So much for the swift boat vets being right wingers.....

[Exile_In_SJ]

Kerry's war record
Robert Novak (archive)


August 9, 2004 | Print | Send


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The television ad that aroused the wrath of John McCain and journalist supporters of John Kerry just begins deconstruction of the Democratic presidential candidate's war record. "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," a 214-page critique of his performance in Vietnam and the antiwar movement, is off the presses ahead of schedule.

I have read the book and found it is neither the political propaganda nor the urban legend that its detractors claim. It is a passionate but meticulously researched account of how Kerry went to war, what he did in the war and how he conducted himself after the war. The very serious charges by former comrades deserve answers but so far have produced only ad hominem counterattacks.

Why should details of what Kerry did more than 30 years ago be part of this election campaign? Only because the senator has made them integral to his strategy. Kerry as war hero received more attention at the Democratic National Convention than plans for the future. Thus, what he did in his shortened four months of combat becomes a valid campaign issue.

John E. O'Neill, co-author of "Unfit for Command," replaced Kerry as commander of Swift Boat PCF 94 in 1969 and has been confronting him since 1971. O'Neill told me he is no George W. Bush partisan and probably would have supported John Edwards had he been nominated for president, but is committed to keeping Kerry out of the Oval Office. Thus, reversing the usual formulation, the assault on Kerry is personal but not political.

O'Neill told me neither he nor his co-author (Jerome R. Corsi, a writer and expert on the Vietnam antiwar movement) has had contact with the Bush White House or the Bush-Cheney campaign. He said he and Corsi, on their own initiative, went to conservative Regnery Publishing to offer the book.

The co-authors paint Kerry as a reluctant warrior. Contrary to claims by Kerry's supporters that he served two combat hitches in Vietnam, his one-year term aboard a guided missile frigate was far from action. His four months in the brown water navy were terminated eight months early by a third Purple Heart wound, none of which required hospitalization.

The book's strength is the vehemence of testimony by swift boat veterans, alleging that Kerry "gamed" the system to win decorations and later betrayed comrades by charging war crimes. Typical is the quote by Bob Hildreth, commanding an accompanying boat: "I would never want Kerry behind me. I wouldn't want him in front of me, either. And I sure wouldn't want him commanding our kids in Iraq and Afghanistan." Some 200 "Swiftees" on May 4 signed a letter to Kerry demanding full release of his service records.

The book's weakness is support for Kerry's presidential campaign by his swift boat crewmates, presumably people who knew him best. O'Neill told me that these former sailors served with Kerry no more than five weeks. Jim Rassmann, now part of the Kerry presidential campaign, was a Special Forces lieutenant spending a few days with Kerry when he fell or was knocked off the swift boat while under fire and was fished out of the Mekong River by the future candidate.

The "band of brothers" was organized by Kerry, according to this book. It tells of a 2003 telephone call to Adm. Roy Hoffmann, who commanded swift boats in Vietnam, telling him he was running for president. Hoffmann, mistakenly thinking it was former Sen. Bob Kerrey, "responded enthusiastically." Once the admiral realized it was John Kerry, "he declined to give Kerry his support." Hoffmann is quoted as saying, "I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States."

"Unfit for Command" sends a devastating message, unless effectively refuted. Perhaps most disturbing are allegations that Kerry's combat decorations are unjustified. His first Purple Heart, the book alleges, was accidentally self-inflicted. His commander, Grant Hibbard, is quoted as saying: "I didn't recommend him for a Purple Heart. Kerry probably wrote up the paperwork and recommended himself." Full release of documents demanded by his critics could settle this claim quickly if it is unwarranted.

[Exile_In_SJ]

of course Kerry won't release his records and will help keep this alive. You know by the bleating his partisans are doing that it's hitting home.

compare that to Bush, who's been attacked by all sorts of lefties about an unproven AWOL incident who doesn't dignify the false accusations with a response, thereby fueling speculation. He's confident that his honorable discharge is proof enough for the majority of Americans (less the whacky left fringe).

