John Kerry on Rush Limbaugh’s Comments on Israel

[nt250]

I have seen the video of him testifying in front of congress. As for the "shooting the kid" video, would that be the reenactment video?

And even if he did meet with the NV in Paris, so what?

So what?

John Kerry admitted to committing treason on the floor of the senate. Even HE knew that, because later in his testimony before the senate he tried to whitewash what he did by saying this:

Mr. KERRY. Mr. Chairman, I realize that full well as a study of political science. I realize that we cannot negotiate treaties and I realize that even my visits in Paris, precedents had been set by Senator McCarthy and others, in a sense are on the borderline of private individuals negotiating, et cetera. I understand these things. But what I am saying is that I believe that there is a mood in this country which I know you are aware of and you have been one of the strongest critics of this war for the longest time. But I think if we can talk in this legislative body about filibustering for porkbarrel programs, then we should start now to talk about filibustering for the saving of lives and of our country. [Applause.]

John Kerry was not a United States senator when he went to Paris and met with the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong. Technically, he was still in the Navy Reserves, although he had apparently been released from that obligation after only 4 years. He signed up in 1966 and he did not receive his official honorable discharge until 1978, but he was apparently released from all his obligations as early as 1970. He spent 2 years on a ship in Vietnamese waters, and then 4 months in Vietnam as a Swiftie, and then used his third purple heart to get sent home in 1969. He spent some time as the driver for some big wig, and then he requested a change to inactive status so that he could run for political office. Which he was granted.

Then he spent the next two years as a spokesman for the VVAW, traveling around the country with his long hair, and his smirk, telling the whole world that all our sevice members committed war crimes and atrocities on a "day to day basis with the full awareness of all levels of command".

And when his anti-war crusade no longer helped him in his quest for political office? He did a total 180 and started cashing in on his past as a war "hero".

The man is a known, proven liar. Yet he almost made it all the way to the White House. Why? Because liberals don't care about the character of anyone whose politics and ideas they agree with.

 

[CharlestonChad]

So what?

John Kerry admitted to committing treason on the floor of the senate. Even HE knew that, because later in his testimony before the senate he tried to whitewash what he did by saying this:




John Kerry was not a United States senator when he went to Paris and met with the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong. Technically, he was still in the Navy Reserves, although he had apparently been released from that obligation after only 4 years. He signed up in 1966 and he did not receive his official honorable discharge until 1978, but he was apparently released from all his obligations as early as 1970. He spent 2 years on a ship in Vietnamese waters, and then 4 months in Vietnam as a Swiftie, and then used his third purple heart to get sent home in 1969. He spent some time as the driver for some big wig, and then he requested a change to inactive status so that he could run for political office. Which he was granted.

Then he spent the next two years as a spokesman for the VVAW, traveling around the country with his long hair, and his smirk, telling the whole world that all our sevice members committed war crimes and atrocities on a "day to day basis with the full awareness of all levels of command".

And when his anti-war crusade no longer helped him in his quest for political office? He did a total 180 and started cashing in on his past as a war "hero".

The man is a known, proven liar. Yet he almost made it all the way to the White House. Why? Because liberals don't care about the character of anyone whose politics and ideas they agree with.

What's worse: A man that lied in the past, or a man that lies right now? Americans voted for the latter of the two.

 

[dilloduck]

What's worse: A man that lied in the past, or a man that lies in the future? Americans voted for the latter of the two.

Lies in the future? okie dokie !

 

[musicman]

My two favorite quotes from this thread;

And even if [Kerry] did meet with the NV in Paris, so what?

What's worse: A man that lied in the past, or a man that lies in the future?

THAT'S entertainment, boy!

 

[dilloduck]

My two favorite quotes from this thread;





THAT'S entertainment, boy!

I guess if you lie in the future you're like an anti-Nostradamus or something. :happy2:

 

[musicman]

I guess if you lie in the future you're like an anti-Nostradamus or something. :happy2:

LOL - Michael Moore peers into his crystal ball.

