All of them, not just MoveOn.
2007-09-20 05:06:39 · 13 answers · asked by oohhbother 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Hmmm, so it's ok to slander SOME military and veterans, just not ALL. (Based on your OK, of course)
2007-09-20 05:17:03 · update #1
Still plenty of you wearing those Purple heart bandaids, I see.
2007-09-20 05:36:18 · update #2
They could care less how anyone is treated if they are not republican.
and as you can see by their response to your question, they also have no regard for the truth, as the swiftboaters were proven to be republican zealot liars, who claimed medals for the same incident and said there was no danger when Kerry got his medal !! At least Kerry was there, while BUSH WAS A W O L
The first SBVT ad was contradicted by the statements of several other veterans who observed the incidents, by the Navy's official records, and, in some instances, by the contemporaneous statements of SBVT members themselves.
Several major newspapers were also skeptical of the SBVT allegations. For example, a New York Times news article stated, "on close examination, the accounts of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth prove to be riddled with inconsistencies."[46] ABC News's The Note opined, "the Swift Boat ad and their primary charges about Kerry's medals are personal, negative, extremely suspect, or false."[47] Regarding the medal dispute, a Los Angeles Times editorial[48] stated, "Not limited by the conventions of our colleagues in the newsroom, we can say it outright: These charges against John Kerry are false." The editorial argued this position on the basis that "Kerry is backed by almost all those who witnessed the events in question, as well as by documentation." On August 22, 2004 The Washington Post reported: "An investigation by The Washington Post into what happened that day suggests that both sides have withheld information from the public record and provided an incomplete, and sometimes inaccurate, picture of what took place. But although Kerry's accusers have succeeded in raising doubts about his war record, they have failed to come up with sufficient evidence to prove him a liar."[49]
The ABC television show Nightline traveled to Vietnam and interviewed Vietnamese who were involved in the battle for which Kerry was awarded the Silver Star. These witnesses disputed O'Neill's charge that there "was little or no fire" that day; they said that the fighting was fierce.[50] SBVT supporters question whether these witnesses are reliable because they spoke "in the presence of a Communist official",[51] but their account of enemy fire is substantially the same as that previously given by another former VC to an AP reporter[1][not in citation given] and by the American witnesses, including the only SBVT member who was actually present that day, Larry Clayton Lee.[52][53][54][55]
Jerome Corsi has said that a picture of Kerry's 1993 visit to Vietnam hangs in the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City as a gesture of "honor" by the communists "for his contribution to their victory over [the] United States",[56][57] and John O'Neill has stated that Kerry "is in the North Vietnamese war museum as a hero. . . . one of the heroes who caused them to win the war in Vietnam".[58] The statement is also repeated in "Unfit for Command" (pp 167-174). However, Josh Gerstein of the New York Sun stated in this regard:
“ While the museum clearly honors opponents of the war from America and other countries, it is not clear that the photo of Mr. Kerry is part of that tribute. The picture of the senator hangs among a set of photos devoted to the restoration of diplomatic relations between America and Vietnam in the 1990s.
It was apparently taken as Mr. Kerry took part in a delegation President Clinton sent to Hanoi in 1993. Other photos nearby show visits during that period by former American officials who played key roles in the Vietnam War, including a Navy admiral who has since died, Elmo Zumwalt, and a defense secretary, Robert McNamara. A secretary of state during Mr. Clinton’s term, Warren Christopher, is also shown meeting Vietnamese officials
2007-09-20 05:19:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Swiftboaters were a group of veterans talking about one of their own. Moveon is a political group funded by George Soros with a political agenda attacking a veteran BEFORE he ever spoke a word. Swiftboaters didn't come out and say John Kerry won 3 purple hearts and was a liar, they come out and questioned how he won 3 purple hearts (for war wounds) in 4 months and never spent a day in the hospital. I have been to combat, and bullet wounds cause serious damage, so if you could clue me in on how he healed so quickly, I have a lot of Marines in the combat zone right now, that could use this valuable piece of information. John Kerry sure hasn't explained it.
2007-09-20 05:20:08 · answer #2 · answered by libsticker 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I do not know what you mean by "swiftboaters". If a candidate like Kerry makes claims regarding incidents he participated in and other people who participated in those same incidents publicly disagree, I have no problem with that. If some political action group attacks an honorable man by accusing him of lying about a report he had not even presented yet, I do have a problem with it.
I do not classify both as "swiftboating" I would classify the first example, perhaps. But the only word that describes the second is libel.
.
2007-09-20 05:18:04 · answer #3 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Funny thing is that the swift boat veterans for truth simply came out to rebuke the lies of John Kerry while moveon.org is a large scale political machine attacking anything and everything that isnt far left. There is a huge difference between the two. The GOP doesnt have an equivalent to the hate and financial backing of moveon.org but maybe they should have a group that has a spine and will get down and dirty rather than trying to always be the good guys, shaking hands and smiling as they get daggers stick into their backs.
2007-09-20 05:16:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I sure hope MoveOn did a real number on General P. He is George W. Bush's water boy.
Funny, how the neo cons scream foul when the Dems strike back. Remember "turn about is fair play".
2007-09-20 05:20:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Kerry was a POLITICAL CANDIDATE using his trumped up, exaggerated service as a credential tool to get elected not an active military man on his way to a combat zone.
There is no comparrison.
Kerry said he threw his medals over the fence on the White House lawn. Truth is, he threw the ribbons. He still has the medals. You can get replacement ribbons at any PX. What a dork.
2007-09-20 05:18:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Character assignation of current active military personnel vs inactive former military politician is not the same. Both groups have the right to say what they want but that also allows the opposing group to question the politician that support them.
2007-09-20 05:19:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
As far as what? Speaking of their personal interactions with John Kerry during the Vietnam war? Offering their opinion of his 3 Purple Hearts earned in 4 months of service and never being hospitalized?
They should be given medals for speaking out.
2007-09-20 05:15:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
I don't understand the question - are you trying to silence people. Swiftboaters and MoveOn are two very different organizations.
2007-09-20 05:14:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
nothing
I like free speech
2007-09-20 05:16:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