QandO

this same group is the one that attacked mclelland kerry served from 16feb 66 to jan71 he had 2 read it two tours in vn denying this make the navy guys liars liars!!YOU guys are wrong the purple heart was mostly a medic thing i saw a ord major who hit a telephone pole get the purple heart anda band aid so your gibbard bs dont cut it any way the swift boat war was a navy jgs and em war i am pretty sure cmdr gibbard was staying in an ac room . i was in jan26 1968 to 23 jan 69 and mar70 to oct70 am entitled to 8 battle stars in my vn ribbon got bronze star and 2 ac was med evac for 30 days in 68 asked to be sent back to duty your stupid danang navy can not find my records spent a month in yokohama hospital in japan no records flew in an ac 135 hospital plane no records .you are lying about kerry i was a phoenix agent and saw naval /marines torture young girls in danang .

Posted by: sauloe contreras at July 6, 2004 05:09 PM

His first tour was an offshore tour aboard the USS Gridley as the Electronics officer. He probably never even saw the coast of VN.

And no the Purple Heart wasn't "mostly a medic thing" as witnessed by the fact that it has to go through channels to be approved (IOW, medics don't get the final say). A Purple Heart is awarded to a servicemember who is wounded by enemy action, not while screwing around with an M79 with no enemy action during the entire mission. So, as far as I'm concerned, his first PH is a fraud.

You can get battle stars for being in theater while never seeing a shot fired in anger. They're simply designated time periods in which certain battles or campaigns took place. If you were there in that period, you get the star.

As for your assertion we're lying about Kerry ... why not pony up a few facts to refute what you're calling lies. Others have tried and been unable to do so.

Posted by: McQ at July 6, 2004 05:34 PM

A Purple Heart is awarded for injuries received DURING enemy action, but not necessarily by the enemy. There was enemy action during that incident for which Kerry received his first PH.

Posted by: Doug Reese at July 9, 2004 04:33 AM

Uh, no there wasn't any enemy action according to his commander, the doctor, the crew of the boat and the LT (SG) who was on the mission.

Posted by: McQ at July 9, 2004 07:43 AM

All of the comments re: the PH are recent, and made by political opponents, so they have no ring of truth at all. If they were true they would have been made 35 years ago. Not even a very good lie, once again. o'kneel looks stupid to everybody except foolish political tools.
And other tools in general.

Posted by: Rob Lawrence at July 18, 2004 02:31 PM

the swiftboat vets are not political at all
check out their website Http://www.swiftvets.com
and they weren't made 35 years ago because 35 years ago Kerry wasn't trying to be commander in chief

Posted by: Lester Palmer at August 4, 2004 05:52 PM

wait a minute, he was, but it wasn't imminent

Posted by: Lester Palmer at August 4, 2004 05:55 PM

Watch that Kerry guy. Hes a typical, overambitious liberal. Look, he cleverly gets himself sent over to 'nam, shoots a few gooks, lucks out and saves some idiot who fell out of his boat (probably drunk). Steals a bunch of medals from the gullible military all for his master plan of taking over the USA some 30 years later. What an evil genius, a real risktaker!

Posted by: marceaumarceau at August 5, 2004 09:31 AM

SOUNDS LIKE KERRY FABRICATED HIS SERVICE RECORD TO
ENHANCE HIS POSITION TO BE ELECTED.
I THINK HE IS A LIAR AND THE PEOPLE WHO PROMOTE HIM KNOW IT BUT DON'T CARE.

Posted by: BOB at August 5, 2004 12:49 PM

Amazing, The facts are stated, and the libs ignore the facts and give us emotional, unsupported, emotional, drama (I will call this just plain stupidity). Kerry has the same mental defect as George Custer. Enough Said!

Posted by: Capt. Sparrow at August 5, 2004 02:41 PM

Did I mention libs base everything on emotion, not facts? Just wanted to repeat the emotional part because you can't have a logical conversation with a traitor.

Posted by: Capt. Sparrow at August 5, 2004 02:44 PM

Look, the truth of the matter is this: Kerry did what he had to do to survive in Vietnam. If he could keep his men from becoming cannon-fodder, that meant he cared about their survival. Unlike the many Jr Officers coming out of West Point who actually USED their men as cannon-fodder, to further their military careers. Kerry had the intelligence to know back then what we ALL know now: the Vietnam War was a big fraud. At the very least, Kerry...unlike GW Bush, didn't run to his daddy to help keep him out of harm's way when it was his turn to fight. While Kerry was spilling blood FOR his country, Bush was spilling vodka ON his country! We need a guy who looks out for his fellow Americans, like John Kerry did his men! Kerry has my vote!

Posted by: KilltheWomenandChildrenFirst at August 5, 2004 07:22 PM

Yeah, right ... I guess that's why he bailed on 'em after 120 days, huh?

Posted by: McQ at August 5, 2004 07:37 PM

Funny that people keep bringing up Bush's Air National Guard service as if that was a "safe" thing to do. It seems to me that we used to refer to the F-102 (the plane Bush flew) as the "dirt dart". Has anybody ever researched how many National Guard pilots died over the years in training flights, probably would be rather high. I think also if Bush was trying to do something safe, he would have become a national guard supply officer or very low risk like that. (no offense to any supply types out there)

Posted by: mwilso at August 5, 2004 10:39 PM

BOB is right....everyone else is a lawyer.

Posted by: McJaxon at August 5, 2004 11:57 PM

Someone mentioned emotional responses. The Democrats are the masters. Ask them anything they don't want to respond to, and the issue becomes one of emotion. "You weren't there, you have no knowledge . . . how can you criticize!". Well, Kerry wasn't there too long either. 4 months. Long enough to make sure he got the purple hearts he needed to bail out of harms way. John Kerry is a coward and a liar!! Massachusetts deserves him as a Senator. One who misses more sessionss than he attends. Like his "medals" all he wants is the glory, not the work to get there. I speak from 25 year of military service. It is a shame that Kerry wasn't fragged by his own men. Would have saved the county a lot of anquish.

Posted by: Captain Don at August 6, 2004 07:48 AM

Look Captain Don, if you wasted 25 years of your life serving in the military...that speaks volumes about what a personal loser YOU are...never mind John Kerry! At least he had the common sense and wisdom to get out while the getting was good. Don't blame other people for your shortcomings, and for the fact that you had to settle for being a lifer just because you had no other options in life. As a rule, people who make a career out of the military do so as a way to avoid going on public assistance. Keep your mouth shut and be grateful that you and your family were able to feed at the trough of the US taxpayer for the better part of your miserable life.

Posted by: KilltheWomenandChildrenFirst at August 6, 2004 04:26 PM

WOW! Hey KtWaCF, you don't respect our brave military, do you?

Posted by: Marty at August 6, 2004 04:55 PM

Marty, I guess going back to finish up your GED really payed off, huh?

Posted by: KilltheWomenandChildrenFirst at August 6, 2004 05:54 PM

Hey - KtWaCF WTF are you? A PhD? A brain surgeon?

Posted by: El Crobaro at August 6, 2004 08:35 PM

KTWCF -- i think you should see a doctor and get your "Little Man Syndrome" fixed.

Posted by: voice of reason at August 7, 2004 03:33 AM

The individual from KTWCF demonstrates the typical aberrant thought processes of the mindless liberal Left. Vitriolic comments instead of reasoned debate, name calling instead of addressing the issues and mindless emotional rantings instead of presenting relevant facts are the sine qua non of those calling themselves liberal. The right to free speech Americans enjoy and that KTWCF casually takes for granted and utilizes in such an abusive manner is protected by those in the military such as Captain Don that KTWCF so readily disparages. While pathetic KTWCF relaxes in air-conditioned comfort those in the military risk their lives daily protecting our rights.

Posted by: Lawrence Gelman at August 8, 2004 09:30 AM

Great! You have to love the name calling on both sides. Who ever started this "no dirty" politics anyway. There's no such thing. Really, what's wrong with name calling and calling Bush and Kerry liars? Let them prove otherwise. Look at the Dems convention. How boring! They acted like nuns. Moore and Dean are the only entertainment the Dems have going. It's simple. Kerry isn't telling lies. He got the metals anyway he could.
However, just think about it. He threw the metals or the ribbons over the fence because they didn't mean much to him. Because he really didn't deserve them. Let's face it the vets at Kerry's rally are grateful to Kerry. Sounds like he jammed that boat in fast-forward every time he heard a shot. I'd love him too if he got me out of harms way. The Swift Boat vets against Kerry have my vote. You can tell their on the upside of the truth. You can just tell. I think within 90 days Kerry will be exposed and that will be a good thing. Kerry acts likes he's Patton touring around with his vets. Release the records and let's get it over with.

