He Said It! (A political trivia game)

[chunkymonkey]

(R)uffda! said:

And, just for the record:

By Mary Jacoby
July 16, 2004 | WASHINGTON -- Choreographed editorials and Op-Ed pieces on Thursday in the Wall Street Journal and National Review and by conservative columnist Robert Novak signaled the revving up of a Republican campaign to discredit former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his claims that President Bush trumpeted flimsy intelligence in the drive to invade Iraq.

(R) ... I thnk we both understand we can find any type of evidence we want ... for any view we want. Right? ;D

Financial Times Reported New Evidence That Iraq Attempted To Obtain Uranium Yellowcake From Africa.

“Until now, the only evidence of Iraq’s alleged attempts to buy uranium from Niger had turned out to be a forgery. In October 2002, documents were handed to the US embassy in Rome that appeared to be correspondence between Niger and Iraqi officials. When the US State Department later passed the documents to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, they were found to be fake. US officials have subsequently distanced themselves from the entire notion that Iraq was seeking buy uranium from Niger. However, European intelligence officers have now revealed that three years before the fake documents became public, human and electronic intelligence sources from a number of countries picked up repeated discussion of an illicit trade in uranium from Niger. One of the customers discussed by the traders was Iraq. These intelligence officials now say the forged documents appear to have been part of a ‘scam’, and the actual intelligence showing discussion of uranium supply has been ignored.” (Mark Huband, “Evidence Of Niger Uranium Trade ‘Years Before War’,” Financial Times, 6/27/04)

The Wall Street Journal Noted Recent Reports “Exposed His Falsehoods.”

“After U.S. and British intelligence reports exposed his falsehoods in the last 10 days, Joe Wilson is finally defending himself. We’re therefore glad to return to this story one more time, because there are some larger lessons here about the law, and for the Beltway media and Bush White House. Mr. Wilson’s defense, in essence, is that the ‘Republican-written’ Senate Intelligence Committee report is a partisan hatchet job. … But the fact is that the three most damning conclusions are contained not in Chairman Pat Roberts’s ‘Additional Views,’ but in the main body of the report approved by Mr. Rockefeller and seven other Democrats.” (Editorial, “Mr. Wilson’s Defense,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/20/04)

[Deleted]

Dirty Tricks
By David Corn, TomPaine.com
Posted on August 5, 2004, Printed on August 5, 2004
www.alternet.org/story/19450/
Here come the dirty bombs.

I'm not referring to the most recent terror alert, which just so happened to coincide with the conclusion of the Democrats' successful convention. (Isn't it awful that the public – quite justifiably – cannot approach the Bush administration's terror announcements without a healthy dose of cynicism?) No, the dirty bombs being launched these days are coming from GOP HQ.

No sooner had Commander Kerry accomplished his mission in Boston – by presenting himself as a serious, smart, firm and sensible alternative to George W. Bush – the Bush campaign declared its intention to rip the former war-hero-turned-war-foe into small pieces. It's not as if the Bush crew hadn't already tried to blast Kerry to smithereens. In the first half of this year, it spent tens of millions of dollar on ads that claimed Kerry was a flip-flopping, equivocating, say-anything pol (who voted for the liberal position 97 percent of the time). Those negative ads took a toll; polls showed that some folks absorbed the GOP's anti-Kerry message. But they did not produce as big a bang as many GOPers expected for all those bucks.

And in the wake of a convention that highlighted Kerry's resolve as a soldier (who actually killed the enemy) and his commitment to certain bedrock principles (such as being honest when assessing threats to the national interest) it might be tough for the campaign of a missing-in-nonaction Guardsman who misled the nation into war to portray Kerry as a weak, vacillating and untrustworthy fellow. So Bush's first post-convention line of attack was to assail Kerry for having achieved little in his 19 years as a senator.

Desperate times call for desperate negative ads. Bush is doing okay in some polls against Kerry, not-so-okay in others. But his approval rating has been on a steady decline for months. A majority of Americans tell pollsters they believe the Iraq war was a mistake; more than 60 percent say the war was not worth it, and in the past two months, Bush's credibility has fallen dramatically, according to the polls. Republicans ought to be worried. And when they fret, they tend to lash out.

