Kerry's Anti-War Book

Kerry wrote this book after returning from Viet Nam. Rumor had it that his campaign was buying up available copies so it wouldn’t be disseminated - that rumor, as far as I know, is unsubstantiated. Kerry refuses to allow the publisher to print more copies, and it is out of print. Apparently there is a waiting list to try to purchase it on Amazon.

However, someone has put it online. If you want to access it, just click here:

http://johnkerrythenewsoldier.blogspot.com/

I wouldn’t advocate taking it for free if he were trying to sell it, but since it seems he’s trying to suppress it, I think people deserve to see the info.

It’s a collection of stories from the Viet-nam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) movement. Many participants in the movement were later shown to be fraudunlently presenting themselves as veterans and lying about the atrocities, although John Kerry himself was never implicated in their lies. John Kerry’s own Senate testimony is excerpted, and he wrote the epilogue.

A Legacy Of Vietnam

?

John Kerry volunteered for Vietnam, and upon returning home, said the war was wrong; George Bush stayed at home, but insisted the war was right. Who has character?
By John Greeley

When the Second World War ended, America could not get out of uniform fast enough. Something on the order of thirteen million were in uniform and the only thing everyone wanted to do was to get back into civilian life and make a decent living. When Korea became a battleground, it was a shock, but not enough to shake us out of our idyllic isolation. After all, who could touch us? But that shock was the first step in our painful education about the way the world really works.

The answer to ?Who can touch us?? was, of course, Vietnam. Vietnam could touch us all right because night after night we were all watching combat footage and reading the Honor Roll of the dead at the end of the nightly news broadcasts. It was war brought home in living, bleeding color, and with it, the real questions started to come.

Why were we in this place no one ever heard of before? Why were we dying? Why were we not beating the crap out of this obviously primitive, puny, tiny country so we could come home and once again take up our happy lives? And the big one, the agonizing question: ?Why should I put my life on the line and go when my number came up?? That was a big deal back then and hard to imagine unless you were personally under the gun. Getting drafted was seen as pretty much a kiss of death, and it took courage; raw, honorable, innocent courage to go, regardless of what duty station you ultimately got. You swallowed your fear and you went. Or you didn?t.

That was the kicker. The ?Or you don?t? part. There was Canada. There was jail. There was the draft and there were deferments. Smart guys, college guys, bragged about getting into the National Guard. Those who knew someone who knew someone could jump ahead of the suckers in line and grab the security of a guardsman?s uniform the way George W. Bush did. It meant you didn?t have to sweat humping through the jungle and getting blown to pieces by unseen yellow fellows.

The bragging these men could do, however, always had a hollow sound. They knew, all right, as they were getting that safe deferment, that they?d failed a big, big test of manhood. And to this very day, they still know. If you are a survivor of that war, you know too. You went. You shut your mouth and went, despite the fear. Despite the bloody pictures on your television screen. You did your duty. You learned the desperate, horrible lessons war teaches and if you were lucky, you came home. If you were wounded, scarred or maimed, sometimes that was better than coming home in one piece because no one – I repeat – no one came back from that place entirely whole. It left a mark, like a brand on the soul.

And that test of courage, that acceptance of the draft board?s notice, to this very day, makes a huge difference in the kind of man you are. Even more so if you volunteered. It is the difference between a John Kerry and a George Bush, and while no man is simply the sum of one good or bad action, it sure is a solid way to guess what kind of person he is.

We Americans still would like to forget the world?s problems, but now we know they belong to us, too. September, 2001 brought us into the painful community of nations. In fact, now that we stand alone in military might, and field a professionals-only army, that same question, that same acceptance of honorable duty, remains. Do we go or don?t we? The man who answers that question for all of us should be the same one who answered it for himself a generation ago. His name is John Kerry and he has an honorable claim to speak on behalf of our nation as its president.

(Posted Sunday, March 1, 2004)

John Greeley is a Marine Corps veteran of Vietnam and a graduate of St. John’s University Law School.

One more vets opinion. Boston, you can still get over to Iraq, as an officer no less! Support the war in a more credible way then posting on internet boards!

You know, Elk,

There’s no doubt that Kerry was in a dangerous situation in Viet Nam, and that he signed up for a naval tour. But I think the distinction between what he thought he was signing up for, and what Bush signed up for, isn’t as well defined as you make it out to be. Of course, I can see where the confusion arose: from the Kerry campaign…

http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_08_22_archive.html#109338012424943922

The myth of Kerry knowingly volunteering for dangerous duty lives on (8/24)

By Brendan Nyhan

The myth that Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry volunteered for swift boat duty in Vietnam knowing it was particularly dangerous continues to spread despite clear evidence to the contrary.

As we have written before, http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_08_01_archive.html#1091679708922 74992
Kerry actually volunteered at a time when swift boats were engaged in relatively safe coastal patrols. They were redeployed to the rivers of Vietnam – a far more risky mission – after Kerry’s decision. Kerry himself has admitted as much, writing in 1986 Boston Globe Online | John Kerry: A Candidate in the Making
that “When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that’s what I thought I was going to be doing.”

Yet Kerry’s campaign website, http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/service.html
vice presidential nominee John Edwards and former president Bill Clinton USATODAY.com - Bill Clinton's remarks at the Democratic convention
have all suggested Kerry knew the risks. As Edwards put it, DEMS 2004 • Democratic national convention
“He volunteered to go to Vietnam and to captain a swift boat, one of the most dangerous duties you could have.”

