STOLEN HONOR RELEASED TODAY
The whole 42:09 Stolen Honor online FREE right now!
Spread the word on the internet!
Post on internet boards AND e-mails!
Stolen Honor nails Kerry and the VVAW and how they
lied at Winter Soldier. And how Kerry lied to the US
Senate in 1971 And how Kerry and his pack of liars
caused our POW's to suffer!
Kerry and the DNC cannot stop EVERYONE on the internet
from seeing this!
Saturday, October 23, 2004
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Bin Laden is located, says 9/11 panelist
Pakistani allies keeping him safe
By Jim Mohr
© SAN BERNARDINO SUN
CLAREMONT, Calif. - The Pentagon knows exactly where
Osama bin Laden is hiding in Pakistan, it just can't
get to him, John Lehman, a member of the 9/11
Commission, said Thursday.
Lehman's remarks echoed those made Tuesday by
Secretary of State Colin Powell, who said the al-Qaida
leader was alive and operating in the western part of
Pakistan.
Bin Laden is living in South Waziristan in the
Baluchistan Mountains of the Baluchistan region,
Lehman told the San Bernardino Sun after delivering a
keynote speech on terrorism at Pitzer College in
Claremont.
In the interview, Lehman noted, "There is an American
presence in the area, but we can't just send in
troops. If we did, we could have another Vietnam, and
the United States cannot afford that right now."
When pressed on why the United States couldn't send
troops into the region to capture the world's No. 1
terrorist, Lehman said the Baluchistan region of the
country is filled with militant fundamentalists who do
not recognize the legitimacy of Pakistani President
Pervez Musharraf, a close ally of the United States.
"That is a region filled with Taliban and al-Qaida
members," he said, acknowledging that Pakistan's
security services also are filled with many who agree
with bin Laden's beliefs and would aid him if U.S.
Special Forces entered the region.
"Look," he said, "Musharraf already has had three
assassination attempts on his life. He is trying to
comply, but he is surrounded by people who do not
agree with him. This is not like Afghanistan, where
there was no compliance, and we had to go in.
"We'll get (bin Laden) eventually, just not now."
Asked how bin Laden was surviving, Lehman said he was
getting money from outside countries, such as the
United Arab Emirates, and high-ranking ministers
inside Saudi Arabia.
"He is not a wealthy man," Lehman said. "We ran that
information into the ground, and discovered he only
receives about $1 million a year from his family's
fortune. The rest of what he gets comes from radical
sympathizers."
Department of Defense spokeswoman Capt. Ronnie Merritt
confirmed the U.S. military believes bin Laden is in
Pakistan. However, she would not comment on Lehman's
remarks, except to say that he normally didn't speak
about these issues, and she was surprised he had.
Lehman, secretary of the Navy under President Ronald
Reagan, was one of the 10 members of the bipartisan
commission that examined the terrorists attacks on the
United States.
He also is the author of three books about military
tactics.
By Jim Mohr
© SAN BERNARDINO SUN
CLAREMONT, Calif. - The Pentagon knows exactly where
Osama bin Laden is hiding in Pakistan, it just can't
get to him, John Lehman, a member of the 9/11
Commission, said Thursday.
Lehman's remarks echoed those made Tuesday by
Secretary of State Colin Powell, who said the al-Qaida
leader was alive and operating in the western part of
Pakistan.
Bin Laden is living in South Waziristan in the
Baluchistan Mountains of the Baluchistan region,
Lehman told the San Bernardino Sun after delivering a
keynote speech on terrorism at Pitzer College in
Claremont.
In the interview, Lehman noted, "There is an American
presence in the area, but we can't just send in
troops. If we did, we could have another Vietnam, and
the United States cannot afford that right now."
When pressed on why the United States couldn't send
troops into the region to capture the world's No. 1
terrorist, Lehman said the Baluchistan region of the
country is filled with militant fundamentalists who do
not recognize the legitimacy of Pakistani President
Pervez Musharraf, a close ally of the United States.
"That is a region filled with Taliban and al-Qaida
members," he said, acknowledging that Pakistan's
security services also are filled with many who agree
with bin Laden's beliefs and would aid him if U.S.
Special Forces entered the region.
"Look," he said, "Musharraf already has had three
assassination attempts on his life. He is trying to
comply, but he is surrounded by people who do not
agree with him. This is not like Afghanistan, where
there was no compliance, and we had to go in.
"We'll get (bin Laden) eventually, just not now."
Asked how bin Laden was surviving, Lehman said he was
getting money from outside countries, such as the
United Arab Emirates, and high-ranking ministers
inside Saudi Arabia.
"He is not a wealthy man," Lehman said. "We ran that
information into the ground, and discovered he only
receives about $1 million a year from his family's
fortune. The rest of what he gets comes from radical
sympathizers."
Department of Defense spokeswoman Capt. Ronnie Merritt
confirmed the U.S. military believes bin Laden is in
Pakistan. However, she would not comment on Lehman's
remarks, except to say that he normally didn't speak
about these issues, and she was surprised he had.
Lehman, secretary of the Navy under President Ronald
Reagan, was one of the 10 members of the bipartisan
commission that examined the terrorists attacks on the
United States.
He also is the author of three books about military
tactics.