Posted by: Michael at August 8, 2004 01:30 PM

Have you ever wondered how this campaign would be going if George W's squadron had been sent to the RVN and John Kerry had been given the diferment he wanted and stayed in France to study for another year??? John Kerry has made his VietNam service front and center so he should have expected an onslaught of oposition to this tactic. I know lots of guys who got PH's some deserved, others ?? My best friend also got a PH & Silver Star..He was there only 3 weeks with the 3rd Marines.Problem was it cost him his life. He was a great friend and a great guy and only 18 but he would not have made a good president..

Posted by: 68-69 at August 8, 2004 03:13 PM

The Swift Boat Veterans, share the
funding and at least two of the same
members as the group that smeared
McCain.

Look at what has been done to Bob
Kerrey, to McCain, to Chuck Hagel,
to Max Cleland and now to John
Kerry? There is a pattern here
and it is not pretty. Our veterans
BOTH Republican and Democrat are being
smeared when they get in the way of
this administration.

With political passions the way they
are, it isn't hard to round up a
couple of hundred nuts. O'Neill and
others have changed their stories
again and again. Corsi is a bigot
and a conspiracy theorist. Several
have been caught in outright lies, big
and small.

This is not a Democratic issue or a
Republican issue, it's a veterans
issue. Remember what they did to
John McCain--calling him unstable,
saying he had a child by a prostitute,
attacking his wife...

It doesn't do the GOP any good to
support this trash... sometimes the
enemy of my enemy is my enemy.
Be real. You know it. I know it.

Posted by: Greg at August 9, 2004 07:39 AM

The Swift Boat Veterans, share the funding and at least two of the same members as the group that smeared McCain.

Facts are either facts or they're not. Why not address the facts and refute them instead of worrying about who funded their ability to get them out?

With political passions the way they are, it isn't hard to round up a couple of hundred nuts. O'Neill and others have changed their stories again and again. Corsi is a bigot and a conspiracy theorist. Several have been caught in outright lies, big
and small.

How about sharing those lies then. While you're at it how about explaining John Kerry's "Christmas in Cambodia" for us as well. Then explain how self-inflicted wounds (even by accident) suddenly qualify for PHs. Tell me how blowing up a rice cache and getting rice in your ass because of your neglegence qualifies for a PH? Instead of attacking the messengers, why not address the facts they've brought forward?

BTW, this "group of nuts" formed themselves in May of this year. This isn't something new. And the vast majority of them served with Kerry, to include one, Steve Garner, who served on Kerry's boat (BTW, denying these men served with Kerry because they weren't on the same boat is essentially as dumb as dening a fighter pilots wing man doesn't serve with him because he's not in the same airplane).

You've obviously thrown your objectivity out the door ... and that's not surprising ... but calling people names and ignoring what they bring up because it is inconvenient to your faith is, well, intellectually dishonest.

Posted by: McQ at August 9, 2004 08:41 AM

bush was awol!

Posted by: god at August 9, 2004 09:48 AM

Then you'll have no problem producing the documentation which charges Bush with AWOL and then convicts him.

Do yourself a favor ... go read up on what AWOL means and how its handled in the military. You apparently haven't a clue.

Posted by: McQ at August 9, 2004 09:59 AM

I was in the Air Force I was attached to a flight.Four flights made up our squadron and our squadron was part of the entire wing. I was in( cobra) "C" flight..I worked with the guys from a,b& d flights. I knew most of them at least by what flight they were in and anything they might have done including being wounded. I would have known about especialy the details of how and where.We lived in the same hooch and and associated with each other very closely. You can't say that the vets for Kerry are above reproach and then say the ones against him are nuts..If Bush was AWOL there must be some record of the MP's bringing him in and the charges he faced under the UCMJ...right?

Posted by: 68-69 at August 9, 2004 10:36 AM

You're right 68-69, claiming that those who served in other boats beside the Kerry boat didn't "serve" with him is about as valid as saying a fighter pilot's wing man didn't serve with him because he wasn't in the same airplane.

Posted by: McQ at August 9, 2004 11:08 AM

First of all, As far as I know, McQ didn't erase one of your comments. I did erase one, however. I thought it was excessively abusive. Additionally, since you are prone to posting things like this:

Look Captain Don, if you wasted 25 years of your life serving in the military...that speaks volumes about what a personal loser YOU are...never mind John Kerry!

...you're lucky I haven't already banned your IP address to prevent you from posting, you son of a bitch.

I notice though, that you don't have the balls to leave a real email address when you post your little screeds, though, do you, ass?

Since you don't feel the normal standards of civility apply to you, I take great pleasure in saying f*ck you, and the horse you rode in on.

Posted by: Dale Franks at August 10, 2004 12:38 AM

Look, Richard Nixon was desparately seeking dirt on Kerry during the VVAW days. O'Neill was recruited by Nixon and Colson. If a SHRED of what the Swift Boat guys are saying were true, Nixon would have blasted it all over. For whatever reason, O'Neill and his gang are fabricating.

Posted by: patriotgal at August 10, 2004 12:57 AM

Actually Dale, I did erase his comments. He's a troll. His attacks are ad hominum and frankly became so vicious that I felt they had to go.

The same paragraph you cite was the one that did it for me. At that point it was no longer a dissenting opinion, which are quite welcome, it was nothing but an insulting screed, and I have no use for those who resort to that. The only thing triple-digit about this goon was the number of insults per comment.

So to KWACF go find some other place to troll and spread you vile filth. No one here is interested in hearing your insult laden nonsense.

Posted by: McQ at August 10, 2004 07:41 AM

Patriotgal: How would Nixon have even known back then? Kerry wasn't running for president and using his 4 whole months in VN as his best qualification for the job. The info wasn't out when Nixon was president.

But do me a favor, will you. O'Neill says John Kerry's "Christmas in Cambodia" claim is a outright fabrication. Seems just about every fact concerning that back O'Neill. So how is he the one "fabricating".

Do you not believe that those who served in the same place and in the same missions as Kerry have as much right to tell their version of those events as Kerry does ... especially since it is Kerry who's brought this all up and made it a centerpiece of his campaign?

And don't you find it at all strange that of the 23 Swiftees who served with Kerry, only 1 ...1... supports his version? I could see your point a little better if most saw it his way or there was a 50-50 split. But 90% who say he's lying?

The Navy did a pretty good job of putting those 22 "Republican" Swift Boat Commanders with Kerry didn't they? Must have known he was going to run for President 35 years later and use his service in Vietnam as a centerpiece.

Posted by: McQ at August 10, 2004 07:47 AM

I've seen this guy who is smearing Kerry, O'Neil, on The Dick Cavett Show debating Kerry. He looks like a guy who didn't get laid very much back in the day. Perhaps this is why he was so bloodthirsty back in Vietnam, and why he is so bitter now.

Posted by: Hanoi Jane at August 10, 2004 07:16 PM

If Lt. Cmdr. Hibbard was John Kerry's immediate superior and he didn't grant recommend/endorse John Kerry for his first Purple Heart, who did? That would be a nice fact to have. It seems unlikely to me that anyone other than Lt. Cmdr. Hibbard could be responsible for the award.

I read recently that Dr. Letson was not the examining physician for the wound for which John Kerry received his first Purple Heart. Is this correct? Do the swift boat vets for truth have an official document corroborating Letson's story?

I haven't visited the swiftvet site yet (until I visited this site, I didn't know the URL), so I don't have a full picture of the group's allegations, I will visit it after I post this. However, with regard to that, I did visit www.disinfopedia.org which has a large section dedicated to providing people with the type of info for which McQ asked (he wanted some people to address the material of the group's allegations, rather than produce ad hominum arguments and emotionally backed convictions). Some of the responses there are subjective and emotional, rather than material, but several (such as the fact about Letson) are exactly what McQ challenged others to produce.

Posted by: Wondering at August 11, 2004 07:26 PM

Wondering: Hibbard apparently left Vietnam prior to the end of Kerry's tour and apparently the PH was submitted by Kerry at that time (that per O'Neill in an interview I heard).

Letson was the examining physician. He was the only physician in the group. The person who signed the medical report was a corpsman who assisted Letson and then filled out the paperwork. The corpsman died in 1992.

