Does Kerry Have Boorda's Sense Of Honor?

Yesterday I brought up Thomas Lipscomb's article about the irregularities surrounding John Kerry's awards from Vietnam. Today he brings up another interesting tidbit related to that issue. It seems that John Lehman, the Reagan administration Navy Secretary whose signature appears on at least one of the revised citations, has no recollection of signing the document.

Asked how the citation could have been executed over his signature without his knowledge, Lehman said: "I have no idea. I can only imagine they were signed by an autopen." The autopen is a device often used in the routine execution of executive documents in government.

This makes it look more likely that the Lehman citation for the Silver Star with the illicit combat V, and possibly the Lehman citation for one of the Bronze Stars, was not authorized and is therefore a fraudulent document.

Who is responsible?

How did the narratives get changed?

Will Kerry release his entire file now?

Another Attempt To Slime Bush Service Misses The Mark

Former Texas lieutenant governor Ben Barnes has said he regrets using his influence to get George W. Bush (and other sons of prominent families and campaign donors) into the Texas Air National Guard. Lefties will cry that this shows Bush's service was illegitimate -- but they are wrong. In fact, the video of the senior Democrat actually discredits the man himself, as well as the Kerry campaign he is closely associated with here in Texas. And it also shows that there was no intervention by former president George H. W. Bush, then a congressman, to get Dubya into the unit. Notice what he says about who he helped.

"I became more ashamed of myself than I've ever been because the worst thing I did was get a lot of wealthy supporters and a lot of people who had family names of importance into the Guard and I'm very sorry about that and I apologize to you and the voters of Texas," Barnes said.

In other words, he helped folks from both sides of the political aisle -- and he makes no effort to implicate the former president in his accusation, as he would assuredly have done if the senior Bush had requested a favor. This was how he acted as a matter of course when he became aware of a member of a prominent family seeking to get into the Guard.

But there is also an admission of his own corruption as a public official, and the rot that infected 9and still infects) the Democrats today.

"I got a lot of other people in the National Guard because I thought that's what people should do when you're in office: You help a lot of rich people," Barnes said.

But hold it, sir, I thought that the Democrats were the party of the little people. You mean that it isn't -- that it is really the party of the wealthy special interests? Or was it simply you who is personally corrupt?

And is your corruption and bias towards the rich why you are a key Kerry supporter in Texas, and a major fundraiser for him?

Who Writes These Things?

The following two headlines showed up on my home page at EV1.net.

Survey: 9-11 Families Split on RNC in N.Y.

Survey: 9-11 Kin Don't Want RNC in N.Y.

I'm going to try to find out who is responsible for the headlines -- them or AP.

Why my interest? Because the articles are identical -- and refer to a bogus study of 339 family and friends of WTC victims sponsored by the New York Times. So which is it? Are they split, or opposed?

And why do I call the survey bogus? The problem is that the there is no clearly defined pool of people to survey (does our initial universe of survivors include all colse family members and friends, and how do we determine who is close enough to be a survivor), therefore we don't know if the sample is random. And since the survey excluded the families and friends of Pentagon and Pensylvania victims, it isn't really a survey of 9/11 kin like the headline states. In other words, we can't be sure of the reliability of the survey because it is flawed from the get-go.

Look Who Is Ahead In The Electoral College

According to CNN, it's George W. Bush who is ahead in the electoral college, with a 274-264 vote lead.

With the exception of Massachusetts neighbor New Hampshire, the president is holding on to every state he won in 2000. That said,

About a dozen states remain extremely competitive and are widely considered too close to call. Leading that list are Ohio, Florida, Nevada and Missouri, where Bush holds a narrow lead, as well as Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Pennsylvania, which now lean toward Kerry.

West Virginia and Arizona are also competitive, but Democrats concede that those state now fall into the Bush column. Likewise, Oregon and Washington state could ultimately back either candidate, but Kerry is currently building a strong base of support in the Pacific Northwest.

The race in Ohio remains extremely fluid, and both campaigns remain highly organized in the Buckeye State. All four principals -- and most of their wives -- have campaigned there at least once over the past two weeks.

So there is hope -- because we haven't even gotten the convention bounce yet.

Another Israeli Betrayal?

