Recent found docs implicate Kerry in colluding with N. Viet

Discussion in 'Multinational HQ' started by ctauch, Oct 26, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Recently discovered documents connect Kerry's anti-war activities in the 1970's with North Vietnam's agenda. It also implicates Kerry with not only meeting with NV reps more then once but also taking direction from them in a effort to undermine US policy...if this doesn't prove treason it sure as heel comes close. 8O

    full story at: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41106
     
  2. How does this compare (if true) with Dubya flying the Bin Laden family out of the States after 11 Sep 01?
     
  3. It doesn't
    1) Bush didn't fly them out
    2) the bin Laden family was not complicit in the attack...only Usama was complicit in the attack.

    :? :? :?

    Very confused at what your point is :roll:
     
  4. It doesn't because it never happened. yet another Michael Moore "exclusive" that turned out to be a big fat lie!

    without putting too fine a point on it:

    see http://www.davekopel.org/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm#Saudi_Departures_from_United_States for a rebuttal of Moore.
     
  5. I think the point is that as the US election draws ever closer there seems to be a constant stream of documents seemingly aimed at helping one or other of the candidates. Us cynical Brits point to the way that they are on message and released at tactically useful times and reach the conclusion that a lot of very smart people are ruthlessly exploiting the good natures of the American people for their own ends. After all, if they are exposed as fakes post-election who cares ?

    And that does not make me a Kerry supporter by the way, nor do I support Bush. Frankly it amazes me that a country like yours can find no-one better than those two wastes of genetic material as candidates. Neither of them does you any credit, nor do they adequately reflect the calibre of Americans I've worked with.
     
  6. Double post
     
  7. Actually there are about four others running. all left out of debates, and hardly ever mentioned by mainstream media

    Now, remind me again who will be running in Britain's next election.....
     
  8. Cutaway

    Cutaway LE Reviewer


    Touché RCS !
    :lol: :lol: :lol:
     
  9. I wouldn't p@ss on any of ours either, but that's not the point.
     
  10. Neither Bush nor Kerry emerge from the Vietnam War with an enormous amount of unassailable credit.

    Kerry served for four months in combat, but would anyone compare swift boat service on the Mekong with foot-slogging further in-country? He had a 'good war', unlike many.

    Bush opted to serve in the Air National Guard, knowing full well that he was not going to see action. As the son of a Second World War veteran, he could have done better. Even then I imagine that either George would have been harbouring political ambitions for George W., so from a purely cynically political viewpoint he should have volunteered for Vietnam.

    Kerry so loved his 'band of brothers' that he availed of the option of going home eight months early after he 'won' his third purple heart. An officer with an overriding sense of duty should have seen out his tour. Whatever about his Vietnam service, his behavious after he returned was disgraceful. His testimony to the Foreign Relations Committe effectively blackened the name of all American veterans of Vietnam. Many of those he associated with in the anti-war movement were not veterans at all, as subsequent investigations have proven. As a junior officer, serving in swift boats for four months, I find it difficult to believe how he could have witnessed and heard of the numerous and varied atrocities which he testified about. Whether intentional or not, he should have known that the anti-war movement was giving encouragement to the enemy. He also should have known that the North Vietnamese used negotiations as a classic Marxist stalling tactic in order to weaken their enemies' resolve and gain strategic advantage. At the very least he was enormously naive.

    Neither man is particularly appealing, but Kerry strikes me a as morally weak poseur. I know what Bush is like - I don't think either America or the West can afford the luxury of waiting to see what Kerry will be like.
     
  11. WorldNetDaily is NOT a sound source. *ends*
     
  12. must.....clutch.......at........straw..........
    rubbishing his military record didnt work, if this one doesnt you can start the rumour that he fired the first round on bloody sunday. :roll:
     
  13. But hasn't that sort of thing got a track record of garnering support from the US electorate ?
     
  14. Bah, he rubbished his own military record
     
  15. but apparently he was the mastermind behind the Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands back in 1982.