Kerry in Vietnam

Hard Ball

New member
"Below the display photograph are explanatory placards in English, French, Vietnamese and Chinese.

The English placard reads: "Mr. Do Muoi, Secretary General of the Vietnamese Communist Party met with Congressman and Veterans Delegation in Vietnam (July 15-18, 1993)."

Epstein's group says the exhibit refutes Kerry's insistence his anti-war protests did not render support to the enemy in time of war.

"The Vietnamese communists clearly feel that the American anti-war protesters were a very important force in undermining support in the United States for American war efforts, a force that contributed materially to ultimate communist victory in 1975," the group said in a statement.

Vietnam Vets for the Truth says it was established to organize a rally publicizing "Kerry's lies" during the "Winter Soldier" hearings in the U.S. Senate in 1971. The rally, called "Kerry Lied," will be held on Capitol Hill Sept. 12.

The Swift Boat Veterans also have called on Kerry to stop unauthorized use of their images in national campaign advertising.The group says only two of the 20 officers in one photo support him and 11 have signed the letter condemning the candidate.

One veteran in the photo, William Shumadine, said Kerry's use of the photo "is a complete misrepresentation to the public and a total fraud."
 
The English placard reads: "Mr. Do Muoi, Secretary General of the Vietnamese Communist Party met with Congressman and Veterans Delegation in Vietnam (July 15-18, 1993)."

Epstein's group says the exhibit refutes Kerry's insistence his anti-war protests did not render support to the enemy in time of war.

Last I heard, the war was long over by July 1993. Quite a few congressmen and women have been to VN since Slick Willy normalized our relations. I'm not sure how that retroactively aided the North's war effort, however.

I'm not crazy about Kerry, but trying to paint him as Hanoi Jane only tars the slanderer and not the subject, IMO.

- 0 -
 
I'm not crazy about Kerry, but trying to paint him as Hanoi Jane only tars the slanderer and not the subject, IMO.

IMO as well.

I guess if you can't find anything good to say about Bush's 'service', the only thing you have left is to tear down Kerry's.

db
 
To my knowledge, Bush never committed treason. I'm not sure that the same is true of the junior Senator from
Massachussetts.
 
To my knowledge, Bush never committed treason. I'm not sure that the same is true of the junior Senator from
Massachussetts.


Hmmm. You said that you don't know that Bush never committed treason, and you said you don't know if Kerry did, either.


So? :confused:


BTW, folks, the point isn't WHEN he was honored in VietNam by the Communists, it's WHY he was honored.
 
Read it again.
Or, if you like, I'll make it simpler...
John Kerry committed treason in that his words and deeds upon his return from VietNam gave aid, comfort and material assistance to our enemies in the field. Those efforts have been recognized and applauded by our former enemies.

George Bush flew fighter jets for the Air National Guard.
No treason there, to my knowledge.
 
Author: Kerry's Meeting With Communists Broke U.S. Law
Marc Morano, CNSNews.com
Thursday, May 20, 2004
The 1970 meeting that John Kerry conducted with North Vietnamese communists violated U.S. law, according to an author and researcher who has studied the issue.
Kerry met with representatives from "both delegations" of the Vietnamese in Paris in 1970, according to Kerry's own testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971. But Kerry's meetings with the Vietnamese delegations were in direct violation of laws forbidding private citizens from negotiating with foreign powers, according to researcher and author Jerry Corsi, who began studying the anti-war movement in the early 1970s.

According to Corsi, Kerry violated U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953. "A U.S. citizen cannot go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power," Corsi told CNSNews.com.

By Kerry's own admission, he met in 1970 with delegations from the North Vietnamese communist government and discussed how the Vietnam War should be stopped.

Kerry explained to Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman J. William Fulbright in a question-and-answer session on Capitol Hill a year after his Paris meetings that the war needed to be stopped "immediately and unilaterally." Then Kerry added: "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."

However, both of the delegations to which Kerry referred were communist. Neither included the U.S. allied, South Vietnamese or any members of the U.S. delegation. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam was the government of the North Vietnamese communists, and the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PVR) was an arm of the North Vietnamese government that included the Vietcong.

Kerry did meet face-to-face with the PVR's negotiator Madam Nguyen Thi Binh, according to his presidential campaign spokesman Michael Meehan. Madam Binh's peace plan was being proposed by the North Vietnamese communists as a way to bring a quick end to the war.

But Corsi alleged that Kerry's meeting with Madam Binh and the government of North Vietnam was a direct violation of U.S. law.

"In [Kerry's] first meeting in 1970, meeting with Madam Binh, Kerry was still a naval reservist - not only a U.S. citizen, but a naval reservist - stepping outside the boundaries to meet with one of the principle figures of our enemy in Vietnam, Madam Binh, and the Viet Cong at the same time. [Former Nixon administration aide Henry] Kissinger was trying to negotiate with them formally," Corsi told CNSNews.com.

Corsi's recent essay, titled "Kerry and the Paris Peace Talks," published on wintersoldier.com, details Kerry's meetings and the possible violations of U.S. law.

Corsi also asserted that by 1971, Kerry might have violated another law by completely adopting the rhetoric and objectives of the North Vietnamese communists.

Definition of Treason

"Article three: Section three [of the U.S. Constitution], which defines treason, says you cannot give support to the enemy in time of war, and here you have Kerry giving a press conference in Washington on July 22, 1971 (a year after his meeting with the communist delegations in Paris) advocating the North Vietnamese peace plan and saying that is what President Nixon ought to accept," Corsi explained.

"If Madam Binh had been there herself at that press conference, she would have said exactly what Kerry said. The only difference is she would not have done it with a Boston accent," Corsi said.

The 7 Point Plan created by the North Vietnamese communists was nothing more than a "surrender" for the U.S., according to Corsi.

"You don't advocate that [7 point] plan unless you are on the communist side. It was seen as surrender. [The U.S.] would have had to pay reparations and agree that we essentially lost the war," Corsi said.

Communist Shill

"Kerry was openly advocating that the communist position was correct and that we were wrong. He had become a spokesman for the communist party," Corsi added.

Kerry's presidential campaign did not return repeated phone calls seeking comment, but campaign spokesman Michael Meehan told the Boston Globe in March, "Kerry had no role whatsoever in the Paris peace talks or negotiations.

"He did not engage in any negotiations and did not attend any session of the talks," Meehan added.


'From Their Point of View'


Kerry "went to Paris on a private trip, where he had one brief meeting with Madam Binh and others. In an effort to find facts, he learned that status of the peace talks from their point of view and about any progress in resolving the conflict, particularly as it related to the fate of the POWs," Meehan added. Kerry was reportedly on his honeymoon with his first wife, Julia Thorne, when he met with the communist delegations.

But Corsi does not accept the Kerry campaign's explanation.

"Meehan made it sound like they were just there on a honeymoon and they got a meeting with Madam Bin, but not every American honeymooner got to meet with Madam Binh. Unless you had a political objective and they identified you as somebody as sympathetic, you were not going to get invited to a meeting with Madam Binh," Corsi said.

"Kerry has skirted with the issue of violating these laws," Corsi added. Sen. Kerry's presidential campaign is "trying to fudge on the issue because they don't want to come clean on it entirely."

Copyright CNSNews.com
Link
 
In June 1971, Le Duc Tho arrived in Paris to join the North Vietnamese Communist delegation to the peace talks. His arrival marked a sea change in the Communists' approach to advancing their goals via negotiations. Le Duc Tho was with Ho Chi Minh one of the original founders of the Communist Party of Indochina, one of North Vietnam's chief strategists.

He arrived to join a comrade, Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, who had been a member of the Central Committee for the National Front for the Liberation of the South, and was now Foreign Minister of the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PRG) of South Vietnam. The military arm of the PRG was widely known as the Viet Cong, just as Madame Binh was widely recognized as the Viet Cong delegate to the conference.

