Latest RW smear: "John Kerry Calls American Troops Terrorists"

I will not link those sites, but they are all the usual suspects, NewsMax, Limbaugh, ...

Apparently, this smear has been extracted from this Kerry's assessment, that is extremely correct, IMHO: "And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs."

as soon as I heard him say that on FTN that they'd latch onto it. They are so predictable! It's a ridiculous twisting of his words; let's hope it fades into obscurity as quickly as it deserves to.

Saw it coming, and I think JK could probably see this coming, too, because he mentioned that a lot of people don't want to acknowledge the cultural differences that make this practice unacceptable to so many Iraqis.

following orders: the policy to terrorize laid out by Cheney and Rummy, who apparently know nothing about Iraq and its customs, religious or otherwise. Change the policy and my guess, just a guess, is that the soldiers stop doing it.

If anyone has time, you might want to prepare an LTTE to the predictable op-ed that will trash Kerry on this. His sentence can be all too easily read as associating "terror" with US troops. Although his point is factually correct, the way he stated it is very easy to twist, and I'm afraid rather damaging in its twisted form. If this seems to get any traction at all in non-whackjob media, we need to stop it with the facts. IMHO.

Can anyone find links to stories about how terrorized Iraqis have felt when their homes have been raided by US soldiers in the middle of the night? I know that I've seen some. I've seen pictures of kids scared shitless with US troops pointing guns at them or their parents. Too bad one can't use a pic in an LTTE. But it could still be sent with the LTTE.

Imagine how you would feel if police came to the door in the middle of the night and started searching your home. Imagine further they won't tell you what they are looking for (In the soldiers' case they can't speak the language). Imagine that only a few years before, your country was governed by a tyrant who would come to houses in the middle of the night. I would be terrified.

I actually wonder if Kerry intended to use that word. He has explained the problem in several interviews very very well - I was surprised at Matthews' face he was clearly taking in this concept. But I've seen few comments on the problem of the US having this function from anyone else.

It's sort of the same principle as torture, isn't it? One of the reasons we shouldn't be doing it is because we'd never tolerate that sort of thing in the US.

that Kerry's use of the word was to cite specifically the policy he's fighting against?

I remember when Abu Grhaib surfaced and everyone tried to dance around use of the word torture for fear of damaging troop morale. Why spin this into some watered down version of the truth. Someone has to say what's happening. Dancing around it only detracts from the real issue. Imagine the things some of these Iraqis have experienced from Saddam reign through today.


I might be wrong about the dancing around the issue thing.

<snip>

Sen. KERRY: Let me--I--first of all, there is so much more that unites Democrats than divides us. And Democrats have much more in common with each other than they do with George Bush's policy right now. Now Joe Lieberman, I believe, also voted for the resolution which said the president needs to make more clear what he's doing and set out benchmarks, and that the policy hasn't been working. We all believe him when you
say,`Stay the course.' That's the president's policy, which hasn't been changing, which is a policy of failure. I don't agree with that. But I think what we need to do is recognize what we all agree on, which is you've got to begin to set benchmarks for accomplishment. You've got to begin to transfer authority to the Iraqis. And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not...

SCHIEFFER: Yeah.

Sen. KERRY: ...Iraqis should be doing that. And after all of these two and a half years, with all of the talk of 210,000 people trained, there just is no excuse for not transferring more of that authority.

<snip>

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/face_120405.pdf

Why is the media not quoting from the full transcript on any of the other issues covered. Now I see a thread in GD about John O'Neill on Hannity criticizing Kerry. Kerry hit a nerve I see, maybe that explains it. This is one of those times when one really has to wonder. Forget the media conspiracy stuff, but why the silence and total avoidance of the topics covered in the interview?


Here is all I could find (same quote buried in articles):

Senator John F. Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, speaking on CBS's ''Face The Nation" said, ''We need a secretary of defense who thinks like John McCain."

Kerry said, ''I'm amazed Secretary Rumsfeld is still there. I believe Secretary Rumsfeld has misconducted this war in the most extraordinary way, from the first decisions about when and how to go in through the last 2 1/2 years."


http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/12/05/mccain_wont_concede_on_torture_ban/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+National+News



Some Democrats renewed calls for Rumsfeld to be removed from his post.

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said U.S. troops ``have been put in greater danger by the mistakes of this secretary of defense who refuses to tell the truth about what is happening in Iraq and pushes aside anyone who dares speak truth to power.''

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5459124,00.html

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2005/12/05/ap2370918.html

and how are troops are perceived in Iraq.

The word terrorize has the potential to open a discussion about the cultural differences.

This has been the big silence for three years for MOST media and politicians and the elephant in the room.

Certainly, the RW media from NewsMax to Fox wont speak about that or defend Kerry. As for the other ones, they probably have the same pb.

I am not sure why people dont get it. Since at least 15 months, Kerry has been saying as plainly as possible the MAIN reasons Bush invaded Iraq:

- create permanent bases where to move the US troops stationned in Saudi Arabia,

- create new markets for his friends (among which Halliburton and oil companies).

