Sociable

Friday, July 30, 2004

Irony can be so ironic......



http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Testimony

The above is Kerry's Testimony before Congress regarding "war crimes" during Viet Nam

Now, as I said earlier, I think Kerry has given this election gift-wrapped to President Bush. So there is really no point to Kerry-bash. However, I always find irony in history facinating and amusing. CASE IN POINT -

Kerry's Chicago based "investigation" involving 150 unnamed and undocumented veterans was called the "WINTER SOLDIER" investigation. In Kerry's words:
We call this investigation the "Winter Soldier Investigation." The term "Winter
Soldier" is a play on words of Thomas Paine in 1776 when he spoke of the
Sunshine Patriot and summertime soldiers who deserted at Valley Forge because
the going was rough.

Now, if the term "winter soldier" refers back to Thomas Paine's characterization of TRUE soldiers who stuck it out through the long hard winter at Valley Forge, and who against horrible pain, suffering, and ongoing challenges, stuck by General Washington and went on to win the War of Independence....... what would Thomas Paine think of a man who recieved 2 minor flesh wounds plus 1 injury that kept him out of service for one whole day?

The patriots at Valley Forge were LOSING TOES AND FINGERS to frostbite! Their footprints were reddened in the white snow due to the blood loss in their feet. They were starving, exhausted, frostbitten, and dying... yet stuck out their entire tour to fight for their country. IF ANY of the true "winter soldiers" at Valley Forge served only 4 months and 12 days...... it was because they died!



So *THAT'S* what you call torture...part 2

You may remember awhile back I wrote a post regarding the never ending flood of Abu Graib coverage. You can find the original post in the archives.

However, I wanted to pass on this web page.... WARNING THE PICTURES ARE NOT PLEASANT
This is what I was trying to say......
http://www.usvetdsp.com/atrocities_iraq.htm

Those who talk about it........

Ever remember how in High School, the guys who talked the most about sex were the ones that weren't "gettin any"? The more you talked about it, the less of a chance you were physically involved with anyone.

A parallel could be drawn with those who have served in the military and in combat. My dad, who served and saw horrors at Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, Sipan, Guam, Phillipine Sea, the Solomans, and eventually sailed into Tokyo harbor, spoke painfully little about his experience. He was proud of his service, and proud of the job he did, but rarely ever talked about it. He reminded me of the Mel Gibson character in "The Patriot" who although his actions were in one light heroic, in the overall scheme of life, they were painful to recall.

He always held the belief that only through an infinate forgiveness of God could he ever enter Heaven, because he had taken lives and killed young men during the war.

He never even suggested that anything might have happened beyond the killing required by combat (no Mai Li - type abuses or Kerry Konfessionals seemingly common in Viet Nam 25 years later)... but he was pretty sure he would be sentenced to Hell for his actions in war. That's how he looked upon serving his duty, and fighting the Japanese in World War II.

To the man, my experience has been the same with every other veteran I've met. They don't talk. Even my brother-in-law who is serving in Iraq as we speak avoids conversations of the conflict and merely nods in appreciation and thanks when someone calls him a hero.

John Kerry, on the other hand, speaks at length of his performing his "duty to his country." He is not shy about discussing his involvement in Viet Nam, and identifies himself through his actions during that conflict. It made me wonder.... Why? Why, when most veterans are not ashamed, but hesitant to even discuss their years at war, why does Kerry speak about it as if it were just one more semester at Yale?

Then it struck me. Kerry's time in Viet Nam was LESS than a semester at school. My brother in law Brett has been in Iraq for nearly a year, my father spent over two years in the South Pacific, and even my other brother in law (who served on the Aircraft Carrier Enterprise in Viet Nam) was in the war for several tours. The veterans I have known were emeshed in the war for a prolonged period of time. They saw war day after day for many, many months, and have a true sense of what being a warrior was/is all about.

They didn't serve 4 months and run away.

Like Al Gore before him, John Kerry seems to have gotten a taste of war, and now claims he is a war hero.

I might remind you of two other war heros who haven't "sold out" their experiences or "capitalized" on their hero status - George Bush Senior and Bob Dole. Neither would allow those around them to make much of their war experiences. Mention it, yes... for they were not ashamed of the fact that they served and served admirably. But the most Bob Dole will make of his experience is to apologize that he can't shake your right hand.