Kerry, decided to add fuel to the fire by having his lawyers try and suppress the veterans free speech rights and then attack the veterans.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Mark Steyn is a great writer and a great humorist... this is funny and right on..

Mark Steyn takes on the Vietnam Vets ad.
Look, I would rather talk about the war. The current one, I mean — not the one that ended three decades ago. But, insofar as I understand the rules of Campaign 2004, every time any member of the administration says anything about the present conflict, he is accused by Democrats of shamelessly "politicizing" it. Whereas every time John Kerry waxes nostalgic about those fragrant memories of the Mekong Delta, he should be allowed to take his unending stroll down memory lane unmolested. After all, as everyone from John Edwards to Max Cleland to Bill Clinton has assured us, being a Swift boat commander for four months is the indispensable qualification for being president. When Hillary runs in 2008, no doubt she'll be leaning heavily on her four months running a Swift boat up and down the Shatt al-Arab during the Iraq war.
But hang on, most of these fellows in the anti-Kerry ad — the ones talking about how he can't be trusted, etc — are also Swift boat commanders? If being a Swiftee is the most important thing in American life, why are all these "Swift Boat Veterans For Truth" less entitled to be heard than John Kerry?
Well, because they're part of the "Republican smear machine". Apparently, it's the GOP's fault that only one of the 22 surviving Swift boat officers who served with Mr. Kerry is willing to support him, and that a big bunch of the remaining Swiftees feel strongly enough about his conduct 35 years ago to appear in one of the most remarkable political ads ever seen.

....The one thing the Democratic Party owed America this campaign season was a candidate credible on the current war. The Democrats needed their own Tony Blair, a bloke who's a big socialist pantywaist when it comes to health and education and the other nanny-state hooey but believes in robust projection of military force in the national interest.
John Kerry fails that test. If you wanted to pick a candidate on the wrong side of every major defense and foreign policy question of the last two decades, you would be hard put to find anyone with judgment as comprehensively poor as Mr. Kerry: total up his votes and statements on everything from Grenada to the Gulf war, Saddam to the Sandinistas, the Cold War to missile defense to every major weapons system of the 1980s and '90s. He called them all wrong.
But that's not how the Democratic Party muscle saw John Kerry. Since the notion of a credible war president wasn't important to them, they looked at the war on terror merely as a Bush wedge issue to be neutralized. And they figured their best shot at neutralizing it was Lt. Kerry on a Swift boat.

[Exile_In_SJ]

another famous right winger (not)

Roger Simon, a leftwing author

August 09, 2004
An Impeachable Offense in Advance?
Despite John Kerry having brought this on himself by making his four months of Vietnam service in the sixties the centerpiece of his campaign for president in 2004, so far it seems only bloggers and the usual right-wing mainstream media suspects are carrying water in the Swift Boats vets campaign to unmask Kerry. But I predict this will soon be changing because the accusations are too important and too well documented. Some are already doing it.

Many of the accusations seem to center around Kerry's medals. His commander, Grant Hibbard, is quoted as saying: ''I didn't recommend him for a Purple Heart. Kerry probably wrote up the paperwork and recommended himself.'' Well, if true, that's pathetic and makes Kerry something of creep. But he's not the first creep to be elected President, alas, and much as it, well, "creeps me out," I'd give him a (rolling eyes) pass and move on.

But I won't move on from his lying about Cambodia (on the Senate floor and elsewhere). If true, that is an impeachable offense in advance.

Now them's fighting words, so I'm going to take a moment to explain myself. Some have accused me of going to the right, but that is only true in a limited area (and that depends on your definition.) I support Bush for reelection because of the War on Terror. I oppose him on gay marriage (I'm considerably to the "left" of Kerry on that issue; he recently even backed the Missouri amendment!). I support a woman's right to choose. I think the War on Drugs is a ridiculous mistake and support the legalization of marijuana (although I don't lose any sleep over the issue). So am I some kind of right winger anxious to nail a "liberal" candidate? Well, it is so if you think so.