Police Call on Kerry to Stop Misrepresenting Their Support
October 14, 2004
Today Chuck Canterbury, the President of the nation's
largest police labor organization, called on John
Kerry to stop making misleading statements regarding
his support from the law enforcement community. Both
on the campaign trail and in Wednesday night's debate
in Tempe, AZ, Senator Kerry has alluded that he has
the support of the majority of these brave men and
women.
"As the elected leader of the largest organization
representing America's Federal, State and local law
enforcement officers, I believe it's important to
point out yet again that we do not support his
candidacy for President," Canterbury said. "And to be
perfectly frank, the groups which do support him
actually share the same membership rolls and, taken
together, probably comprise less than one-quarter of
our nation's police officers."
Canterbury further noted that unlike the organizations
which Senator Kerry touts, F.O.P. members as a whole
decided that the Fraternal Order of Police would
endorse the reelection of President George W. Bush.
They based their decision, he said, on the record of
the Bush Administration in supporting America's first
responders-including helping to secure passage
earlier this year of H.R. 218, the Law Enforcement
Officers Safety Act, the organization's top
legislative priority. Bush also successfully fought to
greatly enhance the benefits for the families of
officers killed in the line of duty.
"While Kerry was flying around the country campaigning
and leaving the actual work of the nation to his
colleagues in the Senate, the President was out there
working on our behalf," Canterbury said. "Senators
Kerry and Edwards have missed so many crucial votes
this Congress that I was beginning to believe there
were only 98 members of the U.S. Senate."
Canterbury also said it was the height of irony that
Kerry would use his position on the reauthorization of
the assault weapons ban as a reflection of his support
from police. "First, if a police officer is killed by
an AK-47, Kerry would oppose the death penalty for the
killer," Canterbury said. "In addition, where was he
when this issue was being discussed in the 108th
Congress? Where was he when we were working to pass
H.R. 218? When it came time to help push for final
passage of legislation important to law enforcement,
Senator Kerry was regrettably A.W.O.L."
"Given the facts, I would greatly appreciate it if
Senator Kerry would refrain from making similar
whimsical assertions regarding his support from the
law enforcement community," Canterbury said. "The real
majority of my fellow officers are standing behind
President Bush, because he has been there for us."
The Fraternal Order of Police is the nation's largest
law enforcement labor organization, representing more
than 318,000 members.
For more information or elaboration, please do not
hesitate to contact the National F.O.P. Legislative
Office at 202.547.8189 or via e-mail.
�1997-2004 Fraternal Order of Police, Grand Lodge
Today Chuck Canterbury, the President of the nation's
largest police labor organization, called on John
Kerry to stop making misleading statements regarding
his support from the law enforcement community. Both
on the campaign trail and in Wednesday night's debate
in Tempe, AZ, Senator Kerry has alluded that he has
the support of the majority of these brave men and
women.
"As the elected leader of the largest organization
representing America's Federal, State and local law
enforcement officers, I believe it's important to
point out yet again that we do not support his
candidacy for President," Canterbury said. "And to be
perfectly frank, the groups which do support him
actually share the same membership rolls and, taken
together, probably comprise less than one-quarter of
our nation's police officers."
Canterbury further noted that unlike the organizations
which Senator Kerry touts, F.O.P. members as a whole
decided that the Fraternal Order of Police would
endorse the reelection of President George W. Bush.
They based their decision, he said, on the record of
the Bush Administration in supporting America's first
responders-including helping to secure passage
earlier this year of H.R. 218, the Law Enforcement
Officers Safety Act, the organization's top
legislative priority. Bush also successfully fought to
greatly enhance the benefits for the families of
officers killed in the line of duty.
"While Kerry was flying around the country campaigning
and leaving the actual work of the nation to his
colleagues in the Senate, the President was out there
working on our behalf," Canterbury said. "Senators
Kerry and Edwards have missed so many crucial votes
this Congress that I was beginning to believe there
were only 98 members of the U.S. Senate."
Canterbury also said it was the height of irony that
Kerry would use his position on the reauthorization of
the assault weapons ban as a reflection of his support
from police. "First, if a police officer is killed by
an AK-47, Kerry would oppose the death penalty for the
killer," Canterbury said. "In addition, where was he
when this issue was being discussed in the 108th
Congress? Where was he when we were working to pass
H.R. 218? When it came time to help push for final
passage of legislation important to law enforcement,
Senator Kerry was regrettably A.W.O.L."
"Given the facts, I would greatly appreciate it if
Senator Kerry would refrain from making similar
whimsical assertions regarding his support from the
law enforcement community," Canterbury said. "The real
majority of my fellow officers are standing behind
President Bush, because he has been there for us."
The Fraternal Order of Police is the nation's largest
law enforcement labor organization, representing more
than 318,000 members.
For more information or elaboration, please do not
hesitate to contact the National F.O.P. Legislative
Office at 202.547.8189 or via e-mail.
�1997-2004 Fraternal Order of Police, Grand Lodge
NATIONAL TROOPERS COALITION (NTC) ENDORSE PRESIDENT BUSH FOR SECOND TERM
Contact: Michael Canning: 410-370-9800
September 24, 2004
Today, the National Troopers Coalition (NTC) with its
46,000 members announced their endorsement of
President George W. Bush. The National Troopers
Coalition comprised of State Police Troopers and
Highway Patrol Officers from across our nation,
unanimously voted to endorse the President at its
national meeting in Galveston, Texas earlier this
year.
