john kerry and cambodia

[CARLHAYDEN]

The simple fact of the matter is that Kerry has repeatedly changed his stories about what, if we are to believe his acceptance speech, is the central element for electing him President, i.e. his Viet Nam experience.

First he made allegations about atrocities in Viet Nam, which he has subsequently backed away from (the allegations were made in testimony on the record before the Senate Foreign Relations committee in 1971).

Second, his story about 'throwing' his medals, or was it robbons, or was it someone else's medals or ribbons, has constantly changed over the years.

Third, his story about being in Cambodia is flatly preposterous.  Now it is changing too, although Kerry earlier stated on the floor of the Senate that it was "seared" in his memory.

Fourth, the video of Kerry's exploits in Viet Nam were recently "enhanced" with added shots of bullets hitting the water that were NOT filmed in Viet Nam at the time Kerry was there.

Fifth, the duration of Kerry's tour of service in Viet Nam was one of the shortest on record for one neither killed not seriously injured.

In conclusion, Kerry has a serious credibility problem.

P.S. - Apparently Kerry is trying to float two new versions of his allegation of spending Christmas in Cambodia.

In the first version, he is changing the time to January, 1968.

In the second version, he was "near" (more than fifty miles away) from Cambodia.

Waiting to see which story he goes with now.

Or, will there be yet another story?

[CARLHAYDEN]

I'll bet Bush can't remember where he was most weekend nights in his 20's because he was high off his ass.  

And if you think I'm trolling...my statement has about as much relevance to this campaign as what you all are blabbering about Cambodia.

Either you don't understand or are deliberately trying to change the subject.

John Kerry is basing his campaign upon his four months service in Viet Nam.  Bush is NOT basing his campaign upon what he did in his twenties.

So far, in a number of areas, previously cited, Kerry's allegations about his Viet Nam experiences have proven to be false, and others are under examination.

If Kerry would run his campaign on his Senate record, then his Viet Nam experiences (real or imaginary) would be of limited relevance.

However, Kerry is studiously avoiding his Senate record, with good reason.

[CARLHAYDEN]

So now we have yet another approach defense of Kerry's adventures in southeast asia.

According to this approach we shouldn't look at "...the details of what he did..."

Also, the questions about whether Kerry actually spent christmas in cambodia in  1968 as he alledged is not simply whether he was lying, but wheather he really believes that story.

Although its nice to see NickG tacity admitting that Kerry is less than honest about his adventures in southeast asia, I'm more concerned with whether Kerry is delusional than with his 'dishonesty' or 'courage' (or lack thereof).

[CARLHAYDEN]

James, if you had read my earliest posting on this thread, you would see that there has been a considerable tendency by Kerry to be less than honest about his experience in Viet Nam (I gave specific examples).

If you look at the record, you will see exactly what I mean.  Any good search engine will take you to a number of sites which quote the lengthy testimony of Kerry before the Senate Foreign Relations committee in 1971.

Similiarly his allegations about medal/ribbon throwing is thoroughy documented.

With respect to the Kerry in Cambodia , the liberal media refuses to examine the issue because they have a pretty good idea of the result.

Please email the liberal media and ask them to stop covering up this matter.

[CARLHAYDEN]

James, if you had read my earliest posting on this thread, you would see that there has been a considerable tendency by Kerry to be less than honest about his experience in Viet Nam (I gave specific examples).

If you look at the record, you will see exactly what I mean.  Any good search engine will take you to a number of sites which quote the lengthy testimony of Kerry before the Senate Foreign Relations committee in 1971.

Similiarly his allegations about medal/ribbon throwing is thoroughy documented.

With respect to the Kerry in Cambodia , the liberal media refuses to examine the issue because they have a pretty good idea of the result.

Please email the liberal media and ask them to stop covering up this matter.

I know there are a lot of rumors out there.  Rumors about Bush include claims he was AWOL, and that he used cocaine.    I dismiss these rumors as unsubstantiated because I have seen no serious evidence of them being true.   If a rumor of something being found several places on the net were the only criteria for veracity, both of those would easily pass.  

According to Fox News, an orginization not exactly known for it's liberalism, the group 'swift boat veterains for truth' has made assertions that he was not in Cambodia but that said claims have not been independently checked.

I suspect that various news orginizations are trying looking in to this, but the claims I have seen in this thread are that he has personally backpeddled on the claim and I wanted to see independent confirmation to see if such claims possessed validity.

If he was in Cambodia, and made comments about it 18 years ago which weren't particularly controversial I don't see how it is remarkably newsworthy.  If he has contradicted himself, I want to see the evidence to back up said contradiction.