With the exception of John Kerry and John McCain.... I have never met a veteran who wore his service on his sleave or cashed in his war experience for personal or political gain. For that I'm grateful.

If I were to meet Mr. Kerry, I would probably spit upon his medals and throw them back in his face. How dare he demean the memory of so many brave men and women who were FULL TIME soldiers and claim the same status as them. Even GW has never tried to place himself upon the level of our full time servicemen and women. He accepts the reservist status he chose, is proud of it... but never is so presumptious as to compare himself who spent years in combat!

One last thing to keep in mind. When Mr. Kerry volunteered for the Swift Boat command, the swift boats were being used outside the deltas and rivers and OUT OF COMBAT. Kerry, when he volunteered, never expected to see combat. It was only AFTER Operation SeaLords went into effect that (and Kerry's assignment) that the swift boats were placed in "hot spots."

When GW Bush volunteered to fly in the 147th, (May 27th 1968) the 147th squadron was actively participating in Viet Nam, and the chances of him being sent were HIGH. He knew that, and chose that fighter wing, knowing he would most likely serve in combat. Not for 2 years would the 147th be removed from active participation in Viet Nam. He later switched from the t-33A to the F-102A, another combat-ready aircraft often used in conflict.

IN SHORT ---- KERRY CHOSE A POSITON THAT WOULD KEEP HIM SAFE, and only through unforseeable circumstances, had to see combat...... BUSH CHOSE A POSITION THAT WOULD PUT HIM INTO COMBAT, and only through unforseeable circumstances, didn't

http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=KerryinVietnam

By the way ... about that band of brothers........ check THIS website out, to see how many are for Kerry, how many see him as unfit, and how many have no opinion.... according to the photo in the KERRY Campaign commercial
http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=SwiftPhoto


This post is dedicated to my father CHARLES DAVID BYRNE of LCS 112, which served valiantly in the South Pacific (and for a hell of a lot longer than 4 months and 12 days)during World War II. Rest in peace, Dad.

Check out http://lcs112.netfirms.com/ for information about LCS 112

Thursday, July 29, 2004

Kerry gives election to Bush

BOSTON - CKNS
With a lackluster acceptance speech driven more by statements of what he would not be as President of the United States, tonight John Kerry effectively handed the 2004 election gift-wrapped to incumbent President George W. Bush.

Once again, candidate Kerry only accentuated his role as a wishy-washy flip-flopper by both attacking Bush and asking president Bush to join him in a civil election.  He both praised his own service, while taking pride in  those who protested his service in Viet Nam.

Although the myth that claims the war in Iraq was based upon "lies" has been totally dismissed, he fed off of the Michael Moor(e) propaganda that somehow President Bush intentionally mislead the USA into war.  Kerry further claimed he would strengthen the military, although he voted against funding to protect our troops in Iraq. 

His faithful were not as duplicitious, however.  They (in the interviews following the speech) were unhesitant is showing their absolute hatred of George W. Bush.  I don't recall such evil hatred towards even Bill Clinton.  In 1996, Republicans wanted to oust the President, but one never got the impression that they wanted to kill him.  Tonight, it seems as if any Democrat with a rifle and a clear line of sight to GW Bush would not forgo the opportunity.  The hatred, the evil, the viciousness.... It truly saddens me that an entire party can be taken over by such deamons and minions of Satan.

Wednesday, July 28, 2004

Tuesday's Convention

A fine line up of Democrats... Teddy Kennedy, "Tahrayyyza" Heinz, and Ron Reagan... a trifecta - a murderer, a liar, and a betrayer - what a perfect group to represent the Democrats.  

TERESA WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE SAINT OF CALCUTTA, BUT JOHN KERRY'S WIFE PREFERS TAHRAYYYZA... SO SHOVE IT!

According to Tahrayyyza, "No one will defend this nation better than (John Kerry)" 
Really?  Is that why he voted against body armor and Humvee protection?  Is that why he voted for military involvement but then voted against funding it?  Isn't that EXACTLY what Washington DC and the Congress did in regards to Viet Nam, hamstringing the military through budgetary oversight, causing us to LOSE the Viet Nam war?  Is that how he is going to protect America?
Or is he just going to turn the keys of sovereignty over to the UN and expect protection that way?