But let's move on to the impeachment issue. I thought the attempt to impeach Clinton was a partisan charade. Even though the man was highly insulting to the public and hugely disprespectful to the people who voted for him (like me), not to mention his family, all he did was lie about a private matter, if under oath. For me that is not enough to overthrow an election, because it has nothing to do with state policy.

What John Kerry allegedly said on the floor of the US Senate in 1986 (not that long ago, actually)had everything to do with state policy. He was using his own supposed experiences in Cambodia to advance a political agenda that would have changed the position of our government in a life or death situation of immense importance (Nicaragua). Only according to what I've read so far, Kerry was never in Cambodia.

I am astounded that much of the mainstream media, even the conservative media, is choosing to ignore this. Kerry should be dogged by questions at every campaign stop. "Were you ever in Cambodia?" "If you weren't, why did you lie to us about that?" "Will you lie to us about such things in the future?"

Enough.

[Rohirrim]

I notice that nobody on earth has yet stepped forward to claim Gary Trudeau's $10,000 to prove that Bush actually performed the majority of his ANG service (or any of it in Alabama). I wonder how much taxpayers spent to teach that guy how to fly a jet. Money wasted once he blew off his physical.

At least we know Kerry showed up.

[watermock]

Hey numbnuts, what is the tread about?

Stick it up your ass, you deflecting. If you want to poke at Bush, have at it. Don't deflect and make yourself a total fool. Your done as a relevant commentator. I am not going to bother with your stupidity.

Go back a few steps you dip.

your not even close to reality.

[watermock]

notice that nobody on earth has yet stepped forward to claim Gary Trudeau's $10,000 to prove that Bush actually performed the majority of his ANG service (or any of it in Alabama). I wonder how much taxpayers spent to teach that guy how to fly a jet. Money wasted once he blew off his physical.

At least we know Kerry showed up.[/quote]

Hey dimwit. this isn't about Bush you Idiot. Your deflecting again. Go look at the thread dimwit.

It's all the same thing. Gary Trudeadu?

What a ****ing laugh.

[watermock]

Here is the point.

Bush never made it a campaign issue, Kerry did.

So when he makes it an issue and gets drug thru the mud it's some sort of Smear Campaign.

Get off the horse and get in the mud.

[Captain_Poncho]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

At least we know Kerry showed up.

...as it turns out, to advance his political career at the expense of the men who fought along side of him, who he accused of chopping off arms and legs, killing children, etc...

Such a class act.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by watermock

Hey numbnuts, what is the tread about?

Stick it up your ass, you deflecting. If you want to poke at Bush, have at it. Don't deflect and make yourself a total fool. Your done as a relevant commentator. I am not going to bother with your stupidity.

Go back a few steps you dip.

your not even close to reality.

Oops. I'm afraid somebody's been slipping cow dung into your corn liquor again, Mock. As if your struggle against the effects of inbreeding wasn't tough enough.

[Exile_In_SJ]

this thread is about Kerry, there are plenty of threads about Bush.

Yeah Kerry went, got 3 minor scratches which never even required hospital time and got 3 purple hearts for them. My uncle in Korea was shot in the upper thigh and was in the hospital for 6 months and got his purple heart. My uncle earned his. John McCain and Bob Dole are true American heroes. Kerry manufactured his medals.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

this thread is about Kerry, there are plenty of threads about Bush.

Yeah Kerry went, got 3 minor scratches which never even required hospital time and got 3 purple hearts for them. My uncle in Korea was shot in the upper thigh and was in the hospital for 6 months and got his purple heart. My uncle earned his. John McCain and Bob Dole are true American heroes. Kerry manufactured his medals.

OK. Have fun.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

Kerry's war record
Robert Novak (archive)


August 9, 2004 | Print | Send


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The television ad that aroused the wrath of John McCain and journalist supporters of John Kerry just begins deconstruction of the Democratic presidential candidate's war record. "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," a 214-page critique of his performance in Vietnam and the antiwar movement, is off the presses ahead of schedule.

