Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vetting the Vet Record (More exposure of Kerry's lies)
National Review Online ^ | 1/27/04 | Mackubin Thomas Owens

Posted on 01/28/2004 3:12:15 PM PST by Elkiejg

Is Kerry a proud war hero or angry antiwar protester?

John Kerry, we know, is running against John Kerry: his own voting record. But there is another record that John Kerry is running against, and this has to do with his very emergence as a Democratic politician: Kerry, the proud Vietnam veteran vs. Kerry, the antiwar activist who accused his fellow Vietnam veterans of the most heinous atrocities imaginable.

John Kerry not only served honorably in Vietnam, but also with distinction, earning a Silver Star (America's third-highest award for valor), a Bronze Star, and three awards of the Purple Heart for wounds received in combat as a swift-boat commander. Kerry did not return from Vietnam a radical antiwar activist. According to the indispensable Stolen Valor, by H. G. "Jug" Burkett and Genna Whitley, "Friends said that when Kerry first began talking about running for office, he was not visibly agitated about the Vietnam War. 'I thought of him as a rather normal vet,' a friend said to a reporter, 'glad to be out but not terribly uptight about the war.' Another acquaintance who talked to Kerry about his political ambitions called him a 'very charismatic fellow looking for a good issue.'" Apparently, this good issue would be Vietnam.

Kerry hooked up with an organization called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW). Two events cooked up by this group went a long way toward cementing in the public mind the image of Vietnam as one big atrocity. The first of these was the January 31, 1971, "Winter Soldier Investigation," organized by "the usual suspects" among antiwar celebrities such as Jane Fonda, Dick Gregory, and Kennedy-assassination conspiracy theorist, Mark Lane. Here, individuals purporting to be Vietnam veterans told horrible stories of atrocities in Vietnam: using prisoners for target practice, throwing them out of helicopters, cutting off the ears of dead Viet Cong soldiers, burning villages, and gang-raping women as a matter of course.

The second event was "Dewey Canyon III," or what VVAW called a "limited incursion into the country of Congress" in April of 1971. It was during this VVAW "operation" that John Kerry first came to public attention. The group marched on Congress to deliver petitions to Congress and then to the White House. The highlight of this event occurred when veterans threw their medals and ribbons over a fence in front of the Capitol, symbolizing a rebuke to the government that they claimed had betrayed them. One of the veterans flinging medals back in the face of his government was John Kerry, although it turns out they were not his medals, but someone else's.

Several days later Kerry testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. His speech, touted as a spontaneous rhetorical endeavor, was a tour de force, convincing many Americans that their country had indeed waged a merciless and immoral war in Vietnam. It was particularly powerful because Kerry did not fit the antiwar-protester mold — he was no scruffy, wide-eyed hippie. He was instead the best that America had to offer. He was, according to Burkett and Whitley, the "All-American boy, mentally twisted by being asked to do terrible things, then abandoned by his government."

Kerry began by referring to the Winter Soldiers Investigation in Detroit. Here, he claimed, "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."

It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit, the emotions in the room, the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam, but they did, they relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do. They told their stories. At times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

This is quite a bill of particulars to lay at the feet of the U.S. military. He said in essence that his fellow veterans had committed unparalleled war crimes in Vietnam as a matter of course, indeed, that it was American policy to commit such atrocities.

In fact, the entire Winter Soldiers Investigation was a lie. It was inspired by Mark Lane's 1970 book entitled Conversations with Americans, which claimed to recount atrocity stories by Vietnam veterans. This book was panned by James Reston Jr. and Neil Sheehan, not exactly known as supporters of the Vietnam War. Sheehan in particular demonstrated that many of Lane's "eye witnesses" either had never served in Vietnam or had not done so in the capacity they claimed.

Nonetheless, Sen. Mark Hatfield inserted the transcript of the Winter Soldier testimonies into the Congressional Record and asked the Commandant of the Marine Corps to investigate the war crimes allegedly committed by Marines. When the Naval Investigative Service attempted to interview the so-called witnesses, most refused to cooperate, even after assurances that they would not be questioned about atrocities they may have committed personally. Those that did cooperate never provided details of actual crimes to investigators. The NIS also discovered that some of the most grisly testimony was given by fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam veterans. Guenter Lewy tells the entire study in his book, America in Vietnam.

Kerry's 1971 testimony includes every left-wing cliché about Vietnam and the men who served there. It is part of the reason that even today, people who are too young to remember Vietnam are predisposed to believe the worst about the Vietnam War and those who fought it. This predisposition was driven home by the fraudulent "Tailwind" episode some months ago.