Oops, I forgot - that fucker probably hasn't SEEN his balls in ten years...

 

[CharlestonChad]

I edited it to keep you guys off my nuts.

 

[nt250]

What's worse: A man that lied in the past, or a man that lies in the future? Americans voted for the latter of the two.

What lies are you talking about?

Millions of Americans voted for John Kerry. A known, proven, liar.

Name one lie George W. Bush has told.

I am not a Bush supporter. It think he's a lousy president and I can't wait until he is out of office. But the hatred, and invective, and the totally horrible things that liberals have hurled at this man is so out of proportion to anything he has ever said or done that it boggles my mind how people can hate somebody that much for no reason.

George W. Bush spent more time in the military than John Kerry did.

John Kerry is on videotape saying that Saddam Hussein was a threat and needed to be taken out.

John Kerry was not opposed to the war in Iraq. He voted FOR it. When Howard Dean, who was considered the front runner, crashed and burned in Iowa, Kerry immediately became all for the war in Iraq and shifted the entire focus of his campaign to be a "war president". He's always traded on his past as a "war hero" when it helps him, and has tried to downplay his past as a traitor to not only his fellow sailors, but to this country, and the fact that he got so many millions of votes does not speak well of liberals, and it is the main reason I have nothing but contempt for the whole lot of them.

John Kerry committed treason and admitted it on the floor of the senate. The man has no business being a United States Senator. The fact that he came so close to being elected president should be a source of shame for every liberal with a working brain.

Oh, wait....

 

[musicman]

I edited it to keep you guys off my nuts.

Never fear, CC - the quote button always remembers.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Name one lie George W. Bush has told.

He said that Iraq supported Al Qaeda.

I can give you more, but that should be enough.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Never fear, CC - the quote button always remembers.

ok.........thanks for the insight

 

[Dr Grump]

I'm not going to judge Kerry for shooting a running combatant in the back during a firefight. The fact that he was unarmed and fleeing was determined after the fact.

However, meeting with the enemy of our Nation during a time of war in a sympathetic manner is treason.

I have listened to one of the men who was on the boat with Kerry during that fight. Remember, this is an eye-witness account, not some Swiftie looking from a distance, and the version I heard (not read) from the person's lips. From what he said, the guy was not shot in the back; they thought he was reloading his weapon.

As for treason, I only have one thing to say: was he charged with treason? If not, your point is moot.

 

[Stephanie]

I have listened to one of the men who was on the boat with Kerry during that fight. Remember, this is an eye-witness account, not some Swifty looking from a distance, and this account I heard (not read) from the person's lips. From what he said, the guy was not shot in the back; they thought he was reloading his weapon.

As for treason, I only have one thing to say: was he charged with treason? If not, your point is moot.

NO.. He wasn't charged for treason.....

But he still betrayed all this fellow military brothers, when he came back and testified to accounts he had not even seen happen...It was all hearsay...(Things that were supposedly told to him).
That bull hearsay would never stand up in a court of law of today, yet he got away with using it in his testimony...

He is a traitor to a lot of people, and you can defend his ass till your blue in the face...... That will never take the hurt and betrayal away, from a LOT of the military men and women that served in Vietnam during his short stint, (all of four months) and then he came back and testified against them, calling them ALL killers of the worst sort imaginable.....

So like it or not, there are the swifties out there and a lot of Vietnam Vets, who DO NOT believe that he should be serving as a President of the United States...
And I stand with THEM..

 

[sitarro]

I have listened to one of the men who was on the boat with Kerry during that fight. Remember, this is an eye-witness account, not some Swiftie looking from a distance, and this accound I heard (not read) from the person's lips. From what he said, the guy was not shot in the back; they thought he was reloading his weapon.

As for treason, I only have one thing to say: was he charged with treason? If not, your point is moot.