Kerry’s campaign continues to encourage this misperception. Spokesman Tad Devine said on CNN’s “Paula Zahn Now” on August 18 that Kerry “volunteered to serve on one of the most dangerous assignments in Vietnam, on a swift boat.” And on August 20 on Fox News Channel’s “The Big Story with John Gibson,” he told guest host Andrew Napolitano virtually the same thing:

DEVINE: Well, first, I would like to say that John Kerry served two tours of duty in Vietnam. After the first tour of duty, which was a year that he served and was awarded a ribbon for being in the theater, he served in a second tour of duty. He volunteered for it.

NAPOLITANO: That's the controversial one.

DEVINE: One of the, you know, most -- the most dangerous assignments of anyone in Vietnam, a casualty rate of more than 50 percent.

Reporter and commentators have picked up the talking point. Knight Ridder’s Joseph L. Galloway wrote recently that
http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/news/special_packages/election2004/9455159.htm “The attacks by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have called into account Kerry’s conduct during the war, when he volunteered for one of the most dangerous duties – the so-called Brown Water Navy.” Michael Tomasky, executive editor of The American Prospect, embellished Kerry’s decision as well,
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=8388 writing in an online article that “John Kerry volunteered for the Navy, volunteered to go to Vietnam, and then, when he was sitting around Cam Ranh Bay bored with nothing to do, requested the most dangerous duty a Naval officer could be given.” Others have made vaguer but equally misleading claims. On Slate, executive editor Jacob Weisberg wrote
http://slate.msn.com/id/2105353/ that Kerry “volunteered to go to Vietnam and, once there, volunteered for dangerous duty.” And San Jose Mercury News columnist Dan Gillmor wrote on his weblog http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/010711.shtml#010711
that “Kerry, unlike Bush, volunteered for dangerous duty in a war zone.”

There is much debate about and confusion over Kerry’s war record, but on this issue, the facts are especially clear. The media should start getting them straight and holding Kerry’s campaign to the same standard.


And then there’s this:

After serving in an admittedly dangerous area - more dangerous than he had signed up for - Kerry went home after 4 and a half months in Viet Nam. He was, of course, allowed to do so after receiving the 3 Purple Hearts. Nothing wrong there, leaving aside the controversy over his Purple Hearts.

Kerry then signed up for a second tour, in the Pacific aboard the U.S.S. Gridley, which spent part of the tour off the Vietnamese coast. Kerry reported to USS Gridley on June 8, 1967. On February 9, 1968, the USS Gridley departs for a Western Pacific (WESTPAC) deployment, to engage in operations in support of the Vietnam War. Ship spends time in the Gulf of Tonkin off North Vietnam, at Subic Bay in the Philippines and in Wellington, New Zealand. (All of this information is from Kerry’s site.) On May 27, 1968, the Gridley sets sail for the U.S.

From the Boston Globe’s biography of Kerry:
http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061703.shtml
"He asked for a cushy assignment - service as an admiral’s aide - and was given precisely that job in Brooklyn… On Jan. 3, 1970, Kerry requested that his superior, Rear Admiral Walter F. Schlech, Jr., grant him an early discharge so that he could run for Congress on an antiwar platform.

“I just said to the admiral: `I’ve got to get out. I’ve got to go do what I came back here to do, which is, end this thing,'” Kerry recalled, referring to the war. The request was approved, and Kerry was honorably discharged, which he said shaved six months from his commitment.

The Bush administration has a pattern of smearing Vietnam vets like John McCain and Max Cleland and then they turn around and claim the uber-patriotic “wartime president” mantle for themselves. This goes for Dick “5 Deferments” Cheney and John “7 Deferments” Ashcroft as well.

John Kerry went to Vietnam. He took two tours. He volunteered for comabt duty. He saw combat. While that was happening, George Bush was doing jumping jacks in Texas. The greatest danger George Bush faced during Vietnam was alcohol poisoning.

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
One more vets opinion. Boston, you can still get over to Iraq, as an officer no less! Support the war in a more credible way then posting on internet boards![/quote]

You pro-Iraq warhawk dorks must be at least SOMEWHAT physically fit! Why don’t you put your money where your big mouth is, and sign up for Iraq?

Hop to it !!!

BTW, here is a link to the entire testimony of John Kerry to the Senate, which he did as part of the VVAW:

http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html

Thank God I live in Canada!

As for Bush, Kerry and all the other clowns running for office if you ask me there all fucking corrupt power tripping mongers looking too excite whatever’s left of their pathetic boring little political life.

PPP

[quote]PPP wrote:
Thank God I live in Canada!

As for Bush, Kerry and all the other clowns running for office if you ask me there all fucking corrupt power tripping mongers looking too excite whatever’s left of their pathetic boring little political life.

PPP[/quote]

It’s nice living under a safety blanket that the American Military affords you, isn’t it?

Thank God you live in Candada.

lol my point exactly ! Our government is smart enough to know we don’t need to pump money into a military because if anyone penetrates Canada the US is too close to ignore that.

We use you and you use us, typical behavoir between freinds and neighbours:)

I am glad the US is a super power cause if it wasn’t I probably wouldn’t be living the way I am now. I wasn’t knocking the US I was knocking the clowns runnning for Pres. ( G Bush and J Kerry.)

Though I don’t want to even get into Canadian Political talks or I’d be here all night writing about a building full of dumbasses.

PPP

[quote]PPP wrote:
lol my point exactly ! Our government is smart enough to know we don’t need to pump money into a military because if anyone penetrates Canada the US is too close to ignore that.

We use you and you use us, typical behavoir between freinds and neighbours:)

I am glad the US is a super power cause if it wasn’t I probably wouldn’t be living the way I am now. I wasn’t knocking the US I was knocking the clowns runnning for Pres. ( G Bush and J Kerry.)

Though I don’t want to even get into Canadian Political talks or I’d be here all night writing about a building full of dumbasses.

PPP
[/quote]

Nice – made me laugh this morning.

Well said.