No, I’m not finished with that TRAITOR.
Well, THIS makes me proud…as I can claim Pascagoula, MS as a hometown of sorts (I went to high school there, and Senator Lott–a friend of the family, but I don’t know him personally–hails from there as well):
While John Kerry is running around claiming President George Bush and our troops overseas failed the American people by not guarding an explosives dump without explosives in it, documents have been uncovered at Texas Tech University that show Kerry was following Vietnam War protest guidelines from North Vietnamese communists in the early 1970s.
“Wait! Why am I not seeing any of this in the national news media, Mr. Gaylon?” you might be asking. “This cannot be true. Our Democrat candidate for president surely wasn’t on the side of the communists and carrying out their requests when he got home from valiantly fighting for his country and winning all those medals, was he?”
Yes, he was.
The documents — which actually LOOK like they came from the 1970s and not from a Microsoft Word program — were found at the Vietnam Center at Texas Tech University in Lubbock and reproduced from captured communist records. These documents have been PROVEN 100 percent authentic BEFORE their release, unlike those 60 Minutes National Guard documents that CBS refuses to investigate. They show that Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, the Viet Cong provisional governor of South Vietnam at the Paris Peace Talks, delivered a plan from Le Duc Tho — Ho Chi Minh’s second in command — for American anti-war activities that anti-war protesters followed to the letter.
These documents are available at www.worldnetdaily.com or www.wintersoldier.com and show anti-war protesters not only received approval from the communists in North Vietnam, but also their direction. One of the documents states, “The spontaneous antiwar movements in the U.S. have received assistance and guidance from the friendly (i.e. communist Vietnamese) delegations at the Paris Peace Talks.”
Another article at www.nysun.com/article/3756 also reflects on the North Vietnamese anti-war coordination with protest groups.
By the way, Madame Binh subsequently became the Minister of Information for the People’s Republic of Vietnam after Saigon fell. You know what “Minister of Information” means in communist countries, right?
Of these organizations, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War and the communist organizations Peoples Committee for Peace and Justice and National Peace Action Committee were represented at the talks. Some representatives of these groups had their airfare covered by the United States Communist Party.
Shortly after Kerry returned from the talks he delivered Madame Binh’s peace proposal through a press conference on July 22, 1971. He did so with veterans’ families around him, a tactic that was suggested by the communists. However, he said he only attended the peace talks because he was on his honeymoon in Paris.
There are two problems, Hanoi John met twice, and possibly thrice, with communist officials in Paris. Also, his honeymoon was spent at the Jamaica home of the Pershing family with then (other) heiress wife, Julia Thorne, in 1970. I suppose Paris was a second honeymoon.
Kerry had also met illegally with Binh in 1970 while he was still a Naval officer on inactive reserve status, and in fact, all his meetings were under the six-year window of the term of his enlistment. This precludes him from even running for elective office, much less president, but nobody is mentioning it for some reason. Amendment 14, Section 3 states: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-president, having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
Other documents show the Hanoi plan for war protests, which was basically accepted and carried out by PCPJ, NPAC and VVAW and other protest groups, which eventually forced a vastly superior military force to capitulate to a sniveling gang of thugs because of propaganda and lies.
It was John Kerry’s finest hour.
Full article HERE.
More HERE, from ChronWatch:
Next week the American people may do something they have never done before: they may elect as president of the United States of America a man who has committed treason against the United States of America.
The Constitution of the United States of America defines treason as follows:
”Section 3. 1. Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”
U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 3.
Let’s look at some facts.
1. The Cover Up of Military Records …(see article)
2. Kerry’s 1971 Direct Ties to North Vietnam … (see article)
3. The Crime of Private Diplomacy … (see article)
4. The Discharge Mysteries … (see article)
5. The First Amendment Breach … (see article)
The Democratic Party cannot afford to elect this man, not if the Democratic Party wants to remain a credible, respected, and cohesive force in American life and politics. Not if it wants to survive this election, or a Kerry presidency.
The euphoria of the election will quickly fade in the litigious aftermath of the voting discrepancies, real and imaginary, and then the lawsuits contesting John Kerry’s eligibility to be president at all will come. This will begin one of the most heated and contentious legal and political battles in American history. And the blood will be on the hands of the Democratic Party which has nominated and elected a man who appears to have committed treason, to have given aid and comfort to any enemy of the United States in a time of war, to the presidency.
And if Kerry is removed from office, then the Presidency will fall on the shoulders of John Edwards, a one-term senator from South Carolina who would not be re-elected to the Senate if he ran again, a trial lawyer who has made himself rich by suing doctors, a man with no military experience, no international diplomatic experience, no national political experience before this election, a man whom even John Kerry has called unqualified to be president!
And what if this legal challenge to the legitimacy of a Kerry presidency occurs at a time of great danger to the United States? In the midst of a war on terrorism? If it disrupts the ability of the administration to conduct that war? What if the election of such a candidate is, itself, an act of giving aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States?
These are serious questions, and serious issues, about which I see no public discussion, certainly not in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the San Francisco Chronicle, or on ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, MSNBC, or even Fox News.
We are on the verge of an election. John Kerry is still covering up some of his own service records, and whatever is in them, and the American people deserve to know what he doesn’t want us to know. Where is the “Peoples’ Right to Know” now? We need to know, before we vote. We don’t like cover-ups. We have called them Watergate. Iran-Contragate. Whitewatergate. Monicagate. They have brought down some presidents, and humbled others. We may call the next one Kerrygate.
And John Kerry and the Democrats will have no one to blame but themselves.
And there’s MORE!
If you haven’t been watching Chad Evans’ blog on this, you’re missing a LOT. I wouldn’t even dream of re-posting the product of his hard work here–you’re going to have to go see it and give him his due props.
Finally, if you scroll ALL THE WAY down to the bottom of this page, I’ve copied a Kerry/VVAW/VC timeline (with the link). Yeah, I know it’s kinda crappy having it posted there, but hey, I’m using Blogger, and I’m not about to re-do the template for it!
Like a so-called progressive's mind, comments are closed.