dirty trick #193424467...

advil

Diabloii.Net Member
dirty trick #193424467...

regarding the kerry/fonda picture showing them sitting next to each other, that was all over the web last week:

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html/index.html
Potential lawsuit over altered Kerry photo

Among the fabricated pap circulating on the Internet about John Kerry last week was a photograph of the anti-war activist sitting next to Jane Fonda at a 1971 rally. The image was, it turned out, Photoshopped. Kerry never sat next to Fonda at a rally, although the doctored image found life on the Internet and in a mention in a New York Times story. Whoever doctored the photo slapped an Associated Press logo on it to make it appear legit.

and here's the guy that took the real kerry pic (w/o fonda):
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/20/MNG4S54RGO1.DTL

Ken Light, now a UC Berkeley professor of journalism ethics, says he photographed Kerry at an anti-war rally in Mineola, N.Y., on June 13, 1971. The decorated Vietnam veteran was preparing to give a speech at the rally -- but Fonda was never at the event.

rats. ;)
 

maccool

Diabloii.Net Member
It's a good thing there's no doctored photos of a certain member of the Bush cabinet meeting with Hussein in the 80's. I find it hard to believe that this is still an issue. Kerry can easily be attacked on his Senate voting record. I guess that's the White House summer agenda.

Well, he did have a stupid haircut in the 70's. That in itself should count as a crime against humanity. Seriously, the 'hair helmet' is totally not cool.
 

Amra

Diabloii.Net Member
Munch said:
Nice. For the record, The Washington Times, the conservative paper that originally ran the photo, is still referring to the picture

I found this pretty interesting from the article:

In the afternoon after his testimony, Mr. Kerry led a group of Vietnam veterans to the front steps of the Capitol, where they tossed away their war medals in disgust.

"Tour of Duty," the glowing 2004 biography of Mr. Kerry by Douglas Brinkley, includes a photograph taken that day of his wife Julia Thorne consoling Mr. Kerry, who is curled up on the front lawn of the Capitol, weeping over the emotion of having just tossed away combat medals.

But it wasn't until 13 years later that Mr. Kerry admitted he had actually thrown someone else's medals away, keeping his own safely at home. "


Maybe Kerry could try acting if his bid fails.
 

advil

Diabloii.Net Member
Amra said:
I found this pretty interesting from the article:

In the afternoon after his testimony, Mr. Kerry led a group of Vietnam veterans to the front steps of the Capitol, where they tossed away their war medals in disgust.

"Tour of Duty," the glowing 2004 biography of Mr. Kerry by Douglas Brinkley, includes a photograph taken that day of his wife Julia Thorne consoling Mr. Kerry, who is curled up on the front lawn of the Capitol, weeping over the emotion of having just tossed away combat medals.

But it wasn't until 13 years later that Mr. Kerry admitted he had actually thrown someone else's medals away, keeping his own safely at home. "


Maybe Kerry could try acting if his bid fails.
i imagine (never having been in the military much less having earned multiple purple hearts, or a silver and a bronze star) that such an act could be pretty emotional even if the medals he threw (he threw ribbons as well, and yes they were actually his) belonged to others. but maybe that's just me.
 

piff

Diabloii.Net Member
Even if he was there with Fonda, who cares? He fought in a war, came home, didn't like what was happening in the war, and protested it. He acted his mind. There's no crime in protesting peacefully, so why should anyone give a damn?
 

llad12

Diabloii.Net Member
piff said:
Even if he was there with Fonda, who cares? He fought in a war, came home, didn't like what was happening in the war, and protested it. He acted his mind. There's no crime in protesting peacefully, so why should anyone give a damn?
I agree. The Vietnam war was a quagmire that continued on and on for years. I recall every week, there would be a list of KIA on the news reports. The numbers of GI's listed as casualties were usually in the hundreds. The Vietcong and NVA KIA were generally in the thousands. The generals and politicians kept fabricating stories to the public about how well were doing ... we were saving the world from the evil of communism ... if Vietnam fell then the domino theory stated that all countries in that area would fall and become communist.

The soldiers returning, however, had different tales. We were seen as an occupation force not liberators. The South Vietnamese government that we installed was corrupt. Our ground forces were used primarily for defensive purposes. Time after time, they ended up retaking the same areas over and over again.

It was a nightmare.

Kerry saw through this charade and became a strong advocate against this war. His speech to the US Senate in 1971 says it better than anything:

From John Kerry's statement before the Senate Foreign




Relations Committee, April 22, 1971.

I would like to say for the record, and for the men behind me who are also wearing the uniform and their medals, that my being here is really symbolic. I am not here as John Kerry, but as one member of a group of one thousand, which in turn is a small representation of a very much larger group of veterans in this country. Were it possible for all of them to sit at this table they would be here and present the same kind of testimony.





I would like to talk about the feelings these men carry with them after coming back from Vietnam. The country doesn't realize it yet but it has created a monster in the form of thousands of men who have been taught to deal and trade in violence and who are given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history -- men who have returned with a sense of anger and betrayal that no one so far has been able to grasp. We are angry because we feel we have been used in the worst fashion by the administration of this country.





