Kerry's Real Military Record

I really do wish those who have never been in the military would at least do some research before commenting on things pertaining to the military. It would make the conversation go better.

I have heard/read numerous people make the claim that only those who were actually on the particular small craft with Kerry were his shipmates. That is so much BS that it would overawe a West Kansas Feedlot. On those small craft everybody bunks in the same barracks areas, separated as officer or enlisted. Everybody knows everybody as much as anybody does.

So yes Sweetie, they were his shipmates.

As to what really happened in any particular incident. Everybody has a different view of the situation at that time and it is quite possible to have two separate views and both be reasonably correct. I'm sure we have all run into situations like this, auto accidents come to mind, where everything is clear as mud.

Having seen various reports, govt. and nongovt., put together I fully believe that there is no single true account of these situations. At best everything is a best guess and who does the Good Fairy smile on today. So don't stake everything on the written word.

His activities after his participation in the Kennedy-Johnson Viet Nam war are what I would be looking at the hardest, cause the fog of war does not apply to statements on camera, paper, and recorded votes.

And my not adult thoughts on this whole situation is that I am reminded of the little wannabe schoolyard bully running up to the teacher while squealing "HE HIT ME BACK! NO FAIR! HE HIT ME BACK!"
 
The Purple Hearts

www.washingtontimes.com

'Trying to acquire Purple Hearts'
By Martin L. Fackler
Published August 26, 2004


John Kerry has presented his Vietnam record as his major qualification to be president of the United States. It is, therefore, the duty of the American public to scrutinize that record carefully. And it is the duty of candidate John Kerry to facilitate that scrutiny. If all the senator's claims about his four months in Vietnam are factual, it would be to his great advantage to facilitate such scrutiny.

Before we get to his record in Vietnam, however, we should examine the widespread misconception about how he got to Vietnam. The oft-repeated claim that Mr. Kerry volunteered to go to Vietnam misleads: He apparently volunteered only after the draft deferment he had applied for was turned down -- thus allowing him to choose service in the Navy to avoid being drafted into the Army.

I served as a combat surgeon in DaNang, (U.S. Naval Support Hospital) from Dec. 10, 1967, through Dec. 11, 1968. While there, I evaluated and treated hundreds of severely wounded combatants.

During my year in DaNang, a few combatants urged me to verify small abrasions as "wounds" so they could get a Purple Heart. Each freely admitted trying to acquire Purple Hearts as rapidly as possible to take advantage of the policy allowing those with three Purple Hearts to apply to leave Vietnam early. I refused them. But some went shopping for another opinion. Unfortunately, we had some antiwar physicians in Vietnam who were happy to become accomplices in these frauds. Most with valid Purple Hearts didn't need to apply to leave Vietnam: The seriousness of their wounds demanded it.

Lt. John Kerry's collecting three Purple Hearts within 100 days -- all for wounds too minor to require hospitalization -- recalls the distasteful memories of having to deal with those few miscreants in DaNang. More disturbing is the revelation that crewmen on Mr. Kerry's boat denied they had received any gunfire from shore at the time when Lt. Kerry claimed such gunfire had caused his wound. The doctor who disapproved Lt. Kerry's application for his first Purple Heart for that wound agreed that the tiny metal splinter sticking in the skin of his arm was inconsistent with enemy gunfire from shore. His crewmates claimed that Lt. Kerry, himself, had fired a grenade launcher from the boat striking a rock on the nearby shore -- and his wound was from a metal splinter from the grenade that ricocheted back, striking him in the arm.

Is there any way we can determine who was telling the truth about this first Purple Heart? Yes, there is. The type of wound can reveal much about the weapon that caused it. The tiny sliver of metal and its very superficial penetration is typical of fragments from explosive devices -- like grenades. It would not have resulted from the most likely gunfire from shore -- small arms rifle fire. The AK 47 rifle, used by the enemy, fires a 30-caliber bullet, which is 50 times or more as heavy as the sliver of metal sticking in Lt. Kerry's skin. Such a bullet would have passed through any part of his body it struck, and certainly no part of it would have remained sticking in his skin.