Posted by: McQ at August 11, 2004 07:37 PM

Here is the situation fellas: What these disgruntled Swift Boat old-timers are saying about John Kerry is just plain unpatriotic, and wrong! Essentially, they are saying that the Navy will hand out Silver Stars, much like Planned Parenthood passes out free condoms. To do so,l besmirches the good name of all fighting men...much like John Kerry, who have put their asses on the front battleline to defend our nation. Anyone who criticizes Kerry for his valiant combat duty in Vietnam, is un-American, and for the most part is a traitor to our country. Moreover, You might want to think twice about letting Captain Don post in this room, given that he has already made a veiled threat to "frag" our next Commander in Chief, John Kerry. To ever who is sponsoring this board, don't be a bit surprised if the Secret Service gives you a call.

Posted by: SaltyOldVet at August 11, 2004 08:15 PM

Saltyoldvet: Why is it unpatriotic and wrong for these guys who served in Vietnam to tell their version of the same events as John Kerry? Where's he get a pass on all of this?

Are you saying these guys didn't put their asses on the line as well? Frankly, all of these guys put their asses on the line for 3 times as much time as Kerry did ... they pulled full 12 month tours.

Anyone who criticizes Kerry for his valiant combat duty in Vietnam, is un-American, and for the most part is a traitor to our country.

And you, sir, are as full of shit as a Christmas Turkey ... but this is America and you're welcome to your opinion, regardless of how ill informed it might be.

Posted by: McQ at August 11, 2004 10:19 PM

McQ, thanks for the response, it is interesting how one's perspective changes with more complete information. Your response about Letson makes me think the disinfopedia people are aptly named since they clearly made _factual_ statements in Letson's case that are misleading.

Who was Kerry's CO after Hibbard left? Is he the one who approved Kerry's first Purple Heart? What does he say about it now?

Posted by: Wondering at August 12, 2004 11:17 AM

McQ,

I do appreciate you position, however it could just be that eating shit out of a turkey's ass is the crux of your problem. My mother always used a nice cornbread stuffing. Are you from the deep south by chance?

The reality of the situation is that even if a GI spent ONE DAY on Vietnam, they could have been felled by a sniper's bullet. Although I am certain that you can't relate to this...most chicken-hawks can't, four months can be an eternity in a war zone. What you can't seem to grasp, is that this smear campaign being waged by the Swift Boat Vets for BS against John Kerry, is being financed by the same conservative group that financed the smear campaign against John McCain. Please, for the sake of our country, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! Has it ever occurred to you that maybe these bitter yahoos have a vendetta against John Kerry because he had the intelligence and wisdom to get the hell out of Vietnam? Moreover, could it just be that they are lying to further their political agenda? All I ask is that you think about it before you open your pie-hole again to criticize a true American hero. Is that too much to ask?

Posted by: SaltyOldVet at August 12, 2004 11:35 AM

my oh my! I stumbled across this board by chance, and couldn't help but notice some of the interesting comments and observations. If I could just add my two cents: I am a registered Independant. I truly despise both major political parties, because there is really not that much difference when you break it all down. What I do have an issue with, is the way SBVFT are attacking a fellow soldier who risked his life to defend our country. Kerry, much like GWBush, could have taken the easy way out, and we wouldn't even be having this conversation. FYI, Kerry was no REMF. He was in the thick of it. Moreover, ALL of the men who ACTUALLY served with Kerry ON HIS BOAT...with the exception of one or two, support him...and say that he did a good job as their commander. So tell me, why should we believe a bunch of guys who never served in close proximity with Kerry? Bill Clinton said it best" When our country called on our finest young men to serve in Vietnam, John Kerry said, "Send me!" To anyone with at least half a brain, that should speak volumes about the man's reputation and character. We should only be so lucky to have John Kerry as our next President. Bottom line: If you want to support our troops in Iraq, then vote for John Kerry come November! He will bring them home with honor.

Posted by: TheVoiceofReason at August 12, 2004 12:21 PM

There's a lot of info here but indulge me this one time

Will start with Bush (will get to Kerry)

“When Bush was admitted into the Guard in 1968, 100,000 other men were on waiting lists around the country, hoping to win admission to similar units. The Guard was popular because those units were rarely sent to Vietnam.” [LAT 7/4/99]

“Records from his [Bush’s] military file show that in January 1968, after inquiring about Guard admission, Mr. Bush went to an Air Force recruiting office near Yale, where he took and passed the test required by the Air Force for pilot trainees. His score on the pilot aptitude section, one of five on the test, was in the 25th percentile, the lowest allowed for would-be fliers.” [7/4/99]

“The Texas Air Guard had about 900 slots for pilots, air and ground crew members, supervisors, technicians and support staff. Sgt. Donald Dean Barnhart, who still serves in the Guard, said that he kept a waiting list of about 150 applicants' names. He said it took up to a year and a half for one name to move to the top of the list. "Quite a few gentlemen were wanting to get in," he recalled. For Bush, there was no wait. He met with commander Staudt in his Houston office and made his application--all before his graduation in June.” [LAT, 7/4/99]

“He [Commander Staudt] recommended Bush for a direct appointment--a special process that would allow the young recruit to become a second lieutenant right out of basic training without having to go through the rigors of officer candidate school. The process also cleared the way for a slot in pilot training school.” [LAT, 7/4/99]

“But Charles C. Shoemake, an Air Force veteran who later joined the Texas Air National Guard, eventually retiring as a full colonel, said that direct appointments were rare and hard to get, and required extensive credentials. "I went from master sergeant to first lieutenant based on my three years in college and 15 years as a noncommissioned officer. Then I got considered for a direct appointment." Even then, he said, "I didn't know whether I was going to get into pilot training."” [LAT 7/4/99]

· “As for a direct commission for someone of Bush's limited qualifications, Hail said, "I've never heard of that. Generally they did that for doctors only, mostly because we needed extra flight surgeons."” [LAT 7/4/99]

And in case you guys think this doesn't matter-

"I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed... managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units...Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to their country." (Colin Powell’s autobiography, My American Journey, p. 148)

But I guess our SOS has changed his mind.

Now questions for those bashing Kerry

George Elliott a man of integrity

Elliott said in the ad that Kerry "has not been honest about what happened in Viet Nam." In his original affidavit Elliott said Kerry had not been "forthright" in Vietnam. The only example he offered of Kerry not being "honest" or "forthright" was this: "For example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back."

Makes sense but wait...

The official citation shows Kerry was not awarded the Silver Star "for simply pursuing and dispatching" the Viet Cong. In fact, the killing is not even mentioned in the official citation. The citation - based on what Elliott wrote up at the time - covers Kerry's decision to attack rather than flee from two ambushes, including one in which he "led a landing party." It says Kerry first attacked an "entrenched enemy" less than 50 feet away: "Unhesitatingly, Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry ordered his boat to attack as all units opened fire and beached directly in front of the enemy ambushers. This daring and courageous tactic surprised the enemy and succeeded in routing a score of enemy soldiers." It says "many enemy weapons" were captured. Later, 800 yards away, Kerry's boat encountered a second ambush and a B-40 rocket exploded "close aboard" Kerry's boat. "With utter disregard for his own safety, and the enemy rockets, he again ordered a charge on the enemy, beached his boat only ten feet away from the VC rocket position, and personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy." There is no mention of enemy casualties at all. Kerry was cited for "extraordinary daring and personal courage . . . in attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire."

Gee he doesn't remember what the citation was for, but still if he knew John Kerry had shot a poor boy in the back it would make perfect sense that he would change his mind. Let's see what he says!

George Elliott (Globe account): It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here. . . . I knew it was wrong . . . In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake.

Wow!! talk about a flip flop but that's inconsistent with what he said last year!!

Elliott (Boston Globe, June 2003): I ended up writing it up for a Silver Star, which is well deserved, and I have no regrets or second thoughts at all about that. . . . (It) was pretty courageous to turn into an ambush even though you usually find no more than two or three people there.

Oh I guess it's not inconsistent.

But the Boston Globe guy is a liar. It's much more plausible to believe a proffessional reporter, on a high profile story, where he can be directly contradicted by the interviewee, would make shit up as oppossed to the guy who's dementia like stories change with the seasons

Its as if stories are changing by the hour...

(a few hours after the "It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words." quote)
Later Elliott signed a second affidavit saying he still stands by the words in the TV ad. But Elliott also made what he called an "immaterial clarification" - saying he has no first-hand information that Kerry was less than forthright about what he did to win the Silver Star.
What Elliott said in the ad is that Kerry "has not been honest about what happened in Viet Nam." In his original affidavit Elliott said Kerry had not been "forthright" in Vietnam. The only example he offered of Kerry not being "honest" or "forthright" was this: "For example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back."