Two recent examples show how reckless and vicious GOPers can get. When the news broke weeks ago that former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger had removed classified documents related to terrorism and notes from a secured viewing room at the National Archives, leading Republicans and conservative commentators – including House Speaker Denny Hastert and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay – went berserk. With little information available about what Berger had done – he claimed he had taken papers out with him by accident and returned most of them later – they accused Berger of stuffing documents down his pants and suggested he had swiped documents to cover up misdeeds or mistakes committed by the Clinton administration and to prevent the 9/11 Commission from finding out truths that would trouble or embarrass the Clinton gang.

But days ago, The Wall Street Journal reported, "Officials looking into the removal of classified documents from the National Archives by former Clinton National Security Adviser Samuel Berger say no original materials are missing and nothing Mr. Berger reviewed was withheld from the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.... The conclusion by archives officials and others would seem to lay to rest the issue of whether any information was permanently destroyed or withheld from the commission." This, of course, doesn't explain what actually happened, but it does take the fizz out of attacks initiated by Republicans before the facts were in.

Before Berger became the target of the GOP hit squad, former ambassador Joseph Wilson – whose wife was outed by unnamed Bush officials as an undercover CIA officer after Wilson challenged Bush's claim that Iraq had been uranium shopping in Africa – was in their crosshairs. The fuss began when the Senate intelligence committee released its report on the prewar intelligence on Iraq. The GOP-led committee declared that the intelligence community had "overstated" and "mischaracterized" the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. It noted that prewar claims about Iraq's WMDs "were not supported by, the underlying intelligence reporting." The committee also concluded that the CIA had "reasonably assessed" there was no working relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq. This meant that Bush's primary rationale for the war – Iraq posed an "immediate" threat to the United States because Saddam Hussein was loaded with WMDs he could share with his pals in Al Qaeda – was @$$%*!*. But how did leading voices of the right – The National Review, The Wall Street Journal, and New York Times columnist William Safire – respond to the damning report, which was bad news for Bush? They pounced on Wilson and claimed that he, not Bush, was the liar.

One section of the report focused on the claim that Iraq had been trying to procure yellowcake uranium in Niger. In examining the Niger allegation – and Bush's reference to it in his 2003 State of the Union address – the committee looked at Wilson's role in the episode. And Wilson's detractors, who also are supporters of Bush and the war, have cited material in this chapter to charge that Wilson lied when he claimed his wife did not set up his trip to Niger as an unofficial CIA envoy and when he declared his trip had provided evidence that the Niger allegation was "highly doubtful."

But Wilson's foes made highly selective use of the committee's report. For instance, Wilson's detractors pointed to the section of the report that stated that some intelligence analysts had considered the information Wilson reported back to CIA to be partial confirmation of the Niger allegation. A-ha, his critics exclaimed, this shows that Wilson lied when he said his trip proved the Niger allegation was unlikely. But here's what happened: When Wilson was in Niger, he met with past and present government officials and people connected to the uranium industry. After these discussions, Wilson concluded it was unlikely such a uranium deal could have transpired, given the tight controls imposed on Niger's uranium business by the international consortiums in charge of it. But, according to the Senate report, some analysts thought that because a former prime minister had told Wilson he had met with an Iraqi business delegation that the prime minister had assumed was interested in uranium, the Wilson trip was partial corroboration of the Niger allegation – even though the former prime minister also said this meeting led to no further action. A senior State Department analyst, however, told the committee that he considered Wilson's report to confirm the State Department's view that the allegation was "highly suspect."

Wilson's interpretation was not initially accepted by all the analysts. That hardly makes him a liar. And the intelligence community eventually came to the same conclusion he did. Over a year later, the CIA wrote a memo saying, "we no longer believe that there is sufficient... reporting to conclude that Iraq pursued uranium from aboard." Ultimately, Wilson's record on accuracy has been better than that of his critics, who have twisted and manipulated information in an effort to discredit Wilson and to change the subject from Bush's false prewar assertions. But by throwing so much dirt at Wilson, his conservative assailants managed to muddy the waters. And Wall Street Journal editorialists, citing the phony charges against Wilson, called for ending the criminal investigation into the leak that disclosed his wife's CIA identity – as if it would be fine for the White House to out a CIA officer if his or her spouse had fibbed in public.

