How many soldiers do you know who are exhibited as honorary war heroes in the Communist War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City?
John Kerry faced major challenges at the beginning of this election cycle: first, the popularity and credibility George W. Bush had with the American people post 9/11; second, his anti-war movement with Jane Fonda – which included abusive statements about the 2.6 million American soldiers that served during the Vietnam War; third, his abysmal anti-national security voting record; and fourth, his failure to leave a legislative footprint in the Senate after being there for twenty years. In response to these challenges, Kerry settled on a strategy that maligned President Bush’s military service and undermined the peoples’ trust in Bush as Commander-In-Chief. At the same time, this strategy called for Kerry to promote himself as a war hero in a calculated offset to his anti-war activities and his extreme anti-national security voting record. See my article Kerry and Unfit for Command (below).
To grasp Kerry’s election strategy, you must be clear on the advantages President Bush has going into the 2004 election cycle: people admire his integrity; they admire how he handled 9/11 and see him as a strong leader and man of honor; they admire his focus on bringing global terrorists to justice; they respect the fact that when he said he was going to do something, he did it; they admire him for not flip-flopping positions for political advantage; they admire him as a person they can trust to win the war against global terrorism; and they see him as a person that would do everything humanly possible to preclude future terrorist attacks on the U.S. In a nutshell, the people trust George W. Bush.
To deal with Kerry’s election year challenges, Kerry and the Democrat Party singled out a strategy designed to defeat President Bush in November of 2004. The objective of this strategy was to subvert the trust of the American people and trust of the United States military in their President and Commander-In-Chief. The successful implementation of this strategy depended on the support of the mass liberal media - agenda driven - propaganda machine, a deluge of “Hate Bush” books in bookstores — and '527' Groups — to do the Kerry Campaign’s dirty work. Close to $70,000,000 (as of September, 2004) has been used by Left-Wing '527' Groups to pay for attack ads to undermine the credibility of the Commander-In-Chief of our Armed Forces. Additionally, the film Fahrenheit 9/11 may equate to more than $100,000,000 in '527' attack ads.
Left-Wing Democrat Leaders have set the tone for their campaign by embracing a vitriolic vocabulary (during a time of war) which they churn out globally: Bush is a liar; Bush lied to the American people; Bush is a coward; Bush is a deserter; Bush is a draft dodger; Bush joined the Guard to avoid Vietnam; Bush went AWOL; Bush lied to us about the war in Iraq; Bush lied about WMD; Bush deceived and betrayed the American people; Bush made the Iraq war up in Texas; Bush took us to war on a whim; Bush put Saddam’s prisons under new management; Bush should fire the Secretary of Defense; Bush should fire his National Security Advisor; Bush should fire the Director of the CIA; Bush should fire his Vice President; Bush should pull our troops out of Iraq; Bush has us in a Quagmire; Bush has no plan; Bush is a cowboy; Bush is an idiot; Bush is a dunce; Bush is dishonest; Bush is insane; Bush is an incompetent leader; Bush is a Nazi; Bush is a Fascist; Bush only went to Iraq for oil; Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln for a photo op; Bush misled the American people; Bush must go; Bush doesn’t honor the fallen dead, and on and on. It is fascinating that the Left-Wing’s political play book doesn’t change. Many of the “Big Lies” used to chip away at the credibility of President Bush were used with equal malevolence yet effectiveness against President Ronald Reagan.
Attacks on President Bush’s Air National Guard service epitomized the Left’s coordinated efforts with media to undermine the trust and credibility of President George W. Bush. See my prior article Bush and Uncommon Valor. The Left-Wing attack strategy (regarding national security) employs a never-ending repertoire of doom and gloom scenarios, defeatism and negativity - augmented with an abundance of the above malicious slogans. The film Fahrenheit 9/11 perfectly complemented Kerry’s Campaign strategy - thus elevating Michael Moore to rock star status at the Democrat National Convention. It’s a sad day for the United States when Middle East Terrorist Organizations use the film Fahrenheit 9/11 and the statements of Left-Wing Democrat Leaders to support the recruiting of terrorists. If Left-Wing Democrats wonder why U.S. credibility is suffering internationally, all they have to do is look at the hate they’re putting out globally against the leadership of our country.
But even more important to Kerry’s election than '527' Groups is the mass liberal media - agenda driven - propaganda machine working every day in his behalf. The New York Times (electronically syndicated to over 650 newspapers) has worked to systematically undermine the trust and credibility of President Bush, his administration and our war efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. To see how liberal media orchestrates its coverage to effect political outcomes, read Journalistic Fraud: How the New York Times Distorts the News and Why It Can No Longer Be Trusted by Bob Kohn.