In the absence of the medical records that Mr. Kerry apparently declines to make public, the only details we have about his second and third Purple Hearts are that he also based them on wounds too minor to require hospitalization. My reason for refusing to verify insignificant wounds as the basis for a Purple Heart was the regulation covering Purple Heart awards. In Part B, Paragraph 2, of the Army Purple Heart Regulation (600-8-22 of 25 February 1995), we find "the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer."

Dr. Louis Letson was entirely correct in turning down Lt. Kerry's first Purple Heart -- even if the wound had been the result of enemy action. Can there be any doubt that the tiny metal sliver could have been removed easily, and safely, by a Navy corpsman? It certainly did not "require" treatment by a medical officer (an MD).

Purple Hearts are not supposed to be awarded for self-inflicted wounds, nor for wounds too minor to require treatment by a physician. So where and how did Lt. Kerry eventually obtain a Purple Heart for his first wound? Nobody seems to know. Only his medical records will tell -- and the American public needs that information to evaluate candidate Kerry's qualifications and candor.

The highly unlikely occurrence of being wounded three times within 100 days, in the very beginning of a tour of duty, and all three wounds being so minor that none required hospitalization, would seem sufficient cause for further investigation.Addingthe inconsistencies surrounding Lt. Kerry's first Purple Heart should make mandatory a thorough scrutiny of his medical records by someone highly qualified to interpret military medical records, and familiar with the regulations on the qualifications for the Purple Heart Medal, to determine if the wounds for which Lt. Kerry was awarded the Purple Heart Medal were serious enough to "require" treatment by a medical officer, as called for by the Purple Heart regulation.

Mr. Kerry has made his Vietnam War record the centerpiece of his campaign. This demands a thorough objective evaluation of his medical records to determine if the three Purple Hearts that allowed him to leave Vietnam after only four months of duty were justified. This evaluation needs to be done before the election.


Dr. Martin L. Fackler served as a combat surgeon in Vietman in 1968. A fellow of both the American College of Surgeons and the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, he also is an author, expert witness and lecturer on wound ballistics and surgery, and former director of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory at Presidio.
 
Glass houses....

Seems funny that the current administration would take pot shots over vietnam. The swiftboat guys are pissed at Kerry for his anti-war stance and the administration has marshalled them. Not hard to connect the dots with this one. That being said, Kerry has definitely hit bush hard with similar ads in the past and this is just payback.

Once again, I can't believe that these two are the best our country has to offer as candidates for President. I am down to the point where one single term is more than enough of a $$$ grab for each administration. 4 years, get the he11 out, let the next guy pay off his people, then he is out, etc. Might be a way to minimize damage.
 
Seems funny that the current administration would take pot shots over vietnam.
Click to expand...
I suppose you are intentionally missing the point. Again, Kerry has used his Vietnam service as his primary qualification for president. He has made it an issue, so he, and others, should expect that issue to be addressed.
 
Bingo. Even if it could be PROVEN BEYOND ANY DOUBT that GW is personally behind the Swift Boat Vets, that would not change the fact that Kerry made it an issue, and it is fair to examine the veracity of his claims.
 
Kerry's Silver Star citation................

Kerry citation a 'total mystery' to ex-Navy chief

Chicago Sun-Times

Kerry citation a 'total mystery' to ex-Navy chief

August 28, 2004

BY THOMAS LIPSCOMB

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman has no idea where a Silver Star citation displayed on Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's campaign Web site came from, he said Friday. The citation appears over Lehman's signature.

"It is a total mystery to me. I never saw it. I never signed it. I never approved it. And the additional language it contains was not written by me," he said.

The additional language varied from the two previous citations, signed first by Adm. Elmo Zumwalt and then Adm. John Hyland, which themselves differ. The new material added in the Lehman citation reads in part: "By his brave actions, bold initiative, and unwavering devotion to duty, Lieutenant (jg) Kerry reflected great credit upon himself...."

Asked how the citation could have been executed over his signature without his knowledge, Lehman said: "I have no idea. I can only imagine they were signed by an autopen." The autopen is a device often used in the routine execution of executive documents in government.

Kerry senior adviser Michael Meehan could not be reached for comment on Kerry's records.

Thomas Lipscomb is chairman of the Center for the Digital Future in New York. "
 
More questions about Kerry's service are surfacing ! One of them is the fact that the US Navy, when asked about the medals shown on the Kerry website, says that two of them are not possible for Kerry to have gotten !!
 
