"60's Lies About Vietnam War Must Be Exposed Now"

[Sparrowhawk]

"If there is to be an inquiry related to the Vietnam War, it should
be into the reasons why enemy propaganda was so widespread in this country, and why the enemy was able to condition the public to such an extent that the best educated segments of our population have given credence to the most incredible allegations."


We are seeing today, how Kerry proudly acknowledges having participated in those lies.

And we are beginning to see the seeds of anger rise once again of what we saw in the 60's when social programs funds were cut to fund the war. People in charge of those programs arose in protest because tehy would ahve to do with less. So the social profesional beggers of that tiem, united with the Anti-war movement to give the anti-war movement the numbers it needed to make it appear that there were many against the war, and they prevailed against common sense.


The "March for Women's Lives" needed the help of other causes in order to generate the number of people that reportedly gathered in Washington, D.C. Many of those in the march had their own agendas to promote that had little or nothing to do with saving women's lives. The invitation to march was extended to homosexual activists, antiwar protesters and those who oppose President Bush.

The pro-abortion organizers had to solicit these other groups in order to shore up the numbers they claimed would be marching. The fact is that they are losing support as more and more people, especially young people, recognize the truth of "pro-abortion" - which in reality is pro-death to the innocent victim of abortion.

Expect that group now, to join Kerry's campaign, oophs they already have, like they did before in the 70's, when Kerry was their hero.

Stupid greedy people, that have no true compassion for others, who want their selfish needs met, no matter what cost it takes. We can expect tehm to unite agaisnt the war in Iraq for all the wrong reasons, but Kerry will carry the banner for them.


They don't want to believe that Hussein is still in charge in Iraq and that those causing the trouble there, are his republican guards and supporters that want us out. When will they ever learn?

just my thoughts...

Cook

[arzach]

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
"If there is to be an inquiry related to the Vietnam War, it should
be into the reasons why enemy propaganda was so widespread in this country, and why the enemy was able to condition the public to such an extent that the best educated segments of our population have given credence to the most incredible allegations."


We are seeing today, how Kerry proudly acknowledges having participated in those lies.

They don't want to believe that Hussein is still in charge in Iraq and that those causing the trouble there, are his republican guards and supporters that want us out. When will they ever learn?

just my thoughts...


Cook

http://www.vwam.com/vets/tet/tet.html

Check this, it'll open yer eyes...been walkin' around for 37 years with this K-bar in my back.

[eddief]

One of the biggest lies of the Vietnam era was when LBJ said, "I will not send American boys to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves". May LBJ and McNamara rot in hell.

[eddief]

LBJ also lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/tonkin_i...ve_occured.htm

[radio relay]

Right on, Cook!

Makes you wonder how the "usefull idiots" of the leftwing press can sleep with themselves. Wonder what they would do if their "dream" of the downfall of the United States, came to pass, and they no longer had the protection of the first amendment?

Call me crazy, but I'm convinced that the media was long ago compromised by foriegn agents, hostile to the United States, and it's people! Too bad that they have an audience of "edief's" . Living in their fool's paradise, and lapping up every irresponsible lie as though it were pure ambrosia....

SF

[radio relay]

Tit For Tet
Ann Coulter
May 26, 2004

Abu Ghraib is the new Tet offensive. By lying about the Tet offensive during the Vietnam War, the media managed to persuade Americans we were losing the war, which demoralized the nation and caused us to lose the war. And people say reporters are lazy.

The immediate consequence of the media's lies was a 25 percent drop in support for the war. The long-term consequence for America was 12 years in the desert until Ronald Reagan came in and saved the country.

Now liberals are using their control of the media to persuade the public that we are losing the war in Iraq. Communist dictators may have been ruthless murderers bent on world domination, but they displayed a certain degree of rationality. America may not be able to wait out 12 years of Democrat pusillanimity now that we're dealing with Islamic lunatics who slaughter civilians in suicide missions while chanting "Allah Akbar!"

And yet the constant drumbeat of failure, quagmire, Abu Ghraib, Bush-lied-kids-died has been so successful that merely to say the war in Iraq is going well provokes laughter. The distortions have become so pervasive that Michael Moore teeters on the brink of being considered a reliable source.

If President Bush mentions our many successes in Iraq, it is evidence that he is being "unrealistically sunny and optimistic," as Michael O'Hanlon of the liberal Brookings Institution put it.

O'Hanlon's searing indictment of the operation in Iraq is that we need to "make sure they have some budget resources that they themselves decide how to spend that are not already pre-allocated." So that's the crux of our challenge in Iraq: Make sure their "accounts receivable" columns all add up. Whenever great matters are at stake, you can always count on liberals to have some pointless, womanly complaint.

We have liberated the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator who gassed his own people, had weapons of mass destruction, invaded his neighbors, harbored terrorists, funded terrorists and had reached out to Osama bin Laden. Liberals may see Saddam's mass graves in Iraq as half-full, but I prefer to see them as half-empty.

So far, we have found chemical and biological weapons – brucella and Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, ricin, sarin, aflatoxin – and long-range missiles in Iraq.

The terrorist "stronghold" of Karbala was abandoned last week by Islamic crazies loyal to cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who slunk away when it became clear that no one supported them. Iraqis living in Karbala had recently distributed fliers asking the rebels to please leave, further underscoring one of the principal remaining problems in Iraq – the desperate need for more Kinko's outlets. Last weekend, our troops patrolled this rebel "stronghold" without a shot being fired.

