Posted on 11/12/2007 9:09:43 AM PST by Sub-Driver
Actually, no, he didn’t. He cut and ran after three supposed wounds. All were no worse than scratches, one was (unintentionally) self inflicted and didn’t even need a band-aid. Who told me that, personally, at a restaurant in Winter Park, Florida? Dr. Letson (sp) the physician who treated him for those supposed wounds.
>>>>The lies and smears of the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush were disproved conclusively in 2004 by the men who fought by John Kerry’s side in Vietnam,
Actually, no they weren’t. Two men said they weren’t true. Fifty seven men who served with him said they were true. 57 vs 2? You want those odds on a horse race?
>>>>by the military’s own records,
Actually, no. Mr. Kerry never signed the DD form 180 to have all the records released.
>>>by investigative journalists,
Actually, no. Many reporters, particularly those who happened to serve in that area in the military, who were covering that area during the war, or who covered the story in 2004 found them to be entirely true. I am one of them.
>>>>the incredible contradictions
What contradictions? He cut, he ran, he lied about where he was and when he was there, then he went to Paris and clearly and publicly represented the interests of the VC and PAVN, the enemy who was at the same time killing Americans in Vietnam.
re: the name Limbaugh.... no American who served in RVN can think of the name Kerry without the terms “coward” and “traitor” floating through your mind.
Mostly the left (although sometimes we do it as well), will label invalid conclusions as lies, rather than mistakes. Almost ever “lie” media matters “exposes” turns out to be nothing more than their own interpretation of what the facts mean, not a complaint about the facts.
So in this case, the guy says the wound was too small to get a purple heart. Probably that was not the right thing to say, since the size of the wound doesn’t preclude a purple heart. If he had said “didn’t deserve”, that would have made it pure opinion, and immune for any charge of lying, but because the statement was an opinion on the applicability, it was a mistake. But not a lie.
Study hard in school or your own stupid mouth could keep you from running for President, like Kerry.
Perfect Democrat form.
Yes, the ones on his payroll.
My husband, a Vietnam vet says contributing to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was the BEST political contribution he has made in this lifetime!
John F. Kerry told Tim Russert on “Meet The Press” he would sign a form 180. When did that happen?
Oooooooooooooooooooooo! That hurts.
and you can't spell Liberal without a LIE being exposed.
During the 2004 campaign, retired Cmdr. Adrian Lonsdale claimed that Kerry "lacks the capacity to lead." But during Kerry's 1996 Senate race, according to reports from ABC News and the Air Force Times, Lonsdale lauded Kerry's bravery during Vietnam: "It was because of the bravery and the courage of the young officers that ran boats ... the swift boats and the Coast Guard cutters, and Senator Kerry was no exception."Note first how the criticism was that Kerry lacked "a capacity to lead", but the "counter" to that is a statement that he "lauded Kerry's bravery". Those are not the same thing, you could say someone was brave but still lacks capacity to lead. Further, we can't even trust they are giving us the full story on the 1996 quote. The "bravery" statement was made of the "young officers" that ran swift boats, and it's only after an ellipses that Kerry is mentioned as being "no exception". So for all we know the 2nd part has nothing to do with bravery.Also in 1996, Lonsdale explained to reporters that Vietnam War medals were only awarded if battle events were corroborated by others. His explanation completely contradicted later claims by the Swift Boat Veterans that Kerry won his awards only because he was able to write up false reports and fool his commanders.
Further, they ignore information that has come to light between the 1996 statement and his 2004 race.
Third, they then use him as some "expert" on war medals, but it's meaningless. He says they "don't award medals unless they are corroberated". Well, I'm sure that's how it's supposed to be. But the allegation was that Kerry's medals were given OUTSIDE the norm. So the fact that someone said medals are corroberated doesn't refute the claim at all. It would be like saying that since the schools prohibit guns in classrooms, Cho couldn't possibly have shot any Virginia Tech students.
So, contrary to their assertion, his statement does not refute their claim that Kerry wrote up his own medals.
However, I always thought their attack on is medals was both the least consequential part of their story, and the part that was least documented. In the zeal to get an entire book, they included a lot of picky little things that were less-well supported, opening themselves up to criticism if a single error was found.
