HANOI JOHNAND
HANOI JANE
By January of 1970, Kerry’s anti-war stance led him to “tell his boss that his conscience dictated that he protest the war, that he wanted out of the Navy immediately so that he could run for congress." He lost his bid for election.
John Kerry attended an anti-war rally in September of 1970 with "Hanoi" Jane Fonda and Donald Sutherland...AFTER Fonda and Sutherland had organized their "F*ck the Army" tour. This tour, a spoof of USO tours, was performed outside military installations, and as its name indicates, was intended to undermine the morale of American soldiers fighting in Vietnam.
The communist Daily World published photos of John Kerry speaking to protestors and bragged that Kerry's group displayed a banner portraying a portrait of Communist Party leader Angela Davis, who once stated publicly that she was “dedicated to the overthrow of your [the United States'] system of government and your society,” the New American reported in May of 2003.
By his regular participation in VVAW demonstrations, Kerry aligned himself with what the Boston Herald Traveler labeled 'revolutionary Communists.’ The December 12, 1971, Boston Herald Traveler reported that an ‘abundance of Vietcong flags, clenched fists raised in the air, and placards plainly bearing legends in support of China, Cuba, the USSR, North Korea and the Hanoi government” were present.’
Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry says: “As a national leader of VVAW, Kerry campaigned against the effort of the United States to contain the spread of Communism. He used the blood of servicemen still in the field for his own political advancement by claiming that their blood was being shed unnecessarily or in vain.
With John Kerry as their leader, "VVAW members mocked the uniform of United States soldiers by wearing tattered fatigues marked with pro-communist graffiti. They dishonored America by marching in demonstrations under the flag of the Viet Cong enemy.”
In recent years, John Kerry's blatant exploitation of the Vietnam Veterans' Memorial for political gain and Veteran's Day photo ops have resulted in many veterans, who are still outraged by his Winter Soldier testimony and his betrayal of his fellow soldiers and his country, turning their backs on him.
Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 23, 1971, Kerry claimed that U.S. soldiers had “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, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam.”
In his testimony, Kerry claimed there was no communist threat and said: “In 1970 at West Point Vice President Agnew said ‘some glamorize the criminal misfits of society while our best men die in Asian rice paddies to preserve the freedom which most of those misfits abuse,’ and this was used as a rallying point for our effort in Vietnam. But for us, as boys in Asia whom the country was supposed to support, his statement is a terrible distortion from which we can only draw a very deep sense of revulsion, and hence the anger of some of the men who are here in Washington today. It is a distortion because we in no way consider ourselves the best men of this country ….”
On April 23, 1971, Kerry led members of VVAW (Vietnam Veterans Against the War)in a protest during which they threw their medals and ribbons over a fence in front of the U.S. Capitol. Kerry, it should be noted, did not throw his own medals—they hold a place of honor in his congressional offices.
John Kerry then led Operation Dewey Canyon III, which began on April 18, 1971, with nearly 1,000 Vietnam veterans, armed with toy rifles, gathering on the Washington Mall for what they called "a limited incursion” wherein they staged mock "search and destroy" missions and massacres of civilians. Under Kerry's leadership, VVAW members mocked the uniform of American soldiers by wearing tattered fatigues marked with pro-communist graffiti. They dishonored America by marching in demonstrations under the flag of the Viet Cong.
Kerry ran for election to the House of Representatives in 1972, and in a further attempt to cover up his perfidy, he quashed reproduction of the picture on the front cover of his own book, The New Soldier. His political opponents reported that "it depicted several unkempt youths crudely handling an upside down American flag to mock the famous photo of the U.S. Marines at Iwo Jima."
VOTING RECORD on NATIONAL SECURITY
According to the American Conservative Union, Kerry has a lifetime rating of 6 percent, compared to 13 for the demolished Rep. Dick Gephardt, 14 for Sen. John Edwards, 15 for Kucinich and 19 for Sen. Joe Lieberman.
