Charles Zentai - update



Zentai proceedings put off until High Court decision - 12th February 2008, 16:00 WST

Extradition proceedings against an accused Hungarian Nazi war criminal Charles Zentai have been delayed at least six months while the High Court decides on an appeal. Hungarian authorities want to try Zentai, 84, over allegations he tortured and murdered a young Jewish man in Budapest in 1944 while serving in the army during World War II. Zentai appeared in the Perth Magistrates Court today where long-drawn out extradition proceedings in the court were put off until August 12. The proceedings began in July 2005, but have been delayed several times. It was first delayed by a now failed Federal Court bid to argue magistrates court do not have the power to rule on extraditions. The latest delay comes as the High Court makes a decision on his appeal against the Federal Court ruling. Zentai has denied allegations brought against him by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, the Jewish human rights organisation, that he is a Nazi war criminal who murdered Peter Balazs, 18, in 1944.    AAP





Australia soft on war criminals. Says nazi hunter  

Steve Pennells, The West Australian, February 9, 2008


The world’s last nazi hunter has accused Australia of allowing alleged war criminals to escape trial, urging the Government to immediately deport Perth grandfather Charles Zentai to Hungary to face a military court. The stark rebuke comes on the eve of 86-year-old Mr Zentai’s appearance in court next week to fight his extradition for alleged war crimes. The battle has dragged on for more than three years. Mr Zentai, who was a soldier in Budapest during World War II, is alleged to have tortured and murdered 18-year-old Jewish teenager Peter Balazs for refusing to wear his yellow star. Mr Zentai has maintained his innocence and his family have fought a long and costly battle to prevent his extradition.


Perth Magistrate’s Court granted the extradition last year but Mr Zentai launched a High Court appeal, challenging the power of magistrates to deal with extradition.


The decision on the appeal, which has put the extradition on hold, is expected this month. The matter is also due for mention in the magistrates’ court next week.


Dr Efraim Zuroff, who runs the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and heads a wordwide hunt for remaining World War II criminals, criticised the Australian Government for the delays. “It is extremely likely that the Zentai case will be the last case, of an alleged nazi war criminal residing in Australia and the final opportunity for Australia to take successful legal action against any of Hitler’s henchmen, who may have entered the country posing as innocent victims,” he said. “If Zentai is not extradited from Australia, it will mean that the Government has failed to take successful legal action against any of the many alleged Holocaust perpetrators who lived in the country, an ignomious result to a noble effort that ultimately failed miserably because of a loss of political will.”


A spokeswoman for Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus said everyone was entitled to have their case reviewed. “Mr Zentai’s case has gone on for a long time but no decision has been made about the extradition order which is now before the High Court,” she said.


Mr Zentai’s son, Ernie Steiner, said if Dr Zuroff was keen on justice, he should let it take its course. “He’s already determined that my father is a war criminal,” he said. “That is certainly not the case in our mind. My father is innocent. He (Dr Zuroff) is really trying to meddle in the process.” Mr Steiner said he believed he had uncovered documents which proved his father’s innocence. Statements which implicated his father in the murder and had been used as the basis for Hungary’s extradition request were almost certainly given under duress during Hungary’s notorious post-war People’s Court trials.




From: Adelaide Institute

Sent: Monday, 11 February 2008 6:00 AM

Subject: Letter to the Editor - The West Australian: Australia soft on war criminals, says nazi hunter, February 9, 2008



Letter to the Editor - The West Australian

Australia soft on war criminals, says nazi hunter, February 9, 2008




That this self-styled Nazi-bounty hunter, Dr Efraim Zuroff, is running out of subjects to catch merely  highlights the tragedy of the twisted mindset that gave rise to the concept of hunting war criminals.


When World War Two hostilities ceased in 1945 it was Charles Zentai’s luck to escape eastern Europe’s communist tyranny by fleeing to Australia where he found peace, security and the opportunity to begin a new life – which he did quite successfully.


Had he returned home, as many of his comrades did, he would have most likely been shot as a collaborator, as countless soldiers were who had joined the Axis powers to fight communism.


That communism as far back as the 1917 Soviet revolution was largely a Jewish-inspired political movement is beyond doubt, but it is an intellectual perversion that Zuroff, who himself is Jewish, continues to obfuscate the issue by claiming special treatment for Jewish victims of that conflict.


