Smear Boat Veterans for Bush Falsehoods

[Rohirrim]

I agree: Our media totally sucks. The whole White House corps is nothing more than a school of little piglets waiting breathlessly to be ushered into the next buffet. The softball questions these guys toss up would embarass old time journalists. But their hair looks nice!

It was the media's job to ask questions about intelligence in Iraq, and even before 9/11. It was the media's job to ask questions about what was being done about the Cole. But of course, that would have distracted from the latest bimbo eruption. You know why the Cole bombing wasn't followed up? Because the media was occupied with the missing Levy chick and the congressman's connection.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

The Cole Bombing occurred on Oct 12th, 2000. Chandra went missing around May 1st, 2001. The media was occupied with the Presidential election and the Florida recount.

[watermock]

Moveon.org got millions from George Soros and his partner.

The Swift boats 527 got 150 grand from some Bush backer in TX.

Jesus ****ing Christ Get your head out of your ass. Moveon.org is run by an insane woman married to Kerry.

150k doensn't even sneeze.

Listen dimwit, the amount of money generated by Moveon.org thru Heinz Catsup is so freaking overwhelming when compared to some 527 contribution for Vets against the Liar it's litereally hillarious.

Your still bringing it too.

Do you even have a clue? Do you even have a clue how much Heinz-Kerry has put into this campaign?

Want me to bring it up?

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Hercules Rockefeller

The Cole Bombing occurred on Oct 12th, 2000. Chandra went missing around May 1st, 2001. The media was occupied with the Presidential election and the Florida recount.

Don't you think that 7 months after the Cole, somebody in the press should have started grilling our government about its response?

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Don't you think that 7 months after the Cole, somebody in the press should have started grilling our government about its response?

I never said that, and Chandra didn't become a story until a few months after she went missing. All I did was point out that your timeline was off and other stories prevented the Cole from being front page news for a long time. Terrorism was seen as the threat by people that it was now. Sadly it was a short attention spanned audience being pandered to by a short attention spanned media.

[Raider Bill]

Kerry's service record distorted (8/5)
By Brendan Nyhan

In his speech to the Democratic convention, vice presidential nominee Senator John Edwards, D-NC, was the latest figure to distort John Kerry's service record in Vietnam:

When John Kerry graduated college, he volunteered for military service. He volunteered to go to Vietnam and to captain a swift boat, one of the most dangerous duties you could have. And as a result he was wounded and honored for his valor.
Like many others who have made the same claim, Edwards' implication is misleading. As Chris Suellentrop pointed out on Slate, Kerry volunteered for swift boat duty before it became so dangerous. Here's how the Boston Globe recounted the story in its multi-part series on Kerry:

Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat" skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.
"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."
But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed -- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous. Under the newly launched Operation SEALORD, swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy. Cruising inlets and coves and canals, swift boats were especially vulnerable targets.
Kerry's biography on his campaign website (which Edwards echoed almost directly) promotes this confusion, citing the Globe's description of the revised mission of the swift boats and implying it was what the Massachusetts senator volunteered for:

In 1968, John Kerry began his second tour of duty, and volunteered to serve on a swift boat, one of the most dangerous assignments of the war. Swift boats patrolled the narrow inlets and canals around the Mekong Delta 'to draw fire and smoke out the enemy,' according to the Boston Globe."
In his convention speech, former President Bill Clinton also obscured what Kerry thought he was volunteering for, saying, "When they sent those swiftboats up the river in Vietnam and they told them their job was to draw hostile fire, to wave the American flag and bait the enemy to come out and fight, John Kerry said: Send me."

And some journalists have also gotten the facts wrong. For instance, Bennett Roth of the Houston Chronicle, who wrote that "Kerry enlisted in the Navy after graduating from Yale in 1966 and requested to command a Swift boat, one of the more dangerous assignments during the war."

Despite Kerry's decorated service record, the circumstances surrounding his request for swift boat duty should not be mischaracterized.

[Rohirrim]

We're all willing to parse hairs when it comes to Kerry, and willing to ignore pink elephants when it comes to Bush.

[Raider Bill]

The media painting him as this Rambo character is BS. He tried to get out on a deferrment, was the electrical officer on a frigate far from the action and by his own words volunteered for Swift boat duty because at the time they weren't involved in the fighting.

To me it isnt a stretch that he got his 3 scratches and bailed. Nothing leading up to that point showed him to be a willing combatant.