You really don't pay a lot of attention to detail do you Grump? I am constantly amazed at how wrong you and your post tend to be.

I think if you actually try reading the real accounts that have come out, Kerry's biggest critic was his gunner who had a great view of everything that happened on those pathetic little boats.

You demean President Bush's 6 year service in the Guard and yet you defend Kerry playing Pt-109 commander for 4 months. One thing different about Kerry's service compared to Bush's....... Kerry was near land but always on the planet. Bush was flying the earliest supersonic interceptor in the U.S. arsenal, the F-102 Delta Dart. A very unstable delta winged aircraft without any computer help. Just starting that pile of crap up was dangerous. My father who was a pilot in the Air Force for 29 years and then for over a million miles in a saberliner business jet along with assorted other aircraft told me he wouldn't have flown it. The F-106 replaced it very quickly. There were no F-102s used in Vietnam.

If you have a son of a Congressman that wants to serve, is it smarter to allow him to spend that time protecting the mainland of our country where there is almost no chance of him being captured by the enemy or send him into Vietnam where he could get shot down, taken prisoner and used for whatever purpose by the enemy. Even if GW would have pleaded with his commanding officer to send him overseas it was probably not possible.

 

[Dr Grump]

You really don't pay a lot of attention to detail do you Grump? I am constantly amazed at how wrong you and your post tend to be..

Please feel free to show me where I'm wrong. For what it's worth I feel the same about your posts, too. I really love your little personal anecdotes that somehow validate your opinions about the "truth" of a matter whether it be some "gay" person you knew back in the 70s or somebody who experimented with drugs. Because, you know don't you Sitarro, because you know of things that have happened to people personally, it must be the norm, right?

I think if you actually try reading the real accounts that have come out, Kerry's biggest critic was his gunner who had a great view of everything that happened on those pathetic little boats.

You mean like these accounts?:

Of those who served in Kerry's boat crew, only Stephen Gardner joined SBVT. Gardner appeared in the group's third television advertisement.

All other living members of Kerry's crew supported his presidential bid, and some frequently campaigned with him. Kerry crewmembers have disputed some of SBVT's various allegations: "pure fabrication" (Jim Rassmann), "totally false" (Drew Whitlow), "garbage" (Gene Thorson), and "a pack of lies" (Del Sandusky).[10][11][12][13]

No members of SBVT were aboard Kerry's boat during any of the incidents for which he was decorated.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swift_Vets_and_POWs_for_Truth#endnote_latimes1

Why don't YOU start reading real accounts Sitty?

Oh, as for your "pathetic little boats" comments. You do realise you are dissing all Swifties by saying such a term, right?

You demean President Bush's 6 year service in the Guard and yet you defend Kerry playing Pt-109 commander for 4 months. One thing different about Kerry's service compared to Bush's....... Kerry was near land but always on the planet. Bush was flying the earliest supersonic interceptor in the U.S. arsenal, the F-102 Delta Dart. A very unstable delta winged aircraft without any computer help. Just starting that pile of crap up was dangerous. My father who was a pilot in the Air Force for 29 years and then for over a million miles in a saberliner business jet along with assorted other aircraft told me he wouldn't have flown it. The F-106 replaced it very quickly. There were no F-102s used in Vietnam.

Christ you talk about me being wrong, come on board as a know-all about aircraft and mention the above little nugget. A few "facts" about the F102. It went out of service in 1955 when Bush was all of nine years old. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Dart
Oh, yeah, and it was a real deadly machine for pilots to fly...
It was very popular with its pilots after its initial teething problems were resolved, with exceptional performance. Air-to-air combat testing suggested that the "Six" was a reasonable match for the F-4 Phantom in a dogfight, with similar high-altitude turn performance

However, according to Bush's own biography he flew Delta Daggers which did see service in Viet Nam..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

Either way, it seems your info is up the wazoo..course Wikipedia could be wrong, too...

