STORM2K

this one falls under the "President mis-led us about WMD's" section:

SPARTANBURG, SC (Talon News) -- Likely Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry, who has been labeled a "flip-flopper" on a wide variety of issues, has now done so regarding the issue of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Kerry, who in the late 1990s talked about WMDs being present in Iraq and then changed his mind once he began running for president, has been especially adamant in his criticism of President George W. Bush's assertion that WMDs will still be found in Iraq.

"George Bush sold us on going to war with Iraq based on the threat of weapons of mass destruction. But we still haven't found them," Kerry said in a speech earlier this month.

He added at the time, "We were misled about weapons of mass destruction."

In addition, former Democratic presidential candidate and Kerry supporter Howard Dean said the lack of WMDs in Iraq is a scandal for the Bush administration.

"There were no weapons of mass destruction," the former Vermont governor told CNN recently. "This is Bushgate, which is far more serious than Watergate."

However, speaking on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews" on Tuesday, Kerry decided to back away from his previous strong stance against WMDs being found.

"It appears, as they peel away the weapons of mass destruction issue -- and we may yet find them," Kerry admitted.

He continued, "Look, I want to make it clear. Who knows if a month from now, three months from now, you find some weapons? You may."

This pronouncement by Kerry came one day after Jordan announced an al Qaeda plan to carry out an attack in Amman with WMDs from Syria using a terrorist trained in Iraq.

It also followed news that a likely WMD plant in Baghdad under the auspices of being a perfume factory suddenly exploded earlier this week when two American troops were investigating.

But in an April 5, 2004 press release posted on the Kerry campaign web site, Kerry asserts that "the President continued to mislead the public about the war in Iraq."

Similarly, in an April 6, 2004 press release posted on the Kerry campaign web site, Kerry claims that Bush "misled the public" about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Goodness...take a stance and stick with it.
Everyone changes their mind sometimes but he's in a class by himself. lol

This thread should be about 1000 pages long by next week.

I put this in streetsoldier's thread but I think it should go here. lol

Backpedaling Kerry



Sen. John Kerry has a problem with saying what he means and meaning what he says. This is hardly news, but it's surprising that Mr. Kerry has not amended this peculiar trait since becoming the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate.
On April 23, 1971, after tossing a handful of ribbons and medals over the Capitol fence, Mr. Kerry spoke to a gathering of veterans. "This [Nixon] administration forced us to return our medals," he said. Later that year, he told a Washington television interviewer: "I gave back ... six, seven, eight, nine medals," including, he added, his Bronze and Silver Stars, as well as his Purple Hearts. Except that he didn't.

Mr. Kerry gave back several of his ribbons and the medals of other soldiers. In an interview with the Los Angeles Times last week, Mr. Kerry nevertheless claimed that he has never been anything but forthright about what exactly he tossed over the Capitol fence. "I never implied that I did it," he said. "Medals and ribbons, there's almost no difference in distinction, fundamentally. They're symbols of the same thing."
Maybe medals are ribbons. On "Good Morning America" Monday, however, ABC's Charlie Gibson reminded Mr. Kerry that that's not what he said in 1984, when Mr. Kerry was a Senate candidate. Back then, Mr. Kerry said that he had thrown only his ribbons, not his medals, emphasizing the difference to union leaders. Mr. Kerry said he had spoken "truthfully" in 1984. So medals are different from ribbons.
Or are they? On Monday morning, after the "Good Morning America" interview, the Kerry campaign Web site curiously added a line on its "D-Bunker" Web page saying, "For John Kerry, the symbolism of medals and ribbons is interchangeable." So, medals aren't in fact different from ribbons — symbolically speaking. Meanwhile, Mr. Kerry says he's "proud" of his medals, which he, symbolically speaking, tossed over the Capitol fence.
Mr. Kerry has called all this a "phony controversy." It might be "phony" in that he's committed no crimes, but it's a controversy that speaks volumes about responsibility: Mr. Kerry's medals, and what they stand for, have been recklessly abused by blatant opportunism.
Neither can Mr. Kerry quite figure out what he means by "atrocities" and "war criminals." On "Meet the Press" on April 19, Tim Russert asked Mr. Kerry whether he committed "atrocities" in Vietnam as he claimed in a 1971 interview. Mr. Kerry responded that "atrocities" was an "inappropriate word" but it was "honest." When Mr. Russert asked him about his use of the term "war criminals" in that 1971 interview, Mr. Kerry said he was "honest," but the words were "a little bit over the top."
So were Mr. Kerry's words honest or inappropriate and over the top? It's not like he was accusing American soldiers of jaywalking. Appearing with him on Dick Cavett's show in July 1971, fellow Vietnam veteran John O'Neill confronted Mr. Kerry about his use of the words "atrocities" and "war criminals" before a Senate committee hearing. Mr. Kerry conceded that he had never in fact actually seen anyone commit an atrocity, but that he had heard "reports." Subsequent federal investigations have confirmed Mr. O'Neill's version of war events.
So medals are ribbons, except when they're not. Vietnam soldiers committed "atrocities," except when they didn't. They were also "war criminals," except when they weren't. If Mr. Kerry insists on waving the bloody shirt, we suggest he buy a dictionary.

WASHINGTON TIMES