At 17:38 10/28/2004, you wrote:
>If you know something about John Kerry being a traitor you should report
>him--and soon. He may be elected President. It is a crime, afterall,
>and I'm sure Mr. Ashcroft would want to look at your hard evidence.
>Don't hold back, Carl, do your duty. Withholding evidence of capital
>crime might just be a crime itself--especially one as serious as
>treason.
>
>David Love
>davidlovepianos@comcast.net
David,
Speaking out politically is WAY different than my norm, and the way this
eternal campaign has polarised the country will probably lose me some
friends on this list, but I feel I must - please indulge me this last time.
I'm not Carl, but _I_ do not need to check websites to determine Kerry's
culpability, but I may dig into my old seabag, pull out my Bluejacket's
Manual and rely on my first hand experience of the effects of Kerry.
If you really still trust websites at this point, perhaps you should
re-read Kerry's own words during his Senate testimony, and also afterwards,
where he admits participating in the same atrocities which he said were
happening. Or... did he say he was just reporting what other vets had told
him. Oh... that's right... he said both. Which version was purgery?
Since I was in the area at the time (Tonkin Gulf) and in the same
organization (US Navy '67-'73) and trying to live under the same rules
(UCMJ) [Uniform Code of Military Justice], let me try to help you with you
some of the military rules with regard to his traitorous activities.
Whilst Kerry was still a commissioned officer and ostensibly bound by the
UCMJ, he visited with members of the Viet Cong in Paris. How a Lieutenant
(Paygrade O-2or3 -- i.e. next to the bottom of officer ranks since Ensign
was routinely skipped) thought he could effect peace, who knows? However,
there is a term called "consorting with the enemy". In a war, the idea
generally is that, if you meet an enemy, you do all you can to kill him.
It's brutal, but that IS what war IS. {Note to Bill Clinton - there's that
word again} As an officer, it is your sworn DUTY to do that and lead
others to do the same. You don't generally sit down to croissants and
caviar with the enemy unless you are a general, admiral or head of
state. Money talks, I suppose, as Saddam knew in his dealings with the
same multiple UN members which Kerry thinks he'd get as allies.
I recall several times in my military career having these things drilled
into my head, so I don't need to consult a website to tell me that, if I as
a 2nd class petty officer (only E-5 or middle of non-commissioned officers,
having turned down E-6 opportunities to return to civilian life) had done
the same thing, I would still be in Fort Leavenworth for it, if not in an
unmarked grave.
How good was he for the morale of troops/sailors in those years? He
certainly didn't make any points with me or my shipmates. In the spring of
1970, when my ship got back from it's tour of duty in the war zone - with
_IT'S_ current mission accomplished and signs celebrating that fact - I did
a lot of traveling around southern and, later, northern California. I went
to concerts at Dorothy Chandler Pavilion (free or at a discount),
hitchhiked, went to movies and church and got invited into strangers homes
for home cooked meals, even got some dates after those meals. ALL WHILE IN
UNIFORM.
In the fall of 1972, when I got back from my second WestPac "cruise",
sailors were, by that time, again allowed to grow beards and have (even
encouraged to have) civilian clothes onboard and allowed (even encouraged)
to go on "liberty" in civvies. WHY? Because, by then, people were
shouting the "baby killer' and other phrases which Kerry had made so
popular in 1971.
Being IN DANGER while wearing your uniform IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY is NOT good
for morale! Having a long hair wig to escape military haircut detection,
and getting spat upon for defending your country is NOT good for morale (I
did and I was)! _Trust me_, not some New York Times/CBS fabrifacts. It
took me 20 years before I felt comfortable even joining the VFW. I lay
that sputum in my face directly on Kerry's doorstep. His statements were
not a little over the top. They were slanderous and self-incriminating, if
you could believe any of them. They were certainly demoralising, and a
comfort to the enemy, whether true or not.
The soldiers/sailors/marines in Iraq do NOT want a POTUS/CIC (President of
the US /Commander in Chief) who is against what they are doing in the first
place. Kerry would have the same benefit to military morale in 2005 as he
did in 1971.
Voting to approve military action and then voting against support for the
same action does not instill a feeling of comfort among those who depend on
that support for their lives, either.
My 10¢.
Conrad Hoffsommer
-Former Machinist's Mate 2nd Class - USN
-Nuclear power plant operator aboard USS Long Beach (CGN-9) 1970-73
Yup, it's personal.
over and out.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC