Rightie talking point

[SHRED]

How do you all counter the rightie "talking point" that Kerry, speaking out following Vietnam, caused more torture of POW's?

I mean how the heck can this be proven or disproven?
In my heart of hearts I think this is a made up point. I guess you would have to know and trust a POW personally.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

1. It absolutely is a made up bullshit point. It is an age old tactic to

silence dissent

[seabeyond]

2. other pows have come out to say

that never was kerry's name mentioned in the camps. they never heard of the man. the viet congs didnt use kerry against them firstly..........(i hate talking this angle because i wasnt their and who am i to say in feeling of experience so i do this respectfully)

Nixon had already made it clear the war was lost, our president. so kerry was not the key figure nor the first to suggest the war was lost

his goal was to save lives. and with his speech in context, it is an eloquent speech and respectful speech to the soldiers

kerry was representing fellow soldiers

[IdaBriggs]

3. Debunked by Hardball on Sept 9th

"Stolen Honor" -- OUTED AS LIARS on MSNBC Hardball on Sept 9, 2004:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5962170/

<snip from a video introducing the show>

JACK FELLOWES, FORMER VIETNAM POW: We stayed two more years because of him. John Kerry, Jane Fonda, and all that crowd, the anti-war movement, I figure they owe us two years.

SHUSTER: But the fact is, the war stopped in 1973 when the Nixon administration negotiated an end. And history shows it was the lack of a settlement before then, not any protest, that kept the North Vietnamese fighting.

<snip from the transcript of the show>

CARLTON SHERWOOD, PRODUCER, “STOLEN HONOR”: Very simply—and I think you know this, Chris—There is a reservoir of resentment out among the Vietnam veterans, combat veterans, particularly, since what John Kerry did in 1971. And I thought the best way to tell this story was through the POWs who—there were direct consequences to these men for what John Kerry...

MATTHEWS: In putting this film together, what did you learn were the consequences, if you could accumulate them right now for us?

SHERWOOD: Oh...

MATTHEWS: Of John Kerry‘s testimony. What you know for sure, not speculation, what you know for sure.

SHERWOOD: According to the POWs, what they said to me...

MATTHEWS: Well, what they know for sure, if you can tell me what that is, not what they‘re speculating.

<more>

MATTHEWS: Wait a minute. This is very important. You told me a minute ago that you were threatened with possible execution, and certainly trial...

WARNER: Right.

MATTHEWS: ... as one of the possible selectees after the war was over.

WARNER: Right.

MATTHEWS: Did they ever say to you, because of John Kerry‘s testimony, you were going to face a possible execution?

WARNER: No. They didn‘t say that. They said—they kept pointing -

· they just kept saying over and over again...

MATTHEWS: Did any other former POWs say that they were told by their captors that they would face trial, potential trial, and potential execution because of what John Kerry said?

SHERWOOD: Oh, yes. Yes. In fact, one guy—one fellow, Leo Thorsness (ph), is a Medal of Honor recipient.

MATTHEWS: And he says?

SHERWOOD: And he said that as a result of Kerry‘s testimony, he was threatened with execution.

MATTHEWS: And he was told by his captors, because of the testimony, they were doing this to him.

SHERWOOD: Yes. This is a—yes.

MATTHEWS: That‘s what I want to know. I‘m trying to nail this down.

SHERWOOD: This is a U.S. Naval officer.

MATTHEWS: Admitting his credentials to speak publicly. I‘m asking, did he say specifically that they told him that because of what Kerry had said, he was facing this possible punishment?

SHERWOOD: Yes. He said that.

MATTHEWS: That‘s what (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to know. Let‘s to go Ken Campbell, who‘s a Vietnam veteran who protested the war. And on the phone, we‘re joined by Phil Butler, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

Let‘s go to Phil Butler. Could you tell me your years of captivity, Mr. Butler?

PHIL BUTLER, FORMER PRISONER OF WAR: Yes. I was captured on April the 20th of 1965 and released on February the 12th of 1973, just a little short of eight years. I‘m the eighth longest-held prisoner of war in Vietnam. And I was in Camp Unity, which was the camp that was mentioned earlier, I think, after the San The raid, from November the 20th of 1970 to May the 25th of 1972. During that time, I lived in room 2 of that camp with Ken Cordier (ph). And next to me in room 3 were Paul Galante and Jim Warner for a while, and also, Bud Day (ph) and Robert Shoemaker (ph) were in room seven of that camp.

And I can assure you that in Camp Unity—there were several hundred of us there—during all that time period, from 1970 up through May of 1972, we absolutely never heard of John Kerry. And if John Kerry‘s name was used or mentioned in other camps, I can assure you that, certainly, in my opinion, John Kerry has absolutely no connection whatsoever either with anybody being tortured or with prolonging the war in any way, shape or form.

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you generically, Phil, did you ever experience as a POW the kind of threats that Mr. Warner suffered, where they said to you, We‘re going to try some of you guys after this war is over, we‘re going to execute some of you guys after this war, and then show that kind of material, show that kind of propaganda, which for them was propaganda, testimony from Jane Fonda or anybody in the anti-war movement? Was anything like that ever done to you?

BUTLER: No. They never really used anybody in the anti-war movement to torture me. I was tortured numerous times between 1965 and 1969, for which I received Purple Hearts and—real Purple Hearts and two Silver Stars, and so on and so forth. But other POWs have, as well...

MATTHEWS: From the other POWs, sir, did you ever hear stories of them being told that testimony by people like John Kerry back home was threatening them or could be used against them in future war criminal trials?

BUTLER: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. I did not know the name John Kerry until quite a while after I came home.

MATTHEWS: Let me go back to Jim Warner. Wasn‘t there any scuttlebutt in the camp? You guys were all in this fix together, possibly going to be executed. You‘re all worried about getting home and wanting to get home. Didn‘t you talk about that with people like Phil?

WARNER: Yes. Yes. We did.

MATTHEWS: Well, how come he doesn‘t remember it?

(There's more; go read it. These guys get totally OUTED as lying.)

[juliagoolia]

6. This needs to move around the net like a virus

I mean it should be forwarded to everyone and asked to be sent to everyone on their mailing list.

[IdaBriggs]

8. From your fingers....

...to everyone's eyes...? :) Best, Ida

[zoeb]

4. Congress knew they had POWs ...

still there yet they allowed the hearings to be televised. Blame Congress for their stupidity not Kerry. After all Dumbass Dubya got to testify behind closed doors about 911.

[mikehiggins]

5. Its like the "spitting on VietVets" thing.

Everyone beleives it happened but there is no evidence.

Me, if I was just back from that war and someone spit on me, I'd break his head (or hers). I had a very good friend who served in the Airborne over there and nobody said boo to him, even though we hung around with lots of college kids who were anti-war.

You just knew that if you got in this guys face you were going to get clocked. Nobody would spit on him and walk away.

Just why would the VietCong give a rat's ass about Kerry? He's only important now because he's running for President. Back then he was only another anti-war voice, one among many.

More fiction.

[Triana]

7. there are no facts, no evidence to support this..

...nothing scientific, nothing proven. It is not fact. It is PROPOGANDA.

Goebbels...

[Cats Against Frist]

9. First of all -- I agree with other posters that there's no proof

Second, as for the atrocities angle that did occur, we do know of SEVERAL mass killings and rape sprees that U.S. soldiers went on -- My Lai, Tiger Force, Thang Phong, Son Thang, and numerous famous war crimes accusations and trials. We also know that, at the time, the armed forces had something called "The Phoenix Program," which officially advocated the torture, rape, terrorization of Vietnamese citizens.

What the GOP is counting on is that no one will know any of these things, and go blind jingo and deny that the U.S. would do something so brutal (yeah right). Right now, thanks to the SmearVets, we are seen historical revisionsim, before our very eyes.

Until this election, a much smaller percentage of the population was supporting the Vietnam War. These are the people that thought we "could have won, were it not for the hippie protesters."

National consensus has been, for some time, except for in far-right quarters, that pulling out of Vietnam, when we did, probably saved THOUSANDS of American lives. It is only in the echo-chamber of the right wing, hate radio brain that this has been re-hashed as a "valid" argument, and due to the lack of cognitive ability in the heads of the freepers and the dullards of the GOP constituency, history is reborn -- more magical thinking to tie in with the rest of the GOP, pre-fascist magical thinking. One more layer that helps obscure the truth from their impressionable minds.

I've noticed something as of late, about GOP jingo -- they don't like international treaties, they don't want to join the ICC, they don't want to cooperate with the UN, and they don't respect the Geneva convention. It seems that, in "defense" of this nation, the US does not want to be held accountable for its actions. So much for a "strong moral compass." This is DEFINITELY relativistic morality -- selective morality, if you will. John Kerry's moral compass might be much stronger than the jingoes, and when he saw war crimes, he felt COMPELLED to testify -- in addition, the quotes that the SmearVet commercials take out of context are mostly -- things OTHER people said they saw -- not just Kerry blanketly accusing the military, from his own first-person perspective.

And, as the poster mentioned above, it is all hearsay and circumstantial evidence that John Kerry had anything to do with increasing the suffering of POWs. It's just made-up hoke.

Even though I fully believe that the Smear Vets are motivated by GOP campaign money, under-the-table kick backs, the spotlight of fame, and good old mean spirit, I also think that it IS possible that some of these right-wingers, who, over the years, have held that the Vietnam war could have been won, if not for the hippies, need a scapegoat to help quell their anger, pain, regret, guilt, sadness, fears -- and most of all, their feelings of failure and futility at being part of a brutal war that they couldn't win. That the leaders of their country continued to send them to, for years, like pigs to a slaughter.

The smear of John Kerry is a strawman for an argument that would be better worked out between the SmearVets and their therapists. Start with O'Neill and the highest dose of Risperdol, three-times-a-week, one hour sessions.

[progdonkey]

10. excellent post

I especially liked the next-to-last paragraph. It reminded me of post-WWI Germany, where there was so much scapegoating by conservative Germans because they couldn't reconcile that the great German People had been defeated. It must have been the Jews, or the Socialists, or Communists, etc., who sabotaged the war effort; it must have! This guy Hitler sounds like he understands the truth....

Likewise, these RW vets can't believe that, as you said, not only were they lied to by their country regarding the reasons for being there, but they failed to win anyway. The accusations of the government lying about Vietnam must themselves be lies! We were trying to stop the spread of Communism; we would have been fighting them in Madison if we didn't in Saigon! We could have won! And we would have won if not for the New York (ahem, Jew) Liberals, or (Jewish) Hollywood, or the Socialist Left!

These people do honestly need therapy: they are victims themselves--but victims who go on to victimize others are still criminals.

[Cats Against Frist]

11. Thanks

I've thought about this a lot, and always try to look for the personal motivations of politicians and public figures, apart from their connection to a group -- what motivates each individual to be there? The SmearVets have numerous psychological conditions, written all over them -- as do the persons who swallow, whole, their indictments of John Kerry. In addition, they appear to have little ability to parse through logic and identify logical fallacies, as well as understand the difference between hearsay, rumour and circumstance and "fact." The logical fallacy in the primary argument behind all of this is very easy to spot -- it's a "false dilemma:"

Since John Kerry testified against American troops, he is therefore a traitor.

It's a favorite with the GOP -- "you're either with us, or against us," is perhaps the most famous false dilemma.

People use them all the time, though -- in personal arguments, in public arguments -- dealing with it can be a very uphill battle. I remember my friend got kicked off our pub quiz team, and when I refused to leave the team, she accused me of "siding with them," rather than siding with her. The fact of the matter was, the team we were on, was an excellent team, which usually came in first or second. Perhaps she still had a right to feel hurt, as I was certainly siding with "being a member of a winning pub quiz team," over leaving the team as a protest to her getting kicked off -- but it in no way affected my personal allegiance with one camp or the other. While I did feel that it WAS best for her to leave the team, I did not like her any less. She was accusing me of de-valuing our friendship, by staying on the quiz team. I tried to explain to her for four hours that this was not the case. Still, she wouldn't get it -- she was mired in a false dilemma.

Tendency toward logical fallacies, such as the slippery slope, ad populum, and the false delimma go hand-in-hand with splitting, projecting and scapegoating -- which are ALL symptoms of totalitarianist mindsets.

This is why I fear the GOP, and their power over the brains of their constituency, immensely. These characteristics, combined with historical and biblical revisionism, or "cherry picking" could be fodder for terrible things.

I digress.

[auburngrad82]

12. Don't you think Nixon's carpet bombing of Vietnam had more to do with

the mistreatment of POWs than one relatively unknown (at the time) protestor? That's like saying the reason for all the beheadings is because Sean Penn is against the war in Iraq.