No doubt, part of the motivation for the right's hyperbolic attacks on Berger and Wilson was their position as foreign policy advisers to Kerry. (Berger has since resigned from the campaign.) And in looking to destroy the Democrats' top dog, the Bush campaign and its comrades will continue to comb through the 6,000 votes Kerry has cast in the Senate. They will be looking for votes they can depict as inconsistencies. (See, he voted for this welfare reform bill, but voted against that welfare reform bill.) And they will be searching for votes that can be misrepresented. (He's weak on defense: He voted to slice a nickel out of this military appropriations bill.) They will mock his positions (He wants to put the UN in charge of U.S. security!). They will encourage various whispering campaigns (He wasn't wounded that badly in Vietnam).

Political consultants always say that it is easier for a candidate to bring down his opponent's numbers (with attacks) than to boost his or her own (with positive messages). Bush's numbers have been trending south for most of this year. He will have a difficult time convincing a majority of voters he is trustworthy and has been doing a good job. So he and his team will have to tear Kerry apart. After the Democratic convention, that is a tougher assignment. But Republicans will not be reluctant to do whatever it takes to make sure this mission gets accomplished. Just ask Berger or Wilson.

[Gorf]

July 28, 2004 - 12 Generals and Admirals Endorse John Kerry or "A dozen he said its!"


“I am proud to have served our country in the military for over 41 years. I am even prouder that 4 of my children have worn the uniform of our armed forces. Three are still serving. As a combat veteran and proven leader, I know that John Kerry will never send them in harm’s way, without exhausting all means of diplomacy. Even then, it will be a last resort. God forbid if he ever has to, he will make sure that they are part of an armed force as best equipped, best training, and most respected in the world.”<br>
Lieutenant General Edward D. Baca (United States Army, Retired)


“Success in the global war on terror requires enlightened U.S. leadership – leadership that knows the importance of listening to and working with other countries. Senator Kerry is such a leader, and as Commander-in-Chief, he will adapt our military to the unprecedented security demands faced by our country and its armed forces.”<br>
Lieutenant General Daniel W. Christman (United States Army, Retired)


"I ask you to join me in standing up for an American who has given truly outstanding service to his country in peace and in war. John Kerry has the right message and right character to bring the nation forward. Both John and I served in Vietnam -- and know what it is to be tested on the battlefield, fighting for your country. John Kerry never quit fighting for his country."

General Wesley K. Clark (United States Army, Retired)


"The current administration has an overly simplistic view of how and when to use our military. By not bringing in our friends and allies, they have created a mess in Iraq and are crippling our forces around the world. John Kerry has a realistic understanding of the requirements of our military and the threats that we face."

Admiral William J. Crowe (United States Navy, Retired)


"My son is a Navy sailor, my son-in-law is a Navy sailor, and my nephew is a Navy sailor. I want them, and all of America’s sons and daughters in uniform to have a new, wiser, better, and courageous commander-in-chief in John Kerry."

Vice Admiral Lee F. Gunn (United States Navy, Retired)


"Sen. Kerry has demonstrated his courage in combat and his broad knowledge of international relations while in the Senate. He’s a leader who is not afraid to lead."

General Joseph Hoar (United States Marine Corps, Retired)


"John Kerry understands the future as it is framed by the international community and by the people at home. He will make the right decisions about education, defense, intelligence, economic development both foreign and domestic, and sustaining international relationships. He is a leader I trust."

Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy (United States Army, Retired)


"The miscalculations of the last three years have severely stressed our armed forces both around the world and here at home. John Kerry understands the military and war. He is the right leader at the right time to restore America’s credibility around the world."

Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick (United States Army, Retired)


"I’m a registered independent, but I like and admire John Kerry. He simply has a great record of brave and skillful service to the country. He is sure to be a fine Commander-in-Chief, one we can all be proud of, and proud to follow."

General Merrill “Tony” A. McPeak (United States Air Force, Retired)


"I believe in John Kerry. As a young man, he heeded his country’s call to service when it needed him. He commanded in combat and did so with bravery and distinction. He knows from experience a commander’s responsibility to his troops. He stands with our troops and with their families."

General John M. Shalikashvili (United States Army, Retired)


"George Bush as the Commander-in-Chief has got us into a morass in both Iraq and Afghanistan. John Kerry is a true veteran, and would be a much better commander-in-chief."

Admiral Stansfield Turner (United States Navy, Retired)


"Senator Kerry is a principled, patriotic leader with the requisite skills to lead America in the 21st century."

General Johnnie E. Wilson (United States Army, Retired)

[Deleted]

"I think the Bush campaign should specifically condemn the ad.''

[Barefoot In Kailua]

We resent very deeply the false war crimes charges he made coming back from Vietnam in 1971 and repeated in the book "Tour of Duty." We think those cast an aspersion on all those living and dead, from our unit and other units in Vietnam. We think that he knew he was lying when he made the charges, and we think that they're unsupportable. We intend to bring the truth about that to the American people.

We believe, based on our experience with him, that he is totally unfit to be the Commander-in-Chief."

-- John O'Neill, spokesman, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth


"I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust -- all absolute tenets of command. His biography, 'Tour of Duty,' by Douglas Brinkley, is replete with gross exaggerations, distortions of fact, contradictions and slanderous lies. His contempt for the military and authority is evident by even a most casual review of this biography. He arrived in-country with a strong anti-Vietnam War bias and a self-serving determination to build a foundation for his political future. He was aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard for specific tactical assignments. He was a 'loose cannon.' In an abbreviated tour of four months and 12 days, and with his specious medals secure, Lt.(jg) Kerry bugged out and began his infamous betrayal of all United States forces in the Vietnam War. That included our soldiers, our marines, our sailors, our coast guardsmen, our airmen, and our POWs. His leadership within the so-called Vietnam Veterans Against the War and testimony before Congress in 1971 charging us with unspeakable atrocities remain an undocumented but nevertheless meticulous stain on the men and women who honorably stayed the course. Senator Kerry is not fit for command."

-- Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman, USN (retired), .



"During Lt.(jg) Kerry's tour, he was under my command for two or three specific operations, before his rapid exit. Trust, loyalty and judgment are the key, operative words. His turncoat performance in 1971 in his grubby shirt and his medal-tossing escapade, coupled with his slanderous lines in the recent book portraying us that served, including all POWs and MIAs, as murderous war criminals, I believe, will have a lasting effect on all military veterans and their families.

Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing, manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive, but the most common phrase that you'd hear is 'requires constant supervision.'"

-- Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)


"Thirty-five years ago, many of us fell silent when we came back to the stain of sewage that Mr. Kerry had thrown on us, and all of our colleagues who served over there. I don't intend to be silent today or ever again. Our young men and women who are serving deserve no less."

-- Andrew Horne

"In my specific, personal experience in both coastal and river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw or heard anything remotely resembling the atrocities described by Senator Kerry. If I had, it would have been my obligation to report them in writing to a higher authority, and I would certainly have done that. If Senator Kerry actually witnessed or participated in these atrocities or, as he described them, 'war crimes,' he was obligated to report them. That he did not until later when it suited his political purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst kind. That he would malign my service and that of his fellow sailors with no regard for the truth makes him totally unqualified to serve as Commander-in-Chief."

-- Jeffrey Wainscott

"I signed that letter because I, too felt a deep sense of betrayal that someone who took the same oath of loyalty as I did as an officer in the United States Navy would abandon his group here (points to group photo) to join this group here (points to VVAW protest photo), and come home and attempt to rally the American public against the effort that this group was so valiantly pursuing.

It is a fact that in the entire Vietnam War we did not lose one major battle. We lost the war at home ... and at home, John Kerry was the Field General."

