Coward/Traitor calls Snowden a coward/traitor
Secretary of State John Kerry escalated his criticism of Edward Snowden, calling him a “coward” and a “traitor,” and saying that the NSA document leaker should return to the United States from Russia and “make his case.”
“Edward Snowden is a coward, he is a traitor and he has betrayed his country,” Kerry said in an interview on MSNBC’s “The Daily Rundown” with Chuck Todd. “And if he wants to come home tomorrow to face the music, he can do so.”
The point in itself may have merit; we can discuss. But for fun, let’s remember some points about Kerry. The following conclusions have been either proven, or at least well-indicated as likely, by eyewitness testimony and other evidence:
- As a young man, Kerry joined the Navy (and the Swift Boats), quite possibly to avoid being drafted into a Vietnam combat role.
- Upon landing in combat anyway (as the Swift Boats were re-purposed for it), Kerry repeatedly falsified reports to exaggerate his heroism and/or cover up his personal war crimes.
- By the exaggerated/false reports, Kerry acquired Silver & Bronze Stars, plus three Purple Hearts in record short time.
- The three Purple Hearts meant an automatic ticket out of combat, that Kerry took. Some of his superiors disliked him enough that they may have gone along with the third (exaggerated) Purple Heart in order to get rid of him. Kerry’s total service in Vietnam amounted to a few months with NO serious injury.
- On his return to the U.S., Kerry made himself a media/political sensation by giving exaggerated and/or false testimony to the U.S. Congress about the conduct of U.S. forces in Vietnam. Kerry was a key force in creating the “Vietnam baby killer” myth, slandering a generation of U.S. veterans. North Vietnam torturers played tapes of Kerry’s testimony to American POW captives.
- Kerry also pointedly threw away “his” medals (they were really someone else’s; Kerry secretly kept his for future political display) in public demonstrations against the U.S.
- Reportedly, Kerry gave encouragement and information to the North Vietnam delegation when they were in delicate negotiations with the U.S.
- Kerry may have been dishonorably discharged for the above (and had the discharge upgraded later by his political influence); but we don’t know because, to this day, Kerry still has never released his military service records to the public. For the 2004 presidential campaign, Kerry released those records – to no one but a tiny handful of very-friendly reporters, who gave the rest of us sanitized accounts.
- Kerry built his political career partly around a personal story “seared, seared” into his memory, about going upriver into Cambodia while hearing President Nixon deny any U.S. presence in Cambodia. The story has been proven false. Kerry was almost certainly not sent upriver to Cambodia and, even if he somehow was, Johnson (not Nixon) was President at the time.
- When the Swift Vets and POWs for Truth rose up in 2004 to challenge Kerry’s myths about himself, he or his supporters repeatedly postured about suing for libel. But Kerry never did sue them. One likely explanation would be that Kerry couldn’t afford to sue, in that he needed to continue hiding his service records from the general public.
31 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Why are you slandering Jim Rassmann?
“The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Rassmann said, “are not just questioning Kerry’s account, they are questioning my account. I take that very personally. No one can tell me that we were not under fire. I saw it, I heard the splashes, and I was scared to death. For them to come back 35 years after the fact to tarnish not only Kerry’s record, but my veracity, is unconscionable.”
Why do you continue to slander Rassmann, a Special Forces Vet just a few days after memorial day?!?!?!?
My god.
Go after Kerry’s post war comments, he is a public figure, and you are a partisan hack. Its fine. But leave this vet and his family alone.
You owe Rassmann an apology, will you?
Comment by mike — May 29, 2014 @ 3:28 am - May 29, 2014
My brother in law served in Vietnam and he said it was extremely easy to get a purple heart. Pretty much any injury, even a scratch, medics would offer to submit you for a people heart. That being said, there are a LOT of Vietnam vets whose purple hearts mean something significant. Because a lot of men who served were more like my brother in law, who declined the offer. I really don’t think Kerry was one of those men who declined the offer.
