The author should be tried for treason.
IVAW is a kangaroo court, no defense of the troops allowed, no opportunity for the accused to confront the accuser, unless of course we all show up and demand a voice.
If they claim war crimes, they need to name the names, who pulled the trigger and do that under oath.
Winter Soldier from the 60's was not under oath and they said things like, "We did this, we did that..." so the only people we know for sure are War Criminals are the Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
I want and person who testifies to provide a signed SF-180 releasing their military records to corroborate their "testimony."
There's not a damn thing that they haven't copied from the VVAW history form the 60's. All one can say is that their re-enactments have been poor shadows of the 60's, gaining no where near the crowds or support the VVAW did.
Because the cowardly terrorists we're fighting use them as shields.
Let the Left have its “show hearings”. They will be opposed by Vets for Freedom and others.
However, what needs to be explained is that this is a copycat of John Kerry and fraudulent Viet Vet Al Hubbard’s Vietnam Veterans Against the War’s “Wintersoldier Hearings”.
Many of the so-called atrocities could not have physically happen, and Kerry conveniently forgot to tell people that he indiscriminately killed Vietnamese civilians and covered it up.
Also, having the marxist-created National Lawyers Guild involved in this propaganda operation only confirms that it is both anti-American and far-left.
Reportedly older reds from VVAW helped in setting up this newer version of their organization/hearings.
One thing to watch for is the time of service of the “witnesses”. Things that were chaotic in 2003 & 2004 were not chaotic afterwards.
Some accidental killings of civilians occurred because the civilians refused to obey military commands to stop for a car check. My son saw the results of this where a man (with a weapon) tried to run to US checkpoints and even after receiving warning shots to stop, continued to drive at a high speed at them. The driver’s family was not seen in the car until it had been shot and stopped. A tragedy, but one that could have been prevented by some common sense on the part of the driver. He chose to get his family and himself killed for some unknown reason.
Was he a terrorist, or just plain stupid? No one knows.
Also, these so-called “hearings” come in tandem with Rep. Dennis the nut Kucinich (D-Oh) call yesterday for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney (so what else is new?).
Other hard-core reds and leftists in Congress will come out in support of these hearings just as Fulbright and his crew of war-saboteurs did during Vietnam.
Appropriate steps will be taken to expose these leftist and duped IVAW “witnesses”, organizers and supporters.
Basically, they are outlining a slicker way to deceive.
Hypothetical scenario: a post IED-detonation firefight in Iraq results in a female civilian being killed in the crossfire.
the group will keep on file in its Philadelphia national office a copy of each testifier’s military service record, known as a DD-214 form
They will find an IVAW shill with a military service record who can plausibly claim to have been in Iraq at the time and who is willing to tell a fanciful story about the incident.
Vasquez’s committee—made up of a team of twelve veterans around the country—will reach out to members of his or her unit for corroboration
They will find one person from his unit who will say that the IVAW shill was in their unit at the time specified. Maybe the contact will also say that he had heard about the incident or was there for it.
That other veteran may not agree with or even know what the IVAW shill's recollection is, but that won't matter.
A network of journalists currently in Iraq will reach out to Iraqi civilians in the relevant cities and towns for independent eyewitness accounts.
Journalists in Iraq will contact local terrorist sympathizers and get their fanciful version of what occurred.
Finally, IVAW will file Freedom of Information Act requests with the Pentagon for relevant corroborating or refuting information
They will get paperwork from the DoD that will tersely document the incident.
Then the IVAW shill will get up on stage and say "I heard my fellow soldiers tell me of a firefight in which a soldier was ordered to shoot an unarmed woman - the officer kept shouting: 'Get her! Kill her!' until someone blew her away. I later found out that she liked to make origami puppets for sick children in the local hospital and dreamed of being a talk show host. Those dreams are now gone forever."
And when questioned, IVAW will produce a DoD form referring to the incident, a DD-214 form showing the IVAW shill to have been present in Iraq on that day, a partial, edited transcript of another soldier attesting that the DD-214 form is accurate, and finally some long colorful accounts of all the lurid details in the IVAW shill's testimony from local Iraqi terrorist sympathizers.
even though this dossier would not stand up to any minute scrutiny, it looks and sounds impressive to a journalist, it gives any journalist more than enough plausible deniability, and it allows IVAW to say: "This is all documented by the US government and eyewitnesses!"
” ... Many had never told their stories before. “
Many had never heard their stories before they were given to them in the motel room the night before by the people sitting on this Kangaroo Court. In fact, most of them never were in the plasces they described, and that can be proved. See “Stolen Valor” by BJ Burkett.