![]() |
The Weblog at The View from the Core - Friday, August 20, 2004
|
Sellout The Swiftees' new TV ad. Here is the script, in which Kerry's own words from his 1971 Senate testimony are quoted (emphasis and ellipses in original): Sellout John Kerry: "They had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads..." Joe Ponder: "The accusations that John Kerry made against the veterans who served in Vietnam was just devastating." John Kerry: "... randomly shot at civilians..." Joe Ponder: "It hurt me more than any physical wounds I had." John Kerry: "... cut off limbs, blown up bodies..." Ken Cordier: "That was part of the torture, was, uh, to sign a statement that you had committed war crimes." John Kerry: "... razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan..." Paul Gallanti: "John Kerry gave the enemy for free what I, and many of my, uh, comrades in North Vietnam, in the prison camps, uh, took torture to avoid saying. It demoralized us." John Kerry: "... crimes committed on a day to day basis..." Ken Cordier: "He betrayed us in the past, how could we be loyal to him now?" John Kerry: "... ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam." Paul Gallanti: "He dishonored his country, and, uh, more, more importantly the people he served with. He just sold them out." Announcer: "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is responsible for the content of this advertisement." This ad, too, is also available for viewing at Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. (As I write, though, you have to right-click and download to get them to play.) As somebody all-too-familiar with Kerry's 1971 Senate Testimony, I am simply delighted that these men are helping Americans today to hear the words that made John Forbes Kerry a hero to America Haters all over the world three decades ago. Maybe, at long last, he will get what he deserves. See also Any Questions? Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 09:56:23 PM |
If You Would Like to Pray Again That I can get my mortgage refinanced right now would probably be another really good time. I can tell you that things are moving along, but we're not quite there yet. Thanks again. See If You Would Like to Pray. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 08:35:59 PM |
Christmas in Cambodia? Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CCCLIX "How many people fake the turning point of their life?" Here are some key texts in the saga of John "F" Kerry's 1968 Christmas Article in the Boston Globe, October 14, 1979. .... On more than one occasion, I, like Martin Sheen in "Apocalypse Now," took my patrol boat into Cambodia. In fact I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas. The absurdity of almost being killed by our own allies in a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real.... Speech on the Senate Floor, March 27, 1986. .... Mr. President [that is, the presiding officer of the US Senate], I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared seared in me, that says to me, before we send another generation into harm's way we have a responsibility in the U.S. Senate to go the last step, to make the best effort possible in order to avoid that kind of conflict.... Passage in biography Tour of Duty, 2004, drawing on Kerry's own journal. .... By the time they reached Sa Dec [in South Vietnam], the air had cooled off considerably. "The night for once is comforting," Kerry wrote, "and you take a Coke and some peanut butter and jelly and go up on the roof of the cabin with your tape recorder and sit for a while, quietly watching flares float silently through the sky and flashes announce disquieting intent somewhere in the distance." Silhouetted by the lights shining from the junks parked along the canal, Kerry could see empty fishnets swaying from their teak poles in the gentle breeze. He realized that the nets would not be filled that Christmas Eve, or any other night as long as the war ground on; nighttime meant curfew for the South Vietnamese, by a law American law. It was their country, but the United States imposed and enforced the edict that at night anything that moved could and would be shot, and damn the consequences. After all, one could never know if a movement in the dark was innocent or hostile. All a PCF [Patrol Craft Fast] officer could know was that somebody, for some reason, was breaking curfew.... Kerry's arch-nemesis John O'Neill is interviewed at Human Events Online today: .... The significance of "Christmas in Cambodia" is that he accused every single fellow officer I mean every superior of a war crime in crossing an international boundary illegally. He painted himself as a hero among villains. He said it was the turning point of his whole life many times how many people fake the turning point of their life?... Perhaps a better question is What kind of person fakes the turning point of his life? Deborah Orin writes at the New York Post today. + + + + + There's now some real angst in Democratic circles be cause of the growing evidence that Democrat John Kerry's claim to have a memory "seared in me" of spending Christmas 1968 in Cambodia was false — and just didn't happen. But what worries some pro-Kerry Democrats is the fear that Kerry has, as one put it, "an Al Gore problem" — that he's a serial exaggerator. (Remember how Gore claimed to have invented the Internet and inspired the novel "Love Story"?) Remember Kerry's claim that "I've