“Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam,” Kerry charged, referring to President Bush,
“here is my answer: Bring it on.” While Kerry was trying to draw the ire of the president, he committed what appears
to be a Freudian slip.
Why would ‘he’ want to debate ‘our’ service in Vietnam, when the president knows he never served
in Vietnam? Shouldn’t Kerry have said what he really meant, which is that he wants his fellow Vietnam Veterans to ‘bring
it on’? Especially in light of the fact that President Bush has repeatedly commended Kerry for his service in Vietnam
and has never once questioned Kerry’s truthfulness about his service record.
For well over a decade the national news media has ran multiple investigations concerning three months of President Bush’s
National Guard service because of Democrat accusations, yet Kerry’s fellow veterans who were eye witnesses to events
of which Kerry has potentially exaggerated and used for political expedience and suddenly those same media outlets are only
concerned about the people making the accusations and aren’t interested in the incidents themselves.
More over, none of the accusations made by the Swift Boat Veterans has changed, yet several of Kerry’s stories has
changed, some almost daily. His ‘Christmas in Cambodia’ story , which he claimed was seared in his memory, has
transmogrified at least three times in recent days. Don’t lose sight of reality, the truth never changes.
Meanwhile, Kerry attempts to play mind games with the masses by trying to divert everyone’s attention towards the
Republican donor who gave $150000 to the Swift Boat Veterans to run their ads by charging that somehow the president is involved.
Michael Moore made that much money in one hour with his Bush-bashfest propaganda movie, yet Kerry and his gang invited Moore
to the DNC convention as an honored guest!
Now the media wants to perpetuate the idea that the veterans are attacking Kerry’s veracity because of his ‘post-Vietnam
anti-war’ stance, which to some degree has validity. After all, he did go on the record directly attacking his fellow
veterans by alleging that they had committed several wide-ranging atrocities while in the theater of combat.
Many media pundits have tried to do damage control for Kerry by asserting that his attacks were directed at the United
States government, not at his fellow veterans. That doesn’t change the fact that in reality, several veterans, including
Senator John McCain, have reported that Kerry’s own words were used by the Viet Cong as they tortured them.
Or that Kerry’s anti-war activities stateside and speech before the Senate committee helped to build a hatred in
America against those who served in Vietnam, which led to many of these veterans being spat on as they returned home. The
people doing the spitting weren’t ‘protesting against the government’ as they called the returning soldiers
‘baby killers‘, they were directly attacking the veterans on behalf of Kerry and his heinous accusations.
Besides, the political spin the media is using by claiming the Swift Boat Veterans are attacking Kerry because of their
need for revenge is an easy way for them to simply discredit the veterans without actually investigating the charges made
by the veterans, probably because the media is afraid of what they will discover about their beloved John Kerry.
Democrats also charge that the Swift Boat Veterans didn’t serve on Kerry’s boat, therefore any assertions they
make should be discounted. Any investigator will tell you that they put more credence in an eye witness account by someone
who wasn’t involved in an incident than the participants of that event.
Former Green Beret Jim Rassmann is an honorable man, but all he can truly testify to is that while he was in the river
and thought he was going to die, Kerry pulled him from the river. How he got in the river will always be questionable, but
the testimony of eyewitnesses from the other boats in the area should be the accounts that have the most credibility. They
shouldn’t be attacked because of their recollection of an event they watched as it transpired.
Suddenly the media doesn’t care about non-participant eyewitness accounts, at least when they indict John Kerry’s
assertions, yet they have searched high and low for someone who served with President Bush during his stint in Alabama for
an eyewitness account of whether or not he was there and have even tried to discredit at least one man who did state that
he served with the president.
Just for the record about the AWOL business, even if he was AWOL during those three months, nobody in the military at that
base or otherwise cared enough or thought it was important enough to make an issue out of it at the time. End of story.
But President Bush has tried to prove many times over that he served all of his time and put the story to rest, even going
so far as to produce every piece of paper that exists concerning his whereabouts during that three months, but John Kerry
has yet to even attempt to address the almost over-whelming inadequacies in his recollections of his four month span of combat
service in Vietnam that he made a campaign issue and has yet to sign off on the release of his military records to silence
his critics. Why?
But the media; that’s not biased, is still spending money investigating that AWOL accusation and I’m sure they’ll
exhaust every fund necessary to discredit the Swift Boat Veterans, because to them, the truth is much too important to divulge
to the American public.
Lee P Butler