The first cliché is that atrocities were widespread in Vietnam. But this is nonsense. Atrocities did occur in Vietnam, but they were far from widespread. Between 1965 and 1973, 201 soldiers and 77 Marines were convicted of serious crimes against the Vietnamese. Of course, the fact that many crimes, either in war or peace, go unreported, combined with the particular difficulties encountered by Americans fighting in Vietnam, suggest that more such acts were committed than reported or tried.

But even Daniel Ellsberg, a severe critic of U.S. policy in Vietnam, rejected the argument that the biggest U.S. atrocity in Vietnam, My Lai, was in any way a normal event: "My Lai was beyond the bounds of permissible behavior, and that is recognizable by virtually every soldier in Vietnam. They know it was wrong....The men who were at My Lai knew there were aspects out of the ordinary. That is why they tried to hide the event, talked about it to no one, discussed it very little even among themselves."

My Lai was an extreme case, but anyone who has been in combat understands the thin line between permissible acts and atrocity. The first and potentially most powerful emotion in combat is fear arising from the instinct of self-preservation. But in soldiers, fear is overcome by what the Greeks called thumos, spiritedness and righteous anger. In the Iliad, it is thumos, awakened by the death of his comrade Patroclus that causes Achilles to leave sulking in his tent and wade into the Trojans.

But unchecked, thumos can engender rage and frenzy. It is the role of leadership, which provides strategic context for killing and enforces discipline, to prevent this outcome. Such leadership was not in evidence at My Lai.

But My Lai also must be placed within a larger context. The NVA and VC frequently committed atrocities, not as a result of thumos run amok, but as a matter of policy. While left-wing anti-war critics of U.S. policy in Vietnam were always quick to invoke Auschwitz and the Nazis in discussing alleged American atrocities, they were silent about Hue City, where a month and a half before My Lai, the North Vietnamese and VC systematically murdered 3,000 people. They were also willing to excuse Pol Pot's mass murderer of upwards of a million Cambodians.

The second cliché is that is that Vietnam scarred an entire generation of young men. But for years, many of us who served in Vietnam tried to make the case that the popular image of the Vietnam vet as maladjusted loser, dehumanized killer, or ticking "time bomb" was at odds with reality. Indeed, it was our experience that those who had served in Vietnam generally did so with honor, decency, and restraint; that despite often being viewed with distrust or opprobrium at home, most had asked for nothing but to be left alone to make the transition back to civilian life; and that most had in fact made that transition if not always smoothly, at least successfully.

But the press could always find the stereotypical, traumatized vet who could be counted on to tell the most harrowing and gruesome stories of combat in Vietnam, often involving atrocities, the sort of stories that John Kerry gave credence to in his 1971 testimony. Many of the war stories recounted by these individuals were wildly implausible to any one who had been in Vietnam, but credulous journalists, most of whom had no military experience, uncritically passed their reports along to the public.

I had always agreed with the observation of the late Harry Summers, a well-known military commentator who served as an infantryman in Korean and Vietnam, that the story teller's distance from the battle zone was directly proportional to the gruesomeness of his atrocity story. But until the publication of the aforementioned Stolen Valor: How the Vietnam Generation Was Robbed of Its Heroes and its History, neither Harry nor I any idea just how true his observation was.

In the course of trying to raise money for a Texas Vietnam Veterans Memorial, Burkett discovered that reporters were only interested in homeless veterans and drug abuse and that the corporate leaders he approached had bought into the popular image of Vietnam veterans. They were not honorable men who took pride in their service, but whining welfare cases, bellyaching about what an immoral government did to them.

Fed up, Burkett did something that any reporter worth his or her salt could have done: he used the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to check the actual records of the "image makers" used by reporters to flesh out their stories on homelessness, Agent Orange, suicide, drug abuse, criminality, or alcoholism. What he found was astounding. More often than not, the showcase "veteran" who cried on camera about his dead buddies, about committing or witnessing atrocities, or about some heroic action in combat that led him to the current dead end in his life, was an impostor.

Indeed, Burkett discovered that over the last decade, some 1,700 individuals, including some of the most prominent examples of the Vietnam veteran as dysfunctional loser, had fabricated their war stories. Many had never even been in the service. Others, had been, but had never been in Vietnam.

Stolen Valor made it clear why John Kerry's testimony in 1971 slandered an entire generation of soldiers. Kerry gave credence to the claim that the war was fought primarily by reluctant draftees, predominantly composed of the poor, the young, or racial minorities.

