The Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation has filed a lawsuit which will test the "facts" underlying John Kerry's anti-war stance and Senate testimony 35 years go.
His organization, financed by Jane Fonda according to the Legacy Foundation, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), portrayed American soldiers as war criminals and barbarians; rapists, murderers and torturers. And that tarnish continues to stain the perception of our gallant and brave fighting men among some Americans, and around the world.
It's past time these slanderers pay for the harm they did. Let's hope at the least they are publicly humiliated and shunned.
What's the statute of limitations on lying under oath to the Senate?
...portrayed American soldiers as war criminals and barbarians; rapists, murderers and torturers.
ReplyDeleteYou mean they claimed that incidents that could be categorized as 'war crimes', as well as rapes, murder, and torture happened, right? That's what was said during the testimony, isn't it? So isn't the use of "portrayed" misleading? It implies that they said the problem was so pervasive that the entire image of US forces in Vietnam was fully overshadowed. Which I don't think is the case. Not now, and not then either. Despite high-profile cases such as My Lai.
Can there be any doubt that such incidents did occur? Did you know that there is a cemetery in France where nearly 100 Americans convicted and executed for capital offenses (such as murder and rape) in the ETO during WWII are buried? Eddie Slovik was buried there until his body was returned to the US some years ago. He is famous as the only American executed for desertion, but there were many other executions. Of course the military is not proud of that record, so the existence of this place is not widely known, and it is almost impossible to obtain permission to visit it.
It's past time these slanderers pay for the harm they did.
Slander is a legal term which, in general, requires proof that defamatory things which were known to be false were said with malice and intent -- do you really believe that to be the case here?
No, I mean they portrayed the American soldiers as war criminals...murderers, rapists and torturers.
ReplyDeleteThat war crimes are committed in war is undeniable. And even Americans have been guilty of them, of course.
But THAT most particularly NOT what Kerry said. He most expressly testified that war crimes by Americans in Vietnam were standard operating procedure, with the full knowledge and tacit approval of the officers.
A good share of the "winter soldiers" had never been in Vietnam. That's a documented fact. So the stories they told of committing or witnessing war crimes were lies by definition. That their "leaders" like John Kerry repreated them can only have one of two explanations.
1)They wanted so much to believe them for the "cause", they did not attempt to verify any of them. Repeating slander.
2)They knew perfectly well they were false, and testified under oath before the Senate that they were true. Committing slander & perjury!
You choose.
So the stories they told of committing or witnessing war crimes were lies by definition.
ReplyDeleteDo you have an example of something as egregious as that -- of someone testifying to having personally 'committed' some specific act or 'witnessed' something specific without ever having been in Vietnam?
...with the full knowledge and tacit approval of the officers.
Or even participation (nothing "tacit" about that) -- Lt Calley was convicted and jailed for his part in My Lai.
Well, it's kinda hard to commit a war crime if you're not in a war. It's also hard to witness a war crime if you're not in a war.
ReplyDeleteSo people who were not in the war, and yet told of committing and witnessing war crimes were lying "by definition".
What's so hard to understand?
Many of the guys that fed Kerry's testimony, were never in Vietnam. Some were, but in "support" positions, never in combat. Neither their stories nor their status was verified at the time. These guys were lying, and those lies informed John Kerry's oathbound testimony before the Senate.
Perhaps he really didn't know they were made up stories. Perhaps he made a point not to check...'cause they were GOLD for his politica agenda. Maybe he was perfectly aware they were false from the start.
He was already scamming for political office, so I figure one way or the other he maintained plausible deniability: an ambitious politician's best friend.
What's so hard to understand?
ReplyDeleteI'm askin' myself the same question.
See, I asked for an example. Here, I'll repeat the question, verbatim:
Do you have an example of something as egregious as that -- of someone testifying to having personally 'committed' some specific act or 'witnessed' something specific without ever having been in Vietnam?
To make it clear: by "example", I mean a name -- someone's name.
