Jump to content

Kerry - Treason?


Guest $iLk
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm sure that some of you are no doubt aware of Kerry's participation in a Vietnam Veterans Against the War meeting in 1971 in which a plot to assassinate United States senators who were pro-war was discussed.

It is true that John Kerry resigned from the group some time after this meeting. But then why would John Kerry lie saying that he had resigned months before this meeting would have taken place, and that there was no way he was even in the city where it was held at the time.

Now that the F.B.I. has released documentation, and the VVATW has released documentation which proves conclusively that Kerry was indeed at this meeting, and Kerry's campaign has released some wishy washy statement about Kerry "not having any recollection" (Thanks Slick Willy) of this meeting.

He sure as Hell seemed to have recollection of never being there and resigning months before it etc., etc. until caught in a lie.

Now then, the legal definition of treason:

quote:

Treason. A breach of allegiance to one's government, usually committed through levying war against such government or by giving aid or comfort to the enemy. The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance; or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power. Treason consists of two elements: adherence to the enemy, and rendering him aid and comfort. Cramer v. U. S., U.S.N.Y., 325 U.S. l, 65 S.Ct. 918, 9327 89 L.Ed. 1441. See 18 U.S.C.A. § 2381. A person can be convicted of treason only on the testimony of two witnesses, or confession in open court. Art. III, Sec. 3, U.S. Constitution.


John Kerry knew about an assassination plot, which although it was not put into action - it could have been. He said nothing about it. That makes him an accomplice - and I damn well guarantee that if this was brought up about Bush's past, the left would be screaming bloody murder.

What are your thoughts on this? And if you want to defend Kerry - kindly explain why he'd lie, and why exactly he shouldn't be tried and removed from his Senatorial position...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think what is important is finding out why he lied about it, and exactly his level of participation. The story is relatively new, and hasn't been picked up on much - but if he was there and participated and knowingly hid it, at the very least he should be impeached from the senate, and his "I fought in Vietnam" angle for the presidency dropped - while he is publicly tarred and feathered.

At worst it is treason so he should be dealt with as a matter of law. The DNC should drop him if it's true and register someone else before it's too late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Treason? Yeah right. Noone took it seriously at the convention. He was disgusted enough with it at that point, to resign, so how WAS he supposed to know the people who brought it up would do it a year later anyways? Simple. He couldent have known. Kerry was NOT involved with the actual conspiracy!

Also: This would be AT MOST conspiracy, as they were arrested for plotting an assault, not actually attacking. Get your facts straight, $ilk.

This is a perfect example of how low the right-wingers will go in an attempt to discredit Kerry.

Also: about lying? Don't even go there. If you had a friend who had joked about doing something, gives no indication of doing it, then does it anyways, you'd want to distance yourself from them too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Kartoffel:

Treason? Yeah
. Noone took it seriously at the convention. He was disgusted enough with it at that point, to resign, so how WAS he supposed to know the people who brought it up would do it a year later anyways? Simple. He couldent have known. Kerry was NOT involved with the actual conspiracy!

This is a perfect example of how low the right-wingers will go in an attempt to discredit Kerry


You mean like the same way the Left-wing is trying to pin the whole blame of 9/11 on Bush?

OOO OOO he knew it would happen but didn't do anything about it!

The same standards can be applied to Kerry. He was at that meeting and knew what was being planned and did nothing. What because he's a democrat he should not be held to same standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clinton warned Bush of Al Qaeda, but Bush was too busy pushing another war in Iraq, regardless of the evidence pointing to Afghanistan - and not Iraq.

Nobody was taking the talk of assasinating people very seriously. It would, perhaps, be like a friend of yours joking about assasinating someone he REALLY hates. You know he hates the aforementioned person, but he is not being very serious about it, and is not a paticularly violent person.

And take a look at this for a fairly comprehensive list of just what Bush has done wrong.

[ 03-24-2004, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: Kartoffel ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's do a little test... I know you wouldn't actually do it, but go to a town meeting or something and try to bring up assassination of members of congress and see if John Ashcroft doesn't have electrodes run to your manhood by sundown.

Don't try to paint Bush as whatever you like to in an attempt to avoid simple facts.

Fact 1: Kerry was present at a meeting where the assassination of members of congress was discussed.

Fact 2: Kerry lied and said he had resigned months before this meeting - but the FBI and members of the group all swear he was there.

If it is AT MOST 'conspiracy' you also forget that it was during time of war, and he was conspiring to aid the North Vietnamese by assassinating members of congress who were pro-war - that's considered treason by legal definition = whether or not he actually carried through or took it seriously.