The Boston Globe- those lyin bastards.

Thank God the swifties credibilty can't be undermined with just one lie, like John Kerry's being in Cambodia, which completely redefines him as a lying, scumbag, liberal, VC lovin, french, homosexual, Pope lovin, vegetarian, loser!!

Keep up the fair, reasoned, dispassionate discussion

Posted by: Tobias at August 13, 2004 02:27 AM

If your spouse told you she was going to Wal-Mart and your friend said he saw her with a good lookin guy at a resturant in a nearby town you would have a choice to make...Believe your wife or believe your friend. Someone knows the truth as painful as it may be. If your friend is right would you stay together or divorce??

Posted by: 68-69 at August 13, 2004 06:05 AM

They call themselves Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, but they are no "band of brothers" to John Kerry.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a former prisoner of war in Vietnam who chairs Bush's campaign in Arizona, says their ad is dishonest and has called on the president's campaign to disavow it. Retired Army general Tommy Franks, who commanded U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, told ABC's This Week on Sunday that Kerry is "absolutely" qualified to be commander in chief.

Who are these men who say Kerry didn't deserve the medals he received as a swift boat commander, a view sharply at odds with that of men who served under him? And why are they telling their stories now, more than 35 years later?

On its Web site (www.swiftvets.com), the group calls itself "non-partisan." But public records show that two of its three main backers are longtime GOP contributors: Bob Perry, a Texas home builder who gave $100,000, and Harlan Crow, a Dallas real estate executive, who gave $25,000.

The third major backer is John O'Neill, who put up $25,000 and is co-author of the group's book. The Texas lawyer was closely tied to Bush when he was Texas governor. In 1971, O'Neill, a swift boat veteran who didn't serve with Kerry, was picked by the Nixon White House to counter Kerry's anti-war stand in TV debates.

The group's chairman and founder, retired rear admiral Roy Hoffmann, says the veterans were angered after reading historian Douglas Brinkley's book about Kerry's service, Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War.

Brinkley accuses the group of "a smear campaign." He interviewed at least seven of the men, some of whom he portrays harshly. Hoffmann, the Navy's top swift boat commander in Vietnam, is described in the book as "blood-thirsty" and "egomaniacal."

Like Hoffmann, none of the 13 men in the TV ad served on either of the two swift boats — small, lightly armed patrol craft — that Kerry commanded. Of the group's 254 members — out of 3,500 swift boat sailors who served in Vietnam — only one served under Kerry. The rest who did serve on Kerry's boats back his record.

Many of Kerry's critics commanded boats that went out on missions with Kerry. Others never met him. Most are still angry about Kerry's leadership of Vietnam Veterans Against the War after he returned home.

Among those criticizing Kerry:

• George Elliott, who came to Kerry's defense during his 1996 Senate campaign when questions were raised about his Silver Star. Kerry received the award after beaching his boat to chase a Viet Cong guerrilla who was firing from shore. Kerry jumped ashore and killed the guerrilla. As Kerry's commander, Elliott approved the award and gave him glowing marks in fitness reports. But in an affidavit last month, Elliott said he "was never informed that (Kerry) had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back." Last week, Elliott recanted that affidavit in a statement to The Boston Globe, saying he had made "a terrible mistake." But the Swift Boat Veterans group has since issued a statement reaffirming Elliott's affidavit.

Elliott was not available for comment Sunday, but in an interview with USA TODAY earlier this year, he said that while he strongly disagreed with Kerry's anti-war activities, "I don't know how anyone would have taken the risks he took in combat just for the glory of running for office."

• Adrian Lonsdale, who in 1996 called Kerry "among the finest of those swift boat drivers." He says he changed his mind after reading Brinkley's book. Lonsdale, who outranked Kerry, recalls meeting him only once at an officers club.

• Charles Plumly, a retired Navy captain who was Hoffmann's chief of staff. He says Kerry "required a lot of supervision" and "did things without permission." Asked in an interview for examples, he said, "I can't give you exact specifics."

• Louis Letson, a doctor who says he treated Kerry. He says Kerry didn't deserve his first Purple Heart because he "inadvertently wounded himself" and "there was no hostile fire." Medical records, however, note that Kerry was treated for shrapnel by J.C. Carreon, not Letson. Bill Zaladonis, who was on Kerry's boat at the time, says the men believed they were shooting at Viet Cong.

FactCheck.org, a non-partisan group that monitors political ads, says Letson's story is "based on hearsay, and disputed hearsay at that." It concludes, "There is reason to doubt" the Swift Boat Veterans' ad because of its funding and because of the discrepancies in memory between Kerry's defenders and attackers.

So there you have it! Hopefully, all of you who were previously uneducated or misinforned on this matter, will now have a better understanding of the motivation of SBVFT, and their smear campaign against a valiant American hero.

Posted by: LetTheREALtruthBeTold at August 13, 2004 12:08 PM

Well, we're certainly more educated now about your ability to cut and paste someone else's thoughts.

Oh, by the way, It's 13 August 04. You do know this post is more than three month's old, right? It ever occur to you to think that, I dunno, we might have discussed this in more depth since this original article?

Just asking.

Posted by: Dale Franks at August 13, 2004 12:18 PM

Dale Franks,

All you have to do to understand why our country is in such deep trouble, is look in the mirror. Unfortunately, there are millions of Americans out there...much like you, who are more caught up in indignificant minutia, than they are relevant facts. You are much more concerned that I cut & pasted "someone else's thoughts", than you are the veracity of those thoughts. Have you ever stopped to think that maybe more than one person shares the same ideas on this subject? The truth is, what the truth is...whether I state it, or someone else. Would it have been more original in your opinion had I pulled stuff out of my ass, like the SBVFT ilk? Do you prefer originality to truth? Moreover, genius...this article was published just 5 days ago in USA Today. All credible news orginizations are proclaiming that this SBVFT story is bunk, which is why you only hear about it on neoconservative right-wing radio programs and FOX News.

Posted by: LetTheTruthBeTold at August 13, 2004 02:25 PM

1. You pasted the article without attribution, as if it was your opinion. That's intellectually dishonest, which is kind of sad, coming from someone who styles himself "Let the Truth Be Told".

2. I may not be a genius, but I'm smart enough to tell when someone is spamming my blog with someone else's thoughts.

3. The article that was published in USA Today was an opinion piece, not a news story. Maybe you haven't been keeping up with current events, but "news" pieces require a factual basis for printing. "Opinion" pieces are just that: opinions. Just because it's in an op/ed, doesn't mean it's true. It just means the writer thinks it is. There's a difference.

4. This is a blog, genius. That means for the most part, that no one is looking at post that was made way, way back on May 5. It also means we've been discussing this constantly for the past week or so since the ad came out. I suppose it never occured to you to see if anything we'd written recently has any relevance to your article.

5. Spamming a 3 month old blog post is not the most useful way of getting your thoughts--I mean, the thoughts you've stolen from someone else and tried to pass off as your own, without attribution--to our current readership. While I'm sure it will strike you as wondrously odd, most of our readers will actually have a better chance to see your little article if you insert it into a more current post. Funny how that works.

6. I neither criticized or commented on the truth or falsity of your article. I merely commented on your dishonesty by not attributing it, and your stupidity for posting it to a three month old entry that hardly anybody is reading any more. I think we've adequately covered the subtsance of the Kerry allegations and rebuttals in our blog over the past few weeks, something that has apparently escaped you entirely.

By the way, does Kerry's increasing lack of credibility over the Christmas he spent in "Cambodia" affect your assessment of his credibility?

Huh. Why am I even asking? Of course it doesn't.

I guess there are some facts that don't really interest you after all.

Posted by: Dale Franks at August 13, 2004 02:54 PM

George Elliott, who came to Kerry's defense during his 1996 Senate campaign when questions were raised about his Silver Star.

He didn't come to his defense about his Silver Star he came to his defense concerning an accusation of committing a war crime in connection with that action.

As Kerry's commander, Elliott approved the award and gave him glowing marks in fitness reports.

No he did not ... he gave him marginal FITREPS at best. He dinged him pretty bad in some areas.

Adrian Lonsdale, who in 1996 called Kerry "among the finest of those swift boat drivers." He says he changed his mind after reading Brinkley's book. Lonsdale, who outranked Kerry, recalls meeting him only once at an officers club.

Lonsdale changed his mind because "Tour of Duty" contains an entire conversation that was reported by Kerry in which he supposedly confronted Lonsdale about more support. Per the other Swift skippers and Lonsdale, the conversation and those questions never occurred except in Kerry's journal, which Brinkly used as a source for the book. Lonsdale, btw, was a COAST GUARD captain who skippered an LST and not in Kerry's chain of command.