"The National Troopers Coalition is proud to stand
with President Bush and offer its endorsement today.
The President's commitment to family values, education
and community affairs is the right recipe for reducing
crime in America." said NTC Chairman Casey Perry.
"President Bush is not just talking the talk, he is
walking the walk. He has distributed more than $11
billion since 2001 to state and local law enforcement
for use in counter-terrorism preparedness efforts,
established the Department of Homeland Security and
acted to pass the Patriot Act."
NTC Chairman Perry continued "Troopers and local law
enforcement are the nations' first line of defense
against domestic terrorism and we applaud the
President's leadership by encouraging Congress to act
in passing historic legislation for qualified active
and retired law enforcement officers to carry
concealed firearms throughout the United States. We
stand with President Bush today to ensure a safer
United States of America."
Troopers from across the country joined President Bush
in Racine, Wisconsin at Pershing Park. The President
graciously accepted this endorsement and reiterated
his commitment to Troopers across this country to
Chairman Perry. This endorsement marks the second time
the NTC endorsed the President, having endorsed him in
the 2000 election against Vice President Al Gore.
September 24, 2004
Today, the National Troopers Coalition (NTC) with its
46,000 members announced their endorsement of
President George W. Bush. The National Troopers
Coalition comprised of State Police Troopers and
Highway Patrol Officers from across our nation,
unanimously voted to endorse the President at its
national meeting in Galveston, Texas earlier this
year.
"The National Troopers Coalition is proud to stand
with President Bush and offer its endorsement today.
The President's commitment to family values, education
and community affairs is the right recipe for reducing
crime in America." said NTC Chairman Casey Perry.
"President Bush is not just talking the talk, he is
walking the walk. He has distributed more than $11
billion since 2001 to state and local law enforcement
for use in counter-terrorism preparedness efforts,
established the Department of Homeland Security and
acted to pass the Patriot Act."
NTC Chairman Perry continued "Troopers and local law
enforcement are the nations' first line of defense
against domestic terrorism and we applaud the
President's leadership by encouraging Congress to act
in passing historic legislation for qualified active
and retired law enforcement officers to carry
concealed firearms throughout the United States. We
stand with President Bush today to ensure a safer
United States of America."
Troopers from across the country joined President Bush
in Racine, Wisconsin at Pershing Park. The President
graciously accepted this endorsement and reiterated
his commitment to Troopers across this country to
Chairman Perry. This endorsement marks the second time
the NTC endorsed the President, having endorsed him in
the 2000 election against Vice President Al Gore.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
Kerry's Despicable Military Record
Geoff Metcalf
Friday, Sept. 10, 2004
Careful what you ask for ...
Since February I have been ranting that the veteran
community would eventually, inevitably become the
prime contributor to the destruction of the John Kerry
campaign. For months, I have been the Lone Ranger and
viewed as a moderately amusing gadfly.
Guess what? I was right in February, and March, and
April, and May. I was right in June, July and August
and despite what smarter, more insightful and
connected pundits maintain, Kerry is TOAST!
In March, I wrote in The Kerry Count, Friends and
foes in the punditry class have been pontificating ad
nauseam, manipulating a kaleidoscope of factoids and
data to support whatever their individual prejudices
may be. Some have accused me of manipulating
perceptions to support my personal prejudices.
Smarter, more dedicated men than this writer have been
beating the drum for MONTHS:
www.SwiftVets.com
www.Viet-Myths.net
www.Kerrylied.com
http://www.i-served.com/MagruderArticlesIndex.html
http://25thaviation.org/johnkerry
http://www.petitiononline.com/kerryrec/petition.html
and over a hundred others
The veteran community jihad against John Kerry is NOT
a partisan issue. John O'Neill of www.swiftvets.com
has said so, Larry Bailey of www.kerrylied.com has
said so, Steven Sherman of www.viet-myths.net has said
so and it IS so.
The overwhelming majority of veterans loathe John
Kerry. The reasons vary. Some hate him for his
treasonous conduct pimping for Vietnam Veterans
Against the War. Some hate him for what they view as
self-aggrandizing hyperbole. Some hate him for his
arrogance, pretension and unlikeability.
The Kerry campaign made a monumental strategic
whoops when they chose to build the foundation for
Versailles de Kerry on his Vietnam experience.
Do-overs have become chronic and it ain't over yet.
The seared seared! memory of Christmas eve 1968 in
Cambodia requires a rewrite.
The Purple Heart stories require amendment.
The clerical error over an
unprecedented/unauthorized V on his Silver Star is
being investigated by the Navy.
Folks with the means, interest and commitment to
�?correct the record�? are now scrutinizing the entire
revisionist history of Kerry the hero.
Frankly, if Kerry had taken a lower profile and not
focused on his martial exploits (recreated in his home
movies), he might have avoided the inevitable
embarrassment and destruction of his antique fiction.
Rather, by his OWN focus on apparently exaggerated
derring-do, he will be forced to realize that there
are consequences to everything we do and do not do.
