Posted 1:50 PM by Steve
"Unfit for Command"

The Treason of John Kerry?


" It is a fact that in the entire Vietnam War the United States did not lose one major battle. We lost the war at home and at home John Kerry was the field general."

Robert Elder
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth

Let's examine the actions and testimony of John Kerry not in a vacuum, but as an important turning point in the history of our nation. It's despicable enough, on a personal level, that he would exaggerate wounds and lie about combat situations in order to achieve medals and then run for various political offices on the basis of falsehoods. Especially in light of the fact that he accused all the military personnel in Vietnam of war crimes and denounced the war effort in general. I think it's fair that we've established what kind of character this man has.

Now, let's look at the results of his words and deeds in a larger sense. Ion Mihai Pacepa is the highest ranking Soviet intelligence officer to have defected to the West. He had some interesting things to say about John Kerry's activities. He states that the KGB picked up on and used, almost word for word, John Kerry's assertions of war crimes and atrocities to foment the antiwar movement in America and abroad. The Communist Party was funding the so-called World Peace Organization to the tune of about $50 million dollars at this time and helping to mobilize all sorts of "useful idiots" on the left. In fact the stated goal of the KGB regarding the the Vietnam War at the time was "to aid or to conduct operations to help Americans dodge the draft or defect, to demoralize it's army with Anti-American propaganda, to conduct protests, demonstrations and boycotts, and to sanction anyone connected with the war."

So, the question is, how much did John Kerry know about the funding, goals, and origins of the antiwar movement? Was he merely a pawn...an ambitious fool... who said what he said to advance his political career? Or was he more deeply involved in the anti-American activities?

I think that this vital question should be answered and quickly by Kerry. Until this question is resolved, Kerry is not only unfit to be President, but he should be stripped of his status as Senator in the United States Congress. Is John Kerry is synonymous with Benedict Arnold.

Posted 7:20 PM by Steve
The weakness of the Democrats vs. The strength of President George W. Bush


In the past few weeks and days we Americans have seen some troubling things. We have reason to be upset and reason to mourn. Americans have been brutally murdered by cold-blooded scum. Car bombs have taken the lives of valiant soldiers and innocent Iraqi non-combatants.

We also have reason to be optimistic. We have a Prime Minister in Iraq who shares President Bush's desire for a free and peaceful Iraq. Prime Minister Allawi said
"Our country has now entered into a new era, the second new era within the past 14 months. Last April Iraq began an era free from Saddam Hussein. We Iraqis are grateful for the coalition action that liberated us from the former dictator's tyrannical grip."
We have a majority of Americans who understand that we are safer without Saddam Hussein running things in Iraq.

The toll of human life in the War in Iraq has been high. Any loss of life is tragic. But it's important to keep in mind that during Saddam Hussein's regime the loss of human life was far greater than during this war. The most conservative estimates range from a minimum of 750,000 Iraqis killed by Saddam's regime with hundreds of thousands of these buried in mass graves in Iraq. Kidnapping, beating, torture, rape and murder were commonplace in Iraq under Saddam Hussein.


While it's revolting and difficult to see innocent people murdered on video in Iraq keep in mind that is exactly the feelings the terrorists want you to have. Fear. Terrorism is a political act; it's the targeting of civilian non-combatants for the purpose of creating fear to accomplish a political objective. The terrorists have a strong ally in the the United States in people like John Kerry who will skillfully try to exploit every tragedy in Iraq to make the President look bad for his own political gain. The terrorists other ally is the media, who cannot help but broadcast the most sensationalist stories that shock and revolt the viewers in their fierce competition for ratings.

Imagine if some powerful inner city drug lord kidnapped some random person from a bus stop and videotaped himself beheading that person for the purpose of "sending a message to the cops." What would the reaction be? Do you think Americans would nervously bite their nails and re-think whether a police presence should exist in that neighborhood? Of course not! Americans would be horrified and rightly so, but no one would seriously suggest that backing down to some drug lord is the right things to do. Americans would demand that individual be brought to justice. That should be our attitude when we see such atrocities

There is a disturbingly racist sensibility that pervades the media when these events are reported that the heinous act of these individuals represents the whole of the public sentiment in Iraq or the Arab world in general. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is also an unspoken racist undertone to the way these cruel acts are cast upon Arabs in general as if "It's our fault we're there." or "It's just the way they are." The same subtly racist and dehumanizing reporting came out of Vietnam.