Comment by Lee — May 29, 2014 @ 4:52 am - May 29, 2014
I served as a Captain, Third Army from 1 August 1966 to July 31, 1968 during the Viet Nam era. I have no respect for Kerry and it surprises me that many people hold this man in high esteem…
Comment by Tony — May 29, 2014 @ 8:34 am - May 29, 2014
mike – Bringing up the Rassman matter is fair, but there exists a fair answer, which I shall now give you. Show your fairness, by seriously considering it.
There is something called “the fog of war” which makes Rassman’s account accurate from his point of view, yet still wrong on the overall picture. Rassman, by his own account, had his head under water at key moments. Thus, Rassman was one eyewitness who (necessarily, innocently) gave a distorted and incomplete account. The testimony of many eyewitnesses must be stitched together, to get the real picture. Many others – now known as the Swift Vets – were there also and their accounts flesh out the full picture.
Which is the following. Five boats were moving along a river in two columns. One hit a mine. Kerry ran his boat away while the others stayed to help. Rassman was knocked off Kerry’s boat, from the suddenness of Kerry’s move. Rassman heard gunfire and kept his head under water. The gunfire was laid down by the other boats that remained, unnecessarily because there was no enemy fire. Realizing that the other boats stayed (and perhaps realizing that he could look like a coward for running), Kerry then zoomed his own boat back and actually *cut off* a boat that was about to pick up Rassman. Thus, Rassman ended up believing a wrong conclusion, that Kerry had rescued him under enemy fire. Kerry submitted a false account of what happened in a report that got him his Bronze Star and second Purple Heart.
So, Kerry fooled Rassman and acquired his eternal gratitude, but that doesn’t mean Kerry deserves it. For more information on this matter, see the witness accounts here: http://swiftvets.com/swiftvetsandpows/ – Click on the fourth documentary, “No Man Left Behind”. Actually do the clicks and think about what the witnesses are saying, please.
Oh, by the way:
If so, why would you come here? In fact I am a registered Independent (and before that, I was a Democrat for years). Your *not* dealing with the information I present or refer to is about what I’ve come to expect from you, mike. You have a chance now to prove my expectations wrong by operating at a better level.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 29, 2014 @ 9:11 am - May 29, 2014
Agree. Which makes it worse, that Kerry cheapened the process or took advantage of it.
Tony – Thank you for your service.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 29, 2014 @ 9:13 am - May 29, 2014
The projection is strong with this one.
Some facts that may infuriate you.
Comment by Ignatius — May 29, 2014 @ 10:01 am - May 29, 2014
I have a lifelong, left-liberal friend in the Army. One time I explained to him that the U.S. had actually won the Vietnam war, militarily, resulting in a peace settlement in 1973 that wound it down while preserving South Vietnam. The destruction of South Vietnam came in 1975, after a post-Watergate Congress had cut off all aid to South Vietnam, which encouraged North Vietnam to restart the war and re-invade the South.
At the time, my friend couldn’t believe it and denied what I said. But he asked around, with his many contacts in the Army. He came back to me a couple years later and said, “You were right. That is what happened.”
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 29, 2014 @ 10:08 am - May 29, 2014
Testimony by Kerry:
Nice hearsay there, but no facts.
Certainly the elegant “Winter Soldiers” and the Congressional investigating stalwarts produced documented evidence of these charges. Right?
The records have a mere 320 incidents that have been substantiated, but not beyond the “alleged” status. Most of those relate to My Lai where 347 were killed.
The scope of the Viet Nam war was vast and involved as many as 550,000 American troops. What the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese troops did to civilians and our troops during the Tet offensive and battle for Hue makes whatever may have happened at My Lai pale by comparison.
Yet Kerry was front and center in slandering our troops who were drafted to fight and survive in a hell hole where the average civilian kid offering up a Coke might be an agent of death.
To take Kerry’s view and run with it is the height of cynicism laced with bigotry. Either you believe his mythology or you wonder where the proof is and why the liberal world has never been able to do anything more than continue the smearing of the vets through Hollywood fantasy.
