Originally Posted by HIX
If you guys want I can type up a report that shows that a buddy and I saved three small children from a house fire. Don't ask my buddy, he probably remembers it as us walking in and putting in a new battery in the smoke detector. But hey, I wrote it up so it is true, right?
I get so tired of the childish squabbling. Kerry wrote up the after action reports. Did he lie? I dunno. Did the other boats occupants lie? Who knows. I find it strange that none of the boats have any damage other than the one that hit the mine. Now I am not a charlie sitting on the banks of the river but if the "official" account is correct and John Kerry had to navigate the 5000 yards back to save his crewmember who was near the other boats who remained on the scene is it my opinion that if I were directing a "hailstorm" of fire at the boats being the hardened soldier that is fighting for my country I would at least be able to hit one boat with at least one bullet.
Assuming that Kerry's account is correct, can anyone care to tell me how they managed to not get hit by one bullet?
On what basis do you say Kerry is the author of the after-action report? I'm looking at it right now and I don't see any indication as to who wrote it. Nor, for that matter, do I see any statement saying that the boats weren't damaged.
On the other hand, Larry Thurlow's Bronze Star citation says that "... all units began receiving enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire from the river banks.... Despite enemy bullets flying about him, [Thurlow] leaped aboard the damaged boat and began rendering first aid and assessing damage..." Then later "... while still under fire, with complete disregard for his personal safety, returned aboard the damaged Inshore Patrol Craft... "His actions and courage in the face of enemy fire were instrumental in the medical evacuation of the wounded..." That's signed by Admiral Zumwalt. So there's another piece of documentary evidence that "all units" came under fire.
Of course, now Thurlow says that there was no enemy fire that day, and thus Kerry's Bronze Star is invalid. So how does he explain his own? Has he offered to give it back?
Who else has come forward to say that Kerry didn't deserve the decorations he got in the war? In addition to Thurlow...
- We've got Roy Hoffman, who said in 2003 that "I am not going to say anything negative about him — he's a good man." but who now says that "John Kerry has not been honest."
- Then there's Adrian Lonsdale, who in 1996 said Kerry was "among the finest of those Swift boat drivers" but who now says that he "lacks the capacity to lead."
- George Elliot said in 1996 that "the fact that he chased an armed enemy down is something not to be looked down upon, but it was an act of courage." Now he's appearing in the commercial saying "John Kerry has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam."
- And then of course we have Dr. Louis Letson who says "I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury" even though Letson's name doesn't appear anywhere on Kerry's medical records.
So, not only is there no documentary to back up anything these guys are saying, a lot of them are flatly contradicting things they've said earlier.
Frankly, I'm wondering why anyone's bothered to pay these guys any attention in the first place.