If you have a son of a Congressman that wants to serve, is it smarter to allow him to spend that time protecting the mainland of our country where there is almost no chance of him being captured by the enemy or send him into Vietnam where he could get shot down, taken prisoner and used for whatever purpose by the enemy. Even if GW would have pleaded with his commanding officer to send him overseas it was probably not possible.

And that is the only saving grace re Bush not going to Viet Nam IMO...

 

[red states rule]

He said that Iraq supported Al Qaeda.

I can give you more, but that should be enough.

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hagin/051128

If Bush lied, so did Democrats!

November 28, 2005


"Bush lied!" "Bush misled us!" "The President withheld intelligence!" We have heard these particular statements from Democrat politicians pretty much non-stop in recent months. These Democrats are desirous of leading Americans to believe that they only voted to approve the invasion of Iraq because President Bush duped them.

Naturally, the followers of Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi are only too willing to buy the lies the Democrats are spreading. Yes, yes, I did say lies. Frankly, the lies being told about the lead-up to the Iraq War, and the vote to approve it, are coming directly from the Democrats, not the White House!

As they have tried to placate their Leftist base, by accusing President Bush of misleading them to support the Iraq invasion, they have stopped supporting our troops, as they deserve to be supported. Yes, that is a harsh charge to level, but it is a just charge as well. The fact is this, for all their bluster about being solidly behind our armed forces, the Democrats and those who are parroting their false claims of being misled are undercutting our troops!

The Democrats cannot at once claim to support the military and blast their mission as one based on lies. The cold fact is this, it is the political left, which is talking of cutting, and running (Rep. Murtha), it is the political left, which has accused our troops of torture and targeting civilians (Dennis Kucinish). It is the left, which has called our troops the problem (Ted Kennedy). Guess what, that AIN'T supporting the troops!

So let us look at the statements of these poor, misled Democrats BEFORE the Iraq invasion. Let us recall their own words, their declarations about Saddam, WMD, and Iraq as a threat to America. While we take this trip down memory lane, let us recall the intelligence they saw was exactly the same as the president saw. Then let us decide if the Democrats were misled then, or are just trying to appease their increasingly Leftist base now.

What did John Kerry say? "According to the CIA's report, all U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons. There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop nuclear weapons." Congressional Record, October 9, 2002

Hmmm, is this the same John Kerry who repeatedly called the Iraq war the wrong war at the wrong time?

How about Senator Clinton? "In the four years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Congressional Record, October 10, 2002.

Did she lie about WMD? If President Bush is a liar, then Senator Clinton is as well.

Let us hear what Charles Schummer said about the threat of Iraq. "[It] is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States."

Congressional Record, October 10, 2002

Was he misleading himself into voting for the war? Did he lie for oil as President Bush has been accused of?

What of Senator Jay Rockefeller? What did he say about Iraq before Selective Memory Syndrome, a common Leftist malady struck? "We must eliminate that [potential nuclear] threat now before it is too late. But that isn't just a future threat. Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose real threats to America today, tomorrow. ... [He] is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East. He could make these weapons available to many terrorist groups, third parties, which have contact with his government. Those groups, in turn, could bring those weapons into the United States and unleash a devastating attack against our citizens. I fear that greatly."

Congressional Record, October 10, 2002

How about failed lifeguard Ted Kennedy? What did he think about Saddam? "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Remarks at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, October 27, 2002

Democratic Senator Chris Dodd had this to say. "There is no question that Iraq possesses biological and chemical weapons and that he seeks to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. That is not in debate. I also agree with President Bush that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must be disarmed, to quote President Bush directly."

Congressional Record, October 8, 2002

Finally let me close with the words of President Bill Clinton! "In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now — a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."

