SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (612066)8/27/2004 2:42:01 PM
From: CYBERKEN  Respond to of 769670
 
"Unfit for Command" is flying off the shelves, and as a result, Kerry will soon be flying home, with Satan taking his place...



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (612066)8/27/2004 2:46:41 PM
From: PROLIFE  Respond to of 769670
 
ROFL!!! You are not only a negative depressed hack, but what planet are YOU actually on???

I see your boy refuses to take a lie detector test...hell...hundreds and hundreds of vets says one thing.....and you call them all liars....you are lucky they don't bust your chops.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (612066)8/27/2004 2:51:24 PM
From: DizzyG  Respond to of 769670
 
Bias Claimed As Anti-Kerry Book Sells Out
Customers Claim Political Bias As Bookstores Struggle to Keep Up With Demand for Anti-Kerry Book

The Associated Press

NEW YORK Aug. 24, 2004 — The nation's two biggest bookstore chains, Barnes & Noble and Borders, say angry customers are accusing them of political bias as the retailers struggle to keep up with demand for a best seller that questions John Kerry's military service in Vietnam.
"Unfit for Command," which went on sale Aug. 11 with a first printing of 85,000, will have 550,000 copies in print by next week, according to Regnery Publishing.

abcnews.go.com

Yeah right, Kenneth. Maybe in your little partisan mind it's over...the American public sees this a little different then you do. :)

Diz-



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (612066)8/27/2004 2:55:05 PM
From: DizzyG  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Another Kerry whopper?
Recalls hearing of '68 Martin Luther King murder while in Vietnam

Posted: August 27, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – Speaking at a Martin Luther King Day celebration last year, presidential candidate John F. Kerry told a Virginia audience that he remembered hearing the tragic news of the assassination while serving in Vietnam – though he did not begin his four-month tour of duty for at least seven months after the shooting.

Chicago Sun-Times from April 5, 1968

"I remember well April 1968, I was serving in Vietnam, a place of violence," Kerry told the assembled, according to a report by Fox News Channel's Brit Hume. "When the news reports brought home to me and my crewmates the violence back home and the tragic news that one of the bullets flying that terrible spring took the life of Dr. King."

The date of King's assassination was April 4, 1968. However, Kerry was not yet serving in Vietnam, but aboard the Navy frigate USS Gridley. According to Kerry's campaign website it was not until Nov. 17, 1968, that he reported for duty in Vietnam.

In March of this year, Kerry authored a column in the New York Times that alluded to his recollections of King's death.

"Nineteen-sixty-eight was a year unlike any other I have known," he wrote. "I was 24 years old, a newly minted naval officer in a convoy headed for the Gulf of Tonkin."

He mentioned learning of the death in Vietnam of a friend, the surprise election results from New Hampshire that resulted in Lyndon Johnson's decision not to seek re-election as president. He mentioned in that column that he was off the coast of Vietnam at the time.

"Weeks later we heard of the death of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., assassinated while campaigning for justice in America," he wrote. "We knew that cities across the country had exploded in riots and much of Washington itself was in flames. There was war all around us and war at home."

Kerry has often referred to his yearlong tour of duty on the USS Gridley as his first tour of Vietnam, even though the frigate only approached the coast in the Gulf of Tonkin.

worldnetdaily.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (612066)8/27/2004 2:57:10 PM
From: DizzyG  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Bring it on, John
Oliver North

August 27, 2004

"Of course, the president keeps telling people he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack group does just that. Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: 'Bring it on.'" -- Sen. John Kerry

Dear John,

As usual, you have it wrong. You don't have a beef with President George Bush about your war record. He's been exceedingly generous about your military service. Your complaint is with the 2.5 million of us who served honorably in a war that ended 29 years ago and which you, not the president, made the centerpiece of this campaign.

I talk to a lot of vets, John, and this really isn't about your medals or how you got them. Like you, I have a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. I only have two Purple Hearts, though. I turned down the others so that I could stay with the Marines in my rifle platoon. But I think you might agree with me, though I've never heard you say it, that the officers always got more medals than they earned and the youngsters we led never got as many medals as they deserved.

This really isn't about how early you came home from that war, either, John. There have always been guys in every war who want to go home. There are also lots of guys, like those in my rifle platoon in Vietnam, who did a full 13 months in the field. And there are, thankfully, lots of young Americans today in Iraq and Afghanistan who volunteered to return to war because, as one of them told me in Ramadi a few weeks ago, "the job isn't finished."

Nor is this about whether you were in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968. Heck John, people get lost going on vacation. If you got lost, just say so. Your campaign has admitted that you now know that you really weren't in Cambodia that night and that Richard Nixon wasn't really president when you thought he was. Now would be a good time to explain to us how you could have all that bogus stuff "seared" into your memory -- especially since you want to have your finger on our nation's nuclear trigger.

