Sunday, October 24, 2004

John Kerry's treasonous meeting with the Viet Cong

The New York Times and The Washington Post would have you believe that John Kerry's secret meeting with the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War while still a naval officer, was not secret after all. In fact, these papers say Kerry told the Senate about his meetings in his 1971 testimony to the Senate.

One problem, one big problem for these papers. John Kerry, while a US Naval officer, did secretly meet with the Viet Cong in 1970. One full year before his testimony to the Senate.

From The Weekly Standard

From the November 1 / November 8, 2004 issue: John Kerry's real record as an antiwar activist.
by Joshua Muravchik
11/01/2004, Volume 010, Issue 08

JOHN KERRY SAYS HE IS "PROUD" of his activities in opposition to the Vietnam War. Why, then, have he and his spokesmen consistently misrepresented them? Indeed the Kerry camp has been so effective in obscuring this history that both the New York Times and the Washington Post were forced to run corrections on the subject recently because their reporters relied on misinformation that the Kerry camp had succeeded in putting into wide circulation.

When the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth unveiled the fourth in their series of television ads--this one accusing Kerry of having "secretly met with the enemy" in Paris--both papers went into full debunking mode. The Post ran 600 words under the headline: "Ad Says Kerry 'Secretly' Met With Enemy; But He Told Congress of It." The story explained that the Swifties were "referring to a meeting Kerry had in early 1971 with leaders of the communist delegation that was negotiating with U.S. representatives at the Paris peace talks. The meeting, however, was not a secret. Kerry . . . mentioned it in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April of that year."

The next morning the Post ran a correction. The previous day's story, it noted, "incorrectly said that John F. Kerry met with a Vietnamese communist delegation in Paris in 1971. The meeting was in 1970." The correction did not acknowledge, however, that this apparently minor error invalidated the entire point of the Post's impeachment of the Swifties' ad. Kerry's visit to Paris took place in or around May 1970, eleven months before his Foreign Relations Committee testimony. In other words, his meeting with the Communists (while he was still a reserve officer in the U.S. Navy) appears to have been kept secret for nearly a year.


As they say, read the whole article.

Is there a statute of limitations on treason?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

OH, what a surprise!
I just saw john b commenting on charlie booker and wondered whether he will repeat his arrogant notion that nobody (but himself) has a sense of humor or a grasp of basic comprehention skills.
Surprise.

Now, where have I seen that one before?

john b: satire, for goodness' sake.

I assume most of you have just read Scott's summary, which misrepresents the piece as serious comment; if you've actually read the article and still come away with the belief that it's anything other than a joke, then the public's comprehension skills have genuinely hit a new low.

Either that or people who read right-leaning blogs are exceptionally humourless. But why would anyone expect that?
Scott:"if you've actually read the article and still come away with the belief that it's anything other than a joke ... "

And a rather funny one too!

One wonders how a similarly presented 'joke' advocating the murder of, say, Nelson Mandela, would be received by Guardian editors and readers.
max:Let's see.
If my public's comprehension skills are in place, having read the article led me to the following summary:

1. The writer notes that the televised debates are " a bit like American Idol, but with terrifying global ramifications."
2. Then, he panders for the BBC and "The exemplary BBC News website".
3. He is sceptic about the "wire" scandal at first, figuring it "was just wishful thinking on behalf of some amateur Michael Moores".
4. Only to realise it is all true. The prez is wired. Either that or the prez is mad. But even if he's mad, " He looks like he's listening to something we can't hear".
5. Insults, blah blah blah.
6. A bit of superiority " I'm trying to work out why Bush is afforded any kind of credence or respect whatsoever in his native country." Those natives, hilarious.
7. Complains about "US media" playing down the "wire" scandal. (A bit more superiority).
8. Concludes that the "wire" scandal maybe wasn't such a good idea and comes with an original hypothesis: "Perhaps he's just gone gaga". That is very very very funny.
9. Goes back to US news media's incompetence while contrasting it with the crown of British journalism, you guessed right, the BBC. (And panders once more, this time for " the must-see documentary series The Power Of Nightmares (Wed, 9pm, BBC2))(And uses bold type so noone would miss it).
10. More Bush insults ("a lying, sniggering, drink-driving, selfish, reckless, ignorant, dangerous, backward, drooling, twitching, blinking, mouse-faced little cheat.")
11. Informs us that he, personally would vote for a tree.
12. Finally, He suggests that someone should murder the President of the USA.

Now John, I've actually read the article and still come away with the belief that it's anything other than a joke.
If anything, it's arrogant conceited garbage.

Please grade my public's comprehension skills.
Chuck Pelto:TO: john b
RE: Satire, I Tellz Ya!

"It's satire, for goodness' sake....

Either that or people who read right-leaning blogs are exceptionally humourless." -- john b

Fine!

I'll tell that to Ted, when we let him out of prison to send you a 'love letter'. He'll add a nice lavendar scent to yours.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P. S. Just 'kidding'....about the scent.

P.P.S. Are we laughing yet?

P.P.P.S. I've got a GREAT sense of humor, if you hadn't noticed....that's YOUR problem.
Maybe he does need Oliver Cromwell on his side after all.

 
Brain Bliss