On July 1, 1971, within days of Le Duc Tho's arrival, Madame Binh advanced a new 7-Point Proposal to end the war. Central to this plan was a cleverly crafted provision offering to set a date for the return of U.S. prisoners of war in exchange for the Americans setting a date for complete, unilateral military withdrawal from Vietnam. In other words, America could have her POWs back only if we would agree we lost, surrender, and set a date to leave.

About one year earlier, two young Americans had also come to Paris, arguably for their honeymoon -- John Kerry, a young, clean-shaven Navy war veteran, accompanied by his new wife, the former Julia Thorne, whose lineage traced back to George Washington.

But honeymooning was not John Kerry's only purpose in traveling to Paris. Kerry's presidential campaign has now acknowledged that he "talked privately with a leading communist representative" there.

On April 22, 1971, as he testified before Senator Fulbright's Committee on Foreign Relations, John Kerry mentioned that in Paris he had meetings with "both sides" of the Paris Peace Talks. The strong likelihood is that John Kerry also met with Le Duc Tho, or some other representative of the North Vietnamese delegation, in addition to Madame Binh who was in Paris representing the PRG. There is no reason to assume John Kerry had any interest in meeting with representatives of the other two sides in the Peace Talks -- the United States or South Vietnam.

Madame Binh's proposal was carefully crafted to send a strong emotional message to the American home front; that the only barrier to having our POWs returned was America's own unwillingness to set a date to withdraw -- even if the proposed withdrawal amounted to a defeat. The 7-Point Proposal directly challenged the South Vietnamese proposal to set a date for a truce and a free election designed to reunify Vietnam. The PRG and the Viet Cong clearly agreed with the Premier of Communist China, Cho En-lai that complete withdrawal of American military forces from Vietnam was the only precondition that would be discussed.

On July 22, 1971, John Kerry called a press conference in Washington, D.C. Speaking on behalf of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), Kerry openly urged President Nixon to accept Madame Binh's 7-Point plan. As the New York Times noted the following day, John Kerry suggested that President Nixon had refused to set a date for withdrawal because North Vietnam had not guaranteed the return of American POWs. Now that the Vietnamese Communists were promising to set a POW return date, Kerry argued that Nixon had no reasonable course left, except to set a date for withdrawing US military forces. Kerry failed to mention one consideration President Nixon most likely found compelling -- that America's cause was just and that the interests of freedom might best be served halting the spread of Communism in Southeast Asia. The U.S., in President Nixon's view, had not fought the war to abandon our allies to Communism but to defend South Vietnam's right to self-determination.

Today, presidential candidate John Kerry would have us believe that the only goal of his anti-war activities was to speak up bravely against a war he knew to be without justification. All he wanted to do was to stop a war where military policies such as free fire zones, the issuance of .50 caliber machine guns to Swift Boats, and tactics such as search-and-destroy led inevitably to war crimes, the killing of innocent civilians and the burning of peaceful villages.

John Kerry today wants us to believe that he has always been an anti-Communist. Yet the historical record raises questions about that claim. Loyal Americans think twice about violating the legal provision against negotiating with foreign powers (18 U.S.C. 953) and the Constitutional prohibition against giving support to our nation's enemies during wartime (Article III, Section 3). Anti-Communists do not openly support proposals that amount to an American surrender to Communist enemies in time of war.

John Kerry may believe in his own mind that his participation in the anti-war cause lifted him to a new moral plane, one where he would not be restricted by conventional legal distinctions or common-sense understandings of patriotism. Yet the record shows that Kerry and the VVAW consistently coordinated their efforts with Communists, both foreign and domestic, represented their positions, and repeated their grossly exaggerated claims of American atrocities. In fact, it is hard to find any disagreement whatsoever between Kerry's words and actions as a leader of the VVAW and those of the Hanoi and Vietcong leadership. Had Madame Binh herself been permitted to testify before that Senate committee in place of John Kerry, the most noticeable difference might have been the absence of a Boston accent.