Kerry returned for an encore:
The “swift boating” of John Kerry was a natural, heartfelt response to a little tin soldier who has excessive gaul oozing out of his pores.
You may recall that the DemonizingRats set George Bush up as a Vietnam coward who leveraged his name to stay away from the war. (As Clinton admitted he had done.) You may recall that Dan Rather lost his career over the “false but accurate” allegations put forth in evidence which was computer generated by a zealous news organization out to get Bush.
So, what does the hero Kerry do? He rides on the prow of a boat across Boston Harbor to the Democrat Convention in Boston and took the rostrum:
That kind of chutzpah is beyond mocking. It is self mockery. It is nearly pathological.
Now Kerry is Secretary of state and he struts and postures and proclaims and has made himself the laughing stock of serious world leaders who deal with him out of respect to the country and while knowing that this little martinet is a weak shadow. Hillary was his opening act and Obama keeps announcing that he will get around to it just about any day now.
We have a foreign policy that is little more than toys in the attic.
So littlelettermike comes back to defend the great and awesome John F’n Kerry and ignore the irony in the pot and kettle remarks Kerry has lobbed at Ed Snowden.
Frankly, if Kerry had been Daniel Ellsberg, he would be far more respected today than he is for being John F’n Kerry. Winter Soldier my a$$. He is a sometimes, sunshine patriot at best.
Comment by heliotrope — May 29, 2014 @ 10:50 am - May 29, 2014
That’s hilarious. Snowden probably cares more about this country than Kerry ever has.
I’m not saying that Snowden is impeccable, mind you. If/when he gets back to the States, he has some serious explaining to do, like why he hooked up with Julian Assange’s people, why he went to China, and why the steady leaking that he certainly knows could be aiding enemies of the state. I don’t think the man should be executed for his actions, but something like a few years of house arrest under heavy surveillance and curtailed internet access.
Comment by Sean L — May 29, 2014 @ 4:27 pm - May 29, 2014
Sean – I’m on the fence about Snowden. I distrust where our government has gotten to over the last 6-8 years, becoming ever larger, doing ever more surveillance on ordinary citizens – as well as allies – and claiming ever more privilege to surveil, detain or even execute people, without warrants. I don’t think it’s healthy. A lot of the post-9/11 or Patriot Act stuff was supposed to be temporary, used only on real terrorists, etc. I’m sure Snowden has damaged our security, but on the whole, I would rather know about his revelations “than not”. And I suspect that if he hadn’t fled the country, we wouldn’t know his name because he would have been buried (legally/metaphorically, if not literally). So I hesitate to blame the guy, hesitate more than I might have in (say) 2006.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 29, 2014 @ 4:42 pm - May 29, 2014
“Rassman and acquired his eternal gratitude, but that doesn’t mean Kerry deserves it. For more information on this matter, see the witness accounts here”
Then everyone else on Kerrys boat is also a liar.
Look. Its clear that the Swift Boaters are driven by hate of Kerry because of what he did after he left the war. -some have admitted this.
The point is everyone on Kerrys boat backs him. The Special Forces solider who Kerry saved backs him. Only folks with a partisan agenda do not back him.
Furthermore are you really saying a special forces solider doesn’t know what gunfire sounds like because he was underwater the whole time?!?!?!?
Come on. Thats implausible….even for libertarian utopist like you.
Comment by mike — May 29, 2014 @ 5:44 pm - May 29, 2014
Helio
fine. Go after Kerry post war record all you want. I dont care.
The fact is he fought for this country. When others hid in the National Guard, got exceptions and burned their draft cards, he manned up and put his life on the line.
If you were not so blinded by Left/Right hatred you should be able to at least acknowledge that and give him your thanks for that portion of his life.