Charles Plumly, a retired Navy captain who was Hoffmann's chief of staff. He says Kerry "required a lot of supervision" and "did things without permission." Asked in an interview for examples, he said, "I can't give you exact specifics."

Which makes perfect sense if you understand how command works. What that means is commanders who had Kerry were reporting up the line to Hoffmann through his CoS Plumly, that they had an officer who required a lot of supervision and did things without premission. Brinkley tells of the time Kerry took his boat to Saigon without permission.
CAPT Thomas Wright reported to Elliott that while on missions in which Wright was OiTC, Kerry would disappear without warning, that his boat had poor fire discipline and wouldn't listen to orders. “I had a lot of trouble getting him to follow orders,” recalls Wright. “He had a different view of leadership and operations. Those of us with direct experience working with Kerry found him difficult and oriented towards his personal, rather than unit goals and objectives. I believed that overall responsibility rested squarely on the shoulders of the OIC or OTC in a free-fire zone. You had to be right (before opening fire). Kerry seemed to believe there were no rules in a free-fire zone and you were supposed to kill anyone. I didn’t see it that way.” He requested that Kerry not be included with him an future operations and Elliott complied.

Louis Letson, a doctor who says he treated Kerry. He says Kerry didn't deserve his first Purple Heart because he "inadvertently wounded himself" and "there was no hostile fire." Medical records, however, note that Kerry was treated for shrapnel by J.C. Carreon, not Letson. Bill Zaladonis, who was on Kerry's boat at the time, says the men believed they were shooting at Viet Cong.

Louis Letson was the ONLY doctor at the facility. HM1 (Hospital Mate 1) Jesse Carreon was his assistant. Letson treated the scratch. Carreon filled out the paperwork and signed it. That's what HM's do. That's why he was Dr. Letson's assistant.

Bill Zaladonis, who was on Kerry's boat at the time, says the men believed they were shooting at Viet Cong.

Which has no relevancy one way or the other. Per the others there, there was no hostile fire involved in the incident. There is also no report in any of the Navy's SITRPES or patrol activity for that night that notes hostile fire. Per Dr. Letson, the tiny piece of shrapnel was from an M79 round. The only person who fired an M79 that night was Kerry.

FactCheck.org, a non-partisan group that monitors political ads, says Letson's story is "based on hearsay, and disputed hearsay at that." It concludes, "There is reason to doubt" the Swift Boat Veterans' ad because of its funding and because of the discrepancies in memory between Kerry's defenders and attackers.

And I've addressed FactCheck's rather poorly done "facts" here.

Like Hoffmann, none of the 13 men in the TV ad served on either of the two swift boats — small, lightly armed patrol craft — that Kerry commanded.

You, like most of Kerry's defenders with no apparent military experience just can't seem to grasp how this all works. Swift boats fought together in groups, their tactics were based on groups and they were withink 40 to 60 yards of each other at all times.

Steve Gardner was on his boat and he agrees with the 13. Additionally the 13 served with Kerry like rifle squads serve together in an infantry platoon. To pretend they didn't see or participate in the same events as Kerry is asinine.

Posted by: McQ at August 13, 2004 03:21 PM

Look McCrackDaddy,

You obviously never saw "Apocolypse Now". In that fine movie about the Vietnam experience, it was a solo swift boat piloted by Captain Benjamin Willard that moved up the river on a mission to find and kill Colonel Kurtz. So please, don't tell me that swift boats always traveled in groups.

Moreover, I DO have military experience. I served two years of Jr ROTC in high school, and had the opportunity to twirl wooden rifles on the drill team.

Posted by: LetTheTRUTHBeTold at August 13, 2004 04:31 PM

If Kerry is so great and such a war hero let him release his military record as he has wanted bush to do and by the way it takes a lot more smarts to fly a fighter jet than run a boat in a river So Kerry put up or shut up your the person who wanted your great war hero out to help get elected

Posted by: Roy Brown at August 16, 2004 06:55 AM

If Kerry is so great and such a war hero let him release his military record as he has wanted bush to do and by the way it takes a lot more smarts to fly a fighter jet than run a boat in a river So Kerry put up or shut up your the person who wanted your great war hero out to help get elected

Posted by: Roy Brown at August 16, 2004 06:57 AM

I wasn't in 'Nam, but did spend over 2 years at Okinawa during the 50's so Had a bit of military time.
We were just west of Kadena Air Base and we could always tell when there was a fresh crop of pilots waiting to fly the old F-100's of that era.
The locals would be in their small boats a few miles from the runway to pick up the splashers. There were usually a couple of 100's dropping in the drink every month or so. Bush never banged his 102 into the ground or water. Kerry did run his boat ashore at least once to shoot someone, I'd liken this to him acting like a SEAL.

Kerry surely did not have the regulations at his finger tips to find out about the exit strategy that left his crew there. Someone (a REMF?) had to have planted the seed. I wonder how many shelf's the Navy regs fill and how obscure the reg was that allowed for 3 and you are out?

Posted by: ron at August 19, 2004 03:47 PM

Liberals are so disconected with reality. Trying to base the truth on a anti war movie to defend the claim Kerry ran solo trips. My god, your so pathetic. You liberals need to spend some real time out of the states, and not in some tourist hotel either to get a view of how good you really have it here. How can you want to defend a Gigolo for President and Commander in Chief. So Kerry goes to VN in the navy to try and mirror JFK PT duty. Spends 1 month in the secured training area, then manages to become wounded and relieved from combat in 3 months time, only after taking advantage of an incoming CO. In that short 3 months of combat duty, he managed to become despised by 90% of his fellow vets in the small group maning the swift boats. You libs are just anti Bush and I can bet it is connected with a disgust for anyone who has real moral values.
sgt r

Posted by: sgt r at August 19, 2004 08:30 PM

God help us if Kerry gets into office!!!
I do believe Kerry is one of the biggest liers ever this country has ever seen at this level.
Kerry started this fight and now that it is getting hot he wants to cry foul. Give him all the hell you can with the truth.
I wish I could help in your quest to help oust this tree hugger with money but I was injured 2 months ago and funds are not available at this time.
Love your ads and I hope you keep getting under Kerry's skin because we don't need trash like him to lead the USA.
May God bless you fellows
Lee Price
A Proud West Virginian

Posted by: Lee Price at August 20, 2004 05:26 PM

an intererting observation i've made---Kerry is in cambodia Christmas 1968, the war is already 3 years old, unpopular, poorly run, etc. The people who should be blamed are the liberals such as LBJ, Robert mac namara. But John F. Scary decides to blame-- you guessed it-- a Republican who hasn't taken office yet!!!!

Posted by: roger at August 20, 2004 06:27 PM

I put Kerry in the same category as jane fonda. They are both forgiven but I don't forget. I was not a Viet Nam veteran. I got out in 1963. I know many guys who were vets and are still suffering from wounds recieved but never got PH's. Also the guys I know that got a PH suffered a lot more than Kerry's bandaid scratches. Also they never put their brothers down even if they disagreed with the war.
Pat

Posted by: Pat Keohane at August 20, 2004 08:07 PM

I first heard about this prick while onboard CVA-66 WestPac '72. A Chief in the CPO Mess had served as a riverene in the same unit as Kerry at the same time. Responding to Kerry's political BS about all the US military murderers in VN, the Chief denounced Kerry and some of his boat crew as 'you vouch for me and I'll vouch for you' regarding the 'write up' for medals.
(One of those dirty little secrets about opportunists in war zones... sorta like nobody in the family ever talks about Uncle Harry's skirts and stockings!)
Anyway, we all knew 'it' was going on somewhere/sometime ... you vouch for me etc... but you don't talk about it because you don't want to demean the guys who really deserve the heroism medals or PHs. (Occassionally, you'd hear about one of these pukes being exposed... and that would be good.)
Anyway, over the years Kerry's name (because of his vociferous war story orations) would pop up at the scuttlebutt re his 'methinks thou dost protest too much' crap.
He sure sounds like the typical, regulation, BS artist too me. He's just getting caught. And that's good.
Sgt Maj
USMC

Posted by: jgdoty at August 20, 2004 10:00 PM

Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 10:07 AM
Subject: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth

Over the last week or so, a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has been attacking me. Of course, this group isn't interested in the truth - and they're not telling the truth. They didn't even exist until I won the nomination for president.

I have read, "Unfit For Command".