In 1972, when John Kerry first campaigned for Congress, he made a commitment to vote against military appropriations. “On what he will do if he’s elected to Congress, Kerry said he would ‘bring a different kind of message to the president.’ He said he would vote against military appropriations.” After he was elected, he went even further, actively introducing legislation that would reduce funding for defense and intelligence. He opposed defense funding throughout the 1980s.
In 1991, Senator Kerry voted cut over $3 billion from the defense budget and shift that money to social programs.
In 1992, Kerry voted to cut $6 billion from the defense budget.
In 1993, John Kerry voted against increased defense spending for military pay raises. Yes, Kerry voted to kill an INCREASE IN MILITARY PAY over five years.
During the First Session of the 103rd Congress in 1993, Kerry introduced Senate Bill 1163, to reduce defense spending by the following:
Cut the number of Navy submarines and their crews
Reduce the number of light infantry units in the Army down to one
Reduce tactical fighter wings in the Air Force
Terminate the Navy’s coastal mine-hunting ship program
Force the retirement of no less than 60,000 members of the Armed Forces in one year.
Sen. Kerry’s Senate Bill 1290, proposed also in the 104th Congress, sought to gut $1.5 billion from the overall intelligence budget, over 5 years.
Sen. Kerry’s Senate Bill 1580, proposed during the Second Session of the 104th Congress, sought to slash Defense Department funding by $6.5 billion
In 1995, Kerry proposed a bill gutting $1.5 billion from intelligence budget. Kerry introduced a bill that would “reduce the intelligence budget by $300 million in each of fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.”
In 1995, Kerry voted to freeze defense spending for 7 years, cutting over $34 billion from the defense budget.
In 1995, Kerry voted to slash FBI funding by $80 million.
In 1996, Kerry introduced bill to slash defense department funding by $6.5 billion
It should also be noted that although John Kerry voted IN FAVOR of sending troops to war in Iraq, he voted AGAINST funding them. Although Kerry, in his stump speeches, states unequivocally that he would "not send our troops to war without body armor," he "voted for the $87 billion BEFORE HE VOTED AGAINST IT."
John Kerry won't tell you the truth, but he VOTED AGAINST SUPPLYING AMERICAN TROOPS WHILE THEY WERE AT WAR!"
TERRORISM
Only two years after the first World Trade Center bombing, John Kerry unsuccessfully proposed legislation to slash $1.5 billion over the next 5 years from our intelligence budget. His proposed cuts equaled a $300 million cut in intelligence funding in 1995; the year before terrorists attacked the Khobar Towers, a $300 million cut in intelligence funding in 1997; the year before terrorists attacked U.S. embassies in East Africa, and a $300 million cut in intelligence funding in 1999; the year before terrorists attacked the U.S.S. Cole.
Twelve days after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, John Kerry stated, “And the tragedy is, at the moment, the single most important weapon for the United States of America is intelligence. It's the single most important weapon in this particular war …”
This is the same Sen. Kerry who in 1995, two years after the first World Trade Center bombing, voted to cut FBI funding by $80 million.
"It is one of those terrible things, and I'll never forget, ever, the sight of that child," Kerry later said about the dead baby. "But there was nothing that anybody could have done about it. It was the only instance of that happening."
Kerry further abdicates personal responsibility by saying that the Navy was to blame for a ''free fire zone'' policy in Vietnam which put civilians at such high risk.
This from the same man who testified before congress that U.S. servicemen “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.”
Kerry impugns the President for his service, and yet Kerry's own record indicates a lack of moral character that is almost unbelievable.
Kerry experienced his first combat action on Dec. 2, 1968. He received a slight wound to his arm and earned his first Purple Heart. He earned his second Purple Heart after sustaining a minor shrapnel wound to his left thigh on Feb. 20, 1969. He was awarded his third Purple Heart on March 13, 1969, when a mine detonated near his boat, slightly wounding him in the right arm. When asked about the severity of the wounds, Kerry said that "one of them cost him about two days of service, and that the other two did not interrupt his duty."
