Posted on 10/25/2004 7:27:46 AM PDT by jmstein7
Reports indicate that Democratic nominee, Senator John Kerry, committed official misconduct in 1994, abusing his position as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA by suppressing evidence of live prisoners of war in Vietnam to give his cousin's company a billion dollar deal.
As Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA in the early 1990s, Senator Kerry lobbied zealously for normalized relations with Vietnam. As a result, his cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, was able to broker a billion dollar deal between Hanoi and Colliers International, a large company based in Kerry's home state of Massachusetts.
Further, according to the Toronto Sun, , Baltimore Sun, Washington Times, et al, in a multitude of articles in February of 1994, there is credible evidence that his committee suppressed evidence – including live sightings – that there were still indeed American prisoners in Vietnam.
If introduced, this evidence may have prevented the normalized relations Kerry sought – normalized relations that were paramount to sealing the Colliers deal.
Some investigators have charged that Kerry actually threatened that, if the suppressed evidence ever leaked out, that they would “wish [they’d] never been born.”
Developing...
Kerry buried the still-missing MIA's/POW's by destroying the report of his committee that contained damaging evidence that Vietnam lied and held live POW's after the war.
The POW/MIA families and their spokesmen have known this for years. Their voices have been ignored by MSM investigative reporters.
Do not expect this to be explored in depth even now, because SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN is also complicit.
FYI: Just one background piece
http://www.vnsfvetakerry.com/KerrybetrayPOWMIA.htm
Why Families Say Kerry Betrayed POWs and MIAs
Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.com
Friday, Feb. 13, 2004
Putative presidential nominee Sen. John Forbes Kerry, D-Mass., began his involvement with the nation’s painful POW/MIA drama long before entering the hallowed halls of American political power.
In April 1971, when as a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, he gave his infamous war-bashing testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Kerry did not stop at declaring that he and many other veterans of that conflict were war criminals.
Pointedly, Kerry also insisted that the United States had a definite obligation to make extensive economic reparations to the people of Vietnam.
Specifically, the newly discharged Navy veteran was an advocate of the so-called “People’s Peace Treaty,” a tome reportedly drafted up in communist East Germany. Its nine points closely followed the enemy Viet Cong’s proposals being touted at the Paris peace talks as a quid pro quo for ending the fighting.
What rankles many Vietnam veterans today is that Kerry’s blatant advocacy of the enemy's position occurred while hundreds of captured American fighting men suffered and languished as prisoners of war in North Vietnamese prisons.
Keep the POWs Hostage
Until the Communists Get Their Way
A key provision of the enemy platform supported by Kerry:
“The Vietnamese pledge that as soon as the U.S. government publicly sets a date for total withdrawal [from Vietnam], they will enter discussion to secure the release of all American prisoners, including pilots captured while bombing North Vietnam.”
In the end, of course, the American leadership wanted nothing to do with a sham proposition that called for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Vietnam first, followed later by negotiations for the release of prisoners.
Some observers suggest that the perfidy of the youthful Kerry had not much tempered by the time, when as a U.S. senator, he was frocked as chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs in 1992.
To many Kerry's agenda as chairman appeared to be more about racing to the normalization of relations with Vietnam than ending the miseries of POW/MIA survivors thirsting for definitive answers as to what happened to their men.
Visiting Vietnam, Kerry repeatedly angered the homefolk by praising his former enemy for being open and reporting he was convinced they were not holding American POWs.
In the end, Kerry and his committee determined in a 500-page final report that American POWs were left alive in Vietnam after the war but felt none were still alive. It made no attempt to identify those left behind, how they died, who killed them or where their remains might be located.
Many POW/MIA families simply didn’t believe him, and they were soon given more to ruminate on as to what could have driven Kerry to such unsatisfying and incomplete conclusions.
Multimillion-Dollar Incentive to 'Reward Vietnam'
Shortly after Kerry declared to the world, “President Bush should reward Vietnam within a month for its increased cooperation in accounting for American MIAs,” Vietnam announced it had granted Colliers International, based in Boston, a contract worth millions.
Designating Colliers International as the exclusive real estate agent representing Vietnam, the communist regime positioned the company to rake in tens of millions of dollars in future contracts to upgrade Vietnam’s ports, railroads and other infrastructure.
