Quoted: Quoted: Right just funny that the mistakes are never in the other guys favor .............. Purely ignorant.  I'm sorry to be blunt, but you are out of your element. edit:  The difference is that when errors are pointed out to the government, when contracts are errantly UNDERBILLED, they usually confirm the error and pay up with no fuss.  Sometimes the confirmation requires a DCAA audit, but still........

Maybe I am -- I am just a regular joe, nothing special, nothing to brag about. I still have one vote, and would like to think I am as at least as normal as the next guy.

What I do - is read and take in info from both sides and try to cut out all the bullshit........  no more no less.

If that makes me seem as less in your eyes,  I  guess I will get over it.

Quoted: Quoted: It is nice to see an article like this in the Washington Times. For all I know, this article is correct, but it is difficult to know what is honest reporting and what is partisan spin. For the record, I have a very difficult time with Kerry's account of his service in Viet Nam (and am inclined to disbelieve it based on comparing the accounts of Kerry and O'Neil), but I also have a difficult time believing much from the Washington Times: Washington Times The Washington Times, is a newspaper owned by Reverend Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church. History In a speech on the twentieth anniversary of the founding of the Washington Times, Moon explained his motivation behind establishing the paper. "I founded The Washington Times as an expression of my love for America and to fulfill the Will of God, who seeks to establish America in His Providence," he said. "In the context of God's Will, there needed to be a newspaper that had the philosophical and ideological foundation to encourage and enlighten the people and leaders of America," he explained. In Moon's analysis, there was an important role for the paper in bolstering support for the continuance of the cold war asgainst Russia."The Washington Times’ editorials and columns supported the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) at a time when many were trying to block this critical development," he said. "I do not have the slightest doubt that God used The Washington Times to help bring an end to the most pernicious worldwide dictatorship in history and gave freedom to tens of millions of people!" he said. With the collapse of the USSR, Moon's support for anti-communist campaigns shifted to central America. "In the 1980s, the Contras in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and other countries were fighting for their lives against the communist Sandinistas who were seeking to seize control of their countries, slaughtering thousands of people. While other media failed to recognize the seriousness of the situation. The Washington Times emphasized through its stories and columns the dangers of communist expansion in the hemisphere and why the freedom fighters should be supported. Once again, The Times news and information helped the leaders in Washington stay strong in their support for the Contras," he said. During the 1990's with opportunities for anti-communist campaigns fading, Moon shifted focus to the "Cultueral War" - "the fight against the degradation of values". While editors of the Washington Times argue that the owners of the paper have no role in setting editorial policy, Moon made clear that he plays a critical role in the priorities of the publication. "Ten years ago, at the 10th anniversary celebration for The Times, I defined another mission for the media. This is the need for media to promote ethics and moral values in our society. For its second ten years, I envisioned for The Washington Times the task of contributing to bringing about a moral society. Because a peaceful world is only possible based on the existence of peaceful, ideal families, The Times became a newspaper that helped people understand the importance of strong moral, family values," he said. In its third decade Moon has new priorities for the title: "...this is the time to emphasize and support faith, the time to emphasize and support spiritual values that are based on the faith of each individual," he said. "While the media can provide all the facts, they also have the responsibility to provide values to prevent confusion and to provide leadership and direction, especially today when the entire world is flooded with news and information. The Washington Times and its affiliated media properties are taking a leading role in this regard," he said. In an article on the Unification Church website discussing the prospects of re-unification of North and South Korea, Rev. Sun Myung Moon, wrote: "With the establishment of The Washington Times in America we initiated a worldwide movement of ideally educating the free world, an intention that I had for a long time; we are also organizing around the globe to form many newspapers, to educate the world media, to give direction to university professors worldwide, to guide student movements in every nation, to bring about cooperation among various South American countries and to form understanding among the world religions." "This new era of media, with the massive distribution of news and information, requires leadership and clear guidance for the betterment of individuals based on values and on the knowledge of God and spirit world. The Washington Times and our family of media have been providing this direction for the past two decades and will continue to do so into our third decade. My hope is that each one of you as well will embody the qualities of defending freedom, promoting family values, and strengthening your faith in God so that you may become leaders of the world," he said. In an August 2002 address at the Heritage Foundation, the Editor in Chief of The Washington Times, Wesley Pruden, who started work with the paper when it commenced in 1982, explained the mood of the time. "Ronald Reagan was new in town, trying to stoke the fires of the free market and pluck up the courage of those of us who still wanted to make a fight