Since then, he has been silenced because he was telling the truth.

The pb is that many of his Democratic colleagues dont want to go in this direction either (Biden and Clinton and people who agree with them ...) and most newspapers at this point are not doing their job properly. They have followed Bush blindly in 2002-2003 and would need to say they were wrong to report that.

We have actually come a long way this year in getting more and more truth out there. The newspapers are beginning to realize that they massively screwed up (even Judy Miller voice regret for her role in hyping the war.)

Give it a little more time. Things are changing. We have to start zeroing in on that call for no permanent bases. It is a key touchstone to getting out of Iraq and leaving behind a relatively safer country. (There will still be a violent struggle for power. But that may now be inevitable no matter what we do. At least can act to no make it worse.)

that make it difficult for our soldiers to be accepted as another reason that we need to pull back and allow the Iraq soldiers to take over?

the more they will. This is why Cong. Murtha coming forward ws so important. He was hearing from 'guys on the ground' in Iraq. He was saying what Sen. Kerry was saying.

The more we hear this from people with contacts in the military, the more the media is going to have to report it.

then Kerry is absolutely right that we could give the Iraqis the search and destroy and policing functions - they are very likely to do it better. Why wouldn't Bush simply do this - obviously not crediting Kerry. It takes us out of one of the most dangerous jobs and helps our reputation.

It sounds like a good idea, even if you intend to stay forever.

Not that that matters to the right wing nuts. I suppose that JK could have used the word "scaring" rather than "terrorizing", but those two words mean the same thing here. One thing is for sure, the right wing is masterful at using the English language to scare people and make them fearful of living - does that make them terrorists? You decide.

So much of their propaganda seems to be built on willfully misreading/mishearing/misquoting. Personally I am getting damn sick of it.

I would have chosen that word, as a writer--but then when you are speaking off-the-cuff, you don't get to edit or re-write. But I agree with you--the RW will jump on anything anyway, and he can't go around worrying about them, paranoid about every word he says.

They're running out of original insults. "Terrorist supporter", "flip-flopper", "librul"....
:yawn:

Most of it doesn't make the RW look too good.

Nobody reading this crap is going to believe the slant that they are putting on Kerry's statements. The statements obviously refer to culture and language barriers that make situations more terrifying and potentially dangerous for all concerned. Give me a break. The more the wing nuts keep it up, the more they look like wing nuts. They are beating a dead horse here. The public is against the war.

Full withdrawal (no permanent bases). Why is the media afraid of the truth?

December 05, 2005
FOX Wants To Swiftboat John Kerry Again
John Gibson and Michael Reagan time tripped back to the "04" campaign tonight using John Kerry to invoke some Swift Boat memories for their viewers. Gibson played a clip of Kerry discussing troop withdrawl on Face The Nation. Out of Kerry's total interview, Gibson picked a short clip of Kerry discussing why it would be better for Iraqi troops to take over. Kerry commented that there is no reason that our soldiers should have to go into Iraqi homes in the dead of night frightening women and children and breaking historical customs because that is something Iraqi forces should do. Gibson and Reagan then twisted this into Kerry accusing our troops of doing horrible things. Does this sound sadly familiar?

A self righteous Reagan jumped in claiming that when he was at Walter Reed Hospital recently, the wounded soldiers were " appalled at things being said about them". Then , of course, he added that Kerry's comment gives aid and comfort to the enemy. Reagan raved that terrorists hide with women and children and the terrorists are the ones who want to kill us.

It seems that Gibson's distortion was not an original idea. One of the right wing sites posted the same quote today around noon with the title Ghenghis Khan Redux.

Then Rush Limbaugh took the reigns claiming that Kerry called our troops terrorists.

This is the start of an organized effort to sytematically go after anyone who speaks out against the war announced by the organization Move America Forward which is the group that went down to Crawford to harass Cindy Sheehan.

comment: Well this is a clear indication of how deeply committed FOXNews is to the doctrine of the radical right. However, this time we're on to them and this time the majority of Americans are repulsed by their sleaze and slime.


Reported by deborah at December 5, 2005 06:04 PM

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/12/05/fox_wants_to_swiftboat_john_kerry_again.php

Also, it was nice to see positive comments re: JK on that site.

bulls***!!! Considering the fact that the radical right actually thinks we're at war with ALL Muslems AND that they hate foreigners and immigrants, pointing out that there are cultural differences between Americans and Iraqis is purely elementary. And I still remember a front page story from the Wall Street Journal -- yeah, that lefty rag -- which talked about an American translator who went on raids (he found it worked better to translate on the spot). In Iraq it is customary to speak to the "man of the house". Usually, the translator ended up talking to an 11 year old boy. The women must cover up and cannot really speak to the soldiers. So now are right wingers saying that it is completely normal for Americans to raid Iraqis' houses, when they usually are bashing Arabs right and left?