I have read the book and found it is neither the political propaganda nor the urban legend that its detractors claim. It is a passionate but meticulously researched account of how Kerry went to war, what he did in the war and how he conducted himself after the war. The very serious charges by former comrades deserve answers but so far have produced only ad hominem counterattacks.

Why should details of what Kerry did more than 30 years ago be part of this election campaign? Only because the senator has made them integral to his strategy. Kerry as war hero received more attention at the Democratic National Convention than plans for the future. Thus, what he did in his shortened four months of combat becomes a valid campaign issue.

John E. O'Neill, co-author of "Unfit for Command," replaced Kerry as commander of Swift Boat PCF 94 in 1969 and has been confronting him since 1971. O'Neill told me he is no George W. Bush partisan and probably would have supported John Edwards had he been nominated for president, but is committed to keeping Kerry out of the Oval Office. Thus, reversing the usual formulation, the assault on Kerry is personal but not political.

O'Neill told me neither he nor his co-author (Jerome R. Corsi, a writer and expert on the Vietnam antiwar movement) has had contact with the Bush White House or the Bush-Cheney campaign. He said he and Corsi, on their own initiative, went to conservative Regnery Publishing to offer the book.

The co-authors paint Kerry as a reluctant warrior. Contrary to claims by Kerry's supporters that he served two combat hitches in Vietnam, his one-year term aboard a guided missile frigate was far from action. His four months in the brown water navy were terminated eight months early by a third Purple Heart wound, none of which required hospitalization.

The book's strength is the vehemence of testimony by swift boat veterans, alleging that Kerry "gamed" the system to win decorations and later betrayed comrades by charging war crimes. Typical is the quote by Bob Hildreth, commanding an accompanying boat: "I would never want Kerry behind me. I wouldn't want him in front of me, either. And I sure wouldn't want him commanding our kids in Iraq and Afghanistan." Some 200 "Swiftees" on May 4 signed a letter to Kerry demanding full release of his service records.

The book's weakness is support for Kerry's presidential campaign by his swift boat crewmates, presumably people who knew him best. O'Neill told me that these former sailors served with Kerry no more than five weeks. Jim Rassmann, now part of the Kerry presidential campaign, was a Special Forces lieutenant spending a few days with Kerry when he fell or was knocked off the swift boat while under fire and was fished out of the Mekong River by the future candidate.

The "band of brothers" was organized by Kerry, according to this book. It tells of a 2003 telephone call to Adm. Roy Hoffmann, who commanded swift boats in Vietnam, telling him he was running for president. Hoffmann, mistakenly thinking it was former Sen. Bob Kerrey, "responded enthusiastically." Once the admiral realized it was John Kerry, "he declined to give Kerry his support." Hoffmann is quoted as saying, "I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States."

"Unfit for Command" sends a devastating message, unless effectively refuted. Perhaps most disturbing are allegations that Kerry's combat decorations are unjustified. His first Purple Heart, the book alleges, was accidentally self-inflicted. His commander, Grant Hibbard, is quoted as saying: "I didn't recommend him for a Purple Heart. Kerry probably wrote up the paperwork and recommended himself." Full release of documents demanded by his critics could settle this claim quickly if it is unwarranted.

O'Neill may not be a Bush partisan, but he was handpicked by Nixon toady Colson for the specific purpose of countering Kerry 30-some years ago. He's still at his personal vendetta today.

Kerry's documentation is available online in pdf format, Exile. I'll find and post the links for you.

Noteworthy is the fact that Robert Novak is the "journalist" who disclosed the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame... a treasonous act that compromised not only Ms. Plame but every contact she had ever made in her career....

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

this thread is about Kerry, there are plenty of threads about Bush.

Yeah Kerry went, got 3 minor scratches which never even required hospital time and got 3 purple hearts for them. My uncle in Korea was shot in the upper thigh and was in the hospital for 6 months and got his purple heart. My uncle earned his. John McCain and Bob Dole are true American heroes. Kerry manufactured his medals.

Takes a lot balls or lack of brains to call a veteran who has been awarded the silver and bronze stars and 3 purple hearts not worthy. Especially from someone who didn't serve in Vietnam. Or have you even served in the armed forces at all?
I wonder, if Kerry is your president come this fall, do you disappear?