Kerry made military service an issue, now he's whining when someone or a group of people calls him on it.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

We're all willing to parse hairs when it comes to Kerry, and willing to ignore pink elephants when it comes to Bush.

Wow, where have you been? Did you see the democratic primaries? It was 24 hour bash Bush time. The news put every wild claim about Bush and reported it as fact. They examined his life down to the barest bone. And you actually think they've ignored Pink Elephants? You can'tpossible be serious.


Funny, Bush never made his military service the prime reason to elect him. Kerry's only got his military service and that now may be tainted. For 20 years in the senate, he's been a back bencher nobody. And now some of his colleagues question his service and the left gets into a tizzy. Too funny.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The extent to which the Rove Sleaze Machine is endeavoring to discount Kerry's military service only underscores how scared the bush minions really are.

After all, they can't run on Smirk's actual record, and they have a real problem w/ Dim Son's repeated failures to provide proof that he fulfilled his ANG commitment.

To compound matters, there are those twelve generals, admirals, and former joint chiefs of staff who have come forward to endorse Kerry. (Something which has never happened before in a US presidential election.)

The more desperate BushCo becomes, the more they crank up the sleaze level, put out bogus terror alerts etc.

Their tactics have become all too transparent and predictable.

[Rohirrim]

Boil it all down to its essence and you come up with one conclusion: Kerry served, Bush partially served. The only people asking the real questions on Bush are writing books, not working for the media. Has the media attacked Bush's rewriting of the energy policy, clean water act, forest service, etc. etc. etc.? Have they sent investigative reporters out to uncover the facts? Did they attack the WMD claims before the war? The Saddam/Al Queda link? No. They were part of the hysteria. They were the cheerleaders. It was just another hypefest, like OJ, like Kobe, like Chandra Levy.

Whatever either of these guys did thirty years ago, I see no reason to change my opinion that Bush is the worst president in history. I'm beginning to wonder if Kerry will be any better. I feel confident that he's a hell of a lot smarter, anyway. And I suppose my strongest argument to myself for voting for Kerry is that I know that when Bush leaves, so goes Cheney, Rummy, Ashcroft, Libby, Perle, Rice, Wolfowitz, etc. (and the direction they want to take this country in). I consider them truly dangerous people. I consider Bush just inept.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by watermock

FACT
(i) Kerry could NOT have gotten his Purple Heart without his Commander's recommendation. Indeed, regulations do not allow combatants to nominate themselves Purple Hearts or award it to themselves.
(ii) The severity of the injury is irrelevant to the award of a Purple Heart. The injury had to be sustained due to an outside force or in action against an enemy or hostile foreign force - or even from friendly fire. So SBV's claims are outrageous and without merit.

Your kidding me right? It says right there that Kerry himself asked for the purple heart. Normally, it's a recomendation. Show me a recomendation Blue. Go on. It's allready admitted it was friendly fire by Kerry himself. That doesn't disqualify him. Simply marching in and demanding a purple heart is pathetic. We have thousands of men fighting in Iraq and Afganistan the shrug off this kind of thing.

It says that Kerry himself could not have nominated himself for the purple heart as the Swiftvets claim; his commander had to be the one to nominate him and apparently the Navy agreed because the medal was, in fact, awarded.

What part of that last sentence from the article (which I've put in bold text) is ambiguous?

[Raider Bill]

Come on Rorhim, Clinton's final days in office were spent lowering the threshold for arsenic in drinking water to an unworkable level with an executive order. So one of the first things Bush would have to do is raise it again , and he was hammered in the press for it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Boil it all down to its essence and you come up with one conclusion: Kerry served, Bush partially served.

If "character counts," as the infamous republican slogan suggests, then consider this:

Kerry came from a privileged background and could have easily found a way to avoid military service altogether. Instead, he volunteered for a combat assignment in Viet Nam. He not only served honorably--he distinguished himself as courageous individual who was willing to risk his life to protect the lives of those men for whom he was responsible. He distinguished himself as a competent leader who performed well under pressure and in crises (contrast this with the image of Bush reading to those school children in Florida on 9/11.) And, contrary to what the chickenhawks for bush would have you believe--the military doesn't just give out purple hearts, bronze stars, and silver stars for nothing. You have to earn them. And you can't get these medals by asking for them--they are awarded to you.