Upon receiving his third Purple Heart, Kerry asked to be sent home, using an obscure Navy rule which allowed any soldier wounded three times to return to the United States immediately. According to Commodore Charles F. Horne, the commander of the coastal squadron in which Kerry served, Kerry requested reassignment ... "as a personal aide in Boston, New York, or Wash., D.C. area."
WAR CRIME?
According to Ted Sampley’s report of Kerry’s actions on February 28, 1969, for which he was awarded the Silver Star, ”when Kerry's Patrol Craft Fast 94 received a B-40 rocket shot from shore, he hot dogged his craft beaching it in the center of the enemy position. To his surprise, an enemy soldier sprang up from a hole not ten feet from Patrol Craft 94 and fled. The boat's machine gunner hit and wounded the fleeing Viet Cong as he darted behind a hootch. The twin .50s gunner fired at the Viet Cong. He said he "laid 50 rounds" into the hootch before Kerry leaped from the boat and dashed in to administer a "coup de grace" to the wounded Viet Cong. Kerry returned with the B-40 rocket and launcher.”
According to the rules of war, it is illegal to kill a wounded enemy if that person is not actively engaged in hostilities. IF the VC combatant was still alive after sustaining 50 rounds from a .50 gun, I can’t imagine there was enough left of him to kill. However, if by some chance he WAS alive, the actions taken by Kerry are tantamount to murder, and are in direct violation of the Geneva Convention.
CONVENTION (I) FOR THE AMELIORATION OF THE CONDITION OF THE WOUNDED AND SICK IN ARMED FORCES IN THE FIELD, AUGUST 12, 1949
“Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely…To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds…”
“The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.”
Heroic action, or war crime? You make the call…
COMMENTS FROM FELLOW VIETNAM VETERANS
Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA), the first pilot to qualify as an ace in the Vietnam War, said, "it diminishes the service some of us almost gave our lives for, and the over 56,000 people that lost their lives —it slaps their families in the face."
"I think it's his right, but it kind of upsets you," Mr. Cunningham said. "He had honorable service, but it's a shame someone would let politics rule their life, instead of their principles." (Mr. Kerry testified in 1971 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, citing accusations that American soldiers in Vietnam routinely committed atrocities such as beheadings, killing children and razing villages. He did not present evidence of these claims).
"Joining the antiwar movement was possibly the worst thing he could have done to the soldiers still in the field," Ted Sampley, a Vietnam veteran who sponsors an anti-Kerry website, said, "He basically gave aid and comfort to the enemy."
Rep. Sam Johnson, Texas Republican, who spent nearly seven years in a prisoner-of-war camp in Vietnam, believes that the photograph of Mr. Kerry with "Hanoi" Jane Fonda will hurt his campaign. "I think it symbolizes how two-faced he is, talking about his war reputation, which is questionable on the one hand, and then coming out against our veterans who were fighting over there on the other," Mr. Johnson said.
Mr. Johnson recalled that his North Vietnamese captors played recordings of Miss Fonda telling U.S. troops to give up the war. "Seeing this picture of Kerry with her at antiwar demonstrations in the United States just makes me want to throw up."
John McCain admitted that during his time as a POW in Vietnam, his captors used reports of protests led by Kerry to goad him and other POWs.
General Patton commented that Kerry's actions "had given aid and comfort to the enemy."
IRAQ
In 1991, John Kerry acknowledged Saddam Hussein’s possession of WMD, but voted against military action in the Gulf War.
In 1998, "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
John Kerry’s Speech before the Senate, 9 October 2002
“It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world. He has as much as promised it.
And he has already created a stunning track record of miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America's response to it. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel. He miscalculated his own military might. He miscalculated the Arab world's response to his plight. He miscalculated in attempting an assassination of a former President of the United States. And he is miscalculating now America's judgments about his miscalculations.
