portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

education | government | human & civil rights


The truth shall set us free.
Veterans from all U.S. military services should unite to demand the complete military records of both Kerry and Bush.

Only by comparing the military records of these two candidates can the voters better determine who has more honorably served his country, Kerry or Bush.

Once these records are made available, ads with the information should be run in major newspapers throughout the country to educate the voters. Certainly, contributions for these ads should be tax exempt because they would be made for educational purposes only and not necessarily for the benefit of either candidate.
Serving Your Country 30.Aug.2004 12:39


Members of the armed service are brain washed and suffer from stockholm syndrome. They follow orders as a beaten dog. Civilians suffer likewise too from fear of our police forces. Consolidated media exploit this illness and perpetuate it. This is shown by our sociopathic policies at home and in the world.

We need to expose US policy not just two killers record.

maybe not, but how would you know?

Anon... 30.Aug.2004 14:18


...two killers? I know one in that bunch, but for all the criticism I here on Indymedia about Kerry, he exposed the atrocities against civilians in Vietnam and is being discredited solely for that today. I'd like to see what you would be like if you were put in a similar situation. Unless you've been there, don't put all vets in the same category.

Hmm 30.Aug.2004 14:21


Would the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth be welcome to contribute also? Because as we all know, they are all for the whole truth.

Militarism 30.Aug.2004 15:38


Kerry and Bush are trying to outdo each other in the militarism and macho department. It's a disgusting spectacle.

Kerry was honorable when he participated in Vietnam Veterans Against the War; however, today he chooses to downplay this. Rather than heeding the lessons from his own experience in Vietnam, he continues to support the war in Iraq, a war which most of his own Democratic constituents (as well as most Americans) oppose.

As for Bush, it's probably already pretty well-known to most Americans that he used his rich family's influence to get out of active duty, and that he didn't even serve much of his time in the Texas Air National Guard.

New way of looking at it. 30.Aug.2004 15:46


Bush avoided Vietnam duty because he was opposed to killing anybody. On the orher hand, Kerry loved to kill, and that is why he volunteered for Vietnam duty.

Yep, let the facts speak for themselves

Kerry Wins, He Killed More 30.Aug.2004 16:00

Sally Mock

At least Kerry has it on his official records that he killed at least 20 people:

And Kerry has admitted to burning down villages and committing atrocities and crimes against civilians during a war.

Bush just joined the Guard to avoid becoming a war criminal like Kerry!

Wonder about this 30.Aug.2004 16:18

Jim B.

Always wondered why Kerry just didnīt continue his anti-war theme in his Presidential bid.
Why the macho, rambo, war-killer Vietnam Hero he is trying to portray (which he was later ashamed of after he returned from Viet Nam).
Why the militaristic "Reporting for duty!" greeting & salute at the Demo convention?
Why not run as a dove, a peace maker? Be the peace candidate - not the war candidate.

Then one reads that Kerry wants to put more troops in Iraq and not reduce troops in Europe and Korea like Bush has said he will do. Which one is the bigger macho-military machine???

And then Kerry talks tough, but yet its been nearly 30 days since he had a serious press conference to answer critics. We need a President that talks big, but hides and is afraid of 267 60-year old swift boat vets???

I wanted Dean to be our candidate.

Cowards 30.Aug.2004 16:44


Cowards are my heroes.

Cowards dont fight.

It takes more courage to be a coward than to show up at the induction center.

Note how many tributes there are to cowards. The state fears them the most.

Jesus was a coward but the state stole his creed. Early christians did not fight in battles or otherwise. I fera I may not have enough courage to be a coward.

Now veterns are the victims of the state. They are the enforcers of contrats laid down unjustly.

Context and critical thinking -- focus! It's your own future. 30.Aug.2004 16:58

Hal E. Burton

My uncle was in the Air Force. He wasn't brain-washed. My dad was in the Army. He wasn't brain-washed either.

For what it's worth -- Kurt Vonnegut and Howard Zinn were also in the service. And I don't think they were brain-washed.

Kerry was sold a bill of goods on Viet Nam. The whole nation was. If you haven't seen "Fog of War" see it to get perspective on what a crappy time that was.

Yes, Kerry is playing to middle-America. He wants to win. What a surprise. That's the only way he can effect some change. Remember, not everyplace is like Portland and not every group is like IndyMedia.

Folks, you can wish that things were different and pretend that an ideal world exists. But if you vote against your own self-interest you will only punish yourself. Consider the stakes. Consider the rules. And contemplate that there may be folks here goading you to do something stupid that will hurt you in the long run.

The way the game is played in America, you get to choose between the lesser of two evils. Sorry, but that's the fact. If you think a principled stand is garnered by a sacrificial vote, that's your right. I won't attempt to talk you out of it. But reckon with what will really happen. Look at the polls. Nader and Cobb are fighting over two percent of the electorate. Kerry and Bush are fighting over the remaining 98 percent. And with the electoral college, it's a winner-take-all game.