And if he felt it wasn't a serious matter - then why lie about it?

And forget this "right winger" crap - this is a serious allegation - and if it is true it is my right as an American citizen to know who in the hell has a chance of leading this country. If Bush had done the same thing I would be just as worked up over it - because whatever your reasoning treason during time of war should = firing squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your test is completely irrelevent to the discussion at hand. Though I could do it, in a joking manner, although those at the meeting would certainly look at me like I'm crazy, and possibly throw me out, I would almost certainly not be charged with anything.

Fact 1: (with ommitted parts included) He was at a meeting where the subject of assasination was brought up, but not taken seriously.

Nobody said "We're going to do it" in a serious tone.

Perhaps Kerry did not want to associate with people who came up with ideas like that. Perhaps something else. The point remains - He had no reason to believe that it would actually be done.

And you still cry treason...

quote:

The offense of attempting by
overt
acts to overthrow the government of the state

So how was a private meeting overt? It wasnt. If they had attacked, it would be. But they did not attack.

For reference, the definition of overt.

YOU need to stop trying to distort facts to paint Kerry as whatever you want.

So he lied... While certainly not something to be proud of, it's a fact of life that politicians will lie. Clinton lied. Bush has lied. People on both sides have lied.

If there had been any grain of truth to Kerry committing treason, then the GOP would have been all over it years ago, when he was getting started in the Senate.

Also note: Those who were responsible, were tried and acquitted. So claiming Kerry is somehow still responsible, is ridiculous.

[ 03-25-2004, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: Kartoffel ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kerry should be held accountable for lying. I do have to admit that neither you nor I know what went on at this meeting exactly. You seem certain that it was little more than a joke, when we only have the word of the guy who made the plot to go on.

But regardless of what the truth is, Kerry should be held accountable for this direct lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

But regardless of what the truth is, Kerry should be held accountable for this direct lie.

And bush, powel, and ashcroft shouldnt be held accountable for BLATANT LIES?(Lies which, In fact have been responsible for THOUSANDS of deaths; Many of which were INNOCENT human beings)

Really!!

You can NOT come to logical conclusions based on partisen PROPAGANDA. Logical reason, can only be acheived through OVERALL knowledge, concerning the WHOLE of any argument.!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Grasping at straws are we ?

Pull the right one and the scarecrow comes apart at the seams?

Our political system has become laughable.

I wouldn't vote for either candidate if they promised me the moon.

If you do NOT vote, YOU give unequivical RIGHT, for another, to decide the destiny for you and your children's future.

Even if you feel neither candidate is 100% right, the swing of the "check and balance" extremes, helps our country to follow a path more centered toward the middle.

Without this SWING, from LEFT to RIGHT, and Back; our country would be consumed by only one EXTREEM form of government.

THIS, I am quite sure, ALL of you would find quite disagreeable real fast...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by street:

quote:

But regardless of what the truth is, Kerry should be held accountable for this direct lie.

And bush, powel, and ashcroft shouldnt be held accountable for BLATANT LIES?(Lies which, In fact have been responsible for THOUSANDS of deaths; Many of which were INNOCENT human beings)

Really!!

You can NOT come to logical conclusions based on partisen PROPAGANDA. Logical reason, can only be acheived through OVERALL knowledge, concerning the WHOLE of any argument.!!


Lies? Name ONE lie, I want to see these socalled lies you are talking about.

Please specify these lies for us..... and prove that they are not only factual, but that the Bush administration, with malice and on purpose, lied about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Lies? Name ONE lie, I want to see these socalled lies you are talking about.

Please specify these lies for us..... and prove that they are not only factual, but that the Bush administration, with malice and on purpose, lied about it.

You know which lies, to which I am referring; as would anyone who reads this post. To require, I repeat them is a slam to everyone's intellect; however, I will give you the GENERAL Idea concerning, my references:

IRAQ having Nuclear WMD, IRAQ purchase of MISSLE CASEINGS..IRAQ HAVING BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS, IRAQ TIED TO ALQUEDA.

And as far as PROOF, All anyone needs to do, is review the statements and speaches throughout the last three years and the LIES are EVIDENT AND BLATANT.

come on...REVIEW PRE-WAR RHETORIC, and compare: case, by case, to the FACTS. And ANY intelligent person, would see the LIES purpose, was INTINTION to INCITE Americans, into an UNPRECIDENTED action: to INVADE, a country which (NO MATTER HOW BAD THE political structure was DEPICTED),was no worse, or more dangerous than HUNDREDS of other countries throughout the world.