Why, yes, Anon, I do have names:
ReplyDeleteGarry Gianninoto, claimed to have witnessed numerous atrocities. He was actually assigned to an aid station at a battalion headquarters, well out of the combat zone.
Chuck Onan claimed he had received special training at military "jungle survival" schools in torture techniques. He claimed they told him "we could rape all the girls we wanted."
Truth: he never attended any special combat schools and worked as a stock clerk at a Marine base in South Carolina. He deserted when he got orders for Vietnam.
Mark Lane, one of the organizers of Winter Soldier, published a book called Conversations with Americans in which (he claimed) Vietnam veterans told their stories of committing atrocities and witnessing endless war crimes. One told him a story about a female communist spy which was tortured and "raped by every man in his battalion."
No one asked or answered the question: There are between 1000-1200 men in a battalion. I leave it to you to decide on the TRUTH of that story.
Terry Whitmore claimed to have taken part in a planned extermination of an entire village. It turns out he wa, indeed, in Vietnam during the time period he claims, but was assigned to an unpopulated area near the DMZ..and both his former battalion commander and a former platoon leader in his company, claimed there was no such massacre. On yes. Terry Whitmore was a deserter.
For your further edification, I recommend to you the book: STOLEN VALOR, by B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley.
Gunslinger rests her case,WELL DONE GIRL!,you get a gold star for that one,for research!.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, though several individuals Lane interviewed for his book, Conversations With Americans: Testimony from 32 Vietnam Veterans, were exposed as frauds, none of those discredited witnesses testified at the February 1971 Winter Soldier Investigation.
ReplyDeleteAgain the question, with (apparently needed) emphasis:
Do you have an example of something as egregious as that -- of someone testifying to having personally 'committed' some specific act or 'witnessed' something specific without ever having been in Vietnam?
BTW, Americans are not as dupe-able as you seem to fear. We know that, while there may be exceptions, most US soldiers conduct themselves honorably even in the most difficult of circumstances, and when they don't, that military authorities conscientiously investigate it. So while a few of the people in Lane's book (for example) may have been delusionally caught up in (or worse, they were liars) the wider (altogether justified, IMO) movement against the war in Viet Nam, there is another form of delusion worth noting here: those who believe there was some of sort of deep and permanent damage done to the reputation of the US military, some sort of 'stolen honor' worth bothering about, decades later. When every year Vietnamese are still dying from, e.g., mines leftover from that war, or suffering grave illness from, e.g., agent orange.
I think most Americans have perspective -- a 'grip' -- on all of that.
But not everyone, apparently.
Agent Orange is indeed a sad legacy of that war,BUT,what can the Americans do?,what can the Vietnamese do about landmines etc...?,dig the fuckers up,war is war,these things happen,here in Britain and on main land Europe we are still finding bombs etc...so bloody what,DEACTIVATE THEM!.
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure how old you are, but it is absolutely true that Vietnam veterans for years were not honored or celebrated for their heriosm or their service. At worst they were considered baby-killers, immoral dupes and tools used by an immoral government.
At best, they were considered an inconvenient and unpleasant reminder of a failed and dishonorable period in American history.
You may argue, if you like, but the fact is, it is only relatively recently that veterans of that war have been "rehabilitated" in the press and in the public's eye.
One of the best gauges of that is the Hollywood/popular media representation of them:
Platoon
Born on Fourth of July
Full Metal Jacket
The Deer Hunter
Coming Home
are examples of the typical take on the"Vietnam" vet/era...Not to mention the plethora of movies that include the crazy, violent Vietnam vet who was so traumatized that they are unable to fit in civilian life of carry on normal interperonal relations.
There has been a very particular, negative impression of the war, it's warriors, and the military. It was widespread for many years...and has been demonstrated clearly by the popular culture.
Anon:
ReplyDelete"Media Matters"?
" non-profit progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in ..."
LOL
If this is the sort of website you take seriously, I only have one question: What color is the sky on YOUR planet?
Never mind, I already know...bolshevik red!