But that's not really the problem, either. The trouble you're having, John, isn't about your medals or coming home early or getting lost -- or even Richard Nixon. The issue is what you did to us when you came home, John.

When you got home, you co-founded Vietnam Veterans Against the War and wrote "The New Soldier," which denounced those of us who served -- and were still serving -- on the battlefields of a thankless war. Worst of all, John, you then accused me -- and all of us who served in Vietnam -- of committing terrible crimes and atrocities.

On April 22, 1971, under oath, you told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that you had knowledge that American troops "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 country side of South Vietnam." And you admitted on television that "yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed."

And for good measure you stated, "(America is) more guilty than any other body, of violations of (the) Geneva Conventions ... the torture of prisoners, the killing of prisoners."

Your "antiwar" statements and activities were painful for those of us carrying the scars of Vietnam and trying to move on with our lives. And for those who were still there, it was even more hurtful. But those who suffered the most from what you said and did were the hundreds of American prisoners of war being held by Hanoi. Here's what some of them endured because of you, John:

Capt. James Warner had already spent four years in Vietnamese custody when he was handed a copy of your testimony by his captors. Warner says that for his captors, your statements "were proof I deserved to be punished." He wasn't released until March 14, 1973.

Maj. Kenneth Cordier, an Air Force pilot who was in Vietnamese custody for 2,284 days, says his captors "repeated incessantly" your one-liner about being "the last man to die" for a lost cause. Cordier was released March 4, 1973.

Navy Lt. Paul Galanti says your accusations "were as demoralizing as solitary (confinement) ... and a prime reason the war dragged on." He remained in North Vietnamese hands until February 12, 1973.

John, did you think they would forget? When Tim Russert asked about your claim that you and others in Vietnam committed "atrocities," instead of standing by your sworn testimony, you confessed that your words "were a bit over the top." Does that mean you lied under oath? Or does it mean you are a war criminal? You can't have this one both ways, John. Either way, you're not fit to be a prison guard at Abu Ghraib, much less commander in chief.

One last thing, John. In 1988, Jane Fonda said: "I would like to say something ... to men who were in Vietnam, who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of things that I said or did. I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I'm ... very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families."

Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?

townhall.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (612066)8/27/2004 3:08:58 PM
From: JakeStraw  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
The Swift Boat Veterans ad does what the media refuses to do

Wednesday, August 25, 2004

By Marcos Rodriguez

The over-blown and hasty reaction from the Kerry camp vis-a-vis the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth TV ad is a tell-tale sign that things are not going well for the senator from Massachusetts. Indeed, ever since Mr. Kerry changed his mind and, contrary to what he had repeatedly promised, decided to make of his four-month period in South Asia more than 35 years ago a central pillar of his current presidential bid, the media at large has refused to question or objectively examine anything of what is spoon-fed to them by the Kerry headquarters --a posture that has proven a dramatic reversal from the very critical and aggressive position they took in 1996, when Bob Dole's heroic war record was not only questioned at nauseam but even mocked by such luminary publications as The Nation.

Contrary to conventional wisdom (i.e. the media pundits), and in clear contrast to their European counterparts whose only news is what their government-controlled media supplies them with, the American electorate is not made up of malleable zombies. In this the Age of Information, most Americans have quickly learned to identify and separate cheap propaganda from actual news; if the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth TV ad is proving to have a tremendous impact on those who watch it, it is because the men who appear on it, beyond their political and personal motivations, tell a compelling story that deserves not only to be heard but, more importantly, looked into, instead of being simply dismissed (like most in the media have done so) as yet another conspiratorial urban legend.

So far, the response from Mr. Kerry and his supporters has not been to produce facts and documents to disprove what it is said in the ad, but instead to denounce it as "morally reprehensible", on grounds that it provides a different view (a view that happens to be shared by tens of veterans who served along John Kerry himself) on John Kerry's purportedly heroic military record.

For a group that has wrapped itself around the new sacred cow of moral relativism --a group, lets remember, that not long ago failed to see acts of adulterous fellatio performed in the Oval Office as even morally questionable-- it is beyond hypocrisy to denounce political dissent to their candidate on precisely moral grounds. But then again, hypocrisy seems to be what people like Max Cleland feed on, as exemplified by his cry that it is unseemly to attack Kerry's war record, while at the same time he maintains absolute silence on Kerry's vicious attack on the war record of his fellow soldiers.

At least Senator Kerry, Presidential Candidate, has today at his disposal the entire American media to respond when and as he wishes, a privilege that his fellow soldiers did not enjoy more than 30 years ago when then anti-war activist John Kerry accused them of committing the most gruesome crimes against humanity --certainly those who were still in the hands of the Vietcong, being tortured beyond imagination, did not.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (612066)8/27/2004 3:14:02 PM
From: JakeStraw  Respond to of 769670
 
"Unfit for Command" a top seller at Barnes & Noble!!