Republicans will never criticize the decorated war
hero. They are scared spitless of any linkage with
the anti-Kerry veteran legions. However, thousands of
decorated war heroes with significantly greater
service, scars, experience and insights loathe and
detest the pampered Brahmin prince.
But the excrement storm thus far is mere prologue.
There IS more
On Feb. 18, 1966, John Kerry signed a six-year
enlistment contract with the Navy (plus a six-month
extension during wartime). He also signed an Officer
Candidate contract for six years five years of
ACTIVE duty & ACTIVE Naval Reserves, and one year of
inactive standby reserves.
Since Kerry was discharged from TOTAL ACTIVE DUTY
after only three years and 18 days, on Jan. 3, 1970,
he was then required to attend 48 drills per year and
not more than 17 days of active duty for training.
Most significant, however, is that Kerry was also
subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
That means as a commissioned officer Kerry was
prohibited from making adverse statements against his
chain of command or statements against his country,
especially during time of war.
Another one of those interesting clerical errors is
that Kerry did not obtain an honorable discharge until
March 12, 2001, even though his service obligation
should have ended July 1, 1972.
On Jan. 3, 1970, Lt. John Kerry was transferred to the
Naval Reserve Manpower Center in Bainbridge, Md.
Therefore, there should be Performance Records for two
years of obligated Ready Reserve, the 48 drills per
year required and his 17 days of active duty per year
training while Kerry was in the Ready Reserves. Have
these records been released?
Has anyone ever talked to Kerry's commanding officer
at the Naval Reserve Center where Kerry drilled?
Kerry's conduct as a Ready Reservist participating as
a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War was
criminal, some veterans now argue:
Lt. Kerry attended many rallies where the Vietcong
flag was displayed while our flag was desecrated,
defiled and mocked, thereby giving aid and comfort to
the enemy.
Lt. Kerry was involved in a meeting that voted on
assassinating members of the U.S. Senate.
Lt. Kerry lied under oath against fellow soldiers
before the U.S. Senate about crimes committed in
Vietnam.
Lt. Kerry professed to being a war criminal on
national television, and condemned the military and
the USA.
Lt. Kerry met with NVA and Vietcong communist leaders
in Paris, in direct violation of the UCMJ and the U.S.
Constitution.
Lt. Kerry, by his own words and actions, violated the
UCMJ and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy
officer. Failing a REAL good explanation, Lt. Kerry is
in violation of Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S.
Constitution.
Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris
is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part
904, and U.S. Code 18 & U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and
Kerry's subsequent support of the communists while
leading mass protests against our military in the year
that followed, also place him in direct violation of
our Constitution's Article 3, Section 3, which defines
treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in
time of warfare.
The Constitution's 14th Amendment, Section 3, states,
"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in
Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President
... having previously taken an oath ... to support the
Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged
in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or
given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Senator Kerry, having established his service as the
foundation for his campaign, has some explaining to
do. The only way to chill the barrage of questions is
to sign off on a Standard Form (SF) 180 and let the
media examine John Kerry's FULL military record.
Friday, Sept. 10, 2004
Careful what you ask for ...
Since February I have been ranting that the veteran
community would eventually, inevitably become the
prime contributor to the destruction of the John Kerry
campaign. For months, I have been the Lone Ranger and
viewed as a moderately amusing gadfly.
Guess what? I was right in February, and March, and
April, and May. I was right in June, July and August
and despite what smarter, more insightful and
connected pundits maintain, Kerry is TOAST!
In March, I wrote in The Kerry Count, Friends and
foes in the punditry class have been pontificating ad
nauseam, manipulating a kaleidoscope of factoids and
data to support whatever their individual prejudices
may be. Some have accused me of manipulating
perceptions to support my personal prejudices.
Smarter, more dedicated men than this writer have been
beating the drum for MONTHS:
www.SwiftVets.com
www.Viet-Myths.net
www.Kerrylied.com
http://www.i-served.com/MagruderArticlesIndex.html
http://25thaviation.org/johnkerry
http://www.petitiononline.com/kerryrec/petition.html
and over a hundred others
The veteran community jihad against John Kerry is NOT
a partisan issue. John O'Neill of www.swiftvets.com
has said so, Larry Bailey of www.kerrylied.com has
said so, Steven Sherman of www.viet-myths.net has said
so and it IS so.
The overwhelming majority of veterans loathe John
Kerry. The reasons vary. Some hate him for his
treasonous conduct pimping for Vietnam Veterans
Against the War. Some hate him for what they view as
self-aggrandizing hyperbole. Some hate him for his
arrogance, pretension and unlikeability.
The Kerry campaign made a monumental strategic
whoops when they chose to build the foundation for
Versailles de Kerry on his Vietnam experience.
Do-overs have become chronic and it ain't over yet.
The seared seared! memory of Christmas eve 1968 in
Cambodia requires a rewrite.
The Purple Heart stories require amendment.
The clerical error over an
unprecedented/unauthorized V on his Silver Star is
being investigated by the Navy.
Folks with the means, interest and commitment to
�?correct the record�? are now scrutinizing the entire
revisionist history of Kerry the hero.
Frankly, if Kerry had taken a lower profile and not
focused on his martial exploits (recreated in his home
movies), he might have avoided the inevitable
embarrassment and destruction of his antique fiction.