I support the Swift Boat Veterans speaking out Against John Kerry.

I served in Vietnam (1969-1971).

I agree with a comment made by Toi Dang, a Vietnamese sailor who served with Kerry in Coastal Division 11 on An Thoi. Listed in the Unfit For Command book.... In Dang's words: "His testimony was all lies. He is a brother only to other liars--not to my Swift brothers."

Guess those of us upset about the Fonda/Kerry issues of the past, can now somehow involve ourselves in correcting those that support them. Being silent only brings others to support their lies. I for one suggest a full accounting of Kerry's conduct in Vietnam......

I have friends feeling very strongly about their Democratic Party. I also feel the same way. However, I changed parties, because of this issue.

Norbert J. Cheri, CMSgt, USAF (Retired)

Posted by: Norbert J. Cheri at August 21, 2004 12:09 PM

If John Kerry commited war crimes as he says he did he belongs in jail!

If he saw war crimes and did nothing and reported nothing to his chain of command he again belongs in jail!!

If he lied (under Oath) about the formentioned war crimes then he still belongs in jail for Perjury!!!

HANOI Jane & John can't hide from their past!!!!

Veterans unite it's now payback time!!!!!

Sfc Robert White
Uncle Sam's Army (Ret)

Posted by: ROBERT WHITE at August 21, 2004 11:47 PM

THis is in reply to killthewomenandchildrenfirst. It amazes me that people like you bask in the freedom and rights that men who have fought and died for this country gave you. People like you are the most ungrateful people in the world. Spoiled to the ease of life which have been bought and paid for by the lives of brave soldiers. If people through the years had thought like you we would be speaking German. And if people like you keep it up we will be speaking arabic. Wake up. This country was not built on cowardice.
Yes I am a vietnam vet. I spent 13 months there in the infantry. I have had a family member in every war or conflict since the revolution. We did out part what have you done. Sip wine on the beach and enjoy the freedoms we fought for you.
Brad

Posted by: Brad McPeters at August 22, 2004 07:49 PM

I have a libral friend and two libral brothers. They have the same pattern. All three of them admit they don't watch the news, too busy. They rely on news from their friends who DON'T KEEP UP WITH THE NEWS. They all 3 have seen the Michael Moore movie but refuse to look into the swift vet's web site.
I can see Kerry making his way into office. I can also see according to his pattern that he will end the war in Iraq right away. He won't consider the state of the Iraqi people or the safety of americans, he will shoot for his own Nobel Peace Prize then maybe bail out of office early.

Posted by: Gary at August 23, 2004 12:26 PM

Bottom line of several bottom lines. Kerry's three wounds were superficial. He was an officer and a supposed leader. He personally requested to be taken out of command and out of the war leaving his 'band of brothers' behind. He then returned to the "world" and dissed everyone who had served, was serving, and those who would continue to serve. In the words of John McCain, he gave aid and comfort to the enemy. Same out of BG George S Patton. Now we have other POW's who are also saying Kerry's comments gave aid and comfort to the enemy. Kerry went to France and met personally w/the North Vietnamese delegation, then came home and began to spew out their party line to end the war. He has never apologized for his actions which he was certainly free to participate in; however, now he is being held accountable by the same 'band of brothers' he so cavalierly abandoned 35 years ago. It is a classic what goes around comes around and Kerry should stop whining, sign a release of his records like the democrats demanded of Bush, apologize to all veterans for his actions and then get on with this campaign. Instead, like the small man he appears to be he tries to shoot the messenger. Ken Lord, Viet Nam 67-68/ 70-71.

Posted by: Ken Lord at August 23, 2004 01:30 PM

SaltyOldVet:

Anyone who criticizes Kerry for his valiant combat duty in Vietnam, is un-American, and for the most part is a traitor to our country.

Hi there! Perhaps you've actually heard about the pseudo-Senator from Massachusetts named John Kerry, and what the young John Kerry actually did after he got back from Vietnam?

Hint: has something to do with joining up with anti-war protesters and pro-Communist sympathizers, as well as a whole bunch of lying and exaggerating, including calling essentially all Vietnam vets "criminals".

Sounds like young Johnny Boy did a whole lot of "criticising" if you ask me... Ipso facto, according to you, John Kerry, as most of us already know, is a traitor.

(Ironically, while I consider Kerry a traitor for good reason, unlike you I don't consider mere "dissent" or protest to be treason.)

Although I am certain that you can't relate to this...most chicken-hawks can't, four months can be an eternity in a war zone. [...] Please, for the sake of our country, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! Has it ever occurred to you that maybe these bitter yahoos have a vendetta against John Kerry because he had the intelligence and wisdom to get the hell out of Vietnam?

Ah, ok. So besides being a Traitor, John Kerry is also a Deserter! (and to think that's what the left likes to call Bush... hmmmm.)

Wow. Kerry's a Traitor and a Deserter. You're doing a great job making a case for your boy!

Anyway, you're beyond retarded. Must be salt on that Alzheimer's-laden brain.

Posted by: Ron C at August 26, 2004 03:21 PM

I have lived in Vietnam for more than 14 years to date. I am a 32 month Vet of Vietnam. I can easily ask this question.

Did Kerry or anyone on that boat smoke POT?

You take it from there.

I know what happens in extreme stress situation which we Vets take on ourselves to do things to help or minds stay in tact, but as we all know, it didn't work all that well. In short, as a vet, I can not in anyway tolerate a young Lt. in Vietnam, as most of the time they brought with them their text book antics and got most of my friends killed and I can guess, Kerry wasn't much different if he did what I am thinking he did make a story to get out of Vietnam. I got wounded three time and never took a PH and when they tried to give it to me, I threw it back at them and said give it to my dead buddies. So, I feel, this man is a lip-service and for sure does not have the policitical base backing him to be a world leader, his is a Lt and that is all. More focus should be place on his anti-war behavior and did he smoke Pot like most of the vets did. Or did he drown himself in booze? Either way, a one single man with lip service can never represent the USA in the world and expect to get the necessary results to stablized the mess in Irag and the middle east. Not a change of face, but the same face to let the world know that the USA is not going away or will run away, and that the people are not going to put a virgin in office and give him the power to dictate our might with the past history of proving himself worthy and which he excape the last bad time in VN, but this time he will not be able to do it. Ask yourself, do you want a Lt in office or a Man of power and the power of old bush and his power backing him to tell the world what must be done or a whimp trying to flex his punny muscle.

You do what you do, but if Kerry becomes the next President, that is a foolish stupid move. He is a coward when he left his buddies, he should have stayed on to finish his term like the rest of us. No excuses no talk about it. It is the way it must go down, if not, he is off the Vet Train.

To me, a coward, but to some a hero. To me a man who did what anyone would have done, no a hero, just a man. So why so many Purple Hearts.......Something is not right. You tell the truth or about this Kerry or our country will have a serious price to pay and a 4 year wait for it to be repaired. No free lunch.

Remember, I live in VN today and have my opinions about war, but that is not the issue, in war things are bad, and we do what we do, but to leave early from VN and leave your buddies behind and not finish your tour, that puts a new person on line for death. All must do their do time or they are not a vet. (excluding the seriously injured Vets, who must return to US for survival or can not fight on. )

Posted by: Rob Vernon at August 27, 2004 01:39 AM

In 1971 when Kerry gave his testimony I noticed over two rows of ribbons. It would be interesting to know what these ribbons are for with only a little over 4 months in Vietnam.
If he earned them I have no problem. It looks to me like he just threw some ribbons on to impress the panel when he gave his testimony.

Posted by: Bob at August 30, 2004 06:14 PM

Here are some issues that I believe need to be researched and the results published.

Point - Kerry was in college for 4 years. ? What defferment did he have to avoid the draft

Point - Kerry enlisted in the navy. ? Was it ROTC - Navy Reserve - or other

Point - Kerry was an officer. ? How did he get commissioned?

Point - Kerry was on a NAM pcket boat tour. ? How was he selected for that assignment?

Point - Kerry volunteered for Swift Boats. ? Did he actually demand that duty or was he assigned? (since he volunteered for the navy then lawyer speak permit that by inferrence he therefore volunteered for whatever happened (technically correct - but - self volunteering is the real McCoy - and the stuff leaders are made of).

Point - Official records support Kerry. ? If kerry wrote the after action reports, what else could they do? He authored the record.

Point - Higher ups support the Kerry version. ? Since these higher persons knew Kerry mainly from the record - and since Kerry wrote the records - what else could they say?