The entire Kurdish region – one-third of the country – is patrolled by about 300 American troops, which is fewer than it takes to patrol the Kennedy compound in Palm Beach on Easter weekends.

But the media tell us this means we're losing. The goalpost of success keeps shifting as we stack up a string of victories. Before the war, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof warned that war with Iraq would be a nightmare: "[W]e won't kill Saddam, trigger a coup or wipe out his Republican Guard forces." (Unless, he weaseled his way out, "we're incredibly lucky.")

We've done all that! How incredibly lucky.

Kristof continued: "We'll have to hunt out Saddam on the ground – which may be just as hard as finding Osama in Afghanistan, and much bloodier."

We've captured Saddam! And it wasn't bloody! Indeed, the most harrowing aspect of Saddam's capture was that he hadn't bathed or been de-liced for two months.

Kristof also said: "Our last experience with street-to-street fighting was confronting untrained thugs in Mogadishu, Somalia. This time we're taking on an army with possible bio- and chemical weapons, 400,000 regular army troops and supposedly 7 million more in Al Quds militia."

And yet, somehow, our boys defeated them in just six weeks! Incredibly lucky again! And just think: all of this accomplished without even having a "Plan."

Now we're fighting directly with Islamic loonies crawling out of their rat holes from around the entire region – which liberals also said wouldn't happen. Remember how liberals said the Islamic loonies hated Saddam Hussein – hated him! – because he was a "secularist"? As geopolitical strategist Paul Begala put it, Saddam would never share his weapons with terrorists because "those Islamic terrorists would use them against Saddam Hussein because he's secular."

Well, apparently, the crazies have put aside their scruples about Saddam's secularism to come out in the open where they can be shot by American troops rather than fighting on the streets of Manhattan (where the natives would immediately surrender).

The beauty of being a liberal is that history always begins this morning. Every day liberals can create a new narrative that destroys the past as it occurred. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

To be sure, Iraq is not a bed of roses. As the Brookings Institution scholar said, we have yet to give the Iraqis "budget resources" that "are not already pre-allocated." I take it back: It is a quagmire.

[Jim]

Speaking of the truth coming out. What happened to the swift boat vets that publicly challenged Kerry's version of his service in Nam and his stance afterward? I saw some of their press conference on CSpan but the rest of the media seems to have ignored them.

[yellowwing]

They have been tied to Nixon's political machine.

One the SBVFT founder's, John Oneill, was hired by Presdient Nixon's political advisor Chuck Colson, "[Kerry] was an immediate celebrity. He was also an immediate target of the Nixon administration. Years later, Chuck Colson--who was Nixon's political enforcer--told me, 'He was a thorn in our flesh. He was very articulate, a credible leader of the opposition. He forced us to create a counterfoil. We found a vet named John O'Neill and formed a group called Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace. We had O'Neill meet the President, and we did everything we could do to boost his group."

The doctor that discredited Kerry's wounds, was debunked when it was found out that he was not the attending physician.

There are plenty of conservative media oulets, if the Swift Boat Veterans have lost the spolight, its not the liberal's fault.

[eddief]

radio relay

I stated facts that had nothing to do with the fine men and women who served in Vietnam. I was talking about the jackasses that got us into the war in the first place. As for you thinking I'm a sucker for the media, that's just not the case. I'm wary of the left wing and right wing media. That's why I check with as many sources as I can to root out the bullcrap. But thanks for that petty little insult of yours. It was good for a laugh.

[radio relay]

Glad to be of service. Always like to leave 'em laffiing...


SF

[arzach]

Originally posted by yellowwing
They have been tied to Nixon's political machine.

One the SBVFT founder's, John Oneill, was hired by Presdient Nixon's political advisor Chuck Colson, "[Kerry] was an immediate celebrity. He was also an immediate target of the Nixon administration. Years later, Chuck Colson--who was Nixon's political enforcer--told me, 'He was a thorn in our flesh. He was very articulate, a credible leader of the opposition. He forced us to create a counterfoil. We found a vet named John O'Neill and formed a group called Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace. We had O'Neill meet the President, and we did everything we could do to boost his group."

The doctor that discredited Kerry's wounds, was debunked when it was found out that he was not the attending physician.

There are plenty of conservative media oulets, if the Swift Boat Veterans have lost the spolight, its not the liberal's fault.

If this was actually the case, don't you think the kerry campaign would have latched on to it and repeated it incessantly? And the media? In both cases, their 'silence' speaks 'volumes'!

just thoughts cruising thru my mind

[yellowwing]

Your assuming that Kerry and his campaign staff are on the ball!

But seriously, if they faded away, why allocate any more resources on them?

[arzach]

Originally posted by yellowwing
Your assuming that Kerry and his campaign staff are on the ball!

But seriously, if they faded away, why allocate any more resources on them?

I ain't assuming anything, kerry's staff is full of horsecrap and really needs to downplay the insinuation that kerry wuz a combat wuss.:evigrin:..there are way too many people in dout of his worthiness of the 3 PH awards, consequently, that also casts doubt on the SS and BS awards.

As for 'fading' away, what was the last big thing reported about him? Yeah, it was that he fudged the process for his own political gain...THAT is what will be remembered in November.