New swiftvet ad, Kerry in big trouble!

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2003
New swiftvet ad, Kerry in big trouble!
95
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 11:12am
Kerry's in big trouble now... the latest swiftvet ad (ad number 2) is if anything more devastating against Kerry than the first...

Check it out at http://a1281.v125028.c12502.g.vm.akamaistream.net/7/1281/12502/v0001/eaglepub.download.akamai.com/12502/sellout.wmv

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 08-27-2004 - 3:16pm
Probably not, but who knows.

Ted Kennedy ran for President, and he actually killed someone without having to be involved in a war.


btw....where did the flower emoticon come from...I thought I clicked the 2cents


Edited 8/27/2004 4:20 pm ET ET by debateguy

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Fri, 08-27-2004 - 3:45pm
Ugh.....

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Fri, 08-27-2004 - 6:16pm
One of the main reasons McCain sponsored finance reform was because he had a bee in his bonnet about the independent ads. It is because of his experience that it is now illegal for 527s to coordinate with the official campaigns. I don't think that Bush had nearly as much to do with the negative ad against McCain as some think, but even if he did, he certainly wouldn't be involved with the 527s now.

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Sat, 08-28-2004 - 9:23pm

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/042883.php


James Warner, POW

After we had talked for quite sometime the interrogator showed me a transcript of testimony that my mother had given at something called the winter soldier hearings...which I had no idea what these were. I read her testimony, and it wasn't damning, but then I saw some of the other stuff that had gone on at this winter soldier hearing and I wondered how did somebody get my mother persuaded to come, uh, appear at something like this.


And then shortly thereafter he showed my some statements from John Kerry. He said that John Kerry had helped to organize the winter soldier hearings because he was so motivated because he had been an American officer served in the US Navy...and...then he started reading some of the statements that John Kerry made.


I'm sorry I can't quote them, but essentially he accused all of us in Vietnam of being criminals. That everything we had done was criminal. Therefore, of course, the North Vietnamese had told us from the time they got their hands on us that we were criminals, we're not covered by the Geneva Conventions, so it was ok for them to do whatever they wanted to us.


And they told us that they were going to put us on trial, and some of us would be executed....


The interrogator went through all of these statements from John Kerry. And he starts pounding on the table, "Well see here is this Naval officer, he admits that you are a criminal and that you deserve punishment."


Well, look they told us this was a camp for punishment. We're in solitary confinement. The last time I had been tortured was, started on the 5th of May and lasted until the 2nd of September, in '69. And after it ended they kept me in this box until November the 10th. I was in the box from June the 1st to November the 10th.


When a guy starts pounding a table and you can spot this in them when they start...the voice starts to rise, their face gets red, that's usually a sign that something bad is about to happen. So it made me very uneasy as this interrogator is pounding on the table, looking at me, saying, "These words prove that you deserve punishment." I didn't know what was gonna come next and I was, for the rest of the time we were in that camp, I was very ill at ease.....


Here's a Naval Officer who comes home and leaves active duty and reports seeing events that he clearly did not see. And reports participating in actions that he clearly did not participate in. And he says them in criticism, not just of the government of the United States, but of the men he left behind when he came home. And of us who were being held prisoner in North Vietnam, he was criticizing us. He was saying we had done these things, and he was saying things that he knew to be false. And knew would harm us, that means he abandoned his comrades. He burned up his broth-...his band of brother’s membership card when he did that.

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Sat, 08-28-2004 - 10:06pm
I have two things two say about this - first, this is one of those instances where enemies of Democracy use our openness against us. If we are not free to express our dissent during times of crisis, then we cease to be a democracy. And second, Kerry cannot be held responsible for what violent people elsewhere in the world chose to do with his words. He was speaking the truth in an effort to turn America around from it's course of destruction and abuse. It was necessary and he did it because he loves his country and wanted to see us back on the right course.