From a navy history page: Naval history

You must be logged in to read this quote.

From this account, it would appear that we did have boats in Cambodia in December of 1968.   This does not establish whether or not Kerry was on one of those boats, but it is clearly plausable unless someone has evidence to the contrary.  (and I think the media will be investigating in hopes of getting some sort of a scoop - or is fox considered 'liberal media' as well in your opinion?)

James, once again we have an example of the liberal technique of "change the subject." I NEVER said a single thing about "rumors" of Kerry being AWOL or using drugs (YOU brought those allegations up).

I gave specific examples of other statements made by Kerry about his Viet Nam experiences which he has subsequently backed away from, and which are contrary to established fact.

His own biographer, David Brinkley, has stated that it would have been impossible for Kerry to have been in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968.

Stop tossing red herrings into the mix, and lets look as specific points.

Was Kerry in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968, as he has gone on the record as alledging?

Seems a pretty simple question to me.

Why all the obfuscation by the Kerry backers on this matter?

If you believe that Kerry WAS in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968, then simply say so!

If you don't believe he was in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968, they say so!!

Stop the name calling, and deal with the issue at hand!!!

[CARLHAYDEN]

So now we have yet another approach defense of Kerry's adventures in southeast asia.

According to this approach we shouldn't look at "...the details of what he did..."

Also, the questions about whether Kerry actually spent christmas in cambodia in  1968 as he alledged is not simply whether he was lying, but wheather he really believes that story.

Although its nice to see NickG tacity admitting that Kerry is less than honest about his adventures in southeast asia, I'm more concerned with whether Kerry is delusional than with his 'dishonesty' or 'courage' (or lack thereof).

I have no idea whether Kerry is being honest or not about each detail of his service...clearly there are conflicting reports, and none of the parties are particularly neutral arbiters.  

I'm just saying that just because Kerry has made his courage and sacrifice for his country a theme of his campaign, that doesn't make every detail of his time in Vietnam a relevant campaign issue.  

Kerry is trying to establish the basic credentials for a commander in chief.   I think he's done that merely by volunteering to serve.  I assume he took his boat where he was commanded to take it: on which particular days he happened to recieve enemy fire is purely coincidental.  

First, Kerry has made a number of statements concerning his brief tour of duty in Viet Nam which he has subsequently backed away from.

Second, while he can be forgiven one of two falsehoods about the time of his life which he states is his most important qualification for office, we eventually reach a point (the cambodia in christmas is it), at which he credibility completely collapses.

If it becomes clear the Kerry did go to Cambodia on Christmas of 1968 to deliver a CIA agent (as he alledged), then this would pretty effectively undermine the credibility of the swift boat veterans who are disagree with his accounts of his exploits in Viet Nam.  

If it turns out that Kerry's story is balderdash, then a reasonable person looking at his record of previous misstatements about his service in Viet Nam, must have serious reservations about his allegations of heroic exploits there in light of yet another misstatement.

To make it simpler, think of this as a trial in which a large number of witnesses say one thing and a small number of persons say something contradictory about a series of incidents.  

Who do you believe?

Well, if the small number (I have yet to find even one swift boat crewman who is willing to publicly agree with Kerry's story of carrying a CIA man to Cambodia on Christmas of 1968) has been impeached (i.e. proven wrong about other statements about the issue at hand), then that small number loses credibility about other relevant issues.

So, once again I ask that the media investigate this specific matter, and leave other allegations aside until the truth of the matter at hand is established.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, the citation for Kerry's allegation of being in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968 is contained in:

132 Cong. Rec. 83564-02, Amendment No. 1718,

In his speech, Kerry said:

Mr. President, I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia.
I have that memory which is seared-seared-in me, that says to me, before we send another generation into harm's way we have a responsibility in the U.S. Senate to go the last step, to make the best effort possible in order to avoid that kind of conflict.

Try to get Kerry of the liberal media to cover this specific item without changing the story.

If Kerry was telling the truth, he should at least be able to get his crewmen to verify the story.

If Kerry was telling the truth, then his hand picked biographer, who had acess to Kerry's diary of his Viet Nam exploits would help verify that claim.

Kerry could easily shut down the Swift Boat detractors IF they were wrong about this matter.  Instead, he has (off the record) backed away from the claim, instead changing both the date (maybe it was in January) and the locale (maybe it was near, say fifty to sixty miles from) Cambodia.

So, if Kerry is going to base his campaign on his Viet Nam exploits, we need to have him either stand by his previous statements on this matter, or admit that he was wrong (not simply let him slide away yet again from another of his Viet Nam misstatements).