|
Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
02-03-04, 07:42 AM | #1 | |
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
|
Kerry AWOL
http://news.bostonherald.com/nationa...articleid=1168
Quote:
|
|
02-03-04, 07:50 AM | #2 |
Semiblind
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,857
|
lol
I hope they take that shit back, he is rich anyway, that fucker dont need the money, put it toward the schools of the country that need money. |
02-03-04, 06:47 PM | #3 |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,024
|
i'm sure the people of texas are still waiting for thier refunds from gov bush when he ran in the primaries and the general election in 1999/2000.
- js. |
02-03-04, 07:43 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
|
nice deflection there
|
06-03-04, 10:02 PM | #5 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
|
Revealed: how 'war hero' Kerry tried to put off Vietnam military duty
By Charles Laurence in New York (Filed: 07/03/2004) Senator John Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential candidate who is trading on his Vietnam war record to campaign against President George W Bush, tried to defer his military service for a year, according to a newly rediscovered article in a Harvard University newspaper. He wrote to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s. The revelation appears to undercut Sen Kerry's carefully-cultivated image as a man who willingly served his country in a dangerous war - in supposed contrast to President Bush, who served in the Texas National Guard and thus avoided being sent to Vietnam. The Harvard Crimson newspaper followed a youthful Mr Kerry in Boston as he campaigned for Congress for the first time in 1970. In the course of a lengthy article, "John Kerry: A Navy Dove Runs for Congress", published on February 18, the paper reported: "When he approached his draft board for permission to study for a year in Paris, the draft board refused and Kerry decided to enlist in the Navy." Samuel Goldhaber, the article's author who is now a cardiologist attached to the Harvard School of Medicine, spent 11 hours trailing Mr Kerry and still remembers that the subject of the Paris deferment came up during long conversations about Vietnam. "I stand by my story," he told The Telegraph. "It was a long time ago, and I was 19 at the time, so it is hard to remember every detail. But I do know this: at no point did Kerry contact either me or the Crimson to dispute anything I had written." Sen Kerry's campaign headquarters in Washington refused an opportunity to deny the report. Despite repeated telephone calls from The Telegraph, a spokesman refused to comment. Another Democrat official said merely: "In Vietnam, John Kerry proved his patriotism beyond question. Everyone knows that." A senior Republican strategist, who asked not to be named, said: "I've not heard this before. This undercuts Kerry's complaints about Bush and it continues to pose questions as to his credibility among ordinary Vietnam veterans." He said it would fuel concerns over the way Sen Kerry made a name for himself by leading anti-war protests in Washington and Boston in the late 1960s and early 1970s after he had completed his service in the US Navy, even while his former comrades continued to fight and die. A newly-published biography of Sen Kerry by Douglas Brinkley, A Tour of Duty, makes no mention of the requested deferment or planned year in Paris. At the time, it was still unclear just how long America would remain in Vietnam, and it might have seemed that a year's deferral of service could render enlistment unnecessary. According to the Democratic Party's version of Sen Kerry's military history, he joined the Reserve Officer Training Corps at Harvard through eagerness to do his duty, and sailed with the Navy for combat as soon as he graduated in 1966. Sen Kerry won a gallantry medal for his service as a gunboat captain on the Mekong Delta, and was honorably discharged with three "purple heart" medals after sustaining three wounds. He has consistently presented himself as a leader who argued against the war only after fulfilling his duty in the field. Supporters argue that his war record makes him a more trustworthy leader than President Bush, who served sporadically in the National Guard at home. "This means that Kerry didn't jump into all that heroic service until he was pushed, and it is a very nice piece of information," said Lucianne Goldberg, a prominent Republican campaigner. Republican strategists for President Bush were already investigating Sen Kerry's record of three wounds sustained in Vietnam. "We find that he had only one day off sick - with three wounds? What exactly were these wounds?" she asked. Mr Goldhaber recalled that, during a day spent with Sen Kerry and one assistant during his congressional campaign, he had described his involvement, service and decision to oppose the war in great detail. "I am not at all surprised that he wants to be president, because he exuded ambition from the word go," said Dr Goldhaber. "At the time, the idea that he tried to persuade the draft board to let him spend a year in Paris was just a detail." A spokesman for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign declined to comment. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad! |
11-03-04, 11:46 AM | #6 | |
--------------------
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
|
Quote:
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend |
|
11-03-04, 02:08 PM | #7 |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,024
|
some scary thinking there sinner. careful, it may bite. so critique is insurrection eh? spoken like true fascist. but let's start with bush, since he's the pres. he failed to stop america's enemies from attacking the us on sept 11 when his admn had the information that could have prevented it, and he's been stonewalling the investigations ever since. talk about your aid and comfort. btw, he criticized the vietnam war too. he liked it even less than kerry. bush hated it so much he wouldn't even fight.