Bush, by contrast, also came from a privileged background. However, he chose to use his father's influence to move to the top of a long waiting list to get into a cushy ANG that had no chance of deployment to Viet Nam. And Bush couldn't even honor this commitment--opting instead to go AWOL. (Just like he used the legacy status bequeathed by Poppy to get into Yale--where he proved himself a mediocre student.)
Every job Bush ever had was given to him by Poppy or his Saudi friends. And Bush screwed up every single one of these opportunities--from Aribusto to Harken Energy to the Texas Rangers--only to be bailed out by Poppy and his Saudi pals time and time again.

I know I'm not the only veteran to whom these issues matter.

[Raider Bill]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Boil it all down to its essence and you come up with one conclusion: Kerry served, Bush partially served.

If "character counts," as the infamous republican slogan suggests, then consider this:

Kerry came from a privileged background and could have easily found a way to avoid military service altogether. Instead, he volunteered for a combat assignment in Viet Nam.

No he didnt. He was denied a deferal to go to France. He served on a Frigate that was far from the action and by his own words volunteered for Swift boat duty because they weren't involved in combat at the time.

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

He not only served honorably--he distinguished himself as courageous individual who was willing to risk his life to protect the lives of those men for whom he was responsible. He distinguished himself as a competent leader who performed well under pressure and in crises (contrast this with the image of Bush reading to those school children in Florida on 9/11.) And, contrary to what the chickenhawks for bush would have you believe--the military doesn't just give out purple hearts, bronze stars, and silver stars for nothing. You have to earn them. And you can't get these medals by asking for them--they are awarded to you.

This is all debatable as we are now seeing.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by watermock

Van O'Dell, a former Navy enlisted man who says he was the gunner on another Swift Boat, states in his affidavit that he was "a few yards away" from Kerry's boat on March 13, 1969 when Kerry pulled one of his crewmen from the water. According to the official medal citations, Kerry's boat was under enemy fire at the time, and Kerry had been wounded when an enemy mine exploded near his own boat. O'Dell insists "there was no fire" at the time, adding: "I did not hear any shots, nor did any hostile fire hit any boats" other than his own, PCF-3.
Others in the ad back up that account. Jack Chenoweth, who was a Lieutenant (junior grade) commanding PCF-3, said Kerry's boat "fled the scene" after a mine blast disabled PCF-3, and returned only later "when it was apparent that there was no return fire." And Larry Thurlow, who says he commanded a third Swift Boat that day, says "Kerry fled while we stayed to fight," and returned only later "after no return fire occurred."

Here's what the official Navy records say happened, Mock...

Van O'Dell was NOT a crewmate of John Kerry's
The Simple Truth: John Kerry was nominated for the Bronze Star by James Rassmann and eyewitness accounts, official naval documents and independent analyses all state that Kerry and his crew were under fire on the day in question.
Official Naval documents available to the public at the Naval Historical Center in Washington, DC and available at www.JohnKerry.com include the after action reports, also known as "spot reports." These reports contain the details of the four boats involved in these actions on March, 13. 1969-including Kerry's boat PCF-94. These reports contain specific details of time, personnel, combat action and even maps. These report specifically detail the boats involved receiving, "HEAVY A/W (automatic weapons) AND S/A (small arms) FROM BOTH BANKS. FIRECONTINUED FOZNABOUT 5000 METERS."
Kerry's injury report for this action, also available at the Naval Historical Center in Washington DC, reads:
KERRY, JOHN F., XXXXXX, USN WOUNDED IN ACTION -
13 March 1969 vicinity of Song Bay Hap, South
Vietnam. Received shrapnel wounds in the left
buttocks and contusions on the right forearm
when a mine detonated close to PCF-94 while
engaged in operations on river. CONDITIONS AND
PROGNOSIS EXCELLENT. RESULT OF HOSTILE ACTION
The Boston Globe, which has repeatedly criticized John Kerry for any exaggeration or misstatement for the past 30 years, did their own investigation into Kerry's military career. The Globe wrote in their book, "John F. Kerry; A Complete Biography by the Boston Globe Reporters Who Know Him Best", that a mine blast threw James Rassmann into the water and made him "a bobbing target as he dodged the bullets whizzing around him." [p.106]
Eyewitness account from James Rassmann also detail the fact that PCF-94 and other boats were under fire. In March of 2004, Rassmann, a registered Republican who had not seen Kerry in more than 30 years before their reunion in Iowa this year, recalled the following: "Viet Cong snipers fired at him, and Rassmann submerged over and over to avoid being hit. The bullets came from both banks, and Rassmann had nowhere to go. He began thinking his time had come, but the fifth time he came up, he saw the convoy had turned around. Kerry had ordered the boats back to pick up the man overboard. Kerry's boat, under heavy fire, sidled up to the struggling soldier. Rassmann tried to scramble up a cargo net at the bow but was too exhausted to make it all the way. He clung to the net as bullets whizzed past." [Los Angeles Times, 3/13/04]
Kerry's Bronze Star citation recounts the events of that day and include this sentence, "In addition, all units began receiving small arms fire and automatic weapons fire from both banks." Versions of this citation were signed by the Secretary of the Navy and the Commander of U.S. Naval Forces in Vietnam. This citation is available for the public to read at www.JohnKerry.com.
...
Jack Chenowith was NOT a crewmate of John Kerry's
Mysterious Vet Named Chenoweth Appears Out of No Where to Accuse U.S. Navy & Fellow Vietnam Vets of Lying: Its Not Kerry's Account on the Bronze Star Citation-It's the Account of the U.S. Navy, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt Commander U.S. Naval Forces in Vietnam and backed up by Presidential Historian Douglas Brinkley, the Boston Globe, James Rassmann and the Crewmate of PCF-44 & PCF 94.