C. Stewart Forbes, chief executive officer of Colliers International, is John Forbes Kerry’s cousin.
The saga, however, does not end there. There remains the nettlesome matter of the document shredding.
John F. McCreary, a Defense Intelligence Agency analyst assigned to Kerry’s committee, is a member of the Virginia State Bar and consequently saw an obligation to report what he suspected was misconduct by Kerry, also an attorney governed by the lawyers’ ethic code.
McCreary felt duty-bound to report knowledge of Kerry’s document shredding – specifically, the intelligence briefing text - to Vice Chairman Bob Smith.
Kerry: Destroy All Copies
A memorandum by McCreary: “Sen. John Kerry ... told the Select Committee members that ‘all copies’ would be destroyed. This statement was made in the presence of the undersigned and of the Staff Chief Counsel who offered no protest.”
On April 9, 1992, McCreary verified that the original document was destroyed, as well as 14 copies.
The McCreary memo continued: “On 15 April 1992, the Staff Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha ... ridiculed the Staff members for expressing their concerns; and replied, in response to questions about the potential consequences, ‘Who’s the injured party,’ and ‘How are they going to find out because its classified.’”
To defuse the growing crisis, on April 16 Kerry stated that the original documents had remained in the Office of Senate Security all along, so nothing wrong had been done.
But according to McCreary: “The Staff Director had deposited a copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security at 1307 on 16 April.”
Kerry had, according to McCreary, ordered a non-original copy of the document entered into the Office of Senate Security, but only after protests from staff caused him to rethink complete destruction of the documents.
Cover-up
As McCreary stated at the time, this “constituted an act to cover up the destruction.”
Ironically, the Kerry campaign's Web site states: “When John Kerry returned home from Vietnam, he joined his fellow veterans in vowing never to abandon future veterans of America’s wars. Kerry’s commitment to veterans has never wavered and stands strong to this day.”
Kerry's Deceit-POW/MIA Issues
Senator Kerry has recently claimed he had all POW/MIA documentation found by the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs (1993) declassified. That is not true. He had it all sent to the National Archives where the National Archives refused to have the documentation declassified. As a representative of the National Alliance of POW/MIA Families, I had all the Department of Defense (DOD) and State Department documents declassified after a five (5) years of delays and the refusal of help from Senator Kerry's office. I had repeatedly been turned away by Senator Kerry Staff and told the records were no longer of concern to Senator Kerry. I was told the committee had ended and I should contact the Department of Defense where I was stalled by their classification office.
In May 1998 I filed a Freedom of Information act law suit that resulted in: 1) The National Archives put over 30 people on the declassification of the above mentioned DOD and State Department documents, and 2) that 40,000 pages CIA documents never declassified -- were declassified.
Kerry's Conflict of Interest
Senator John Kerry has stated that Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs found that there were no live POW/MIAs left from the Vietnam War. He ignored some and hid other evidence. There are approximately 85 American POWs, known captured by the North Vietnamese, that they still fail to report on. Senator Kerry ignores such facts to prove none are alive. The were 60 POWs held by the communists in Laos in 1973. Henry Kissinger never negotiated for them in 1973, Senator Kerry refused to seek out their fate and present status so he could maintain his position that none survive today. He failed to check very far on Korea, reports on live POW/MIAs are being withheld to this date.
The information on the survival of Navy "Gulf War" pilot Capt. Michael Speicher, after he was shot down the first day of the war, was suppressed until the public forced out the truth. In 2003 the Navy changed Capt. Speicher's status to Captured after being listed as Killed in Action for 10 years. The 1993 POW/MIA Committee was charged with finding the truth on the fate of POW/MIAs -- under Senator Kerry's command and pressure the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIAs fell short. The truth on Capt. Speicher was kept hidden undermining the integrity of the senate investigative responsibilities, and the hope of a nation placed in the congress.