Part 2 of this ridiculous attack, is that how can they disagree with Kerry that Iraqis need to take over? It's what the freakin' POTUS has said already (when they stand up, we will stand down).

Sorry, this argument breaks down in about 2 seconds. Jihadi terrorists do much more than "terrorize" us. They kill us. JK did NOT say American soldiers are terrorists. But you know what? I have watched video of Americans raiding Iraqi houses, and it's pretty terrifying. His remarks were on the money, and he also knows this from experience when he dealt with the Vietnamese, and the gulf of their cultural differences were insurmountable.

How many Dems are they going to go after with this stuff. It will work for their core audience, which is about 35% of the vote. But it isn't working beyond that. That 35% is hardcore Rethug. Kerry, in the debates last year, had that quote about a 'global test' and the RWers used that to suggest the near-opposite of what Kerry meant. (And that everyone watching the debates understood at the time.) Same thing.

It is not possible to avoid these traps. At this point in time, with the public support for the same old, same old in Iraq deeply waning, I would not worry too much about it. As you said, this is a sign of desperation and is yet one mmore attempt to play the patriotism card. That is getting less and less effective every time they drag it out. (Remember, it didn't work at all with Cong. Murtha.)

He clearly did not call the soldiers terrorists - and no rational personal will think that. Rush's listeners still believe the SBVT, Kerry could walk across the Atlantic and pacify the entire middle east with words and these clown would claim he's negotiating with the terrorists.

If they make it an issue - more people will hear the paragraph - and it IS a very sensible idea. One, that while not obvious before it is said, seems so sensible that it seems something everyone would want.

I tried unsuccessfully to find a passage in Tour of Duty where he wrote about a small (Vietnamese) boy watching from shore as they delayed a boat for hours to check everything out - and he wrote of the boy having reason to hate them. He also mentioned very often not knowing enough of the language and seeing that as a major handicap.

I have a feeling that if he's questioned on this, those types of mundane stories where he, doing his job, likely trying to be as inoffensive as possible knew that he was making their lifes harder and the US more hated. These tasks put the soldiers at great risk, build hatred and shouldn't be done by us.

word that was used.

It just shows how they are desperate BECAUSE KERRY IS TELLING THE TRUTH ON THE PERMANENT BASES.

Thanks to NewsHounds.com to tell it as it is.

It is important not to let us be bullied by these freepers. Democrats have spend enough time trying to moderate their language on this issue. We have to call things as they are.

The Rethugs are bringing out their tired old talking heads to smear John Kerry. Well, John Kerry is not running for anything at the moment. He is a powerful voice in the Democratic Party that is trying to find a way to get out of Iraq. (Elections over, Rethugs. Got to find some new arguments here boys!)

Kerry is very right to point out, in the plain and clear language that he did, that having US soldiers do the fighting in IRaq is making them less safe and is making the mission of securing Iraq enough for us to turn over power to a new government more difficult.

If the Rethugs don't like it, they can bite me. (Seriously. Too bad for them.) Sen. Kerry is not the only voice saying this. He is backed, more and more, by the very soldiers and military strucutre that the smear people claim to be honoring. It's not going to work. Kerry is not a lone voice on this. He is well-supported by many military people.

-the cultural differences that make our soldiers' jobs even more difficult and the perception the Iraqi's have of our soldiers. This falls right into us being part of the problem over there.

That said, I have heard the the SBV-O'Neil to be exact- has reared his very ugly head again. A part of me whats to fight their lastest John Kerry bashing and another part of me wants to wait and see if they still have any clout left. They are trying to make this a Kerry vs the troops thing again.

When someone says something as assinine as this, we need someone to make fools out of these people.

I didn't watch Olbermann yet, did he say anything about it? Maybe in the worst person segment? Probably not .. you know my concerns here.

Ohhh this is just so ridiculous.

But at the same time, anytime Kerry gets in front of the media, they are going to go after him. They are like those bullies in the playground.

I'm sorry if I sound rude.

But frankly it is terrorizing the kids! AND frankly as a kid who was terrorized by the angry assaults of "Christians" in the 60's and 70's, I personally tell Kerry or ANYONE to tell them to F-off on the misquoting of that word.

I experienced the terror of hate...of having people hate you for who you are (your religion) of having rocks thrown through windows in the middle of the night.

And I can only imagine that the military blasting through your door in the middle of the night, yelling, carrying guns, etc IS terrorizing to EVERYONE in that area!

Pretty disgusting thing too. Some freeper articles call them both traitors now.

We all know that John Kerry would not say (or think) that US soldiers in gereneral are terrorists. Their news sources are not as good. For any one hearing this in Iraq, this could be very disheartening - that a man who nearly half the country wanted as President supposedly said this.

Beyond what it could do to Kerry's reputation this is sick. Does Limbaugh stop to think even 10 seconds how much this could hurt the soldiers?