Originally Posted by watermock

Again, don't take what a man says seriously. Fact is, it was in a battle condition. This hasn't been contested that Kerry helped another boat. Noone claims the event never happened. Again, it's Kerry that is blowing his own horn in this campaign.

What was Kerry supposed to do? Turn tail? To do anything other than what he supposedly did, (pick up the wounded) would be cowardice. Recardless, he deserves the Purple Heart in this instance of saving lives. Again, this isn't even an issue. You act like he was operating in a vacume.

Finally the 3rd, from your own site.

In any case, even a "friendly fire" injury can qualify for a purple heart "as long as the 'friendly' projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment," according to the website of the Military Order of the Purple Heart. All agree that rice was being destroyed that day on the assumption that it otherwise might feed Viet Cong fighters.

So what is the point? From his 3 purple hearts, it seems like your own source shows that he was hit more often from friendly fire than the enemy.

The point still remains that people who served with him were totally unimpressed with is capability as a Junior Grade LT.

Is that why he never received a subpar review from his superior officers throughout his tour of service?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

He was denied a deferal to go to France.

Um, I'm assuming you mean "deferment?"

Link?

Even if your claim is true (which I highly doubt) the fact remains that, unlike AWOL Boy, Kerry volunteered for combat duty in Viet Nam.

He served on a Frigate that was far from the action and by his own words volunteered for Swift boat duty because they weren't involved in combat at the time.

Thanks for making my point for me. Kerry volunteerd for swift boat duty because they were "involved in combat" at the time. Actually, swift boat duty was one of the most dangerous assignments in country.

This is all debatable as we are now seeing.

Not at all.

The only thing we're "seeing" is a pathetic, desperate effort by a few GOP operatives and goons for hire to discount Kerry's military service.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[Raider Bill]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

He was denied a deferal to go to France.

Um,Thanks for making my point for me. Kerry volunteerd for swift boat duty because they were "involved in combat" at the time. Actually, swift boat duty was one of the most dangerous assignments in country.

You are just flat out wrong on this...and dont give me a bunch of crap about a biased site. They hammer Dems and Repubs alike
From Spinsanity.org


Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat" skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.
"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by njbil

You are just flat out wrong on this...and dont give me a bunch of crap about a biased site. They hammer Dems and Repubs alike
From Spinsanity.org


Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat" skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.
"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."

Was Kerry even required to sign up for a second tour of duty? The fact that he did volunteer for deployment to Vietnam suggests that avoiding combat was not his primary objective.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You are just flat out wrong on this..

What you are posting is pure bullsh*t.

Kerry volunteered for swift boat duty. Everyone who wasn't sleeping during Viet Nam knows that swift boat duty was one of the most dangerous combat assignments you could draw.

But, just for the sake of argument, let's say you are right.

The fact remains:

Kerry went.

Bush went AWOL (from a cushy non-combat unit.)


"I still have glass in my ass from sitting on a broken Jim Beam bottle in Laredo back in '72..."

