who had been a river boat commander at about the same time as John Kerry, John O’Neill, who was to soon leave the Navy and who had been denied an opportunity by Senator Fulbright to rebut Kerry."
Fulbright must have had a lot of power to hold a Senate committee hearing so that we could listen to a wet-behind-the-ears O-3 with four months in-country tell lies about the conduct of the war. Watching Kerry in his unkept utility uniform, improperly displaying ribbons, with non-regulation haircut testify in front of the senior legislative body of the United States made the Senators in attendence look like clowns. That was a sad day in our history and brought discredit on the thousands of military personnel that served their country honorably. I will not forget.
You want him out of there? I won't banish you if you have to freepmail me.
On its way!
I was trying to think of an expletive for John SKerry and couldn't come up with one vile enough. Traitor, murderer, commie, gigolo, leech...?
That's a good start.
For the agenda his party is trying to sleeze upon an unsuspecting America, he probably will . .
Go to www.wintersoldier.com for more scoop on the Kerrypooper.
NRA Life
NRA Instructor
He sure as hell does NOT seak for me F... John Fonda kerry
Seak = speak ... hard to type when I think of that valor stealing POS
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.