of it. He had managed to get himself elected President of the United States, but he was greeted, like the media establishment greeted us, with incredulity, suspicion, frustration, even anger," Pruden said. Pruden defends his papers style of journalism as being more in tune with the public than other mainstream media. "We would not only cover the news without slant or bias, but give voice to those who had been shut out of the national debate. This challenged a smug and entrenched journalism establishment that was swiftly losing touch with its constituency," was how he explained the charter of the paper. "The one constant would be our editorial independence. We would never be told to put anything in the paper; more important, perhaps, we would never be asked to leave anything out. All that was ever asked was to be faithful to the task of reporting the news without fear or favor, to get it first and get it right", Pruden told those attending the Heritage Foundation’s ‘Second Annual Distinguished Journalist Lecture’. "We hold to conservative political views, but we do not cover the news with a conservative slant or bias. A newspaper with a conservative bias in covering the news is no better than the newspapers with a liberal bias, because the reader can never know when someone is blowing smoke at him. We keep our opinions, and we have a few, to the editorial and commentary pages, or to columns clearly identified as opinion, in the honored tradition of American newspapers," he said. Gene Grabowski, who resigned in 1988 over the misleading alternation of an article, said of the Washington Times: "It's the Fox News of the print world." Another reporter, Dawn Ceol – daughter of Paul Weyrich resigned too after Pruden – who has been editor in chief since 1992 – altered a story she wrote about Anita Hill to be more critical of Hill. Beirich and Moser, writing in the Intelligence Report published by the Southern Poverty Law Center, argue that those who dismiss The Washington Times as having little influence are mistaken. "But nobody has to actually read the Times to imbibe its spin on the news; the wilder its stories, the more likely television and print media are to pick them up and run with them," they wrote. In particular they cited the case of a series of stories and editorials initiated by Washington Times reporter, Audrey Hudson, claiming that scientists had been caught attempting to fabricate evidence that lynx were more widespread than they really were. The story was picked up by Associated Press, the Wall Street Journal, the Seattle Times gaining widespread coverage within the US and even internationally. While the story was that the biologists who made the unauthorized lynx hair submissions[6] claimed to be submitting blind samples in order to test the labs[7], the limited after the event retraction did little to diminish the impact of the original story. In May 1992, after the Times had been operating almost ten years, Moon disclosed that he had invested "close to $1 billion" in the paper. External links * Sun Myung Moon, "Freedom, Family, Faith - The Role of the Media in the 21st Century", Washington Times 20th Anniversary Banquet Washington DC May 21, 2002. (http://www.tparents.org/moon%2Dtalks/sunmyungmoon02/sm020520%2Dmedia.htm) * Wesley Pruden,"Fear and Loathing on the Potomac:The Washington Times at Twenty", Heritage Lecture No 757, August 15, 2002. (http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/HL757.cfm) * Heidi Beirich and Bob Moser,"America's Newspaper?: The Washington Times has a long record of hyped stories, shoddy reporting and failure to correct errors", Intelligence Report, Southern Poverty Law Center, undated (approx 2002). (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=65) * Allan Freedman, "Washington's Other Paper: Is the time right for the Times?", Columbia Journalism Review, March/April 1995. (http://www.cjr.org/archives.asp?url=/95/2/times.asp) * Fred Clarkson, "Behind the Times: Who Pulls The Strings at Washington's No. 2 Daily?", Exra!, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, August/September 1987. (http://www.fair.org/extra/best-of-extra/washington-times.html) * Rev. Sun Myung Moon, Way Of Unification (Part 2), November 21, 1986. (http://www.unification.net/wu2/wu2-7-1.htm) * Elisabeth Bumiller, "The Nation's Capital Gets A New Daily Newspaper", The Washington Post, May 17, 1982; page C01. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/cult/unification/wtimes.htm) * The Consortium for Independent Journalism The Dark side of Rev. Moon. This page has a small archive of stories relating to Rev. Moon and American politics between 1997 and early 2001. (http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/moon.html) * Paul Tolme, “The Washington Times’ Hair-Raising Tall Tale Lynx fur "hoax" story shows the power of right-wing media, Extra!, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, May/June 2002. (http://www.fair.org/extra/0205/lynxgate.html) * Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, “Engineering a scandal: How the Washington Times Manipulated the Lynx Story”, undated, accessed December 9, 2003. PEER has created a webapges with links to the various uinvestigations rebutting the Washington Times claims at http://www.peer.org/Lynx/index.html. (http://www.peer.org/Lynx/times_factsheet.html) * Heidi Beirich and Bob Moser, “Defending Dixie:The Washington Times has always been conservative and error-prone — now it's helping to popularize extremist ideas”, Intelligence Report, Southern Poverty Law Center, undated. (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=124) * Wayne Madsen, “Moon Shadow:The Rev, Bush & North Korea”, CounterPunch, January 14, 2003. (http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen01142003.html) * Statement of Ronald Malfi, Acting Managing Director, Office of Special Investigations. "Canada Lynx Survey: Unauthorized Hair Samples Submitted for Analysis" US GAO Publication GAO-02-496T, March 6, 2002 (http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/archives/107cong/fullcomm/2002mar06/malfi.pdf)