:D

Oh, what a tangled web....


OK, folks what does this tell us. Even for the liberals, who we KNOW don't care about lying ( in fact, they ENCOURAGE it), have to take note of this.

This guy is too stupid to even lie well! :eek:
 
Fact: Kerry was in Viet Nam, he did come under fire at some point. BFD. Viet Nam was a dangerous place to all who served there. "Ticket punching" and medal inflation was common during the VN war, and it's pretty clear to me that Kerry gamed the system and took full advantage of the situation.

There are a couple things that do strike me as odd, though. I'm a VN-era vet, and I've done alot of business with the DOD during my IT career in teh DC area. I've known a lot of officers in all branches of the service. It is my observation that it is highly unusual for one officer to disparage another, even under questionable circumstances, it just isn't done, particularly out of spite, jealousy, or as part of a political agenda.

To me, the fact that so many officers are speaking openly of their distrust of Kerry and of his dishonesty and unfitness tells me something is REALLY wrong here.

But what really, really makes me think Kerry is unfit is his voting and work record while in the Senate for the last 20 years. All the missed votes, lacadaisical participation (e.g. missing 38/49 meetings of the Senate Intel Committee) and attendance, inconsistent postions, and just plain being on the wrong side of too many things that are important to me . . . :barf: He has abrogated his duty as a US Senator, why on Earth, would anyone trust him as CIC? I have seen little evidence of anything that looks like real leadership or integrity on his part.

He is a poser, pure and simple.

While there is no doubt that there is a dearth of leadership on both sides, the Democrats should be ashamed to try and foist off such a dull boy as a a Presidential candidate. JMNSHO.
 
Take Your Pick

Believe who you choose, but here are some facts:

1) The "swiftvets" story now is the opposite of what they said at the time. Ergo, they are admitted liars. Either lying now or lying then. Simple fact, lot's of excuses from them but they are admitted liars.

2) The head liar O'Dell has repeatedly said that Kerry was NEVER under fire so he got his bronze star fraudulently.

OK. But here's the problem:

It isn't Kerry's word against ODells, it's John Kerry, Robert Lambert, and Jim Rassman against ODell. Jim Rassmann was a Green beret who was blown off the deck of Kerry's boat. Rassmann says he was under fire and he also says Kerry saved his butt.

When I surfaced, all the swift boats had left, and I was alone taking fire from both banks. To avoid the incoming fire, I repeatedly swam under water as long as I could hold my breath, attempting to make it to the north bank of the river. I thought I would die right there.

The odds were against me avoiding the incoming fire and, even if I made it out of the river, I thought I'd be captured and executed. Kerry must have seen me in the water and directed his driver, Del Sandusky, to turn the boat around. Kerry's boat ran up to me in the water, bow on, and I was able to climb up a cargo net to the lip of the deck. But, because I was nearly upside down, I couldn't make it over the edge of the deck. This left me hanging out in the open, a perfect target. John, already wounded by the explosion that threw me off his boat, came out onto the bow, exposing himself to the fire directed at us from the jungle, and pulled me aboard.

For his actions that day, I recommended John for the Silver Star, our country's third highest award for bravery under fire.


he still says it today. Rassmann is a republican who voted for Bush. Exactly why is rassmann lying for John Kerry?

If he (Rassmann) is telling the truth, ODell and company are a a bunch of liars... which we already knew since they changed their story, but it means they are lying NOW.


http://www.tblog.com/templates/index.php?bid=SpyMaster&static=257817


"'John Kerry saved my life..." ... Thursday 08.12.04 [4:03 pm]

Shame on the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush

By Jim Rassmann, Wall Street Journal, [link]

I came to know Lt. John Kerry during the spring of 1969. He and his swift boat crew assisted in inserting our Special Forces team and our Chinese Nung soldiers into operational sites in the Cau Mau Peninsula of South Vietnam. I worked with him on many operations and saw firsthand his leadership, courage and decision-making ability under fire.

On March 13, 1969, John Kerry's courage and leadership saved my life.

While returning from a SEA LORDS operation along the Bay Hap River, a mine detonated under another swift boat. Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river, and a second explosion followed moments later. The second blast blew me off John's swift boat, PCF-94, throwing me into the river. Fearing that the other boats would run me over, I swam to the bottom of the river and stayed there as long as I could hold my breath.