Comment by mike — May 29, 2014 @ 5:57 pm - May 29, 2014
partisan hack
With my apologies. I was referring to the swift boaters and their own admitted statements for being anti Kerry. Not you. Poor editing
I know well that you are a utopian who lives in the libertarian fantasy land
Comment by mike — May 29, 2014 @ 6:04 pm - May 29, 2014
It’s rich that you call Kerry a traitor.
You and your fellow bloggers and commentors hate this country and what it stands for.
Coupled with idiotic ideas of international political economics routinely post wet dreams over the demise of US hegemony.
Worst of all you lot are not only traitors but cowards.
You lot believe America and it’s government is evil. You believe that Russia is superior to the US culturally and economically. Yet you won’t leave this country. I love my country and my government. I want it bigger to keep people like you in check. On the other hand you have no love for the US or it’s government and despite the lack of any force keeping you from emigrating, you choose not to move to your Christian Conservative paradise of Russia or your libertarian paradise of Somolia. Why don’t you leave you American haters and allow those of us who believe the US is the greatest country in history, who believe the US government is the greatest government on Earth and those who believe western culture is superior to all other cultures alone to fix this country?
We all win. You lot get to live in a country with out a functioning government and we don’t have to deal with you traitors messing this up any more.
Comment by James Edward — May 29, 2014 @ 9:01 pm - May 29, 2014
If Snowden is a traitor than the enemy of the regime is the productive taxpayer. Snowden has no explaining to do. Everything Snowden laid out about the statist regime was even worse than what tin foil hat wearers thought. Before Snowden, if I said the govt was listening to my phone calls ever since I talked to Angela Merkel people would have thought I was crazy.
Snowden took an oath to defend against enemies foreign & DOMESTIC. Its unlikely that there was anyone between him and the President that followed that oath. I myself reported Health Care Fraud not when I found out about it, but days before I moved over 800 miles away, with positive references already gained. All of the former healthcare workers convicted of fraud would consider me a traitor, but because I explained to the inspector generals office how to find fraud by looking over different records they didn’t even know it was me.
And if you think that lame stream US media gaye an accurate account of what Snowden reveled then I have an Eiffel tower to sell you.
Comment by Steve — May 29, 2014 @ 9:53 pm - May 29, 2014
I see you’ve gotten away from your handlers again, you sideshow freak.
What’s your game plan? Is it to post as many disjointed, sociopathic rants before the big net is thrown over you, and you’re once again donning that nifty white sleeveless top coat?
You need to be placed in the nearest “striped sunlight room”, tranq’ed out, and secured with four point restraints.
And if you’re that ‘hot’ to have all of “us traitors” leave, all you have to do is have the stones to put us on the next plane out of here.
But you wouldn’t ever try that, because you know that if you did you’d wind up on the other side of that piss soaked patch of grass I told you about.
So be careful what you wish for…
Comment by JMan1961 — May 29, 2014 @ 10:18 pm - May 29, 2014
Jman1961
You hate this country. You hate this government. You hate non conservative Christians. Why don’t you leave?
Comment by James Edward — May 29, 2014 @ 11:32 pm - May 29, 2014
Here’s a transcript where Rassman and Larry Thurlow were interviewed together: http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=16262#16262
One thing that’s interesting is that Thurlow casts no aspersions on Rassman’s character. Thurlow’s line of discussion is, this is what I remember / this is what I know to be true. But Rassman…tries to cast several aspersions on Thurlow’s character. Rassman’s line of discussion is **exactly as if he was coached** by the Kerry campaign: namely Thurlow is dishonest, Thurlow is partisan (which he wasn’t: Thurlow was an independent / non-partisan), Thurlow deceives, Thurlow should have said something 35 years ago (back when Thurlow *couldn’t* have known anything about Kerry’s false after-action report), etc.
I recognize mike’s tactic at #1 (rushing to call me a partisan, or a utopian or whatever in mike’s updated version) in Rassman’s tactics in that interview. It seems to be a standard tactic of lefties when they’re stuck playing defense: Don’t like the message, but can’t really destroy the message, so try to destroy the messenger.