You ought to believe it...'cause it is the truth!

Yup...Moon owns it but so what?  Do a bit of research on the Editor in Chief, Wesley Pruden and you will quickly learn that he is NOT beholding to any man and runs his paper without influence from Moon or anyone else.  The WT  is the most unbiased print media along the entire eastern seaboard and for most of the country in FACT.  I read the WT daily plus the NYT, LAT, WP, my local rag, USA Today and a few others...not all of them EVERY DAY but often enough to get a good flavor of how they report the news.  WT is much like Fox News...Fair and VERY balanced, unlike the other news outlets I mention above that are nothing but partisan liberal mouthpieces for the Democratic Party.

The "SOURCES" you quote are some of the biggest tinfoil hat liberals in the entire fucking COUNTRY!  They are some of the same assclowns who want to see the end of Fox News, Limbaugh, Hannity et al.  Why?  Because they are losing the war of opinion and TRUTH and they can't compete in a free media market.  Your info on the paper has no merit whatsoever on how they report the news.  Best find another way to try and discredit them.    This dog won't hunt.

Quoted: According to both Kerry and O'Neil, atrocities such as interdiction, free-fire zones, search and destroy missions, burning villiages, etc., occurred routinely. Perhaps not on a daily basis (I don't know), but as a routine part of their duty. The statements of these two men, seemingly diametrically opposed but yet making essentially the same point, dispute what you say is "patently false."

Bullshit.

How many VN COMBAT vets do you know personally?  I know two, one of whom is my father, who are well educated and successful members of society.  Neither has any idea of this business about burning villages and terrorizing/maiming/raping/murdering the natives.

The VAST majority of VN Combat Soldiers and Marines fought an honorable war against a Communist enemy whose attrocities against its own people began to escalate dramatically after the fall of Saigon in '75.  Ask the famous Vietnamese "boat people" who the War Criminals are.

You are a small-minded and pathetically naiive individual if you believe Kerry's April 1971 Senate testimony.  

Maybe we should put your picture on the wall in the Communists' war crimes museum.

Quoted: Quoted: According to both Kerry and O'Neil, atrocities such as interdiction, free-fire zones, search and destroy missions, burning villiages, etc., occurred routinely. Perhaps not on a daily basis (I don't know), but as a routine part of their duty. The statements of these two men, seemingly diametrically opposed but yet making essentially the same point, dispute what you say is "patently false." Bullshit. How many VN COMBAT vets do you know personally?  I know two who are well educated and successful members of society.  Neither has any idea of this business about burning villages and terrorizing/maiming/raping/murdering the natives. The VAST majority of VN Combat Soldiers and Marines fought an honorable war against a Communist enemy whose attrocities against its own people began to escalate dramatically after the fall of Saigon in '75.  Ask the famous Vietnamese "boat people" who the War Criminals are. You are a small-minded and pathetically naiive individual if you believe Kerry's April 1971 Senate testimony.

Apparently, you cannot understand what I wrote. I am not saying that any vet did anything (I don't know), I am discussing what Kerry said, and what is credible (or not).

Please keep the insults and emotion out of the discussion.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: According to both Kerry and O'Neil, atrocities such as interdiction, free-fire zones, search and destroy missions, burning villiages, etc., occurred routinely. Perhaps not on a daily basis (I don't know), but as a routine part of their duty. The statements of these two men, seemingly diametrically opposed but yet making essentially the same point, dispute what you say is "patently false." Bullshit. How many VN COMBAT vets do you know personally?  I know two who are well educated and successful members of society.  Neither has any idea of this business about burning villages and terrorizing/maiming/raping/murdering the natives. The VAST majority of VN Combat Soldiers and Marines fought an honorable war against a Communist enemy whose attrocities against its own people began to escalate dramatically after the fall of Saigon in '75.  Ask the famous Vietnamese "boat people" who the War Criminals are. You are a small-minded and pathetically naiive individual if you believe Kerry's April 1971 Senate testimony.   Apparently, you cannot understand what I wrote. I am not saying that any vet did anything (I don't know), I am discussing what Kerry said, and what is credible (or not). Please keep the insults and emotion out of the discussion.

Apparently, you cannot understand that you don't know enough about this topic to argue the leftist "widespread war crimes" theory about Viet Nam.  Kerry is a Marxist American.  That is where is sympathies and motivations are based.  That is why he has his picture on the wall in Ho Chi Minh.

My insults stand because they accurately describe you here.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: According to both Kerry and O'Neil, atrocities such as interdiction, free-fire zones, search and destroy missions, burning villiages, etc., occurred routinely. Perhaps not on a daily basis (I don't know), but as a routine part of their duty. The statements of these two men, seemingly diametrically opposed but yet making essentially the same point, dispute what you say is "patently false." Bullshit. How many VN COMBAT vets do you know personally?  I know two who are well educated and successful members of society.  Neither has any idea of this business about burning villages and terrorizing/maiming/raping/murdering the natives. The VAST majority of VN Combat Soldiers and Marines fought an honorable war against a Communist enemy whose attrocities against its own people began to escalate dramatically after the fall of Saigon in '75.  Ask the famous Vietnamese "boat people" who the War Criminals are. You are a small-minded and pathetically naiive individual if you believe Kerry's April 1971 Senate testimony.   Apparently, you cannot understand what I wrote. I am not saying that any vet did anything (I don't know), I am discussing what Kerry said, and what is credible (or not). Please keep the insults and emotion out of the discussion. Apparently, you cannot understand that you don't know enough about this topic to argue the leftist "widespread war crimes" theory about Viet Nam.  Kerry is a Marxist American.  That is where is sympathies and motivations are based.  That is why he has his picture on the wall in Ho Chi Minh. My insults stand because they accurately describe you here.

One of us certainly does not know much about the subject being discussed. I contend that anyone who resorts to insults and emotion rather than discussing the issue in a rational manner is probably that person.

Please provide reasonable, rational data to support your contentions. Having one's picture on a wall in Viet Nam is hardly conclusive proof of any political ideology, particularly when it is placed there by someone other than the person represented.

Additionally, anecdotal "testimony" concerning the service of two personal acquaintances does not refute the statements of the principals who were there (and that largely concur).

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Sweet. If the media used as much time researching this (or WMDs in Iraq, but that's another thread) as they do trying to dig up crap on Bush and Cheney, the sheeple would see how much of a sham Kerry is. Shams -- let's talk about Chaney and Hallibuton and millions in fraud while he was VP Contracts given to Chaney's  old company -- this Kerry medal thing is fly shit on a huge turd. The turd being the present administration and all the bullshit they are pulling. The point, Cy, is for the media to put the same effort to Kerry they did to Bush and Cheney. Which they won't, because he's their golden boy. By the way... Halliburton is an oil infrastructure company. Who would you contract to go rebuild an oil infrastructure? ETA: Also what about the war crimes Kerry testified to seeing and committing? The VN war is over, I swear people had an easier time forgiveing each other  after the civil war than what happened after the VN war. It is over !  If people  could forgive each other after the civil war we should be able to do the same with  the VN war.

