So, Kissinger's Vietnam papers prove Kerry right - what will swifts say?

[blm]

They insisted that Kerry was lying about the political machinations behind the scene, and that the Vietnam war WOULD HAVE BEEN WON except for Kerry and those who protested with him.

The corporate media would let them have as much airtime as they needed to make those charges.

Whatever will they say now?

[Nikki Stone 1]

1. I wonder if the freeper types even understand what this means

That Kissinger/Nixon behind the scenes with China negotiated a North Vietnamese takeover as soon as American troops were out. Yeah, Kerry was right, but the freepers, swiftboaters and all will never admit it.

[blm]

6. Yeah - but there goes the BASIS of their campaign lies. Not even the media

can change this development for them. It pretty much SEALS SHUT whatever they thought they could do in the future against Kerry.

[ginnyinWI]

21. but there is still the issue of questioning his military service

He's suing them on that, though. It was a two-pronged attack: his military service and his anti-war activism.

There is so much residual damage from the Vietnam war--just look at all of the anger that got stirred up so easily. War does so much damage to people's psyches, as well as to everything else.

[Recursion]

28. And, as an extra bonus

We GSAVE vets get to go through all this again in 20 years when we start taking the reins. I don't look forward to it.

[Ilsa]

12. And they'll never have to. They know they can't bring it up again

for fear of being made to look like fools. And anyone of those bastards reading this thread knows they were wrong about the politics and Kerry.

This coming out could make me okay with getting behind Kerry again should he decide to run. I just didn't see any point in repeating a campaign with the same information out there and the same dogma to fight. This changes the battle.

[Fuzz]

15. Here's the freeper thread about it.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1639090/posts

[ginnyinWI]

23. of course: now they are attacking Kissinger and Nixon. n/t

[seabeyond]

2. hey blm.... do you have any link

i can pick up that will igve this information supporting kerry. also the visiting n korean official was another area where they said made kerry a traitor

[Nikki Stone 1]

3. It was on the news last night: CBS I think. I'll look for the link

...

[acmejack]

4. This would be the document

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/DOC_readers/kissinger/nixzhou/

[OwnedByFerrets]

5. They will continue to lie...

The truth has never gotten in the way of a good smear campaign.

[blm]

8. Thanks.

.

[Nikki Stone 1]

16. Wow. Thanks for the original.

:)

[emulatorloo]

7. Link here to Washington Post/AP story on papers:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2309046&mesg_id=2309046

WP/AP: More Vietnam War Papers Released
Kissinger Told China U.S. Could Accept Communist Takeover
By Calvin Woodward
Associated Press
Saturday, May 27, 2006; Page A22

Henry A. Kissinger quietly acknowledged to China in 1972 that Washington could accept a communist takeover of South Vietnam if that evolved after a withdrawal of U.S. troops -- even as the war to drive back the communists dragged on with mounting deaths.

President Richard M. Nixon's envoy told Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai: "If we can live with a communist government in China, we ought to be able to accept it in Indochina."

Kissinger's blunt remarks surfaced from a collection of papers released yesterday by George Washington University's National Security Archive. The collection, from his years of diplomacy, was made up of documents available at the National Archives and obtained through the research group's declassification requests.

Kissinger's comments appear to lend credence to the "decent interval" theory posed by some historians who say the United States was prepared to see communists take over Saigon as long as, to save face, that happened long enough after a U.S. troop departure.

But Kissinger cautioned in an interview yesterday against reaching easy conclusions from his words of more than three decades ago. "One of my objectives had to be to get Chinese acquiescence in our policy," he said....

---
link in du thread sited above

[lonestarnot]

9. Is Jane Fonda now vindicated?

[Kansas Wyatt]

18. Swiftboat Freeper logic: Nope!

The Not So Swift Liars will probably claim Hanoi Jane married John Kerry in North Vietnam, and they celebrated by personally shooting down American aircraft. Hanoi Jane & Kerry personally trained the North Vietnamese how to shoot down all American aircraft, so they and their Democratic Party are responsible for losing the Vietnam War. The Nixon Administration had no choice but to find a graceful way out, since Hanoi Jane & Kerry turned over all advantages the U.S. had by committing treason.

Seriously, these Batshit Loons believe whatever their diluted loony minds can dream up, never mind the truth or the facts.

[lonestarnot]

27. LOL. Bashit Loons is right!

[LuckyLib]

24. After how many years of listening to the BS about the domino

theory and how we would never tolerate a "red" takeover of Indochina. Those sons-a-bitches. Wasted 53,000 lives to get to the outcome that would have happened anyway. I couldn't have lived with losing a family member in Vietnam, and don't know how folks are doing it now with Iraq. I'd leave the country before fighting their stupid, senseless wars.

[movonne]

10. Freepers don't give a shit, I believe they knew that the swift boys

were a pack of liars, but they wanted to win and whatever it takes...

[tabasco]

17. That and cognitive dissonance.

Many of them are conditioned to wait for Rush to explain it all to them.

They will believe every lie no matter what the facts.

What I call the "brownshirt mentality."

[peekaloo]

11. Not a damn thing. The Bu$hism would be to "let lying dogs sleep".

:mad:

[agincourt]

13. If they had a sliver of candor,

it would be "Ha Ha dumb sheeple suckers!". They're probably too busy working on new lies now to be concerned with this thing.

[UTUSN]

14. K&R The question presupposes that the Swiftbots have a conscience n/t

[Mass]

19. The media will say nothing. The NYTimes has a snarky article

about Kerry defending himself against the liars where they give O'Neill and co the same respect they give to Kerry (I am nice to the NYT saying that, it is probably more).

[patrice]

20. The October Surprise?

?

[bigtree]

22. they don't seem to read much

but, you know they'll just trash Kissinger . . . if someone bothers to read to them what he wrote.

[The Backlash Cometh]

25. Kissinger is a dishonorable person for not setting the record

straight when it would have mattered.

[SeaBob]

26. swifties

I just sent them an email telling them they were disgusting and repugnant and they made me ashamed I was a Viet Nam Era Vet

[saltpoint]

29. Yeah, blm, but you have to consider the source. Henry Kissinger is

a flaming radical leftist who NATURALLY would rise to the defense of John Kerry. You know how these liberals ARE.

_ _ _ _ _

Very good point. Kissinger is no liberal's friend, and if there was evidence in his papers to condemn Kerry, FOX News would have been trumpeting it from the tallest towers in the kingdom by now.

Since we haven't heard from the Right on this, it puts a great strain on the Swiftboat Liars' take on Kerry's record. On DU we knew it was flagrant bullshit from the word go, but now here is one more nail in the Swifters' coffin.

[Festivito]

30. "Gee, what a nice house and pretty suit I got!" Waddya think they'll say?

"It's important, as Americans realize, how we stand, as God grants us grace to walk this walk and not as those whom I do not support, who do not understand the basic tenants that make this country the greatest country in the world so that all I can say is God bless America.
Thank you for listening."

"Asshole!"

[Joe Bacon]

31. They won't say a word because IOKIYAR

you won't hear a peep from them!