We should look at these acts of violence as the ultimate justification for our being in Iraq. The fact that horrific things like this happen inside Iraq prove that the responsible, free nations of the world should use any and all means to improve humanitarian conditions there. The absolute worst message would be sent by "cutting and running". If anything, we as a nation should see these horrendous acts as simply more evidence that we are doing the right thing by liberating the millions of peaceful people in Iraq. Tyranny doesn't only come in the form of a dictator named Saddam Hussein. Tyranny also comes in the form of desperate violent individual terrorists.

Posted 1:59 PM by Steve
"Unfit for Command"

Let's now address John Kerry's litany of lies at the Fulbright Committee:

Without a shred of proof, and without any documentation, or even an affidavit Kerry accused U.S. military personnel of "war crimes" "committed on a day-to-day basis" with the full "awareness of the officers at all levels of command." Torture, disfigurement, murder and wanton violence were among Kerry's unsubstantiated charges.

John Kerry's testimony was a slap in the face to military personnel who were, at the time, still serving honorably in Southeast Asia.

John Kerry's testimony was carefully planned and orchestrated to serve Senator Fulbright's anti-war agenda while launching the career of a politically ambitious John Kerry.

The real motivation behind the anti-Vietnam war movement cannot be completely shrouded by this mockery. And there is a real parallel to be drawn from the"anti-Vietnam war" movement to the current "anti-Iraq war"movement. Even in the midst of the Cold War, John Kerry and Senator Fulbright myopically didn't see any threat to the United States coming from the spread of Communism in Southeast Asia.

John F. Kennedy said, " Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and success of liberty."

Contrast this with Kerry and Fulbright's attitude of "If it doesn't directly affect me, ignore it." which closely resembles the appease-first attitude of today's leftists, from Howard Dean and Ralph Nader to John Kerry.

Just as today's leftists, Kerry and Fulbright refused to see the preservation of freedom as the saving of human life. Freedom, whether it is from Communism or Islamic totalitarianism, is the ultimate human rights tool.

Posted 7:13 PM by Steve
WAKE UP CALL:

There is no such things as a "hostage" when you are dealing with Islamic terrorist scum. These wretched dirtbags who videotape themselves brutally murdering civilian non-combatants are seriously deluded if they think "Allah" will embrace them in paradise. The Qur’an says about the prohibition of murder, “…Take not life, which Allah hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus does He command you, that ye may learn wisdom.” (Al-An`am: 151)

Posted 2:18 AM by Steve
"Unfit for Command" Surprise! Kerry lied about his Silver Star too!

John Kerry received the Silver Star for shooting a wounded, teenage Viet Cong in the back according to eyewitnesses and his own crew members. He has been criticized by the Swift Boat veterans and the Boston Globe for using this ignoble event as political capital. In fact, each of the officers requested by Kerry to defend him, signed the May 4, 2004 letter condemning Kerry for his own misrepresentations of his record.

By manipulating the system and pre-planning maneuvers in order to make himself look courageous, Kerry shames himself and gives the military a bad name.

Posted 3:16 PM by Steve
The shameful hypocrisy of John Kerry

Today, John Kerry, in apparent desperation at trailing in the polls, hit a new low. He attacked President George W. Bush on Iraq.

"Yet today, President Bush tells us that he would do everything all over again, the same way. How can he possibly be serious?"

John Kerry 9/20/04
FLIP-FLOP ALERT!!!!!

As recently as six months ago Kerry said:

"Those who believe we are not safer with his (Saddam's)capture don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president."
John Kerry

DOUBLE FLIP-FLOP ALERT!!!!!!!!!

As recently as AUGUST, Kerry, when asked whether he would support the war "knowing what we know now", said:

"Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have."

This guy is un-freaking-believable. He must have to take a poll to decide what color tie he is going to wear that day!!

Someone with no core principles who wavers and flip-flops from day to day cannot be counted on as Commander in Chief. John Kerry lacks the character and integrity to hold our nations highest office.