- js. |
11-03-04, 02:20 PM | #8 | |
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
|
Quote:
i would hardly define calling your fellow soldiers war criminals (words former POW's say emboldened the Vietcong) merely a "critique". and the Bush crap is just that, if Bush knew and "let it happen" then thats a damn big conspiracy Mr. Tin Foil, alot of people would have to be involved, you'd think there'd be leaks of some type, but there isn't just more kooky conspiracy theories with no basis in reality. and about his supposed hatred of vietnam, i assume you have facts to back up that disproven and baseless statement? i got news for you jacky, if you didn't want to fight in Vietnam you didn't join the Air Force, the most dangerous profession to train in. it's sad Jacky, the rest of the Dems have dropped the Vietnam thing, perhaps you need to go freshen up on the new talking points at dnc.org. |
|
11-03-04, 03:38 PM | #9 | |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,024
|
Quote:
- js. |
|
11-03-04, 03:54 PM | #10 | |
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
|
Quote:
|
|
11-03-04, 04:32 PM | #11 | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
|
Quote:
spoken like a true fascist. Quote:
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad! |
||
12-03-04, 03:19 AM | #12 |
even the losers
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,090
|
enough.........back to the topic
next time we hear Sens. Kerry or Edwards, for that matter, proclaim how they're fighting for those out of work, let's not forget that while they were preparing for their important debate, they missed a vote in the Senate on February 26 that would have extended now expired unemployment benefits an additional thirteen weeks. it failed by 2 votes.
way to go guys |
15-03-04, 12:18 AM | #13 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
|
another kerry flip-flop...
Kerry ready for war
with Iraq in 1997 Clinton didn't need U.N. authorization, he said, for move for Mideast 'stability' Posted: March 14, 2004 9:15 p.m. Eastern By Joseph Farah © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com WASHINGTON – Sen. John Kerry, who approved the use of force against Saddam Hussein by the Bush administration, but now, as a presidential candidate, claims he cast that vote only because he was deceived, was ready for war on Iraq in November 1997, according to statements he made on a CNN debate show. Kerry sparred with CNN "Crossfire" co-host John Sununu Nov. 12, 1997, using language that sounded remarkably similar to the rhetoric of the Bush administration six years later – criticizing the United Nations and allies France and Russia for not standing tougher against Iraq. "Well, John, you're correct that this resolution is less than we would have liked," said Kerry. "I don't think anybody can deny that we would have liked it to have threatened force and we would have liked it to carry the term 'serious consequences will flow.' On the other hand, the coalition is together. I mean the fact is there is a unanimous statement by the Security Council and the United Nations that there has to be immediate, unrestricted, unconditional access to the sites. That's very strong language. And it also references the underlying resolution on which the use of force is based. So clearly the allies may not like it, and I think that's our great concern – where's the backbone of Russia, where's the backbone of France, where are they in expressing their condemnation of such clearly illegal activity? But in a sense, they're now climbing into a box and they will have enormous difficulty not following up on this if there is not compliance by Iraq." Kerry, who now blames Bush for not achieving a broader international alliance in the war, said in 1997 nothing other nations had to say would stop the U.S. and Clinton from acting in defense of America's security interests. "There's absolutely no statement that they have made or that they will make that will prevent the United States of America and this president or any president from acting in what they believe are the best interests of our country," said Kerry. "And obviously it's disappointing. It was disappointing a month ago not to have the French and the Russians understanding that they shouldn't give any signals of weakening on the sanctions and I think those signals would have helped bring about this crisis because they permitted Saddam Hussein to interpret that maybe the moment was right for him to make this challenge." Kerry said it was clear the U.S. did not need allies nor the U.N. to force its will on Iraq. "The administration is leading." said Kerry. "The administration is making it clear that they don't believe that they even need the U.N. Security Council to sign off on a material breach because the finding of material breach was made by Mr. (Richard) Butler. So furthermore, I think the United States has always reserved the right and will reserve the right to act in its best interests. And clearly it is not just our best interests, it is in the best interests of the world to make it clear to Saddam Hussein that he's not going to get away with a breach of the '91 agreement that he's got to live up to, which is allowing inspections and dismantling his weapons and allowing us to know that he has dismantled his weapons. That's the price he pays for invading Kuwait and starting a war." Kerry blamed France's objections to force against Iraq on monetary interests. "The fact is that over a period of time France and Russia have indicated a monetary interest," he said. "They on their own have indicated the desire to do business. That's what's driving this. I mean, as (The New York Times') Tom Friedman said in a great article the other day, France Inc. wants to do business with oil and they are moving in the exact sort of opposite direction on their own from the very cause of the initial conflict, which was oil." Kerry made clear that the move against Iraq was about more than weapons of mass destruction and Iraq's efforts to back out of its agreements. He also left no doubt he was talking about war. "This is not just a minor confrontation," said Kerry. "This is a very significant issue about the balance of power, about the future stability of the Middle East, about all of what we have thus far invested in the prior war and what may happen in the future." Kerry, who now boasts about the support he has from other nations around the world, was particularly tough on France in his comments urging force in Iraq. He said the Clinton administration did all it could behind the scenes to pull France into agreement. "It's not the first time France has been very difficult. ... " he said. "I think a lot of us are very disappointed that the French haven't joined us in a number of other efforts with respect to China, with respect to other issues in Asia and elsewhere and also in Europe. These are, this is a disappointment. But the fact is this. The president has, in effect, put military action on the table. Secretary (Richard) Cohen canceled his trip, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff canceled a trip, troops are deployed, the aircraft carriers are being brandished. There's no misunderstanding here about where the United States is prepared to go and I think that people need to just sort of back off. It's funny how in Washington inevitably there are always distinctions to be found, even if they're only at the margins here, and I would suggest that if all we're doing is suggesting that the president needs to be doing some diplomacy behind-the-scenes, that's not a bad criticism because he's obviously doing that behindthe scenes." http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=37578
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad! |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|