Rather, by his OWN focus on apparently exaggerated
derring-do, he will be forced to realize that there
are consequences to everything we do and do not do.
Republicans will never criticize the decorated war
hero. They are scared spitless of any linkage with
the anti-Kerry veteran legions. However, thousands of
decorated war heroes with significantly greater
service, scars, experience and insights loathe and
detest the pampered Brahmin prince.
But the excrement storm thus far is mere prologue.
There IS more
On Feb. 18, 1966, John Kerry signed a six-year
enlistment contract with the Navy (plus a six-month
extension during wartime). He also signed an Officer
Candidate contract for six years five years of
ACTIVE duty & ACTIVE Naval Reserves, and one year of
inactive standby reserves.
Since Kerry was discharged from TOTAL ACTIVE DUTY
after only three years and 18 days, on Jan. 3, 1970,
he was then required to attend 48 drills per year and
not more than 17 days of active duty for training.
Most significant, however, is that Kerry was also
subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
That means as a commissioned officer Kerry was
prohibited from making adverse statements against his
chain of command or statements against his country,
especially during time of war.
Another one of those interesting clerical errors is
that Kerry did not obtain an honorable discharge until
March 12, 2001, even though his service obligation
should have ended July 1, 1972.
On Jan. 3, 1970, Lt. John Kerry was transferred to the
Naval Reserve Manpower Center in Bainbridge, Md.
Therefore, there should be Performance Records for two
years of obligated Ready Reserve, the 48 drills per
year required and his 17 days of active duty per year
training while Kerry was in the Ready Reserves. Have
these records been released?
Has anyone ever talked to Kerry's commanding officer
at the Naval Reserve Center where Kerry drilled?
Kerry's conduct as a Ready Reservist participating as
a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War was
criminal, some veterans now argue:
Lt. Kerry attended many rallies where the Vietcong
flag was displayed while our flag was desecrated,
defiled and mocked, thereby giving aid and comfort to
the enemy.
Lt. Kerry was involved in a meeting that voted on
assassinating members of the U.S. Senate.
Lt. Kerry lied under oath against fellow soldiers
before the U.S. Senate about crimes committed in
Vietnam.
Lt. Kerry professed to being a war criminal on
national television, and condemned the military and
the USA.
Lt. Kerry met with NVA and Vietcong communist leaders
in Paris, in direct violation of the UCMJ and the U.S.
Constitution.
Lt. Kerry, by his own words and actions, violated the
UCMJ and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy
officer. Failing a REAL good explanation, Lt. Kerry is
in violation of Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S.
Constitution.
Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris
is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part
904, and U.S. Code 18 & U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and
Kerry's subsequent support of the communists while
leading mass protests against our military in the year
that followed, also place him in direct violation of
our Constitution's Article 3, Section 3, which defines
treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in
time of warfare.
The Constitution's 14th Amendment, Section 3, states,
"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in
Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President
... having previously taken an oath ... to support the
Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged
in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or
given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Senator Kerry, having established his service as the
foundation for his campaign, has some explaining to
do. The only way to chill the barrage of questions is
to sign off on a Standard Form (SF) 180 and let the
media examine John Kerry's FULL military record.
Former POW: Kerry Preyed on My Family
Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.com
Tuesday, Oct. 19, 2004
A former Vietnam War prisoner of war charges that as
he was being tortured by his communist captors, John
Kerry was preying on his family to denounce the United
States.
The new allegation against Kerry is made in the
controversial documentary �?Stolen Honor: Wounds that
Never Heal�? by James H. Warner, a former Marine Corps
naval flight officer who won the Silver Star after
spending more than five years in a North Vietnamese
prison.
Warner�?s sensational charge against Kerry is just one
of the fresh allegations that Kerry did more than
protest U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War �? he also
worked to help the North Vietnamese by getting
families of POWs to criticize the U.S. government.
When Capt. James (Jim) Howie Warner was shot down on
Oct. 13, 1967, he could hardly have known at the time
that his pain and suffering wwould be enhanced by a
recently discharged naval officer-turned-war protester
named John Kerry.
As Warner suffered brutal treatment in Vietnam, young
Kerry was helping to organize the infamous Winter
Soldier hearings held in Detroit, Mich., at the end of
January and into early February of 1971.
Warner recounts that Kerry personally recruited his
grieving mother to testify at the Winter Soldier
hearings �? testimony that Warner was confronted and
taunted with while in captivity, testimony that later
appeared in John Kerry�?s infamous wartime book, �?The
New Soldier.�?
In �?Stolen Honor,�? Warner says, �?They showed me a
transcript of testimony that my mother had given at
the Winter Soldier hearing. I read her testimony; it
was not particularly damning, but I wondered how did
someone persuade her? Then they showed me a statement
by John Kerry. I know that he did talk to her and my
sisters. It is really a contemptible act to take a
grieving old lady and prey upon her grief and
manipulate her grief purely for the promotion of your
own political agenda.�?
In his interview with NewsMax, Warner�?s anger toward
Kerry for involving his family is still very much
alive and well: �?There�?s not a single thing Kerry has
done �? except to marry a rich woman �? that didn�?t show
bad judgment.�?