And all those miscalculations are compounded by the rest of his history: he is a brutal, oppressive dictator guilty of personally murdering and condoning murder and torture, grotesque violence against women and execution of political opponents. He is a war criminal who used chemical weapons against another nation, and of course, as we know, against his own people, the Kurds. He has diverted funds from the oil for food program which were intended by the international community to ease the burden of the Iraqi people. He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal and has given money to families of suicide bombers.
I mention these not because they are a cause to go to war in and of themselves - as the President previously suggested - but because they tell us a lot about the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction and the nature of this man. We should not go to war because these things are in his past but we should be prepared to go to war because of what they tell us about the future. ”
“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. It has been with us for the last four years - since Saddam Hussein kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors at the end of 1998. And frankly, after Operation Desert Fox failed to force Iraq to readmit inspectors, the United States - and the international community - erred in failing to find effective ways to compel Iraqi compliance, thus giving Saddam Hussein a free hand for four years to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction programs and allowing the world to lose focus on the threat of proliferation.
The United States Senate worked to urge action -- in early 1998 I joined Sens. McCain, Hagel, and other Senators in a resolution urging the President to ''take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Later in the year Congress enacted legislation declaring Iraq in "material and unacceptable breach" of its disarmament obligations and urging the President to take appropriate action to bring Iraq into compliance. President Bush could well have taken office backed by our sense of urgency about holding Saddam Hussein accountable, and with an international, United Nations backed, multilateral stamp of approval already on a clear demand: disarmament of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
But the Administration missed an opportunity two years ago and particularly a year ago after September 11th to address this issue. They regrettably, even clumsily, complicated their own case. The events of September 11 created a new understanding of the terrorist threat and the degree to which every nation is vulnerable. That understanding enabled the Administration to forge a broad and impressive coalition against terrorism. Had the Administration tried then to capitalize on this unity of spirit to build a coalition to disarm Iraq, we would not be debating this question now, just a few weeks before Congressional elections. The Administration's decision to engage on this issue now, rather than a year ago or earlier, and the manner in which it engaged has politicized and complicated the national debate and raised questions about the credibility of its case.”
“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
"It appears that with the deadline for exile come and gone, Saddam Hussein has chosen to make military force the ultimate weapons inspections enforcement mechanism. If so, the only exit strategy is victory, this is our common mission and the world's cause. We're in this together. We want to complete the mission while safeguarding our troops, avoiding innocent civilian casualties, disarming Saddam Hussein and engaging the community of nations to rebuild Iraq." John Kerry, April 1, 2003
As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Kerry shared the assessment of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. He voted for the use of force in Iraq, then later tried to say it was a vote to “threaten” the use of force, and then ultimately declared himself an “anti-war” candidate.
PACS AND SPECIAL INTERESTS
Teresa Heinz Kerry gave over $50,000 to the League of Conservation Voters, which endorsed her husband's candidacy and run ads on his behalf, according to the New York Post and Greenwire.
According to the Washington Post, former Sen. Robert Torricelli, a Kerry fundraiser who was chastised by the Senate for his questionable fundraising activities less than two years ago, contributed $50,000 to a group for the specific purpose of running ads against Howard Dean in Iowa.
The Kerry campaign engaged in push-polling (polling voters by prefacing a question regarding support for a candidate on the basis of an untrue statement or conducting a "survey" for the purpose of suppressing or changing the voting position of the call recipient) tactics in Iowa. A Howard Dean supporter making a documentary about the Dean's campaign was present when the Kerry campaign called a constituent's home on the night of the caucuses and accused Howard Dean of being an environmental racist, according to a ABC News report.
More horrifying and offensive yet, the New York Daily News reports that Kerry campaign supporters plan to go into pro-life chat rooms on the Internet this fall to spread a slanderous and defamatory story that President Bush drove a former girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her abortion.
© 2004 D. LaTourette All Rights Reserved.