It appears that once again we have once again been stabbed in the back by the Israelis, who have placed a spy in the heart of our government to ferret out our secrets. The suspected spy works for Douglas J. Feith, the undersecretary of defense for policy. He is the third ranking official at the Pentagon. According to CBS and the Associated Press,

The investigation centers on whether the employee in Feith's office passed secrets about Bush administration policy toward Iran to the main pro-Israeli lobbying group in Washington, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which then allegedly gave them to the Israeli government, one official said.

If accurate, the guilty parties should be executed for spying during wartime. If involved, AIPAC needs to be closed down. And the foreign aid budget for Israel needs to be zeroed out -- and diplomatic relations downgraded.

We will not stand for such activity from a putative ally which survives on the largesse of the US taxpayer.

Kerry Medals -- Plus A Point I Raised

Thomas Lipscomb raises the issue of Kerry's medals in a different way today, noting that there are some definite irregularities in the documentation. These are:
1) Silver Star with combat V -- the Navy does not issue them that way, but researcher B.G. Burkett notes that veteran-impostors often have paperwork claiming that they received such an award.

"I've run across several claims for Silver Stars with combat V's, but they were all in fake records," he said.

2) Three defend citations for the Silver Star -- each issued by a different authority, with a different description of the events.

Maj. Anthony Milavic, a retired Marine Vietnam veteran, calls the issuance of three citations for the same medal "bizarre." Milavic hosts Milinet, an Internet forum popular with the military community that is intended "to provide a forum in military/political affairs."

Normally in the case of a lost citation, Milavec points out, the awardee simply asked for a copy to be sent to him from his service personnel records office where it remains on file. "I have never heard of multi-citations from three different people for the same medal award," he said. Nor has Burkett: "It is even stranger to have three different descriptions of the awardee's conduct in the citations for the same award."

2) Two different certificates for his Bronze Star -- again, with different narratives and issued by different authorities.

So far, there are also two varying citations for Kerry's Bronze Star, one by Zumwalt and the other by Lehman as secretary of the Navy, both posted on johnkerry.com.

3) Kerry's DD215 authorizes four combat stars for his Vietnam Service Medal -- despite serving in only two of the eligible campaigns.

Kerry's Web site also carries a DD215 form revising his DD214, issued March 12, 2001, which adds four bronze campaign stars to his Vietnam service medal. The campaign stars are issued for participation in any of the 17 Department of Defense named campaigns that extended from 1962 to the cease-fire in 1973.

However, according to the Navy spokesman, Kerry should only have two campaign stars: one for "Counteroffensive, Phase VI," and one for "Tet69, Counteroffensive."

Lipscomb also points out another interesting anomaly, one that I have wondered about since I posted about Kerry's potential UCMJ problems on Monday. Did John Kerry complete his Naval Reserve obligation? Noting that the Washington Post's Michael Dobbs has discovered that only six of 100 pages from Kerry's personnel file have been released to the public, Lipscomb asks why Kerry was not discharged from the Naval Reserve until 1978, even though his obligation should have been up on June 30, 1972. George W. Bush completed his Air National Guard obligation on time and was honorably discharged, but Kerry's was delayed for SIX YEARS! Did KERRY make his drills, or was he AWOL? Was there some other issue? Given the scrutiny of Bush's service, doesn't Kerry deserve equal scrutiny? What is in those 94 pages?

The Burkett quote at the end of the article sums it up well.

"The multiple citations and variations in the official record are reason for suspicion in itself, even disregarding the current swift boat veterans' controversy."

UPDATE: The guys at QandO blogged on this same topic and point up this little gem from National Review, dealing to Adm. Boorda's suicide after discovering he had inappropriately been wearing an unauthorized combat V. Senator Kerry apparently gave a couple of interviews on the matter.

Veterans said yesterday that although they would take offense at someone falsely wearing a "V" combat pin, they couldn't see how this could drive Navy Adm. Jeremy Michael Boorda to suicide.

“Is it wrong? Yes, it is very wrong. Sufficient to question his leadership position? The answer is yes, which he clearly understood,” said Sen. John Kerry, a Navy combat veteran who served in Vietnam.

and

“The military is a rigorous culture that places a high premium on battlefield accomplishment,” said Sen. John F. Kerry, who received numerous decorations, including a Bronze Star with a "V" pin, as a Navy lieutenant in Vietnam.

