# John Kerry: War Hero



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 9, 2013)

Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!


----------



## PredFan (Aug 9, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!



Yup, he's a disgrace, the president is a disgrace, Obama's whole regime is a disgrace.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 9, 2013)

Whenever someone tries to criticize John Kerry, this is all they can ever come up with. Last I checked, it is not a crime to be be critical of a military operation, especially something like Vietnam. I have not seen the footage of Kerry, and if he actually said that every soldier is a war criminal, then he shouldn't have made such a blanket statement. However, there were certainly various crimes committed by our soldiers in Vietnam. In terms of throwing his medals over the fence, if a man wins a medal and doesn't want it, feels he doesn't deserve it, or whatever, I think it's his choice to do with it as he pleases. Kerry was not the only returning soldier to protest the war; there were thousands.

I don't particularly like the man, but the smear campaign against him and his role in the Vietnam War is, I think, a joke, not to mention irrelevant. Criticize him on his policy and his actions today, not something from forty years ago.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

Q. What do you call a lousy, anti-American, lying scumbag?

A. Mr. Secretary of State


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

He also said that if the US left SE Asia his Communist friends would not be too vengeful, I think he said there would be 10,000 murdered -- tops

Oopsies


----------



## regent (Aug 9, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Q. What do you call a lousy, anti-American, lying scumbag?
> 
> A. Mr. Secretary of State



I still say if Republicans are trying to groom Putin for the presidency they have to get a constitutional amendment.


----------



## tjvh (Aug 9, 2013)

regent said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Q. What do you call a lousy, anti-American, lying scumbag?
> ...



Still say? Are you implying you've used that gem of a statement before?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

regent said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Q. What do you call a lousy, anti-American, lying scumbag?
> ...



Putin would be a better President than Obama, he has more faith in Free Markets and Liberty than Obama


----------



## Sallow (Aug 9, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...





Gotta love it.


----------



## Sallow (Aug 9, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> He also said that if the US left SE Asia his Communist friends would not be too vengeful, I think he said there would be 10,000 murdered -- tops
> 
> Oopsies



Opps what?

There were 3 million or so people killed DURING the Vietnam war by American military actions.

Was that an "opps"?


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 9, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> Whenever someone tries to criticize John Kerry, this is all they can ever come up with. Last I checked, it is not a crime to be be critical of a military operation, especially something like Vietnam. I have not seen the footage of Kerry, and if he actually said that every soldier is a war criminal, then he shouldn't have made such a blanket statement. However, there were certainly various crimes committed by our soldiers in Vietnam. In terms of throwing his medals over the fence, if a man wins a medal and doesn't want it, feels he doesn't deserve it, or whatever, I think it's his choice to do with it as he pleases. Kerry was not the only returning soldier to protest the war; there were thousands.
> 
> I don't particularly like the man, but the smear campaign against him and his role in the Vietnam War is, I think, a joke, not to mention irrelevant. Criticize him on his policy and his actions today, not something from forty years ago.



*This is all they can come up with? Isn't it enough? It's obvious you've never served or you would comprehend just what this scumbag did. First, he slimed his way out of Viet Nam by faking wounds to get 3 Purple Hearts in just 120 days while serving on a gunboat. Not one of these "wounds" caused hospitalization. Secondly, there were a couple of million men who served in Viet Nam, so "thousands" protesting is a tiny number.  There are crimes committed in all wars by all sides but I guarantee you that Americans commit the fewest of any. He deserves more than a smear campaign for labeling our soldiers war criminals and to say that it is a joke and irrelevant says that even if you did serve, you are a blame America firster. *


----------



## Sallow (Aug 9, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Q. What do you call a lousy, anti-American, lying scumbag?



President Ronald Reagan.

Great American Traitor!


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 9, 2013)

I see the repubs/rwer's are pulling this same old tired subject out of their ass for yet another thread.


----------



## Sallow (Aug 9, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever someone tries to criticize John Kerry, this is all they can ever come up with. Last I checked, it is not a crime to be be critical of a military operation, especially something like Vietnam. I have not seen the footage of Kerry, and if he actually said that every soldier is a war criminal, then he shouldn't have made such a blanket statement. However, there were certainly various crimes committed by our soldiers in Vietnam. In terms of throwing his medals over the fence, if a man wins a medal and doesn't want it, feels he doesn't deserve it, or whatever, I think it's his choice to do with it as he pleases. Kerry was not the only returning soldier to protest the war; there were thousands.
> ...



Your third sentence is already bullshit.

Kerry still carries the shrapnel of one of his war wound..it's inoperable.

An absolving America of war crimes in a country it never should have invaded..is well..beyond reprehensible.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Aug 9, 2013)

I read somewhere that kerry got one of his Purple Hearts,when he tried to blow up a rice cache and ended up with a piece of rice shrapnel embedded in his ass.


----------



## Sallow (Aug 9, 2013)

I read somewhere that Ronald Reagan gave money to bloodthirsty terrorists that raped, tortured and murdered 3 American Nuns.

4 Salvadorans Say They Killed U.S. Nuns on Orders of Military - New York Times

Oh yeah..and there's the link.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 9, 2013)

Swift Boating never ends


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 9, 2013)

Silver Star baby....read it and weep

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Silver_Star_citations.pdf


----------



## Camp (Aug 9, 2013)

It's just very sad to see a veteran or group of veterans challenge the awards for heroism bestowed on a service member by the military. It is especially sad when the veterans that served in combat at the time of the action with the individual come out and confirm to the public the acts of heroism as happened in this case. The accusers weren't there or in the position to witness the actions. The fact that the accusers got exspense paid appearence tours and celebrity status makes it more disturbing. What the vet says or does after his return has no bearing on his heroism in combat. Nor should it.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

Kerry is a scumbag who built up a fake narrative as a "War Hero" so he could come home and disgrace all the people who served and fought honorably


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 9, 2013)

What a pussy!

John Kerry military service controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Meehan went on to state that Kerry had been "deep in enemy waters" between Vietnam and Cambodia and that his boat came under fire at the Cambodian border. Meehan also said that Kerry did covertly cross over into Cambodia to drop off special operations forces on a later occasion, but that there was no paperwork for such missions and he could not supply dates.[70]

Based on examination of Kerry's journals and logbook, historian Douglas Brinkley placed the covert missions soon after Christmas. In an interview with the London Daily Telegraph, Brinkley stated that Kerry had gone into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions, dropping off U.S. Seals, Green Berets, and CIA operatives. Brinkley added, "He was a ferry master, a drop-off guy, but it was dangerous as hell. Kerry carries a hat he was given by one CIA operative. In a part of his journals which I didn't use he writes about discussions with CIA guys he was dropping off


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 9, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Kerry is a scumbag who built up a fake narrative as a "War Hero" so he could come home and disgrace all the people who served and fought honorably



*Fake it right. It was alleged they were self inflicted wounds as well. Looks like I stirred up a whole shitload of nonserving commies coming to defend one of their own. Oh well. *


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

John Kerry, if he's telling the truth, he's a War Criminal


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

rightwinger said:


> What a pussy!
> 
> John Kerry military service controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ...


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

Took a trip to Cambodia on Christmas






Has a fake memory of taking a trip into Cambodia on Christmas "Seared" into his memory


----------



## peach174 (Aug 9, 2013)

Sallow said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > He also said that if the US left SE Asia his Communist friends would not be too vengeful, I think he said there would be 10,000 murdered -- tops
> ...




And 4.5 million were killed by their own Communist Government.
Is that an opps?


----------



## Sallow (Aug 9, 2013)

peach174 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



By Pol Pot.

Who was backed by Nixon.

Your numbers are off too..unless you think Nixon beats Hitler in people killin'


----------



## peach174 (Aug 9, 2013)

Sallow said:


> I read somewhere that Ronald Reagan gave money to bloodthirsty terrorists that raped, tortured and murdered 3 American Nuns.
> 
> 4 Salvadorans Say They Killed U.S. Nuns on Orders of Military - New York Times
> 
> Oh yeah..and there's the link.



Killed Dec. 2nd 1980
Carter was still the President.
It was Carter that gave them money.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 9, 2013)

Sallow said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...



Actually it is your post that is bullshit. His "shrapnel wound" was about as serious as a minor shaving nick and the object was removed without any need for surgery. It may also have been self-inflicted in any case.


----------



## Sunni Man (Aug 9, 2013)

#1) I am a Vietnam Vet 1970-71

#2) I detest liberals like Kerry.

#3) He was awarded the Silver Star and for that I salute him.  ..    


*Attacks on John Kerry Discredited*

As a retired Navy Captain, a Vietnam combat veteran, and a Swift Boat skipper who served in the Mekong Delta at the same time as John Kerry, I have been appalled by recently published articles which often open with a recycled whopper: a tangled conspiracy theory about Navy records related to Kerry's Silver Star medal for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action on February 28, 1969.

The cold and undisputed truth is that Vice Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, Commander Naval Forces Vietnam, personally selected the Silver Star award for Kerry and personally pinned the Silver Star on Kerry's chest at a ceremony at our Coastal Division 11 base in An Thoi, South Vietnam just days after the action. A decoration, like every other award for heroism, that was recommended by his Division Officer and endorsed by then Captain Roy L. Hoffmann. According to Zumwalt, he actually wanted to give Kerry an even higher award, the Navy Cross, but decided upon a Silver Star because he wished to make the award as expeditiously as possible. These points were publicly reiterated by Admiral Zumwalt in 1996, in defense of Kerry's military record.


----------



## peach174 (Aug 9, 2013)

Sallow said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...




No - by Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot and it includes the number of people under that Communist Regime not just the Vietnam War.
What part of Communist Government did you not get?

Hitler killed 11 to 14 million, that total includes the people in Concentration camps and killed in War.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 9, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Bloodrock44 said:
> ...



We're you there?  Self inflicted?

Who says?


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 9, 2013)

I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.


----------



## Staidhup (Aug 9, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.



There is no glory in war and the scar and pain it leaves runs deep, never washed away. Kerry has and is entitled to his beliefs, however, there comes a time when one must make a stand and for those that fall, they are the only true hero's.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 9, 2013)

Staidhup said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.
> ...



I don't think John Kerry is a hero, I just don't think he's a criminal for criticizing the war. He shouldn't be commended or disparaged. In fact, I see no reason to talk about someone like him at all. He's sort of an empty suit in my opinion.


----------



## hortysir (Aug 9, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!



I used to say that if he had beaten Bush on 2000, we'd still be at the negotiating table with OBL.
FrankenKerry is one shaky character....never thought I'd miss the Hillderbeast


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 9, 2013)

Sallow said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...



Nixon backed people he was bombing "illegally"?

LOL


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 9, 2013)

Kerry is the type of officer we'd throw over the side.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 9, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.



*I don't recall anyone accusing him of crimes or being treasonous. It's obvious you never served. 99.9% of those who went to Viet Nam served honorably. They came home and were spit on by the same ilk who are supporting him here. He came home with the intention of launching his political career by accusing the 99.9% of being war criminals. If you think there are more important things to debate then by all means go debate them. But those of us who remember what he did and consider it relevant. But not to worry. We got our revenge. It was the veterans vote that kept him from being president.  *


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 9, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.



Bullshit. Kerry volunteered and pulled every string he could find in order to be part of the tiny percentage of Navy personnel (other than corpsmen)  to be assigned combat duties  in Vietnam. Then, having gotten what he must have wanted so badly, he promptly pulled every string in order to be allowed to abandon his crew and the duty he had volunteered for. I suspect he found out they were shooting real bullets. 
I could care less about any convictions he might have had about the war. His willingness to defame his supposed "comrades in arms" with malicious lies and baseless slander for perceived political gain make him a well documented scumbag to anyone willing to actually look at his record.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 10, 2013)

Kerry was an obscure officer on some obscure ship before the Navy allowed him to volunteer for "Swift Boat" duty. They should have had a psychiatric evaluation at the time but they didn't. Kerry had a unique position where he was able to recommend himself for awards. Most of the Swift Boat skippers (God bless 'em) honorably served but Kerry was a savvy politician long before he ran for office. To put it in perspective, Marine Col Victor Krulak was awarded a Navy Cross and a Purple Heart for taking shrapnel wounds to the head and later the shoulder during in a Para-Marine operation in the Pacific during WW2. The Army dominated review board claimed the injuries weren't severe enough to qualify for a Heart. Times changed during the Vietnam war. It seems that Kerry took shrapnel to his butt from his own grenade when he tossed it into a cache of VC rice. For Heart #2 apparently some explosive device was triggered in the retrieval of a mine and Kerry suffered a wound to his finger that didn't even require a bandaid. Kerry 's boat took fire from a single VC on shore and instead of delegating authority to his crew to dispatch the threat, the freaking skipper grabbed a .45 and chased the unarmed single VC kid and shot him dead. Kerry wrote himself up for a Silver Star for his valor and it was systematically forwarded.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 11, 2013)

Yes Kerry was an obscure officer who they knew someday run for President. So they cooked up excuses for him to win three purple hearts and a Silver star to make him look good

That happened a lot in VietNam


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 11, 2013)

Kerry was a subversive who built a fake resume as a "War Hero" just come out later to undermine public support for our troops, so of course he'd have a stellar career in the DemoCCCPrat Party


----------



## Sunni Man (Aug 11, 2013)

^^^^  Even if just 1 of the PH's are genuine.

That plus his Silver Star is enough to make Kerry a 'War Hero' by anyone's standards.  ..  


(again, I can't stand Kerry or his politics)


----------



## Sallow (Aug 11, 2013)

peach174 said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > peach174 said:
> ...



Ho Chi Minh wasn't alive for most of the war. He also tried, in vain, to negotiate with the US. That's after helping the US defeat the Japanese during WWII for the promise of Independence.

See how that worked out?


----------



## Sallow (Aug 11, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.
> ...



You folks shit on every liberal vet no matter their valor.

Doesn't really matter who it was either. Name a prominent liberal vet and you find a conservative shitting on his service.

That's from Rangel on to Duckworth.

Doesn't matter..you creeps attack their service.

That's if you folks aren't fragging them in the field.

Like Pat Tillman.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 11, 2013)

Everyone knows they handed out Silver Stars like candy in VietNam. Most soldiers came back with three or four of them

Kerry has nothing to be proud of


----------



## editec (Aug 11, 2013)

Like so many rich kids, Kerry's assignments were crafted according to his needs, not the military's.  

But for _this board's chickenhawks _to attach _his _character?



Least he showed up and didn't get deferment after deferment like so many of today's famous REPUBLICAN POLS and commentators did.


----------



## Surfer (Aug 11, 2013)

Kerry is a godless commie like most liberals


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 11, 2013)

Sallow said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...



I don't know how to break it to you but the vast majority could give a shit less about your liberal/conservative labels. A POS is a POS no matter what label he prefers.


----------



## Sallow (Aug 11, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



The vast majority?

It's conservatives that attack military service.

You don't liberal shitting on John McCain's or Bob Dole's service record.

You DO hear CONSERVATIVES shitting on Tammy Duckworth's, Jack Murtha's, John Kerry's and Charlie Rangel's service record.

And you also hear them LYING about Pat Tillman.

That's truly a piece of shit thing to do.


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> Whenever someone tries to criticize John Kerry, this is all they can ever come up with. Last I checked, it is not a crime to be be critical of a military operation, especially something like Vietnam. I have not seen the footage of Kerry, and if he actually said that every soldier is a war criminal, then he shouldn't have made such a blanket statement. However, there were certainly various crimes committed by our soldiers in Vietnam. In terms of throwing his medals over the fence, if a man wins a medal and doesn't want it, feels he doesn't deserve it, or whatever, I think it's his choice to do with it as he pleases. Kerry was not the only returning soldier to protest the war; there were thousands.
> 
> I don't particularly like the man, but the smear campaign against him and his role in the Vietnam War is, I think, a joke, not to mention irrelevant. Criticize him on his policy and his actions today, not something from forty years ago.


I guess you haven't read my posts on Kerry.

The man met with representatives of the North Vietnamese government and rubber-stamped their terms for a US surrender.

Normal people call that treason.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/262447-john-kerry-unfit-for-service.html


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2013)

Sallow said:


> I read somewhere that Ronald Reagan gave money to bloodthirsty terrorists that raped, tortured and murdered 3 American Nuns.
> 
> 4 Salvadorans Say They Killed U.S. Nuns on Orders of Military - New York Times
> 
> Oh yeah..and there's the link.


So, how's your desperate attempt to distract from Kerry's service to North Vietnam going?

Not too good, looks like.


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.



Personally, I believe that anyone who advocates his nation surrender during a time of war is not a suitable choice for Secretary of State.


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> Staidhup said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...


He's not a criminal for criticizing the war.  He SHOULD be considered a criminal for lying to Congress.

The Winter Soldier "investigation" was based on lies.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 11, 2013)

daveman said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever someone tries to criticize John Kerry, this is all they can ever come up with. Last I checked, it is not a crime to be be critical of a military operation, especially something like Vietnam. I have not seen the footage of Kerry, and if he actually said that every soldier is a war criminal, then he shouldn't have made such a blanket statement. However, there were certainly various crimes committed by our soldiers in Vietnam. In terms of throwing his medals over the fence, if a man wins a medal and doesn't want it, feels he doesn't deserve it, or whatever, I think it's his choice to do with it as he pleases. Kerry was not the only returning soldier to protest the war; there were thousands.
> ...



Who needed Henry Kissenger when we had a Navy Lieutenant to negotiate for us?


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2013)

Sallow said:


> It's conservatives that attack military service.



"I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command....

"They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."​John Kerry is a conservative?


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2013)

rightwinger said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...


He had no authority to do so.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 11, 2013)

"You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. "If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."  -- John Kerry, War Criminal Scumbag


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> "You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. "If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."  -- John Kerry, War Criminal Scumbag


----------



## Surfer (Aug 11, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> "You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. "If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."  -- John Kerry, War Criminal Scumbag



I have 3 surgeon friends who quit their jobs here shortly after 911 and joined the military. Heroes; not losers.


----------



## Camp (Aug 11, 2013)

Surfer said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > "You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. "If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."  -- John Kerry, War Criminal Scumbag
> ...



Kerry simply pointed out that the educated have more options about their future. He didn't call those who had less options and chose the military losers. You did. It's called projection. Your surgeon friends are heroes, but the grunts are loosers?


----------



## Surfer (Aug 11, 2013)

Camp said:


> Kerry simply pointed out that the educated have more options about their future. He didn't call those who had less options and chose the military losers. You did. It's called projection. Your surgeon friends are heroes, but the grunts are loosers?


Bull. Kerry is a condescending, arrogant @sshole. Everyone knows it. I never said anything about the grunts. I think all Conservative military personnel are heroes. The liberals who b*tch and moan the whole time they're serving, who are only there because it was that or prison, who are just there for the benefits and who give/sell our secrets to our enemies etc are maggots.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 11, 2013)

Camp said:


> Surfer said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



Kerry disparaged the troops. There's no other way to read it.


----------



## Camp (Aug 11, 2013)

Surfer said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Kerry simply pointed out that the educated have more options about their future. He didn't call those who had less options and chose the military losers. You did. It's called projection. Your surgeon friends are heroes, but the grunts are loosers?
> ...



Thanks for clearing that up. Folks who agree with you are heroes and those that don't are maggots or at least not worthy of appreciation for their service.


----------



## Camp (Aug 11, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Surfer said:
> ...



Sure there is another way to read it. Just not in your closed and brainwashed hateful mind. Suppose you support Surfer and don't consider his remark to disparage troops.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

Surfer said:


> Kerry is a godless commie like most liberals



There's nothing wrong with being an Atheist or a Communist. It's a personal choice. That being said, liberals have no ties to either one of those denominations.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

daveman said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever someone tries to criticize John Kerry, this is all they can ever come up with. Last I checked, it is not a crime to be be critical of a military operation, especially something like Vietnam. I have not seen the footage of Kerry, and if he actually said that every soldier is a war criminal, then he shouldn't have made such a blanket statement. However, there were certainly various crimes committed by our soldiers in Vietnam. In terms of throwing his medals over the fence, if a man wins a medal and doesn't want it, feels he doesn't deserve it, or whatever, I think it's his choice to do with it as he pleases. Kerry was not the only returning soldier to protest the war; there were thousands.
> ...



I'm not saying you're wrong, but do you have a link to your sources that show that John Kerry met with the NVA leaders?


----------



## Camp (Aug 11, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...



The idea that some young anti war veteran could influence the Vietnamese, Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon after and during years of negociations involving input from both the Soviets and Chinese is just so warped and bizzar as to fall into the category of delusion.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucY7JOfg6G4]Vietnam War Hearing: John Kerry Testimony - Vietnam Veterans Against the War (1971) - YouTube[/ame]

I just watched the complete footage of his congressional testimony for the first time, and I found nothing particularly offensive or disparaging to the troops. John Kerry did not support the war effort as a whole, and thus the troops, by proxy, were not supported by him either. However, it seemed to me like his sentiments arose out of having experienced the war first-hand as a participant, not because he had any particular hatred or disrespect for his fellow troops. All this being said, in this testimony he was acting as a representative of the veterans against Vietnam. Thus, despite his relatively limited experience in the war due to his injuries, his stories or accounts of the war crimes of soldiers do not necessarily come from his own eyes, and I presume come from stories he has heard from other veterans. I see no purpose as to why he or others would lie about crimes committed by their fellow troops.

By any stretch of the imagination, it's not too hard to believe that there were atrocities committed in Vietnam, aside from the infamous My Lai massacre, that were never reported or that there was no evidence for. I don't mean to speculate in such a way, but logically if there was one incident, in a war with thousands of like-minded participants, then I doubt it was an isolated one. John Kerry, to me, simply seemed to be drawing attention to the darker aspects of our role in the region, and the futile attempt to fight Communism and win the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people.

At any rate, his congressional testimony seemed to me to be focused primarily on SUPPORT for the veterans, stating that they had been forgotten by their government and their fellow countrymen. He advocated for better health services for returning veterans, and a greater respect for black soldiers who had served; things of that nature. Once again, I saw nothing that was particularly offensive in his statements.

Now, I already know what critics of my comments will say, which is that this footage of his testimony was heavily edited and that it left out some incriminating statement that would change everything. Or perhaps they just simply disagree with me that his statements were not controversial. Whatever it is, I believe John Kerry brought up many good points in his testimony about the Vietnam war, no matter what his personal political motives were. I think it would be very hard to prove that his only motivation for such testimony were to springboard his political career. 

Regarding his Purple Hearts, many, many soldiers received Purple Hearts, "against their will" so to speak, for injuries minor to severe. Some deserved it, some did not, but to my knowledge it was not the soldier who decided whether they should receive a Purple Heart. Even if he was undeserving of these awards, or his Silver Star, or anything else, that seems to me to be a moot point compared to his very important testimony before Congress. We could argue for years about one man's awards that he received in Vietnam, but I think the bulk of our focus should be on the mishandling of the Vietnam War, and in particular the mishandling of the young American men of that generation.


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 11, 2013)

I remember when he was campaigning for the Presidency. His motorcade was scheduled to come directly past our local VFW. And it did
About 30 of us were out there waiting. 
As Kerry passed - we flipped him the bird. 
An epic moment!!!


----------



## Wry Catcher (Aug 11, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!



Please post the salient points from your DD-214 which allows you to judge another member of our armed force's combat experience.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> I remember when he was campaigning for the Presidency. His motorcade was scheduled to come directly past our local VFW. And it did
> About 30 of us were out there waiting.
> As Kerry passed - we flipped him the bird.
> An epic moment!!!



An "epic-ly" mature moment no doubt.


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 11, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Please post the salient points from your DD-214 which allows you to judge another member of our armed force's combat experience.



The guy doesn't need a DD-214 (like I have/you don't), nutsack, to express his views on the traitor and national disgrace John Kerry.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 11, 2013)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



When you have to "Read it another way" it's you who are "Closed-minded and brainwashed"


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



I don't see how that makes any sense. "Reading another way" means that one acknowledges the fact that there are different ways of interpreting the same information. That goes for both the people who support Kerry and those who disparage him. It is the opposite of accepting your own position as absolute fact, and certainly the opposite of being "close-minded".


----------



## whitehall (Aug 11, 2013)

It's alleged that Kerry met with V.C. representatives during the Vietnam conflict while on vacation in Paris while he was still in the Navy reserves. Is it treason?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 11, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



No, hon. Words have meaning and sometime people can use a double entendre or twist a phrase, but when someone says, "You didn't build that" or says get educated or get stuck in Iraq, it's fairly clear what he means. Now when you have a population of zombies who parrot back what they're instructed, that's when you get these fake interpertations


----------



## Camp (Aug 11, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...


Back peddle and bs all you want, you don't get to determine how a person reads a statement and determines what it means. But that was only part of my response to your post. I suggested that you supported the comments made by Surfer that liberals serving in the military were maggots because they were liberals and conservatives were the only heroes. Answer that without all the bs. You are so worried about comments made by a returning vet made over 40 years ago, but got nothing to say about insults made to active duty military just a few hours ago. In fact, you seem to want to support him. So why should anyone give a crap about your opinion on Kerry? It's not based on reality or fact, it's based of your present day political views. Certainly not based on concern for vet's and active duty military.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



I don't know what you were trying to prove with that statement, but yes, indeed, people can twist a phrase. That is my point about the critics of John Kerry and his statements in 1971, or his statements about "get stuck in Iraq", is that people can indeed twist those phrases to mean whatever they like. That goes for BOTH sides. The only one that can accurately portray his opinions and clarify his position is John Kerry; we can only judge it from the outside looking in.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

whitehall said:


> It's alleged that Kerry met with V.C. representatives during the Vietnam conflict while on vacation in Paris while he was still in the Navy reserves. Is it treason?



Posting things like this is just going to fan the fires. Until the allegations go from allegations to convictions, all this does is breed speculative contempt towards a man that very few people can prove did anything wrong.

However, to answer your question, no, I do not believe that is treason, even if he DID meet with them. Treason to me would be if he gave them information or helped them attack our soldiers, if he was a "double agent" so to speak. Yet, there is absolutely no proof of that.

You can't simply say that things are "alleged" and then discuss things like they are fact. I do not necessarily blame you for this, but there are many people on this website and in society as a whole that ignore the word "suspected" or "alleged" and simply read everything else. We as debaters and posters have to know this and word our sentences accordingly, making it strictly clear that these allegations are indeed ONLY allegations.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 11, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > It's alleged that Kerry met with V.C. representatives during the Vietnam conflict while on vacation in Paris while he was still in the Navy reserves. Is it treason?
> ...



I was trying to be diplomatic by saying "alleged" but an easy google search reveals that Kerry admitted meeting with V.C. representatives in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations committee.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

whitehall said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...



Ah, I'm sorry, I obviously mis-interpreted what you were trying to prove. I appreciate your concern for being diplomatic. However, I think my point about it fanning the fires still stands. For the record, though, I watched  Kerry's testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and saw no mention of him admitting to meeting Viet Cong representatives in Paris. The video of his testimony is in one of my earlier posts on this thread. It's certainly POSSIBLE that whatever mention there was of his meeting with these Viet Cong representatives was edited out, but that's complete speculation. I see no reason the Viet Cong would even want to meet with him to be honest. 

Anyways, sorry if I got on your case a bit too much about your post. I just get frustrated when I see the words "alleged" or "suspected" or "supposedly" and then other people take those things as facts.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

Upon realizing that the earlier Youtube video I posted was shortened, and did not include all of John Kerry's congressional testimony, I found this; a complete transcript of his comments and the comments of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. This should provide a more accurate picture than my previous video.

WinterSoldier.com - <p>Complete John Kerry Testimony, 04/22/71


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

whitehall said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...



This is to correct my earlier point that Kerry never admitted to meeting in Paris with delegations from the North Vietnamese.

"I have been to Paris. I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government and of all eight of Madam Binh's points it has been stated time and time again, and was stated by Senator Vance Hartke when he returned from Paris, and it has been stated by many other officials of this Government, if the United States were to set a date for withdrawal the prisoners of war would be returned." - John Kerry

Somehow I must have missed this point when I was watching the video, as it was actually in the original Youtube video I posted. However, judging by the nature of his comments, that he met with both sides at "peace talks", the statement that he met with Viet Cong on a vacation in Paris seems completely false. Paraphrasing and simply saying that Kerry went on a personal trip to Paris to meet specifically with the Viet Cong is completely different than saying that he met and talked with both sides, and implies that he was doing so secretly and with malicious intentions when he was doing nothing of the sort. On the contrary, for whatever reason, it seems he was simply present at the negotiating process between the North and South Vietnamese in Paris

Most likely, I feel, John Kerry was there as a simple observer with very little to no influence, and certainly no direct ties or sentiments with the Viet Cong themselves. So no, if various U.S. senators, leaders, military men and otherwise met with the North Vietnamese in negotiations, then I do not think it constitutes treason if John Kerry has a discussion with the North Vietnamese.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 11, 2013)

sambino510

_I just watched the complete footage of his congressional testimony for the first time, and I found nothing particularly offensive or disparaging to the troops. John Kerry did not support the war effort as a whole, and thus the troops, by proxy, were not supported by him either. However, it seemed to me like his sentiments arose out of having experienced the war first-hand as a participant, not because he had any particular hatred or disrespect for his fellow troops. All this being said, in this testimony he was acting as a representative of the veterans against Vietnam. Thus, despite his relatively limited experience in the war due to his injuries, his stories or accounts of the war crimes of soldiers do not necessarily come from his own eyes, and I presume come from stories he has heard from other veterans. I see no purpose as to why he or others would lie about crimes committed by their fellow troops._

The fact of the matter is that Kerry swore under oath that the allegations he was making were from particular people who held particular positions in a particular place at a particular time. His testimony was investigated and many of these people were simply not who and what they claimed and some of the rest never participated in the duties they described. Some had never been in the military or anywhere near Vietnam much less been involved in. The investigation found only one allegation that was worthy of further follow up and in the end no chargeable crime was found.
His injuries never any loss of duty time what-so-ever. 
He never had "fellow troops". He was a *Navy *officer who ran boats up and down rivers for a little while and had no way of knowing what was going on elsewhere. 
Most troops considered it highly disrespectful to be accused of all sorts of dishonorable conduct and being the target of nasty lies.

_" I don't mean to speculate in such a way, but ..."_

Then maybe you should avoid doing so lest your speculations prove as untrue as your presumption above.

_Regarding his Purple Hearts, many, many soldiers received Purple Hearts, "against their will" so to speak, for injuries minor to severe. Some deserved it, some did not, but to my knowledge it was not the soldier who decided whether they should receive a Purple Heart. _

",,,to my knowledge..." What knowledge would that be? Apparently you don't have any related to Kerry or Vietnam and what little you think you have is wrong. The fact that Kerry campaigned for his medals is part of the record.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 11, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> sambino510
> 
> _I just watched the complete footage of his congressional testimony for the first time, and I found nothing particularly offensive or disparaging to the troops. John Kerry did not support the war effort as a whole, and thus the troops, by proxy, were not supported by him either. However, it seemed to me like his sentiments arose out of having experienced the war first-hand as a participant, not because he had any particular hatred or disrespect for his fellow troops. All this being said, in this testimony he was acting as a representative of the veterans against Vietnam. Thus, despite his relatively limited experience in the war due to his injuries, his stories or accounts of the war crimes of soldiers do not necessarily come from his own eyes, and I presume come from stories he has heard from other veterans. I see no purpose as to why he or others would lie about crimes committed by their fellow troops._
> 
> ...



No need to attack my personal intelligence or knowledge of the Vietnam War. I have admitted my shortcomings, and acknowledged that much of what I say is, indeed, speculation. Just out of curiosity, what shows that Kerry campaigned and actively advocated for his medals and awards? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just have never heard anything of the sort.

Indeed, I understand the frustration other soldiers would have if Kerry did accuse them of such heinous crimes if they were not guilty of them. However, in his testimony I did not notice anything that seemed to make a blanket statement that all U.S. soldiers were horrible, horrible people. I know very little about follow-up investigations as to his specific allegations towards specific soldiers. Could you give me a link? 

Also, I once again do not think it's hard to imagine that incidents like My Lai occured more than once. Even if they did not, I think the carpet bombers and indiscriminate Napalm bombs of entire forests deserves some attention as well.

Once again, as I have stated in my previous discussions with you, it's a matter of perspective. There may or may not be times when I present information that is false, but I make a pretty serious effort at backing up my statements with evidence or facts. I do not actively try to lie.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 11, 2013)

QandO: The Fraud of the Winter Soldier

February 16, 2004

The Fraud of the Winter Soldier
Posted by McQ



Many statements have been made that because John Kerry participated in Viet Nam, he had earned the right to protest the war. I want to say an unequivocal &#8220;I agree&#8221;. But that being said, I&#8217;d agree that ANY American has that right. Dissent is critical to the maintenance of freedom and I&#8217;d not deny that right to anyone for any reason.

However, as with any right, there come responsibilities. One of the responsibilities incumbent upon any who dissent is to do so in a PRINCIPLED fashion. It is their right to dissent, but it is their duty to do so responsibly. 

THAT is the crux of my problem with John Kerry&#8217;s dissent. For the most part it was based on fraud. His dissent was NOT based in truth. His dissent was not conducted responsibly. It was, in my opinion, based on mischaracterization, outright lies, and fraud.

[Much of what I&#8217;m going to quote here comes from an excellent book that I urge all to read concerning this specifically and Viet Nam and its veterans in general. The book is &#8220;Stolen Valor&#8221; by B.G. Burkett. I&#8217;ll append &#8220;[BG]&#8221; after those quotes so excerpted.]

Neil Sheehan, certainly not a proponent of the war in Viet Nam by any stretch, characterized what was going on at that time quite well. Sheehan destroyed the credibility of Mark Lane&#8217;s book &#8220;Conversations with Americans&#8221; by revealing most of the &#8220;veterans&#8221; who&#8217;s &#8220;atrocities&#8221; Lane quoted hadn&#8217;t been in combat or even in Vietnam in many cases :

&#8221;This kind of reasoning," Sheehan wrote, "amounts to a new McCarthyism, this time from the left. Any accusation, any innuendo, any rumor, is repeated and published as truth."[BG} 

It was, however, Lane&#8217;s book which inspired the &#8220;Winter Solder investigation&#8221;. The major organizers of the so-called &#8220;investigation&#8221; staged in Detroit in 1971 included Jane Fonda, Dick Gregory, Phil Ochs, Graham Nash, David Crosby, Tom Hayden, Daniel Berrigan actor Donald Sutherland and activist lawyer and writer Mark Lane - the same guy who&#8217;d already been revealed as a fake. Also deeply involved in the organization of the event was the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) which included John Kerry who was on the VVAW Executive committee.




Kerry hooked up with an organization called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW). Two events cooked up by this group went a long way toward cementing in the public mind the image of Vietnam as one big atrocity. The first of these was the January 31, 1971, "Winter Soldier Investigation," organized by "the usual suspects" among antiwar celebrities such as Jane Fonda, Dick Gregory, and Kennedy-assassination conspiracy theorist, Mark Lane. Here, individuals purporting to be Vietnam veterans told horrible stories of atrocities in Vietnam: using prisoners for target practice, throwing them out of helicopters, cutting off the ears of dead Viet Cong soldiers, burning villages, and gang-raping women as a matter of course. 


To reveal the depth of dishonesty present, Al Hubbard, one of the founders of the VVAW and its Executive Secretary, claimed to be an Air Force pilot, wounded in Viet Nam. In fact, Hubbard was never an officer, never wounded and never in Viet Nam. VVAW members Elton Mazione, John Laboon, Eddie Swetz and Kenneth Van Lesser all claimed to have been a part of the Phoenix program in Viet Nam where they routinely killed children and removed body parts as a part of their duty. They were shown to have never been in the Phoenix program nor had they ever been in Viet Nam. And the list of more frauds later found within the organization is mind-boggling.

So this is the organization with which Kerry was associated when he used the &#8220;horrible stories&#8221; generated by Mark Lane and the VVAW&#8217;s &#8220;Winter Soldier investigation&#8221; as the basis of his Congressional &#8220;testimony&#8221; later that year, saying at one point:

I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.&#8221; [emphasis added]

Not content with this outright lie, he stated further on in his &#8220;testimony&#8221;:

&#8221;It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to communicate to people in this country: the question of racism which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions; also the use of weapons, the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage in the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war, when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions, in the use of free-fire zones, harassment, interdiction fire, search-and-destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, the killing of prisoners - accepted policy in many units in South Vietnam.&#8221;

This too is a complete and utter lie. For instance, to pretend that torturing or killing prisoners was an &#8220;accepted policy in many units in South Vietnam&#8221; is to DISHONOR those who served in Vietnam because it requires one to then believe that gross human rights violations were encouraged by the chain-of-command and therefore committed &#8220;routinely&#8221;,as a matter of policy, by our soldiers. 

As Guenter Lewey pointed out in his book &#8220;America in Vietnam&#8221;, 

"Yet these incidents either (as in the destruction of hamlets) did not violate the law of war or took place in breach of existing regulations," Lewy wrote. &#8220;Those responsible were tired and punished. In either case, they were not, as alleged, part of a 'criminal policy,'" [BG]

We&#8217;ve also since learned that John Kerry&#8217;s &#8220;impassioned&#8221; and &#8220;impromptu&#8221; testimony wasn&#8217;t even written by him and certainly, as he claimed, NOT &#8216;impromptu&#8217;.

And Kerry's emotional, from-the-heart speech had been carefully crafted by a speech writer for Robert Kennedy named Adam Walinsky, who also tutored him on how to present it.[BG]

But that didn&#8217;t stop Kerry from mischaracterizing it to Congress:

&#8221;I would simply like to speak in very general terms. I apologize if my statement is general because I received notification yesterday you would like to hear me and I am afraid because of the injunction I was up most of the night and haven&#8217;t had a great deal of time to prepare.&#8221;

So what about the famous &#8220;Winter Soldier investigation&#8221; which was the basis for Kerry&#8217;s testimony?

The same disrespect for the truth was in operation during the Winter Soldier hearings. After all the atrocities were dutifully taken down, the transcript was inserted into the Congressional Record by Sen. Mark O. Hatfield, who asked the commandant of the Marine Corps to investigate the many crimes, particularly those perpetrated by Marines. 
"The results of this investigation, carried out by the Naval Investigative Service are interesting and revealing," said historian Guenter Lewy in his book America in Vietnam. His history of the war was one of the first to rely on previously classified documents in the National Archives. "Many of the veterans, although assured that they would not be questioned atrocities they might have committed personally, refused to be interviewed. One of the active members of the VVAW told investigators that the leadership had directed the entire membership not to cooperate with military authorizes. 

One black Marine who testified at Winter Soldier did agree to talk with the investigators. Although he had claimed during the hearing that Vietnam was "one huge atrocity" and a "racist plot," he could provide no details of any actual crimes. Lewy said the question of atrocities had not occurred to the Marine until he left Vietnam. His testimony had been substantially "assisted" by a member of the Nation of Islam.

"But the most damaging finding consisted of the sworn statements of several veterans, corroborated by witnesses, that they had in fact not attended the hearing in Detroit," Lewy wrote, "One of them had never been to Detroit in his life." Fake "witnesses" had appropriated the names of real Vietnam veterans.
 Lewy pointed out that incidents similar to those described at the Winter Soldier hearings did occur. "Yet these incidents either (as in the destruction of hamlets) did not violate the law of war or took place in breach of existing regulations," Lewy wrote. Those responsible were tired and punished.

"In either case, they were not, as alleged, part of a 'criminal policy,'" Lewy said. Despite the antiwar movement's contention that military policies protecting civilians in Vietnam were routinely ignored, Lewy said the rules of engagement were implemented and taken very seriously, although at times the rules were not communicated properly and the training was inadequate. That's what made the failure so notable. [BG]


Lewey&#8217;s findings?

"The VVAW's use of fake witnesses and the failure to cooperate with military authorities and to provide crucial details of the incidents further cast serious doubt on the professed desire to server the causes of justice and humanity." Lewy wrote. "It is more likely that this inquiry, like others earlier and later, had primarily political motives and goals.&#8221;[BG]

Although the &#8220;Winter Soldier investigations&#8221; were thoroughly discredited, they continued to be used to discredit the Vietnam era military, such as in a 1993 &#8220;Newsweek&#8221; story by Brownmiller about gang rape by soldiers. They also continue to be the basis for the myths and stereotypes which linger, even today, about Viet Nam veterans.

Bottom Line:

Was John Kerry entitled to protest the war in Viet Nam - Yes.

Was John Kerry&#8217;s dissent principled and responsible &#8211; NO

It was John Kerry&#8217;s responsibility to ensure his dissent was both principled and responsible. He instead participated in a fraud and a sham known as the &#8220;Winter Soldier investigation&#8221; and then compounded that by using the fraudulent &#8216;testimony&#8217; from that event as the STATED basis of his testimony to Congress. He made no effort to determine the truth of what he testified to, or if he did, chose to ignore the results. He completely failed the test of 'responsible dissent'.

With his testimony he indicted an entire generation of soldiers as war criminals, committing war crimes &#8220;not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.&#8221;

For that, for his total lack of responsible dissent, I find his anti-war activities to have been despicable, reprehensible and unforgivable.

And, because of that patent fraud, and irresponsible behavior, I also find him to be totally unsuited to be President of the United States.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 11, 2013)

Albrektson Family Web » Blog Archive » John Kerry: War Hero

John Kerry: War Hero

Raymond, 29 July 2004, No comments
Categories: Opinion


Am I the only one who feels a stirring in my gag reflex whenever John Kerry dons the mantle of Vietnam veteran and military hero? Last night (July 28, 2004) John Edwards alleged in his DNC speech, &#8220;When John Kerry graduated college [sic], he volunteered for military service, volunteered to go to Vietnam, volunteered to captain a swiftboat, one of the most dangerous duties in Vietnam that you could have. As a result, he was wounded, honored for his valor.&#8221;
Let&#8217;s get this straight: John Kerry volunteered for military service the way Clinton volunteered for impeachment. He couldn&#8217;t avoid it! Which is, in itself, surprising, since he was the golden-haired scion of a super-rich East-coast family that almost never saw their sons sail into harm&#8217;s way. What went wrong?
 We&#8217;ll probably never know why Kerry&#8217;s draft board refused his request for an additional deferral to &#8220;study in Paris,&#8221; but when the writing was on the wall (i.e., the draft was looming), then Kerry &#8220;volunteered&#8221; for military service.
 But his blue-blooded luck held&#8211;he got a super-safe berth on a guided-missile frigate and in a ridiculously short period, was given the golden handshake: his own command at an even younger age than the original JFK.
 And Kerry made the most of those next four months of skippering of his own boat: he shot reel after reel of self-glorifying film footage of himself being heroic, won a Silver Star (for actions that included putting a bullet into the head of a wounded Viet-Cong and retrieving his empty weapon), and got three Band-Aid wounds for each of which he applied for and was awarded a Purple Heart.
 And I&#8217;m sure the limbless, blind, and disabled veterans of American military history don&#8217;t begrudge Kerry those Purple Hearts. After all, those medals gave him the legal justification (the &#8220;controlling legal authority&#8221 he needed to apply for a cushy reassignment stateside&#8211;an application that was in the mail less than a week after they put the third Band-Aid on his arm.
 Let&#8217;s not even mention Kerry&#8217;s despicable anti-war protest while still in uniform (and technically still assigned as an admiral&#8217;s aid), his self-confessed war crimes, his persecution of other Vietnam veterans, or the truthfulness of his different accounts regarding the medal-throwing episode.
 Do I have a right to resent a fellow Vietnam-era veteran? You bet I do. He can&#8217;t help being a silver-spoon sucking prep-school blue-blooded rich kid, but he chose his own Vietnam identity: a self-glorifying, show-boating hothead who transformed four months or random acts of violence into a &#8220;heroic tour of military duty&#8221; and the foundation for a presidential run as the &#8220;real war hero.&#8221;
Gag me&#8211;with a silver spoon.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 11, 2013)




----------



## RKMBrown (Aug 11, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!



For democrats the measure of greatness is how big a piece of dung you are.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 11, 2013)




----------



## whitehall (Aug 11, 2013)

As an independent commander of a Swift Boat Kerry got to recommend his crew for medals and oh yeah himself too. It seems he was rather lavish in self praise when he recommended himself for a Silver Star for shooting a single (unarmed?) V.C.


----------



## Surfer (Aug 12, 2013)

Camp said:


> Surfer said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



I, like most good, decent Americans am fed up with liberals pretend/fake/alleged patriotism. Most are liars and frauds. They only want to use this country for its benefits like welfare, freedom of speech, free education, good healthcare etc. Most contribute nothing and suck us dry financially. Most breed like rats and demand the working people pay up. The godless commie liberal military members can go fck themselves. The honorable, patriotic, Republican, Independent, Christians and Jews are heroes.


----------



## RKMBrown (Aug 12, 2013)

Surfer said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Surfer said:
> ...



There are some heroes that are not Republican or Independent or Christian or Jewish.  Just sayin.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 12, 2013)

Surfer said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Surfer said:
> ...



It's pretty assumptive to say that it is only the Republicans and Western religions that are the honorable people. It is also assumptive to say that all liberals are "godless commies". I have many Democratic family members and friends (even though I'm Independent) who all believe in God. In the same way that people should not stereotype Republicans, I would urge you to avoid stereotyping Democrats. I guarantee you there are many useless Republicans too, many of which also use things like food stamps or free education.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 13, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> Surfer said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



Can you freaking (left wing) moderates ever focus on a freaking issue? Kerry was a fraud and a traitor and the freaking everything you hate until he ran as a democrat.


----------



## regent (Aug 13, 2013)

whitehall said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > Surfer said:
> ...



The navy didn't say he was a fraud, but said upon investigation that Kerry deserved the awards. If you are uncomfortable with the medals why not take it up with the navy, the navy gave the awards not the Democratic party.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 13, 2013)

whitehall said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > Surfer said:
> ...



I have no problem focusing on an issue. I was responding to the post made by Surfer, a post which happened to be a bit off topic.


----------



## daveman (Aug 14, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...


In the thread I linked.  Reading is fun!


----------



## editec (Aug 14, 2013)

As to the issue of the wars crimes during the Viet Nam conflict?

I too heard numerous confessions about a war crimes by returning servicemen when I was a NAV corpsman.

I was dealing with the fallout of those war crimes as the people who perpetrated them often had severe psychological problems because it what they did or saw while serving in country..

So you tell yourselves whatever makes you feel okay, but those of us who were involved in that conflict heard PLENTY of first hand accounts of shit that went down there.

Incidently I also hear plenty of stories about our soldiers finding the victims of war crimes committed by the VC, too.

It was an ugly war, kiddies.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 14, 2013)

I was there. Kerry is a lying POS.


----------



## Surfer (Aug 14, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> I was responding to the post made by Surfer, a post which happened to be a bit off topic.



Off topic my (fine) ass. Kerry is exactly who I am describing--a fake, fraud, POS liberal.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 14, 2013)

Army CID Investigations of VVAW War Crimes Allegations  


 VVAW members are seen striking poses in a pamphlet for the 1971 "Winter Soldier" war crimes conference in Detroit



----------
 In April 1971, Sen. Mark Hatfield placed transcripts from the Vietnam Veterans Against the War's "Winter Soldier Investigation" (WSI) war crimes conference into the Congressional Record. The House Committee on Armed Services responded by directing the Department of Defense to conduct a prompt review of the VVAW's allegations.
The Army's Criminal Investigation Division (CID) opened a case for each witness who claimed to have knowledge of criminal actions by the Army. These cases are described below, with links to the actual Army summary reports.

Note: Personal information and the names of non-VVAW witnesses have been redacted from the summary reports.



----------
 The following are Army WSI witnesses investigated by the CID:
Note: Cases 1, 11, 19, 32 and 40 cover allegations made outside WSI by witnesses who also made WSI statements.



1. Beitzel, John, 21, Sgt. (E-5), 4/21, 11th Brigade, Americal Division (January 1969 to January 1970).


Allegation: 1) Indiscriminate firing upon unarmed Vietnamese, 2) Torture and maltreatment of prisoners/detainees, 3) Mutilation of dead bodies. 
Investigation summary: Complainants Beitzel and Joseph Brenman refused to provide specific information to support their allegations, which were made in a venue other than WSI, but are basically the same. Joe Bangert (USMC) and Jeffrey Dubrow (USN) accompanied Beitzel and Brenman at the subject venue.

Result: Investigation terminated; insufficient evidence.

John Beitzel / Joseph Brenman CID Investigation Report


2. Bernath, Fred, 26, 1st Lt., 101st MP Co., 101st Airborne Division (December 1968 to October 1969).


Allegation: 1) Electrical torture of prisoners/detainees, 2) Gassing of civilians. 
Investigation summary: Complainant submitted a sworn statement supporting his WSI claims, but was unable to identify any of the individuals involved or the date of the incident. He did name a possible witness who subsequently submitted a sworn statement denying any knowledge of the events alleged by Bernath.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Fred Bernath CID Investigation Report


3. Bunge, Sam, 1st Lt., "B" Co., 3/187, 101st Airborne Division (July 1968 to June 1969).


Allegation: 1) Attempted murder of Vietnamese male, 2) Desecration of graves, 3) Gassing of Vietnamese civilians. 
Investigation summary: Complainant repeated WSI claims but refused to sign a written statement. He provided names of possible witnesses but did not name any of those allegedly involved, including his former commanding officer. Interviews with former members of Bunge's unit and his former commanding officers revealed no evidence that supported the allegations.

Result: Investigation completed; supplemental investigative efforts completed; unfounded.

Sam Bunge CID Investigation Report


4. Butts, Dennis, 24, SP/4 (E-4), HHQ Co., 2/12, 25th Infantry Division and "E" Co., 4/39, 9th Infantry Division (September 1966 to September 1967).


Allegation: 1) Indiscriminate killing and wounding of Vietnamese civilians, 2) Destruction of private property. 
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to cooperate without immunity on advice of VVAW counsel. 

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Dennis Butts CID Investigation Report


5. Byrne, Kevin, 21, Sgt. (E-5), 42nd Scout Dog, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division (November 1968 to November 1969).


Allegation: 1) Attempted murder of an NVA officer, 2) Failure to render medical treatment, 3) Indiscriminate use of fire power, 4) Destruction of private property. 
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to answer questions or provide further information for fear of "causing trouble for the peons instead of the generals."

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Kevin Byrne CID Investigation Report


6. Caldwell, Dennis, 24, CWO-2, "A" Trp., 3/17, Air Cav., 1st Aviation Brigade (October 1968 to October 1969).


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Indiscriminate use of fire power, 3) Indiscriminate destruction of villages, 4) Gassing (tear gas) of civilians and livestock, 5) Aggravated assault on a prisoner. 
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to answer any questions or provide further information.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Dennis Caldwell CID Investigation Report


7. Chiles, David, 24, SP/4 (E-4), 3/4, 25th Infantry Division (January 1968 to December 1968).


Allegation: 1) Mutilation of enemy corpse, 2) Indiscriminate killing of two Vietnamese children and an elderly Vietnamese man. 
Investigation summary: Counsel present at interview. Complainant declined to provide any substantive information, saying he would testify only before a Congressional Committee.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

David Chiles CID Investigation Report


8. Craig, Douglas, 22, SP/4, "D" Co., 2nd Bn., 8th Brigade, 1st Air Cav. Division (December 1968 to August 1969).


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese. 
Investigation summary: Complainant stated that he had no direct information that civilians were killed and no direct knowledge of the alleged event. He further stated that he had misgivings about testifying at Detroit, as he could not substantiate the allegations.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Douglas Craig CID Investigation Report


9. Craig, Larry, 29, SP/4, Public Information Office, 25th Infantry Division (1966 to 1967). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified prisoner, 2) Desecration of a grave. 
Investigation summary: Complainant backtracked on his WSI testimony and was unable to provide specific information or identify any U.S or Vietnamese personnel. 

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Larry Craig CID Investigation Report


10. Donner, Donald, 24, SP/4 (E-4), 20th Brigade, 86th Combat Engineers (August 1967 to July 1968).


Allegation: 1) Murder of a Vietnamese male, 2) Wounding of a 14-year-old Vietnamese girl, 3) Dereliction in the performance of duty, 4) Indiscriminate killing of livestock, 5) Failure to bury enemy dead. 
Investigation summary: Complainant characterized the alleged incidents as accidental, misrepresented by him at WSI, or known to him only by hearsay.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Donald Donner CID Investigation Report


11. Drolshagen, Jon, 26, 1st Lt., 25th Infantry Division (1966 to 1967).


Allegation: 1) Murder and torture of unknown Vietnamese nationals.
Investigation summary: CID statement refers to allegations made in different venue, six months prior to WSI, by Drolshagen, Edward Barbour (former SP4, 101st Airborne Division) and Frederick Morton (former E5, 11th Armed Cavalry Regiment). Subjects refused to make written statements or to answer questions concerning their allegations. 

Result: Investigation completed; case closed.

Note: Drolshagen's statement at WSI was considerably less specific than his earlier allegation that a major had committed torture and murder. At WSI, Drolshagen spoke vaguely of a major's participation in unspecified activities.

Edward Barbour / Jon Drolshagen / Frederick Morton CID Investigation Report


12. Duffy, James, 23, SP/5 (E-5), 228 Aviation Bn., 1st Air Cav. Division (February 1967 to April 1968).


Allegation: 1) Negligent homicide of unidentified Vietnamese child, 2) Maltreatment of prisoners, 3) Assault, 4) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Investigators were unable to contact complainant.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

James Duffy CID Investigation Report


13. Dzagulones, Don, 23, SP/5, 635th Military Intelligence Detachment, attached to 11th Infantry Brigade, Americal Division (January 1969 to December 1969).


Allegation: 1) Torture and assault of prisoners / VC suspects.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to answer any questions. Investigators were unable to identify the unidentified major referred to in the allegations.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Don Dzagulones CID Investigation Report


14. Erard, Michael, 29, SP/5 (E-5), 3/503, 173rd Airborne Brigade (April 1969 to March 1970).


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese civilians, 2) Failure to take prisoners.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to make any statement or provide any information. 

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Michael Erard CID Investigation Report


15. Farrell, Michael, 24, SP/4 (E-4), "A" Co., 2/60, 9th Infantry Division (January 1967 to January 1968).


Allegation: 1) Murder of a Vietnamese child, 2) Maltreatment of a prisoner, 3) Destruction of crops and livestock.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to make any statements or provide any information on advice of attorney.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Michael Farrell CID Investigation Report


16. Galbally, Joe, 23, SP/4 (E-4), 1/6, 198 LIB, Americal Division (October 1967 to April 1968).


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Rape, 3) Assault.
Investigation summary: Efforts to locate complainant were unsuccessful.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Joe Galbally CID Investigation Report


17. Hagelin, Timon, 21, SP/4 (E-4), Graves Registration Platoon, 243 Field Serv. Co., 1st Logistics Command (August 1968 to August 1969).


Allegation: 1) Assault of unidentified Vietnamese civilians.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to answer any questions.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Timon Hagelin CID Investigation Report


18. Hartner, John, 26, Sgt. (E-5), H & HD 3rd Brigade, H & HD 2nd Brigade, 4th Infantry Division (November 1969 to August 1970). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of a Vietnamese baby, 2) Wounding of three Vietnamese women, 3) Suppression of the above information.
Investigation summary: In a sworn statement, complainant refused to provide any information.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

John Hartner CID Investigation Report


19. Henry, James, 23, Sgt., 1st Bn., 3/35th, 4th Infantry Division (August 1967 to August 1968).


Allegation: 1) Murder, 2) Rape, 3) Maltreatment of unidentified Vietnamese.
Investigation summary: Complainant submitted a sworn statement. An extensive investigation failed to reveal sufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegations. Subsequent supplementary investigative efforts revealed that a group of unarmed civilians may in fact have been killed by members of Company B, 1/35th Infantry on February 8, 1968. That investigation was ongoing at the time of this report.

Result: Investigation completed; supplemental investigation in progress.

Note: The CID statement refers to allegations made in several different venues a year prior to WSI, and repeated there. See also Civilian Killings Went Unpunished, Los Angeles Times, August 6, 2006. This is the only known WSI allegation for which there is substantiation.

James Henry CID Investigation Report


20. Henry, John, 26, SP/4, 2/60, 1/11 Artillery, 9th Infantry Division (March 1968 to February 1969).


Allegation: 1) Maltreatment of prisoners and Vietnamese civilians, 2) Destruction of livestock and private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant could not be located.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

John Henry CID Investigation Report


21. Hunter, Michael, 24, Sgt (E-5), "B" Co., 5/7 Air Cav. Reg., 1st Air Cav. Division (February 1968 to February 1969); "H" Co., 75th Rangers, attached to 1st Air Cav. Div.; "I" Co., 75th Rangers, attached to 1st Inf. Division (September 1969 to March 1970).


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Mutilation of corpses, 3) Desecration of graves and destruction of private property, 4) Rape, 5) Refusing to render medical aid, 6) Gassing of Vietnamese civilians (tear gas).
Investigation summary: Complainant admitted his own offenses orally but would not make a written statement or provide times, dates or names. Numerous former members of Hunter's unit denied his allegations. One witness said that Hunter had killed a Vietnamese man without orders while walking point on a patrol.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Michael Hunter CID Investigation Report


22. Keyes, Gary, 22, SP/4, "E" Troop, 1st Cav. Reg., 11th Brigade, Americal Division (April 1969 to March 1970).


Allegation: 1) Gassing of villages, 2) Aggravated assault, 3 Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to answer any questions.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Gary Keyes CID Investigation Report


23. Keys, Eugene, 25, SP/4 (E-4), 3/4 25th Infantry Division (February 1966 to February 1967).


Allegation: 1) Forced evacuation of Vietnamese villages, 2) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant said he would only make a statement to a joint session of Congress.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Eugene Keys CID Investigation Report


24. Kogut, Russell, 22, WO-1, 155 Assault Helicopter Co. (May 1968 to March 1969).


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Aggravated assault, 3) Looting and destruction of private property, 4) Forced evacuation of Vietnamese villages.
Investigation summary: Complainant said a VVAW staffer told him that VVAW's lawyers advised him not to make any statement.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Russell Kogut CID Investigation Report


25. Lenix, Mark, 24, 1st Lt., 1/11th Arty. and 2/39 Infantry, 9th Infantry Division (1968 to 1969).


Allegation: 1) Murder of prisoners and unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Indiscriminate use of fire power, 3) Looting and destruction of private property, 4) Forced evacuation of Vietnamese civilians.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to provide any information concerning his allegations.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Mark Lenix CID Investigation Report


26. Lloyd, Murphy, 27, Sgt. (E-5), "D" Co., 4th Bn., 173 Airborne Brigade (February 1967 to February 1968).


Allegation: 1) Murder of prisoners, 2) Torture and maiming of prisoners.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to answer any questions on advice of lawyer.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Murphy Lloyd CID Investigation Report


27. Lytle, John, 24, SP/4 (E-4), "E" Co., 6/15 Arty., 1st Infantry Division (August 1967 to March 1969). 


Allegation: 1) Indiscriminate use of fire power, 2) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant backtracked on his WSI allegation that villages were targeted indiscriminately, saying that the villages were fired on because it was suspected that VC occupied them and because incoming fire had been received. Lytle was unable to identify any personnel involved or name specific incidents.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

John Lytle CID Investigation Report


28. MacKay, James, 20, Sgt. (E-5), HHQ 3rd Brigade, 9th Inf. Div. (October 1968 to August 1970). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of Vietnamese civilians, 2) Maltreatment of enemy dead, 3) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant could not be located.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

James MacKay CID Investigation Report


29. Mallory, John, 24, Captain, 1st Sq., 11th Arm. Cav. Reg., 1st Air Cav. Division (May 1969 to May 1970).


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Desecration of enemy graves, 3) Aggravated assault, 4) Larceny and destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to provide any specific information or identify any of the persons allegedly involved. He said he and the VVAW were only interested in initiating a Congressional investigation into U.S. policy in Vietnam.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

John Mallory CID Investigation Report


30. McConnachie, Robert, 22, Sgt. (E-5), 2/28th, 1st Infantry (October 1967 to October 1968).


Allegation: 1) Involuntary manslaughter of unidentified Vietnamese civilians, 2) Indiscriminate use of fire power.
Investigation summary: Complainant backtracked on his WSI allegations, saying that no Vietnamese children were actually killed by troops throwing C-ration cans at them. He also said he now believed that the alleged killing of civilians in a hospital by artillery fire was accidental.

Result: Investigation completed; unsubstantiated.

Robert McConnachie CID Investigation Report


31. Misiaszek, Michael, 22, SP/4 (E-4), 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division, FSSE (December 1968 to January 1970). 


Allegation: 1) Desecration of graves, 2) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant made oral and written statements, but was unable to substantiate his WSI allegations. Investigation disproved one of his allegations, that Army engineers plowed under Vietnamese graves while constructing a stadium.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Michael Misiaszek CID Investigation Report


32. Noetzel, Steve, 31, SP/4, 5th Special Forces Group Augmentation (May 1963 to May 1964). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified prisoners / detainees, 2) Inhumane treatment of prisoners.
Investigation summary: The CID statement refers to allegations made in another venue nine months prior to WSI, but the main allegation is basically the same. Complainant Noetzel repeated his allegations orally, but returned a written summary unsigned. An extensive investigation failed to substantiate Noetzel's allegations.

Result: Investigation completed; unfounded / insufficient evidence.

Gordon Livingston / Robert Johnson / Steve Noetzel CID Investigation Report


33. Ostrenga, Patrick, "D" Co., 25th Infantry Division (February to December - year unknown). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Refusing to render medical treatment to wounded prisoners and Vietnamese.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to provide any information concerning his allegations.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Patrick Ostrenga CID Investigation Report


34. Palosaari, Ronald, 23, SP/4, 1/6, 198 LIB, Americal Division (1967 to 1968). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Mutilation of corpse.
Investigation summary: Complainant was unable to provide specific dates, locations or names of individuals allegedly involved, and backtracked on his WSI allegation that he had witnessed the mutilation of enemy dead.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Ronald Palosaari CID Investigation Report


35. Perry, Bill, 23, Pfc. (E-3), "A" Co., 1/506, 101st Airborne Division (November 1966 to August 1968). 


Allegation: 1) Indiscriminate use of fire power, 2) Mutilation of corpses.
Investigation summary: Complainant could not be located.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Bill Perry CID Investigation Report


36. Podlaski, Ron, 24, Sgt. (E-5), 5th Special Forces Group (April 1968 to April 1969). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of prisoners, Vietnamese civilians and a Laotian national, 2) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant declined to answer questions pending advice from his attorney, then moved and could not be located.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Ron Podlaski CID Investigation Report


37. Pugsley, Don, 23, SP/4, 5th Special Forces (October 1969 to December 1969). 


Allegation: 1) Indiscriminate destruction of livestock.
Investigation summary: Complainant said in a sworn statement that the strafing of water buffalo he alleged at WSI did not actually occur.

Result: Investigation completed; unsubstantiated.

Don Pugsley CID Investigation Report


38. Rice, William, 21, SP/4, 3/47th and HQ, 3rd Brigade, 9th Infantry Division (January 1969 to January 1970). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of prisoners, 2) Torture of prisoners, 3) Maltreatment of prisoners.
Investigation summary: Complainant declined to make any statements or provide any information concerning his allegations.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

William Rice CID Investigation Report


39. Rippberger, Carl, 23, (E-4), "K" Troop, 3rd Squad, 11th Armored Cav. Reg., attached to 9th Infantry Division (May 1967 to May 1968). 


Allegation: 1) Torture and maltreatment of prisoners, 2) Failure to bury enemy dead, 3) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to provide any information concerning his allegations on advice from his attorney.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Carl Rippberger CID Investigation Report


40. Rottmann, Larry, 25, 1st Lt., Public Information Office, 25th Infantry Division (June 1967 to March 1968). 


Allegation: 1) Presence of nerve agents in Vietnam, 2) Suppression of war crime information from news media, 3) Wearing of ears and scalps by US forces, 4) Murder of enemy personnel attempting to surrender, 5) Destruction of Vietnamese villages by bombing and napalm, 6) Torture of VC/NVA.
Investigation summary: The CID statement refers to allegations made at two different venues, nine months and two months prior to WSI. Rottman's WSI testimony was about military press censorship and he did not allege any war crimes there. Attempts to contact the complainant were unsuccessful. The case was closed due to the lack of cooperation and the lack of any definitive leads.

Result: Investigation completed; case closed.

Larry Rottmann / Michael Uhl CID Investigation Report

Note: The CID also investigated an allegation by Rottmann that General Westmoreland had ordered the destruction of a village in the Mekong Delta. This allegation was determined to be unfounded.

Larry Rottmann CID Investigation Report


41. Ruth, Kenneth, 26, (E-4), HHQ Co., 2/12 Air Cav. Reg., 1st Air Cav. Div. (February 1966 to February 1967). 


Allegation: 1) Torture of VC suspects, 2) Indiscriminate use of fire power, resulting in the injury of 43 Vietnamese civilians.
Investigation summary: Complainant's WSI allegations were found to be unsubstantiated. He also backtracked on an additional claim made in a LIFE Magazine article, stating to investigators that he had no personal knowledge of casualties as a result of the test firing of weapons.

Result: Investigation completed; unsubstantiated.

Kenneth Ruth CID Investigation Report


42. Schorr, Sam, SP/4 (E-4), 86th Combat Engineers (September 1966 to September 1967). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Desecration of graves, 3 Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to answer any questions about his allegations. He further stated that if the President of the United States was investigated for war crimes, he would release information relative to his testimony.

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Sam Schorr CID Investigation Report


43. Shepard, Franklin, 23, S. Sgt. (E-6), 5/60, 9th Infantry Division (March 1968 to August 1969). 


Allegation: 1) Mutilation of enemy dead and unidentified Vietnamese.
Investigation summary: Complainant provided a written, sworn statement in support of his allegation. Multiple witnesses interviewed contradicted Shepard's claims, and further investigation also failed to support his statements.

Result: Investigation completed; unsubstantiated.

Franklin Shepard CID Investigation Report


44. Smith, George, (E-6), 5th Special Forces; taken prisoner by the NLF in 1963 and released in November 1965. 


Allegation: 1) Maltreatment of prisoners.
Investigation summary: Complainant backtracked on his WSI allegations, stating that Vietnamese troops rather than American troops had committed illegal acts.

Result: Investigation completed; unsubstantiated.

George Smith CID Investigation Report


45. Stark, David, 25, SP/5 (E-5), 524 Military Intelligence Detachment (October 1967 to October 1968). 


Allegation: 1) Indiscriminate use of fire power resulting in the deaths of unidentified Vietnamese, 2) Maltreatment of prisoners.
Investigation summary: Complainant backtracked on his WSI allegations, saying that he had not witnessed the maltreatment of prisoners, and that he saw no bodies and could not identify the military units involved in the alleged events.

Result: Investigation completed; unsubstantiated.

David Stark CID Investigation Report


46. Stephens, Charles, 24, Pfc. (E-3), 1/327, 101st Airborne Division (December 1965 to February 1967). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of Vietnamese civilians and prisoners, 2) Mutilation of enemy dead, 3) Indiscriminate use of fire power, 4) Refusing to render medical aid.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to provide any statement on advice of counsel concerning both WSI and LIFE Magazine allegations. 

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Charles Stephens CID Investigation Report


47. Weber, Jim, 24, Sgt. (E-5), "A" Co., 1/6 and 1/46, 198 LIB, Americal Division (November 1967 to November 1968). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified Vietnamese and prisoners, 2) Assault, 3) Destruction of private property.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to provide any statement, saying the only subject he would identify was President Johnson. 

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Jim Weber CID Investigation Report


48. Wiktorski, Robert, 22, SP/4 (E-4), "C" Co., 2/12 Air Cav. Reg., 1st Air Cav. Div.(May 1968 to May 1969). 


Allegation: 1) Murder of unidentified North Vietnamese Army soldier, 2) Aggravated assault.
Investigation summary: Complainant refused to make any statement or provide any information. 

Result: Investigation completed; insufficient evidence.

Robert Wiktorski CID Investigation Report



----------


 The following are Army WSI witnesses whose available summary reports show inconclusive preliminary investigations: 
1. Bezanson, William, 24, Pfc., 4/3, 11th Brigade, Americal Division and 123rd Aviation Bn. (1967 to 1968). 
Allegation: 1) Torture of enemy prisoners, 2) Indiscriminate killing of 15 unidentified Vietnamese civilians, 3) Destruction of private property.
Preliminary investigation summary: Unable to identify complainant. 
2. Crouse, Allan, 22 (E-4), 3rd Engineers Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division (January 1969 to December 1969). 
Allegation: 1) Destruction of private property.
Preliminary investigation summary: Unable to identify complainant. 
3. Hopkins, Barry, 23, 3/39th, 9th Infantry Division (January 1969 to January 1970). 
Allegation: 1) Murder, 2) Maltreatment of female prisoners, 3) Failure to render medical treatment to prisoner.
Preliminary investigation summary: Unable to identify complainant. 

----------


 The following are Army WSI witnesses for whom no summary reports have been found: 
1. Bjornson, Dr. Jon, 37, Major, Psychiatrist, Flight Surgeon, Deputy Surgeon, USASC, 8th Field Hospital, Nha Trang (May 1964 to April 1965).


Summary of WSI allegations: Asserted that war crimes are routinely committed by the U.S. military. Theorized about causes of criminal violence in troops, promotes widespread drug abuse exaggerations, and blamed the American system for evil nature of troops. Quoted Marx. No claim to have personal knowledge of war crimes. 
2. Braum, David, 25, SP/5, 21 Trans. Co., 119 Avn. Co. Airmobile, 52 Combat Avn. Bn., 52 Prov. Plt., Delta Bn. (1963-1964). 
Summary of WSI allegations: Moderator of "Weapons Panel" at WSI. Made the absurd claim that "...in civilian life I was, for five years, purchasing all materials and supplies for the United States Air Force, the U.S. Navy, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Army and the CIA...." Characterized various weapons systems as de facto illegal and/or immoral. Provided slides for presentation that depicted equipment, not events. 
3. Carey, Orville, 1st Logistics Command. Postal clerk in Pleiku, Vietnam. Appeared on "Third World Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: No allegations of war crimes. Alleged racism in Army, stating, "We [in U.S. Army, Germany] had Klansmen... and this was more or less accepted as policy. Nobody worried about cross burnings or stuff... There was no chance for a promotion. You were handed out all the vile details... The only way I could get out of Germany was to volunteer to go to Vietnam." 
4. Crandell, William, 26, 1LT, 199th LIB, Americal Division. Made "Opening Statement" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Generalizations about genocide and pervasive war crimes as a result of policy.

5. Crumb, Jan, 28, SP/4, 18th Aviation Co. (December 1961 to October 1963). Moderator, along with John Kerry, of "Miscellaneous Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: No discernible record of remarks. The caption "Moderator" is used throughout in the transcript, not distinguishing between the two moderators. 
6. Duncan, Don, M/Sgt., 5th Special Forces (1964 to 1965). Made "Closing Statement" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Generalizations. Blamed entire country and media for atrocities. "It has been done systematically, deliberately, and continuously...." Argued that American schools and American society need to be changed. "...I think the fact that so much can be done to so many men by so few people is the greatest testament to the fact that our colleges, our high schools, our everyday life is nothing but pre-basic training." 
7. Egendorf, Arthur, 525 Military Intelligence Group, Saigon. Appeared on "What Are We Doing To Ourselves Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Said that he went to Harvard and majored in economics. "...the institutions of this society are very much a part of the phenomenon that we're discussing..." Claimed that corporations and the media were providing cover identities for covert operatives. No specific war crimes allegations. 
8. Galicia, Dr. David, Major, Psychiatrist, 3rd Field Hospital, Saigon (July 1969 to June 1970). Appeared on "Medical Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Testified about the poor condition, as he saw it, of medical and psychiatric services. Spoke of drug abuse among troops, lack of American medical care for Vietnamese, and criticized the effects of some incendiary weapons. No war crimes allegations. 
9. Grosso, Dr. Joseph, 31, Captain, General Medical Officer, 173rd Airborne Brigade, Field Hospital, Nha Trang (April 1967 to December 1967). Appeared on "Medical Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Claimed that the Army's Medical Civil Action Program (MedCap) "...was an attempt to use the practice of medicine as a propaganda device" Alleged that "...it was more or less command policy that prostitution be part of the military operation." No war crimes allegations. 
10. Hale, Nathan, 23, SP/5, 199th LIB, Americal Division (December 1967 to December 1968). Appeared on "3rd Marine Division Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Claimed that "...in January of '68 I was assigned to the 1st Cav., Americal Division." -- The 1st Cav. and the Americal are two different divisions. Said that he took part in a Marine mission called Daring Endeavors, south of Da Nang, during October 1968. Displayed slides purportedly showing Vietnamese National Field Police interrogating a prisoner using torture. Hale claimed he also used torture to interrogate enemy prisoners, and alleged that an enemy combatant died as result of the use of CS (tear) gas in a tunnel.
Note: A memo dated 21 April 1971 from Col. Tufts (head of CID) to CoS, U.S. Army, stated that Hale's complaint was under investigation. No other CID documents available to date refer to his allegations. 
11. Kruch, Robert, 25, Pfc. (E-3), Co. A, 3/21, 196 LIB, Americal Division. Appeared on "Americal Division Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Talks about poor leadership and maltreatment of U.S. troops by commanders. Says his company refused "to go back out" at one point. No war crimes allegations. 
12. Light, William, 22 (E-3), "E" Co., 1/6, 198 LIB, Americal Division (May 1968 to June 1969). Appeared at "Third World Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Generalized remarks about racism. No war crimes allegations. Received a General Discharge. 
13. McSheffrey, Ron, 6/31 9th Infantry Division (1969-1970). Appeared on "What Are We Doing To Ourselves Panel" at WSI, erroneously listed as "Dr." McSheffrey. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Tells of his drug addiction in Vietnam. No war crimes allegations. Received a "212 discharge" - namely, "honorable wartime service subsequent to desertion." 
14. Moore, Scott, 26, 1st Lt., 2/39th, 9th Infantry Division (1968 to 1969). Appeared on the "1st, 4th and 9th Infantry Divisions Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Generalized complaints. No war crimes allegations." 
15. Murphy, Ed, 23, Sgt. (E-5), 1/6, 198 LIB, Americal Division (October 1967 to September 1968). Appeared on "Miscellaneous Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Testimony consists of one paragraph of generalized remarks affirming the testimony of others. 
Note: A memo dated 21 April 1971 from Col. Tufts (head of CID) to CoS, U.S. Army, stated that Murphy's complaint was under investigation. No other CID documents available to date refer to his allegations. 
16. Newton, Ron, 24, Pfc. (E-3), 3rd Brigade, HHQ Co., 704 Maintenance Bn., 4th Infantry Division (July 1966 to June 1967). Appeared on "1st, 4th and 9th Infantry Divisions Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Complains about Army training, poor medical care and alleged racism towards Vietnamese. No war crimes allegations." 
17. Novick, Wayne, 22, SP/4, 1st En., 26th Inf., 1st Inf. Division (February 1969 to February 1970). Moderator of the "1st, 4th and 9th Infantry Divisions Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Asked questions of witnesses. No independent war crimes allegations. 
18. Pitkin, Steve, 20, SP/4, "C" Co., 2/239, 9th Infantry Division (May 1969 to July 1969). Appeared on "Miscellaneous Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Said that he would "...testify about the beating of civilians and enemy personnel, destruction of villages, indiscriminate use of artillery, the general racism and the attitude of the American GI toward the Vietnamese." This was followed by generalized complaining about the military. No specific war crimes allegations.
Note: Pitkin publicly recanted his participation in WSI in 2004, saying in a signed affidavit that he had been pressured to present false testimony about war crimes in Vietnam by other VVAW members, including John Kerry. 
19. Primm, Alex, 26, SP/4 (E-4), Public Information Office, 1st Logistics Command, Headquarters (September 1968 to June 1969). Appeared on "25th Infantry Division and Public Information Office Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Complained about military and other news reporting. No war crimes allegations. 
20. Romo, Barry, 23, 1st Lt., "A" Co., 2/1, 196 LIB, "C" Co., 3/4, 11th Inf. Brigade, Americal Division (June 1967 to November 1968). Moderator of the "Americal Division Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Mostly generalizations about racism toward Latinos. He is Chicano and became a commissioned officer at age 19. No war crimes allegations. 
21. Shibla, Vernon, 27, SP/4, Public Information Office, 25th Infantry Division (1966 to 1967). Appeared on "25th Infantry Division and Public Information Office Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Complained about Army Public Information policies of censorship. No war crimes allegations. 
22. Umenhofer, James, SP/4 (E-4), 2/501, 101st Airborne Division (November 1969 to October 1970). Appeared on the "82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions and 173rd Airborne Brigade Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Mostly generalizations. One allegation of racially motivated fragging. 
23. Williams, Donald P. Did not serve in Vietnam. Claimed 8 years active duty service, units not revealed. Said he deserted to Sweden after his unit was deployed to Saigon in March 1968. Appeared on "Third World Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Complained of racism. Falsely claimed that "...statistics say that blacks constitute only ten percent of the total population in the United States, yet they represent at least forty percent of the fighting forces in Vietnam." Proposed smoking grass as an antidote to racism. 
24. Wingrodski, Curtis, 22, SP/4, 59th Scout Dog, 11th Brigade, Americal Division (March 1969 to October 1969). Appeared on the "Americal Division Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Testimony is brief, lacking any content. No war crimes allegations. 
25. Wright, Doug, SP/4, 1/6, 198 LIB, Americal Division. Appeared on "Americal Division Panel" at WSI. 
Summary of WSI allegations: Testimony is brief, lacking any content. "And these things go on..." "Here I am, you know." No war crimes allegations. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Thanks to John Boyle for making these reports available and providing summary information. 



Last Updated Tuesday, March 04 2008 @ 03:37 PM EST; 29,420 Hits View Printable Version








 Copyright © 2013 WinterSoldier.com
 All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Powered By GeekLog 
 Created this page in 0.64 seconds


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 14, 2013)

daveman said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Sorry, I read this post before I had watched his testimony. He did meet with NVA leaders but not on some personal, secretive level. He met with both sides in peace talks and, I would assume (since he had no position of authority) had no influence on either side.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 14, 2013)

Surfer said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > I was responding to the post made by Surfer, a post which happened to be a bit off topic.
> ...



Well whether it was on topic or off topic, I was accused of being off topic while responding to your post..which doesn't make much sense. Either way, i find it hard to believe that liberals are responsible for all the evils of this world. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## The Gadfly (Aug 14, 2013)

editec said:


> As to the issue of the wars crimes during the Viet Nam conflict?
> 
> I too heard numerous confessions about a war crimes by returning servicemen when I was a NAV corpsman.
> 
> ...



Yes, it WAS an ugly war; wars are like that, which is why most of us who have actually fought one, would prefer not to fight another. It's not that we're ashamed of what we did; it's that we have seen, heard, felt, and done things that horrified us, enraged us, shocked us,  hurt us, and made us afraid. I don't blame any man who experiences that, and after it's over, questions why it had to be, or even decides to oppose the policies that led to and continue it. I don't even have a problem with a man who receives a decoration, and later decides he doesn't want it; on a personal note, I'd trade every piece of metal and cloth the army ever gave me for doing my job, for bringing just one of the guys I lost safely home to his family, instead of in a coffin. I do not have a problem with anyone who PERSONALLY witnessed conduct that violated orders, regulations, or the ROE, reporting that to his chain of command, or once out of uniform, going public with it, if he feels it was not investigated and dealt with. That's not just a right, it's a duty.

That said, I DO have a problem with ANYONE who presents hearsay about alleged "atrocities" as the gospel truth, whether in public or private; or even worse, knowingly produces testimony from people who were not present at the alleged event, or indeed even in-country, as supposed evidence of such conduct. Were there atrocities committed by Americans in Vietnam? Of course, and some of them are well-documented (and many were in fact investigated and punished by the military services). Over two-and-a-half million of us served there, and a comparative few did things that were across a very bright line; but the truth is, that the vast majority of us emphatically DID NOT. We did our best to behave honorably, and we did not, we damn well DID NOT, go around raping women, burning down villages for the hell of it, abusing Vietnamese civilians, or deliberately killing obvious noncombatants. We may not have acted like a bunch of altruistic boy scouts, but we didn't act like a band of brigands either, and that's the truth. Those of us who served in Vietnam are a band of brothers, or at least try to be. So, when any of our own decided for whatever personal reasons or agenda, to embellish and outright falsify what went on, or deliberately sought out false testimony that directly or by implication presents a false and dishonorable picture of the rest of us, then you're damn right, I'm offended! That's wrong; it it is especially wrong, when a former officer does it. It's as wrong as the untrue stereotypes that paint us as a bunch of maladjusted, drug and alcohol-addicted losers, when most of us have in fact adjusted well to civilian life, and been successful, even in spite of emotional and physical scars. It's wrong, when any of us chooses to misrepresent who the rest of us were, and what we did, for the sake of ANY personal agenda, however noble.

Who's a hero? All of us, most of us, some of us, any of us? I don't pretend to know. The plain fact is, most of us were scared kids, some of us trying to lead other scared kids, in a difficult situation  in a strange country halfway around the world, while back home, life went on as usual for people second-guessing everything we did from the comfort of their living rooms.. Personally, I feel more like a survivor, than anything else. I just think we all deserve just a little better, though, than being portrayed as monsters, willing dupes, or hapless victims; and the way John Kerry decided to handle this, did exactly that. Whatever else he did, in Vietnam or since, he DID do that; he chose to do it, no one made him do it, and he is responsible for it. He chose to throw his brothers-in-arms under the bus for the sake of a political agenda. I don't claim to know much, but I do know a little something about honor and leadership, and that's neither.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Aug 14, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Kerry was a subversive who built a fake resume as a "War Hero" just come out later to undermine public support for our troops, so of course he'd have a stellar career in the DemoCCCPrat Party



Tell us about your service CrusaderFrank.  Oh yeah, 4-F, I forgot.  Was it mental or physical?  I'd bet both.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 15, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Kerry was a subversive who built a fake resume as a "War Hero" just come out later to undermine public support for our troops, so of course he'd have a stellar career in the DemoCCCPrat Party
> ...



That's all you got, Freddo?

I was in high school while Kerry was putting himself in for Purple Hearts and traveling up the Do Long river to assassinate  Col. Kurtz during Christmas in Cambodia


----------



## Camp (Aug 15, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



Seems like Freddo has got plenty.  It's one thing for veterans to go negative on another vet, and I don't much like that, but hey, they were there and they earned the right. For a guy who is not a combat vet to challange a combat vet's courage or whether he earned his awards is just beyond despicable. Make no mistake, you have every right to go negative on Kerry for what he did when he returned from the war and his politics of today, but there is no way you have the right to judge that mans behavior under combat if you have never been under combat yourself.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 15, 2013)

Moonglow said:


> I see the repubs/rwer's are pulling this same old tired subject out of their ass for yet another thread.



Their own heroes are Chickenhawk gutless traitors who had Daddy get them out of having to fight Communists.  Kerry earned his Purple Hearts.  They are awarded because they meant coming within an inch of getting killed or seriously wounded.  But those who love flagwaving sissyboys like Bush know nothing about war.  Their idea of service is going on hungover joyrides playing Snoopy and the Red Baron.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 15, 2013)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



*Then I have the right to judge. You don't get awarded 3 purple hearts in just 120 days and not spend 1 day in the hospital. I would have been ashamed to accept an award for illegitimate wounds.*


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 15, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > I see the repubs/rwer's are pulling this same old tired subject out of their ass for yet another thread.
> ...



*Kerry was awarded 3 purple hearts in just 120 days and by his own accounts didn't spend 1 day in the hospital, Comrade. You know not what you speak of.*


----------



## daveman (Aug 15, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...


Not so much, actually.

Archived-Articles: Did Navy Lt. Kerry violate The UCMJ?
John Kerry, in sworn testimony before the Senate in April 1971, said he met with the North Vietnamese and Vietcong delegations in Paris in May 1970. He said they discussed their peace proposals  especially the eight points of Madam Binh. Kerry strongly recommended that the Senate accept those proposals.

I have been to Paris. I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government and of all eight of Madam Binh's points...

...I realize that even my visits in Paris, precedents had been set by Senator McCarthy and others, in a sense are on the borderline of private individuals negotiating, et cetera.​In the ensuing months, Kerry became even more strident in his insistence that the US accept Madam Binh's (and the NVM and VC's) peace proposals.

Meanwhile, other representatives of Kerry's group, the Vietnam Veterans Against The War (VVAW ), met with the NVM and VC delegations in Paris, in March 1971. They were even photographed sitting at a table with them, as in a photo displayed in Winter Soldiers, by Richard Stacewicz, page 284. 

Subsequently, VVAW representatives met with the North Vietnamese and Vietcong delegations on numerous occasions, both in Paris and even in Hanoi.

The VVAW even signed a treaty with the North Vietnamese which included all of Madam Binh's points, as noted by the historian of the antiwar movement, Gerald Nicosia, his book Home To War: 

These people signed their own symbolic "people's peace treaty" with the Vietnamese.  As Jan Barry recalls, the gesture was intended as a means of embracing the people they had harmed, of asking forgiveness for those they had killed.​When you tell the Senate to accept your nation's enemy's terms of surrender, that's not the act of a patriot.

It's the act of a traitor.


----------



## Camp (Aug 15, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



You obviously don't know the criteria for being awarded the Purple Heart.  1rst, lots of guys have been awarded 3 of them in LESS than 120 days. You do not have to spend a day in the hospital. You can be treated and sent right back into combat, as thousands of Purple Heart recepients have in every war this country has ever fought. Just because you get a wound does't mean you leave the battle field or get a bunch of time off. If it doesn't disable you, you go right back into the fight or right out the next day. As long as a medical report is made that confirms a wound sustained in enemy action, you get the award. Please explain illegetimate wounds.  How does a wounds gotten in combat become illigitimate? Are you alleging that you have information to confirm that his wounds were self inflicted or he recieved them in a non-combat situation?


----------



## daveman (Aug 15, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > I see the repubs/rwer's are pulling this same old tired subject out of their ass for yet another thread.
> ...


Four whole rep points?  What a terrible burden.  Let me lighten your load, my friend.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 15, 2013)

I was an Army medic in Vietnam with a combat unit and involved in the PH process. 
I agree with Bloodrock. 
It is possible-but highly unlikely- to get 3 PH's in that time period legally. I don't think that it is possible to do so honorably nor is it honorable to actively seek medals with such trivial excuses for "wounds". IMO Kerry demeaned the medals and those who actually deserved earned them, sometimes at the cost of their own lives and there is no greater sin in my mind. Kerry was not in-country long enough to recover from *one* wound worthy of being called such.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 15, 2013)

Camp said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



*I think 9thIDDoc answered this quite succinctly. Your whole post is BS except for one statement. Just because you get a wound doesn't mean you leave the battlefield, but the policy was if you got 3 purple hearts you were sent home. Kerry got 3 scratches, didn't spend a day in the hospital; and hightailed it home, deserting his men. I'm not alleging anything other than he is a coward. Now kindly provide a link of lots of guys who were awarded 3 purple hearts in less than 120 days.  *


----------



## Surfer (Aug 15, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> ...i find it hard to believe that liberals are responsible for all the evils of this world. That's all I'm saying.



Not "all". 99%


----------



## Camp (Aug 15, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> I was an Army medic in Vietnam with a combat unit and involved in the PH process.
> I agree with Bloodrock.
> It is possible-but highly unlikely- to get 3 PH's in that time period legally. I don't think that it is possible to do so honorably nor is it honorable to actively seek medals with such trivial excuses for "wounds". IMO Kerry demeaned the medals and those who actually deserved earned them, sometimes at the cost of their own lives and there is no greater sin in my mind. Kerry was not in-country long enough to recover from *one* wound worthy of being called such.



Doc, if you were with the 9th I suspect you served in the same general area of op's as Kerry and may have even had experience with Swift Boats, although I thought you guys operated your own little Navy down there. As a Doc, you know that the main factor for getting the PH was the medical report and how the company clerk handled it. Some times, some units brushed off minor wounds and so medical reports weren't turned in. Other times company clerks could just not be bothered with putting in the paperwork in for minor wounds. Sometimes guys gave instructions to medical and company clerks that they didn't want to be written up because they didn't want to sound like a dick when they explained how they got the PH. So, it is certainly plausible that Kerry had a great company clerk and a medical unit that processed every wound they treated, no matter how minor, and the clerk turned in every page of paperwork with every i dotted and every t crossed. But that doesn't mean the man was not in a combat situation and under enemy fire and that he didn't recieve a wound, even a minor one. I happen to think Kerry is a POS for what he did when he returned and how he failed veterans as a U.S. Senator. But that has nothing to do with his in country service. If the military decides to give a man an award, thats that. Just hate to see people question a mans service. Don't think it should be done. Specificly shouldn't be done by folks that weren't there. Folks that never saw combat. How the hell do they know how they would react? You know, they don't know. No man knows until he is put to the test. These guys that talk crap are just talking crap.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 15, 2013)

Surfer said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > ...i find it hard to believe that liberals are responsible for all the evils of this world. That's all I'm saying.
> ...



Ah, how generous of you to leave 1% for the alternative point of view.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 15, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Kerry was a subversive who built a fake resume as a "War Hero" just come out later to undermine public support for our troops, so of course he'd have a stellar career in the DemoCCCPrat Party
> ...



Personal attacks on fellow posters do not bolster Kerry's credibility. In fact they are an admission the defense of Kerry's legacy is hopeless.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 16, 2013)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



*There is no way I have the right to judge? So now you're denying my 1st amendment right? I thought this was a major reason Americans fought and died for so we could have the right to opine whether or not we were experienced in the subject we speak of. Sad that people wish to deny others of a basic God given right.*


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 16, 2013)

The ruling class nominated Kerry in order to make war heroes look bad and sissyboy draftdodgers like Bush and Cheney look good.  Like Benedict Arnold, who had been instrumental in freeing us from the British aristocracy, Kerry's medals were honorably gained but he betrayed the troops when he came home.  The protesters he joined in loyalty to his class were not anti-war; they were snobbish brats of the rich who wanted to make the working-class GIs look like baby-killers.  

While my fellow combat veterans and I were brought up on movies glorifying war, the preppies saw the same movies as implying that working-class GIs had saved the nation.  They couldn't let the common people have any pride, so they made sure that the Vietnam heroes would be looked at as psychotic killers or pathetic losers.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 16, 2013)

whitehall said:


> Kerry was an obscure officer on some obscure ship before the Navy allowed him to volunteer for "Swift Boat" duty.  Most of the Swift Boat skippers (God bless 'em) honorably served but Kerry was a savvy politician long before he ran for office.  Times changed during the Vietnam war. It seems that Kerry took shrapnel to his butt from his own grenade when he tossed it into a cache of VC rice. For Heart #2 apparently some explosive device was triggered in the retrieval of a mine and Kerry suffered a wound to his finger that didn't even require a bandaid. Kerry 's boat took fire from a single VC on shore and instead of delegating authority to his crew to dispatch the threat, the freaking skipper grabbed a .45 and chased the unarmed single VC kid and shot him dead. Kerry wrote himself up for a Silver Star for his valor and it was systematically forwarded.




While serving as a Marine infantryman in Vietnam, I had a ricochet throw dirt in my face and buzz my ear.  Because it didn't break the skin it didn't qualify for a Purple Heart.  But the trauma was so great that I was temporarily paralyzed.  The sergeant told us to move forward and I couldn't move.  Lucky for me, the other Marines disobeyed the order because they were afraid to move up even though they could.

  Because we were rushed over there with insufficient training, many Marines were shell-shocked the first time they heard enemy gunfire.  Our generals asked for more territory ( Tactical Area Of Responsibility) than they could possibly hold with the insufficient number of properly trained Marines they had.  It was right up against North Vietnam.  When the enemy swarmed across during Operation Prairie, Westmoreland had to take much of I Corps away from us and assign it to the Army's Americal Division. 

I'm sorry if I make Chickenhawk-lovers squirm in guilt by telling what war is really like.  But I personally know of two Marines who died just because of inadequate training, which is Off-Topic because John Kerry was trained properly and showed it by his bravery in battle.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 16, 2013)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...





They are transferring their guilt from supporting gutless unpatriotic pukes like Bush, Cheney, Quayle, Gingrich, Lott, Romney, Ashcroft, Gramm, Limbaugh, Kemp, Ted Nugent, and boytoy Michael Reagan among thousands of other flag-waving traitors.  They have contempt for unprivileged Americans and want us to be proud to die taking a rich kid's place.  Any real man would have grabbed that preppy pipsqueak Bush by the ear when he was 18 and marched him down to the active-duty Induction Station, telling the Sergeant there, "Here, take this spoiled little sissy; he owes the country more than I do."


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 16, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Seems like Freddo has got plenty.  It's one thing for veterans to go negative on another vet, and I don't much like that, but hey, they were there and they earned the right. For a guy who is not a combat vet to challange a combat vet's courage or whether he earned his awards is just beyond despicable. Make no mistake, you have every right to go negative on Kerry for what he did when he returned from the war and his politics of today, but there is no way you have the right to judge that man's behavior under combat if you have never been under combat yourself.
> ...





Just like Chickenhawk hypocrites, Netties won't support something when it applies to themselves or the plastic idols  they worship.  As long as we have the Ignore function, there is no need for moderators.  But all the talk about freedom of speech is muffled when it comes to the self-enslaving Internet.  I dare you to send your post, exactly as written, to the Mod Squad of Netiquette Nannies.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 16, 2013)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



I think the year I spend in high school in the South Bronx in 1973 was on par with John Kerry's service. I've been close, and I mean real fucking close to gunfire twice in my life and I had to pick my uncle's brains off the wall after the police left and the Coroner's office took the body away. So you can join Wry in the go fuck yourself club


----------



## daveman (Aug 16, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> The ruling class nominated Kerry in order to make war heroes look bad and sissyboy draftdodgers like Bush and Cheney look good.  Like Benedict Arnold, who had been instrumental in freeing us from the British aristocracy, Kerry's medals were honorably gained but he betrayed the troops when he came home.  The protesters he joined in loyalty to his class were not anti-war; they were snobbish brats of the rich who wanted to make the working-class GIs look like baby-killers.
> 
> While my fellow combat veterans and I were brought up on movies glorifying war, the preppies saw the same movies as implying that working-class GIs had saved the nation.  They couldn't let the common people have any pride, so they made sure that the Vietnam heroes would be looked at as psychotic killers or pathetic losers.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 16, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



*WTF are you talking about? Lay off the sauce and seek help...soon.*


----------



## regent (Aug 16, 2013)

If people are upset about the way the navy awards decorations the place to complain is to the navy. The navy, however, when this ruckus started said it reviewed the records and all was shippy-shape. Kerry, and others, veterans or not, had a right to protest the war. Is Vietnam today considered a war America needed to fight and needed to win? Did My Lai happen?


----------



## whitehall (Aug 16, 2013)

regent said:


> If people are upset about the way the navy awards decorations the place to complain is to the navy. The navy, however, when this ruckus started said it reviewed the records and all was shippy-shape. Kerry, and others, veterans or not, had a right to protest the war. Is Vietnam today considered a war America needed to fight and needed to win? Did My Lai happen?



In the greatest Country in the world the Military still works for the people. We have the right and some would say the duty to review awards that the Navy sanctioned weather or not the Navy wants to address the claims. It's an insult to real Veterans who were wounded in combat to read about Kerry's self recommended Purple Hearts when the statutes clearly indicate that intentional or unintentional self inflicted wounds do not qualify. One of Kerry's self recommended Purple Hearts concerned an incident where he threw a grenade into a cache of V.C. rice and a grain of rice or a piece of shrapnel bit him in the ass. The Military's policy was three Hearts and you got a ticket home and it's clear that the chicken shit Navy Lt. was determined to get his ass out of combat and the best way was to get three Hearts. Kerry's tour lasted three months.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 16, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!


That's a lot better than having an AWOL as CINC, like when Bush43 was President.


----------



## Camp (Aug 16, 2013)

whitehall said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > If people are upset about the way the navy awards decorations the place to complain is to the navy. The navy, however, when this ruckus started said it reviewed the records and all was shippy-shape. Kerry, and others, veterans or not, had a right to protest the war. Is Vietnam today considered a war America needed to fight and needed to win? Did My Lai happen?
> ...



The insult is that by alleging Kerry was able to obtain these awards without earning them, is the insult you hoist on every man who was awarded the same honor. You and your kind don't care about  how your bullcrap effects the status of other PH awarded vet's. You question the honor of vet's as you try to rewrite the criteria for being awarded a PH with the notion that you have the right to do so. You place the stigma on those vet's that perhaps they didn't earn their PH. You ignore the fact that Kerry was also awarded the Silver Star, and so you challange every man that has earned that honor. What you are saying is that just because a vet was awarded a Medal does not mean he actually earned it. You insult all vet's that have earned awards from all wars. So, you tell us, where does that put you on the scale of honor and decency?


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 17, 2013)

Camp said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...



I disagree. If you are a VIP, or are willing to bargain, or part of the system medals are not that hard to get. Which explains why there are so many highly decorated company clerks. That truth doesn't besmirch those that do not game the system; only those who do and those that aid them for whatever reason. Kerry's biggest critics are those who served with him and actually earned whatever honors they received. You have a right to question their honor but not Kerry's? Does not compute.


----------



## AquaAthena (Aug 17, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!




*You mean THIS guy, John Kerry Heinz?!??!?!?*


----------



## regent (Aug 17, 2013)

whitehall said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > If people are upset about the way the navy awards decorations the place to complain is to the navy. The navy, however, when this ruckus started said it reviewed the records and all was shippy-shape. Kerry, and others, veterans or not, had a right to protest the war. Is Vietnam today considered a war America needed to fight and needed to win? Did My Lai happen?
> ...



I'm not sure there was ever a time element involved in the requirement for a Purple Heart. Some may have earned the award on the first day of their tour. Self inflicted wounds can qualify, might want to check it out.  
If we have the right to review military awards, and you have now reviewed the claim, and...? 
One mistake the military might have made is giving a bonus to people awarded medals. In WWII they gave the purple heart some points for going home and no longer did GI's ignore wounds but now got medical attention for minor wounds.


----------



## daveman (Aug 17, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> > Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!
> ...


Dan Rather's memos were fakes.  You do know this, right?

Let me guess -- you've been shown the proof countless times, but still believe they're real.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 17, 2013)

AquaAthena said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> > Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was he was a gutless coward. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and threw his medals over the fence at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. Great job America!
> ...



*Thanks for reminding us that he teamed up with Hanoi Jane...who should have gone to prison.*


----------



## Camp (Aug 17, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...



I disagree with you on the "those who served with him". While it is true that the Swift Boat community challanged his awards, his actual crew members and the Green Beret that was rescued by Kerry and the crew have stood behind him. So it depends on what you consider "those that served with him". Not sure if your comment  "You have the right to question their honor but not Kerry's?" is in reference to something I said, but if it does it is a  misinterpretation. I do not question anyones awards or honor in how they earned them. I question the honor and decency of people who have never served who judge specific individuals that have served with heresy and rumor and data that can not be confirmed one way or the other. Until the Swift Boat campaign to discredit Kerry, I can not recall this kind of challange having ever occured. It opened up a can of worms that did not need to be opened, all for the use of his political opponents in a political campaign. It's not as though there wasn't plenty of stuff to attack him on. IMO the Swift Boat guys were used for politics without concern for how it would effect them and Vietnam Vet's in the long run. It is still being used. In my mind these challages should be off limits. Ofcourse that will not stop people from doing it because it is only my opinion. I just hope this is the last man who is challanged in such a way and men and women in the future do not have to defend themselves and how they earned awards if they decide to enter politics.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 17, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> AquaAthena said:
> 
> 
> > Bloodrock44 said:
> ...



I'm gonna have to call bullshit on the first picture, which really looks photoshopped. However, your other points about his testimony and all remain true, and I can see how some veterans may be offended by his positions. Though I doubt he actually "hates" veterans. In fact, throughout the core of his congressional testimony he is advocating for better health benefits for returning GI's. Doesn't sound like the kind of thing a traitor would say, and definitely not something he would say if he would give veterans the finger.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 17, 2013)

daveman said:


> Dan Rather's memos were fakes.  You do know this, right?
> 
> Let me guess -- you've been shown the proof countless times, but still believe they're real.


This has nothing to do with Rather.

Bush's National Guard record still shows an 18 month gap between entries and he's never produced any documents showing his whereabouts during that period in Alabama.

Anyone who has served in the military knows what the odds are of going 18 months without a single entry in your file.

He's a fuckin' AWOL and you know it!


----------



## daveman (Aug 17, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Dan Rather's memos were fakes.  You do know this, right?
> ...



Progressive melt down, Aisle 3.  



The left's constant lies about Bush's service failed.  He was re-elected.  

Suck it up, Buttercup.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 17, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> PrometheusBound said:
> 
> 
> > Bloodrock44 said:
> ...



You are an American in name only.  Your natural right to free speech is being violated all over this dependent fraud of an Internet and you act like some silenced slave in North Korea, who is probably able to yap about how bad South Korea is or say anything else that doesn't get him in trouble.  Welcome to the land of the self-enslaved.


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 17, 2013)

Camp said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



Vietnam Vets hate his fucking guts. 
Trust me on this, imbecile.


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 17, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Dan Rather's memos were fakes.  You do know this, right?
> ...



Bush produced an honorable discharge. 
Can you do the same?

Of course you can't

You're a fucking Chickenshit Chickenhawk. 

Next?


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 17, 2013)

Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco were all decorated and wounded war veterans.  No opponent of those fascists questions their bravery before they came to power.  We have really sunk that low to treat Kerry worse than wiser and more mature people treated mass murderers.  At the same time, those who clearly avoided the draft get elected to public office.  

  After Joe Kennedy, Jr., got killed in combat, JFK's father told him he'd have to end his rich kid's duty as a DC-based naval officer and put his life on the line because now he had to run for office.  At the time, the American people wouldn't elect a rich kid whose Daddy got him out of having to fight to any office at all.  

That should be the law.  But we are not that kind of country any more.  In World War II, Japan and Germany lost their worst people, while England and the US lost their best.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 17, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 17, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> I fought in Vietnam.  I came out with my pride intact.  I wasn't a crippled burnout with all the fight taken out of him.  Those are the castrated hollow men who say, "Bush didn't protest.  He didn't call us names.  So having his Daddy get him out of fighting is all right with me."



You're also a lying sack of shit. 

Thanks


----------



## Camp (Aug 17, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



You are the imbecile asshole. I don't need to trust you that Vietnam Vet's hate his guts. I did more to expose his anti-war activities in the 80's and 90's than you could ever dream about, including helping to fund and publish a Veteran's newspaper with of publication of over 300,000 issue's. You can find some of it on the internet. Look for U.S. Veterans Dispatch and U.S. Veterans New & Report. Your reading comprehension indicates you are in fact as stupid as you look in your avatar. My comments have been about attacking a man for the awards he was given while in the service of his country. Jerks like you who are unable to articulate your hatetred of Kerry for his political views and actions when he came home have to revert to challanging his awards at the exspense of other veterans.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 17, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> Bush produced an honorable discharge.


Who gives a fuck!

What he didn't produce, was any documents showing his whereabouts for 18 months in Alabama.  Until he does, he's a fuckin' AWOL!

At least Kerry was man enough to go to Vietnam.  He didn't puss out, like Bushy-boy did.




Warrior102 said:


> Can you do the same?


What?  Say things I don't mean?  Show people my word don't mean shit?  No, I wouldn't want to do shit like that.




Warrior102 said:


> Of course you can't
> 
> You're a fucking Chickenshit Chickenhawk.
> 
> Next?


And you admire cowards!


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 17, 2013)

daveman said:


> Progressive melt down, Aisle 3.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


His re-election didn't prove he wasn't an AWOL.

But if you think it does, then you're the one who needs "Aisle 3".


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 17, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> Bush was as much of a fighter pilot as Dukakis was a tank commander.


Now that's funny!

Here's proof Bush served in the National Guard...


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 17, 2013)

Camp said:


> Warrior102 said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



Sure you did
Chill out poser
Before you blow a gasket


----------



## daveman (Aug 17, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Progressive melt down, Aisle 3.
> ...


"Bush!!  BOOOOOSH!!!"







Oh, shut up, kid.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 17, 2013)

daveman said:


> "Bush!!  BOOOOOSH!!!"
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You talk like a 10 year old.


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 17, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> PrometheusBound said:
> 
> 
> > Bush was as much of a fighter pilot as Dukakis was a tank commander.
> ...



Where'd you serve, hero


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 17, 2013)

I could care less about Kerry's medals.
I could care less about the political implications.
Soldiers hate Kerry because of his vicious campaign of lies waged against us. That was true then and remains true now. 
It's not about politics or awards and never has been.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 17, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> I could care less about Kerry's medals.
> I could care less about the political implications.
> Soldiers hate Kerry because of his vicious campaign of lies waged against us. That was true then and remains true now.
> It's not about politics or awards and never has been.



I understand the frustration of the soldiers who were cited in specific cases by Kerry. However, I do not necessarily think the average soldier should feel personally insulted by Kerry's testimony. Obviously, however they want to feel is up to them, that's just my opinion. Indeed, it's possible the cases he cited weren't true or were thrown out due to lack of evidence, and that those soldiers named were wrongly defamed. Yet throughout most of Kerry's core statement to the Congress, he is advocating for more health benefits for G.I.s, and more attention given to their injuries and sacrifice. That doesn't sound like the words of a man that has some inherent hatred towards soldiers.

You're right, his awards don't matter. Whether you disagree with his testimony and stories of war crimes is one thing, but I can pretty much guarantee you Kerry holds nothing personal against the average soldier. I think what's sad about this whole situation is that it's people like Kerry, who misspeak or rush to conclusions or are overly emotional, who really distract from the important issues. In other words, we all are here debating this particular man and not so much the larger picture of G.I. health benefits and overall treatment when coming back home. Kerry is a spokesperson, and in my mind almost entirely irrelevant.

All that being said, I for one do not think Kerry was attempting to make a blanket statement that all soldiers were war criminals, no matter how his testimony was received. I also think very few people would consider the average Vietnam War veteran some crazed rapist psycho. 

I, too, will personally apologize if I have offended any veterans who think I have wrongly disparaged or insulted their honor and sacrifice. I could personally care less about John Kerry, but I think his goal in his campaign against the war was not to insult 100% of Vietnam veterans, but rather to bring attention to a number of very real problems that were going on at the time. Once again, I emphasize his attention to the lack health benefits at the time, or the overall feelings that society had towards veterans.

I guess I just don't want people to pretend like there weren't crimes committed in the Vietnam War, or any other war for that matter. I suppose it's a fine line between fighting the enemy and committing a war crime. Burning a village down, for instance, can be portrayed in a number of different ways. I think we need to find a way to reconcile the two view points; the one that honors and thanks our veterans for their service (almost all of which indeed committed no crimes), and the one that honors history and the crimes committed as well. We can all find a way to co-exist.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 17, 2013)

_"All that being said, I for one do not think Kerry was attempting to make a blanket statement that all soldiers were war criminals, no matter how his testimony was received. I also think very few people would consider the average Vietnam War veteran some crazed rapist psycho." _

He didn't "attempt" anything. He did in fact make blanket statements that were in fact pre-planed, deliberate and malicious slander intended to discredit and vilify the average soldier in Vietnam. And, no, he didn't just "misspeak" in his testimony (under oath). He had been spouting the same bullshit long before and after his testimony. The wintersoldier "investigation" was a deliberate fraud that he participated in. He preached his slander as gospel to uncounted thousands of drugged out hippies who believed every word and responded by cursing us in the streets, spitting, and throwing dog shit at us along with occasional violence.
War crimes? Why have I never heard Kerry speak of this one?


Massacre at Hue - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## regent (Aug 17, 2013)

As I remember Kerry didn't say he saw or participated in war crimes but had been told by other veterans of the crimes. So was My Lai the only crime in Viet Nam or were there others?  My Lai didn't seem to be on the army's hit parade and it took them some time to investigate, in fact the army seemed somewhat reluctant to check out My Lai. So do some want to believe  Vietnam was like John Wayne portrayed it in his Viet Nam hero movie?


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 17, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> _"All that being said, I for one do not think Kerry was attempting to make a blanket statement that all soldiers were war criminals, no matter how his testimony was received. I also think very few people would consider the average Vietnam War veteran some crazed rapist psycho." _
> 
> He didn't "attempt" anything. He did in fact make blanket statements that were in fact pre-planed, deliberate and malicious slander intended to discredit and vilify the average soldier in Vietnam. And, no, he didn't just "misspeak" in his testimony (under oath). He had been spouting the same bullshit long before and after his testimony. The wintersoldier "investigation" was a deliberate fraud that he participated in. He preached his slander as gospel to uncounted thousands of drugged out hippies who believed every word and responded by cursing us in the streets, spitting, and throwing dog shit at us along with occasional violence.
> War crimes? Why have I never heard Kerry speak of this one?
> ...



*Doc, I was going to add a couple of comments but you put it much better than I could. The only thing I can add is that I'm glad that it was the veterans vote that kept him out of the White House.*


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Aug 17, 2013)

regent said:


> As I remember Kerry didn't say he saw or participated in war crimes but had been told by other veterans of the crimes. So was My Lai the only crime in Viet Nam or were there others?  My Lai didn't seem to be on the army's hit parade and it took them some time to investigate, in fact the army seemed somewhat reluctant to check out My Lai. So do some want to believe  Vietnam was like John Wayne portrayed it in his Viet Nam hero movie?



You missed my link immediately above your post? War crimes were in fact SOP for the VC and NVA. They claimed they could not commit war crimes because they signed none of the treaties that designated such as crimes.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 17, 2013)

Camp said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...



How many times do we need to call attention to the fact that Karry recommended himself for a Purple Heart and Silver Star. He insulted the legacy of the honorable men who earned the awards not me.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 17, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> Where'd you serve, hero


Los Altos drive-in theater.

After 11pm, it's a virtual war zone.

And the only thing I had to keep the peace, was a flashlight.


----------



## sambino510 (Aug 17, 2013)

9thIDdoc said:


> _"All that being said, I for one do not think Kerry was attempting to make a blanket statement that all soldiers were war criminals, no matter how his testimony was received. I also think very few people would consider the average Vietnam War veteran some crazed rapist psycho." _
> 
> He didn't "attempt" anything. He did in fact make blanket statements that were in fact pre-planed, deliberate and malicious slander intended to discredit and vilify the average soldier in Vietnam. And, no, he didn't just "misspeak" in his testimony (under oath). He had been spouting the same bullshit long before and after his testimony. The wintersoldier "investigation" was a deliberate fraud that he participated in. He preached his slander as gospel to uncounted thousands of drugged out hippies who believed every word and responded by cursing us in the streets, spitting, and throwing dog shit at us along with occasional violence.
> War crimes? Why have I never heard Kerry speak of this one?
> ...



Doc, I once again am not trying to defend Kerry. I don't care about the man. I just think some of his testimony has been misinterpreted or exaggerated, and that if you talked to the man today, he would not just piss all over Vietnam veterans like they're trash. I'm also very aware that there were many Americans who treated veterans very poorly, and I don't support that. I have watched/read pretty much all of Kerry's two-hour congressional testimony, and I saw very little evidence that he considered every single soldier a criminal. As I mentioned before, there were many things he brought up in his testimony which showed his support of veterans.

Also, once again, I am well aware that there were crimes committed by the VC and NVA, as all wars have crimes committed by both sides. And yes, those should be mentioned as well. However, those do not justify things that we may have done. I'm not saying we were WORSE or that we were BETTER, but there's nothing wrong with admitting that there were mistakes made. I'd be the last one to say that all Vietnam veterans are criminals. That's ridiculous.


----------



## daveman (Aug 17, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > "Bush!!  BOOOOOSH!!!"
> ...


Is that the best you can do, repeating my insults?  Can't you come up with any insults on your own?

Well, nobody ever said progressives were bright.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 17, 2013)

daveman said:


> Is that the best you can do, repeating my insults?  Can't you come up with any insults on your own?
> 
> Well, nobody ever said progressives were bright.


Why would I want to insult you?

I'm Father fuckin' Theresa!


----------



## daveman (Aug 18, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Is that the best you can do, repeating my insults?  Can't you come up with any insults on your own?
> ...



You're a spoiled child who thinks he's entitled to instant agreement with and affirmation of every dumbass bit of drivel that comes out of his vacuous head.

You're destined to go through life bitter and disappointed, boy.

But then, that's all progressives ever are.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 18, 2013)

daveman said:


> You're a spoiled child who thinks he's entitled to instant agreement with and affirmation of every dumbass bit of drivel that comes out of his vacuous head.
> 
> You're destined to go through life bitter and disappointed, boy.
> 
> But then, that's all progressives ever are.


All you're doing is spewing shit.  Whether it's true or not, is not of interest to you.  All you care about, is getting something out of your mouth.  How do I know this?  It's simple.  You make claims, you can't explain.  Which means you have no clue as to what you're talking about or what you're saying.

So prove me wrong!  Give me 3 reasons why you think I'm  a "spoiled child"?  3 examples of what I have said, that would lead you to believe I feel  "entitled to the agreement of others"?  Or how you were able to surmise my "destiny"?

You can't!  You're unable to explain why you said what you said.  You don't even know what you said.  Maybe I was giving you too much credit when I said you talked like a 10 year old.  You're more like a 5 year old.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 18, 2013)

Warrior102 said:


> PrometheusBound said:
> 
> 
> > I fought in Vietnam.  I came out with my pride intact.  I wasn't a crippled burnout with all the fight taken out of him.  Those are the castrated hollow men who say, "Bush didn't protest.  He didn't call us names.  So having his Daddy get him out of fighting is all right with me."
> ...



You're lying about which side you are on.  It's obvious that you are a Left winger coming on here to make Right wingers look stupid.  Although I am an Independent, I have to congratulate your Left Wing guru for his effective mentoring of you on how to discredit the whole Right Wing.  With your drooling posts, the whole world will think that Bushwhackoffs are inbred congenital idiots.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 18, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> PrometheusBound said:
> 
> 
> > Bush was as much of a fighter pilot as Dukakis was a tank commander.
> ...



He also spent a lot of his "service" in Houston's titty bars buying lap dances with Daddy's Money.  That's how he learned about Shock and Awe.


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 18, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> Warrior102 said:
> 
> 
> > PrometheusBound said:
> ...



Independent, huh? 
Lemme guess - you voted for Obama, Kerry and Clinton. 

Very independent of you, dickslap.


----------



## daveman (Aug 18, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > You're a spoiled child who thinks he's entitled to instant agreement with and affirmation of every dumbass bit of drivel that comes out of his vacuous head.
> ...


Excellent strategy.  When compared to a small child throwing a temper tantrum, throw an even BIGGER tantrum.



I showed you the truth of the alleged Collateral Murder video, and you preferred to believe the edited tape Assange released.

You're not interested in the truth.  All you have is dogma and agenda and programming.  You're dull-witted and slow.  You're incapable of thinking for yourself.

Get to bed early tonight, kid.  You have school tomorrow.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Aug 18, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> Warrior102 said:
> 
> 
> > PrometheusBound said:
> ...



*Independent? Yeah right, Comrade. Next you'll be telling us you served in the military.*


----------



## whitehall (Aug 18, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> PrometheusBound said:
> 
> 
> > Bush was as much of a fighter pilot as Dukakis was a tank commander.
> ...



It don't freaking matter that President Bush was a National Guard pilot anymore than it matters that Bill Clinton was a hair away from being indicted for dodging the draft or Al Gore cried to the chaplain about the danger of the typewriter corps. All that matters is whether or not Kerry exaggerated his role in the killing of an alleged unarmed V.C. or whether he was aware that self inflicted wounds do not qualify for a Purple Heart.


----------



## The Gadfly (Aug 18, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > _"All that being said, I for one do not think Kerry was attempting to make a blanket statement that all soldiers were war criminals, no matter how his testimony was received. I also think very few people would consider the average Vietnam War veteran some crazed rapist psycho." _
> ...



We still arguing over this? OK, let's all take a deep breath, and think about why we are doing that. There are a few of us here, who actually fought in Vietnam, and a few more who were actually around back here in the states at the time, and old enough to understand some of what was going on there. There are a lot more here who likely were not even born until after our war was just a memory. Nothing is going to change the opinions of those of us who went to Vietnam back then, or those who stayed home. We lived it, and we have our emotions connected to it; some of those emotions are still pretty strong, and maybe always will be. This is primarily for the rest of you, still making partisan political hay of one kind or another over us, our war, and the ones who protested it.

Those of us who fought in Vietnam are all old now, most of us past sixty. Before we're all gone, there's something I'd like to say to those of you who think you know all about it, from the history books, the old newsreels, and the movies. Whatever our ethnic background, whatever our social class, whether we volunteered or were drafted, we were mostly young, scared, and trying to survive a year fighting in a strange place halfway around the globe. Most of us managed to find a few moments of laughter and cheer in uncomfortable surroundings, but most of the time, we were uncomfortable, dirty, bug-bitten, and sleep-deprived. Boredom alternated with horror, and moments of sheer terror. Sometimes, it wasn't easy to even tell who the enemy was; the line between combatant and non-combatant was often blurred; some things were cut-and-dried, a lot more weren't. Heroes? You want the plain truth? I don't think ANY of us felt much like heroes; we were too damn busy trying to stay alive, or keep each other alive, to worry about it. I don't recall any of us having too many thoughts about the flag, glory, or God, country, motherhood and apple pie, in the middle of a firefight. We won, on the battlefield; what we won otherwise, is something else we've argued about for forty years. All I'm really sure of is that 58,274 of our brothers and 9 of our sisters died for it, and the rest of us felt damn lucky to have survived it. Did they, and we, do all that, so someone today can run for political office on the medals he received, or someone else can call one politician a traitor, or another a "chickenhawk", depending on whether he did, or din't serve, and where? Sometimes, it makes me feel like a bunch of vultures are circling the carcass of our war, picking at the bones of the dead, and picking the scabs off the wounds of the living ; and I have to ask, is that what they died for, and what we lived for? I ask, because sometimes, it feels like that process stains the little bit of honor that's been lost in all the recriminations and counter-recriminations, and it makes me feel just a little dirty, and a little sick.

So excuse me when I say I wish we could just stop, and think about not doing this anymore, and maybe letting the dead rest in peace, and the wounded heal, if they can. I guess even that's too much to ask, and this won't change things, anymore than all the bickering over who is or isn't a "hero" will. So go ahead, if you have to; but dammit, sometimes, it hurts, just the same.


----------



## Wildman (Aug 18, 2013)

Sallow said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Q. What do you call a lousy, anti-American, lying scumbag?
> ...



how many times did you get dropped on your head as a baby, toddler and teen ?

what a fuckwad you are, stick with the present time frame find someone alive who would punch your lights out for a smear such as this.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 18, 2013)

whitehall said:


> It don't freaking matter that President Bush was a National Guard pilot anymore than it matters that Bill Clinton was a hair away from being indicted for dodging the draft or Al Gore cried to the chaplain about the danger of the typewriter corps. All that matters is whether or not Kerry exaggerated his role in the killing of an alleged unarmed V.C. or whether he was aware that self inflicted wounds do not qualify for a Purple Heart.


Since you support the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, I don't want to hear shit from you about the killing of innocent VC.  It would be the equivalent of listening to Charles Manson bitch about people who are pro-choice.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 18, 2013)

The Gadfly said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



 Kerry should make you feel a little dirty and a little sick and at ain't about a bunch of vultures. He dishonored you and apparently your political affiliation gets in the way of understanding what he did. Quit the crying bullshit and stick to the topic.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 18, 2013)

daveman said:


> Excellent strategy.  When compared to a small child throwing a temper tantrum, throw an even BIGGER tantrum.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How can you say I'm not interested in the truth, when I watched your video (in its entirety) twice?

And the Assange video has nothing to do with my comment that your video doesn't prove what you claim it does.

BTW, you still haven't commented on the van getting shot up when they were tending to the wounded.  Why can't you comment on that, you fuckin' coward?


----------



## Wildman (Aug 18, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> Was watching a program where they were showing Kerry testifying before a Senate committee in the '70's where he called American troops war criminals and baby killers. The truth about Kerry was *he was a gutless coward*. The policy at the time he was in Viet Nam was that if you were awarded 3 Purple Hearts you got sent home. Kerry served a total of 120 days in country on a gunboat. He was awarded 3 Purple Hearts but *did not spend 1 day in a field hospital. How is that possible? *He was sent home, joined a group of veterans against the war, led protests and *threw his medals over the fence *at the Whitehouse. That made him enough of a hero to the commies in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to get him elected to the senate. Now the SOB is the Secretary of State. *Great job America!*



*IF THERE EVER WERE A MODERN AMERICAN MILITARY TRAITOR.., J.F. KERRY WOULD BE NUMBER 1
*
"he was a gutless coward"..., STILL IS  

cowards always claim band aid scratches as PH worthy

FACT: he never threw HIS medals over any fence, he threw some medals someone gave to him 

don't blame America, blame those Massachewshit commies for this traitor being where he is


----------



## Wildman (Aug 18, 2013)

Sallow said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...



*THAT IS PURE BULLSHIT 
*
*PROVE IT  !!!!*


----------



## Wildman (Aug 18, 2013)

Sallow said:


> I read somewhere that Ronald Reagan gave money to bloodthirsty terrorists that raped, tortured and murdered 3 American Nuns.
> 
> 4 Salvadorans Say They Killed U.S. Nuns on Orders of Military - New York Times
> 
> Oh yeah..and there's the link.



why do dirt bag filthy scumbags have to scrape the bottom of the barrel for something President Ronald Reagan ALLEGEDLY said or done ? can't you find something more current ?

i pity you for your lack of intelligence.


----------



## Wildman (Aug 18, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.



he is still a *TRAITOR*


----------



## The Gadfly (Aug 18, 2013)

whitehall said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> > sambino510 said:
> ...



I understand EXACTLY what Mr. Kerry did, Whitehall. I didn't agree with his actions then (lying about your brothers-in-arms, no matter how noble the supposed reason is or is not, is still LYING!), and don't agree with his politics now. I'm just sick of arguing over who is or isn't a hero, or who did or didn't deserve a medal, or any of that, when I know that others sacrificed so much, so those of us who did make it home could, and they never got a damn thing for it but a PH and a flag on their coffin for their next-of-kin. I'm just tired; tired of their sacrifice and our blood, sweat and tears being a damn political football, for either side. That's one thing I didn't fight for. That is all.


----------



## The Gadfly (Aug 18, 2013)

sambino510 said:


> I think the main lesson here is that there are far, far more important things to debate and discuss in this forum, in my opinion, than John Kerry's "crimes". He went to war, didn't want to be there, may or may not have hurt himself or exaggerated his injuries in order to get out of the war, and, forty (emphasis on FORTY) years later, he is our Secretary of State. I see very little relevance between his actions during and post Vietnam War to his role as a Senator, former presidential candidate, or as Secretary of State. He had a conviction that the war is wrong, and that the people who participated were wrong. That's his opinion.



His opinion, he's entitled to; lying about his brothers-in-arms to promote that opinion is what I take issue with.  I don't know about his actions in-country; I didn't see them; but the reason the other conduct is politically relevant, is that he ran for office campaigning on his status as a Vietnam combat vet, AFTER the falsehoods he procured slandered the rest of us. I guess I'm just tired of seeing all the real sacrifice I saw, being used to score political points, whether that's being done by some of our own, or even worse, by people who weren't ever there, but judge us all as either heroes or villains, without even understanding what it was like, or how we felt about it.


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 19, 2013)

Bloodrock44 said:


> PrometheusBound said:
> 
> 
> > Warrior102 said:
> ...



More proof that you people must be Leftists pretending to be Chickenhawk-lovers in order to make your enemies seem like bootlicking Bushbots in denial, lashing out at everybody who respects those who actually fought for their country.  But we know better, that all the real Conservatives here are willing to make sacrifices for their fellow Americans.  You obviously have no compassion, so you have to be a fake from the Left Wing clinic.  That mighty combat veteran and family man, Rush Limbaugh, warned us against such _agents provocateurs._  And he wasn't even doped up on oxycodone when he dittoed that into our brains!


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 19, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> > PrometheusBound said:
> ...



I served in the military for 23 years, nutsack. 
When/where did you serve?


----------



## PrometheusBound (Aug 19, 2013)

The Gadfly said:


> sambino510 said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...


----------



## whitehall (Aug 19, 2013)

The Gadfly said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > The Gadfly said:
> ...



The topic is John Kerry. If you are sick of it go somewhere else. If you want to defend him go ahead. The conduct of officers during wartime has been a topic of discussion since Arnold betrayed Washington. Lee's actions at Gettysburg is a hot topic for C/W/ buffs. Hollywood made a movie about Patton's quirks and MacArthur was denied the GOP nomination probably because of efforts by Korean War Veterans. Kerry is secretary of state and his conduct during Vietnam is relevant.


----------



## Warrior102 (Aug 19, 2013)

PrometheusBound said:


> I'll stop when those who died in the place of that privileged trash come back to life.  Or better yet, when there's a wall for Chickenhawks who finally paid for their crimes.  The men I served with were worth far more than the flag-waving draftdodgers and most of them were only twenty years old.



Speaking of Chickenhawks, how are you and Obama doing?


----------



## daveman (Aug 19, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Excellent strategy.  When compared to a small child throwing a temper tantrum, throw an even BIGGER tantrum.
> ...


I can say it because like an idiot, you claim an RPG is a camera bag -- just like Assange programmed you to say.

Moron.


Billo_Really said:


> And the Assange video has nothing to do with my comment that your video doesn't prove what you claim it does.


Of course it does.  But you're too blinded by your love of terrorists to see it.


Billo_Really said:


> BTW, you still haven't commented on the van getting shot up when they were tending to the wounded.  Why can't you comment on that, you fuckin' coward?


Oh, eat shit, kid.  How about you condemn the terrorists for bringing kids to a firefight?


----------