Point - The Purple Hearts were earned. ? By regulation an injury such as a bruise from falling of the Captains perch as a result of a mone rocking the boat does qualify. But, almost no leader would recommend a PH for such - and almost no real "Sailor" would ask for or go along with such a "wound". (Kerry was pushing for 3 and out).

Point - Kerry earned his "Star" medals. ? But, if he was a system savvy person who wrote his own recommendations, the documents could be expected to "fly". He knew how to get the jury to believe what he wanted them to believe.

The accurate answers to the above may describe a persona not suited to any career but that of a trial lawyer. Scarry!

Posted by: BobA at August 31, 2004 07:48 PM

Man, I've been stuck in Germany so long, I forgot where the heck I came from: America. I love all you guys and gals. You're great, and this is fun!

And then there's this:

I'd appreciate it greatly if some or all would spend a small amount of time reading at these two links:

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061603.shtml

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/journal_day2.shtml

To me, it seems as though Kerry is stating that he received "enemy fire" in the form of red tracers, which could mean a number of things:

1 He experience yet another near-fratricide incident (one is specifically mentioned in his war journal).

2 The enemy was in possession of U.S. weapons and/or ammunition.

3 He never saw enemy fire, because enemy tracers are *green*. He may have seen lots of training fire (every fifth round is a red tracer for non-NVG night fire) and/or he may have himself fired at seen or unseen enemy with red tracers (thus he knew the color of our tracers).

The item of interest that actually caused bells and whistles to go off in my head was the wording on one of his Bronze Star Medal certificates/orders.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the "V" device that is attached to a Bronze Star denotes valor. I.e., a Bronze Star "with Combat V" is incorrect terminology simply because the military Awards regulation changes when we go on war-footing:

- You *can't* receive a Bronze Star of any variety unless you do something in a combat zone (the term "Combat V" is meaningless/moot).

- You *can* receive a Bronze Star for meritorious non-heroic service during combat (I was awarded one after Desert Shield/Storm and did nothing other than show up at a turkey shoot to receive it).

- And you *can* receive a Bronze Star with a "V" device for valor exhibited in a combat zone.

Anyway. Back to my novel ...

Rich Henricks
Wuerzburg, Germany

Posted by: Richard Henricks at September 1, 2004 08:31 AM

I've been reading these blogs and others for a while. I am a veteran although I joined in '72 and saw no action. Currently my son is in the navy, joined after 9/11.

I do not care as much about his actions in 'Nam as I do about his actions afterward. Look at the timeline of his actions and remember that while he was being financed by Hanoi Jane, he met with the enemy and his actions caused harm to the POWs. I had tears in my eyes when I read the treatment they received. I believe he has a lot of explaining to do and I doubt he can slink his way out of his actions while his 'band of brothers' were in action. He went far beyond protest and provided aid to the enemy.

The only question is if he is elected which foreign policy position does Hanoi Jane get?

You guys should really read the FBI reports of his group and actions during his meeting with the head of the VC in Paris and the VVAWs plan to kill off several hawkish Senators. He claims he wasn't there but 2 witnesses say he was.

To the vets that served with honor, your parade is long overdue. It's amazing that there are fools that chose to belittle your accounts without checking the facts. The men that served and returned with honor deserve better than what I am seeing.

I've never seen a sober vet blow his own horn as much as that guy. You would think after throwing away your medals (claims they were his ribbons and someone elses medals) he wouldn't be so Gung-Ho and proud of them. Reporting for duty my ass.

He is a pompous ass.

Posted by: navydad at September 1, 2004 11:44 AM

The guys actions in the Senate are another hot topic. What has that fool done? His only concerns are what the polls say and when he can get his next Botox shot. He looks like Frankenstein now. Deadpan forehead really helps his image.

That little 'reporting for duty' comment during his homecoming was really embarassing, who other than that draft dodger Clinton would bring that up. The Swift Boat Vets only stated the obvious. This guy is a real tool. His only concern has been votes. That backfired.

Then the idiot and his ilk whined about what the real vets were saying but none of their party said squat about the constant false attacks on Bush. Scuba driver Teddy Kennedy went off the deep end and Al Gore showed he was presedential material with his wild tirade. None of the self righteous whining liberals said a word. I guess they can only hear what they want.

Posted by: navydad at September 1, 2004 12:38 PM

Re: "Posted by: navydad at September 1, 2004 11:44 AM"

Roger that. Nice to meet another patriot.

I didn't know anything about Kerry until I started to read through his military records. I'm starting to think the ambush described at this links—I *think* he's describing an ambush; his journal reads like he planned on writing a novel when he got back, rather than seeking the presidency—may have actually been another friendly fire incident. He notes the Christmas celebration fratricide incident elsewhere in his journal.

It almost sounds like someone got tired of him and his boat firing at the wrong people, and lit him up in retaliation (thus the red tracers; enemy tracers are normally green).

17th paragraph: http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/journal_day2.shtml

Posted by: Richard Henricks at September 2, 2004 04:22 AM

Kill the women and Children first. Hmmmm..... no name, sounds like a pogue to me. Kerry had to do what he had to do to survive in the Nam is bull----! Kerrys swiftboat was anchored in the ocean about 10 miles out and did not go on patrols every day he was there. He was lucky to go out once every 5 days (For a day) We have more fire fights in our south valley with more bullets flying in one evening then Kerry saw in one 4 month tour. He got a PH for a bruise bouncing off a bulkhead. Lordy, lordy. When I was at Khe Sanh We had rockets and 81mm mortars landing every ten minutes and all we could do was hunker down. When one landed next to you (With 8 feet or so) it bounced you off the wall of the bunker. It looked like I was beat up by 4 sumo wrestlers. No hearts for that. Marines aren't pogues though. So Bush spent his time in the guard, did he? So did 1/2 million others.
We had discontent for them at the time also. TImes have changed and the guard, which used to be a good place to hide from combat duty, as evidenced by Iraq, is no longer the case. Country calls, you go. I got three hearts, no bronze or silver, saved a few guys myself. Just doing what Marines do. We're brothers and stick together. I spent twice over 48 hours in the hospital, with real wounds. Got back to my unit a few weeks later and told to be on light duty. No one awarded me any hearts the entire time in the nam and I didn't ask or refuse any.
I didn't PUT in for a heart (I don't know where that comes from? (PUT IN?) After I got out of the Nam and the corps about 4 months later, I got home, got a job and a month or two later, three hearts arrived with a letter commending me for fighting communist insurgents on the following days and that was it! Nothing formal, either in the Nam or home. Yeah, I was wounded, yeah, I got three hearts mailed me. So what? Nobody cared then, especially me. All I cared about was not getting shot at or mortared. Ten days before tet (Jan 30 '68) I left the Nam. Five years ago, a lot of us vets (Combat Vets) came out of the closet, and were no longer ashamed of what we did. Sure I cut off a few ears, yeah, I burned a village or two down, and yeah I shot at civilians. Atrocities? The NVA& VC were dead so we took an ear. They would take a head of a dead Marine and put it on a post for all in the village to see. Paybacks a bitch. Villages? We'd go into a village, go into a hooch and find a box with 24 AK's under a grass sleeping mat? Bet your back side we burned it down. Remember that scene in Apocalypse Now when that kid threw a satchel charge in the chopper and blew it to smithereens? Yeah, a civilian kid did that. So, exactly who was the enemy. Every civilian was an enemy (suspected) until a weapon was shown. Then that confirmed it. Kerry didn't see s--- while there. Was not in country long enough. My vote is for BUSH!

Posted by: Bob Bruno at September 3, 2004 01:12 PM

If these allegations are true, why would the swiftboat vets want to stop those ads for an apology? If they are true, tell the truth and keep telling it!!!!!!!!!! Truth is stronger than lies. As hitler said, if you keep telling a lie enough times, people will begin to believe it!
There is more reliability in 200 eyewitnesses than Kerry and a few of his cohorts. Who knows, maybe he paid them off, since he has billions of dollars at his disposal,right?

Posted by: Mary Clark Walls at September 3, 2004 10:09 PM

Now, if elected, Kerry will seek permission from the likes of France for our foreign policy. If that doesn't scare people back to reality we may be in serious trouble.

BTW- Richard Henricks- I read the article, it sure sounds like he was trying to create a novel. Imagine what his sitreps were like. Bet they were colorful and self indulgent enough to 'win' medals. I have friends that did tours that also think he was pretty lucky to be able to write his own accounts of what happened and get awards based on them even to the point of demanding a purple heart after the doc told him no.

I wonder where Hanoi Jane is? She could really be helpful to his campaign by explaining her involvement in his anti-US theatrics.