Australia’s politicians and judiciary, as far back as the 1991 Adelaide War Crimes Trials, have wisely not bent to Jewish pressure to bring forth convictions that do not fulfil the basic Common Law  principles of judging a person innocent until found guilty through due process.


Although Australia’s media barons would have gone along with such prosecutions, the judiciary was not prepared to bend to Jewish pressure when it came to finding someone guilty on mere suspicion of having arrived from war-torn eastern Europe and for having belonged to the Axis-forces whose prime aim was to stem the spread of communism – something that today’s media tends not to broadcast too loudly lest it offend those who matured from communism to become quite active in Australia’s current Labor politics.


Dr Zuroff’s use of the world media to drum up hatred against Charles Zentai, and the world media outlets eagerly running with the story, is indicative of the strength of the outgrowth of world Jewish supremacism.


That the Zentai matter has been going on for over three years is an indication that massive doubt exists about the case as presented by Dr Zuroff. That he now moves deeply into Australian politics by claiming Australia is soft on war criminals can be seen as Zuroff’s final attempt to blackmail Australia’s politicians into action on his behalf.


Let’s hope Australia stands firm against the hater Dr Efraim Zuroff.


Dr Fredrick Töben



PO Box 3300

Norwood  – 5067

61+ 88331 0808

61+4170 88217  



Last chance to catch the Nazis

Efraim Zuroff

Published 11 February 2008


Efraim Zuroff argues age and frailty of the Holocaust's perpetrators must not weaken our resolve to bring them to account


The news that Austria is re-opening the case of Erna Wallisch, a female guard at the Majdanek death camp, currently residing in Vienna, was accompanied in many media outlets by a photograph of an elderly, rather disoriented housewife - who looked as if she had been awaken from a deep sleep.


Indeed it appeared on the surface quite difficult to connect the subject of the photograph to the content of the news story. And that in a microcosm, is a significant element of the problems we face in our efforts to facilitate the prosecution of Nazi war criminals, more than six decades after they committed their crimes.


Due to the advanced age of the suspects, there is more than a little scepticism as to the value of such prosecutions.


In that context, it is important to reiterate the four basic principles which guide us in our efforts to hold Holocaust perpetrators accountable for their crimes – and which have motivated the launch of our 'Operation: Last Chance' project, which seeks to maximize prosecution by offering financial rewards for information which helps facilitate the conviction and punishment of Nazi war criminals.


The first principle is that the passage of time in no way diminishes the guilt of the perpetrators. If someone committed a crime in 1941 or 1942 and is not caught, he or she is just as guilty today as they were six decades ago.


The second principle is that murderers do not deserve a prize for longevity. The fact that a killer reached an elderly age should not afford them any special consideration.


The third principle is that if we were to institute a chronological limit on prosecution of Nazi war criminals, it would mean on a practical level that we were allowing people to get away with genocide since the basic implication of such a limit would be that if a killer was rich enough, smart enough or lucky enough to elude justice until he or she reached the age limit - they would escape punishment. To create such a situation would obviously be unthinkable from a moral and judicial standpoint.


The last principle relates to the victims. One of the points always stressed by the late Simon Wiesenthal was that the post-Holocaust generation has an obligation to the victims to make every effort to hold their murderers accountable. On a more personal level, if someone had murdered your grandmother and the killer was only found forty or fifty years later, the fact that many years had passed since the crime would not in any way diminish your natural desire that the murderer of your grandmother be punished for that terrible crime. And in that respect we must remember that every one of the Nazis’ victims was someone’s grandmother or grandfather, father or mother, son or daughter. Hence every one of those victims deserves that an effort be made to find their murderers and hold them accountable.


The moral arguments listed above are complemented by several statistics which underscore the validity of the contemporary efforts to prosecute Nazi war criminals. Thus during that period from April 1 2006 until March 31 2007, a total of 21 individuals who either participated in Nazi war crimes during World War II or actively collaborated with Nazi forces were convicted, and since January 1 2001, 69 such convictions have been obtained. As of April 1, 2007, there were at least 1019 ongoing investigations in fourteen different countries of individuals suspected of Nazi war crimes.


These figures reflect two important phenomena – the increased sensitivity of certain governments to the significance of Holocaust crimes and the obvious necessity of trying to achieve justice while it is still possible. Having said that, it would be naïve to attribute all the investigations currently underway solely to these factors since it is clear that numerous governments lack the requisite political will to prosecute the criminals of World War II and often open investigations primarily to deflect possible public criticism and delay unpopular prosecutions.