I also notice that Thurlow’s account – and demeanor – carry a greater logic and internal consistency, in addition to Thurlow’s account enjoying the support of dozens of other eyewitnesses of the incident.
But I’m still not saying that Rassman lied. Rassman could simply have been stuck in the famously-defensive “denial” stage of being faced with a new truth – in this case, the new (to Rassman) truth that John F. Kerry was a liar and fabulist who had long played Rassman for a fool.
What I’m noticing here, in short, is Rassman’s remarkable readiness to slander the Swift Boat Vets. Rassman was far more ready to attack/slander Thurlow (in that interview at least), than Thurlow was to attack/slander Rassman. Interesting.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 29, 2014 @ 11:36 pm - May 29, 2014
Straw man alert! mike tries to plant the suggestion that I’ve called Rassman a liar, when in fact I have gone out of my way NOT to.
(1) No, not everyone. (2) And what about the other people, on the other boats who took part in the same incident that day? They outnumber the (few) Kerry backers several times. A reasonable court of law would go with the eyewitnesses who outnumber by 4 or 5 to 1, in the end.
No, I do not think that, nor did I anywhere imply that.
What I think is that Rassman *did* know the sound of gunfire, but, literally having his head underwater for most of the time, did not grasp who was doing the firing and made assumptions. (Obviously it was so…because if Rassman hadn’t felt/assumed that it was enemy fire then he wouldn’t have kept his head carefully under water to begin with; and because even the guys that day who were *above* water needed a solid minute or so themselves, to grasp that they were the only ones firing.)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 29, 2014 @ 11:55 pm - May 29, 2014
Question for you mike: Do you concede or deny that Kerry lied to Congress about them? Do you concede or deny that Kerry strove to put a destructive, false/undeserved stereotype onto a generation of American veterans?
Your answer will be interesting because, going by the facts, only one answer is possible (namely, that Kerry did).
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 30, 2014 @ 12:09 am - May 30, 2014
What this country stands for historically – and, what I love – is human freedom, understood as individual initiative & rights to life, liberty and property under a limited government that practices Rule of Law. (i.e. impartiality; as distinct from Rule of Men, i.e., rule of politicians, bureaucrats and the people who have paid-for ‘pull’ or ‘access’ to same)
And what I hate, James Edward, are the modern-day-fascist “if you don’t support this administration you’re a racist traitor!!!1!eleventy!” types who, in the last several years, have “fundamentally transformed America” (recognize the phrase?) into a disgusting kind of crypto-dictatorship.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 30, 2014 @ 12:15 am - May 30, 2014
That’s an interesting comment for several reasons. First, I have yet to make any such post. What I have posted is neutral/descriptive commentary on certain aspects of the demise of US hegemony under Obama, that I feel aren’t noticed enough in U.S. media.
In comments to those posts, I’m sometimes accused of the opposite of a “wet dream”, namely, undue fear over the demise of US hegemony. This marks the first time that I’ve been accused of enjoying it. But both accusations are false. I neither fear the demise of US hegemony, nor enjoy the prospect. I merely describe.
Why would someone have an emotional, negative reaction to my describing the demise of US hegemony? What comes to mind first is that they probably just don’t want to deal with the information. (Again going back to what is called “denial”.)
Second, it’s interesting because James Edward would appear to admit the existence of US hegemony and even view it as something desirable or valuable. But I thought lefties were against American imperialism (synonym for hegemony).
In one of the threads, V the K said of leftists’ strange reactions:
I could say something similar here. As a left-leaner who denounces “wet dreams” over the demise of US hegemony, James Edward would seem to hold two contradictory ideas simultaneously.
1. American hegemony is bad and must be ended.
2. American hegemony is good and only a “traitor” (his word) would fail to defend and affirm it.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 30, 2014 @ 12:46 am - May 30, 2014
Nope.
I hate you, and every POS like you.
True.
I also hate you, and every POS like you.
Whether or not a person can actually be a non conservative Christian is a debatable point.
