Critical "Swift Boat Veteran" Retracts Charges Against Kerry

[Tgace]

I'd like rationality and a basic awareness of reality, but I do understand that writing guff such as, "If you can get out of the way of your massive intellect and righteous indignation...," remains much easier. I should be especially unsurprised because, on a rather more-significant level, this is precisely what's happening with the election.

And I still see that folks don't seem to want to address issues and facts--such as Bush's peculiar military service--about which we are absolutely certain. Hm.

Well, I do try to avoid personal attacks...call it a "gut reaction" to the typically insulting "tone" of some of the posters around here. I will try to avoid it in the future.

As to Bushes military service, yes he got into the NG to avoid going to Vietnam as many people did and many others would have done if they had the chance. He apparently wasnt dishonorably discharged. Clintons lack of service apparently didnt hurt him.

I did some NG time myself and can say I dont find the records issues and absence from training too surprising (sad as that is). The current state of affairs has forced the NG to get their paperwork in order. I just hope that people realize that the NG of today is not that of the 60's. Two comrades of mine lost their lives in Iraq while in the service of the NG.

 

[Makalakumu]

Ill let these folks answer that...
http://www.powmiafamiliesagainstjohnkerry.com/

"In retrospect, it is clear that John Kerry had but one goal as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs. His goal was to remove the issue of Prisoners of War and Missing in Action, as a roadblock to trade and normalization of relations with Vietnam. The question is.... why?


All we need to do is look at two events which occurred shortly after the committee presented its finding, in January 1993.

Francis Zwenig, staff director for the Committee, who was often seen during hearings whispering in Kerry's ear, became Vice President of the U.S. - Vietnam Trade Council. Ms Zwenig, who helped shaped the conclusion of the committee and its final report was now benefitting financially from the committee's efforts to close the POW/MIA issue.

In June of 1993, as reported in a Boston Herald article by Michael E. Knell, "Colliers International brokered a $905 million dollar deal to develop a deep sea port in Vietnam.." To skirt the trade embargo still in effect against Vietnam, Colliers International acted through its partner firm Colliers Jardine based in Singapore. At the time the deal was brokered, C. Stewart Forbes was the Chief Executive Officer of Colliers International.

All through 1993 and into early 1994, John Kerry pushed for the lifting of the trade embargo against Vietnam, citing of Vietnamese cooperation on the POW/MIA issue. As evidenced in the articles of Sydney Schanberg and scripted event involving Senator Kerry and Col. Pham Duc Dia, Vietnamese cooperation was clearly a myth.

Yet, Kerry persisted in his campaign to lift the trade embargo. Finally, his efforts were rewarded in February 1994, when President Clinton lifted the embargo.

Did Kerry have an another agenda, beyond the stated goals of the committee? Before you answer that question, there is one other piece of information you need to know. C. Stewart Forbes CEO of Colliers International and John Forbes Kerry are cousins.

Did financial gain motivate Kerry's actions as Chairman of the Select Committee? Perhaps someone in the media will ask the question."

Apparently you are fond of conspiracy theories as well... Honestly, I have no problem talking about these things, but I would like you to recognize this for what it is.

upnorthkyosa :asian:

 

[rmcrobertson]

While I very much appreciate your courtesy, tgrace, I realize that it's not very surprising that Guard paperwork sucked, and assuredly the Guard today is more than a little different, I also think that these unsubstantiated allegations about Kerrey and Vietnam are exactly what the damn problem is with the, "Swift Boat," nastiness.

Kerry has his Navy paperwork, pretty much complete, and it pretty much backs up his story; for many that's meaningless, or evidence that he was up to something; Bush's ANG paperwork is a mess, it doens't support him very well at all, and for many that's evidence that he did nothing sleazy.

Huh?

We know for FACTS--no leaps of faith necessary--that Bush comes from an oil tycoon family with strong ties to Saudi Arabia; that he himself was closely allied with the likes of Ken Lay; that his VP ran Halliburton during some of their criminal activity; that companies such as Bechtel, with which both Cheney and Bush have strong, clear ties, got no-bid contracts (against federal law, I believe) for work in Iraq.