In this context, it is important to note that contrary to common popular perception, the biggest obstacle to the prosecution of Nazi war criminals in the 21st century is not finding them or the evidence against them - but rather combating the lack of political will in numerous countries which refuse to take the necessary legal measures to hold Holocaust criminals accountable. For example, two out of the four strongest cases developed in the framework of 'Operation: Last Chance' are currently bogged down in extradition problems, which have so far prevented the prosecution of Croatian police chief Milivoj Ašner and Hungarian officer Charles Zentai, both of whom are wanted in the countries in which they committed their crimes (Croatia and Hungary respectively).


An important component of our efforts in the Wallisch case will be to 'train' people to look at her and see the Majdanek guard who took people to be gassed as opposed to the elderly Vienna housewife. That may not be easy, but it is part of our obligation to her victims and an important part of the fight for justice.


You can find out more about Operation Last Chance at the project's website.



From: Adelaide Institute 
Sent: Monday, 11 February 2008 6:00 AM
To: Adelaide Institute
Subject: Nationalists in Germany wearing T-shirts


Nationalists in Germany wearing T-shirts with image of Iranian president, Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on it and the caption: My Friend is a Foreigner

A provocation - ….a good idea!




NPD im Kreistag des Burgenlandes soll umstrittene T-Shirts nicht mehr tragen dürfen


Halle. Die Abgeordneten der NPD im Kreistag des Burgenlandes sollen nicht mehr mit T-Shirts auftreten dürfen, die den iranischen Präsidenten Mahmud Ahmadinedschad und den Schriftzug "Mein Freund ist Ausländer" zeigen. Das Innenministerium von Sachsen-Anhalt habe dem Kreistag jetzt mit einem Erlaß die Grundlage für ein Verbot geliefert, sagte Innenstaatssekretär Rüdiger Erben (SPD) am Samstag und bestätigte damit einen Bericht der "Mitteldeutschen Zeitung" vom selben Tag. Die Hemden seien antisemitisch und störten die Ordnung. Rückendeckung für die Befürwortung des Verbotes habe das Ministerium von Rechtsexperten der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle bekommen, sagte Erben.


Hintergrund ist ein Eklat im Naumburger Kreistag. Die drei Mitglieder der NPD-Fraktion waren in der letzten Sitzung mit T-Shirts aufgetreten, die den iranischen Staatspräsidenten mit dem genannten Schriftzug zeigten. "Das war eine klare Provokation. Ahmadinedschad hat den Holocaust geleugnet und will Israel auslöschen", sagte Erben. Die Hemden hatten für Empörung im Kreistag gesorgt, Konsequenzen gab es jedoch nicht. Die nächste Kreistagsitzung ist laut Erben für diesen Montag einberufen.


"Die NPD-Fraktion will ohne inhaltlichen Zusammenhang zur Ratsarbeit durch Provokation Aufmerksamkeit erregen und mißbraucht die Ratssitzung als willkommenes Forum", sagte Reimund Schmidt-De Caluwe, Professor für öffentliches Recht an der Universität Halle der Zeitung. Das habe mit demokratischer Willensbildung im Kreistag nichts zu tun, sondern behindere diese. Der Kreistagsvorsitzende könne die NPD-Abgeordneten anweisen, die Hemden auszuziehen. Sollten sie sich weigern, könnten sie aus dem Sitzungsraum notfalls mit Hilfe der Polizei verwiesen werden.

dpa © vom: Samstag, 9. Februar 2008  




-----Original Message-----
From: Adelaide Institute 
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 11:41 PM
To: Adelaide Institute
Subject: Integration YES - Assimilation NO


D-W news item 8 January 2008

Merkel und Erdogan gedenken der Opfer von Ludwigshafen

 Das Treffen von Kanzlerin Merkel und dem türkischen Regierungschef   Erdogan mit Berliner Schülern begann mit einer Schweigeminute für die Opfer von Ludwigshafen. Erdogan warb für ein besseres Miteinander - und regte an, türkische Schulen in Deutschland zu schaffen.


Integration YES - Assimilation NO


During his 7 February meeting with the German Chancellor Merkel, and students in Berlin, Turkish Prime Minister, Erdogan, suggested that more Turkish schools should be built in Germany. He also stated that he is in favour of Turks ‘integrating’ but not ‘assimilating’ within German society.


