QandO
Questions and Observations| « Military Realignment: 70,000 out of Europe & Asia | Main | God Bless the IOC » |
|
August 14, 2004 "Unfit for Command": A Review I’ve read “Unfit for Command”. That’s the easy part. Since then I’ve been struggling to find a way to explain why this is so important to many of us out here to those who don’t find it to be important. “It was 35 years ago, for heaven sake!” or “So he exaggerated his war stories a little” are common explanations, or excuses, as to why many don’t take this seriously. Some will never take it seriously. They’re the same people who thought Bill Clinton’s problem had to do with sex instead of character. But that is the point here. This sort of exaggeration and lying does reflect on a man or woman’s character. And that is one of the reasons the Swift Boat Vets are engaged in telling their side of those stories. They have as much of a right to do so as John Kerry. But there’s an even more important point that seems to be lost in all of this. It has to do with men who’ve been in combat, who’ve seen their comrades suffer horrible wounds and die. Who’ve watched acts of unselfish valor go unrewarded and who deeply resent those who attempt to take advantage of the system for self-glorification or political gain. Who cynically use their service as a stepping stone to political office and lie about the events of that service to condemn and pillory those who’ve served their country in combat and those still serving in combat. In a word, this is about “honor”. The money quote for me, the paragraph that said “this is why” came in the 4th chapter where an incident in March of 2004 involving Admiral Hoffmann and John Kerry. In 2003 Kerry had called Hoffmann to try to get his support in his run for President. Hoffmann was initially enthusiastic as he mistakenly thought the caller was Bob Kerrey, the Navy Medal of Honor winner and former Senator. When he realize the caller was John Kerry, his entire tone changed. He refused to give Kerry his support. In the ensuing months, “Tour of Duty” was published, in which Kerry savaged Hoffmann. “On March 15, 2004, Admiral Hoffmann’s telephone rang again. Once again, the caller was John Kerry. Kerry had clinched the Democratic nomination, and he knew that Hoffmann was organizing Swiftees to bring out the truth about him, his exaggerated military record and his antiwar lies that had slandered his fellow veterans. Kerry made the admiral an offer: If you will back off and drop your efforts, I will ensure that my biography, “Tour of Duty”, which I know is unfair to you, will be changed to make it accurate in a revised edition. Here is my secretary’s number – you can get me anytime. So for Admiral Hoffmann and the rest of the Swiftees, this isn’t about Republican or Democrat. Its not about wealth or power. This is a matter of honor. The Swift Boat Veterans, as a group, and you’ll find this mostly true of most veterans and particularly Vietnam and Vietnam era veterans, the problem they have with Kerry is a matter of honor. They feel he dishonorably lied about them and their service after he left Vietnam, that he dishonored those who were a part of the very same operations he now claims for his awards through his exaggerations and fabrications and he dishonored the thousands who’ve given lives and limbs for the very same awards they allege he faked. In the military, and among veterans and veteran’s groups, honor is a very important and even sacrosanct subject. The honor of serving, the honor of serving well, the honor of awards for valor, all are taken very seriously. The honor of legitimate heros is closely guarded and worshiped. It is not something taken lightly or waved off with “oh, he was just exaggerating a little”. That is especially true if the “exaggerations” were actually cynical attempts to portray the service of others in a dishonorable way for the self-promotion of the person telling the lies. It is this concept of honor which drives the Swift Boat Veteran’s for Truth. And it is this concept which is so hard for civilians and politicos to comprehend and take seriously. Honor isn’t a constant thread in their daily lives as it is in the military. The greatest sin for any military man or woman is to dishonor his or her comrades, unit and service. It is that which the Swiftees contend John Kerry has done. The book very compellingly and succinctly makes their case. This isn’t a book which deals with innuendo and rumor. It is meticulously researched and footnoted. It uses direct quotes which were obtained in signed and notarized affidavits. In short, it is a documented indictment of John Kerry’s perfidy. More importantly, it’s a documentation of his lack of honor. In 1971, John Kerry accused American soldiers of daily atrocities of the most heinous kind. But he, and his comrades in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War provided nothing specific. No names, no places, nothing which could be checked. “Unfit for Command” however, provides us with some specifics to meet the charges. In 1971, in front of the US Congress, John Kerry had the following to say: “We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them.” In “Unfit for Command” three incidents are described where Kerry destroyed a village and the animals in the village, fired without orders in a free-fire zone and falsified body counts in a report. In the first incident, George Bates, another PCF commander in CosDiv11 and now a retired USN Captain, recalls where he and Kerry were on a mision together and came upon a small village. “With Kerry in the lead, the boats approached a small hamlet with three to four grass huts. Pigs and chickens were milling around peacefully. As the boats drew closer the villagers fled. There were no political symbols or flags in evidence in the tiny village. It was obvious to Bates that existing policies, decency and good sense required the boats to simply move on. Tom Wright, another PCF commander, talks about Kerry and “free-fire” zones.
In fact, Wright finally went to his boss, George Elliott and asked that Kerry not be assigned to any further missions Wright was put in charge of because of his unreliability. “I had some very serious problems with Kerry one day and I told the DivCom that I did not want Kerry in my group anymore.” The last incident involves a sampan, the ubiquitous little boats that Vietnamese use for transportation and commerce on the rivers of Vietnam. Vietnam had a dusk to dawn curfew which prohibited travel on the rivers at that time. On the day in question, Kerry and another Swift boat (PCF 21) were on patrol. The night, as described, was “pitch-black”. Out of the dark came a sampan, and Gunner’s mate Steve Gardner, in the absence of Kerry orders (Kerry was in the pilot house and not on deck) saw what looked like a man with a weapon drawing down on him and fired into the sampan. Technically, to this point, nothing wrong has been done. The sampan was out after dark, Gardner thought he saw a weapon and fired. What happened afterward is the problem. When the lights of the PCF were turned on Kerry relates what he saw: “The light revealed a woman standing in the stern of the sampan with a child of perhaps two years or less in her arms. Neither [was] harmed. We asked her where the men from the stern were, as one of the gunners was sure that he had seen someone moving back there. She gesticulated wildly and I could see traces of blood on the engine mounting. It was obvious they had been blown overboard. Then somebody said there as a body up front and we moved closer to se the limbs of a small child limp on th stacks of rice.” All indications were that the boat had mistakenly shot into the sampan of a family, probably returning late from some destination. This wasn’t at all unusual, but usually ended much less dramatically and with no loss of life as the sampan was searched, the crew warned and let go. As stated, though, to this point, technically the Kerry’s crew had done nothing wrong. Until the report was filed. According to The CTF 115 report (called the Commander Coastal Surveillance Force Vietnam (CTF 115) Quarterly Evaluation Report) of March 29, 1969, the following was reported by Kerry: “...20 January PDFs 21 and 44 (Kerry’s boat - ed.) Operating in An Xuyen Province ... engaged the enemy with a resultant GDA of one VC KIA (BC) [body count], four VC KIA (EST) and two VC CIA (VQ810650/44)” In other words, what Kerry reported was he’d killed a VC (the man blown off the boat), probably killed four other VC (purely fictional) and captured two VC (the mother and the two year old) in action. The child who was killed was simply ignored. The four estimated VC KIAs were simply made up out of whole cloth. The mother and child suddenly became VC who were captured. These three incidents put an exclamation point to why the Swift Boat Vets for Truth specifically and may other veterans in general find Kerry to be a dishonorable man and “Unfit for Command”. Regardless of your political leanings or feelings for either candidate (and in full disclosure, I feel and have felt precisely the same way the Swiftees do about John Kerry) you need to read this book. It's contents deserve a review before you cast your vote in November. |
Astounding. And frightening. Even without the powerful, damning evidence provided by the SB vets, the contradictory and even mutually exclusive stories Kerry and his factoti have themselves given over the years, about each and every example of his personal valor in Vietnam, are sufficient to make an impartial finder of fact question whether his whole scarred-hero-with-a-consciende persona is not concocted in whole or in part. When you consider the stories of the vets themselves, who have absolutely nothing to gain, and almost certainly knew the kind of torment and attack on their own reputations they would suffer should they choose to speak out, ring chillingly true.
I'm not surprised that in my own skims through the web sites covering this, (from LT SMASH to Atrios), the Kerry supporters fighting the good fight can make no legitimate, coherent defense of their man, to the point of being unable to make use of even his own (multiple) prior statements. Their responses are limited to ad hominen attacks on the vets individually and collectively, and "but-Bush-was-an-AWOL-coward" canards. I'm almost embarrassed for them to see such panic and helplessness.
What is astounding is the absolute hypocrisy exhibited by the (putatuvely) objective major media. Have they no shame? Do they not understand how their arrogance and partisanship are even now contributing to their own demise?
Had George Bush made the campaign claims of Kerry (much less had he based a poltical career on them) and had the quantum and nature of the evidence against him been a mere shadow of that facing Kerry, the editors of NYT, LAT, WaPo, BG, etc., would even now be thundering for articles of impeachment. The broadcast networks would be ominously intoning, "Can he hang on? Chances are slim", and running nightly specials on the looming constitutional crisis. Newsweek and Time would run a cover shot with Bush wearing his "lucky hat", or a still from the "re-enacted" home movies, with the headline, "WAS IT ALL A LIE?", or, "WHAT KIND OF MAN IS GEORGE BUSH?". Do you have any doubt?
We cannot, must not, let this story be spiked, or these men be gagged. Thank you for what you are doing.
Posted by: John Earnest at August 14, 2004 12:57 PM
An excellent review. Please keep up the good work. The big three will not report on this and if they do, they will not speak the truth.
I just now sent off a scathing email to Chris Matthews for his atrocious behaviour towards John O'Neill.
PLEASE KEEP SPREADING THE WORD. THANKS A MILLION.
Posted by: Manju Subbiah at August 14, 2004 10:12 PM
I just finished Richard Miniter's "Losing Osama" in which Clinton's disregard of our security vs. the islamic terrorist threat was detailed. I see these two books closely linked in the operation of 'honor' in leadership.
We had warnings that Clinton was not an honorable man before he was elected. While he thrashed about defending his Presidency and his legacy -- instead of resigning when his lies were revealed, the terrorists built their infrastructure and killed dozens of Americans.
Men without honor in positions of leadership can do enormous damage to our national security. This is why the swift boat men are raising the alarm.
Posted by: Red at August 14, 2004 10:59 PM
These men must be heard. I have served for 13 years as honorably as possible, and understanding I will never measure up to the guys like Bud Day, Lance Sijian, and the countless others who have made my USAF great and contributed to our military tradition of superior leaders. But they are the ideal, not always perfect, but in one time period, for a brief period of their lives, they were the perfect role models for the guys to follow. My Dad and Grandfather served honorably, one in WWII and one in Vietnam. Guess which one got spit on on returning from winning medals for bravery under fire? Guess how much my father hates this man Kerry, who organized the useful idiots and gave them lies to feed on in his testimony to congress? Kerry is truly unfit to command, its just a statement of fact. One man will not destroy the US, but they sure can damage it. Kerry is a cartoon of a man who matters little and I hope will lose big time in November, but his attack dogs are after our Swiftboat Vets. Honorable men who have taken on a new enemy. We must support them in every way possible, not with just emails but by calling our newspapers, TV stations and donating to the Swiftboat organization to blaze their ads across the US. These poor guys thought the war was over in 1975, at least in Vietnam you could shoot your enemy.
Posted by: Aspiring Warrior at August 14, 2004 11:55 PM
First Vistica, in his May 2001 NY Times piece on
Than Rang, then his book 'the Education of Bob
Kerrey, as well as Brinkley, pre-emptively savaged
Captain (now Admiral) Hoffman, so as to preclude
any testimony he would make against Kerry. Funny
that no one asked 9-11 Commissioner Kerrey, if his
application of counterinsurgency was the kind of
thing we should avoid in the current war on terror
(Being as he was so upset over Western forces in
Iraq)
Posted by: NARCISO at August 15, 2004 12:34 AM
On March 15, 2004, Admiral Hoffmann’s telephone rang again. Once again, the caller was John Kerry. Kerry had clinched the Democratic nomination, and he knew that Hoffmann was organizing Swiftees to bring out the truth about him, his exaggerated military record and his antiwar lies that had slandered his fellow veterans. Kerry made the admiral an offer: If you will back off and drop your efforts, I will ensure that my biography, “Tour of Duty”, which I know is unfair to you, will be changed to make it accurate in a revised edition
This has got to be the most damaging paragraph ever written about a Presidential candidate. Short of catching Kerry with the proverbial dead girl or live boy in bed, this is really bad news for Kerry.
What this paragraph tells us is as follows:
1. Kerry deliberately misrepresented the truth about Hoffman in his book Tour of Duty. We know this because Kerry himself said that the book was not fair to Hoffman.
2. Kerry attempted to extort support from Hoffman in exchange for changing his book.
For those of you who say that point 1 is not true, then I ask why Kerry would subsequently agree to lie in exchange for political support.
There's no getting around it: Kerry is a thoroughly dishonest man, and not worthy of the office he seeks.
Posted by: Steverino at August 15, 2004 01:03 AM
I was in the US Navy from Oct. 1962 to Oct. 1966. The Navy sent me to Great Lakes, Ill. for electronics school training in the first year. Next I went to Keflavic Airport, Iceland for two years, and then to a Destroyer based in Norfolk, Va. for the last year. The Navy decided where I was to serve, and that alone should not disqualify me from speaking out now against John Kerry. My point is that all a person needs is a functioning brain to speak out against John Kerry. Unfortunately not a single Republican politician has yet to speak out against Kerrys Vietnam service time. They all side with John Kerry still being a big hero, even now after your own experiences with Kerry become public in America. Republicans fail us all by not saying what they really feel about John Kerrys Vietnam service time.
