Gee, Cosmo, I’m a little concerned about that, given my penchant for relentless fairness. IIRC, there was one finding of a rear-echelon motherflinger presenting himself as a jungle commando. I get suspicious when the facts look too good, you know what I mean?
But your point is well taken, even if only half these guys were telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but, that doesn’t help all that much.
**Mag ** is good at guessing, maybe had can guess why they were lying.
Read it yourself you crotchety old cock. Don’t miss “I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command…”
Serious question: do you have some life-threatening ailment again? Because you don’t seem like the same person from six months ago.
So, they were lying?
Because they did say these things, you know that, right? Kerry didn’t make it up, there was such testimony, there were reporters there and everything.
So, were they lying? And if so, why? What’s your guess?
Kinda hard to paint yourself out of a corner, isn’t it, son?
Beware of Wiki: http://www.qando.net/archives/002160.htm
Gotta run to teach a class. Be back later. 
Humans being what they are I would expect to find some exaggerations and a pretender or three. Still, seeing the care that was taken to verify, rather than a gleeful “we hate the war so we we’ll believe anything” attitude I’d say that makes Day a lying asshole. I’m not sure what that makes those who want to embrace him as an honorable daring truth teller.
Of course that’s only Wikki’ so maybe it’s completely false as well. I’m open for evidence. I’m thinking I won’t get any.
My experience is that most people are a mix of positive and negative traits. I have no problem believing some of the negatives about Kerry but I see no reason to embrace every negative while swallowing what Day said without evidence.
Helluve cite, there, Mag! Boy, talk about non-partisan and trustworthy! Sure beats the shit out of Wiki, for being, you know, non-partisan and trustworthy! What, the Freeper site was down?
But actually, your cite doesn’t even pretend to address the testimony, only insists that there were some frauds amongst them. Well, if half of them were frauds, what about the rest?
Were they lying, Mag? And if so, why?
Wowzers. That…essay?..is pretty impressive. But yanno, I hate to break it to you: being on a blog doesn’t make it true. For ghod’s sake, the guy’s argument is based entirely on B.G. Burkett, whose arguments against the VVAW and the Winter Soldier testimony are demonstrably riddled with wholesale deception.
So your evidence is a link to a blog quoting a guy who was factually incorrect and outright deceptive.
Strong stuff, that.
.
Yeah, a bit of let-down.
[Crotchety old cock mode on]…Yep, back in the day, me and ol’ Scylla, we went about nine pages over this, hammer and tong, tooth and nail. (…spits some chaw on the dog, dog too drunk to notice…). This young ‘un just don’t measure up, ol’ Scylla, he could squirm himself loose of an anaconda! After he been swallered!..It was the Summer of ought-five, it was, yessir…wore an onion in my belt, piss off the Kaiser…[crotchety old cock mode off]
So that’s your evidence? Did you read the comments?
I’d accept that it’s possible that a few fakes slipped in. It appears even the people trying to discredit the testimony can only find a few and then play a guilt by association game. “Since these few lied, they must all be lying” It’s illogical and unreasonable.
The writer states
This does not follow. Kerry is not saying all soldiers or even most soldiers are war criminals. He is saying there are incidents of atrocities going on regularly and officers are aware of it. I see no reason for that fact to be a personal attack on those who know they and their close comrades served in combat honorably.
Even one vet in comments
I’m sorry that some vets feel that Kerry’s testimony implied guilt on their part. I don’t see it that way. As I said before, I think the point was to make the horrors of an ongoing war clear in order to stop it. Stoping it saved lives.
Since you feel Kerry was morally obligated to verify his testimony before he testified do extend that same rigor to Day? Was Day in any way morally obligated to investigate the facts before he called Kerry’s testimony complete fabrications?
Failing to do that what does that make him?
According to the evidence presented I don’t see any reason to assume Day was correct and frankly I don’t see any reason to give him the benefit of the doubt any longer. As you said, there are dishonorable ways of doing things and he seemed to choose them.
This is a waste of time for both of us, as we each will not like each other’s sites. I’ll just provide this one and ask you to view the videos. It doesn’t PROVE anything, but I don’t think anything will one one or another. But if you are so quick to discount Medal of Honor winner Bud Day, maybe this will give you pause. Maybe not.
Whoops. Here you go. Give a listen. Look at the credentials. Are they all sellouts, liars, etc.?
Also here is a chapter from a new book that I think reveals who John Kerry is. It also explains about how he got out of action so quickly. Enjoy. (Warning: pdf)
magellan, how can you not believe the great majority of the Winter Soldiers? What motive would they have to make up these stories?
Did you know that more men who served in Vietnam have now died from suicide than were killed in the war itself? This information was recently passed on to me by a man who remains haunted by what he endured there.
That’s a great exaggeration. 48% of the voters on election night told George W. Bush to shut the fuck up and go home. The were outnumbered by 3 percentage points. It’s not as if the nation rose as one and sent John Kerry away with his tail between his legs.
I respect your right to a conservative opinion, but when you start exaggerating and not backing up your claims and citing wiki, well…
There is no doubt atrocities were committed. As in every war. That war perhaps saw even more/i do not know. I was not there. But for Kerry to claim that it was routine maligns thousands of honorable men, some of them dead and not able to defend themselves.