What is the practical effect of integration and assimilation?


It means that Turks and Germans are to live side-by-side in a multi-cultural state where Germans are not at home within their own country because they are forced to share it with a foreign element – democratically decided, of course.


It also means that German culture is put to the test of survival – how strong is famed German ingenuity and creativity with the influx of foreign impulses that impact upon the structure of German  society?


Would reciprocal arrangements also be possible in Turkey, i.e. the building of extensive German communities in Turkey, and would Germans en-mass wish to migrate and live in Turkey? If not, why not?


For the Turks, and for any other national group in the world, it will be easy to integrate within German society. There will be little resistance put up by Germans because they actually seek assimilation - any other identity but German.


What is the powerful weapon used to smash any German resistance against having to accept ‘integration’ of foreign elements within their culture, within their body politics and the disarming of Germans who seek to resist any assimilation so as to retain their nationhood?


It is the myth of the ‘Holocaust-Shoah’ that neutralises any German activity designed to retain a sense of German patriotism, of German nationalism. Any expression of dissent against integration and assimilation is met with howls of disapproval by those who still control Germany’s destiny. After all, Germany is still an occupied country and the victors of World War Two still dominate Germany as a defeated country that still has no peace treaty with its former enemies.


The recent case of a German TV hostess stating live within the context of a games show,  ‘Arbeit macht Frei – work liberates’ , then profusely apologising for having used the phrase that adorns the Auschwitz concentration camp’s gate, then still losing her job, indicates how Germans shamefully are not masters within their own country. That the TV station Pro-Sieben is own by a Jew may also have been significant in this decision of instant dismissal – the signal sent through the media to all those who harbour some kind of normal appreciation of German history that certain subjects are still taboo.


The case of TV presenter Eva Hermann still reverberates around the country because she refused to apologize for correctly stating that during the National Socialist years the family had pride of place and motherhood was celebrated.


The only nationalist political party, NPD, has endured mounting pressure and attempts legally to ban it have failed. Now the screw is on to financially eliminate its operations. Just the other day the treasurer was arrested when allegations of fraud were made against him.


The screw is tightening around those Germans who simply still want to be Germans. The media tightens its domination over the German mindset through such examples of instant dismissal for having said something offensive, and German politicians screw their German people with their behaviour of cow-towing to the idea of a multi-cultural Germany that is open to integration AND to assimilation.


Is it now a truism what decades ago did the rounds: Germany must perish!


The question now is: If Germany is to perish, when will it happen, and will this happen without any resistance from patriotic Germans?


Fredrick Töben





From: don.stacey

Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 11:23 PM

Subject: McCain gave Vietnamese information that resulted in American deaths / Senators think John McCain psychologically unstable / McCain's Real Record on the War in Iraq


Interview of retired Colonel speaking about John McCain divulging information that led to American deaths::  





Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler 

Thursday, 31 January 2008 


The number of fellow Senators who think John McCain is psychologically unstable is large.  Some will admit it publicly, like Thad Cochran who says, "The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine."

Others relate times when McCain screamed four-letter obscenities right in their faces in the Senate cloak room, like Dick Shelby, Rick Santorum, or Jim Inhofe.  "The man is unhinged," one Senator told me.  "He is frighteningly unfit to be Commander-in-Chief."

That John McCain is clinically nuts is scary enough.  What worries a small group of GOP Senators and Congressmen even more is a deep and dark skeletal secret in McCain's glorified past to which they are privy, and which the Clintons will use to blackmail him.

They have been having discussions with a Russian whom we'll call "T" for Translator.  T's father was the Soviet military intelligence officer who ran the "Hanoi Hilton" prison holding captured Americans during the Vietnam War.  One of those prisoners was John McCain.

The GRU -- Glavnoje Razvedyvatel'noje Upravlenije or Main Intelligence Directorate of the Soviet (now Russian) Armed Forces - operated the entire North Vietnamese prison system holding American prisoners of war.  GRU officers, all of whom were Russians, oversaw the interrogation of every American POW.

The interrogations themselves were conducted by Vietnamese who spoke some English.  After each interrogation session, which could often include torturing the prisoners at the direction of the GRU officers, the Vietnamese interrogator would write a report of the session - in Vietnamese.