Posted 1:59 PM by Steve
Bush's Honorable Air National Guard Service

By Col. John H. Wambough, Jr. USAF (Ret.) September 20, 2004

George Bush and I were fighter pilots. Lt. Bush flew F-102s in the Air National Guard (ANG) -- 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS); I flew F-105s in combat -- 34th Tactical Fighter Squadron (TFS). Both our flying assignments were inherently dangerous -- Lt. Bush's because of the high performance nature of the fighter interceptor aircraft he was flying, the training required to fly the F-102, and the high risks that come with all weather (night and day) intercept missions.
Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic National Committee's Mr. Terry McAuliffe and the anti-war (weak on National Security) left wing of the Democrat Party have relentlessly attacked the service of Lt. Bush and by inference other pilots and service members in the ANG and Reserve forces as cowards and shirkers of responsibility for not being in Vietnam. Their flippant slandering of our Guard and Reserve forces in an effort to discredit President Bush and win an election is beyond the pale. They have no decency left.
Lt. Bush's opportunity to fly jets and serve his country came through the Air National Guard when he was 22 years old. Just like Lt. Bush, my goal as a young man was to fly high performance jet fighter aircraft -- both of us realized our dream. I might have been just a dumb fighter pilot but I don't remember looking ahead (and I'm sure Lt. Bush didn't either) to what missions we could be assigned -- peacetime or wartime. All we wanted to do as young men was to fly these magnificent flying machines (jets) and enjoy the opportunity to serve our country. (Contributing to the Air National Guard's Air Defense mission, Lt. Bush flew hundreds of hours in the F-102 -- the world's first supersonic all-weather jet interceptor aircraft; he served his country protecting the United States.)
Neither Lt. Bush nor I had control over mission assignment, where we would be deployed or how the service would task the units we were assigned. Lt. Bush would have gladly gone to Vietnam or anywhere else his unit was deployed -- but the reality was that young Lt. Bush had no say as to how his unit would be utilized to support our country's National Security interests. I guess you could say such decisions were above our pay grade. Lt. Bush's mission, as a squadron fighter interceptor pilot, was to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft inbound to the United States; for example, Soviet Nuclear Bombers. Remember, we were still in the Cold War in the 1970s with Air Defense a high priority mission. Today our Air Defense forces protect us against aircraft with terrorists onboard.
I can say from my experience that flying operational fighter jets is highly dangerous. People don't strap fighter jets to their backside if they are overly concerned for their future. While in F-105 training at McConnell AFB in early 1968, we lost five aircraft in six weeks (one aircraft crashed in air-to-air combat training; one aircraft crashed on the air-to-ground gunnery range; one crashed on take off; one crashed on final approach at a nearby airfield; and one crashed coming back from a cross-country mission). My nephew was killed while flying a Marine Corp EA-6B Prowler during a low level state-side training mission. I was in a flight where an F-105 pilot was killed while we were training on an air-ground gunnery range. Also, I've been in F -105 and F-111 operational units where a number of pilots were killed while training for their war time mission. We got really good at flying "Missing Man Formations" and doing memorial services for our fallen comrades and their families. I can assure you that Lt. Bush was continuously exposed to similar dangers during all weather scrambles and during training exercises as evidenced by the F-102 pilots killed in his unit.
Cowards (or people who lack courage) don't take on the risks that Lt. Bush did in flying Fighter Interceptor Aircraft. Flying jets in wing formation in the weather and carrying explosive ordnance on board is dangerous work. The pilots in these squadrons (including Lt. Bush) did what their country asked them to do. They performed their assigned mission and did it well. In November 1970, the Commander of the Texas Air National Guard, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, called Mr. Bush, then 24, "a dynamic outstanding young officer" who stood out as "a top-notch fighter interceptor pilot." "Lt. Bush's skills far exceed his contemporaries," Colonel Killian wrote: "He is a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership. Lt. Bush is also a good follower with outstanding disciplinary traits and an impeccable military bearing."
As a Fighter Squadron Commander in the Air Force (F - 111E aircraft, 55 TFS, Royal Air Force, Upper Heyford, United Kingdom) and having been in fighter squadrons during my career in the Air Force, all I can say is that the young people who make up these squadrons (like Lt. Bush) are the cream of the crop, top performers, talented, courageous and willing to take on any mission challenge presented to them, anytime, anyplace and anywhere. Everyone in a unit realizes that they serve to protect the National Security Interests of the United States and that they can be mobilized -- with short notice -- to deploy anywhere in the world.
During the Vietnam conflict, military pilot training was greatly expanded to accommodate the increased need for pilots. Thousands of pilots were trained during this conflict, primarily to support mission and pilot rotation requirements. F-105, F 4 fighter pilots, and the pilots of other combat aircraft were routinely rotated out of the combat theatre after completing their 100 combat missions. That meant that other pilots needed to be trained to take their place. As the Vietnam conflict began to phase down around 1971, there was a surplus of hundreds of pilots in the U.S. Military, for which there were relatively few flying jobs. Thus, the active duty force as well as ANG and Reserve forces could be very accommodating to those who wanted to pursue alternative career paths (such as Lt. Bush going to Harvard Business School). In fact, these sorts of administrative actions (early releases) helped alleviate the challenges facing the services of a pilot surplus. Also, commanders were lenient in allowing individuals to fulfill their service obligations in ways not involving flying duty. Such arrangements were coordinated at the unit level.