I think the motivation was different for each: disgust with the war they had seen (atrocities or not), anger at the U.S. for sending them over there, desire to feel important, the limelight, etc.
And what is Bud Day’s motivation? What does he gain by hounding a combat veteran he’s never met? What standing does he have to accuse Kerry of perjury, murder, insurrection, and treason? Why does he include the likes of Ted Kennedy and Robert Kennedy in his rant? And why is he now turning his guns on General Clark? The answer is that he has a political agenda. It might have been unseemly for Kerry to toss his medals at the US Capitol, but Day has chosen the much darker and more striking gesture of sticking his medals up his own ass.
Reason, logic, and evidence. I listened to several of the people on the link. Some didn’t work. No they’re not sellouts and liars. They’re giving their opinions Nothing they say discounts Kerry’s testimony or paints the stories told at Winter Soldier as complete fabrications. Bud Day said that. Was he correct or not? If not then what does that make him? You seem to accept his word on it without considering the evidence. I’m not sure what to make of that.
There’s no logic in using his medal of honor to defend his integrity while you’re attacking Kerry’s medals. There’s no logic is implying that since he won a medal he wouldn’t lie, …is there? You know there isn’t.
The evidence seems to show that because one author rushed to publish stories that were later revealed to be false extra care was taken to verify the service of the men at Winter Soldier. Your cite conveniently leaves that out. Out of over 100 vets that testified they found two or three that were bogus. Reason tells me that means a lot of the stories were true.
One of the videos on your link is a wife of a ex POW saying how Kerry’s testimony reflected on all Vietnam Vets and accused them all and all the soldiers who had died as well. It’s an emotional response that simply isn’t true. The tragedy to me is that because of their bitterness toward Kerry they decided he wasn’t fit to be CIC so instead we get a guy who avoided active service {why weren’t they more offended by that?} and led us into another unnecessary war with 1000s of lost American lives, widows , fatherless children, mothers and fathers who will never see their children again. But that’s another discussion. I’m unsure what those folks think would’ve happened had it not been for the anti-war movement. We were here for ten long years with no end in sight while our own leaders were lying to us. The honorable and courageous service of the majority doesn’t change that, nor does it alter the incidents of war atrocities. War atrocities that occurred does not mean we’re the bad guys, the criminals, and they are the victims. It’s a fallout of war on both sides and a good reason that armed conflict should be the last resort.
I’ve already said I’m not a big fan of Kerry and I agree with your assessment of his political persona being a facade. I can believe there are questionable things in his past. That’s not the question here. I think it’s unreasonable and illogical to assume Kerry is a lying dishonorable scumbag and Bud Day is an honorable Medal of Honor winner without taking an honest look at the evidence so I looked at it.
The evidence doesn’t support Day. A bunch of veterans who are still bitter about Kerry’s testimony doesn’t change the facts. Kerry may indeed be an asshole but that doesn’t mean Day isn’t. If in 2004 the choice was the lesser of two assholes I think we got the wrong one.
No it doesn’t. People claiming that his testimony, which was repeating stories told to him by combat veterans, somehow maligns every soldier who served and the dead as well is simply false. Saying it was routine in one group, or several groups, out of the hundreds there does not say it was in every group. IMO that’s the a huge problem here. The emotional illogical response to Kerry’s testimony.
Are we saying that those combat vets at the winter soldier conference shouldn’t tell their story because it reflects badly on those that served honorably? What were you saying about the truth?
Hate to bail - and I think the points that were made that a more general criticism of Liberal would have been more spot-on were good ones.
I’m going on vacation - and part of that vacation includes not talking to all of you. 
See you all real soon.
Let’s make believe that their was no fraud with any of the men and the stories all were true. That doesn’t excuse this:
You know the picture he is trying to paint. And it is a lie and offensive. He is a liar. Just like when he told the senate that his comments were impromptu, while the damn speech was written for him. The lying sack of shit should be walking around with a contraption that continually shines a bright white light on him because it’s ALL ABOUT HOW WONDERFUL AND BRAVE HE IS. Did you read the chapter from the book. I found the new information interesting. And the ending was quite revealing.
And this has nothing to do with Bush. Like I said, I’ve no use for him either. We’re assessing the character of Kerry. Or, more accurately, lack thereof.
Not good enough. Especially the coy bit about “make believe”, which is arch and cutesy-poo. You either have evidence of fraud, and some plausible motivation on their part, or you don’t. May we stipulate that you do not? And if you oppose such an acceptance of fact, have you any basis? Outside of your insistence that it must be so, because Kerry teh suxxor?
But you don’t, do you, otherwise you would have presented it by now, otherwise you would not find yourself retreating to ever more implausible scenario.
If even half the men at Winter Soldier told the truth, does that not indicate a pattern of denial and cover-up? How then can you assault Kerry’s accusation of complicity at all levels of command? How you evidence to offer that it never got beyond the junior officer level? Do we not honor, as an establlished principle, that officers are responsible for the actions of thier subordinates?
More and more, it appears that John Kerry’s “crime”, in your estimation, was telling the truth. You screech about him not “verifying” the stories, knowing full well that he was in no position to do so. Then you are forced to accept that if the stories had been vetted, they would likely have been shown to be true.
As I said: you got nothing.