These reports had to be translated into Russian.  T, a bright teenager living in the GRU compound in Hanoi, had become fluent in Vietnamese, and ended up translating many of the reports and interrogators' notes.

John McCain, flying his A-4 Skyhawk, was shot down over Hanoi on October 26, 1967.  Badly injured from the ejection, he was beaten and abused by his captors.  In July, 1968, his father, US Navy Admiral J. S. McCain, was made CINCPAC, Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Command, commander of all US military forces in the Vietnam theatre.  Upon learning this, the Vietnamese offered - according to McCain - to release him. 

McCain claims he refused, because he demanded all American POWs captured before him be released as well.  He thus remained a prisoner when he could have gone home, and was subjected to constant brutal beatings and torture for years:  that is the source of the "war-hero" saga making McCain a greater war-hero than any other American POW.

Yet the offer of release would had to have been approved by the GRU overseers of the North Vietnamese - and T does not recall any such offer being made.  T admits, however, that this took place before McCain was transferred to Hoa Loa prison, nicknamed the "Hanoi Hilton" by the POWs.  T had only direct knowledge of what happened at Hoa Loa, and not the other prisons, where T's father was in charge.

McCain was kept at the Hanoi Hilton from December 1969 until his release, along with all the remaining POWs, in March of 1973.  During this time, T translated all the Vietnamese interrogators' notes and reports regarding John McCain.

According to T, they reveal that McCain had made an "accommodation" with his captors, and in exchange, T's father saw that he was provided with an apartment in Hanoi and the services of two prostitutes.  Upon returning to his prison cell, he would say he had been held in solitary confinement.  That may be why so many of his fellow prisoners said later they saw so little of him at Hoa Loa.

The notes and reports written in Vietnamese were sent to Moscow, where T was a now a college student, for T's translation into Russian, then placed into GRU archives.  That's where they stayed until 1991.  Late that year, as the Soviet Union was collapsing, the CIA and the GRU made a deal for a document swap. 

All of what it involved, T doesn't know.  What T's father, by now retired but still with substantial contacts within the GRU, did learn (and thus T learned) was that the swap included all of T's translations.

In other words, the CIA has in its possession the notes and reports of John McCain's interrogators at the Hanoi Hilton, in both the original Vietnamese and translated Russian, showing collaboration with his Communist captors.

Allegations of this nature have been made over the years, many by Vietnam veterans.  There is an even an organization, Vietnam Veterans Against McCain.  But they are based on suspicions and circumstantial claims.  There has never been any hard direct evidence.   

What T says the CIA has is such evidence.  Its release would destroy McCain.  The threat of its release could force McCain to take a fall, blow the election and lose on purpose.  And just who do you suppose would know what the CIA has and work with them to release it?

Someone who has been a CIA asset since he was recruited by London station chief Cord Meyer while a student at Oxford in 1968?

(Back in the 90s years after he retired,  if Cord drank a little too much Scotch, he would laugh derisively at those conspiratorialists who accused Bill Clinton of being connected with the KGB.

"They all darkly point to Bill's participation in anti-war peace conferences in Stockholm and Oslo, and his trip to Leningrad, Moscow, and Prague while he was at Oxford. ‘Who could have paid for this?', they ask. ‘It had to be the KGB!' they claim." Cord would shake his head. "What rot - we paid for it. We recruited Bill the first week he was at Oxford. Bill's been an asset of The Three Bad Words ever since."  Cord passed on in 2001.)

The small group of Senators and Congressmen who have been briefed by T have been unable to confirm with the CIA any details of its document swap with the GRU beyond an admission that such a swap "may have happened."  They are very nervous about pursuing the matter any further.

The Clintons are not nervous.  They are utterly ruthless, and have buddies at Langley all too happy to help them.

It has been noted many times here in To The Point that while most folks think the CIA is a right-wing outfit, it is not. The CIA has been dominated by left-wing hyper-liberals for years.

The CIA is a left-wing, liberal outfit, and its main job for some time now is not attacking America's enemies but conservatives in general and George W. Bush in particular.  The story is best told by friend, Ken Timmerman in his new book Shadow Warriors.

When the time is right, the Clintons will see to the leaking of the GRU archives on McCain to the media.  Bet on it, just as you can bet they'll follow it up with media disclosures of the lady lobbyists in Washington having adulterous affairs with McCain.  (There are at least three of them; I know the name of one but I'm not going to put it in writing.)