“In a sense, there's nothing that says more about your career than when you fought, where you fought and how you fought,” Kerry said.

“If you wind up being less than what you’re pretending to be, there is a major confrontation with value and self-esteem and your sense of how others view you.”

Of Boorda and his apparent violation, Kerry said: “When you are the chief of them all, it has to weigh even more heavily.”

Since John Kerry wants to be the REAL chief of them all, we need full disclosure now!

You Can't Argue With Facts -- So Kerry Supporters Ignore Them

I've been dealing with Kerry supporters who want to trash the Swift Boat Heroes and their charges against John Kerry. While some just want to call names, some are genuinely convinced that they are right in their support of John Kerry, and that Kerry was right those many years ago to lay charges of war crimes and atrocities at the feet of the men who served in the United States military in Vietnam. Mackubin Thomas Owens presents his response to such folks on National Review Online.

Owens argues that the charges of atrocities are unsubstantiated and contradictory. He makes a special point of documenting that the tales that Kerry repeated from the Winter Soldier hearings were never substantiated, and that

When the Naval Investigative Service (NIS) attempted to interview those who allegedly had witnessed atrocities, most refused to cooperate, even after assurances that they would not be questioned about atrocities they may have committed personally. Those who did cooperate never provided details of actual crimes to investigators. The NIS also discovered that some of the most grisly testimony was given by fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam veterans.

This is documented in Guenter Lewy's seminal book, America in Vietnam, as is the failure of a similar Army investigation to produce any actual evidence of such atrocities. Similarly, Owens points out that the accusations of widespread war crimes are patently untrue.

And it was, after all, the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese who turned hamlets into battlefields. The Communist practice of 'clutching the people to their breast' was a violation of the Geneva Convention of 1949, which prohibits a combatant from using the civilian population as a shield: 'The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.' And while the Hague Convention IV (1907) prohibits the attack or bombardment of inhabited areas that are not defended, it is the general practice of states to treat a town occupied by a military enemy as a defended place, subject to attack.

That the official U.S. position was to avoid indiscriminate attacks on civilians is indicated by a 1966 directive from the U.S. military command: "Firing on localities which are undefended and without military significance, is a war crime." Clearly, the U.S. command attempted to abide by the principle of discrimination, but the method of fighting employed by the enemy made discrimination difficult in practice.

In short, the very tactics of the Communists in violation of international law created a situation in which the tactics used were within the scope of international law!

He also points out the contradictions inherent in the position Kerry took in 1971 and that he takes now. In 1971, the American soldier was a creature of whom Americans should be afraid,

a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence. . .; men who have returned with a sense of anger and a sense of betrayal which no one has yet grasped.

Today those soldiers is one of a band of brothers who nobly fought for America, men of whom we should be proud. The two positions cannot be reconciled, but Kerry seeks to hold to both.

And let me add a note on the hypocritical irony of Kerry and his defenders. John Kerry's defenders are always quick to point out that Kerry had a right to protest the war. Owens notes that the Swift Boat Heroes don't disagree with that point, but rather with Kerry's words and his methods. But today it is that Kerry himself who will not concede that same right to his comrades -- unless they support him. Dissent appears to be a one way street for the Left, as usual.

Feeling Better

I've been down with a nasty bg these last few days, hence my absence from the blogosphere.

Here's hoping I can make up for lost time!

Parole Revoked For Marine's Killer

I blogged about the parole of white supremacist scumbag murderer Donald Worth Riley last month. He is one of the worthless pieces of of crap that murdered Marine Cpl. Tarron Dixon two days following his return from the Persian Gulf War in 1991, because they wanted to "f*ck with some niggers."

Well, the parole was revoked after board members followed state law and met with Dixon's parents, as requird by state law. A hearty "Well Done" to them.

Unfortunately, they granted Riley a short date for the next parole hearing -- meaning that he gets another chance for parole from his life entence next year. Which also means that Dixon's parents will again have to go before the board to oppose letting this scumbag out of prison early.

No word on what action will be taken to shorten the sentence of life without her father given to Dixon's daughter, who was born after his murder.

And Riley, I know you and your wife come nosing around here from time to time, as I DO check to see where visitors come from. If you REALLY have something to say that would present your side of the story, feel free to do it here -- if you have the guts to do so.