I totally agree with this thought cyanide.  There is no reason to harbor malice toward a former and otherwise honorable enemy soldier.  However, apples and oranges.

God... the man gets more disgusting by the day.

I regret not being able to serve my country (although certain job apps in the future may allow me to change that sentiment) but this guy is a goddamn joke and his motivation for serving is not to be confused with anyone else's.   (Lets not get into a "but there was a draft" argument... God bless our Vets)


- BUCC_Guy

Activate the bastard and court martial him. Yes, it can be done.

It takes a real loser to make Bill Clinton look like a good alternative....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: According to both Kerry and O'Neil, atrocities such as interdiction, free-fire zones, search and destroy missions, burning villiages, etc., occurred routinely. Perhaps not on a daily basis (I don't know), but as a routine part of their duty. The statements of these two men, seemingly diametrically opposed but yet making essentially the same point, dispute what you say is "patently false." Bullshit. How many VN COMBAT vets do you know personally?  I know two who are well educated and successful members of society.  Neither has any idea of this business about burning villages and terrorizing/maiming/raping/murdering the natives. The VAST majority of VN Combat Soldiers and Marines fought an honorable war against a Communist enemy whose attrocities against its own people began to escalate dramatically after the fall of Saigon in '75.  Ask the famous Vietnamese "boat people" who the War Criminals are. You are a small-minded and pathetically naiive individual if you believe Kerry's April 1971 Senate testimony.   Apparently, you cannot understand what I wrote. I am not saying that any vet did anything (I don't know), I am discussing what Kerry said, and what is credible (or not). Please keep the insults and emotion out of the discussion. Apparently, you cannot understand that you don't know enough about this topic to argue the leftist "widespread war crimes" theory about Viet Nam.  Kerry is a Marxist American.  That is where is sympathies and motivations are based.  That is why he has his picture on the wall in Ho Chi Minh. My insults stand because they accurately describe you here. One of us certainly does not know much about the subject being discussed. I contend that anyone who resorts to insults and emotion rather than discussing the issue in a rational manner is probably that person. Please provide reasonable, rational data to support your contentions. Having one's picture on a wall in Viet Nam is hardly conclusive proof of any political ideology, particularly when it is placed there by someone other than the person represented. Additionally, anecdotal "testimony" concerning the service of two personal acquaintances does not refute the statements of the principals who were there (and that largely concur).

I and others in this thread have presented links to all kinds of information for you to peruse.  You're either too lazy to read it or too ignorant to appreciate it.

Here's more:
wwwar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=258975&page=1
www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=240717
media1.stream2you.com/rnc/072304v2.wmv

Regardless of your repeated denials, the 1960's US war protestors, and in particular the "big names" like Kerry and Fonda, were utterly instrumental in the Communist takeover.  That's why they have Kerry's ugly mug on their wall.

Do you think they did it to help the Bush '04 Campaign team?  No?  It IS a nice little side effect though, isn't it?

O'Neil DOES NOT agree with Kerry regarding the laundry list of fairy tales he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Quoted: It takes a real loser to make Bill Clinton look like a good alternative....

That's what I tell people, I friggin HATE Slick Willie but would take him over scary Kerry any day! Kerry is a snake in the grass!

I bought "Unfit for Command" (even if I never read it) out of a show of support for the author/s!

GO BUSH!

"W" 2004!

Quoted: It takes a real loser to make Bill Clinton look like a good alternative....

EXACTLY. My wife once made the comment that Kerry actually makes the Clintons look good. I wonder if that isn't the Secret Plan. Maybe that is his unknowing purpose in the scheme of things.

FITTER

Quoted: It takes a real loser to make Bill Clinton look like a good alternative....

and that's the sad truth too.