"ASK NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU"

Teddy Kennedy's litany of "what have we DEMS dems done for you lately" was the single greatest definition of liberalism/socialism in recent times.  Thank God for Teddy!  He's  too old and doddering to be apologetic for his blatantly socialistic agenda. 

Time and again in America's history, we as Democrats have offered new hope of a stronger, fairer, more prosperous future for all our people, a society that feeds the hungry, shelters the homeless, and cares for the sick so that none must walk alone.

When the elderly faced poverty and sickness that threatened their golden years, we created Social Security (news - web sites) and Medicare. When the voices of many citizens went unheard and their lives were blighted by bigotry, we fought for equality and justice for civil rights and voting rights and the rights of women, for the cause of Americans with disabilities.

When higher education was beyond the reach of veterans returning home from war, we created the G.I. Bill of Rights and we have continued ever since to make college more affordable for millions more Americans. When men and women needed protection in the workplace, we demanded safe conditions for their jobs. We insisted on the right to higher pay for working overtime.

We guaranteed the right to form a union. We pledged a fair minimum wage, so that no one in America who works for a living should have to live in poverty.  




Unfortunately, to deride any of these programs makes one seem heartless and cruel, so it's an argument most choose not engage.  One can NOT get around the fact that ALL of these things are BIG GOVERNMENT helping out the little folk.  This country was based upon the ideals that the little folk do MUCH better when the Government gets out of their way. 

What happened to his brother's admonishing to "...ask what you can do for your country."?  The Democratic party has become a quasi-socialist fringe group forever having their hands out asking the government to fix everything from their screwed-up personal investments to their spilled hot coffee.  It's a wonderful, blissful idea... having someone acting like a Big Brother to look out for you and protect you.  But history has proven that governments are notoriously ineffective and inefficient.  The same shelters, protections, and opportunities can be better served in the private sector.

Case in point (and this dovetails with Traitor Reagan's speech)  Stem cell research - The restrictions placed upon embryonic Stem Cell Research do not, I repeat DO NOT limit private research, and in fact allow govn't research on 6 strains already being used.  Those 6 strains provide plenty of sources for any study desired.  But that's beyond the main point.  If stem cell research was TRULY the panacea that the pro-abortionists claim, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that Geneva Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers - Squib, and Merck would be clamoring to perform private studies in order to secure the patents to this "miracle cure"?  Of course they would!  But they know that embryonic Stem Cell Research is a mirage and a red herring.  There is much more potential in Coi blood and adult stem cells.

Test subjects that have had embryonic stem cells injected into their brains have had bone tissue grow right into their cortex.  Most, if not all, have had higher cases of tumors and cancer than if they had been just left alone.  Embryonic Stem Cell research is NO panacea, only a tool for the pro-abortion crowd to justify their continuing slaughter of unborn humans.

Many commentators have noted that the speakers so far at the convention have tried to play to the center, to give a moderate face, and refrain from Bush-bashing.  Fortunately, they have failed on both counts, showing their colors brightly and proudly, they just used softer language. 



Monday, July 26, 2004

And they're off!!!

Tonight (Monday) marked the begining of the Democrat National Convention in Boston.  Has anyone mused over the fact that Kerry is good friends with the French... The French have a very large and powerful Islamic movement, and the fact that most of the 9-11 Highjackers boarded their last fatefull flights at logan airport in Boston?

I'm not delving into any whacko conspiracy stuff (I'm not Michael Moore, after all)... only pointing out a haunting and telling coincidence.  What IS relevant, however, is that all I could think of during Bill Clinton's speech tonight was this -  he was standing only a few miles from where 10 Islamic hijackers - that HE allowed into the country and HE allowed to train on our own soil throughout most of his tenure as President - boarded flights UA 175 and AA11 which would fly into the World Trade Center.  This would be akin to O.J. Simpson giving a speech about domestic violence only blocks away from Rockingham.  In most cases I find liberal hypocricy laughable or silly, but this irony only turned my stomache.