Posted on 02/11/2004 9:55:53 PM PST by kattracks
If a decorated firefighter becomes an arsonist, is he still considered a hero?
If a dedicated FBI agent leaves his agency, then attacks it – and becomes a professional witness for the defense - is he still a “hero?”
The answers are obvious to any common sense person.
But, if a Vietnam-era soldier comes home, blasts his country, gives aid and comfort to our enemies, and tosses his war medals over the White House fence – in this unique circumstance – then he’s apparently still a hero in the minds of many, including the mainstream media.
No amount of draft-dodging or anti-war activity kept Bill Clinton out of the White House, so why should John Kerry suffer from his anti-war, anti-USA excesses? The answer is, he won’t. In fact, Kerry will prosper, because in the minds of the persons who will support and vote for him, his heroics are not found fighting Communists in the jungle swamps of Vietnam. Rather, they adore Kerry’s “courageous” activism for coming home and standing up to the “corrupted” and hated Nixon Administration.
Those who hate Joe McCarthy love this guy. The Anti-anti Communists flock to Kerry, because he and his ilk had only compliments for the vicious leaders of North Vietnam. How do I know this? I was at many of the so-called “peaceful war protests.” I saw the literature expressing support for the Viet Cong. I heard the speeches spewing hatred for Nixon and our government.
I watched the peaceniks roll over police cars and set them on fire. I saw them throw rocks and bottles at the police who tried hard to maintain order. I witnessed the cops fall, as some of those sharp rocks found their mark, and I heard these peaceful war protesters laugh as the blood began to flow.
They wore red headbands in the best traditions of world-wide Communism. They also waved banners praising the North Vietnamese murderers and held up Mao’s Little Red Book of Communism as their bible and justification.
They hated Amerika – as they called it – and everything about our life here. We mostly tolerated their hatred and overlooked much of their treason and violence, only to realize that our passivity encouraged them to become ever more violent, ever more hateful.
Finally, setting up 50-caliber machine guns around the perimeters of the Department of Justice, The FBI and the Pentagon was the only “message” the protestors understood – and stopped them from storming and burning down these institutions.
Ah, for these peaceful war protestors, rallies were a great place to get high and meet babes. And I am not simply relying on my own observations, as a 24-year-old FBI agent working undercover in their midst. I base my conclusions on the written accounts available to anyone willing to learn more about these terrible times in our nation’s history. Several of these books were written by the leaders of these very movements, and all the facts are there for those who choose to learn the truth.
I’m quite certain Senator John Kerry will be a “hero” to today’s peaceniks, anarchists and any others who hate Amerika. But for the more than 50,000 Vietnam Veterans whose names appear on the Vietnam Memorial, Senator John Kerry is nothing but a skunk.
Let’s see what happens when he brings his medals to the first presidential debate. I’m willing to bet George W. Bush will have no trouble dealing with this coward.
That Kerry is a US Senator from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts – to that I say, so is Ted Kennedy.
Massachusetts may have produced many national heroes. But Massachusetts politics do not favor these – only the anti-heroes and misfits do well there. Both of these US Senators owe the country an apology, each for his own reasons, and no amount of political spin will ever erase the colorful stain on their reputations.
Gary Aldrich is president and founder of The Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty, a Townhall.com member group.
©2003 Gary W. Aldrich
The people who rubbed our noses in those pictures of Fonda in North Vietnam--the Walter Cronkites of the world--also loved to televise Kerry types inveighing against "the Establishment."What could be more obvious than that the people who chose who appeared on television--and how favorably--were the real Establishment!!
Back then Walter Cronkite was credibly called "the most trusted man in America." Trusted, yes--but trustworthy? Boy, were Americans media-credulous naifs back then. Most of us belived that guy's fables!
http://www.620wtmj.com/620programs/charliesykes/weblog.asp
As stunning as his charges, Kerry insisted that the barbaric acts of American soldiers “were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.”
As evidence for his sweeping indictment of the American soldier in Vietnam, Kerry cited the testimony from the Winter Soldier Investigation. As Kerry explained: “The term Winter Soldier is a play on words of Thomas Paine's in 1776 when he spoke of the Sunshine Patriots and summertime soldiers who deserted at Valley Forge because the going was rough.”
The “Winter Soldier Investigation,” Mackubin Thomas Owens recently wrote in National Review Online, was, in fact “organized by the ‘usual suspects’ among antiwar celebrities such as Jane Fonda, Dick Gregory, and Kennedy-assassination conspiracy theorist, Mark Lane.” Owensis 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. He notes that “Kerry's 1971 testimony includes every left-wing cliché about Vietnam and the men who served there.”
Even worse, much of what Kerry said turned out to be demonstrably false.
Owens writes: “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….
“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.”
http://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/vietnamcenter/events/1996_Symposium/96papers/lesson.htm
. Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi’s victory? A. It was essential to our strategy. Support for the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.
Q. [Why] did the Politburo pay attention to these visits? A. These people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize the will to win. While we need not attribute North Vietnam’s victory solely to domestic dissent in the U.S., we need to recognize that such dissent poses some unresolved issues. Clearly in a democracy, the government shouldn’t be able to mold public opinion. Dissent against an unwise or immoral war is a necessary part of democratic society. In some way, however, it must be possible to counter dissent which involves collaboration with the enemy. We must not allow the enemy to intervene in our domestic politics, even under the guise of dissent. However, this issue has yet to be satisfactorily resolved.
http://www.geocities.com/seavet72/AW/ws-kerry.htm
http://www.geocities.com/seavet72/LI/link-1.htm#AWP2-6
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.