See what I mean? You're relying on maybes to attack Kerry--and maybe you're right--but we KNOW FOR FACTS some of the crap Bush has been up to (look into the extraordinary sweetheart deal he got with regard to the Texas Rangers!), and it doesn't seem to faze you in the least.

So why is that?

 

[Makalakumu]

See what I mean? You're relying on maybes to attack Kerry--and maybe you're right--but we KNOW FOR FACTS some of the crap Bush has been up to (look into the extraordinary sweetheart deal he got with regard to the Texas Rangers!), and it doesn't seem to faze you in the least.

So why is that?

I don't think that Tgace supports President Bush or Senator Kerry.

 

[michaeledward]

Ill let these folks answer that...
http://www.powmiafamiliesagainstjohnkerry.com/

"In retrospect, it is clear that John Kerry had but one goal as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs. His goal was to remove the issue of Prisoners of War and Missing in Action, as a roadblock to trade and normalization of relations with Vietnam. The question is.... why?


All we need to do is look at two events which occurred shortly after the committee presented its finding, in January 1993.

Francis Zwenig, staff director for the Committee, who was often seen during hearings whispering in Kerry's ear, became Vice President of the U.S. - Vietnam Trade Council. Ms Zwenig, who helped shaped the conclusion of the committee and its final report was now benefitting financially from the committee's efforts to close the POW/MIA issue.

In June of 1993, as reported in a Boston Herald article by Michael E. Knell, "Colliers International brokered a $905 million dollar deal to develop a deep sea port in Vietnam.." To skirt the trade embargo still in effect against Vietnam, Colliers International acted through its partner firm Colliers Jardine based in Singapore. At the time the deal was brokered, C. Stewart Forbes was the Chief Executive Officer of Colliers International.

All through 1993 and into early 1994, John Kerry pushed for the lifting of the trade embargo against Vietnam, citing of Vietnamese cooperation on the POW/MIA issue. As evidenced in the articles of Sydney Schanberg and scripted event involving Senator Kerry and Col. Pham Duc Dia, Vietnamese cooperation was clearly a myth.

Yet, Kerry persisted in his campaign to lift the trade embargo. Finally, his efforts were rewarded in February 1994, when President Clinton lifted the embargo.

Did Kerry have an another agenda, beyond the stated goals of the committee? Before you answer that question, there is one other piece of information you need to know. C. Stewart Forbes CEO of Colliers International and John Forbes Kerry are cousins.

Did financial gain motivate Kerry's actions as Chairman of the Select Committee? Perhaps someone in the media will ask the question."

Okay ... so this group is arguing that Kerry participated in Patronage. Are you submitting their argument as representative of your point of view?

In light of the Patronage going on in the Bush Admininstration, I can not help but get a chuckle.

Of course, I believe both political parties participate in such behavior, but the Republicans certainly seem to be more proud of it.


Also ... Found this concerning SBVT ... .

Columnist Has Ties to Anti-Kerry Book

[size=-1]By JACQUES STEINBERG[/size]

Published: August 30, 2004

mong the stoutest defenders of "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," the best-selling book arguing that Mr. Kerry lied about his record of service in Vietnam, is the columnist Robert Novak.

In his syndicated columns and on the CNN program "Crossfire," Mr. Novak has lauded the book and referred to veterans who criticize Mr. Kerry - most notably John E. O'Neill, the book's co-author - as "real patriots."

Unmentioned in Mr. Novak's columns and television appearances, however, is a personal connection he has to the book: his son, Alex Novak, is the director of marketing for its publisher, the conservative publishing house Regnery.

http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_...&goto=http://www.nytimes.com/ads/astrazeneca/​

In a telephone interview, Robert Novak said he saw no need to disclose the link.

"I don't think it's relevant," he said.
"I'm just functioning as a columnist with a point of view, and a strong point of view," he added.

 

[Tgace]

I don't think that Tgace supports President Bush or Senator Kerry.

Apparently if you say something bad about a Dem. your a Rep. supporter...:shrug:

 

[Tgace]

Apparently you are fond of conspiracy theories as well... Honestly, I have no problem talking about these things, but I would like you to recognize this for what it is.

upnorthkyosa :asian:

One post does not a conspiracy theorist make.