Just as Lt. Bush's supervisor released him from the ANG to go to Harvard, I released a pilot from the Air Force months early (when I was Commander of the 4442nd Tactical Control Group) so he could participate in the pilot hiring cycle of Delta Airlines. I could have held this pilot to the end of his service commitment but chose not to -- since letting him go early created no hardship to our unit. Rather, it gave a pilot (who had served his country well) an immediate opportunity for a future career. I point this fact out so that the public knows that Commanders have the prerogative to make decisions that take into consideration the needs of the Unit and the needs of an individual ready to make a career transition out of the service. Having been a Squadron Commander, I can tell you this -- we know the status of our assigned personnel all the time -- everyone is accounted for. We reported the status of all our squadron personnel daily to a higher level in our organization. Likewise, Lt. Bush's Squadron Commander of 30 plus years ago (Lt. Col. Killian, now deceased), would have known where Lt. Bush was or, at the very least, how to contact him should that have been necessary. The bottom line: Lt. Bush's documented Air National Guard service exceeded the requirements set forth in his Guard contract and Lt. Bush received an Honorable Discharge.
As Lt. Bush completed his flying assignment in April 1972, F-102s were being phased out of the Air National Guard. What we know is that he served honorably; he flew fighter jets; he embraced the inherent high risk of flying an F -102; he served our country; he met his Air National Guard requirements and he received an Honorable Discharge. The attacks on Lt. Bush are designed to diminish Lt. Bush's service to our country in the eyes of our citizens and soldiers some thirty years after Lt. Bush received an Honorable Discharge. This is truly reprehensible and driven by political adversaries like Sen. Kerry, Mr. Terry McAuliffe and their left-wing media surrogates. (Go to cspan.org for the White House Press Briefing with Scott McClellan on 02/10/04 -- the impetus for me to write this letter.)
There is a much bigger story to be told than anything related to Lt. Bush's honorable service to our country. It is the story of a fringe element of the Democrat Party (as represented by Sen. Kerry from Massachusetts and Mr. Terry McAuliffe of the DNC) that will stoop to any depth to obtain political power to include: attacking the motives of our service members (ANG and Reserve); it is a fringe element that is willing to undermine the confidence of our fighting forces in their commander-in-chief in the midst of our global war on terrorism; it is a fringe element that places political power higher on their priority list than U.S. National Security; otherwise, they wouldn't be denigrating and diminishing ANG and Reserve Service in an effort to undermine the credibility of the commander-in-chief of our Armed Forces.
Political leadership should be looking ahead not behind. But since we are looking 30 years behind I will make several comments: (1) I served with true heroes, although none of the guys I served with ever considered themselves heroes -- they just put their butts on the line every day whether flying in operational, combat or training units; (2) Lt. Bush put his butt on the line every time he scrambled on an Air Defense mission. He is a true hero that our soldiers and citizens should be rightfully proud of; and (3) the service of our Guard and Reserve soldiers should never be denigrated or diminished for political purposes or to win an election -- as is being done by Sen. Kerry and Mr. Terry McAuliffe.
Like many veterans of Vietnam, I returned to a country that was, for the most part, unappreciative of the service rendered by our fighting forces. It is sad that this attack on our commander-in-chief results in reopening the feelings and wounds of bygone years, and brings back thoughts of many comrades in arms that never returned to United States -- having given their lives for their country.
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 turn coat 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 while they were still engaged in battle. He lied about what our soldiers were doing in combat. He defamed our brave fighting men. The ultimate insult our citizens could inflict on the Armed Forces of the United States would be to vote into office (as commander-in-chief) the person who betrayed his comrades in arms while they were still fighting and dying on the battlefield and in air combat.
Further, military people understand that Sen. Kerry has voted against the major weapon systems needed by the military to carry out their mission. Additionally, he has voted against CIA funding of human intelligence needed to preclude attacks on our country (such as 9/11) and protect our citizens and soldiers overseas. Senator Kerry voted for the war in Iraq and then voted against funding the war after our troops were placed in harm's way.
As we all know, since Sept. 11, 2001 our country has been at war with international terrorism. Instead of supporting our national leadership (in taking the battle to our terrorist enemies), a cabal of power-hungry politicians, supported by the liberal media elites and their vitriolic followers, have done everything they can to undermine our war on terror, our troops and the commander-in-chief of our armed forces.
Today we look with pride at our service people who risk their lives everyday for us. I'm grateful that we now have a population that, for the most part, appreciates our armed forces and their efforts to defend us. We need to fully support our soldiers and their president. Our country's success in fighting the war on terror depends on our (1) supporting those that are on the front line protecting us and (2) standing by the president who is taking the battle to the enemy.
We have not been attacked in the United States after 9/11 because we have a president and an administration that have been proactive in going after the national security threats to United States. Just think about how our national security would likely have been handled by the anti-war left of the Democrat party and Sen. Kerry. We would probably still be debating what to do in the United Nations; Afghanistan would likely still be under control of the Taliban; Iraq would still be under the control of Saddam Hussein, and cities in the United States would have come under attack on multiple occasions as terrorist organizations were further emboldened by our meek responses. And it wouldn't be surprising if we were negotiating with al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations to preclude further attacks on our cities.
The question everyone needs to ask themselves before voting in November is: Who do you trust to handle our national security? I trust President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, National Security Advisor Dr. Condoleezza Rice and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. Who do you trust?

