Kerry Finally Signs Vietnam Release

NewMax.com ^ | Saturday, May 28, 2005 12:02 a.m. EDT | With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[Czar]

"Will Kerry be allowed to redact information?"

I'm betting "yes" but, of course, Kerry and his MSM enablers and apologists will bob & weave, deny & deny, and stonewall in a massive cover up.

If Kerry has signed the form, you can absolutely count on there being nothing adverse left on record.

Guaranteed.

[hershey]

Or maybe redact those portions he'd rather not let voters see.

[brushcop]

Not a chance, what with the duplicity of many, there's been some "sanitizing" going on. Now, if "Jugs" Burkett (Stolen Valor) was processing this, I would be very optimistic.

[SeaBiscuit]

"Once they are made public, the documents will either prove or disprove claims the Swift Boat veterans leveled against the senator during the 2004 presidential election campaign."

Poppycock, they've been sanitized.

[lilylangtree]

Yeah right! I'll believe this when the papers are released. My question is: what's been doctored to his advantage?

[itsahoot]

I think the talk of "scrubbing" the records a bit on the paranpid side

Never heard of Sandy Berger huh? And those records were super secret, how hard would it be in comparison to get into personnel files at a low security site.

[supercat]

My best guess is that he will send it to himself so he can clean it up.

I would not regard as meaningful any documentation not received directly from the government archives. If Kerry requests the documents and then distributes them, it would be trivial for him to "adjust" anything that needed "fixing".

[the Real fifi]

Exactly..and he'll stall it and release it to the most favorable press under circumstances where the most favorable reading of them is out first before the truth catches up..

[mississippi red-neck]

I guess the reason it took so long is they had to wait for Hillary to give them a copy.

They where probably hard for her to find.

They where more than likely under those that disappeared from the late Vince Foster's office.

[RedwM]

He should have released them immediately, like every veteran here would have done (my belief).

Like my old Pappy (USMC) used to say... "He's a day late, and a dollar short".

[SpinyNorman]

If they are scrubbed, doctored, or selectively released, you can be sure the eagle eyes of the Swiftboat Vets will know.

Sometimes, what is missing is just as revealing as what is released.

[blanknoone]

Can you do a selective release using the Form 180?

Yes, selective in what gets released and who it gets released to. Dollars to Donuts, they are released only to him, and then he decides what to release and what not to. I would be very surprised if he does what the some of the Swift Vets did...allow their records to be released to anyone who asks. Leaving some documents out is easy enough. His cleansing issue is creating a cover story for the documents that everyone knows are in there. My money is on that he did not get an honorable discharge which was later upgraded.

Once he signs the form, a FOIA request is all it takes to make them public.

Far from it.

[SpinyNorman]

If they are scrubbed, doctored, or selectively released, you can be sure the eagle eyes of the Swiftboat Vets will know.

Sometimes, what is missing is just as revealing as what is released.

[write_on61]

John O'Neill has apparently signed a Form 180:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/images/banners/O%27Neill_Form_180.jpg

I wonder how many lies will come to the surface about his service?

After all, we know he's lied about his service in Vietnam.

Don't think so? Here's a FOIA summary of his service posted by the Navy Times:

http://navytimes.com/content/editorial/pdf/kerry_oneill.pdf

So according to his own records - and simple arithmetic - he served about 15 months on a minesweeper, which spent about three months of that time in Vietnamese waters:

http://www.usswoodpeckermsc209.com/woodpecker_history.htm

Then he spent just under a year in Vietnam proper on Swift Boats - about 3.5 months in Cos. Div. 13 and 8 months in Cos. Div. 11. (also check out the history link at www.swiftboats.net).

That makes a grand total of about 15 months of service in or off the coast of Vietnam.

But a quick Google search shows that in 1971 he repeatedly claimed to have been "in Vietnam" nearly THREE YEARS:

During the Cavett debate: "... and after being in Vietnam for almost three years, I decided I wanted to go home back to Texas."

http://www.swiftvets.com/staticpages/index.php?page=Debate2


To the US Conference of Mayors: "I served in Vietnam for almost three years."

http://www.usmayors.org/uscm/us_mayor_newspaper/documents/04_12_04/kerry_oneill.asp

In a written statement prepared for a congressional committee: "This was the single most heroic act that I have witnessed during almost three years in Vietnam."

http://horse.he.net/~swiftpow/article.php?story=2004102209180749&mode=print


More uh, "misrepresentations":


To Kerry, in Cavett debate: "The first point is I served in Coastal Division 11 for 12 months, not four. ... I did serve in the same place you did, and not for four months but for 18 months... ."

http://www.swiftvets.com/staticpages/index.php?page=Debate2

"I served in Coastal Division 11 for a year. . . .I served for much of the prior two years in waters adjacent to Vietnam. "

http://horse.he.net/~swiftpow/article.php?story=2004102209180749&mode=print



And more recently:

"Ironically, John Kerry and I served much of our time, a full 12 months in my case and an abbreviated 4 month tour in his, commanding the exact same six-man boat, PCF-44, which I took over after he requested early departure."

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005036

Actually, he took over PCF 54 (not PCF 44) more than eight months after Kerry left.




(Also posted at "Caveat Emperor" thread)

[write_on61]

Correction to Post #54:

O'Neill took over PCF 94 five months after Kerry left, not eight months.

[lainde]

My vote is for "tidied up!".

[torchthemummy]

So let me get this straight. IF John O'Neill's biggest lie is that he over-inflated in statements about how long he was in Vietnam and the theatre then that compares to what? John Kerry?! Please. You are comparing the credibility and honor of Mr. Kerry, who has been caught in lie after lie about his time/missions in Nam, lied in front of congress with baseless charges and fake soldiers, met with the enemy and accepted and publicly endorsed the communist's 7-point plan and John O'Neill who served honarbly, did a full tour (over 12 months) and got his honorable discharge certificate months and not years later?

Wow talk about streching moral relatism to its extremist form.

[torchthemummy]

Sorry on the spelling.

[conshack]

Hey Mr write-on, what did O'neill do AFTER he "COMPLETED" his tour in Vietnam?
I'll tell you this much, he sure as hell didn't commit TREASON.