The deficit is booming and between that and rising oil prices, inflation is about to hit home hard. Greenspan is saying you'll have to work for another 10 years or so. And women's right to choose and affirmative action are about to disappear. Idealism is for egotists, consider and vote the real world and its consequences or you'll have to deal with the real world and its consequences.

To hal 30.Aug.2004 17:18

Not Hal

Hal sez:
1."The deficit is booming and"
(REPLY: So what? It boomed before and came down and nothing happened. The current deficit is very manageable with such a huge economy the U.S. has. The U.S. economy is starting to grow strong, unemployment is lower now than when Clinton was in office. Show me how a budget deficit effects anyone today. Or how the budget deficits of 20 years ago effect you today.
P.S. We are at war, wars are expensive. But not as expensive as being attacked repeatedly by terrorists.)

2. "between that and rising oil prices, inflation is about to hit home hard."
(REPLY: Oil prices are dropping. Oil prices are staying high because the demand is strong(growing worldwide economies are growing). We need to develop viable alternatives to oil.
Inflation is barely rising, your scars are not true or based on any facts.)

3. "Greenspan is saying you'll have to work for another 10 years or so."
(REPLY: So what? What is wrong with working? I am an artist and hope never to stop working!)

4. "And women's right to choose and affirmative action are about to disappear."
(REPLY: What proof do you have of those charges?)

Democrats and Republicans are equally responsible for any troubles we may have.
Congress funds any actions a President wants. No funds from Congress, no action.

Remember we are at war, BinLaden wants to destroy our country and society and replace it with radical Muslim rule. (As one terrorist proclaimed: "Your grandchildren will be Muslims.")
Which Presidential candidate will do the best job to win this war on terrorism? Vote for him.
If we are at war and under attack how can we be solving the other problems???

Hal E. Burton 30.Aug.2004 17:33


Boot Camp Is Brainwashing.

Our parent are victims as Zin, Vonneget and Chompski. Nazi's, Niggers, Commies, Japs, Red Skins,
Savages, Heathens, Anarchist, Philestines, all but conan the barbarian are all words invented by the state/City/religeous structures.

Granted its theoretical, but thats the beasts tit were sucking on. Its makes killers and perpetuates itself by serving the uppercrust and the uppercrust maintaining the organs of state.

When the population gets too big or threatens the ruling elite its time to cull the crop thru war.
Eazy Rider
Eazy Rider

Do you have a point you wish to make? 30.Aug.2004 17:44

Hal E. Burton

'Cause if so, I don't get it. . .

Old Scottish lore has a peasant and lord meet up.

Lord says, "How'dya like living on my lands...?"

Peasant says, "How'dya get 'em...?"

Lord says, "We fought for them and won them righteously..."

Peasant says, "Want to fight again...?"

Seriously, see Keenan on the U.S. place and role in the world and decide if you really want to sacrifice, just what exactly...? (Personally: meat, gasoline, most electricity, most "new" things and the list goes on. . .)

But don't kid yourself that you can write what you want everywhere in the world. The government and the army in this country are "of, by and for the people" (with a few exceptions...).

While we're on it. . . 30.Aug.2004 17:47

Hal E. Burton

Where will you be moving and when Anon?

Why not live your beliefs and values?

Wrong about cowards 30.Aug.2004 19:42


In that case you admire Bush and Cheney, cowards who avoided the draft, along with Clinton who, between them, killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians. Cowards are not so innocent, and BTW, Jesus would not qualify as a coward in the slightest. If you fled to Canada, more power to you. You were brave to stand up for what you believed and be threatened with adverse actions upon your return. Cowards like Cheney, avoided things because they were powerful enough to do so and they would rather be in the position to send someone else off. Kerry is admirable in the fact that he was wealthy enough, he could have avoided Vietnam and did not. Regardless of his motives, he is a better person. believe me, I'm no Kerry suck up, but I give credit where it's due.

Jesus was not a coward 30.Aug.2004 20:40

Eddie Estes

"Jesus was a coward but the state stole his creed. Early christians did not fight in battles or otherwise. I fera I may not have enough courage to be a coward."
Jesus was not a coward!! If he was he would not have died on the cross. That was not a cowards
way to die.
His followers were not cowards either.
They mostly died gruesome deaths because the proclaimed that Jesus was the savior of the
world and was a higher authority than Ceaser.
If you want to comment about Jesus at least read the Bible to have your facts correct.

2 million Dead VC 30.Aug.2004 21:17


Bush, Cheney, Kerry are killers as with our other veterans. They have moral courage. It is sending your brothers to battle while you watch tv. I am sure these idiots are qualified. Kerry may have had personal courage. Mohomad Ali showed more courage by looking at the man in the eye and said no. Those
who were nobodys showed more courage than Ali.

I am sorry you vetrans follow leaders and we are stuck with goverenment socioopathic calculations. It not your falt. Its historical fate, ignorance and greed. There are not enough cowards to stop war.

History has stuck us with idiots who honorably commit mass murder of other poor suckers for eons and and put up with my spelling. We have nice churches to support you so you dont feel so stupid. I do feel sorry for the casualties of war, most of which are civilians and property.

