Posted on 08/10/2004 10:02:13 AM PDT by Bob J
1) Christmas in Cambodia, sounds like Apocalypse Now (1979)
...
2) the doctor (Letson) has got to clarify his story.
,,,my understanding is that the PH requires the wound
to be serious enough to require the attention of a
medical officer (if available), thats why Kerry sought
out (likely to the exclusion of others) Letson, even
though a hospitalman actually wrote in the sick call list.
Swifties versus John Kerry.... cleared up quickly by Kerry releasing his military records.
ba-da-boom.
Those records are key to showing who is lying and who is not.
"1. Of course these men weren't on Kerry's boat"
They are witnesses. sKerry also confirmed the claim about burning a village with his own televised statement, frequently quoted by Hannity. They also have the support of 250 swiftboat veterans. How many swifties support sKerry?
"2. Collectively these men have 375 years of experience in Vietnam and on their swift boats, compared to the 16 total months of Kerry and his nine enlistees."
That argument is convoluted. 250 is a huge number.
"3. These men were in boats yards away from Kerry and were witnesses to what happened. They were well positioned to observe the events in question."
Kerry confessed to burning a village. So, his buddies saw it, right? Or did he lie? He's damned either way. And so are his supporters. If he lied, he purposefully slimed the Vietnam veterans. If he said the truth, then his supporters support a war criminal. Checkmate.
4. Many of the Swift Boat Vets are decorated war heroes themselves and not only have earned the right but have a duty to expose those who they believe received honors fraudulently.
He's a confessed war criminal. They have discredited themselves by supporting him. sKerry can't have it both ways. At the same time, he made a 'joke' about assassinating a vice president, Dan Quail. Here's a man who confessed to burning a village and makes jokes about assassinating a vice president. Who would respect the supporters of such a man? Only a partizan rat.
"5. The Swift Boat Vets who signed the petition collectively earned (Insert total of medals and honors) Saying these men do not have the right to speak out or claiming they are lying is an abomination and insult to all soldiers who served their country honorably during the VietNam war."
Collective witnesses supporting confessed war criminals who claim that it was the norm to commit war crimes. Somethings out of whack here. Zero credibility. On the other side of the coin, the claim of seeing him burn down a village with his zippo lighter, 100% credibility. Why? He confessed to doing it.
"6. Saying the Swifties have no right to give witness to these events because they were not in the same boat as Kerry is like saying Ron Goldman (if he survived) has no right to testify against OJ because he wasn't wearing Bruno Magli shoes."
If OJ confessed on the witness stand that he killed them, no dream team could have saved him. Kerry confessed. My case I rest.
Re the Cambodia charge
APOCALYPSE NOW Release Date: August 15, 1979
What was the first sighting of the Kerry in Cambodia story? I think he did have something in a Boston paper in 1979.
His core personality "defect" is a "Me, Too, Me, Too" view of the world.
That is why he cannot see anything wrong with dressing in a funny suit at Cape Canaveral, for example. In his mind he WAS an astronaut for that brief moment in time.
Or lying about ferrying a CIA officer to Cambodia in a vessel that never went there.
Or announcing his candidacy in front of a mothballed aircraft carrier last summer in Charleston SC, while at the same time denouncing President Bush for wearing a flight suit and landing on a carrier.
Or - pretending hi is Lance Armstrong
Or - pretending he is a kid walking on a railroad track
Or -
Maybe someone could introduce him to a human.
There don't seem to be very many on his "advisory" staff.
I have a theory...
We have info that in early 1969 the commanders got together and spoke with Kerry about "time to get out of here" and they probably bribed him to leave by stating that they would authorize his medals and let him go with his 3 purple hearts and other medals. They saw him as a loose cannon, someone not to be trusted, someone who did not take orders well and wasn't a "team player".
It stands to reason that someone so privately humiliated by his officers and peers would sooner or later respond to the festering sores and go counter to the authoritative position.
That is where his out in left field comments about atrocities and being in Cambodia might come from - he was punishing the very military establishment that didn't "appreciate" him. It was the old "I'll show YOU" syndrome. He found a way to gain recognition and fame while also striking out against the establishment that shamed him so.
And, as many persons caught up in such energy-intensive paranoic defenses, he started believing what he was saying, believing that he was right and everyone else was wrong.
Dang, it is a great scenario for a movie...
I think he believes his own lies, but I'm not sure if he had/has the capacity to recognize that he was being gotten rid of after his quick 4 months. You may be right. But he has such a tin ear for how he comes across. Would a rational person go as far as he did into the hippy anti-war movement who had real aspirations for political office at a future date.
He seemed to go from one photo-op to the next - his entire life.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column, "Says the Wuss: Ma, He's Touching Me"
If you haven't already joined the anti-CFR effort, please click here.
There is something that I have not seen discussed on talk radio or in the print media.
I presume Kerry still believes his testimony before Congress in 1971.
If so should he be bragging about his medals?
I mean they were earned by participating in an unjust and unlawful war on behalf of corrupt political and corporate interests, in which war crimes were the norm and the United States was the aggressor nation.
By any self respecting leftist's definition of "honor", Kerry should have thrown his medals away.
(Snicker) Did I say that?
By the same token, the Kerry supporters, when they accuse the Swift boat veterans of cheapening the value of all medals, should remember John Kerry himself.
Aren't we continuing the time honored tradition began by John Kerry himself when he testified before Senator Fulbright in 1971?
Didn't John Kerry himself accuse his contemporaries of atrocities, that were supposedly being covered up by the military?
Yet, now, Kerry is supposed to be PRAISED for his Vietnam service, without question, and no military records questioned as being inaccurate.
With the possible exception of his Silver Star, the activities sKerry were engaged in that formed the justification for his honors were not the activities he described while lying about his fellow soldiers and Dick Nixon.
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.