Which Lies Started the Swift Boat Controversy? by Jan Ireland

Which Lies Started the Swift Boat Controversy?

By Jan Ireland

September 10, 2004

Kerry supporters have strained credulity, not to mention the First Amendment, in the entire last year with unrelenting attacks on President George Bush, portraying him as puppet, deserter, murderer, and even Hitler. Michael Moore's discredited movie continues its run, despite more than 50 documented lies. Democrat books linking liar to George Bush litter the shelves.

While Kerry barely contains his glee at this mountain of false attacks on George Bush, his long face cries foul at the "lies" of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

But which lies, exactly, started the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth controversy about John Kerry?

Kerry has used millions of dollars, legal threats, FEC complaints, and coercion to keep Americans from reading Unfit for Command. He accuses George Bush of bankrolling and directing the Swift Vets, creating them for this election cycle, and demands that Bush "stop" the Veterans. He is trying to trap George Bush into breaking the law.

IRS rules governing 527s clearly state that a candidate cannot control or direct a 527. (www.irs.gov ) Kerry, Janus-like, says one thing and means another. But his accordion slide spine is comfortable with lies and dirty tricks. Senator, were you lying then, or are you lying now?

John O'Neill repeatedly tried to challenge Kerry's lies about the military back in 1971. Denied time to rebut Kerry at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he persisted. Kerry agreed only to the friendly territory of The Dick Cavett Show.

Leadership of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War was Kerry's down payment for a future grasp at the presidency. He cultivated a supremely liberal voting record, staking out both sides of every issue for future camouflage. He obsequiously courted the United Nations, accepted copious special interest money, and favored tax hikes - a perfect Democrat candidate.

Then disaster struck. 9/11 happened. The country wanted a strong, military minded leader to fight the war on terrorism. Bush rallied the nation, and was a fighter pilot.

Kerry was out - unless he could discredit George Bush and make himself a war hero.

How does a man who testified that his comrades "…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 a fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside …" pretend to be a war hero?

Brazenly. Sailing into Boston Harbor, smartly saluting and "reporting for duty!" Making barely four months in Vietnam the centerpiece of his qualifications to become President.

And when he decided to do those things, he re-angered the military men he had maligned 30 years ago.

O'Neill says in Unfit for command, "His fellow veterans would have preferred to … remain silent. But John Kerry's character and the Swiftees' duty to the American people, prevent that."

Americans deserve to know that Kerry's picture hangs in the War Remnants Museum in Vietnam. Former General Secretary of the Communist Party Du Muoi is also in the picture that honors Kerry's "heroic" contributions to the North Vietnamese victory. And that picture was taken, not in the 60's or 70's when Kerry was a young antiwar protestor, but in 1993, when Kerry was a US Senator.

America won every major victory in Vietnam, but lost Kerry's war at home. Kerry's speech was made while America still had POWs in Vietnam. It was played over and over to try to break our valiant men.

It was Kerry's own lies that started the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth controversy. Tell me, how could you ask a country to elect a Kerry by mistake?