From his Winter Soldier hearings, which have largely
been discredited by historians, Kerry gained national
publicity for himself and furthered the anti-war
cause. The POWs claim Kerry and his fellow anti-war
protesters helped prolong the war �? and their brutal
captivity �? by two years or more.
For his efforts, Kerry has been lauded in Vietnam and
is featured as one of the Vietnamese communists'
heroes in their national war museum.
Warner says that while Kerry was having his various
dialogues with the enemy in Paris and using Warner�?s
family for his ends, he still could have intervened to
help the POWs.
Warner says with some anguish that Kerry didn't �?even
ask them to stop the torture. While he was making
friends, why didn�?t he do something to get us letter
privileges with our families? My mother didn�?t know if
I was alive or dead.�?
B.G. Burkett, Vietnam historian and author of �?Stolen
Valor: How the Vietnam Generation Was Robbed of Its
Heroes and Its History,�? tells NewsMax that Warner�?s
family was not alone in their experience.
Burkett said that Kerry�?s Winter Soldier group
contacted the families of several POWs to denounce the
United States.
�?It�?s a pretty horrendous thing, these family members
being called by Kerry or his group while their son or
husband is being tortured in a Hanoi prison,�? Burkett
said. �?And the message to the POW families was clear:
If you speak out against the U.S., the communists will
go easy on your loved one.�?
Burkett said the effort to involve the POW families in
the anti-war movement was one of the most �?evil things
Kerry and his group ever did.�?
When Virginia Warner did testify, she did not denounce
the U.S. but she spoke as a mother would: �?My name is
Virginia Warner, and I am the mother of James Warner,
who has been a prisoner in Vietnam, North Vietnam,
since 1967 in October. I'm here to ask the American
people to help get this thing over with.�?
Having his mother�?s testimony included with the
"testimony" of those who claimed to be veterans, with
the left-wing activists present, gave a dignity to the
whole proceeding that it did not merit, Warner argues.
Kerry�?s work on behalf of North Vietnam and his use of
Warner�?s mother were not overlooked by Warner�?s
communist captors.
A Captor Taunts the Marine Aviator
In a recent essay, Warner writes about the interchange
between himself and one of his tormenting captors �? a
man he refers to as �?Boris.�?
�?Then Boris reached behind his back and pulled out
some clippings from a left wing newspaper in the U.S.
He showed me several articles about an event, which
had been held in Detroit, called 'The Winter Soldier
Hearings.' He left me to read the articles while he
left the room. The articles reported alleged
"testimony" from people who claimed to be Viet-Nam
veterans who allegedly claimed that they had done
things which, if true, would have [led] to courts
martial for each of them.
�?Suddenly, I read an article about my mother
testifying. Unlike the leftists, she did not condemn
the U.S., she merely stated that she hoped the war
would end soon and I would be released. The next
article mentioned testimony from my father. His was
like my mother's testimony, merely expressing hope
that the war would end soon and that all who suffered
from war would find relief. Nothing they said fit with
the virulent anti-American sentiments that the
leftists had expressed. But having their testimony
included in with the �?testimony�? of those who claimed
to be veterans, and the left wing activists present,
seemed to give a dignity to the whole proceeding which
it did not merit.�?
Boris told Warner to note especially the former U.S.
military officer who had accused American soldiers of
war crimes.
�?�?This man was an officer in your navy. He says that
the war is illegal, immoral and unjust. Read what he
says.�?
�?I read the words of John Kerry. What John Kerry said,
according to the clippings, was that the U.S. should
abandon South East Asia, unilaterally and immediately.
This, of course, would not only leave the Prisoners of
War in the hands of the communists, but far worse,
there was not a sane person in the universe who did
not know that the instant the countries of South East
Asia were abandoned, the blood bath would begin.�?
Warner wondered why Kerry did what he did.
�?When John Kerry said that Vietnam vets were
criminals, did he not know that the communists would
use his words against the POWs?�? Warner asked. �?He
feels insulted when someone questions his patriotism.
What other conclusion would you come to, if you were
in my shoes? Kerry, from what I read, did not
criticize the tactics or strategy we were using in
Vietnam. If that was what he wanted to say, I am sure
that most Vietnam vets, who saw first hand that
McNamara's strategy was foolish, would have agreed
with him.�?
Warner is just one of 17 POWs who appear in "Stolen
Honor" and who accuse John Kerry of betrayal.
Warner is frustrated that his story, and that of the
other POWs, is being denied to the American people and
efforts have been made to stop Sinclair Broadcasting
from airing the documentary.
�?They should have read the McCain-Feingold law that
most of them voted for,�? Warner says. �?In the black
letter law of the act, the restrictions do not apply
to one who owns or operates a media outlet.�?
Burkett argues that new revelations, such as Kerry�?s
use of POW families, need to be revealed to the
American people before they make a historic decision
on Election Day.
�?These POWs more than anyone else have a right to be
heard and should be heard by all Americans,�? Burkett
told NewsMax, adding, �?They each spent additional
months if not years in prison because of John Kerry.�?
Tuesday, Oct. 19, 2004
A former Vietnam War prisoner of war charges that as
he was being tortured by his communist captors, John
Kerry was preying on his family to denounce the United
States.
The new allegation against Kerry is made in the
controversial documentary �?Stolen Honor: Wounds that
Never Heal�? by James H. Warner, a former Marine Corps
naval flight officer who won the Silver Star after
spending more than five years in a North Vietnamese
prison.
Warner�?s sensational charge against Kerry is just one
of the fresh allegations that Kerry did more than
protest U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War �? he also
worked to help the North Vietnamese by getting
families of POWs to criticize the U.S. government.
When Capt. James (Jim) Howie Warner was shot down on
Oct. 13, 1967, he could hardly have known at the time
that his pain and suffering wwould be enhanced by a
recently discharged naval officer-turned-war protester
named John Kerry.
As Warner suffered brutal treatment in Vietnam, young
Kerry was helping to organize the infamous Winter
Soldier hearings held in Detroit, Mich., at the end of
January and into early February of 1971.
Warner recounts that Kerry personally recruited his
grieving mother to testify at the Winter Soldier
hearings �? testimony that Warner was confronted and
taunted with while in captivity, testimony that later
appeared in John Kerry�?s infamous wartime book, �?The
New Soldier.�?
In �?Stolen Honor,�? Warner says, �?They showed me a
transcript of testimony that my mother had given at
the Winter Soldier hearing. I read her testimony; it
was not particularly damning, but I wondered how did
someone persuade her? Then they showed me a statement
by John Kerry. I know that he did talk to her and my
sisters. It is really a contemptible act to take a
grieving old lady and prey upon her grief and
manipulate her grief purely for the promotion of your
own political agenda.�?
In his interview with NewsMax, Warner�?s anger toward
Kerry for involving his family is still very much
alive and well: �?There�?s not a single thing Kerry has
done �? except to marry a rich woman �? that didn�?t show
bad judgment.�?
From his Winter Soldier hearings, which have largely
been discredited by historians, Kerry gained national
publicity for himself and furthered the anti-war
cause. The POWs claim Kerry and his fellow anti-war
protesters helped prolong the war �? and their brutal
captivity �? by two years or more.
For his efforts, Kerry has been lauded in Vietnam and
is featured as one of the Vietnamese communists'
heroes in their national war museum.
Warner says that while Kerry was having his various
dialogues with the enemy in Paris and using Warner�?s
family for his ends, he still could have intervened to
help the POWs.
Warner says with some anguish that Kerry didn't �?even
ask them to stop the torture. While he was making
friends, why didn�?t he do something to get us letter
privileges with our families? My mother didn�?t know if
I was alive or dead.�?
B.G. Burkett, Vietnam historian and author of �?Stolen
Valor: How the Vietnam Generation Was Robbed of Its
Heroes and Its History,�? tells NewsMax that Warner�?s
family was not alone in their experience.
Burkett said that Kerry�?s Winter Soldier group
contacted the families of several POWs to denounce the
United States.
�?It�?s a pretty horrendous thing, these family members
being called by Kerry or his group while their son or
husband is being tortured in a Hanoi prison,�? Burkett
said. �?And the message to the POW families was clear:
If you speak out against the U.S., the communists will
go easy on your loved one.�?
Burkett said the effort to involve the POW families in
the anti-war movement was one of the most �?evil things
Kerry and his group ever did.�?
When Virginia Warner did testify, she did not denounce
the U.S. but she spoke as a mother would: �?My name is
Virginia Warner, and I am the mother of James Warner,
who has been a prisoner in Vietnam, North Vietnam,
since 1967 in October. I'm here to ask the American
people to help get this thing over with.�?
Having his mother�?s testimony included with the
"testimony" of those who claimed to be veterans, with
the left-wing activists present, gave a dignity to the
whole proceeding that it did not merit, Warner argues.
Kerry�?s work on behalf of North Vietnam and his use of
Warner�?s mother were not overlooked by Warner�?s
communist captors.
A Captor Taunts the Marine Aviator
In a recent essay, Warner writes about the interchange
between himself and one of his tormenting captors �? a
man he refers to as �?Boris.�?
�?Then Boris reached behind his back and pulled out
some clippings from a left wing newspaper in the U.S.
He showed me several articles about an event, which
had been held in Detroit, called 'The Winter Soldier
Hearings.' He left me to read the articles while he
left the room. The articles reported alleged
"testimony" from people who claimed to be Viet-Nam
veterans who allegedly claimed that they had done
things which, if true, would have [led] to courts
martial for each of them.
�?Suddenly, I read an article about my mother
testifying. Unlike the leftists, she did not condemn
the U.S., she merely stated that she hoped the war
would end soon and I would be released. The next
article mentioned testimony from my father. His was
like my mother's testimony, merely expressing hope
that the war would end soon and that all who suffered
from war would find relief. Nothing they said fit with
the virulent anti-American sentiments that the
leftists had expressed. But having their testimony
included in with the �?testimony�? of those who claimed
to be veterans, and the left wing activists present,
seemed to give a dignity to the whole proceeding which
it did not merit.�?
Boris told Warner to note especially the former U.S.
military officer who had accused American soldiers of
war crimes.
�?�?This man was an officer in your navy. He says that
the war is illegal, immoral and unjust. Read what he
says.�?
�?I read the words of John Kerry. What John Kerry said,
according to the clippings, was that the U.S. should
abandon South East Asia, unilaterally and immediately.