One who requires PROOF, which HAS BEEN publicly displayed, would not ACCEPT any statement which counters a PRE-CONCIEVED absence of PROOF.

To DENY the PROOF to exist, at this point; is self induced blindness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see, so if Clinton says it, which he did, it's NOT a lie, but if Bush says it and then acts upon that same intelligence that Clinton had, then Bush is lying. Interesting.

Very fascinating......

Oh, and the intelligence service which gave us the information saying that an Iraqi intelligence officer met with an agent of Al Quaeda weeks before 911, STANDS upon that claim. The meeting occurred. Also the fact that Saddam has ties to terrorism is beyond dispute. You think this war on terror is JUST against Al Quaeda?

You thought wrong, there are hundreds of other groups that we are fighting as well. Al Quaeda is by far the largest, or WAS the largest, but is not and was not the only one.

The links that Saddam had to other various terrorist organizations are blatant, and only if you are blinded by partisan propaganda could you say otherwise. Those organizations are now cut off from their major funding because Saddam is gone.

Nuclear weapons in Iraq, no doubt in my mind that Saddam was trying if not succeeding in creating those weapons. Where are they? they may be still in the country, but because Saddam had so much lead time, I believe, as do others, and not just in the intelligence community, that they were smuggled out of the country through Syria. Along with other WMD's, gas being the most prevalent.

Those weapons exist, it is now a matter of finding them.

And again, this is NOT a country the size of Rhode Island, this is a country the size of California. You go try and find WMD's in that square mileage, if it takes you less then a year, I'd call you lucky.

Lies, NO, not lies, bad intelligence, possibly.

The weapons did and probably still do exist, look at the paperwork from the gulfwar, to see what and how much of these weapons Saddam had.

And then compare that to what was supposedly destroyed. The discrepancy is astounding. but no, those can't exist. Geez, what a bunch of rhetoric, no substance at all, because you just ignore any facts that might disagree with you.

[ 03-26-2004, 06:32 PM: Message edited by: Jaguar ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys will do and say ANYTHING to support a man who is unworthy of your well meaning but misguided loyalty. To attempt to paint a decorated war hero who put his life on the line for your and my sorry asses as a traitor while Bush played army men is beneath contempt. Anyone who has the balls to say something is rotten in the Bush admin. is immediately attacked and branded a "liberal lover" Like Clark is saying all those things cause he has a buddy who works for Kerry. Horseshit. Two prominent conservative members of Bushes admin. speak out and suddenly are traitors? Gee you guys should do better research before you appoint cabinet members and retain security advisors. I mean he worked under Bush I and Reagan and just now he's showing his true colors? Arent any of you worried that SOME of what Clark is saying might be true?

As far as Kerry is concerned, I guess he gets no free pass for associating with a few loonies in his youth after being shot at constantly for long periods of time. I wish the GOP would spend more time finding those WMD's and Bin Laden than pursuing witch hunts on any one who doesnt see the world the same convoluted way they (and apparently you) do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets take a break on the Clinton thing too. I mean everytime we point the appearance of inconsistency in what this admin. says you drag ole Bill out again. It reminds me of when I talk to my kid about wetting her pants and she tells me about a kid in daycare who crapped in his.

Oh yeah Street, Wolfie and Kartoffel hang in there. We may not agree on everything but someone has to point out the emperor has no clothes and i'm with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Race Bannon IV:

You guys will do and say ANYTHING to support a man who is unworthy of your well meaning but misguided loyalty.

My point through my arguments has been that they are all bass turds. None of them deserve our loyalty or vote. But we keep following the pack by loyalty to the parties involved. And yes this includes Kerry. He is no better than the rest. It's whatever the campaign wants to spin on the media is all we see. Does the media do good by us. No I say not cause they are biased towards a certain party. The media has always been like that. If they did what they are suppose to do, none of the candidates that the party pushes would have ever become where they are and maybe the parties would think twice about who they select for primaries and finaly the american public would get a person they deserve and one that would do right by this country and the world. The only thing I see for the future of this country is the way of Rome. Is there a solution? Maybe. The only solution I see to this ever growing problem is the whole country not vote. Call it a voters strike if you will. Maybe that would send a message to washington "Stop Fudging with us". Then and only then will they stop thinking about us as cash cows and pawns in their little power game. Okay my rant is over have a swing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would but I cant find anything to disagree with. I was a John Edwards supporter because he at least tried to discuss issues and inject optimism into the campaign.