----------
Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D.
Link

When it looks like a commie rat, and it acts like a commie rat, chances are it's a commie rat. Or maybe it is just a coincidence that he is the most left-wing of ALL current Senators.

[jon lovitz voice]Yeah, coincidence. That's the ticket![/voice]

He's not like Hanoi Jane. No, not Johnny. :rolleyes: :barf:
 
Read it again.

I read it. I was commenting on the fact that your qualifiers ("to my knowledge", "I am not away") were so sweeping that they effectively reduced your statement to NOTHING. Flipped around, it says the same.


John Kerry committed treason in that his words and deeds upon his return from VietNam gave aid, comfort and material assistance to our enemies in the field. Those efforts have been recognized and applauded by our former enemies.


No argument there. And the fact that the ceremony honoring him for those efforts didn't take place until long after the war doesn't change what he did. Some folks seemed to think that the 93 date somehow made it okay. Not. That particular trip may not have been illegal, but the earlier deeds were treason. Accepting an honor for treason is treasonous as well, in my book.
 
Section Three, Article Three, Clause One of the United States Constitution states: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

I invite your attention to the specific language that addresses providing “Aid and Comfort” to the enemy.

You judge whether John Kerry is guilty of this heinous crime, especially when US forces were actively engaged in combat operations against the North Vietnamese at the same time he visited their representatives.
 
3 Hearts in 4 months + 0 hospital = Major Phony

3 Hearts = Home

How long was a typical tour in 'Nam? I'm betting more than 4 months. Why did Kerry get to go home after 4 months? 3 Purple Hearts and you go home automatically. It was in the regs. Suffice it to say that I'm a bit suspicious of his motives considering he never required a hospital stay for any of his injuries.

His conduct after discharge was also reprehensible, but thankful that is coming back to bite him.
 
MrAcheson,

Let me respond to your statements (with which I generally agree):

a) Generally, Vietnam tours were a year long, although early (’65 – ’67)Marines frequently spent 13+ months in country; however, many of us spent several tours in Southeast Asia.
b) Bureau of Naval Personnel directives – not Navy Regulations – addressed the “three Purple Heart and home policy”. But, regardless of the type of directive, the CLEAR INTENT WAS TO RETURN ONLY THE SERIOUSLY WOUNDED TO CONUS -- AND IT WAS NOT AUTOMATIC, MANY/MOST WHO QUALIFIED DID NOT APPLY FOR EARLY RETURN TO THE STATES.
c) Most of Kerry’s wounds were so minor that many/most service members would not have sought an award of the Purple Heart; obviously, Kerry was self-promoting.

Regards.
 
One of my Drill Sergeants (Staff Sergeant Robinson, 1974) had NINE purple hearts.

He didn't come home early. I don't think he was unusual.


The BEST you can say for Kerry's PH record is that it shows he was (is) a wimp.
 
OK, I see what you guys are saying now. I was only going on the brief caption quoted at first. And while I don't beleive that having been against the war is in itself wrong, I agree that aiding and abetting is. Whether Kerry is the Second Coming of Hanoi Jane or not I don't know, and comparisons to Shrubya are irrelevant in evaluating Kerry's history, which should stand or fall on its own merits (or lack thereof). Frankly, I put trustworthy politicians in the same category as unicorns and virgin go-go dancers, but that's me.

Personally, I'm waiting to hear that a volcano somewhere in the Pacific has created a new island outside of everyone else's 200-mile territorial limit, so I can claim it and start my own Libertarian paradise -- or benevolent dictatorship, whichever comes first. Mind you, I'm not holding my breath.

- 0 -
 
Kerry, maggot

"Hmmm. You said that you don't know that Bush never committed treason, and you said you don't know if Kerry did, either."


But Bush didn't call me and thousands of other Vietnam Veterans, murderers, rapist and other assorted things.

John Kerry is a despicable piece of dung and is responsiable for how lots of returning Vietnam veterans were treated!

He can crawl back under the rocks as far as I'm concerned. :barf:
 
Back
Top