This is from Kerry's testimony in Congress from the cooked up "Winter Soldier testimony" of communist activists faking to be Vietnam Veterans:
"They 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 countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
Basically, to enhance his anti-war credentials Vietnam Veterans Against The War enlisted the services of a bunch of phonies, who pretended to have served in Vietnam, to raise allegations of systematic war crimes perpetuated by US soldiers, he then used this fake evidence to sell to the public a lie.
And of course this was also played by the North Vietnamese government in propaganda broadcasts to their population to spurn them on to fight and kill American soldiers. I think "aiding and abetting the enemy" is the term that comes to mind.
Kerry then took a consistently pro-communist position during the 70's and 80's, opposing the rebuiling of our military, opposed the liberation of grenada, supported an unilateral "nuclear freeze", opposed the construction of virtually every major weapon system in the US military's inventory, such as the M-1 Abrams, M-2 Bradley, Cruise Missile, Patriot Missile, F-15, B-1, B-2, Apache Helicopter, MX missile, etc. Opposed the liberation of Kuwait, even with UN approval. He also consistently voted to defund the CIA. During the campaign he claimed that the threat from terrorism is "exagerrated", and that terrorism is mostly a law enforcement activity, which was our approach during the 90's and it failed miserable.
This is why Kerry had to attack Bush's military record, to weaken his strength and to cover up his weakness. So far, whenever Kerry's surrogates have been challenged on Kerry's very weak record on national security, they had to flee into Kerry's Vietnam record as if that was relevant to the issue at hand, and to insinuate that to critizise Kerry's national security record is to question his patriotism. Ending of course in feigned outrage of "how dare you question the patriotism of this Vietnam war hero".
How exactly is he going to keep us safe in the age of terrorism?
"They 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 countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
Basically, to enhance his anti-war credentials Vietnam Veterans Against The War enlisted the services of a bunch of phonies, who pretended to have served in Vietnam, to raise allegations of systematic war crimes perpetuated by US soldiers, he then used this fake evidence to sell to the public a lie.
And of course this was also played by the North Vietnamese government in propaganda broadcasts to their population to spurn them on to fight and kill American soldiers. I think "aiding and abetting the enemy" is the term that comes to mind.
Kerry then took a consistently pro-communist position during the 70's and 80's, opposing the rebuiling of our military, opposed the liberation of grenada, supported an unilateral "nuclear freeze", opposed the construction of virtually every major weapon system in the US military's inventory, such as the M-1 Abrams, M-2 Bradley, Cruise Missile, Patriot Missile, F-15, B-1, B-2, Apache Helicopter, MX missile, etc. Opposed the liberation of Kuwait, even with UN approval. He also consistently voted to defund the CIA. During the campaign he claimed that the threat from terrorism is "exagerrated", and that terrorism is mostly a law enforcement activity, which was our approach during the 90's and it failed miserable.
This is why Kerry had to attack Bush's military record, to weaken his strength and to cover up his weakness. So far, whenever Kerry's surrogates have been challenged on Kerry's very weak record on national security, they had to flee into Kerry's Vietnam record as if that was relevant to the issue at hand, and to insinuate that to critizise Kerry's national security record is to question his patriotism. Ending of course in feigned outrage of "how dare you question the patriotism of this Vietnam war hero".
How exactly is he going to keep us safe in the age of terrorism?
posted by Hansmeister | Wednesday, February 11, 2004
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home