The same multifaceted Kerry campaign apparatus used to undermine the credibility of President Bush is now directed at the Swift Vets for Truth. In response to the book Unfit for Command by John E. O’Neill and Jerome R. Corsi (which documents Kerry’s betrayal and deception during the Vietnam War), Kerry dispatched lawyers to intimidate TV stations into censoring veteran ads off the air and to pressure bookstores to ban Unfit for Command from their bookshelves. Whether you agree or disagree with these Vets, they have earned (on the battlefield) their right to be heard.
We should all wonder if the actions by Kerry to restrict the Vets free speech rights are a forewarning of what Kerry might do if elected. Would Kerry prohibit certain books, ads and conservative talk show hosts – based on his Administration’s perception of the truth? Will he now hire private investigators to marginalize the reputation of any Swift Boat Veteran who takes issue with his fitness to be the Commander-In-Chief (254 Swiftees now say he is unfit)? Will Kerry now re-initiate a media barrage attacking President Bush's Air National Guard Service – even though President Bush has released all his military records? (Kerry still needs to execute Standard Form 180 releasing his military records).
As an assist to Kerry’s actions to fend off the Swift Boat Veterans, the New York Times, its hundreds of syndicated newspapers, other liberal media and the '527' groups have resorted to an all out effort to smear the reputations of these Veterans — despite that these Vets are an apolitical group made up of more Democrats / Independents than Republicans. To these Veterans, the issue with Kerry has to do with honor on the battlefield (and the honor of all veterans and military members) and how this honor was mocked and trashed by John Kerry. Additionally, the New York Times articles attacking the Swift Boat Veterans (in apparent synchronization with Kerry) are being echoed by the liberal media’s national networks — CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, etc., plus National Public Radio (NPR), cable TV, liberal radio talk shows and media spin doctors.
The myriad of attacks on the Swift Boat Vets and President Bush — to undermine their credibility with the American Public — will ultimately backfire on Kerry. Why? Because after all the dust settles there will be a fundamental question for Kerry. Is he a war hero for the Communists (John Kerry holds a place of honor in the Communist War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City for his “heroic” contributions to the North Vietnamese victory) or is he a war hero for United States?
Whatever your answer to this question is, no one can deny that Kerry gave aid and comfort to the enemy; that Kerry's anti-American propaganda was played to United States Prisoners of War (POWs) as they were being tortured; that he vilified the reputations of 2.6 million American soldiers that served in combat in Southeast Asia (over a ten year period), vilified the 58,000 of our brave fighting men that died during the Vietnam conflict and vilified the 300,000 that were wounded in combat. Is it not ironic then — that the one war hero who emerges out of the battlefields of Vietnam is John Kerry. He wants to be Commander-In-Chief. Is he a villain or a hero? If he is a hero what about the 2.6 million American soldiers he labeled as villains? Are they still villains or are they now heroes or is Kerry the only real hero to emerge from Vietnam with his reputation whole?
The greatest insult our citizens could inflict upon the U.S. military would be to vote into office as Commander-in-Chief the very person who betrayed our soldiers while they were still fighting and dying on the battlefield and in air combat — and struggling for survival in POW camps such as the Hanoi Hilton. In this veteran's view, voting Kerry Commander-In-Chief would be unconscionable and demonstrate a profound disregard for the deep-rooted feelings of hundreds of thousands of veterans and soldiers.
Kerry’s election strategy to malign Bush’s military service in the Air National Guard and undermine President Bush's credibility with the American people (while promoting himself as a war hero) has blown up in Kerry’s face. The hero component of Kerry’s strategy has now been debunked by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (Read: Unfit for Command). Also, citizens must realize that Kerry's resume for Commander-In-Chief is irreversibly flawed given Kerry's abysmal anti-national security voting record and his betrayal and vilification of 2.6 million American soldiers that went to war in service of the United States of America.
A Kerry Administration would pose, in itself, a National Security threat to the United States - hear Zell Miller. Why? Because a Kerry Administration would incorporate Kerry's long time supporters: Left-Wing anti-war, anti-military, anti-Patriot Act, anti-intelligence gathering people, pacifists, appeasers and the blame America first crowd. These Kerry supporters would be far more interested in dismantling the U.S. military and turning our national security over to the U.N. than in aggressively going after global terrorism.
Kerry and Unfit for Command
Kerry Betrayed His Comrades In Arms. In my my prior article Bush and Uncommon Valor I state that although it is fair to recognize Sen. Kerry's four-month war record and medals, it is what he did after leaving the military that deserves the greatest scrutiny. He became a turncoat by misrepresenting to the American public what our soldiers were doing in Southeast Asia. As part of the anti-war movement with Jane Fonda, he maligned, mocked and discredited our soldiers. He lied about what our soldiers were doing in combat. He defamed our brave fighting men. Today, John Kerry holds a place of honor in the Communist War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City for his "heroic" contributions to the North Vietnamese victory.
