2004 US Presidential Election
October 31, 2004
Kerry | Did Kerry take direction from North Vietnamese Communists?
On October 22, 2004, Swift Veterans and POWs for Truth researchers Troy Jenkins and Tom Wyld located two Vietnamese communist documents in the archives of the Vietnam Center at Texas Tech University, in the Douglas Pike Collection. Douglas Pike was a leading authority on the Vietnam War who collected over 2 million pages of original documents now archived at the Vietnam Center. James Reckner, Ph.D., Director of the Vietnam Center at Texas Tech, verifies that the documents in the Pike collection are original and authentic. The Circular and the Directive are listed as items numbered 2150901039b and 2150901041 respectively.
The fifth paragraph of this document makes clear that the Vietnamese communists were utilizing for their propaganda purposes the activities of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. The protest described as occurring from April 19 through April 22, 1971 coincides directly with the dates of Dewey Canyon III, the Washington, DC, protest led by John Kerry, during which John Kerry’s testimony before Senator Fulbright’s Foreign Relations Committee was a televised centerpiece. The description of the protest activities in the Directive even include the “return their medals” ceremony in which John Kerry and other VVAW members threw their medals and/or ribbons toward the steps of the US Capitol, with several shouting threats of violence against their government as they did so.
Further reporting of this research is available in this New York Sun article.
Posted by Windrider at October 31, 2004 07:10 AM | TrackBack
Chad at In The Bullpen and Kevin over at Wizbang have done extensive reporting on this throughout the week. Chad even had an exclusive interview with Troy Jenkins. I’m surprised you didn’t mention or link to either of them.
Posted by: Digger at October 31, 2004 08:09 AM
Posted by: PeterUK at October 31, 2004 08:23 AM
In answer to the headline, “Yes, So What?”.
Either voters have already listened to what the SwiftVets and POWs have said about Kerry’s post-war activities, or they’ve ignored the whole subject of his treachery long ago as irrelevant. ( I don’t like using the word ‘treachery’, it makes me sound like a fruit loop - nonetheless, it’s the most appropriate word to use. Bummer. ).
However, for the record, things like this should be set down permanently. And after the election, regardless of the outcome, further digging needs doing.
But should Kerry get elected, wait till he’s out of office. In wartime, even if the POTUS is the north end of a southbound camel, he should be supported - as long as he doesn’t return to bad habits from his youth. If he does, impeach the bum.
Of course, if Bush got re-elected, then fell off the wagon so he became a drunken incompetent, his posterior should be impeached too.
Sometimes it helps being an Aussie, with no particular stake in the Dem/Rep factional brawl.
FWIW my wife Carmel’s parents took one look at Kerry on the Gogglebox (knowing nothing about him), and their reaction was “Sleazeball”. Their reaction to Bush was “Fair Dinkum (Genuine, the real McCoy, bona fide), but maybe not the brightest bulb on the Christmas Tree”.
Carmel’s parents were astonished that Kerry was quite possibly the next POTUS. They wouldn’t trust him as 3rd-assistant dog-catcher in Oodnadatta. It’s not his crookedness (sometimes an advantage in a politician), it’s that he’s so obviously treacherous. That word again…
Still, it’s your election, not ours. Good luck.
Posted by: aebrain at October 31, 2004 08:53 AM
This topic really doesn’t matter.
ELECTION IS HERE: TIME TO BOTTOM LINE IT
This election is a referendum on Bush. If he’s bad, then it’s time to give the new guy Kerry a chance. If not, then let Bush have four more years.
KEY AREAS OF BUSH RECORD ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 10
BUSH RECORD ON TERRORISM – 2 OUT OF 10:
BUSH RECORD ON IRAQ – 1 OUT OF 10.
BUSH RECORD ON THE ECONOMY: 3 OUT OF 10.
BUSH ON SOCIAL ISSUES: 5 OUT OF 10.
BOTTOM LINE: Bush’s record is weak. Time to give the new guy a chance. Kerry proved himself capable and Bush’s match during the debates. Many of the people hollering about Kerry should remember all the similar hollering about Clinton, who turned out to do a pretty good job for America. No big wars on Clinton’s watch. A great economy. At least four terrorist attacks averted by the Clinton administration through hard work leading up to the turn of the millennium, whereas the Bush administration ignored similar signs leading up to 9/11. Maybe that’s why bin Laden was so surprised that 9/11 exceeded all his expectations in running flawlessly.
Posted by: JD at October 31, 2004 12:01 PM
Bin Laden on the loose - and a shadow of his former self. Best he can muster is ‘stop it, or I will taunt you agan!’ If he could hit us, he would have. At this point, having his head on a pijke would be good, but he’s at the point of the Monty Python character ‘it’s only a flesh wound!’
The President is correct that we avoid ‘target fixation’ on this one individual. We are fighting an idea, not a man. Capture of kill bin Laden, and the war isn’t over.
Iraq was a logical next step. It fits in with the overarching strategy to spread liberty to the greater Middle East. The fact that Saddam was already at war with us seems lost on a lot of folks. The inspections were not working - an aspect highlighted by the ‘missing explosives’ story, but rarely brought up. The IAEA guys were under mandate to destroy exactly that sort of material - and they let Saddam hold onto it, without so much as a note from Klinger’s mother.
As for ‘the Iraq mess not being cleaned up’ - news flash, sports fans: war is a messy business. Particularly against a shadowy and elusive opponent that will go to the point of suicidal actions, without regard for who is in the area. The wail is that there were no terrorists in Iraq before the war - patently untrue - and that it is now a terrorist recruiting ground. I’d disagree and portray it as a terrorist graveyard. Thousands of them have been sucked in by the opportunity to run down the street with their AK-47s and RPGs after the infidels, only to get mowed down like the morons they really are.
The Preseident’s economic policies have cushioned us from two major body blows to the economy - the bursting of the dot com illusion, and the attacks of 9/11. Make as much hay out of the moaning over the loss of ‘surpluses’ - those were projections based on a mirage. The couple of years that the budget did run ‘in the black’ scarcely made an impact on the national debt. The President’s tax cuts were timely, in that they mitigated some, but not all, of the impact of a recession that was already in full swing when he took over. But it is a nice try to play pin the blame on the incumbent for the collapse of what could be termed basically a numeric Ponzi scheme by the Clinton folks.
The stem cell issue is one of the most annoying red herrings of this campaign. If you fault the President for picking a middle ground that allows research to go ahead, without opening up the federal funding spigot against the deeply held moral concerns of a significant segment of the US population, then you’d probably also not be willing to give him credit for even picking out matching socks in the morning.
Posted by: Wind Rider at October 31, 2004 12:42 PM
Wind Rider - Excellent point, there NEVER was a surplus. NEVER, not even close. Not because of something Bush did wrong or Clinton did right - because the federal government has cooked off the books the totally unfunded $26 trillion liability of Social Security.
Yes, it’s a big number and it can’t be ignored, but it doesn’t keep the feds from pretending it’s not there. Of course, who supposed to cover SS? The milkman? Your 401k?
My guess is the same feds who spent every cent every worker ever pumped into this dry hole. The same people who talk about ‘lock boxes’ and ‘trust funds’ as if they actually existed.
Someone’s got to address this - SOON. What are your bets Kerry will do squat?
Posted by: torpedo_eight at October 31, 2004 10:04 PM