I've brought this point up before, we have a leadership vacuum. Our society seems incapable of inducing the women and men who DO have the capacity to lead to put up with the circus national politics have become. Elections are bought and sold to the highest bidder and the feeding frenzy of the 24 hour news beast dissuades any sensible person for running for office.

A few thoughts:

It is too hard to vote in this country. More people would vote if everyone over 18 with a valid drivers liscence could use that to vote in any election.

Each candidate should have an identical spending cap for campagning and political ads should be free.

We need a REAL independent political party. A legitimate third party made up of people who feel no allegiance to the Dems or GOP.

If we can keep the money in our bank accounts relatively safe, why cant we figure a way for Americans to vote electronically at home or the polling place?

Schools and Universities need to make leadership training mandatory. We are raising a country of consumeristic clones unwilling or unable to think or act for themselves. Most beleive anything if said loudly and long enough.

Lastly opposition research should be outlawed unless it deals with political and or business history. Is it really important to know that Clinton inhaled and Bush was a drunk driver in thier impetuous youth? Anyone who has made such mistakes and were able to turn it around is stronger for it but most with any skelton in thier closet shy away from running for public office. We can do better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by street:

if you do NOT vote, YOU give unequivOcal RIGHT, for another, to decide the destiny for you and your children's future.

Even if you feel neither candidate is 100% right, the swing of the "check and balance" extremes, helps our country to follow a path more centered toward the middle.

Without this SWING, from LEFT to RIGHT, and Back; our country would be consumed by only one EXTREEM form of government.

THIS, I am quite sure, ALL of you would find quite disagreeable real fast...


I see it this way...

My children are grown and make their own decisions now.

Our government has already been consumed by extremists. People with extreme wealth and a huge vested interest in what the government does or doesn't do. They sow the seeds of chaos to hide themselves from scrutiny and retribution.

Now honestly, tell me with 100% proof that one vote would make a difference.You can't and it won't. Our political leadership, and I use that term very very loosely, Is no longer elected by the people. They are placed in the seats of government to carry out the will of a select few.

The select few I speak of are nothing more than elitist drug smuggling, racist thieves who dictate how this country is run by using their wealth as leverage.

They have, been in control for over a century, for the sole purpose of tightening their grip on the planet's resources.

Think about it....

If you wanted to control this planet, how would you do it?

That's correct boys and girls, you take control of every natural resource.

Right now their master plan is close to completion.

Welcome to the New World Order boys and girls.

Now be a good little slave/sheeple and get to work. I hope they haven't targeted you for their little Eugenics project.

Uh Oh! I have a problem. I can't work anymore.

Looks like I'll be shuffled off to the Euthanasia facility. Hmmm...Wolferz flavored Soylent Green, or oil for your crankcase.

IT'S MADE FROM PEOPLE!!!"

So you see, a third party would not make a dent in what these people have going and they would do anything and everything to undermine any attempt by the people to reclaim the government.

Open your eyes folks. Take a closer look at what's going on in the world. It's downright frightening.The Beast has all the tools and the advantage. It's going to be comply or die.

[ 03-27-2004, 09:35 AM: Message edited by: Wolferz ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you guys this niave ?

Kerry was only in Vietnam for FOUR months. He was a officer on a patrol boat on a river. That was his only assignment and a commanding officer

According to him he was shot and got a purple heart, he got the silver star for saving someone on another boat.

All this information is availible on public records. So it really is interesting to me how some of you are saying he's been there longer

Kerry also PROTESTED the war when he returned, it is a traitorous act if you protest a war while in the military or out, in other words you're against you're government

Answer me this question

If I was to protest a war and plot behind someone's back to kill someone, I would be branded a traitor and put infront of a firing squad

Kerry did the same thing and ploted behind someones back and all he get's a slap on the wrist ? BULLCRUDE!

In my eyes, and forever in my eyes, he'll always be a traitor he is not worthy of being president and I do not support him, or any other liberal freaks, liberal's have done NOTHING for this country to warrent any respect from me or my family, all they've accomplished is infiltrating our school system and bringing down our educational level, why do you think the US isn't even RANKED in the educational area of the world? Because of the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Kartoffel:

It's a fact of life that politicians will lie. Clinton lied. Bush has lied. People on
both
sides have lied.

Clinton admitted to a lie, Kerry was obviously caught in a lie, exactly what was it that Bush lied about?

Your whole "Conspiracy to attack Iraq" deal? That may be debated but it's not a fact, just because someone writes some words in a book that have not been coroborated by any witnesses, doesn't mean that it's a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...