The Clinton administration awarded Halliburton a no-bid contract in Kosovo. Halliburton is a huge company, tailor made to rapidly establish infrastructure. There isn't another company that can operate on the scale of Halliburton that I am aware of.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Sweet. If the media used as much time researching this (or WMDs in Iraq, but that's another thread) as they do trying to dig up crap on Bush and Cheney, the sheeple would see how much of a sham Kerry is. Shams -- let's talk about Chaney and Hallibuton and millions in fraud while he was VP Contracts given to Chaney's  old company -- this Kerry medal thing is fly shit on a huge turd. The turd being the present administration and all the bullshit they are pulling. cynadie - give it a break. Are you on the payroll for john-john.com or something?

Cyanide-are you as worried about the Big Labor frauds giving money hand over fist to the DNC that unions extort from their members?  Or is that acceptable?

Halliburton has had contracts with the US govt and the military since WWII. I suppose that Bush and Cheney had something to do with that too.
Some jobs are so big that many companies cannot fulfill them, Halliburton is one that can.

Quoted: I and others in this thread have presented links to all kinds of information for you to peruse. You're either too lazy to read it or too ignorant to appreciate it. Here's more: wwwar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=258975&page=1 www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=240717 media1.stream2you.com/rnc/072304v2.wmv

Please provide data that supports your claim that I have neither read nor appreciated the information you "and others" have posted. I have considered the information posted here, and responded accordingly. It would appear that your emotions are clouding your perceptions in this matter.

Regardless of your repeated denials, the 1960's US war protestors, and in particular the "big names" like Kerry and Fonda, were utterly instrumental in the Communist takeover. That's why they have Kerry's ugly mug on their wall. Do you think they did it to help the Bush '04 Campaign team? No? It IS a nice little side effect though, isn't it?

Illogical. Please provide supporting evidence of my "denials." I have not broached the subject as to whether or not Fonda/Kerry were instrumental in the communist takeover, therefore I cannot "deny" that such events transpired. You are irrationally equivocating about what I *am* writing with what you *think* I am writing.

O'Neil DOES NOT agree with Kerry regarding the laundry list of fairy tales he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Nor have I said that he did. What I wrote was that, on the Dick Cavett Show (and I provided a link to the video), O'Neil denied that *any* war crimes were being committed in VN by US servicemen, but then admitted on that same show, that he had participated in activities deemed illegal by the Geneva and Hague conventions, thus refuting his own statement.

Please try to maintain objectivity when debating the issues that I have responded to in this thread. Irrationally mistating the issues is counterproductive.

ETA proper attribution.

Quoted: Quoted: I and others in this thread have presented links to all kinds of information for you to peruse. You're either too lazy to read it or too ignorant to appreciate it. Here's more: wwwar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=258975&page=1 www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=240717 media1.stream2you.com/rnc/072304v2.wmv Please provide data that supports your claim that I have neither read nor appreciated the information you "and others" have posted. I have considered the information posted here, and responded accordingly. It would appear that your emotions are clouding your perceptions in this matter. Regardless of your repeated denials, the 1960's US war protestors, and in particular the "big names" like Kerry and Fonda, were utterly instrumental in the Communist takeover. That's why they have Kerry's ugly mug on their wall. Do you think they did it to help the Bush '04 Campaign team? No? It IS a nice little side effect though, isn't it? Illogical. Please provide supporting evidence of my "denials." I have not broached the subject as to whether or not Fonda/Kerry were instrumental in the communist takeover, therefore I cannot "deny" that such events transpired. You are irrationally equivocating about what I *am* writing with what you *think* I am writing. O'Neil DOES NOT agree with Kerry regarding the laundry list of fairy tales he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Nor have I said that he did. What I wrote was that, on the Dick Cavett Show (and I provided a link to the video), O'Neil denied that *any* war crimes were being committed in VN by US servicemen, but then admitted on that same show, that he had participated in activities deemed illegal by the Geneva and Hague conventions, thus refuting his own statement. Please try to maintain objectivity when debating the issues that I have responded to in this thread. Irrationally mistating the issues is counterproductive. ETA proper attribution.

If you want to argue about whether O'Neil's idea of war crimes matches up with Kerry's, I think we're getting a bit semantic.  I'm not really interested in that, only in refuting the lies spread about widespread horror at the hands of US servicemen.

The point of this thread is to illustrate how shallow Kerry's motivations in VN were and how he manipulated the system to support the leftist war protest movement.

Nothing more.