met foreign leaders" who told him he had to beat Bush? Turned out he hadn't met any foreign leaders in years. Kerry's campaign Web site claimed credit for Vietnam missions when another man, Tedd Peck, was the skipper (that was removed when he protested) and last week was claiming credit for former Sen. Bob Kerrey's service as Senate Intelligence Committee vice chairman. "John Kerry, Bob Kerrey — similar names," blithely explained Kerry campaign spokesman Michael Meehan, as if Kerry didn't know his own bio. Not one of Kerry's Swift boat crewmates, even the ones backing his candidacy, recalls being in Cambodia in Christmas 1968 — and anti-Kerry Swift boat veterans cite a host of evidence that he was 50 miles away in Vietnam. Why does it matter? Because Kerry has said the Cambodia incident — of being sent on a covert mission to "a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops" was "seared" in his mind and changed his view of America. Team Kerry's excuse is that maybe he accidentally crossed the border or his time frame was fuzzy, but that just won't square with his passionate 1986 claim, on the Senate floor, that the Christmas memory was "seared — seared — in me." Unlike the conflicts over Kerry's medals, this isn't a he said/he said dispute — Kerry either was or wasn't in Cambodia. Eventually a reporter will ask him point-blank if he still claims he was in Cambodia that Christmas — yes or no. For sure, as the anti-Kerry Swift vets pointed out — thus embarrassing every reporter who missed it for over a decade — Kerry's statements were clearly false, since Nixon wasn't yet president in Christmas 1968. But adding Nixon sure embellishes the tale. The story has unraveled so badly that Kerry's court biographer, Douglas Brinkley, is said to be preparing a new account in which Cambodia is said to come post-Christmas. So why did Brinkley leave it out of his campaign bio? The other fascinating part of this story is the key role that bloggers on the Internet have played in pointing out the holes in Kerry's story — even as much of the press tries to ignore them. For instance, when Team Kerry held a press conference featuring his crewmates this week, one was conspicuously missing — David Alston — after the Internet-fueled revelation that he may have only served on Kerry's boat for one week. A Web blogger, captainsquartersblog, began questioning whether Alston (who has spoken emotionally about how they "bled together") ever served with Kerry. National Review examined the records and concluded maybe — for just one week. This whole story could be a test of the Internet's impact in this campaign. While most papers have been ignoring the story — until Kerry went ballistic at the Swift vets yesterday — bloggers have been examining it in detail. On Web sites like Instapundit.com, captainsquartersblog.com, hugh- hewitt.com and rogerlsimon.com, skeptical veterans are trading details on Kerry's service and raising intricate questions about his veracity based on their own experience. Their online dialogue is punctuated with questions about why the "mainstream media" have been mostly ignoring this story — and why the 13 pro-Kerry vets are automatically assumed to have more credibility than 264 anti-Kerry vets. Just imagine the coverage if 264 vets who served with Bush in the Texas Air National Guard made similar charges. For those bloggers, this story has become a test of the mainstream media's credibility — and its liberal anti-Bush bias. Deborah Orin is The Post's Washington bureau chief. + + + + + The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes. P.S. The Inimitable One weighs in, Aug. 15 (quoted ellipsis in original): .... It turns out at Christmas 1968 [John Kerry] wasn't in Cambodia but was instead 55 miles away at Sa Dec, South Vietnam. So the Kerry campaign's begun riffling hurriedly through its Sears Rowback catalog for more or less watertight back-pedaling of the story: They now say that ''many times he was on or near the Cambodian border,'' which is true in the sense that 80 percent of Canadians live on or near the American border. But most folks in Vancouver don't claim to be living in the Greater Seattle area. Earlier, senior Kerry spokesman Michael Meehan told ABC News: ''The Mekong Delta consists of the border between Cambodia and Vietnam, so on Christmas Eve in 1968, he was in fact on patrol ... in the Mekong Delta between Cambodia and Vietnam.'' For a crowd of ostentatious multilateralists, they can't seem to hold the map the right way up: The Mekong River isn't the border between Cambodia and Vietnam; it cuts through the heart of Cambodia and then runs through Vietnam to the sea. But this question isn't about geographical degrees of latitude so much as psychological ones. Here's the real reason Lt. Kerry wasn't spending Dec. 24, 1968, on a secret mission in Cambodia: On the previous day, Dec. 23, the U.S. government finally secured the release, after a five-month diplomatic stand-off, of 11 Americans whose U.S. Army utility landing craft had made a navigational error and strayed into Cambodian waters. Prince Sihanouk had rejected U.S. apologies and threatened to try the men under Cambodian law. It's unlikely, 24 hours after their release, anyone in Washington was thinking, ''Hey, we need to send that hotshot Kerry in there.'' So what are we to make of Sen. Kerry's self-seared 30-year-old false memory of Christmas in Cambodia with its vast accumulation of precise details? Of being shot at by the Khmer Rouge (unlikely in 1968) and of South Vietnamese troops drunkenly celebrating Christmas (as only devout Buddhists know how)? It's not about dates and places. For Kerry, his Yuletide mission was an epiphany: the moment when he realized his government was lying to the people about what was going on. This is the turning point, the moment that set the young Kerry on the path from brave young war volunteer to fierce anti-war activist. And it turns out it's total bunk.... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 08:19:41 PM |