The record shows something different, indicating that 86 percent of those who died during the war were white and 12.5 percent were black, from an age group in which blacks comprised 13.1 percent of the population. Two thirds of those who served in Vietnam were volunteers, and volunteers accounted for 77 percent of combat deaths.

Kerry portrayed the Vietnam veteran as ashamed of his service:

We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped their memories of us. But all that they have done and all that they can do by this denial is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission, to search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbaric war, to pacify our own hearts, to conquer the hate and the fear that have driven this country these last ten years and more, and so when in 30 years from now our brothers go down the street without a leg, without an arm, or a face, and small boys ask why, we will be able to say "Vietnam" and not mean a desert, not a filthy obscene memory, but mean instead the place where America finally turned and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning.

But a comprehensive 1980 survey commissioned by Veterans' Administration (VA) reported that 91 percent of those who had seen combat in Vietnam were "glad they had served their country;" 80 percent disagreed with the statement that "the US took advantage of me;" and nearly two out of three would go to Vietnam again, even knowing how the war would end.

Today, Sen. Kerry appeals to veterans in his quest for the White House. He invokes his Vietnam service at every turn. But an honest, enterprising reporter should ask Sen. Kerry this: Were you lying in 1971 or are you lying now? We do know that his speech was not the spontaneous, emotional, from-the-heart offering that he suggested it was. Burkett and Whitley report that instead, "it had been carefully crafted by a speech writer for Robert Kennedy named Adam Walinsky, who also tutored him on how to present it."

But the issue goes far beyond theatrics. If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service. Who can be proud of committing war crimes of the sort that Kerry recounted in his 1971 testimony? But if he is proud of his service today, perhaps it is because he always knew that his indictment in 1971 was a piece of political theater that he, an aspiring politician, exploited merely as a "good issue." If the latter is true, he should apologize to every veteran of that war for slandering them to advance his political fortunes.

— Mackubin Thomas Owens is an NRO contributing editor and a professor of strategy and force planning at the Naval War College in Newport, R.I. He led a Marine infantry platoon in Vietnam in 1968-1969.

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2004; johnfnkerrylies; kerry; kerryhypocracy; kerryrecord; vvaw
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last
To: MEG33
" I received it in an email from a retired military guy who told me it's being circulated around active and retired military!!"

I sent this to another retired Army guy yesterday who forwarded it to his "mailing list". I'm guessing that several others did the same thing - amazing how fast news can travel.
21 posted on 01/28/2004 4:44:54 PM PST by Ben Hecks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MEG33; Elkiejg
OOPS! That was supposed to be addressed to Elkiejg.....sorry MEG.
22 posted on 01/28/2004 4:47:23 PM PST by Ben Hecks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MEG33

It's too early to expose Kerry's sordid past life lies and misbehavior....
Let him continue to portray himself as the warrior's brother and protector.
Let him contiune to hide his post-Vietnam behavior and his Senate voting record....

Let him become the candidate -- and THEN kick his ass and expose him for the freaking phoney and dupe or liar that he became...

Semper Fi
23 posted on 01/28/2004 4:53:13 PM PST by river rat (Militant Islam is a cult, flirting with extinction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
If (Kerry) believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service. Who can be proud of committing war crimes of the sort that Kerry recounted in his 1971 testimony?

Kerry is a slithering opportunist, trying to have it both ways.

He shouldn't be allowed to have it either way!

24 posted on 01/28/2004 5:16:33 PM PST by Gritty ("There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily"-Geo Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
"In fact, the entire Winter Soldiers Investigation was a lie. It was inspired by Mark Lane's 1970 book entitled Conversations with Americans, which claimed to recount atrocity stories by Vietnam veterans."

This would be the same ultra leftwing KGB stooge, Mark Lane, who brought us the Kennedy assassination conspracy.

