OT-John Kerry

*****Gunners Note..this is an email from someone Im well aquainted with in the retired Special Forces community.
"Gunner
I am personally acquainted with the author of this article in the WSJ. Steve Sherman is highly thought of in the Special Forces/Special Operations world and has authored "Who's Who" type books that have become the authoritative word by those who need to know who was, who wasn't, who is and who isn't. The man tells the truth as he finds it without embellishment." (name with held by Gunner)
*****************
A turning point may have been reached in the Iowa caucuses when Special Forces Lt. James Rassmann came forward to thank John Kerry for saving his life in Vietnam. Although Mr. Rassmann, like most of my veteran friends, is a Republican, he said that he'd vote for Mr. Kerry. I don't know if the incident influenced the caucus results. But I took special interest in the story because Jim served in my unit. Service in Vietnam is an important credential to me. Many felt that such service was beneath them, and removed themselves from the manpower pool. That Mr. Kerry served at all is a reason for a bond with fellow veterans; that his service earned him a Bronze Star for Valor ("for personal bravery") and a Silver Star ("for gallantry") is even more compelling. Unfortunately, Mr. Kerry came home to Massachusetts, the one state George McGovern carried in 1972. He joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War and emceed the Winter Soldier Investigation (both financed by Jane Fonda). Many veterans believe these protests led to more American deaths, and to the enslavement of the people on whose behalf the protests were ostensibly being undertaken. But being a take-charge kind of guy, Mr. Kerry became a leader in the VVAW and even testified before Congress on the findings of the Investigation, which he accepted at face value. In his book "Stolen Valor," B.G. Burkett points out that Mr. Kerry liberally used phony veterans to testify to atrocities they could not possibly have committed. Mr. Kerry later threw what he represented as his awards at the Capitol in protest. But as the war diminished as a political issue, he left the VVAW, which was a bit too radical for his political future, and was ultimately elected to the Senate. After his awards were seen framed on his office wall, he claimed to have thrown away someone else's medals -- so now he can reclaim his gallantry in Vietnam. Mr. Kerry hasn't given me any reason to trust his judgment. As co-chairman of the Senate investigating committee, he quashed a revealing inquiry into the POW/MIA issue, and he supports trade initiatives with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam while blocking any legislation requiring Hanoi to adhere to basic human rights. I'm not surprised that there are veterans who support a VVAW activist, if only because there are so few fellow veterans in politics. Ideally, there'd be many more. If you are going to vote on military appropriations, it would be nice if you didn't disrespect the soldiers. Congress hasn't had the courage to declare war in more than 60 years, despite numerous instances in which we have sent our military in harm's way. Of all the "lessons of Vietnam," surely one is that America needs a leader capable of demonstrating in himself, and encouraging in others, the resolve to finish what they have collectively started. But the bond between veterans has to be tempered in light of the individual's record. Just as Mr. Kerry threw away medals only to claim them back again, Sen. Kerry voted to take action against Iraq, but claims to take that vote back by voting against funding the result. So I can understand my former comrade-in-arms hugging the man who saved his life, but not the act of choosing him for president out of gratitude. And I would hate to see anyone giving Mr. Kerry a sympathy vote for president just because being a Vietnam veteran is "back in style." Mr. Sherman was a first lieutenant with the U.S. Army Fifth Special Forces Group (Airborne) in Vietnam, 1967-68.
"This device is provided without warranty of any kind as to reliability, accuracy, existence or otherwise or fitness for any particular purpose and Bioalchemic Products specifically does not warrant, guarantee, imply or make any representations as to its merchantability for any particular purpose and furthermore shall have no liability for or responsibility to you or any other person, entity or deity with respect to any loss or damage whatsoever caused by this device or object or by any attempts to destroy it by hammering it against a wall or dropping it into a deep well or any other means whatsoever and moreover asserts that you indicate your acceptance of this agreement or any other agreement that may he substituted at any time by coming within five miles of the product or observing it through large telescopes or by any other means because you are such an easily cowed moron who will happily accept arrogant and unilateral conditions on a piece of highly priced garbage that you would not dream of accepting on a bag of dog biscuits and is used solely at your own risk.'
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gunner wrote:

So, what's your point Gunner?
Other than the fact, that you wholeheartedly agree with the opinion of some right wing nut case, who doesn't like that Kerry went home to Massachusetts and who doesn't like Jane Fonda. Which is really a point you don't need to belabor in this newsgroup. We know that already. Tell us something we don't know.
Abrasha http://www.abrasha.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

with
WSJ.
it
some
Massachusetts and

to belabor

know.
The point is that now Kerry is a front runner. Therefore, Karl Rove, Bush's brain, and his minions will have their long knives out. One of their documented tactics is the whispering campaign. They used it effectively against Sen. McCain, where they planted a rumor that McCain's long captivity rendered him too unstable to be president.
All the article says to me is that Kerry was capable of political thought and had the character to act upon his beliefs. I suppose it would have been better if Kerry, after returning from combat in Vietnam, had been more like Bush, who, after going AWOL from the ANG, spent those "off the record" years apparently loafing around, snorting coke, getting drunk and having a good ol' time for himself.
Furthermore, Kerry has actually consistently stoop up for vets, unlike Bush, who has opposed combat pay for troops in Iraq, cut and de-funded vets benefits and the VA medical system.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

All the above may or may not be true, Jeff. I haven't checked and don't have the time at the moment.
The thing about Kerry to me is that every time I have done some checking on him, it has turned out he's been two-faced.
The only folks on the Democratic side, so far, who I haven't decided to be "probable" liars, are Edwards and Lieberman.
<Sigh> I was kinda hoping to have TWO valid candidates up for election. And that is an honest statement of my view. Then I could examine their platform, position on the issues, etc and make up my mind.
But so far, Kerry, Dean, and Clark have given me no cause to trust that they actually mean what they say. Thus, as of this moment (it could change) I can't even trust the words out of their mouths. And I've got to have that trust before I even care what their positions are.
I can't figure out why the Dems aren't pushing Lieberman or even Edwards more than they are.
Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You have a real problem here, the likely Democratic candidate, Kerry, Dean, or Clark, might be liars. The Republican candidate is a liar. Lieberman is just the "Bush" on the Democratic ballot. Who are you going to vote for?
Pete.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:39:38 -0500, Peter Reilley wrote:

Gary Nolan: http://www.lp.org
Oops! Thought you were talking to me!
--
"Please God, help me cleanse the computer of viruses and evil photographs
that disturb and ruin my work ..., so that I shall be able to cleanse
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:39:38 -0500, "Peter Reilley"

Okay, you could very well be right. Truthfully I don't follow politics that closely. Infrequently watch TV, maybe catch 3 hours total a week.
Soooo ... you could very well be correct that Bush is a liar.
I've heard folks assert as much.
So, enlighten me. What lies did he tell? To the American public. Any stories he told while relating how big a fish he caught last time he went fishing doesn't count.
Understand what I'm asking. I'm not asking for accusations. I'm asking for facts.
Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The big one that is killing people now is; Saddam had WMD's.
Are you following the process where blame for Bush's lies is being shifted to the CIA. The CIA expressed reservations before the war but Bush did not listen.
The Bush people "outed" a CIA agent to get back at her husband.
These two things have probably done more damage to the CIA than anything in a long time. Will the CIA risk giving the president any meaningful intelligence in the future? Not likely.
Will CIA agents risk their lives overseas when they may be exposed by their government for political gain? Not likely.
If anyone had any hope that the CIA would be of any use in this stupid "war against terrorism" those hopes are now dashed. The terrorists are going to win because we are stabbing ourselves in the back. They must be enjoying the show.
Pete.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:42:35 -0500, "Peter Reilley"

How did Bush force the CIA to give Clinton the same info in 1998?
How did Bush force all the intelligence agencies in the world to believe the same things?
I give your Bash Bush conspiracy theory a 2 of 5. Original, but completely lacking in depth. Details, man, Details! If you are going to spin a whopper then it wont work without details.
Strider
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No, my point was that the CIA was not sure that Saddan had WMD's. It was the Bush people that took the CIA's suspicions and made them certainties. That is Bush's lie.