The Technology Liberation Front A new weblog. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 06:25:56 PM |
The New Republic Clobbers Kerry Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CCCLVIII Thanks to a fellow blogger for sending this (emphasis and ellipsis in original). + + + + + Listening to John Kerry's recent evolution on Iraq makes us wistful for the John Kerry of old the John Kerry whose position on the war was contorted to the point of near incomprehension. True, the candidate's explanation of his 2002 vote to authorize force against Iraq may have varied by campaign stop, and true, his vote against the $87 billion for reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan represented the triumph of politics over policy. But, looking forward, Kerry usually sounded a responsible note. In April, for example, Kerry said "it would be unwise beyond belief for the United States of America to leave a failed Iraq in its wake." The good news is that Kerry's position on the war is no longer inscrutable. The bad news is that it is now indefensible. In the space of a month, the Democratic standard-bearer has gone from a pledge to bring troops home during his first term in the White House, to a pledge to bring troops home during his first year in office, to a pledge to bring them home during the first six months of his administration. Today, well, he just wants to bring the troops home. Hence his latest applause line: "We're going to get our troops home where they belong!" John Kerry is no Patrick Buchanan. He claims he won't simply cut and run from Iraq. "If we demonstrate an America that has a foreign policy that is smarter, more engaged ... and more respectful of the world," Kerry says, "we're going to bring people to our side." This, he adds, is "the way to bring our troops home." Kerry's desire to enlist our allies in Iraq is commendable. But does he honestly believe a "fresh start" will induce countries to dispatch forces to a war they opposed to begin with? India, Pakistan, Germany, France, and Russia have ruled out sending troops. If the Democratic presidential candidate knows of specific countries that would send their young to Iraq in the event of a Kerry presidency, he ought to stop waxing Nixonian and identify them. We suspect Kerry knows no help will be forthcoming, which is what makes his pandering so cynical. But even pandering can have consequences. Given the unpalatable choice between breaking a campaign pledge in order to go it alone or simply going home, we're worried Kerry may be tempted to choose the latter. This would be a terrible mistake. There are, after all, greater sins than unilateralism. One is indifference. Another is betrayal. Were we to "bring our troops home" prior to the establishment of a stable and at least nominally democratic Iraq, we would be guilty of both. Leaving aside the staggering moral calculation involved in abandoning a country the United States has invaded and turned inside out, how would a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq work in practical terms? It wouldn't. Iraqi security forces are still poorly trained and equipped, and, in the absence of a sizeable U.S. military presence, the war-torn state is likely to come apart at the seams. For a preview of what would follow a precipitous U.S. withdrawal, look no further than the terrorist metropolis of Falluja. None of this, however, seems to have made an impression on Kerry, who boasts that the aim of his Iraq strategy is to "get the hand out of the pocket of the American taxpayer and get the troops home." But this is not a strategy for success unless one defines success in terms of exit strategies. And that is the problem: Kerry has never said what he would consider an acceptable outcome in Iraq. Withdrawing American troops quickly makes sense only if one is content to leave behind a nation far different from the budding Middle Eastern democracy President Bush promised when he launched the war. Kerry may indeed be satisfied with such an outcome (at this point, Bush may be as well). He may, in fact, think a democratic Iraq unrealistic. If this is the case, he should say so. He came close once, in April, when he proclaimed that America's goal should be "a stable Iraq, not whether or not it is a full democracy." But he has never defined stability or said just how little democracy he would tolerate. Any decision to bring the troops home must be rooted in a policy for Iraq--a policy Kerry has yet to unveil. Sure, even absent a clear plan, promises to bring soldiers home swiftly may help Kerry in Dayton and Milwaukee. But they will hurt America in Najaf and Baqubah, emboldening the Baathist and Islamist guerrillas and demoralizing the government of Iyad Allawi and whoever succeeds him in elections scheduled for January. What's more, these promises will make it harder for Kerry to insure the stable Iraq he says he wants. The purpose of exit strategies is to win elections, not wars. Kerry needs to demonstrate that he remains as committed to the second goal as he is to the first. + + + + + The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 06:10:12 PM |