When I surfaced, all the swift boats had left, and I was alone taking fire from both banks. To avoid the incoming fire, I repeatedly swam under water as long as I could hold my breath, attempting to make it to the north bank of the river. I thought I would die right there.

The odds were against me avoiding the incoming fire and, even if I made it out of the river, I thought I'd be captured and executed. Kerry must have seen me in the water and directed his driver, Del Sandusky, to turn the boat around. Kerry's boat ran up to me in the water, bow on, and I was able to climb up a cargo net to the lip of the deck. But, because I was nearly upside down, I couldn't make it over the edge of the deck. This left me hanging out in the open, a perfect target. John, already wounded by the explosion that threw me off his boat, came out onto the bow, exposing himself to the fire directed at us from the jungle, and pulled me aboard.

For his actions that day, I recommended John for the Silver Star, our country's third highest award for bravery under fire. I learned only this past January that the Navy awarded John the Bronze Star with Combat V for his valor. The citation for this award, signed by the Commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Vietnam, Vice Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, read, "Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry's calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service." To this day I am grateful to John Kerry for saving my life. And to this day I still believe that he deserved the Silver Star for his courage.

It has been many years since I served in Vietnam. I returned home, got married, and spent many years as a deputy sheriff for Los Angeles County. I retired in 1989 as a lieutenant. It has been a long time since I left Vietnam, but I think often of the men who did not come home with us.

I am neither a politician nor an organizer. I am a retired police officer with a passion for orchids. Until January of this year, the only public presentations I made were about my orchid hobby. But in this presidential election, I had to speak out; I had to tell the American people about John Kerry, about his wisdom and courage, about his vision and leadership. I would trust John Kerry with my life, and I would entrust John Kerry with the well-being of our country.

Nobody asked me to join John's campaign. Why would they? I am a Republican, and for more than 30 years I have largely voted for Republicans. I volunteered for his campaign because I have seen John Kerry in the worst of conditions. I know his character. I've witnessed his bravery and leadership under fire. And I truly know he will be a great commander in chief.

Now, 35 years after the fact, some Republican-financed Swift Boat Veterans for Bush are suddenly lying about John Kerry's service in Vietnam; they are calling him a traitor because he spoke out against the Nixon administration's failed policies in Vietnam. Some of these Republican-sponsored veterans are the same ones who spoke out against John at the behest of the Nixon administration in 1971. But this time their attacks are more vicious, their lies cut deep and are directed not just at John Kerry, but at me and each of his crewmates as well. This hate-filled ad asserts that I was not under fire; it questions my words and Navy records. This smear campaign has been launched by people without decency, people who don't understand the bond of those who serve in combat.

As John McCain noted, the television ad aired by these veterans is "dishonest and dishonorable." Sen. McCain called on President Bush to condemn the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush ad. Regrettably, the president has ignored Sen. McCain's advice.

Does this strategy of attacking combat Vietnam veterans sound familiar? In 2000, a similar Republican smear campaign was launched against Sen. McCain. In fact, the very same communications group, Spaeth Communications, that placed ads against John McCain in 2000 is involved in these vicious attacks against John Kerry. Texas Republican donors with close ties to George W. Bush and Karl Rove crafted this "dishonest and dishonorable" ad. Their new charges are false; their stories are fabricated, made up by people who did not serve with Kerry in Vietnam. They insult and defame all of us who served in Vietnam.

But when the noise and fog of their distortions and lies have cleared, a man who volunteered to serve his country, a man who showed up for duty when his country called, a man to whom the United States Navy awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts, will stand tall and proud. Ultimately, the American people will judge these Swift Boat Veterans for Bush and their accusations. Americans are tired of smear campaigns against those who volunteered to wear the uniform. Swift Boat Veterans for Bush should hang their heads in shame.

Mr. Rassmann, a retired lieutenant with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, served with the U.S. Army 5th Special Forces Group in Vietnam 1968-69. - [link]
 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,130326,00.html

Swift Boat Crewman: Kerry Boat Took Fire
Friday, August 27, 2004


PORTLAND, Ore. — A swift boat crewman decorated in the 1969 Vietnam incident where John Kerry (search) won a Bronze Star says not only did they come under enemy fire but also that his own boat commander, who has challenged the official account, was too distracted to notice the gunfire.