[Raider Bill]

Revealed: how 'war hero' Kerry tried to put off Vietnam military duty
By Charles Laurence in New York
(Filed: 07/03/2004)


Senator John Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential candidate who is trading on his Vietnam war record to campaign against President George W Bush, tried to defer his military service for a year, according to a newly rediscovered article in a Harvard University newspaper.


Senator Kerry on the campaign trail in Iowa
He wrote to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s.

The revelation appears to undercut Sen Kerry's carefully-cultivated image as a man who willingly served his country in a dangerous war - in supposed contrast to President Bush, who served in the Texas National Guard and thus avoided being sent to Vietnam.

The Harvard Crimson newspaper followed a youthful Mr Kerry in Boston as he campaigned for Congress for the first time in 1970. In the course of a lengthy article, "John Kerry: A Navy Dove Runs for Congress", published on February 18, the paper reported: "When he approached his draft board for permission to study for a year in Paris, the draft board refused and Kerry decided to enlist in the Navy."

Samuel Goldhaber, the article's author who is now a cardiologist attached to the Harvard School of Medicine, spent 11 hours trailing Mr Kerry and still remembers that the subject of the Paris deferment came up during long conversations about Vietnam.

"I stand by my story," he told The Telegraph. "It was a long time ago, and I was 19 at the time, so it is hard to remember every detail. But I do know this: at no point did Kerry contact either me or the Crimson to dispute anything I had written."

Sen Kerry's campaign headquarters in Washington refused an opportunity to deny the report. Despite repeated telephone calls from The Telegraph, a spokesman refused to comment. Another Democrat official said merely: "In Vietnam, John Kerry proved his patriotism beyond question. Everyone knows that."

A senior Republican strategist, who asked not to be named, said: "I've not heard this before. This undercuts Kerry's complaints about Bush and it continues to pose questions as to his credibility among ordinary Vietnam veterans."

He said it would fuel concerns over the way Sen Kerry made a name for himself by leading anti-war protests in Washington and Boston in the late 1960s and early 1970s after he had completed his service in the US Navy, even while his former comrades continued to fight and die.

A newly-published biography of Sen Kerry by Douglas Brinkley, A Tour of Duty, makes no mention of the requested deferment or planned year in Paris. At the time, it was still unclear just how long America would remain in Vietnam, and it might have seemed that a year's deferral of service could render enlistment unnecessary.

According to the Democratic Party's version of Sen Kerry's military history, he joined the Reserve Officer Training Corps at Harvard through eagerness to do his duty, and sailed with the Navy for combat as soon as he graduated in 1966.

Sen Kerry won a gallantry medal for his service as a gunboat captain on the Mekong Delta, and was honorably discharged with three "purple heart" medals after sustaining three wounds. He has consistently presented himself as a leader who argued against the war only after fulfilling his duty in the field. Supporters argue that his war record makes him a more trustworthy leader than President Bush, who served sporadically in the National Guard at home.

"This means that Kerry didn't jump into all that heroic service until he was pushed, and it is a very nice piece of information," said Lucianne Goldberg, a prominent Republican campaigner.

Republican strategists for President Bush were already investigating Sen Kerry's record of three wounds sustained in Vietnam. "We find that he had only one day off sick - with three wounds? What exactly were these wounds?" she asked.

Mr Goldhaber recalled that, during a day spent with Sen Kerry and one assistant during his congressional campaign, he had described his involvement, service and decision to oppose the war in great detail.

"I am not at all surprised that he wants to be president, because he exuded ambition from the word go," said Dr Goldhaber. "At the time, the idea that he tried to persuade the draft board to let him spend a year in Paris was just a detail."

A spokesman for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign declined to comment.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Was Kerry even required to sign up for a second tour of duty?

Nope.

The fact that he did volunteer for deployment to Vietnam suggests that avoiding combat was not his primary objective.

Bingo.

You'd think even the most simple-minded bushbot would get this.

[Raider Bill]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

Was Kerry even required to sign up for a second tour of duty? The fact that he did volunteer for deployment to Vietnam suggests that avoiding combat was not his primary objective.

Are you guys this friggin obtuse.. read the mans quote.. not mine.. It's a godamn direct quote from John Forbes Kerry


"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The spam njbil is posting is just another right-wing hatchet job like that of the Smear Boat Vets for Bush.