People are taught to want their own nations (idol whorship) as the British found out. Too bad we can't see the lesson we taught the Brits. It would have prevented this catastrope in the making. Other empires found out the same on ther way to bankruptcy.

Save the country be a coward and dont go to war. If this makes you mad perhaps you identify with your capturers. You may have the syndrome.

Jesus did not join war.
People Can Stand
People Can Stand

Let's not be suckered by the militarists 30.Aug.2004 22:50


"Veterans for Truth" (sic) is just a puppet on a string pulled by the Democratic and Republican parties and corporate "news" media. All of them have combined to have a debate on Bush and Kerry's PAST (premised on who was most patriotic, most serving and servile to U.S. imperialism, etc.---premises progressive people should reject) because neither candidate, nor their party, nor the capitalist ruling class that these two parties represent wants a debate regarding the PRESENT war in Iraq. Besides this, they have very little to debate regarding Bush's war, which Kerry hopes to make HIS war. Kerry voted for it, he says he would do so again even if he had known there were no weapons of mass slaughter in Iraq, he says there will be U.S. troops in Iraq four years from now if he's elected, he's said he would send more troops, etc., etc. (For more on this see ). True, Kerry and the Democrats tend to be more multilateralist, that is that they want more countries to send the sons and daughters of their working classes to kill and be killed in the interests of the U.S. and allied capitalists, but this difference is a shifting one. In fact the American ruling class has been shifting toward multilateralism since it saw Iraq becoming a quagmire this spring, and Bush and the Republicans have also been shifting along with it. But they've failed to get any new allies (one of the reasons a large section of the ruling class has thrown its support to Kerry). Meanwhile, in his campaign speeches the liberal Kerry has assured the ruling class that he will also act unilaterally "when necessary".

The issue, the debate if you will, is how to build the anti-war movement. In this debate, the reasons for the war (monopoly capitalism meaning there will be endless imperialist slaughtering, wars for oil or empire, etc., as long as it exists) have to demonstrated and explained with facts over and over. In this debate the stands and role of the Republican, Democrat, and other parties has to be analyzed and explained over and over as well. But neither the RepubliDems, corporate media, nor "Veterans for Truth" want this kind of debate. Better to quibble over the stands of two rich boys 30-odd years ago.

Ommission 30.Aug.2004 22:55


Right on, Wilhemina! 30.Aug.2004 23:26

we're getting suckered again!

The dick-measuring contest continues. Much ballyhoo now, with Kerry-Edwards are arguing with the Bush cartel about "winning" the frigging "war on terror", for pity sakes! Edwards insists that the "war can, indeed, must, be won", while Bush now suggests that it is endless and unwinnable.. This outrageous media event gets us lathered up about wars and the merits of warriors all the time, and the corporations are grinning, the media whores are spinning, and we're all doing exactly what they knew we would.

Let's stop arguing about who is the bigger dick, and create a better world without stupid wars. It is totally possible as long as we think it is.

when you have to choose. . .every way you look at it you lose! 31.Aug.2004 08:14

Hal E. Burton

Deficit spending -- despite Cheney's plaint that "Deficits don't matter," -- is an inflationary factor. It's the government spending money it doesn't have which means it will need to be repaid and with interest. See  http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Why are true fiscal conservatives concerned about this if it doesn't matter? Check the Concord Coalition website.

Oil prices fluctuate, but the trend is up for just the reason you mention -- demand worldwide is growing. Yes, alternatives need to be developed (and technology that requires less energy like hybrid cars).

As to working longer, you might check Greg Ip's "Outlook" column in yesterday's Wall Street Journal... he quotes Princeton economist Alan Blinder, "It's easy to be a professor at 75; it's not so easy to lift heavy objects."

Women's rights and affirmative action... time will tell. But reading the Republican platform, you might get the impression they've got some plans.

Republicans have both houses and the executive. I'd say the last four years is pretty much theirs to own.

And as for Muslims taking over the world, I recall the impression of a Japanese WWII general who, on flying 'cross country from California to the east coast could only exclaim, "What were we thinking...?"

Iraq is about the size of a western state. Terrorists can disrupt things, but they can't win hearts and minds. Nor can they (as Bush now acknowledges) ever be done away with. "War" is almost certainly a misnomer, therefore.

indy 31.Aug.2004 18:15

refuse to fight

Anon is right about cowards. I think using the word coward is deliberate, to provoke, as in cause to think. What if all young men and women were to refuse to fight any more wars? No more wars for oil or gold or drugs. Gee, the CIA would have to go out of business. What if instead of getting college educations for serving in the army, young people were to get money for their education by helping to restore the infrastructure in the inner cities, or to replant forests, or to volunteer with the Peace Corps. Of course we need to first get off the oil based economy. This can be achieved by putting money for research and development into new energy technologies, money that is now siphoned off to Haliburton and the giant military industrial complex. Hurray for all "cowards",-- refusniks, peaceniks and lovers of peace everywhere. I really think we need to rethink the whole honor and glory rah rah rah thing. Valor is achieved in many ways--and war destroys many more lives and souls than it ever instills courage and heroism.