The FIRST EVER Newsweek coverage of Kerry’s lies now includes the Video of the 2 POW’s who were tortured because of Hanoi John.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5783805/site/newsweek

Newsweek Shows POW’s Talking About Torture

Posted by: leaddog2 at August 22, 2004 12:59 PM

LD2: Ah — there’s that overbroad brush again.

The logical fallacy you commit here is the infamous Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc problem, beloved of Small Minds who have difficulty with time sequences.

If A happens, then B happens, there is no reason to believe that A caused B.

Except, of course, when you’re spinning. Again.

Posted by: Don at August 22, 2004 01:00 PM

Don, I am glad you kept your logic book. Let us stick to the topic, gents. Hypocrisy.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/07/kerry.exley/

“Zach Exley, the director of special projects for the MoveOn PAC, is going to the Kerry campaign to become its director of online communications and organization.”

Posted by: jones at August 22, 2004 01:39 PM

Alas, Jones ol’ chap — you commit the selfsame logical error that LD2 committed.

Can you see it, or do you need to have it pointed out to you directly?

Posted by: Don at August 22, 2004 05:14 PM

Don, where did you ever obtain the mistaken impression that you know what logic represents?

Hypocracy, Thy Name is DEMONCRAT

Posted by: leaddog2 at August 22, 2004 06:14 PM

Don,

Be careful about dismissing so easily this one about how the NVA tortured and pressured POWs. They really liked to use public announcements from Kerry and the other Viet Nam Vets Against the War and relay articles about these comments by the press and Congress.

I’ve personally reviewed many after action reports from the POWs and it was a common tactic for the NVA to show the anti-war movement growth and theatrics to try and break the POWs refusal to sign “war crimes” statements. Kerry’s coverage before Congress and the media was especially useful to the managers of the Hanoi Hilton. Most of the POWs who had been there the longest felt espcially betrayed by Kerry’s comments as they had withstood hours of physical abuse and torture and who knows how many hours of isolation and deprivation after refusing to sign those cherished Communist Cold War documets which to the Communist would achieve a major Cold War objective.

If Newsweek or others run with this, it could be devastating if more records are researched and interviews with former NVA guards obtained.

As I observed in previous posts, featuing Kerry’s Viet Nam record promiently during this campaign was a very dangerous double-edged sword… it can cut both ways with Vets, especially if it taps into long pent-up frustration felt by many Vets about Kerry and the whole anti-war movement.

Posted by: steve at August 22, 2004 10:16 PM

related cartoon here.

(scroll down for some others, slightly less related)

Posted by: CERDIP at August 23, 2004 11:41 AM

What Don wishes us to believe is that there is no relationship between Kerry’s behavior after his tour of duty and the behavior of the North vietnamese prison officials. And of course absent some additional information, like oh say the eyewitness reports of American POW’s, Don’s point is valid.

So Don can argue logic but he’s up against emotion this time. Many vets are simply mad as hell and are not going to let this one go by. Kerry infuriated the people he served with and now must deal with their anger.

I am surprised that the Kerry camp wasn’t better prepared for this.

Posted by: skip at August 23, 2004 01:20 PM

Skip, CERDIP et al:

Did the North Vietnamese torture Murken prisoners before 1971? Seemingly they did! Did they use whatever information was Out There on them? No question — they did that too! Did they make up things to tell to the POWs? Yes — they did that too.

Now, make the case that had the Kerry statements Not been a matter of public record at the time, they would Not have tortured anyone. Can you do that?

No — you cannot. Nor will you Ever be able to do that either.

Kerry’s statements did Not cause Murkens to be tortured. Nor were they Untrue on their face. The things he told the SFRC were indeed true.

This thing that VietVets are now trying to do by saying that the statements were alleged against each and every Murken soldier is what’s nonsense.

That was a dirty little war, and our part in it is simply Not noble across the board. There’s a bunch of these self-styled Heeroes that carry with them the knowledge of how They acted more than merely badly in the war.

War is like that. All wars are like that. The Viet Nam War was like that ab initio, and it got worse as the overall picture of the war got worse over time.

Kerry has Nothing to apologize for in standing tall and telling the Murken People what their Noble Sons were doing in their name far more often than they should.

But it always was McNamara and/or Kissinger who should have told the story — not a decorated junior officer. Someone had to.

It’s the others who were the Cowards — not him.

Posted by: Don at August 23, 2004 02:45 PM

Yeah Don, put that up alongside the fact that this Reserve Lieutenant went to Paris to have his own talks with the Vietnamese!! When the whole story of this TREASONOUS act comes out your man Kerry will be toast…so you better hope American’s are as stupid as you portray them. The logic you promote is an ideaology not a logical brain response…otherwise, you yourself should have been aborted…..or at least the result of a same sex marriage!

Posted by: dickmr at August 23, 2004 04:56 PM

Wow…now I know why you go by “dick”. Calling Americans stupid or suggesting that Don should have been aborted and whatever else you drooled out certainly doesn’t lend itself to a discussion, nor does it address anything. Think you can back off your jets there a bit, Dick?

Posted by: Jatsby at August 23, 2004 08:36 PM

Dear Don,
Normally I have great respect for your idea’s (While I cannot say I agree with the majority of them, I will say you give me a lot to think about), generally they are logical and researched, however this time I am greatly dissapointed.

The first point you brought up, “Did the North Vietnamese torture Murken prisoners before 1971?” has absolutley no bearing on this disscussion. If the vietcong used John Kerry’s statements to torture/antagonize POW’s then the statement that his actions were used for torture is true. While I absolutley agree with you in that the full extent of the damage done by Senator Kerry’s remarks will never be known, to say that they had no effect (or to say that he is unresponsible for what he has said) is ludicrous(sp).

Furthermore there is absolutley no need to make a case that if “Kerry statements Not been a matter of public record at the time, they would Not have tortured anyone.” There is no need to do this simply because they ARE a matter of public record because they were made to be extremely public. To suggest changing the nature of the statements is a nice ploy, but far below you.

Finally the fact that the statements did not cause the Americans to be tortured does not lessen the fact that the statments were used to torture Americans. True and Untrue is not the point here, the point here is simply that the statements where used to torture American POWs. To argue anything else is to change the subject (which is a cowards way to admit defeat.)

Please Don, consider what it is you are debating. We, as free thinking individuals, should do our utmost to be bipartisan. Making choices on the merrits of those choices and not simply on the group advocating said choices. I can understand that you like Kerry (everybody is entitled to an opinon,) but to blindly follow him and overlook his flaws is childesh at best.

- Amadeaus

Posted by: Amadeaus at August 24, 2004 06:42 PM