[Exile_In_SJ]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

O'Neill may not be a Bush partisan, but he was handpicked by Nixon toady Colson for the specific purpose of countering Kerry 30-some years ago. He's still at his personal vendetta today.

Kerry's documentation is available online in pdf format, Exile. I'll find and post the links for you.

Noteworthy is the fact that Robert Novak is the "journalist" who disclosed the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame... a treasonous act that compromised not only Ms. Plame but every contact she had ever made in her career....

Again, a personal vendetta doesn't mean that 2 + 2 doesn't still add up to 4. Apparently LABF has a personal vendetta against GWB and yet you unquestioningly believe what he says.

Hmmm as far as Robert Novak, has he been tried? charged? Kind of early to call his act treasonous without any proof of treason.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

Takes a lot balls or lack of brains to call a veteran who has been awarded the silver and bronze stars and 3 purple hearts not worthy. Especially from someone who didn't serve in Vietnam. Or have you even served in the armed forces at all?
I wonder, if Kerry is your president come this fall, do you disappear?

based on observations of people who have been wounded in war, including family members, 3 purple hearts awarded for three scratches and one medal being denied only to have Kerry go behind his commanders back to obtain it, appears very weak to me. I think he's not worthy. I've not said anything about his bronze and silver medals.
I've seen the left comment on Bush and his national guard service. Have these commenters served in the National Guard? Have they served in the armed forces at all? Do they have the right to comment on GWB's service? If they do, will you comment negatively to/about them? Just wondering.

As for your second question.. Probably not, but then the women who were charging Clinton with his various foibles, found that the IRS decided it was appropriate to audit them. I doubt I'm inportant enough for a future President Kerry (god forbid) to worry about.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by Exile_In_SJ

Again, a personal vendetta doesn't mean that 2 + 2 doesn't still add up to 4. Apparently LABF has a personal vendetta against GWB and yet you unquestioningly believe what he says.

While my political ideology is similar to LABF's, it would be inaccurate to say that I unilaterally agree with everything he posts. And isn't it a bit presumptuous for you to inform me of what I do and do not believe? Just asking...

Hmmm as far as Robert Novak, has he been tried? charged? Kind of early to call his act treasonous without any proof of treason.

Disclosing the name of an active CIA operative is a treasonous act. The investigation into the matter is still ongoing and while no indictments have been issued yet... the key word here is yet.

[Captain_Poncho]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

While my political ideology is similar to LABF's, it would be inaccurate to say that I unilaterally agree with everything he posts.

I certainly have yet to see this statement backed up in deed.

I won't hold my breath.

"You see, what LABS meant to say when he mocked the 9/11 commission as a fraud and then used it to back a point on Bill Clinton is that he didn't mean that the whole commission was a fraud because when he mocked the commission, the commission wasn't cited as a whole thing of the thing he was mocking, you see, so he didn't mean there were no facts in the fraud...er..Where was I going with this?"

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by Captain_Poncho

I certainly have yet to see this statement backed up in deed.

I won't hold my breath.

"You see, what LABS meant to say when he mocked the 9/11 commission as a fraud and then used it to back a point on Bill Clinton is that he didn't mean that the whole commission was a fraud because when he mocked the commission, the commission wasn't cited as a whole thing of the thing he was mocking, you see, so he didn't mean there were no facts in the fraud...er..Where was I going with this?"

I don't think you know me well enough yet to read my mind, Captain.

As to the "9/11 commission" posts, it appeared that you were having trouble defining the position LABF intended to take with his iinitial post. I merely shared my own interpretation of it in order to assist you... in light of the fact that his political ideology appears closer to mine than to yours, which would be very nearly the polar opposite.

[Captain_Poncho]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

I don't think you know me well enough yet to read my mind, Captain.

Where, exactly did I assert this?

Originally Posted by Blueflame

As to the "9/11 commission" posts, it appeared that you were having trouble defining the position LABF intended to take with his iinitial post.