-- Robert Elder


"My daughters and my wife have read portions of the book 'Tour of Duty.' They wanted to know if I took part in the atrocities described. I do not believe the things that are described happened.

Let me give you an example. In Brinkley's book, on pages 170 to 171, about something called the 'Bo De massacre' on November 24th of 1968... In Kerry's description of the engagement, first he claimed there were 17 servicemen that were wounded. Three of us were wounded. I was the first..."

-- Joseph Ponder

"While in Cam Rahn Bay, he trained on several 24-hour indoctrination missions, and one special skimmer operation with my most senior and trusted Lieutenant. The briefing from some members of that crew the morning after revealed that they had not received any enemy fire, and yet Lt.(jg) Kerry informed me of a wound -- he showed me a scratch on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared to be from one of our own M-79s. It was later reported to me that Lt.(jg) Kerry had fired an M-79, and it had exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recall being advised of any medical treatment, and probably said something like 'Forget it.' He later received a Purple Heart for that scratch, and I have no information as to how or whom.

Lt.(jg) Kerry was allowed to return to the good old USA after 4 months and a few days in-country, and then he proceeded to betray his former shipmates, calling them criminals who were committing atrocities. Today we are here to tell you that just the opposite is true. Our rules of engagement were quite strict, and the officers and men of Swift often did not even return fire when they were under fire if there was a possibility that innocent people -- fishermen, in a lot of cases -- might be hurt or injured. The rules and the good intentions of the men increased the possibility that we might take friendly casualties."

-- Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)


"Lt. Kerry returned home from the war to make some outrageous statements and allegations... of numerous criminal acts in violation of the law of war were cited by Kerry, disparaging those who had fought with honor in that conflict. Had war crimes been committed by US forces in Vietnam? Yes, but such acts were few and far between. Yet Lt. Kerry have numerous speeches and testimony before Congress inappropriately leading his audiences to believe that what was only an anomaly in the conduct of America's fighting men was an epidemic. Furthermore, he suggested that they were being encouraged to violated the law of war by those within the chain of command.

Very specific orders, on file at the Vietnam archives at Texas Tech University, were issued by my father [Admiral Elmo Zumwalt] and others in his chain of command instructing subordinates to act responsibly in preserving the life and property of Vietnamese civilians."

-- Lt. Col. James Zumwalt, USMC (retired)

"In a whole year that I spent patrolling, I didn't see anything like a war crime, an atrocity, anything like that. Time and again I saw American fighting men put themselves in graver danger trying to avoid... collateral damage.

When John Kerry returned to the country, he was sworn in front of Congress. And then he told my family -- my parents, my sister, my brother, my neighbors -- he told everyone I knew and everyone I'd ever know that I and my comrades had committed unspeakable atrocities."

-- David Wallace

"I served with these guys. I went on missions with them, and these men served honorably. Up and down the chain of command there was no acquiescence to atrocities. It was not condoned, it did not happen, and it was not reported to me verbally or in writing by any of these men including Lt.(jg) Kerry.

In 1971, '72, for almost 18 months, he stood before the television audiences and claimed that the 500,000 men and women in Vietnam, and in combat, were all villains -- there were no heroes. In 2004, one hero from the Vietnam War has appeared, running for President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief. It just galls one to think about it."

-- Captain George Elliott, USN (retired)

"During the Vietnam War I was Task Force Commander at An Thoi, and my tour of duty was 13 months, from the end of Tet to the beginning of the Vietnamization of the Navy units.

Now when I went there right after Tet, I was restricted in my movements. I couldn't go much of anyplace because the Vietcong controlled most of the area. When I left, I could go anywhere I wanted, just about. Commerce was booming, the buses were running, trucks were going, the waterways were filled with sampans with goods going to market, but yet in Kerry's biography he says that our operations were a complete failure. He also mentions a formal conference with me, to try to get more air cover and so on. That conference never happened..."

-- Captain Adrian Lonsdale, USCG (retired)


"I was in An Thoi from June of '68 to June of '69, covering the whole period that John Kerry was there. I operated in every river, in every canal, and every off-shore patrol area in the 4th Corps area, from Cambodia all the way around to the Bo De River. I never saw, even heard of all of these so-called atrocities and things that we were supposed to have done.

