Former POW Resigns From Bush Campaign

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
U2democrat said:


Yes, good ol' McCain, the darling of all parties. You'd think a man of his good character would distance himself from Bush after this smear campaign.

I know. The whole situation is really sort of ironic. The same people who made the Swift Boat ads carried out the 2000 smear campaign against McCain. I remember that campaign as I actually "crossed over" to vote for McCain in the 2000 primaries. This disqualified me from voting in the Democratic run-off elections, something I wasn't overjoyed with.
 
Last edited:
The only reason McCain sticks with the Bush camp even after sort of getting smeared in the 2000 primary is that he is a Republican at heart (with a liberal streak).

He knows better than to trust Kerry to lead this country in the area of foreign relations.
 
nbcrusader said:
Interesting how Kerry is calling for the ads to be pulled rather than disclosing the records that would refute their claims....

Which records would those be? The official Navy reports? The citations for his own and Larry Thurlow's Bronze Star?
 
FullonEdge2 said:
The only reason McCain sticks with the Bush camp even after sort of getting smeared in the 2000 primary is that he is a Republican at heart (with a liberal streak).

I think the reason McCain stays with Bush is because he wants to be the nominee in 2008 after Dubya's second term.
 
John McCain is a Republican who very much has a mind of his own. He follows after his own heart and convictions, something that's really rare in politics.
 
ThatGuy said:


Which records would those be? The official Navy reports? The citations for his own and Larry Thurlow's Bronze Star?

Apparently, those records haven't diminished the questions regarding Kerry's service and there are other records he has refused to release.
 
OMG, we are sitting here arguing about who will and will not release military service records?

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Precious.
 
ThatGuy said:


I think the reason McCain stays with Bush is because he wants to be the nominee in 2008 after Dubya's second term.

Actually, its because McCain views on foreign policy and national defense are often very different from Senator Kerry's as we have seen in the past. McCain voted for the 1991 Gulf War to remove Saddam's military from Kuwait. Senator Kerry voted against removing Saddam's military from Kuwait. McCain voted for the first aid package to support the military and economic development in Iraq, Kerry voted against it. These are just a couple of examples.
 
I'm not suggesting that McCain should ENDORSE Kerry he would never do that (unless bush REALLY f***ed up), but he could at least distance himself from the campaign (did y'all see bush kiss McCain's head at a rally?)
 
I think the Swift Boats deal is a right-wing version of Fahrenheit 9/11. What you think of Fahrenheit 9/11 really depends on what you think of George Bush. What you think of the Swift Boat Veterans depends on what you think of John Kerry. I think in both cases it's a matter of "preaching to the choir" and probably won't impact the election. At least I don't think either one should. There are some hard-core opinions and passions out there, and that won't change.
 
Here's another account of the day

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/news/news_2004_0822.html

This is what I saw that day'
Feb. 28, 1969: On the Dong Cung River
Chicago Tribune

by William B. Rood

There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam more than 35 years ago--three officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened on February 28, 1969.

One is John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate who won a Silver Star for what happened on that date. I am the other.

For years, no one asked about those events. But now they are the focus of skirmishing in a presidential election with a group of swift boat veterans and others contending that Kerry didn't deserve the Silver Star for what he did on that day, or the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts he was awarded for other actions.

Many of us wanted to put it all behind us--the rivers, the ambushes, the killing. Ever since that time, I have refused all requests for interviews about Kerry's service--even those from reporters at the Chicago Tribune, where I work.

But Kerry's critics, armed with stories I know to be untrue, have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown. The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there.

Even though Kerry's own crew members have backed him, the attacks have continued, and in recent days Kerry has called me and others who were with him in those days, asking that we go public with our accounts.

I can't pretend those calls had no effect on me, but that is not why I am writing this. What matters most to me is that this is hurting crewmen who are not public figures and who deserved to be honored for what they did. My intent is to tell the story here and to never again talk publicly about it.

...
 
It's being reported on the MSNBC website that Bush has asked the Swift Boat Veterans to take their ads off of the air. I haven't seen this on any other site and the article on MSNBC said that the story was just breaking and check back as the story develops. Apparently this is bothering him.
 
I hope that is true, but I wonder why Bush waited so long :hmm:

Supposedly the quotes from Kerry in those ads, the ones w/ his testimony before Congress, are actually Kerry quoting other soldiers. That's what some talking head I saw over the weekend said. Also CSpan has been showing the debates on the Dick Cavett show between Kerry and the guy who I guess "founded" this swift boat group. I saw some of it last week.

Another link..

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0820041kerry1.html
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
I hope that is true, but I wonder why Bush waited so long :hmm:

Supposedly the quotes from Kerry in those ads, the ones w/ his testimony before Congress, are actually Kerry quoting other soldiers. That's what some talking head I saw over the weekend said. Also CSpan has been showing the debates on the Dick Cavett show between Kerry and the guy who I guess "founded" this swift boat group. I saw some of it last week.

Another link..

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0820041kerry1.html

Kerry may be quoting other soldiers, but he goes on to state himself that such events were not isolated and were approved by ALL chains of command. Kerry accuses virtually every person who served in Vietnam of war crimes by making such a statement. By quoting these other veterans in speech before Congress, Kerry supports and agrees with their views. Kerry stated that he in fact committed war crimes on the Dick Cavett show just like everyone else did. At no time does Kerry ever attempt cast doubt on any of the unsubstatianted allegations made by a few veterans. He takes their allegations and presents them as the gospel truth before Congress. Later in his speach he claims that there is no threat from Communism at all!
 
Bush did his part, now Kerry should do his

Dole suggests Kerry apologize

Former Republican Sen. Bob Dole suggested Sunday that John Kerry apologize for past testimony before Congress about alleged atrocities during the Vietnam War and joined critics of the Democratic presidential candidate who say he received an early exit from combat for "superficial wounds."
 
Last edited:
The leading newspaper in Edinburgh, Scotland is running an article about the controversy in their newspaper and on their website. They think it's absolutely ludicrous and wonder what the hell it has to do with Iraq and the U.S. economy. The answer to that question, is, of course, "nothing". The RNC and the September jobs report is probably going to knock this :censored: out of the news.
 
Last edited:
ThatGuy said:
Kerry did do his part. He denounced an ad aired by MoveOn last week. That's a comparable situation. Kerry apologizing for his testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is not comparable.

http://www.cwes01.com/13790/23910/ktpp179-210.pdf

What here should Kerry apologize for? Give me the quotes.

Also, Del Sandusky, someone who may have more authority on Kerry's wounds, tells Dole to suck it.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002013026_webbush23.html

Here are the quotes that support what I said above.

"not isolated incidents, but crimes committed on a day to day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command"

"They relived the absolute horror of what this country has, in a sense, made them do."

"razed villiages in a fashion reminicient of Genghis Khan"

"We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country; we could be quiet; we could hold are silence; we could not tell what went on in Vietnam, but we feel because what threatens this country, the fact that the crimes threaten it, not reds and not redcoats, but the crimes which we are committing threaten it, that we have to seak out."

"The country doesn't know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the forms of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history; men who have returned with a sense of anger and a sense of betrayal which no one has yet grasped."

"In our opinion, and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam, nothing which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos, by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocricy, and it is the kind of hypocricy which we feel has torn this country apart."

"we are probably angriest about all we were told about Vietnam and about the mystical war against communism."

"We fought using weapons against those people which I do not believe this country would dream of using were we fighting in the European theater or let us say non-third world people theater,"

"the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage in the Geneva Conventions and using that as a justification for the continuation of this war when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions"

"But all they have done and all they can do by this denial is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission, to search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbaric war,"

"So what I am saying is yes, there will be some recrimination but far, far less than the 200,000 a year who are murdered by the United Sates of America,"

"Yes sir. I think we have a very definite obligation to make extensive reparations to the people of Indochina."

"It is my opinion that the United States is still reacting in very much the 1945 mood and postwar cold-war period when we reacted to the forces which were at work in World War II and came out of it with this paranoia about the Russians and how the world was going to be divided up between the super powers, and the foreign policy of John Foster Dulles which was responsible for the creation of the SEATO treaty, which was, in fact, a direct reaction to this so called Communist monolith. And I think we are reacting under Cold War precepts which are no longer applicable."

"Why do we have to, therefore, consider and keep considering threats?"

"but right now, we are reacting with paronoia to this question of peace and the people taking over the world."

"I think it is bogus, totally artificial. THERE IS NO THREAT. The Communist are not about to take over our McDonald hamburger stands."

" A lot of Guys, 60%, 80% stay stoned 24 hours a day just to get through the Vietnam"
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


So now we endorse every view we quote?

When one is testifying, they have limited time and what they do or do not support is clearly indicated by what quotes the carefully choose to use. If you read Kerry's testimony, he clearly endorses those quotes.
 
ThatGuy said:
So STING, are you saying atrocities didn't occur, or that Kerry should have just kept his big mouth shut regarding them?

http://hnn.us/articles/3552.html

Thats not the point. The point is that his statements which painted the United States as evil in regards to its actions in Vietnam and Vietnam veterans as war criminals are simply false. His testimony before Congress is, inaccurate, offensive and simply disgusting.
 
"The country doesn't know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the forms of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history; men who have returned with a sense of anger and a sense of betrayal which no one has yet grasped."

I don't know. I've not only read about, but met, some Vietnam vets who seem to meet this description awfully well. Just because Kerry said what no one wants to hear doesn't mean it isn't true.
 
Back
Top Bottom