Maybe McCain will try to fight back by confirming Hillary's well-known bisexuality and her lesbian affair with her beautiful assistant, Huma Abedin.  Google "Hillary" and "Huma Abedin" and you'll get almost 6,000 hits.  Turns out Huma is a Moslem who grew up in Saudi Arabia and is strongly suspected of working for Saudi intelligence.

Or maybe he'll capitulate to Clinton blackmail.  You never can tell what a psychologically unstable guy will do.

And that last point is why - be prepared for this, folks - I would not in any circumstances vote for John McCain, not if either Hillary or Obama were the alternative.  Evil is safer than crazy.  Leftie amateur inexperience is safer than crazy.  So I agree with Ann Coulter who says:

"I'd rather deal with President Hillary than with President McCain. With Hillary, we'll get the same ruinous liberal policies with none of the responsibility."

How in the world can the Republican Party get saddled with a nutcase whack-job who knows nothing about economics, is so anti-capitalist he uses "profit" as a term of derision, has never run a business or had any job outside of government, will raise taxes, is so stupid that he believes "stopping global warming" is worth destroying the American economy, won't drill ANWR, won't appoint strict constructionist justices, won't protect marriage, will give amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens, is beloved by the New York Times, and lives in a delusionary world of vanity and rage?

Rush is right.  A McCain presidency will be the destruction of the Republican Party.  It needs to be rebuilt, not wiped out with the field clear for the fascists of the left to consolidate power and eliminate freedom.

And maybe the only way to rebuild it is in dedicated impassioned opposition to a Clinton White House.  That should be the subject of Ann Coulter's next book.  I've already got the title for here.  Her last book was If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans.

Ann needs to now write this book:  If Republicans Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans.






RE: Senator McCain's Real Record on the War in Iraq

DATE: February 8, 2008 


Senator John McCain presents himself as a maverick and a critic of the Iraq war. But a close read of his record indicates that his position on the Iraq war has consistently matched President George W. Bush's.


Before The War:


 * McCain used many of the same arguments as Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney and President Bush when advocating going to war with Iraq.


 * McCain co-sponsored the Use of Force Authorization that gave President George W. Bush the green light—and a blank check—for going to war with Iraq. [SJ Res 46, 10/3/02]


 * McCain argued Saddam was "a threat of the first order." Senator McCain said that a policy of containing Iraq to blunt its weapons of mass destruction program is "unsustainable, ineffective, unworkable and dangerous." McCain: "I believe Iraq is a threat of the first order, and only a change of regime will make Iraq a state that does not threaten us and others, and where liberated people assume the rights and responsibilities of freedom." [Speech to the Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2/13/03]


 * McCain echoed Bush and Cheney's rationale for going to war. McCain: "It's going to send the message throughout the Middle East that democracy can take hold in the Middle East." [Fox, Hannity & Colmes, 2/21/03]


 * McCain echoed Bush and Cheney's talking points that the U.S. would only be in Iraq for a short time. McCain: "It's clear that the end is very much in sight. ... It won't be'll be a fairly short period of time." [ABC, 4/9/03] 


 * McCain said winning the war would be "easy." "I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women." [CNN, 9/24/02]


During The War: 


 * Senator McCain praised Donald Rumsfeld as late as May 12, 2004, after the Abu Ghraib scandal.


 * Asked if Donald Rumsfeld can continue to be an effective secretary of defense, McCain: "Yes, today I do and I believe he's done a fine job. He's an honorable man." [Hannity and Colmes, 5/12/04]


 * Senator McCain repeatedly supported President Bush on the Iraq War—voting with him in the Senate, defending his actions and publicly praising his leadership.


* McCain maintains the war was a good idea.