Posted by: William Gildone at August 15, 2004 07:43 AM
Its way too touchy an issue. The best thing Bush can do is to neither support nor condemn the SwiftVets. The second he questions Kerry's record, the MSM will launch into a vicious attack on his service record. We've already seen it: He was a coward, he was unpatriotic, he went AWOL, etc. etc. The Kerry camp will join the feeding frenzy by accusing Bush of questioning his patriotism and the patriotism of ALL veterans who served. Logically, none of this stuff makes sense, but for the MSM and Kerry, it doesn't have to make sense. If the Republicans say anything, Bush will be instantly demonized.
Posted by: Chris at August 15, 2004 12:20 PM
It has been several weeks since this review has been written and the over whelming documentation has proven that the SB's are in fact lieing in numerous areas of their stories. It is a shame that people who write these articles are not require to get off their lazy butts and actually research this crap. I was impressed by a reviewer who stated that his father and grandfather fought in WWII and VietNam. My father and all his brothers served in WWII and Korea my Brother served in VietNam and I served in the first Gulf War and have 16 years of service in. I support John Kerry due to the facts. Not from 200 people who did not serve on his boat. The SB's all seem to have a personal agenda in this matter and it appears Bush's family ties again are stepping in to smooth the road for this unfit president (George Bush). In all my years I have never heard a president stand up and invite the enemy to attack american soldiers in the field (Bring It On). AThat staement alone is enough for me. I am sorry that you do not have the mental capacity to think for yourself instead of being brain washed by the Bush team. Possible in another life God will see fit to give you a little intelligence.
Posted by: Buck at August 26, 2004 06:22 AM
Watch out, the media is going to try and change the subject. They are not doing their job and more and more people are comming to understand that. Look for some big crisis to break that will put the Bush administration in a bind. They are desperate to change the subject. I watched NBC last night and Lisa Meyers tried her best to get the questions about Kerry's medals to moot out. She said we are probably never going to know because of "the fog of war". She implied that it is time to move on to more important things. Can you believe that? More important things than the character of our next commander-in-chief. Shameful. Big Media is showing itself for what it is, a partisan propaganda machine for the big government liberals.
Posted by: ken at August 28, 2004 09:42 AM
I read this review, along with the following comments, and got to this one statement that really struck a nerve with me, 'I am sorry that you do not have the mental capacity to think for yourself instead of being brain washed by the Bush team. Possible in another life God will see fit to give you a little intelligence.' I do not understand how anyone could say that the 'brainwashing' is being done by Bush's team when every time I turn on the news all I hear is Kerry is a War Hero and Bush is an idiot. I think this person may need to take a deep look inside and see if what they believe in is truly their opinion or the opinion of the major news groups. I thought this review was well written and made several very good points. The only people who would get upset with this review are the people who do not want to believe what really happened.
Posted by: chris at September 10, 2004 08:47 AM
After reading this review I have to say, Thank you. Kerry and his following of democratic 'fellows' are truly guilty of hate speech and of lying. Bush and his supporters are not trying to brainwash anyone, they are only speaking the truth. It is sad to think that there are so many people who only listen to one side instead of listening to both and then making an intelligent decision on their own. I am not interested in all that Kerry did 30 years ago, allthough I do beleive the SB Vets, but in what he has done since then and that is not what he wants us to focus on; I wonder what he is afraid of.
Posted by: Phyllis at September 10, 2004 07:01 PM
I am a Vietnam Era veteran. I volunteered for 'Nam but, the assignment USCG chief yeoman recognized my name ... he knew my late father ... and pulled me off the list. So, I did NOT go but, I STAYED in, retiring from the USAR as a captain, in 1994 after 24 years of service ... active, reserve, enlisted,cadet and, officer as well as being a reserve technician.
I KNOW what type of service "W" did ... no more no less than others like myself in that era.
I can only guess at what te service of John Kerrey was like BUT, being of an educated and analytical mind, after reading "Unfit For Command" I find that JFK (about the only thing, he shares ... including The People's Republic Of Massachusetts ... with Kennedy are the initials!) is, indeed unfit.
For this "person" ... I can't characterized HIM as a "man" as he did not, has not and will comport himself as one, much less as a president ... to be running, is shameful to the party from which JFK came from.
Our family votes go to "W" ... he, like myself, served in the reserve forces. Our few decorations were EARNED, not stolen thru verbal trickery and deceit.
EVERY voter should ead this book. I hope enough do so that a TRAITOR isn't elected. Hopefully, our votes will do the job.
Posted by: Fred Langille at September 28, 2004 01:52 AM