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; because those he calls misfits were standing up for us in a way that nobldy else in this country dared to; because so many who have died would have returned to this country to join the misfits in their efforts to ask for an immediate withdrawal from South Vietnam; because so many of those best men have returned as quadriplegics and amputees -- and they lie forgotten in Veterans Administration hospitals in this country which fly the flag which so many have chosen as their own personal symbol -- and we cannot consider ourselves America's best men when we are ashamed of and hated for what we were called on to do in Southeast Asia.





In our opinion and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy.





We are probably angriest about all that we were told about Vietnam and about the mystical war against communism. We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but also we found that the Vietnamese whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image were hard put to take up the fight against the threat we were sup- posedly saving them from. We found most people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. . They practiced the art of survival by siding with whichever military force was present at a particular time, be it Viet Cong, North Vietnamese, or American.





We found that all too often American men were dying in those rice paddies for want of support from their allies. We saw firsthand how monies from American taxes were used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by our flag, and blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties. We saw Vietnam ravaged equally by American bombs and search- and-destroy missions, as well as by Viet Cong terrorism, and yet we listened while this country tried to blame all of the havoc on the Viet Cong. We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum. We learned the meaning of free-fire zones. shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of Orientals.





We watched the United States' falsification of body counts, in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while month after month we were told the back of the enemy is about to break. We fought [with] weapons against those people which I do not believe this country would dream of using were we fighting in the European theatre. We watched while men charged up hills because a general said that hill has to be taken, and after losing one platoon or two platoons, they marched away to leave the hill for reoccupation by the North Vietnamese. We watched pride allow the most unimportant battles to be blown into extravaganzas, because we couldn't lose, and we couldn't retreat, and because it didn't matter how many American bodies were lost to prove that point, and so there were Hamburger Hills and Khesahns and Hill 81s and Fire Base 6s, and so many others.





And now we are told that the men who fought there must watch quietly while American lives are lost so that we can exercise the incredible arrogance of Vietnamizing the Vietnamese. Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn't have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."





We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? But we are trying to do that, and we are doing it with thousands of ration- alizations, and if you read carefully the President's last speech to the people of this country, you can see that he says, and says clearly, "but the issue, gentlemen, the issue is communism, and the question is whether or not we will leave that country to the Communists or whether or not we will try to give it hope to be a free people." But the point is that they are not a free people now, and we cannot fight communism all over the world. I think we should have learned that lesson by now.





Suddenly we are faced with a very sickening situation in this country, because there is no moral indignation and, if there is, it comes from people who are almost exhausted by their past indignations. . . The country seems to have lain down and shrugged off something as serious as Laos, just as we calmly shrugged off the loss of 700,000 lives in Pakistan, the so-called greatest disaster of all times. But we are here as veterans to say we think we are in the midst of the greatest disaster of all times now, because they are still dying over there -- not just Americans but Vietnamese -- and we are rationalizing leaving that country so that those people can go on killing each other for years to come.





Americans seem to have accepted the idea that the war is winding down, at least for Americans, and they have also allowed the bodies which were once used by a President for statistics to prove that we were winning the war, to be used as evidence against a man who followed orders and who inter- preted those order no differently than hundreds of other men in Vietnam.





We veterans can only look with amazement on the fact that this country has been unable to see there is absolutely no difference between ground troops and a helicopter crew, and yet people have accepted a differentiation fed them by the administration. No ground troops are in Laos, so it is all right to kill Laotians by remote control. But believe me the helicopter crews fill the same body bags and they wreak the same kind of damage on the Vietnamese and Laotian country- side as anybody else, and the President is talking about allowing that to go on for many years to come. One can only ask if we will really be satisfied only when the troops march into Hanoi.





We are asking here in Washington for some action, action from the Congress of the United States of America, which has the power to raise and maintain armies, and which by the Constitution also has the power to declare war. We have come here, not to the President, because we believe that this body can be responsive to the will of the people, and we believe that the will of the people says that we should be out of Vietnam now.





We are here in Washington also to say that the problem of this war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to communicate to people in this country -- the question of racism, which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions such as the use of weapons; the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage in the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions; in the use of free-fire zones, harassment interdiction fire, search-and-destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, the killing of prisoners, all accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are trying to say. We are also here to ask, and we are here to ask vehemently, where are the leaders of our country? Where is the leadership? We are here to ask where are McNamara, Rostow, Bundy, Johnson, and so man others? Where are they now that we, the men whom they sent off to war, have returned? These are commanders who have deserted their troops, and there is no more serious crime in the law of war. The Army says they never leave their wounded. The Marines say they never leave even their dead. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude. They have left the real stuff of their reputa- tions bleaching behind them in the sun.





Finally, this administration has done us the ultimate dishonor. They have attempted to disown us and the sacrifices we made for this country. In their blindness and their fear they have tried to deny that we are veterans or that we served in Nam. We do not need their testimony. Our own scars and stumps of limbs are witness enough for others and for ourselves.



We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped away their memories of us. But all that they have done and all that they can do by this denial is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission - to search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbaric war, to pacify our own hearts, to conquer the hate and fear that have driven this country these last ten years and mores, so when thirty years from now our brothers go down the street without a leg, without an arm, or a face, and small boys ask why, we will be able to say "Vietnam" and not mean a desert, not a filthy obscene memory, but mean instead the place where America finally turned and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/943982/posts

I commend John Kerry for speaking out against that war. He spoke for his friends, fellow veterans, and conscience.
 
Top