At the 2004 Republican National Convention, McCain, focusing on the war in Iraq, said that while weapons of mass destruction were not found, Saddam once had them and "he would have acquired them again." McCain said the mission in Iraq "gave hope to people long oppressed" and it was "necessary, achievable and noble." McCain: "For his determination to undertake it, and for his unflagging resolve to see it through to a just end, President Bush


Senator McCain: "The war, the invasion was not a mistake. [Meet the Press, 1/6/08]


Asked if the war was a good idea worth the price in blood and treasure, McCain: "It was worth getting rid of Saddam Hussein. He had used weapons of mass destruction, and it's clear that he was hell-bent on acquiring them." [Republican Debate, 1/24/08]


* McCain defended Bush's rationale for war. Asked if he thought the president exaggerated the case for war, McCain said, "I don't think so." [Fox News, 7/31/03]


* McCain has been President Bush's most ardent Senate supporter on Iraq. According to Michael Shank of the Foreign Policy in Focus think tank, McCain was at times Bush's "most solid support in the Senate" on Iraq. [Foreign Policy in Focus, 1/15/08]


* McCain voted against holding Bush accountable for his actions in the war. McCain opposed the creation of an independent commission to investigate the development and use of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq. [S. Amdt. 1275 to H.R. 2658, Vote # 284, 7/16/03]


* McCain praised Bush's leadership on the war. McCain: "I think the president has led with great clarity and I think he's done a great job leading the country..." [MSNBC, Hardball, 4/23/03]


Senator McCain has constantly moved the goal posts of progress for the war—repeatedly saying it would be over soon.


* January 2003: "But the point is that, one, we will win this conflict. We will win it easily." [MSNBC, 1/22/03]


* March 2003: "I believe that this conflict is still going to be relatively short." [NBC, Meet the Press, 3/30/03]


* June 2004: "The terrorists know that this is a very critical time." [CNN, 6/23/04]


* December 2005: "Overall, I think a year from now, we will have a fair amount of progress [in Iraq] if we stay the course." [The Hill, 12/8/05]


* November 2006: "We're either going to lose this thing or win this thing within the next several months." [NBC, Meet the Press, 11/12/06]


Senator McCain opposed efforts to end the overextension of the military that is having a devastating impact on our troops.


* McCain voted against requiring mandatory minimum downtime between tours of duty for troops serving in Iraq. [S. Amdt.. 2909 to S Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 341, 9/19/07; S Amdt. 2012 to S Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote #241, 7/11/07]


* McCain was one of only 13 senators to vote against adding $430 million for inpatient and outpatient care for veterans. [S Amdt. 3642 to HR 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06]


* Senator McCain has consistently opposed any plan to withdraw troops from Iraq


* Senator McCain repeatedly voted against a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. [S. Amdt. 3876 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #438, 12/18/07; S.Amdt.. 3875 to S.Amdt.. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote # 437, 12/18/07; S.Amdt.3164 to H.R. 3222, Vote # 362, 10/3/07; S.Amdt. 2898 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #346, 9/21/07; S.Amdt. 2924 to S.Amdt.. 2011 to H.R.1585, Vote #345, 9/21/07; S.Amdt.2 087 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #252, 7/18/07; S.Amdt. 643 to H.R. 1591, Vote #116, 3/27/07; S.Amdt. 4320 to S. 2766, Vote #182, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766, Vote #181, 6/22/06; S.Amdt.. 2519 to S.1042, Vote # 322, 11/15/05]


* Senator McCain has consistently demonized Americans who want to find a responsible way to remove troops from Iraq so that we can take the fight to al Qaeda.


* McCain: "I believe to set a date for withdrawal is to set a date for surrender." [Charlotte Observer, 9/16/07]


* McCain called proponents of a congressional resolution opposing the troop surge in Iraq intellectually dishonest. [Associated Press. 2/4/07]


The Future:


* Senator McCain now says he sees no end to the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq.


* McCain: "[M]ake it a hundred" years in Iraq and "that would be fine with me." [Derry, New Hampshire Town Hall meeting, 1/3/08]


* McCain on how long troops may remain in Iraq: "A thousand years. A million years. Ten million years. It depends on the arrangement we have with the Iraqi government." [Associated Press, 1/04/08]


Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.


I am passing along this messag that I just received. Interesting list.




I think that Hillery Rodham Clinton will use some or all of these sources to defeat "Songbird" McCain

Boston Herald: Romney depicts loose cannon McCain

YouTube - John McCain Losing His Cool

YouTube - John McCain vs. John McCain

YouTube - A Soldiers Words McCain is a war profiteer

YouTube - McCain laughs, Sings Bomb Iran

YouTube - Sleepy Senator John McCain

YouTube - McCain Caught Sleeping Again

YouTube - Raw Video: Too Old? 'You Little Jerk,' McCain Laughs

YouTube - John McCain Gets Owned on Meet The Press

YouTube - Vietnam Veterans Against McCain


Top | Home

©-free 2008 Adelaide Institute