This is not true. We're not standing for it. We want to set the record straight."

-- William Shumadine

[Barefoot In Kailua]

In 1971, when John Kerry spoke out to America, labeling all Vietnam veterans as thugs and murderers, I was shocked and almost brought to my knees, because even though I had served at the same time and same unit, I had never witnessed or participated in any of the events that the Senator had accused us of. I strongly believe that the statements made by the Senator were not only false and inaccurate, but extremely harmful to the United States' efforts in Southeast Asia and the rest of the world. Tragically, some veterans, scorned by the antiwar movement and their allies, retreated to a life of despair and suicide. Two of my crewmates were among them. For that there is no forgiveness. "

-- Richard O'Meara

"My name is Steve Gardner. I served in 1966 and 1967 on my first tour of duty in Vietnam on Swift boats, and I did my second tour in '68 and '69, involved with John Kerry in the last 2 1/2 months of my tour. The John Kerry that I know is not the John Kerry that everybody else is portraying. I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from him in a gun tub, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy... if a man like that can't handle that 6-man crew boat, how can you expect him to be our Commander-in-Chief?"

-- Steven Gardner

."I served in Vietnam as a boat officer from June of 1968 to July of 1969. My service was three months in Coastal Division 13 out of Cat Lo, and nine months with Coastal Division 11 based in An Thoi. John Kerry was in An Thoi the same time I was. I'm here today to express the anger I have harbored for over 33 years, about being accused with my fellow shipmates of war atrocities.

All I can say is when I leave here today, I'm going down to the Wall to tell my two crew members it's not true, and that they and the other 49 Swiftees who are on the Wall were then and are still now the best."

-- Robert Brant

"I never saw, heard of, or participated in any Swift boat crews killing cattle, poisoning crops, or raping and killing civilians as charged by John Kerry, both in his book and in public statements. Since we both operated at the same time, in the same general area, and on the same missions under the same commanders, it is hard to believe his claims of atrocities and poor planning of Sea Lord missions.

I signed this letter because I feel that he used Swift boat sailors to proclaim his antiwar statements after the war, and now he uses the same Swift boat sailors to support his claims of being a war hero. He cannot have it both ways, and we are here to ask for full disclosure of the proof of his claims."

-- James Steffes

[Gorf]

"The chief of the Swift Vote veterans is John O'Neil, who's been assailing Kerry since 1971. He was handpicked by Chuck Colsen, Nixon's political dirty tricks man and was widely considered a "crazy extremist. These guys have basically been after Kerry since 1971, embittered over Vietnam and angry over Kerry's later anti-war activism. Their first attempts to smear Kerry fizzled, because it was reveald that several officers criticizing Kerry now wrote glowing evaluations of him as a young man (obviously political differences led to a change of heart)."

[D'oh J. Simpson]

Bush misspeaks during signing ceremony
McClellan: 'This president speaks with clarity and conviction'
Thursday, August 5, 2004 Posted: 2:19 PM EDT (1819 GMT)



WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush offered up a new entry for his catalog of "Bushisms" on Thursday, declaring that his administration will "never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people."

Bush misspoke as he delivered a speech at the signing ceremony for a $417 billion defense spending bill.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we," Bush said.

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

No one in Bush's audience of military brass or Pentagon chiefs reacted.

The president was working his way toward a larger point. "We must never stop thinking about how best to defend our country. We must always be forward-thinking," he said.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush's misstatement "just shows even the most straightforward and plain-spoken people misspeak."

"But the American people know this president speaks with clarity and conviction, and the terrorists know by his actions he means it," McClellan said.

[Gorf]

"SBVT contains many officers who praised Kerry's conduct during the Vietnam War. These include Division Commander Grant Hibbard, who wrote positive evaluations of Kerry, and Commander George Elliott, who submitted Kerry for a Silver Star.

By contrast, none of the men who directly served under Kerry in his swift boat belong to SBVT and they actively campaign on behalf of Kerry's presidential bid."