I was having trouble? You're so cute when you get condescending.

Rational people have trouble reconciling a position that mocks an entire source as a whole, and then turns around to use said source as backing. Your attempts to dig something rational out of that big pile of stupid was sad to say the least. The fact that you're still trying to do it is hilarious.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by Captain_Poncho

Where, exactly did I assert this?

OK... here's how the conversation went:

Exile: "Apparently LABF has a personal vendetta against GWB and yet you unquestioningly believe what he says. "

Me: "While my political ideology is similar to LABF's, it would be inaccurate to say that I unilaterally agree with everything he posts. And isn't it a bit presumptuous for you to inform me of what I do and do not believe? Just asking... "

You (quoting part of my post): "I certainly have yet to see this statement backed up in deed.

I won't hold my breath. "

It appears to me that both you and Exile were informing me of what I do and do not believe...

I was having trouble? You're so cute when you get condescending.

Rational people have trouble reconciling a position that mocks an entire source as a whole, and then turns around to use said source as backing. Your attempts to dig something rational out of that big pile of stupid was sad to say the least. The fact that you're still trying to do it is hilarious.

To say you were "having trouble" is more polite than saying you were deliberately attempting to twist what he'd said in an effort to paint him into a corner. It looks like you might still be a tad chafed that the ploy didn't work.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Blueflame, you misunderstand, I'm not telling you what you believe, just making an observation and stating my opinion. I don't think you have any hatred like LABF, but what I see idealogically you two are very close. someone would have to go an awful long way to come close to LABF's hatred.

[Rohirrim]

Here's the one premise that blows all this crap out of the water, and the one, undeniable point (according to Navy records) that nobody seems willing to address, regardless of how Kerry earned his Puple Hearts: Did he command a Swift boat up the rivers of the Mekong Delta? Yes. Did he complete numerous missions? Yes. Did he come under fire numerous times? Yes. Did he personally pull a Special Forces soldier out of the water while under fire? Yes. Did he drive his boat into an enemy ambush, then leap off the boat and kill that enemy combatant? Yes.

Final, double Jeopardy question for $1000 bucks: Did he know in advance where every bullet, and every piece of shrapnel was headed?

If your answer to the last question is no, then you, and these so-called Swift Veterans Against Kerry, are now maligning, and attempting to defame, the reputation of an American hero in order to justify your own political ends.

Wave your flag accordingly.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Here's the one premise that blows all this crap out of the water, and the one, undeniable point (according to Navy records) that nobody seems willing to address, regardless of how Kerry earned his Puple Hearts: Did he command a Swift boat up the rivers of the Mekong Delta? Yes. Did he complete numerous missions? Yes. Did he come under fire numerous times? Yes. Did he personally pull a Special Forces soldier out of the water while under fire? Yes. Did he drive his boat into an enemy ambush, then leap off the boat and kill that enemy combatant? Yes.

Final, double Jeopardy question for $1000 bucks: Did he know in advance where every bullet, and every piece of shrapnel was headed?

If your answer to the last question is no, then you, and these so-called Swift Veterans Against Kerry, are now maligning, and attempting to defame, the reputation of an American hero in order to justify your own political ends.

Wave your flag accordingly.

And yet there are affidavits which are made under oath which say that Kerry's war record is at times false and lies. He could clear it all up by releasing ALL documentation regarding his Viet nam service.

You last statement has no meaning at all. You're defending him to justify your own political ends. Big deal.

Your side attacks Bush for their own political means. Again, so what?

The swift boat vets have their own reasons for trying to set the record straight and have every right to do so. Kerry has every right to trumpet his service. Good for him, he does not have the right to stop others from disputing him or disagreeing with him or his conclusions.

BTW the cambodia episode is gaining legs. Kerry denied it yet when presented with the congressional record showing he personally said he was in cambodia, they had to retreat and are currently figuring out what to say and how to respond.

[Rohirrim]

Dance around the main point all you want - the man served, in combat, under the American flag. The rest is politics - the dirtiest kind. Enjoy.