So he is a war hero for the Communists and a war hero for the United States — all in the same war. How is that possible? It is certainly a unique accomplishment in the annals of warfare. Now with the book Unfit for Command (written by John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi and supported by inputs from more than 60 honorable Swift Boat Veterans), it is clear that several of Kerry's combat awards were based on betrayal and deception as were his attacks against his fellow soldiers during the Vietnam War.
Kerry vilified the reputations of 2.6 million soldiers that served in combat in Southeast Asia (over a ten year period), vilified the 58,000 of our brave fighting men that died during the Vietnam conflict and vilified the 300,000 that were wounded in combat. Is it not ironic then — that the one war hero who emerges out of the battlefields of Vietnam is John Kerry. He wants to be Commander-In-Chief. Is he a villain or a hero? If he is a hero what about the 2.6 million he labeled as villains? Are they still villains or are they now heroes or is Kerry the only real hero to emerge from Vietnam with his reputation whole?
The greatest insult our citizens could inflict upon the U.S. military would be to vote into office as Commander-in-Chief the very person who betrayed our soldiers — while they were still fighting and dying on the battlefield and in air combat. In my view, to make him Commander-In-Chief would be unconscionable and demonstrate a profound disregard for the feelings of hundreds of thousands of Veterans.
As a combat veteran having flown in North Vietnam, South Vietnam and Laos in 1968-1969, and knowing of many Tactical Fighter Pilots who lost their lives in combat, I will not be voting for John Kerry — the man who defamed the reputations of the men and women who gave their all in behalf of the citizens of the United States of America.
My conclusion from reading Unfit for Command is that Kerry still owes the U.S. taxpayer 243 days of Vietnam service based on factual misrepresentations made in his award submissions. According to Unfit for Command, two of John Kerry's Purple Heart awards were based on self-inflicted wounds and were not the result of hostile fire of any kind. Since one of the requirements to be awarded a Purple Heart is enemy fire and given none took place, these awards were fraudulently obtained.
However, read the book and draw your own conclusions. The Purple Heart stories are just the tip of the iceberg of what the Swift Boat Veterans have documented about John Kerry. The book Unfit for Command can be purchased at Amazon.com. Should John Kerry become President, who do you think would be in charge of the war against global terrorism? Would it be Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Jane Fonda, pacifists, appeasers, Left-Wing anti-war, anti-military, anti-Patriot Act, anti-intelligence gathering people and the United Nations — to include the French, Germans, Russians and Chinese? These people comprise Kerry's center of influence and the front line of his Left-Wing Democrat Party. These people (given their record) would be a lot more interested in dismantling the U.S. military and turning our national security over to the U.N. than in going after any terrorists. Beware America.
John O'Neill, Jerome Corsi and the more than 60 Swift Boat Veterans that have been courageous enough to set the record straight in Unfit for Command should be applauded; they have earned on the battlefield their right to speak out. Their voices need to be heard despite Kerry's many efforts to silence and discredit them. Also, 254 Swift Boat Veterans should be applauded for demanding that Kerry release his military and medical records by executing a Standard Form 180. Immediate release would allow the public time to review all of Kerry's records. Citizens have a right to examine Kerry's credentials prior to voting on November 2, 2004.
Those involved in the exposure of Kerry's military record to the public should know they will be viciously attacked by Kerry and the mass liberal media propaganda machine as being agents of the Bush Campaign — which they are not. Also, expect that the New York Times (electronically syndicated to over 650 newspapers) will do everything they can to trash the reputations of the Swift Boat Veterans in order to get Kerry elected — despite the fact that the Swift Boat Veterans are an apolitical group made up of Democrats, Republicans and Independents. Additionally, the New York Times articles (attacking the Swift Boat Veterans) will be echoed by the liberal media's national networks — CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. plus National Public Radio (NPR), cable TV and radio talk shows.
In closing, let me ask how many soldiers do you know who are exhibited as honorary war heroes in the Communist War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City? I know of only one, his name is John Kerry. This is hardly a qualification to be Commander-In-Chief of our Armed Forces.
Note: I suspect my fellow veterans have little interest in going back 30 to 35 years to revisit discordant memories of their Vietnam experience; the Vietnam and post-Vietnam phase of our lives long ago faded into the sunset of history. However, John Kerry has chosen to bring Vietnam into the forefront of his 2004 campaign (as his most significant qualification to be Commander-In-Chief of our Armed Forces) by portraying himself as a war hero while at the same time deprecating President Bush's military service in the Air National Guard. See my article in Insight Magazine — Left-Wingers' Attacks on Bush are Slap in Face to Servicemen.
j-bwambough@cox.net
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=632731
Read more articles by John H. Wambough, Jr.