Bible Can Remain In Mosher Monument -- For Now

You may recall that some weeks ago I commented on the case of the Bible outside the Harris County Civil Courthouse. It is part of a monument to philanthropist William Mosher, erected by the Star of Hope Mission on the courthouse grounds some 50 years ago. Recently, a federal judge ordered the Bible removed.

Today was the deadline for the Bible's removal.

Until the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals acted today.

The Word of God gets a temporary reprieve.

United States Code, Title 10, Chapter 47, Article 104

Seems like John Kerry might have a little legal problem still hanging over his head, according the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY

Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.

Now according to this document on Kerry's own website, Kerry was promoted to Lieutenant on January 1, 1970, and placed on inactive reserve status on January 3, 1970. He remained on that status until his transfer to the inactive Standby Reserve on July 1, 1972. Kerry was not discharged until February 16, 1978.

You may be asking how these two bits of information relate.

In April 1971, Kerry testified before the Senate that he met with representatives of the North Vietnamese government and the Viet Cong in Paris in May 1970. They discussed diplomatic means of ending the war. Upon his return to the United States, Kerry then worked to implement the plans he discussed with these enemy representatives during time of armed conflict. Kerry also served as a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War during this time, and the group sent several other delegations to meet with the enemy leadership. Kerry himself did so during the summer of 1971.

Thus it would seem that Kerry committed a clear violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice -- and that the statute of limitations is still running on this. That may be why the Kerry campaign twice glosses over the period after his transfer to inactive status, here making it appear that he was out of the Navy completely and here skipping over the thirty months by making it appear there was a break in his service. But the official document referenced above tells the true story about his service, and points out this glaring problem.

I guess this raises a couple of questions in my mind. Should George W. Bush formally issue John Kerry a pardon for this offense? Or will Kerry pardon himself if he becomes president? Does this constitute a "high crime or misdemeanor" for impeachment purposes? Or should Kerry be recalled to active duty, prosecuted and either imprisoned or executed under this provision of the UCMJ?

A big "thank you" to AmericanThinker.com for this one.

So THIS Is What She Meant By UnAmerican

You may remember that billionairess Teresa Heinz Kerry declared some of us to be "unAmerican" a few weeks back, and then told a reporter to "shove it" when he dared to ask what she meant. Well, we finally have the answer, through her son Chris Heinz.

According to Heinz,

"Un-American traits are things like voter suppression, lying about people and their records.... It's been happening in American politics for years; it's not just Bush-Cheney, but they are a big part of it...

Apparently he doesn't include multiple voting, dead voting, military vote suppression, and lying about the president's National Guard service to be unAmerican -- since these are all Democrat tactics. He even has the audacity to complain about the amount of money spent by th Bush campaign, despite the free access of Kerry surrogates to the Soros fortune.

And then, having complained about falsehoods about people and their records, Heinz said

"They have misled the American people on the economy and on the war, and someone has to point that out."

Which is, of course, a bald-faced lie about the Bush record.

But what REALLY rankles them?

"And I think what happened in Florida, with the vote count, what Bush and his supporters did there, was un-American, from beginning to end," Heinz said.

And so the big lie about the GOP, the President, and the Florida election continues -- but that isn't unAmerican, since only Republicans can be unAmerican, if you live in a Heinz Kerry sort of world.

The Next Governor of New York?

New York Secretary of State Randy Daniels is very clear about which party offers the best opportunity to blacks today -- his own, the GOP. And while he thinks that we could stand to do more outreach to the black community (a sentiment I share), he is right when he says

"Anytime a party [Democrats] gets 90 percent of the vote, the other party didn't show up to compete, and there is no way you can win if you don't compete," said Daniels, a Democrat who turned Republican about two years ago and co-leader of the state's Republican convention delegation.

Daniels is often mentioned as a potential Pataki successor. I think he sounds like a keeper to me.

When Will Kerry's Treasonous Lies Be Covered?

Harold W. Andersen of the Omaha World-Herald raises the issue many of us want dealt with in the media -- Kerry's denigration of his fellow Vietnam vets during the war. After all, Kerry accused them of war crimes, despite the fact that he was never in a position to see such things from his swift boat. Here are some details from his April 23, 1971 testimony before the US Senate

First,

Kerry said that "they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam . . . ."