Below are quotes from the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIAs "Report" showing how he reached such a conclusion -- by ignoring the evidence and not negotiating for survivors. There have been numerous live sighting reports that were ignored so John Kerry could make an unsubstantiated statement. His quick fix committee closed down the live POW/MIA issue so that he could have his investments in Vietnam prosper. The Collier Corporation is an international Real Estate leasing organization, the largest of its kind in the world. The Collier Corporation had business leases in Vietnam before the Committee ended. Even before we normalized [relations] with Vietnam. Kerry's supposedly "blind" trust fund was heavily devoted to building a new $905 million dollar sea port in at Vung Tau, Vietnam while he was quickly ending the POW/MIA Select Committee. The Committee ended a year short of its potential life authorized by the Senate when it was formed under Senator Kerry's pressure. Who ran his trust? His cousin, Forbes. Who ran the Collier Corporation? His cousin Collier. The Kerry Committee opened the way for normalization with Vietnam and huge profits for his trust fund and the investments of his relatives.
Kerry, and the Committee he led, brushed over the lives and captivity of POW/MIAs in a rush to close the books. His henchmen and relatives were reaping lucrative profits before we ever normalized relations with Vietnam. His duplicity has been a conflict of interest when it comes to national priorities over personnel profits.
Statement of Senators from the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs "1993 REPORT"
P. 9 While the Committee has some evidence suggesting the possibility a POW may have survived to the present . . . there is, at this time, no compelling evidence that proves that any American remains alive in captivity in Southeast Asia.
P. 124 There is evidence that a small number of specific individuals did survive their incidents, and that some number of other individuals, not clearly identified, also survived.
P. 451 Statement of John Kerry: Although the Committee, unlike previous investigations, uncovered evidence that a small number of American's may have survived in captivity after Operation Homecoming, there is, in my view, no reason to believe that any American's remain alive today. Yes, the possibility exists that a prisoner or prisoners could be held deep within a jungle or behind a locked door under conditions of greatest security. But there is no evidence of that, and it is hard to conceive of a reason for it. (Collier/Forbes.)
P. 456 Statement of Sen. Bob Smith: Based on our review of all available intelligence information, the Committee unanimously agreed that there is evidence that indicates the possibility of survival (of American POWs) after Operation Homecoming. As of today, we also agree that there is evidence that some POWs may have survived to the present . . and some information still remains to be investigated. However, at this time, there is no compelling evidence that proves American's are still alive.
P. 468 Statement of Sen. John McCain: There is some - evidence though no proof to suggest only the possibility that a few Americans may have been kept behind after the end of America's military involvement in Vietnam ... there are some remaining differences over the quality of evidence that supports the possibility of survival.
Roger Hall
rhall8715@aol.com
_______________
for more info -- go to
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkeery.com
KERRY ILLEGALLY ORDERS DESTRUCTION OF Staff documents containing Staff intelligence findings ON POW/MIA's
http://www.aiipowmia.com/ssc/mccreary.html
Memos of John F. McCreary
April 27, 1992
Memorandum for:
Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Prisoners of War and Missing in Action
From: John F. McCreary
Subject: Legal Misconduct and Possible Malpractice in the Select Committee
1. As a member of the Virginia State Bar, I am obliged by Disciplinary Rule DR-1-103(a) to report knowledge of misconduct by an attorney "to a tribunal or other authority empowered to investigate or act upon such violations." Under Rule IV, Paragraph 13, of the Rules for the integration of the Virginia State Bar, this obligation follows me as a member of the Bar, regardless of the location of my employment, for as long as I remain a member of the Virginia State Bar. Therefore, I am obliged, as a matter of law and under pain of discipline by the Virginia State Bar, to report to you my knowledge of misconduct and possible prima facie malpractice by attorneys on the Select Committee in ordering the destruction of Staff documents containing Staff intelligence findings on 9 April 1992 and in statements in meetings on 15 and 16 April to justify the destruction.