"For instance, documents smuggled out of Russia by Vasilii Mitrokhin, a former KGB archivist, suggest that the KGB secretly subsidized the work of Mark Lane"
25 posted on 01/28/2004 5:27:06 PM PST by Hon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: river rat
The problem with this issue is that you had to be there, you have to have lived thru it to understand how contemptible he is. The voters now who have no memory just have a vague feeling, "viet nam was awful, Viet Nam vets are scared, suffering,,that war was terrible". They have no clue as to how the anti war moviement was financed, driven by anti Americans and how it ripped this country apart and how we have paid for it and suffered from it for thirty years. The divisions now are were generated by that movement thirty years ago, more likely fifty years ago. They just will never understand. Kerry was a tool of that movement. He probably doesn't know it.
26 posted on 01/28/2004 5:28:53 PM PST by cajungirl (se)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: river rat
We are armed for when the time comes...;}
27 posted on 01/28/2004 5:40:45 PM PST by MEG33 (America will never seek a permission slip to provide for the security of our country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
The Vietnamese and Cambodians sure paid for it.
28 posted on 01/28/2004 5:43:23 PM PST by MEG33 (America will never seek a permission slip to provide for the security of our country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg; kdf1; AMERIKA; Lancey Howard; MudPuppy; SMEDLEYBUTLER; opbuzz; Snow Bunny; gitmogrunt; ...
major need to bump
29 posted on 01/28/2004 5:57:01 PM PST by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
Another acquaintance who talked to Kerry about his political ambitions called him a 'very charismatic fellow looking for a good issue.'

The same was said of Jane Fonda early on in the Vietnam experience. She and Kerry both had an agenda of sorts and both were trying to exploit it in some fashion. Jane Fonda was described as an empty vessel searching for a cargo to transport ... she was successful to some extent.

30 posted on 01/28/2004 6:02:32 PM PST by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
Yes and the world turned a blind eye to the million Cambodians killed. They still turn a blind eye. Shameful.
31 posted on 01/28/2004 6:15:20 PM PST by cajungirl (se)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
I just hope that the stupid party (the Republicans), has the brass orbs to hang the lying "veterans" and Jane Fonda albatross around his neck...

John F'ing Kerry must be smart enough to KNOW, that we KNOW and we know that he knows we know -- so he must not be sleeping well...

Lies and betrayal have a habit of catching up with one -- eventually....

Semper Fi
32 posted on 01/28/2004 6:20:25 PM PST by river rat (Militant Islam is a cult, flirting with extinction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
Race thanks for the ping. we have been talking about this, on the Mass Locale, my latest post.

I saw this on the Viet Nam Veterans against Kerry.

I don't know what the rules of engagement, in the Delta, in a free fire zone were, but you couldn't shoot just anyone, you had to receive fire or observe the enemy under arms, then you could do pretty much as you pleased as long as you faced an armed foe.

As a note to this; No matter what what you saw on "Combat" or read in your history books or WW2 movies, if you are a civilian in a war zone and you are stupid enough to be caught in a battle, you are likely to get dead, as we used to say. Targets of opportunity is cowboy talk and an excuse for poor discipline, kinda like a deer hunter making sound shots, they either got guns or they don't.

While in command of Swift Boat 44, Kerry and crew operated without prudence in a Free Fire Zone, carelessly firing at targets of opportunity racking up a number of enemy kills and some civilians.

His body count included a woman, her baby, a 12 year-old boy, an elderly man and several South Vietnamese soldiers.

"It is one of those terrible things, and I'll never forget, ever, the sight of that child," Kerry later said about the dead baby. "But there was nothing that anybody could have done about it.

It was the only instance of that happening.

Kerry said he was appalled that the Navy's ''free fire zone'' policy in Vietnam put civilians at such high risk.

33 posted on 01/28/2004 6:23:04 PM PST by Little Bill (The pain of being a Red Sox Fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: river rat
I despise what he did.
34 posted on 01/28/2004 6:26:53 PM PST by MEG33 (America will never seek a permission slip to provide for the security of our country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
35 posted on 01/28/2004 6:36:28 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
The WH isn't the place for a fool (one possibility) or a dishonest scammer - he didn't get his character flaws from "Irish Roots" that he doesn't have, but that he claimed when he thought it would benefit him...
36 posted on 01/28/2004 6:42:16 PM PST by 185JHP ( "The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP
Your right he doesn't have Irish roots. Saw his orange tie he was wearing last nite and wondered why a guy who acts Irish would do that after winning the primary. If he does it on St Patrick's Day we know where this NWO guy sentiments are.
37 posted on 01/28/2004 6:57:54 PM PST by eternity (From here to...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry
38 posted on 01/28/2004 8:59:39 PM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
Bump and a bookmark. Plan on me sending this one to all my Vet friends!
39 posted on 01/28/2004 9:12:16 PM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace (Alec <a href = "" title="Miserable Failure">"Miserable Failure"</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
Kerry was in Nam?

He sure ought to mention that!
40 posted on 01/28/2004 9:13:12 PM PST by razorback-bert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson