Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
There are lies, damn lies and the Liberal version
Published on August 1, 2005 By Dr Guy In Politics

In an interview with Judy Woodruff of CNN in 2004, Kerry was asked about his accusations against American Troops during the Vietnam war.  Here is his answer:

No, I was accusing American leaders of abandoning the troops. And if you
read what I said, it is very clearly an indictment of leadership. I said
to the Senate, where is the leadership of our country? And it's the
leaders who are responsible, not the soldiers. I never said that. I've
always fought for the soldiers.

The problem with the 70s and 80s liberals is that the MSM is not the only source of information now.  A quick googling of the senate record turns up what he actually said:

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

They told the stories [that] at times they had personally raped, cut off
ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human
genitals and turned on 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.

Maybe I missed it, but I did not read in there anywhere, where he said the leaders ordered it or the leaders did it. Sorry Kerry, you just plain lied.


Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Aug 14, 2005

nothing here says 'i'...only the collective 'we' because he is NOT speaking solely for himself. the senate understood that.

We is a cowards way of saying I.

on Aug 14, 2005

you're surely not suggesting that two years of selling newspapers at pendleton while you were a kid somehow enables you to know what kerry and the vvaw saw in combat.

No, I am saying that my view is as valid.  Verstehen sie?

on Aug 14, 2005

You "still" don't get it do you? The lying little shit was on a GOD DAMN BOAT! How in the hell could he have witnessed anything that "supposedly" happen inland?

He could not have, but that escapes his appologists.

on Aug 14, 2005

no you *don't* get it...and i doubt you ever will. he was speaking collectively and describing an actual event that was filmed so portions of it can be seen today. you can see and hear for yourself participants describing what they experienced at various combat areas. he was reporting what was said and there is an audiovisual record.

No, he was not.  The simple truth is he WAS describing what he did not see.  And at the time, he had no film.  You see the truth of the matter is, he lied and he was caught in it.  LATER facts could be used to bear him out, but AT THE TIME of his testimony, he was plain and simple a bald face liar.

Prove me wrong.

on Aug 14, 2005

with all due respect for your service, if you were to follow the link i provided and read kerry's testimony again (i'm presuming you've read it in the past since otherwise you wouldnt be able to qualify it as to its truthfulness or lack thereof) as if you were reading it for the first time--in other words, with an objective and open mind--i believe you'd see the intention (if not the ultimate result) was to condemn the pentagon and the administration rather than the men and women who were not served well nor properly by the command.

With all due respect, the truth is he called 2.5 million GIs war Criminals.  That can not be excused or explained away, no matter how much you want to.

on Aug 14, 2005

Kerry? A liberal? LMAO!
Yeah right!

Bye Dabe.

on Aug 14, 2005

In case "you" don't see it, all those we's would include him also, now wouldn't it?

Actually, it was his cowards way of saying I.

on Aug 14, 2005

It's a manner of speech, an affectation if you will and it's fairly common. There's no concrete proof that he meant to mislead by using it, only that as the current representative of the soldiers he felt entitled to use it. Is that really so difficult to accept? That Kerry might have said or done something without intending to deceive?

Have you been elected yet?  You are a natural!

on Aug 14, 2005

he was a member of a group acting as their spokesperson...recounting the things the group had discussed. i'm sure you can find the film in which those vets were discussing the very things kerry mentioned and see it for yourself.

Funny, it does not seem to exist as most of them said they were either coerced or taken out of context.

Funny.

on Aug 14, 2005

if kerry hadn't served on the exact same type of craft you were assigned and he offered an opinion about what you'd done or seen, you'd be so outraged you'd likely wind up as a big hot pool of goo.

Yet you would trash the SBVs.  For that very reason.  Sorry, you lost this one a long time ago.  After you can justify the SVBs ads and allegations and facts, then try this one again.

3 Pages1 2 3