I really wasnt well informed about what POW/MIA's thought about Kerry so I did a little research is all...thats just some of what I found.

 

[rmcrobertson]

This would be, I believe, the same Robert Novak who exposed the CIA agent serving in a foreign country because he didn't like her husband?

Clearly, Novak's beautifully qualified to yak about patriotism.

 

[Tgace]

we KNOW FOR FACTS some of the crap Bush has been up to (look into the extraordinary sweetheart deal he got with regard to the Texas Rangers!), and it doesn't seem to faze you in the least.

So why is that?

How do you know that it dosent? I just dont see the need to jump on the bandwagon. I also dont like the idea that Kerry is "immune" to criticism because he isnt Bush. Lets be fair now and see how many Kerry conspiracy theories we can find before we put him in office. ....Problem is we have to pick one or the other (Yeah I know, Nader, but come on).

 

[Tgace]

Just a little more...

http://www.nationalalliance.org/mccreary/index.htm
http://www.powforum.org/fans2.htm

 

[michaeledward]

One post does not a conspiracy theorist make.

I really wasnt well informed about what POW/MIA's thought about Kerry so I did a little research is all...thats just some of what I found.

SOME of what you found? What else might you have found? Perhaps something that shows a different point of view? What conclusions did you draw from what you found?

Or are you just posting this out here to put a little bit of gasoline on the fire?

 

[Tgace]

Hell, I haven seen much water thrown on the Bush fire you have going here....(Bush fire get it???)

To be fair I did find this...
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040315&c=2&s=corn
http://kerry.senate.gov/low/record.cfm?id=181558
Just google "Kerry POW MIA" and see what you get......

 

[rmcrobertson]

Who exactly was it who argued, or so much as suggested, that Kerry's immune from criticism? Could you point that out to me, please? What's the title of this thread again?

Tell you the truth, I'm rather more outraged about the shoddy logic, mean-spirited and childish rhetoric, and distortion/absence of facts on the part of the Swifties than I am by the abuse of a politican. Though I do think it's a dangerous way to make one's political points.

The bad news and unfortunate fact is, public discourse WAS often more intelligent and better informed back in the 1960s. Partly because of the sad failure of English teachers like myself, more and more people--at least, that's how it seems--appear to think that ANY wackadoo opinion, ANY vicious insult, ANY distortion of reality, is OK.

I blame Savage and the rest, in part. But what's even worse, these well-paid bullies teach that you can not only be an ignoramus, but you don't have to find anything out for yourself, either. Then they throw around words like, "open-mindedness," scream that liberals are traitors, collect the fat check, and go home.

 

[michaeledward]

Apparently if you say something bad about a Dem. your a Rep. supporter

Working from the assumption that you support neither, and the knowledge that it is these two who are going to comprise the choices available on the ballot in November. I submit two fairly thoughtful articles by conservatives.

Christopher Dickey
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5878893/site/newsweek/

Fareed Zakaria
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5709288/site/newsweek/

Mike

 

[Tgace]

Good articles....Whats Kerrys plan? Ive heard the bring troops home and make America safer line, thats nice, but whats the "solution" to Iraq/Terrorism? Neither side seems to be able to articulate one very well.

 

[Tgace]

Then they throw around words like, "open-mindedness," scream that liberals are traitors, collect the fat check, and go home.

Why do so many people believe it? Theres a need/feeling/emotion thats being fed. It is said that terrorism is a backlash for arrogant American foreign policy...judging from the crowds that listen to right-wing media, could it be that liberals are experiencing a backlash too?

 

[rmcrobertson]

Last two posts seemed dead on to me, for what that's worth.

As for what in the hell to do, I'm sort of a "Take a time machine back and change some of the incredibly stupid, exploitative and arrogant things that Europe and America have done in the Mid-East," school of thought.

Not too helpful in view of reality, I realize...

 

[Tgace]

Were in a "@#$% or get off the pot" situation now....Vietnam and personal issues aside, Kerrys biggest weakness (to me) is lack of a plan in regards to Iraq/Terror War. I want more than election year soundbites. Iraq aside (as much as you can..) The Bush admin. has been effective, like Mikes article reference stated, in overthrowing the Taliban, rounding up Al Queda etc..It just dosent seem to know what the long range plan is.

 

[michaeledward]

Good articles....Whats Kerrys plan? Ive heard the bring troops home and make America safer line, thats nice, but whats the "solution" to Iraq/Terrorism? Neither side seems to be able to articulate one very well.

You can Choose Bush.
You can Choose Kerry.
You can Choose Nader (Bush).
You can choose not to participate.
* I can't think of any other options, can you?

You can vote for a candidate.
You can vote against a candidate.
You can choose not to participate.
* I can't think of any other options, can you?

These articles suggest that all of the accomplishments of the Bush administration have not reached a measureable conclusion. Certianly, they are arguing voting against a candidate. And you may not like that the positions are negative toward Bush, as opposed to postive toward Kerry. But when you get into the voting booth, you still, really, have only two choices.


As for Kerry's plan:

Directing Military Action to Destroy and Disrupt Terrorist Networks. .

Keeping Weapons of Mass Destruction Out of Terrorist Hands.

Strengthening America’s Intelligence Capabilities.

Leading Relentless Efforts to Shut Down the Flow of Terrorist Funds.

Preventing New Terrorist Havens.

Preventing Recruitment of New Terrorists.

P.S. and since this thread is about SBVT .... there's this:
http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/0831-03.htm

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]WASHINGTON - August 30 - A new Media Matters for America (MMFA) analysis finds that in 2004, media coverage of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's baseless attacks on John Kerry's war record has been more than twice that of the coverage of the controversy over George W. Bush's service in the Alabama National Guard:[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Both current major-party presidential candidates served their country during Vietnam. Both candidates' service has been questioned.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The similarities end there.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]John Kerry, according to every available piece of documentary evidence, including official U.S. Navy records, served bravely and honorably, won five medals (including three Purple Hearts), and saved a crewmate's life. Everybody -- everybody -- who served on Kerry's boats during the incidents that led to his medals agrees that he deserved them and praises his distinguished service.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]President George W. Bush, according to the documentary evidence available, apparently didn't bother to show up for duty for a lengthy period in 1972-73 -- a period when, according to USA Today, "commanders in Texas and Alabama say they never saw him report for duty and records show no pay to Bush when he was supposed to be on duty in Alabama." In contrast with Kerry, who has shipmates who sing his praises, Bush hasn't been able to produce anyone who can credibly say they remember serving with him in the Alabama Guard.[/font]

Article continues . . .

 

[hardheadjarhead]

The Bush admin. has been effective, like Mikes article reference stated, in overthrowing the Taliban, rounding up Al Queda etc..It just dosent seem to know what the long range plan is.

HERE is what I find frightening about the Bush Neocon administration, summed up in a Bush quote from the Dickey article:

"We will win by staying on the offensive, we will win by spreading liberty.''

Bush and his administration apparently want to "spread liberty" throughout the 22 Arab states. Bush would propose to seed liberty throughout the Islamic states where freedom of speech, women's suffrage and freedom of religion is not only repressed, but actually anathema amongst the majority of the population. To millions of Muslims we are the "evil empire", and with each military incursion onto Arab soil that paradigm is spread even further.

Neocon Norman Podhoretz wrote in Commentary "The regimes that richly deserve to be overthrown...are not confined to the three singled-out mambers of the axis of evil [Iraq, Iran, North Korea]. At a minimum the axis should extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya, as well as "friends" of America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, along with the Palestinian Authority."

Podhoretz and other neocon warhawks wrote Bush a political ultimatium in a letter nine days after the 9-11 attacks essentially demanding an invasion of Iraq or face political censure. Richard Perle, Podhoretz, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Richard Perle, William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer all signed the letter. Many are vociferous in their support of what Podhoretz calls "World War Four", wherein the United States overthrows those nations listed above.

So, we will "spread liberty" at the point of a gun and force it down the throats of a people whose very religion, when translated, means "submission".

Since when did we become the Soviet Union in attempting to force our ideaology on others?


Regards,


Steve