2. The attached Memoranda For the Record, one by myself and another by Mr. Jon D. Holstine, describe the relevant facts, which I summarize herein:
a. On 9 April 1992, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, in response to a protest by other members of the Select Committee, told the Select Committee members that "all copies" would be destroyed. This statement was made in the presence of the undersigned and of the Staff Chief Counsel who offered no protest.
b. Later on 9 April 1992, the Staff Director, Frances Zwenig, an attorney, repeated and insured the execution of Senator Kerry's order for the destruction of the Staff intelligence briefing text. I personally delivered to Mr. Barry Valentine, the Security Manager for SRB-78, the original printed version of the intelligence briefing text. I also verified that the original was destroyed by shredding in the Office of Senate Security on 10 April 1992, along with 14 copies.
c. On 15 April 1992, the Staff Chief Counsel, J. William Codinha of Massachusetts, when advised by members if the Staff about their concerns over the possible criminal consequences of destroying documents, minimized the significance of the act of destruction; ridiculed the Staff members for expressing their concerns; and replied, in response to questions about the potential consequences, "Who's the injured party," and "How are they going to find out because its classified." Mr. Codinha repeatedly defended the destruction of the documents and gave no assurances or indications that any copies of the intelligence briefing text existed.
d. On 16 April, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, Senator John Kerry, stated that he gave the order to destroy "extraneous copies of the documents" and that no one objected. Moreover, he stated that the issue was "moot" because the original remained in the Office of Senate Security "all along."
e. I subsequently learned that the Staff Director had deposited a copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security at 1307 on 16 April.
3. The foregoing facts establish potentially a prima facie violation of criminal law and a pattern of violations of legal ethics by attorneys in acts of commission and omission.
a. It is hornbook law that an attorney may not direct the commission of a crime. In this incident two attorneys, one by his own admission, ordered the destruction of documents, which could be violation of criminal law.
b. Neither the Staff Chief Counsel nor any member of the Select Committee made a protest or uttered words of caution against the destruction of documents, by admission of the Chairman, Senator Kerry. The Chief Counsel has an affirmative duty to advise the Staff about the legality of its actions, and, in fact, had earlier issued the general prohibition to the Staff against document destruction.
c. The Chief Counsel's statements during the 15 April meeting to discuss the document destruction showed no regard for the legality of the action and displayed to the Staff only a concern about getting caught. By his words and actions, he presented to the Staff investigators an interpretation of the confidentiality and security rules that the rules of the Select Committee may be used to cover-up potentially unethical or illegal activity.
d. The Staff Director's action in placing an unaccounted for copy of the intelligence briefing text in the Office of Senate Security on 16 April constitutes an act to cover-up the destruction. Throughout the 16 April meeting, all three attorneys persisted in stating that the document had been on file since 9 April. This is simply not true.
4. I believe that the foregoing facts establish a pattern of grave legal misconduct - possibly including orders to commit a crime, followed by acts to justify and then to cover-up that crime. Even absent criminal liability, the behavioral pattern of the attorneys involved plays fast and loose with the Canons of Legal Ethics and establishes that one or more of the attorneys on the Select Committee are unfit to practice law. I am obliged to recommend that this report be filed with the appropriate disciplinary authorities of the State Bars in which these attorneys are members.
(Signed)
John F. McCreary, Esquire
This is old news that was covered over a decade ago.
This is a typical Bush stunt which smacks of a desperate candidate
This is a complete falsehood and typical of a President who lies to the American people.
Even if true, it is not on the same level of Halibuton's no bid contracts.
Blah, Blah, blah
BTTT!!!!!!!
Dammit! Who cares about the details!!??? The important question us WHAT DOES CHER THINK?
Don't count on it; the media knows about it. And it's been discussed on numerous FR threads. The part about the Forbes cousin cashing in is in Unfit for Command.
see post #13, the link to the Village Voice article
Old news. Threads on this all over FR, esp. during this past summer.
No, not a DNC response, but an FR response to vanity posts on articles that already exist on FR in large numbers. Do a search, it has been discussed often on here.
This has been posted in some form before. Apparently, there was a whole lot of shredding going on.
Thank you for sourcing this "breaking news" from February.
Ping to .45MAN
Great tag line! And your probable DNC responses are what they always come up with; so transparent, yet, for some reason effective on some....
Is John Kerry related to Steve Forbes?
Cousin?
You are seriously overestimating my level of interest in this story.
Yup.
PING!
Regardless of the outcome of the election, ALL of the scandals need to be heaped on Kerry's head like so many hot coals. He is not fit for duty, not fit to serve in congress, not fit to do much in public life.
Not that this will go anywhere, but here is some info from swiftvets on this topic.
Posted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:17 pm Post subject:
I am afraid we have been to this place in the past, but it is nice to see it again.
Never call me sweatheart.
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.