Retired Chief Petty Officer Robert E. Lambert (search), of Eagle Point, Ore., got a Bronze Star for pulling his boat commander — Lt. Larry Thurlow — out of the Bay Hap River on March 13, 1969. Thurlow had jumped onto another swift boat to aid sailors wounded by a mine explosion but fell off when the out-of-control boat ran aground.

Thurlow, who has been prominent among a group of veterans challenging the Democratic presidential candidate's record, has said there was no enemy fire during the incident. Lambert, however, supports the Navy account that says all five swift boats in the task force "came under small arms and automatic weapon fire from the river banks" when the mine detonated.

"I thought we were under fire, I believed we were under fire," Lambert said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

"Thurlow was far too distracted with rescue efforts to even realize he was under fire. He was concentrating on trying to save lives."


The anti-Kerry group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (search), has been running television ads challenging the Navy account of the boats being under fire. Kerry has condemned the ads as a Republican smear campaign.

A career military man, Lambert is no fan of Kerry's either. He doesn't like Kerry's post-Vietnam anti-war activity and doesn't plan to vote for him.

"I don't like the man himself," Lambert said, "but I think what happened happened, and he was there."

A March 1969 Navy report located by The Associated Press this week supports Lambert's version. The report twice mentions the incident and both times calls it "an enemy initiated firefight" that included automatic weapons fire and underwater mines used against a group of five boats that included Kerry's.

Kerry's Bronze Star was awarded for his pulling Special Forces Lt. Jim Rassmann, who had been blown off the boat, out of the river. Rassmann, who is retired and lives in Florence, Ore., has said repeatedly that the boats were under fire, as have other witnesses. Lambert didn't see that rescue because Kerry was farther down the river and "I was busy pulling my own boat officer (Thurlow) out of the water."

Thurlow could not be reached for comment about Lambert's recollections.

But speaking for the Swift Boat Veterans group, Van Odell, who was in the task force that day, remembers it differently from Lambert.

"When they're firing, you can hear the rounds hit the boat or buzz by your head. There was none of that," he said in a telephone interview from Katy, Texas, where he lives.

On Thursday, the group released a 30-second Internet ad disputing Kerry's contention that his swiftboat crossed into Cambodia. Kerry's campaign has acknowledged that he may not have been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve of 1968, as he has previously stated, but that he does recall being on patrol along the Cambodia-Vietnam border on that date.

Lambert said the swift boats were on their way out of the river when a mine exploded under one, PCF-3.

"When they blew the 3-boat, everyone opened up on the banks with everything they had," he said. "That was the normal procedure. When they came after you, they came after you. Somebody on shore blew that mine."

"There was always a firefight" after a mine detonation, he said.

"Kerry was out in front of us, on down the river. He had to come back up the river to get to us."

Lambert retired in 1978 as a chief petty officer with 22 years of service and three tours in Vietnam. He does not remember ever meeting Kerry.
 
As to Odell's credibility

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129590,00.html

The following is a transcribed excerpt from 'FOX News Sunday,' August 22, 2004:

CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: The biggest political story this week has not been about the war on terror or the economy. No, it's been about John Kerry's service in Vietnam (search) 35 years ago.

Today we hope to get past all the name-calling to some actual facts. Joining us are John Hurley, national director of Veterans for Kerry (search), and Van Odell, a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (search), the group that says Kerry is lying about his record.

And welcome to both of you. Let's get to it.

VAN ODELL, SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH: Thank you, Chris.

WALLACE: Mr. Odell, I want to start by asking you about contradictions in what some leaders of your group have been saying over the years.

George Elliott, who was the commander of the division that all of your swift boats were part of, let's look at what Elliott says in one of your ads now and what he said about John Kerry back in 1996. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE ELLIOTT, SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH: John Kerry has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELLIOTT: John turned his boats to the beach, and the enemy was routed. The fact that he chased an armed enemy down is something not to be looked down upon but it was an act of courage.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Back then when there was no presidential campaign, Mr. Elliott said that Kerry had acted courageously.