Operation Liberty Rising Protest Warriors plan their own kind of protest during the Republican National Convention in NYC later this month: .... Most elections revolve around one central question: should we grow government at a fast rate, or should we grow it at a very fast rate. This time however, battle lines have been drawn and each side is polarized like never before, and the issues could not be more fundamental and important. While President Bush and the Republican Congress have unfortunately caved in to Democrat principles and not done nearly enough to limit government, considering the times we live in today, President Bush's leadership in the wake of 9/11, removing two of the most vile, fascist decrepit regimes off the face of the earth and establishing the seeds of freedom in the Middle East, is worthy of any liberty lover's support. As the spirit of anti-war protests has been crushed under the weight of the emerging democracy in the Middle East, they have found a new justification to raise their fists in the air in frantic indignation: the Republicans have committed the cardinal sin of choosing New York City as the location for their National Convention, as this hinders the left's efforts to erase the events of September 11th from America's memory. And they will be working full steam to make sure anyone associated with the RNC feels less than unwelcome. As mobs of 'pacifists' plan to descend on New York, encouraging each other to blockade hotels and convention sites, anti-RNC websites are distributing lists of delegates' itineraries and hotel accommodations, targeting them for harassment. On August 29th, the Republican National Convention will begin, and ProtestWarrior will be there to take on the hordes of leftists whose entire goal is to silence, to hate, to scream out of existence the idea that freedom can flourish throughout the world.... This week, they published their manifesto: .... For most of this century their weapon of choice was Communism/Marxism/Socialism take your pick, which would have enslaved the entire world in totalitarianism but not for a vigilant America armed to the teeth, a policy they denounced every step of the way. Now we face a new threat, Islamo-fascism, a movement that will not stop so long as any outpost of Judeo-Christianity remains. It doesn't matter that Islamo-fascist countries have no freedom, no civil liberties, no women's rights, no science, no art, and are controlled by billionaire oligarchs who pay the clerics to keep their people under control; that they are part of the revolutionary struggle against America is all that is required to receive the moral approval of the 'pacifists.' The best foreign policy would be for America to stand as a beacon to the power of liberty, and not involve itself in foreign entanglements. Every nation deserves their government, and we detest that one American soldier should have to die to fix the problems that another nation created. But as much as we wish this weren't the case, the unfortunate situation is that we have enemies that will not be placated from destroying us, and either we take the fight to them, or they bring it to us.... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 05:38:57 PM |
Ted Kennedy Gets on Wrong List The That was obviously a mistake. Chappaquiddick Fats should be on a watch list for automobiles not airlines. The Blog from the Core could not reach Mary Jo Kopechne for comment. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 06:47:30 AM |
Clintonspeak At Its Finest Pay close attention to this: Sen. John Kerry accused President Bush on Thursday [Aug. 19] of relying on front groups to challenge his record of valor in Vietnam, asserting, "He wants them to do his dirty work." Defending his record, the Democratic presidential candidate said, "Thirty years ago, official Navy reports documented my service in Vietnam and awarded me the Silver Star, the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts." "Thirty years ago, this was the plain truth. It still is. And I still carry the shrapnel in my leg from a wound in Vietnam." .... As far as I know and I try to keep informed nobody has denied that Kerry has shrapnel in his leg. I, for one, would like to see a recent X-ray, though, for verification. More importantly, nobody denies "official Navy reports documented" his "service in Vietnam and awarded" him various awards. That is, indeed, the "plain truth", then and now. The Swiftees' claim is, rather, that the Navy's documents & awards were based on John Kerry's own lies going up the chain of command. (BTW, John Hurley does this continually in his encounters with John O'Neill on TV: O'Neill claims that the Navy's official documents are based on John Kerry's lies, and Hurley just keeps reading from the documents. Duh.) How about that? Kerry can pretend to be defending himself at the very time he is actually ignoring the real issues. Worse, he can use the "plain truth" to continue to try to fool people. As slick as spittle. And Bill Clinton, too. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Fri. 08/20/04 06:39:00 AM |
The Blog from the Core © 2002-2008 E. L. Core. All rights reserved. |
Previous | Week | Next |