Posted 1:48 AM by Steve
"Unfit for Command"?

If these allegations are true that is putting it lightly!

According to eyewitnesses, John Kerry was in command of PCF 44 when they came upon a civilian vessel in an area it was not allowed in. Kerry claims "warning shots" were fired upon the vessel, a sampan occupied by a Vietnamese family, the results of these warning shots fired by the heavy .50 caliber weapon was one dead father and one dead child and a grieving mother with a frightened baby left on the boat.

According to Swift Boat officer Bill Franks, "absent clear indications of danger, Swift boat crews simply did not open fire upon such boats. Rather, the vessel would be boarded, searched, and let go with a warning. Often the crew would notch the boat with a K-Bar knife , along the starboard gunnels just aft of the bow. If a boat with several such notches was stopped, the Officer in Charge might go so far as to fire a round from an M-16 into the hull, causing a leak that could be readily plugged but sending a message to the crew."

Boat Officer of Coastal Divisions 11, Jack Chenowith, has recently written that "The only atrocity I ever knew of or heard of was about Kerry killing the small child in the junk."

Were John Kerry's phony indictments about rampant war-crimes in front of the Fulbright committee really just a sort of public confession about his own inner demons?

Posted 10:49 PM by Steve
"Unfit for Command"

According to his own comrades on PCF-3 (Patrol Fast Craft) in Vietnam John Kerry cheated to get his first Purple Heart by using a self-inflicted scratch, then used the faked award to leave a combat sector eight months early and used these phony awards as a basis for crafting a "war hero" myth around himself in order to run for political office.