"[Let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who has really worked on this for any length of time, believes that, too." Remarks at the Pentagon, February 17, 1998

"Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again." Remarks at the White House, December 16, 1998

Was Bill Clinton helping Bush mislead Democrats with these words? Was he plotting to assist George W. Bush in misleading us into a war on false pretenses over two years BEFORE Bush was elected? If you are a Leftist then you have to believe this if you believe Bush lied.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Hagin was born in Tampa, Florida, and now resides in Dallas, Texas. He is 38, single, loves outdoors, and dreams of having a political column nationally syndicated. Doug has been writing political columns for 7 years, and now his column runs regularly in American Daily, Republican News Daily, the Starr Journal, the Intellectual Conservative, Hour Eleven, the Reality Check, Opinion Editorials, the Ellis County Press, and the Daley News Post along with others. Visit Doug's website at http://doughagin.tripod.com/

© Copyright 2005 by Doug Hagin
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hagin/051128

 

[sitarro]

Please feel free to show me where I'm wrong. For what it's worth I feel the same about your posts, too. I really love your little personal anecdotes that somehow validate your opinions about the "truth" of a matter whether it be some "gay" person you knew back in the 70s or somebody who experimented with drugs. Because, you know don't you Sitarro, because you know of things that have happened to people personally, it must be the norm, right?




Oh, as for your "pathetic little boats" comments. You do realise you are dissing all Swifties by saying such a term, right?

I'm"dissing' that ugly little boat not the sailors that got stuck crewing them.

Christ you talk about me being wrong, come on board as a know-all about aircraft and mention the above little nugget. A few "facts" about the F102. It went out of service in 1955 when Bush was all of nine years old. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Dart
Oh, yeah, and it was a real deadly machine for pilots to fly...
It was very popular with its pilots after its initial teething problems were resolved, with exceptional performance. Air-to-air combat testing suggested that the "Six" was a reasonable match for the F-4 Phantom in a dogfight, with similar high-altitude turn performance

However, according to Bush's own biography he flew Delta Daggers which did see service in Viet Nam..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

Either way, it seems your info is up the wazoo..course Wikipedia could be wrong, too...

I was wrong in calling the F-102 a Delta Dart it was the Delta Dagger. Like I said ,you don't pay much attention to detail....look at the page you link to and you will see that it is an article about the F-106 that I said replaced the F-102(never did call airplanes by their cute little names, I always new them by F-this or A-that or P-51...etc.) As for Wikipedia being wrong, oh heavens no your world would crash around you if it wasn't for wiki.

if you go tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-102_Delta_Dagger you will see the information about the aircraft he actually flew. I meant to say that there weren't any F-102s being used in Vietnam while Bush was in the Guard and if you look at the bottom of the page they say that the F-102 was taken out of Vietnam in 1968.

Oh by the way, my Dad was stationed at Perrin Air Force Base as an instructor pilot when they still had some of those ugly F-102 on the field, I always liked the F-106 better. I don't know, being stationed at a base that had a squadron of F-102s I would think maybe he had a chance to actually talk to the people that flew them rather than reading about it in an online encyclopedia 45 years later.

Yea, personal experience is certainly nothing compared to "scientific" studies or an article written by "who knows" in WIKIPEDIA.

 

[red states rule]

Rush calls libs out on what they say and what they do

To libs, that is an unforgivable sin

 

[CharlestonChad]

He said that Iraq supported Al Qaeda.

I can give you more, but that should be enough.

Crickets Chirping in the background.

 

[nt250]

He said that Iraq supported Al Qaeda.

I can give you more, but that should be enough.

When did Bush say that, and why do you consider that a lie?

If I remember correctly, didn't Saddam Hussein have a standing policy of paying the family of Palestinian suicide bombers $25,000?

You do know what Al Qaeda is, don't you? I'm sure you've heard the term Islam before? Shirley you must know that they are all connected.

What was the name of that well known terrorist who was found dead in Iraq? Jeez, the name escapes me now. But they all sound the same after a while, don't they?

Try the next lie.