What’s not debatable is that I hate you, and every POS like you.
I’ll be here long after you’re gone…beneath that piss soaked patch of grass that has your name on it.
Get back on those meds. Your crazy is showing.
Comment by JMan1961 — May 30, 2014 @ 9:41 am - May 30, 2014
While I understand you enjoy killing gay people and indeed non-conservatives. There are at least millions of people who fit in that category.
It’s going to take a lot of time killing all those people, not to mention the gallons of water you would need to drink to satisfy your homophobia and Anti-Americanism.
Are you sure it wouldn’t be easier to just leave?
Comment by James Edward — May 30, 2014 @ 12:22 pm - May 30, 2014
But the funny part here is that the coward James Edward won’t condemn calling for the deaths of gay people and Christians.
So what we have here is simple: James Edward wants to be able to murder people with impunity while condemning others for murder.
That is classic. The fascist James Edward — and the child is a fascist — thinks his skin color and his sexual orientation exempt him from having to follow the laws he imposes on others. Just like the black child Obama, James Edward believes that he is of the “chosen race” and that all others are untermenschen, suitable only to obey or be killed.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 30, 2014 @ 2:34 pm - May 30, 2014
@ ND30: Don’t dignify him with a response. James and all other internet creatures of his ilk live to stir up crap and love it when people respond to him. He can’t be this stupid. Just ignore him.
Comment by Sean L — May 30, 2014 @ 2:55 pm - May 30, 2014
I think it’s wonderful – in a sad/perverse way; that is, wonderfully *illustrative* – that leftists have moved beyond calling lovers of traditional American liberty “racists”, into calling us “traitors” outright.
I always suspected they would, sooner or later. Because it’s what National(ist) Socialists would do.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 30, 2014 @ 4:42 pm - May 30, 2014
#19. To my knowledge all members of kerrys boat and the special forces solider whose life was saved by Kerry back his account. So for your version of events to be true all of those veterans are lying. His quote in comment #1 directly contradicts your fantasy explanation.
Read his quote again in #1 and think about it for a bit instead of reading the long winded stories by partisans.
Its much more plausible that the other boats were not directly next to kerrys boat and one or two of the enemy were firing or sniping.
Comment by mike — May 30, 2014 @ 8:10 pm - May 30, 2014
#20
I dont know. I know that is things that some veteran groups say and they may have a point. But I dont know enough to say who I think is right.
But I do think everything Kerry has done or said is fair game to go after, so…rip away.
Just leave his crew alone. You dont need to slander veterans who have chosen to live outside of the public eye.
Comment by mike — May 30, 2014 @ 8:18 pm - May 30, 2014
Yet John Kerry chose to maliciously slander hundreds of thousands of Vietnam veterans by calling them all murderers and baby- killers.
It is amusing that mike screams about slandering veterans, yet endorses and supports John Kerry and the Barack Obama Party for doing exactly that.
This is the “empathy” of which mike’s fellow conservative-hater James Edward speaks — the idea that conservatives should police our own behavior while giving liberals like John Kerry and Barack Obama to freely slander others for political gain.
This is an attempt to exploit empathy, and it is characteristic of sociopathic behavior — similar to that displayed by the Santa Barbara shooter.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 30, 2014 @ 8:40 pm - May 30, 2014
Let us not forget…
Kerry admitted he’s a war criminal.
on TV
MR. KERRY: Well, I have often talked about this subject. I personally didn’t see personal atrocities in the sense that I saw somebody cut a head off or something like that. However, I did take part in free fire zones and I did take part in harassment interdiction fire. I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground. And all of these, I find out later on, these acts are contrary to the Hague and Geneva Conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the applications of the Nuremberg principles, is in fact guilty.
Oh mikey, boy… the facts the facts are calling.
I’m sure you can provide links to ‘all’ the people on his boat supporting him. I understand facts are hostile to you, but please, amuse me and try.
Comment by The_Livewire — June 2, 2014 @ 3:47 pm - June 2, 2014