Kerry described such incidents as "crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with a full awareness of officers at all levels of command." Such conduct, he testified, reflected "the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do" and was "accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam."

He went on

"The Army says they never leave their wounded," Kerry said. "The Marines say they never even leave their dead. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude. They've left the real stuff of their reputations bleaching behind them in the sun . . . ."

Such comments clearly demonstrate why so many veterans hold Kerry in contempt. He slimed them, making them out to be monsters. And he claimed to be a witness to attrocities that he could never have witnessed during his three-hour cruise. . .er. . . four-month abbreviated tour of duty. Kerry built his career upon falsehoods which left "the real stuff of their reputations bleaching . . . in the sun . . . ."

And check back with Andersen next week -- he promises more on the subject, from men in a position to know what ground combat was really like in Vietnam.

I Guess It Doesn't Count If The Victim Is A Christian.

We've all been bombarded with PC propaganda about the need to be sensitive to members of religious and ethnic minorities, as well as women and homosexuals. But it seems that such tolerance doesn't apply if you are a Christian. At least not in the People's Republic of Massachusetts, at MIT.

A devout Christian working at MIT claims co-workers wore phony clerical collars, called him Jesus and blasted the Rolling Stones' ``Sympathy for the Devil'' during a 15-year campaign of harassment and ridicule against him.
In a discrimination lawsuit pending in federal court, machinist Mark A. Peterson contends supervisors at the school's Lincoln Lab in Lexington joined the harassment, "openly telling jokes about God" and refusing to reprimand workers who spit in his coffee and left a noose on his workbench.

Now think about it -- what would happen to an emplyee who came to work wearing a turban or a burqa to harrass a Muslim employee? If a Hindu employee were refurred to as "Hare Krishna" in the workplace? And I don's need to guess about the noose, given that we had firings here in Harris County over one left in the locker of a black man.

But that isn't all.

"Employees and/or supervisors at MIT Lincoln Lab have harassed Peterson because of his religious beliefs (Christian), including assaulting him with a chemical, vandalizing and stealing his property, tampering with the machines he was working on and making verbal threats," the suit says

Furthermore, Peterson was forbidden to bring his Bible to work with him, a restriction which violates federal law.

Somehow I doubt that liberals are going to flock to this man's cause. And where are the prominent Massachusetts exponents of tolerance on this one?

Dems Concerned About Illegal Coordination?

Well, they claim they are.

But what is this little tidbit from AmericanThinker.com?

The Democratic Party is partnering with MoveOn.org, People for the American Way, Campaign for America's Future, and dozens of other groups representing millions of Americans to organize a massive public mobilization. On Wednesday, May 14, join us by calling and emailing your representatives in Congress to let them know that the majority of Americans oppose more irresponsible tax cuts that go overwhelmingly to the wealthiest sliver of Americans.

At least that is what a post on the Democratic Party Women’s Vote Center says.

Sounds like collusion to me! After all, this Women’s Vote Center is an official part of the DNC.

Democrat Teresa LaPore Creates Another Confusing Ballot

We all remember Teresa LaPore, whose butterfly ballot confused elderly and incompetent voters in palm Beach County in 2000. Well, she has done it again!

Seems she has decided to require voters to "connect the arrow" rather than simply using a standard "fill the circle" technique that most Americans are familiar with. This could be a real problem, because

"People do the crazier things when they're asked to connect the arrows," said Stephen Ansolabehere, a former director of the Voting Technology Project, a collaboration between CalTech and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

I guess they are already prepping for Kerry's post-defeat strategy.

Kerry Hypocrisy On Falsehoods In Media

Confessed war criminal John Kerry and his cohorts have attempted to get Unfit for Commandbanned as part of his campaign against the Swift Boat Heroes. According to his campaign,

“No publisher should want to be selling books with proven falsehoods in them.”

The Manchester Union-Leader has a great response to this:

Oh, really? What about Bill Clinton’s memoir, which contradicts his sworn testimony about Monica Lewinsky? And does that standard apply to films as well? If so, shouldn’t the campaign have tried to prevent theaters from running Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11,” which is filled with lies?

So come on, John, let the denunciations begin!