SVBT sounds very much like a group of massive hypocrites and liars.

[Gorf]

"When the 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth' launched its campaign against John Kerry 10 days ago, leadership and guidance were provided by Republican activists and presidential friends from Texas -- notably Houston attorney John E. O'Neill and corporate media consultant Merrie Spaeth.

"On closer inspection, the ostensibly nonpartisan 'Swift Boat Vets' seem to have another pair of significant sponsors with deep and long-standing Republican connections in Missouri. Both are officers of Gannon International, a St. Louis conglomerate that does lots of overseas business in, of all places, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

"Ties to Gannon can be traced via the Swift Boat Vets Web site ... On April 14, the site was registered under the name of Lewis Waterman, Gannon's information technology manager, at 11301 Olive Boulevard in St. Louis, the firm's headquarters address. Although Waterman wouldn't discuss why he had set up the Web site, he didn't deny that his boss, Gannon president and CEO William Franke, had asked him to do so.

"None of Gannon's profitable activities in the communist republic would be possible, of course, without the approval of the Hanoi government, which Franke has described as 'strong' and 'stable.' Nor would Gannon be conducting business in Vietnam without the Clinton administration diplomacy, assisted by Sen. Kerry, that established diplomatic and trade ties with the United States in 1994. It would appear that Franke, Hayes, and Gannon have placed their political convictions above their own corporate interests, since they are now going up against the same Democratic politcal machine that enabled them to do business in Vietnam.


"It was also during those early visits to Vietnam, as he told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, that Franke reached a clearer understanding of the war he had once fought as a young Navy lieutenant.

"'As I looked back 20 years, I saw that it was a very imperial relationship we had with these people,' said Franke in 1989. 'We were young. We were there because we were told to be there and that they were the enemy. This time I saw them as human beings who had fears and hopes the same as we.'




More hypocritical dealings from the SVBT group.

[Gorf]

The group's founder is "retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffman, a cigar-chomping former Vietnam commander once described as 'the classic body-count guy' who 'wanted hooches destroyed and people killed.'"

"Until now," he adds, "Hoffmann has been best known as the commanding officer whose obsession with body counts and 'scorekeeping' may have provoked the February 1969 massacre of Vietnamese civilians at Thanh Phong by a unit led by Bob Kerrey -- the Medal of Honor winner who lost a leg in Nam, became a U.S. senator from Nebraska and now sits on the 9-11 Commission."

[Barefoot In Kailua]

DEM'S MARINE MISFIRE

www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/kerry_marines2.jpg[/img]


By STEFAN C. FRIEDMAN
New York Post Online Edition --- July 31, 2004 -- SCRANTON, Pa. -- John Kerry's heavily hyped cross-country bus tour stumbled out of the blocks yesterday, as a group of Marines publicly dissed the Vietnam War hero in the middle of a crowded restaurant.

Kerry was treating running mate Sen. John Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, to a Wendy's lunch in Newburgh, N.Y., for their 27th wedding anniversary -- an Edwards family tradition -- when the candidate approached four Marines and asked them questions.

The Marines -- two in uniform and two off-duty -- were polite but curt while chatting with Kerry, answering most of his questions with a "yes, sir" or "no, sir."

But they turned downright nasty after the Massachusetts senator thanked them "for their service" and left.

"He imposed on us and I disagree with him coming over here shaking our hands," one Marine said, adding, "I'm 100 percent against [him]."

A sergeant with 10 years of service under his belt said, "I speak for all of us. We think that we are doing the right thing in Iraq," before saying he is to be deployed there in a few weeks and is "eager" to go and serve.

It wasn't an auspicious start to the senators' "Believe in America" bus tour -- a 22-state, 43-city tour that will cover roughly 3,500 miles over 15 days in an effort to carry some of their momentum out of the Democratic convention . . .