ODELL: Well, yes, he did. And one of the things that they were defending -- I said the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are for the truth.

(?)

////////////
WALLACE: But here's a man who says John Kerry has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam, and in '96 he said he acted courageously.

Let me show you a statement by another one of your members, Adrian Lonsdale. Let's take a look at what he says now in one of your ads and what he said in 1996. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ADRIAN LONSDALE, SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH: He lacks the capacity to lead.

It was mainly won because of the bravado and the courage of the young officers that ran the boats, the swift boats and the Coast Guard cutters. And Senator Kerry was no exception. He was among the finest of those swift boat drivers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Again, here's a man who now lacks the capacity to lead, according to Mr. Lonsdale, but back in 1996 showed courage, bravado and was one of the finest swift boat drivers.

ODELL: Well, again, you have to ask Lonsdale what he said about that. //

WALLACE: How do you explain these 180-degree contradictions in what these two men are saying now and what they said eight years ago?

ODELL: Well, I know they've been on TV explaining this. I can't explain exactly what was in their heart. ////


Mr. Odell, let's go back to you. Let's talk about the one key incident that you and John Kerry were both a part of, March 13, 1969, when your swift boats came under attack and Jim Rassmann was thrown out of Kerry's boat.

You say, your group says, but you specifically say that John Kerry's Bronze Star citation is a lie, and that in fact he did not come under enemy fire that day. Do you stand by that?

ODELL: I stand by that 100 percent. ////

WALLACE: But specifically, you say, and you say as you sit here today, that there was no enemy fire from either bank.

ODELL: There was no enemy fire from either bank.

/////////

WALLACE: All right. Let's look at the records from 1969. I have here John Kerry's -- the recommendation for him to receive a Bronze Star medal, and let's look at what this document says.

It says that there were two mine explosions, including one that knocked Jim Rassmann off Kerry's boat.

And then it says this about Kerry: "He immediately turned his boat around to assist the man in the river, who by this time was receiving sniper fire from the river banks. Throughout the entire action, Lieutenant Junior Grade Kerry proved himself to be calm, professional and highly courageous in the face of enemy fire."

Mr. Odell, this recommendation for John Kerry to receive a Bronze Star, this recommendation that said he was courageous under fire, was signed by George Elliott, a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

ODELL: Yes, it was. Yes, it was. //

WALLACE: How do you have the evidence that the after-action report was written by John Kerry? Where's the evidence of that?

ODELL: He was the officer that volunteered to write it whenever it came back. Because the only people...

WALLACE: Do you have a document?

ODELL: No, I do not. I do not have a document that says that.

WALLACE: You do not have a document that says that he -- and you're saying that, with all of these people there, that he made up a story and with all of these other -- all of you there, that he made up a story that there was no enemy fire -- or that there was enemy fire and everybody else just accepted it?

//
WALLACE: But wait a minute. Another member of your group, Larry Thurlow, who was also in that same action, also received a Bronze Star, and his citation also says there was enemy fire.

I want to show you something else. These are the after-action reports from March 1969. These are the reports of the action. These did not come from an individual person. They talk about -- and let's take a look at it.

They say that the boats received heavy A.W. -- automatic weapons -- and S.A. -- small arms -- from both banks. And they say that all of your boats sustained battle damage, including Thurlow's boat and Kerry's boat.

These are the documents.

ODELL: I've seen them. //

WALLACE: Wait a minute. I mean, I've got here the recommendation that was written in real-time, 10 days after, to recommend a Bronze Star for John Kerry; also the one that was written for Larry Thurlow. I've got the after-action reports.

Do you have a single document, a single piece of evidence from 1969 that shows that John Kerry made up this story?

//

WALLACE: The answer is no, you do not have a single document.

ODELL: No, I do not.

WALLACE: There's not a single document from 1969 to prove your story.

ODELL: Just seven eyewitness accounts.

WALLACE: From 35 years after the fact.
 
bountyh: NICE, you just owned them so badly.


On the flip side of the coin, Bush sure did a nice job of protecting the skies of Texas from North Vietnamese bombers whilst John Kerry was on a boat in Vietnam, and John McCain was in the Hanoi Hilton.
 