Posted by: navydad at September 5, 2004 04:29 AM

No matter how you cut it, the facts remain the same. John Kerry went to Vietnam and actually took part in combat operations. George W. Bush went into the Texas National Guard, disobeyed a direct order (an offense under the UCMJ), and went to Alabama where he went AWOL. See: http://texansfortruth.com/ for the squadron commanders comments on President Bush's assignment to his unit in Alabama.

Posted by: ROMAD Ray at September 12, 2004 03:42 PM

Posted by: navydad at September 5, 2004 04:29 AM

It was either a planned novel, or a planned fictionalization to try to document a war record for when he later sought the presidency. I need to go back through my Desert Shield/Storm journal to see how I penned my words: Hope I didn't say "and then you ..."

Anybody know how often NVA/Vietcong used red tracers against U.S. forces?

I keep posting my questions about red vs. green tracers and finally got someone to respond with real discussion.

The statement made to me in another blog--to try to convince me that Kerry may actually know the color of enemy-fire tracers (I don't think he does)--was: "Viet Cong often used captured weapons and ammunition."

OK, but I wish Kerry had gone into specifics such as these in his journal:

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/journal_day2.shtml (para. 17)

I'd also like to read his journal in its entirety.

Posted by: Richard Henricks at September 16, 2004 09:44 AM

RE: Posted by: KilltheWomenandChildrenFirst at August 6, 2004 04:26 PM

"Look Captain Don, if you wasted 25 years of your life serving in the military ..."

-----

Wow. What a statement. I've heard of people that think that way; never met one.

The funny thing about people who believe stuff like that, is that they usually fall into a category that precludes them from serving their country: Overweight, half-blind, deaf, one leg shorter than the other, flat feet; that sort of thing.

I don't have anything against any of God's people who are not physically perfect, but there are pretty high physical standards in all services these days, as well as requirements to stay physically fit and seek out higher education.

I don't consider my 20 years a waste, other than having missed a lot of papa time with my boys. Point in fact, my retirement check kinda/sort makes it a worthwhile effort, as it allows me to work at home as a freelance writer (and travel whenever I want, write about German food, bier and wein, all that).

I think a discussion of this nature should focus on the honorable aspects of what has been stated thus far: For example, I think it's above and beyond honorable for someone to raise their right hand and volunteer to defend others' right to free speech. If we didn't have honorable military folk doing that, we could be living in a country that lines people with big mouths up against and a wall, and, well, you know ...

Posted by: Richard Henricks at September 16, 2004 10:16 AM

"Marty, I guess going back to finish up your GED really payed off, huh?"

Posted by: KilltheWomenandChildrenFirst at August 6, 2004 05:54 PM

-----

I guess that means KtWaCF has a couple of degrees and make lots of money? Or is still in school and assumes she or he will finish?

Ironically, that means either now or later, the amount of monthly taxes she or he pays could equal my monthly military retirement check?

Thanks, that's the way it should be.

I got to thinking about other groups of people who never serve their country, and my list is growing:

- There are the silver spoons. I don't mind covering for these guys and gals, because I'd like to be rich someday myself (I'm a pretty persistent fellow, too). I think the caste system is great, although timing and perspective probably make it seem like a bad thing: I'm glad I served my country, but I'll be even happier that there are other honorable types covering for me when it's my turn to lie on the beach and be rich. (I'm saying this with my tongue placed firmly in my cheek, although I could also be serious :-)

- Then there are your pure civilians. I don't mind protecting these guys and gals either. They're not necessarily rich, but they just never considered serving their country due to circumstance. They missed out on something, but they'll never know it and as long as they appreciate those that did serve, everything is fine. There's actually (obviously) not even a requirement for them to be appreciative, but if they're wise, they're polite toward military folk (and police, fire and emergency service workers; anyone that protects them). These people are almost always clueless about the military because you really do have to spend some time in uniform to understand what it's all about. And these people are easily fooled by fake war heroes.

- Then their are "chapter cases," those people who come in the military possibly with good intentions, but they do something stupid or criminal in nature and end up with dishonorable or less-then-honorable discharges, or they do prison time at Leavenworth before being released back into the civilian world.

I wonder which of the above KtWaCF is? She or he comes off like a chapter case.

And what the heck does "KilltheWomenandChildrenFirst" mean anyway?

Also, has anyone else been given the impression that Kerry may have been somewhat piqued during his college days because his family connections weren't powerful enough to keep him out of Vietnam? There's a lot of information available that would lend credence to that.

Posted by: Richard Henricks at September 17, 2004 05:21 AM

Who could possibly believe a Kerry backer? They sound like a Dan Blather supporters who never let facts or integrity affect their tirade, and they never let spelling or education interfer with their lack of thought. I believe the Swift Boat Vets are entirely correct. As a former Marine, I only wonder how such a joke could be a Presidential Candidate. Even Dan Blather can't help this clown.

Posted by: Ed Zuber at September 17, 2004 06:39 PM

What vile crap "KTWACF" can spew, tpyical of a narrow minded Lib. He/She probably compared Bush to Hitler hmmm' lets see Hitler was directly responsible for WWII and sent 6 million Jews to their deaths, as well as Gypsies, Poles, and other people of from different ethnics. Bush has liberated 25 million people in Iraq and Afhganistan. Yeah I can sure see how they are simillar.
This person probably is screaming out "Where are the WMD's" well, no one really knows but Sadamm. He has them and has used them, just a Kurd or an Iranian about them. As you can see "KTWACF" I am not hiding behing a silly moniker, I am not calling you names. I am not trying to silence you words. That is your right however ludricous it is. People like you are valuable, it is important to see how the other side thinks. Remember this one thing... This war is not pouplar, which war is. There was a war a long time ago that was not popular and that President took a lot of heat for standing up to the rights of a group of people. Many, many people died. 58,000 men died during a four day battle. It was the Cicil War, and his name Abahram Lincoln. Thank you President Bush for standing up for what is right. You will have my support, my vote, and my money.

Posted by: Mike Kramer at September 24, 2004 01:13 PM

Kerry's current actions, i.e. condemnation of the United States and the war against Islamic Terrorism, are consistent with his actions for the past 35 plus years. Kerry and his political party have been anti military from about 1965 to the present. They have become quite adept at: "...turning victory into defeat." Also, warfare has never been "by the numbers." Our country's situation in Iraq is difficult. That's war! Kerry's retoric, and the retoric of his political party give ample fuel to the enemies propaganda machines. Kerry is working hard at ensuring another American defeat. The communist from his brief war confined thier military activities to the theater of war. Our enemy today considers the world to be a thearter of war. Nothing good can come to America with John Kerry.

Posted by: Dale R. Suiter at September 25, 2004 01:40 AM

i have seen this bs about kerries vn service but you prople are blinded by bush awol service a lying sack of crap that was appionted to be president not elected by the people a corrupted superim court run by who else republicans who will do any thing to smear even their own one like SEN MCAIN THE BS USED BY THE SWIFT BOAT VETS HAS BEEN PROVEN WRONG LIES BY THE US NAVY SO ALL THAT BS IS JUST LIKE I SAID CRAP YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT SEN KERRY SAID WHILE IN THE WAR YOU CAN ARGUE WITH HIM ABOUT IT BUT HE WAS THERE AND NOW OUR SO CALLED WAR PRESIDENT THE GIRLY PRESIDENT WHO COULD NOT EVEN COMPLETE HIS DUTY IN THETANG WITH THE HELP OF HIS DADDIES FRIENDS IN THE GUARD A PATTERN OF LIES JUST LIKE HIS GRANDFATHER IN WW1 PRESCOTT BUSH STATED HE HAD AWARED SOME MEDALS THEN IT TURNS OUT HE DID NOT ,SO HE HAD TO PUBLICLY STATE HE DID NOT NOW HIS FAMILY WOULD NOT SPEAK OF IT FOREVER IN THE FAMILY,THEN MISTER NOT IN THE LOOP HG BUSH INVOLVED WITH IRAN CONTRA HE KNOWS MORE THAN HE SAYS HE DID. NOW FOR GW BUSH A CERTIFID LIAR.EVEN AFTER STATING KERRIES STATEMENT

Posted by: A.E GARZA at October 2, 2004 04:44 PM

I see Lawrence O'Donnell has been using a phoney name (A. Garza). I didn't Think those Kerry Kool-Aid drinkers would be able to find this site. If you want Benedict Arnold for your President-vote Kerry-Edwards-Fonda!!

Posted by: Pat Keohane at October 28, 2004 09:47 AM