US civilians who were decapitated in Saudi Arabia and Iraq were told it was in response to Abu Grahib. Should we fault the media for revealing the abuse? Does CBS have blood on its hands for revealing something ugly about us?

I also wonder what Galanti thought of the Bush 2000 campaign's claim that McCain was nuts because of his time spent in the Hanoi Hilton. In WorldNetDaily Galanti said he supported McCain in 2000.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2003
Sat, 08-28-2004 - 10:30pm
"I have two things two say about this - first, this is one of those instances where enemies of Democracy use our openness against us. If we are not free to express our dissent during times of crisis, then we cease to be a democracy. And second, Kerry cannot be held responsible for what violent people elsewhere in the world chose to do with his words."

Metrochick, for the most part, I completely agree with you. The one problem I have,is that I have heard it discussed, and also read, about Kerry going over to Vietnam and speaking with the government regarding this issue. I am not going to give specifics, because honestly, I don't know what is fact, or what is fiction or embelishment. So far I haven't been able to find much information about this. Also, it is my understanding that our enemies in this war incorporated all types of torture against American POW's. Now, I'm not trying to say that it makes it all fair game, but to someone like me that in the past only listens to the sound bites of the news programs, or reads only the headlines and the first paragraph or two of the paper, the appearance is that only the US was engaging in the use of illegal tatics, and it would seem that it was extremely wide spread, that it was the rare US soldier in Vietnam that wasn't engaging in these illegal acts. After, some, but admittedly not extensive reading, I'm finding that neither are the truth. What bothers me is that Kerry's testimony MAY have drawn an inaccurate picture of what was happening there, and that many have suffered b/c of sensationalism. I understand that Kerry and others felt they needed to draw attention to this topic, but is it possible that in doing so they jepordized many American lives, and even more US soldier futures, needlessly?

"US civilians who were decapitated in Saudi Arabia and Iraq were told it was in response to Abu Grahib. Should we fault the media for revealing the abuse? Does CBS have blood on its hands for revealing something ugly about us?"

The soldiers that participated in the abuse are the ones that have blood on their hands, I only question the necessity of the length of time it spent on the front pages of the papers and as the headlining stories on news programs, especially since it was already under investigation. I'm not suggesting hiding dirty secrets, but how they are told has an impact, this was very negative, as though the government was trying to pretend it never happened and nothing was being done about it, and that was not the case. I don't believe that giving an enemy reason to kill more of our citizens, especially in a brutal manor can be glossed over with a "free speech" claim or "dissention, that's what America is all about" claim. In this case, what purpose did alerting the world that some of our soldiers are no better than thugs? I'm not sure that it served any purpose. Now, what if we told the world that we were prosecuting our soldiers that treated POW's inhumanely, what might have been the result of that? Maybe it would have garnered a little respect for our government, that in the face of war, we do not tolerate such horrid and deplorable behavior from our soldiers, instead, the appearance was that we were simply doing nothing.

If I have any of my facts wrong, please correct me.

NIU Ribbon   Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-21-2004
Sun, 08-29-2004 - 5:43pm
As
Donna
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-21-2004
Sun, 08-29-2004 - 5:44pm
Also about the WMD the administration had been told by the CIA that the estimates were wrong, inaccurate and still they went with them. He had an agenda to take out Saddam all along. Republicans who were there wrote books about it.

Donna

Donna
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-21-2004
Sun, 08-29-2004 - 5:48pm
All I can say is your are very young, as is your husband and do not remember how it was back then during the VN war. Atrocities happened and no one was proud of it. Some were reported and prosecuted but most were not. Kerry undoubtedly knew of those atrocities even if he did not participate.

Donna

Donna
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-21-2004
Sun, 08-29-2004 - 5:51pm
Oh, so Kerry runs on his record as a Viet Nam war vet which he indeed is, but then when the campaigns come out slander him then it is his fault? This is war time. That is why he wanted everyone to know he has had experience in war, unlike our current fiasco of a bumbling idiot president.

Donna

Donna

Pages