[Barefoot In Kailua]

TUE AUG 03, 2004 21:35:02 ET
ANTI-KERRY VETS GATHER FOR ASSAULT; BOOK CLAIMS KERRY WAR 'FABRICATIONS'
**Exclusive**
A veterans group seeking to deeply discredit Democrat John Kerry's military service will charge in the new bombshell book UNFIT FOR COMMAND:


Two of John Kerry's three Purple Heart decorations resulted from self-inflicted wounds, not suffered under enemy fire.

All three of Kerry's Purple Hearts were for minor injuries, not requiring a single hour of hospitalization.


A "fanny wound" was the highlight of Kerry's much touted "no man left behind" Bronze Star.

Kerry turned the tragic death of a father and small child in a Vietnamese fishing boat into an act of "heroism" by filing a false report on the incident.

Kerry entered an abandoned Vietnamese village and slaughtered the domestic animals owned by the civilians and burned down their homes with his Zippo lighter.

Kerry's reckless behavior convinced his colleagues that he had to go -- becoming the only Swift Boat veteran to serve only four months.

The Kerry campaign is planning to vigorously counter the charges and will accuse the veteran's groups of being well-financed by a top Bush donor from Texas, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

"They hired a goddamn private investigator to dig up trash!" charged a top Kerry adviser traveling with the senator late Tuesday. "This is pay for play, and the dirtiest of all dirty tricks ever played on a candidate for the presidency. How low can they go?"

Kerry supporters are comparing the effort by the veterans to the Arkansas State troopers tell-all against Bill Clinton.

UNFIT FOR COMMAND will not be released until August 15.

The names. The details. All on the record.

Beginning tomorrow, the DRUDGE REPORT will break the embargo.

[Barefoot In Kailua]

{ said:

>-(Gorf)-<[} link=board=news&thread=1091067092&start=68#4 date=1091772246]"SBVT contains many officers who praised Kerry's conduct during the Vietnam War. These include Division Commander Grant Hibbard, who wrote positive evaluations of Kerry, and Commander George Elliott, who submitted Kerry for a Silver Star.

By contrast, none of the men who directly served under Kerry in his swift boat belong to SBVT and they actively campaign on behalf of Kerry's presidential bid."


SVBT sounds very much like a group of massive hypocrites and liars.

humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/unfit_pdf.html

[Barefoot In Kailua]

{ said:

>-(Gorf)-<[} link=board=news&thread=1091067092&start=69#4 date=1091772836]"When the 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth' launched its campaign against John Kerry 10 days ago, leadership and guidance were provided by Republican activists and presidential friends from Texas -- notably Houston attorney John E. O'Neill and corporate media consultant Merrie Spaeth.

"On closer inspection, the ostensibly nonpartisan 'Swift Boat Vets' seem to have another pair of significant sponsors with deep and long-standing Republican connections in Missouri. Both are officers of Gannon International, a St. Louis conglomerate that does lots of overseas business in, of all places, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

"Ties to Gannon can be traced via the Swift Boat Vets Web site ... On April 14, the site was registered under the name of Lewis Waterman, Gannon's information technology manager, at 11301 Olive Boulevard in St. Louis, the firm's headquarters address. Although Waterman wouldn't discuss why he had set up the Web site, he didn't deny that his boss, Gannon president and CEO William Franke, had asked him to do so.

"None of Gannon's profitable activities in the communist republic would be possible, of course, without the approval of the Hanoi government, which Franke has described as 'strong' and 'stable.' Nor would Gannon be conducting business in Vietnam without the Clinton administration diplomacy, assisted by Sen. Kerry, that established diplomatic and trade ties with the United States in 1994. It would appear that Franke, Hayes, and Gannon have placed their political convictions above their own corporate interests, since they are now going up against the same Democratic politcal machine that enabled them to do business in Vietnam.


"It was also during those early visits to Vietnam, as he told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, that Franke reached a clearer understanding of the war he had once fought as a young Navy lieutenant.

"'As I looked back 20 years, I saw that it was a very imperial relationship we had with these people,' said Franke in 1989. 'We were young. We were there because we were told to be there and that they were the enemy. This time I saw them as human beings who had fears and hopes the same as we.'




More hypocritical dealings from the SVBT group.

humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/unfit_pdf.html