The British are undergoing the same thing. They had their doubts and Tony Blair made them into certainties. Thus his "WMD's can be used in 45 minutes" speech. The process of shifting the blame to the intelligence service is going on in Britain as well.
No country was certain about Saddam's WMD's but only the US and the UK lied about it.

Hope that makes my point more clear, Pete.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says... <snip>
You know, it's fun sitting on the sidelines and watching this exchange, but I need to make a couple of points here:

Then, it is also the Senate and House Intelligence subcommittee's lie, and the lie of all elected officials who backed the President when they saw the same information he saw. Including John F Kerry.

Really. Prove it. You keep neglecting to include the fact that numerous UN resolutions stated that Hussein had WMDs, that there was no definitive proof that they were destroyed, and that ongoing intelligence showed they were still there. You wanna indict Bush for acting? Then, you better damned well be prepared to indict Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, and the rest who believed the same intelligence reports.

Hardly, but nice try.
--
Regards,

Rick

(Remove the HIGH SPOTS for e-mail)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What was happening was a lynching. Everyone got all fired up and rational voices and doubts were drowned out. Kerry is guilty too.

There can be no definitive proof that something was destroyed when it did not exist. Do you want to prove to me that you destroyed that nuke in your basement?
Clinton did not believe the reports enough to go to war. We now know that Clinton was right and Bush was wrong. They both read the same reports and one president did the right thing and the other did not.

Did that clear it up? Pete.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:38:15 -0500, "Peter Reilley"

Uh, yes, there can be. BTW, the stuff did exist. The US gave it to him before the '91 Gulf War to be used on Iranian troops. (Iran/Iraq War) He had stuff left over. THAT was the stuff he used on the Kurds after the US pulled out after the '91 War. Saddam claims he destroyed the stuff after that. Fine. Show us where. Show us the leftover destroyed parts.

I would show you the bomb casing, the materials, the fuel/fuel residue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 08:38:39 -0500, "Peter Reilley"

So you are pissed because the CIA wasn't 100% certain. So, what is your threshold of certainty. 80%, 90%, 95%, 98%?
You must live a very sheltered life if you can only act on 100% certainty.

See above.

Nope. Still not enough detail. Conspiracy kooks such as yourself typically crank out far more detailed bullshit that this. You are simply must try harder.
Strider
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Kerry,
liar.
you
time
but
That is an easy answer, it does not matter. We should not have invaded even if he had WMD's. Why is it OK for our friends to have WMD's even when our friends are just as bad as our enemies. I am speaking of Israel here.

We should not have invaded even if we were sure. We should not have invaded even if he did have them. It virtually guarantees that every country than might be in our "invade next" list will develop WMD's of their own. Why was Iraq invaded and North Korea not invaded. One has WMD's and the other did not. Those countries on our bad list will be able to figure that out. Even one nuke is a guarantee against invasion. What country would not go for that.
Another thing that this mess has taught all those bad countries is how to hide their programs. They know what works and what does not.

There you have it, you will have to figure it out for your self.
Pete.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 19:49:06 -0500, "Peter Reilley"

Like Libya?
Chuckle
Gunner
Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Absolutely. They gave up a program that was not working. Chemical or even more frighteningly biological programs are much easier to hide. There are no different than chemical plants or drug plants.
Do you think that Libya is our friend now? Have we made them see the light? Do they now believe that we have the right to invade whoever we like? Do they now believe Israel has a right to be a racist state?
Pete.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pete, The point isn't to make thugs with WMD's like us, it's to make them fear us. Greg sefton
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Racist state ??? I don't think so. Racist states are China, Japan, numerous Arab & African countries etc. Israel could be a tribalist state.. maybe. But then who isn't ( a little) ? :o). Judaism isn't a race, in case you're wondering. Hint: it's a religion Greg Sefton
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

numerous
But
Israel is the worst racist state. Is that OK for you? Other countries may not have flawless records on this subject including the US. Only Israel is enforcing it's racist policies with genocide, assassinations, and torture.
Pete.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.