This, of course, would not only leave the Prisoners of
War in the hands of the communists, but far worse,
there was not a sane person in the universe who did
not know that the instant the countries of South East
Asia were abandoned, the blood bath would begin.�?
Warner wondered why Kerry did what he did.
�?When John Kerry said that Vietnam vets were
criminals, did he not know that the communists would
use his words against the POWs?�? Warner asked. �?He
feels insulted when someone questions his patriotism.
What other conclusion would you come to, if you were
in my shoes? Kerry, from what I read, did not
criticize the tactics or strategy we were using in
Vietnam. If that was what he wanted to say, I am sure
that most Vietnam vets, who saw first hand that
McNamara's strategy was foolish, would have agreed
with him.�?
Warner is just one of 17 POWs who appear in "Stolen
Honor" and who accuse John Kerry of betrayal.
Warner is frustrated that his story, and that of the
other POWs, is being denied to the American people and
efforts have been made to stop Sinclair Broadcasting
from airing the documentary.
�?They should have read the McCain-Feingold law that
most of them voted for,�? Warner says. �?In the black
letter law of the act, the restrictions do not apply
to one who owns or operates a media outlet.�?
Burkett argues that new revelations, such as Kerry�?s
use of POW families, need to be revealed to the
American people before they make a historic decision
on Election Day.
�?These POWs more than anyone else have a right to be
heard and should be heard by all Americans,�? Burkett
told NewsMax, adding, �?They each spent additional
months if not years in prison because of John Kerry.�?
Monday, October 18, 2004
Top GOPers in 'Major Effort' to Uncover Kerry's Naval Discharge
Monday, Oct. 18, 2004 8:58 a.m. EDT
Top Republicans in Washington are trying to determine
whether or not John Kerry received an honorable
discharge from the Navy, the reporter who's taken the
lead in probing Kerry's naval records said Sunday.
"I've already received an indication from high-ranking
Republican officials that, basically, there is a major
effort going on in Washington to find proof" of the
type of discharge Kerry received, New York Sun
reporter Thomas Lipscomb told WABC Radio's Steve
Malzberg. Last week, Lipscomb quoted a spokesman for
Sen. John Warner, who was Secretary of the Navy at the
time, as saying his boss "has no recollection that
would either confirm or challenge any representation
that Senator Kerry received a less than honorable
discharge."
And Kerry campaign spokesman David Wade hasn't
responded to Lipscomb's inquiries on the matter.
A document on Kerry's web site says he was honorably
discharged in 1978. But his actual separation from the
service was in 1972.
The Kerry document is a form cover letter in the name
of the Carter administration's secretary of the Navy,
W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry's discharge
as being subsequent to the review of "a board of
officers."
Notes Lipscomb: "This in it self is unusual. There is
nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action
in the Navy that requires a review by a board of
officers."
Because so many Navy documents from that era have
subsequently been destroyed, Lipscomb said the only
evidence of the circumstances of Kerry's 1972
separation would be in national security records.
But technically they're protected - up to a point.
Lipscomb said there's always the possibility that
someone would leak Kerry's records.
"Remember what happened to Linda Tripp?" he reminded
Malzberg. "She had a juvenile conviction that was
supposed to be expunged from the records . . . But one
of the Department of Defense Clinton employees
proceeded to out her national security file."
Lipscomb says the jury is still out on Kerry's Navy
discharge until further evidence emerges.
"I'm kind of sitting here, hanging in the breeze,
trying to sort this out - waiting for somebody to
talk, some document to pop," he said.
Top Republicans in Washington are trying to determine
whether or not John Kerry received an honorable
discharge from the Navy, the reporter who's taken the
lead in probing Kerry's naval records said Sunday.
"I've already received an indication from high-ranking
Republican officials that, basically, there is a major
effort going on in Washington to find proof" of the
type of discharge Kerry received, New York Sun
reporter Thomas Lipscomb told WABC Radio's Steve
Malzberg. Last week, Lipscomb quoted a spokesman for
Sen. John Warner, who was Secretary of the Navy at the
time, as saying his boss "has no recollection that
would either confirm or challenge any representation
that Senator Kerry received a less than honorable
discharge."
And Kerry campaign spokesman David Wade hasn't
responded to Lipscomb's inquiries on the matter.
A document on Kerry's web site says he was honorably
discharged in 1978. But his actual separation from the
service was in 1972.
The Kerry document is a form cover letter in the name
of the Carter administration's secretary of the Navy,
W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry's discharge
as being subsequent to the review of "a board of
officers."
Notes Lipscomb: "This in it self is unusual. There is
nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action
in the Navy that requires a review by a board of
officers."
Because so many Navy documents from that era have
subsequently been destroyed, Lipscomb said the only
evidence of the circumstances of Kerry's 1972
separation would be in national security records.
But technically they're protected - up to a point.
Lipscomb said there's always the possibility that
someone would leak Kerry's records.
"Remember what happened to Linda Tripp?" he reminded
Malzberg. "She had a juvenile conviction that was
supposed to be expunged from the records . . . But one
of the Department of Defense Clinton employees
proceeded to out her national security file."
Lipscomb says the jury is still out on Kerry's Navy
discharge until further evidence emerges.
"I'm kind of sitting here, hanging in the breeze,
trying to sort this out - waiting for somebody to
talk, some document to pop," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)