”I've known a lot of officers in all branches of the service. It is my observation that it is highly unusual for one officer to disparage another, even under questionable circumstances, it just isn't done, particularly out of spite, jealousy, or as part of a political agenda.

”To me, the fact that so many officers are speaking openly of their distrust of Kerry and of his dishonesty and unfitness tells me something is REALLY wrong here.”
Click to expand...


I strongly endorse Mike’s comment (above).

I spent two decades as a highly successful Naval officer, currently followed by 15+ years as a defense executive working daily with senior Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force officials, including many Flag/General officers. What strikes me as most revealing about Kerry is:

(1) The preponderance of his peers – fellow Riverine officers – who believe he is a charlatan and a self-promoting opportunist. I honestly would be suicidal if the overwhelming majority of officers with whom I served held me in such disrepute;

(2) His sworn, recorded testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that clearly was intentionally inflammatory, entirely inaccurate, and undoubtedly detrimental to the morale and trust of his fellow warriors still in Southeast Asia.
 
WALLACE: How do you have the evidence that the after-action report was written by John Kerry? Where's the evidence of that?
Click to expand...
The evidence of that is in the parts of Mr. Kerry's Service Record that he has refused to release. If Mr. Kerry's position is truthful, then he could release those records tomorrow morning, and win by a landslide in November.

He will never release those records. Nor will the media pressure him - as they did President Bush - to release all of those records. Those records contain facts that would be irrefutable, and they would directly reflect the opinion(s) held by Kerry's superior officers prior to his selling them out to the North Vietnamese.

They would reflect his record prior to his association with Al Hubbard the man who falsely claimed to be a Viet Nam combat veteran, and who was Kerry's co-moderator during the Winter Soldiers "investigation". That way, no one could reasonably say that those records reflect any ill will that real combat veterans feel in Mr. Kerry's having acted in concert with the perpetrator of a fraud. A fraud which Mr. Kerry subsequently used as a center piece of his testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971.

Kerry has every reason not to release his records, because if he were to do so, those of us who have actually served in the military would be able to read them and decide for ourselves what leadership qualities he may or may not have possessed at that time.

In any event, Mr. Kerry's problems merely begin in the bygone era of the 1960s. Mr. Kerry's real problem is that those of us who love freedom, and most importantly perhaps, those of us who hate freedom's enemies, know exactly who Mr. Kerry is by (lack of) virtue of his actions. His Senate record is something that even he cannot hide. That alone is enough.
 
How can you say you love freedom when you support George W. Bush and his adminstration. Lots of people have had their rights trampled in the name of fighting TERRAR.
 
On the flip side of the coin, Bush sure did a nice job of protecting the skies of Texas from North Vietnamese bombers whilst John Kerry was on a boat in Vietnam, and John McCain was in the Hanoi Hilton.
Click to expand...

It's interesting your bring up the Hanoi Hilton. Pilots who were prisoners there have stated their guards used Kerry's book as a instrument of psychologocial warfare, showing it to them to prove that they had been abandoned by their country and their comrades. Nice, huh?

As for being on a boat, would that be the one that Kerry got the Silver Star with Combat V for? The one he proudly displays on his campaign? The one that, according to the Navy, he can't have because it never existed?
 
How can you say you love freedom when you support George W. Bush and his adminstration. Lots of people have had their rights trampled in the name of fighting TERRAR.
Click to expand...

Kerry's only interest in free speech is the ability to perjure oneself in Congressional testimony when it supports his cause. He doesn't give a crap about anyone else's rights, including the 2nd A.

By the way, please identify anyone who has had their 1st Amendment rights violated by Bush in the "name of fighting TERRAR?"
 
Let's cut through all the crap. I wouldn't vote for Kerry if he had single handedly won the Vietnam war and won every medal this country has to offer.

Kerry is a liberal Dumbocrat and unless you are totally dense, you had better believe this guy wouldn't hesitate to go along with the gun grabbers in his party.

George Bush may not be perfect, but I think his head is in the right place and he has proven that he is willing to take a stand. To think that George Bush relished the idea of going to war against anyone, you have to be cracked.
 
Someone previously mentioned Officers Fitness Reports being a key indicator of how an officer is viewed by his superiors. According to an account I read by his immediate commanding officer in 'Nam, it is that Kerry required constant supervision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top