Frankly, I thought Brinkley's book about Kerry was quite damaging, but nobody really analyzed it enough to catch on. For example, Brinkley's book is where we learn that Kerry asked to serve in vietnam (he was on a navy ship outside of harms way) only because a friend of his was killed and he wanted to get revenge. But when he showed up and saw the actual fighting, he tried to withdraw his "volunteering" for swift boat duty, only to be assigned anyway. That's from his own authorized biography.
..............
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/06/07/kerry_allows_navy_release_of_military_medical_records/
Here ya go, Kerry signed his 180 for full release (to Kranish) on May 20, 2005. Nobody but Kranish has it, and he read everything and found nothing new, just more praises and laurels for Jon. WE don't get to see it but the Boston Globe has it all locked away somewhere.
But, Jon Carry can honestly rebut your demand by stating that he DID "sign the 180" on May 20, 2005.
"The evil Swiftboaters are after me again..."
..............
They WERE released in proper accordance with the SF 180- and he filed with the proper agency- but did not release to the public. He can do that.
The person holding the data is that Globe reporter, not Kerry! Kerry put onto his release forms that everything went to Kranish (and if you read the article, the only thing Kranish says is that there are many more commendations than Kerry had mentioned).
The Globe guy is the one who must release them to the public. He is under no obligation to either release, or keep them, he can shred them if he wants to or has wanted to since 2005.
Kerry was clever in doing this, he signed the 180, released his records, and now it’s not his fault nor responsibility if we can’t pore over them in detail.
Yes, I remember how honest those people were, willing to fix up their own pictures whenever something changed. And for that, they just got hit with more charges of lying and “confessing to lies”.
Meanwhile, Kerry NEVER stopped using the original picture.
He simply says nothing other than a long winded smear to say "they lied", as if simply because the spokesman says the words below that they prove anything; which they do not:
"The lies and smears of the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush were disproved conclusively in 2004 by the men who fought by John Kerry’s side in Vietnam, by the military’s own records, by investigative journalists, and by the incredible contradictions that exposed these right wing smear artists."
And
"In fact, most of the allegations the Swift Boat Veterans made about Kerry's Vietnam War service have been thoroughly discredited, often by official military records, but also by the Swift Boat accusers themselves, who struggled to keep their stories straight."
In fact, none of the allegations of the Swift Boat Veterans have been discredited, and the facts are that some official military records themselves do not resolve many of the claims because they sometimes simply carry forward Kerry's own, unsubstantiated claims as the author or chief witness of action reports used as the basis for the "official military records" upon which some of his medals were awarded.
The Kerry website then uses the Clinton hit group "Media Matters" as its authority for where the Swift Boat Vets claims are refuted. Kerry must have told the Clintons that its payback time now for helping to get Special Prosecutor Barrett's scathing report on the Clintons buried and out of public access.
And what does the hit group "Media Matters" have to offer? Essentially, nothing. Here, in italics is the mostly "apples and oranges" pathetic attempt they make.
MM1 Only one of the men making the allegations actually served on a Swift Boat captained by Kerry.
The statement demonstrates nothing other than either the ignorance of "Media Matters" or the ignorance they hope to instill in the reader. The specifics of that ignorance is how the swift boats actually operated - they did not operate alone. They operated in teams of swift boats, together (they were too defenseless alone). Their military engagements were as teams of swift boats and most of the time the other crews of the other boats were not so distant from Kerry's boat as to place only Kerry and his crew in the witness box of events. What "Unfit for Command" often documents is the contradictions between Kerry's account of something and the accounts of the crews and commanders (Kerry's actual peers) on the other boats that were right there during those same events.
MM2-1 "In the first Swift Boat ad, then-Clackamas County (Oregon) senior deputy district attorney Alfred J. French announced: "I served with John Kerry. ... He is lying about his record." In preparation for the ad, French signed a sworn affidavit for the Swift Boat Veterans asserting that Kerry had received his Purple Heart "from negligently self-inflicted wounds in the absence of hostile fire." A fundamental requirement of any affidavit is that the person signing it must have personal knowledge of the matters involved. The affidavit French signed declared, "I do hereby swear, that all facts and statements contained in this affidavit are true and correct and within my personal knowledge and belief" (emphasis added)."
And
MM2-2 "But in an interview with The Oregonian, French freely admitted he had no firsthand knowledge of the events surrounding Kerry's medals and that his information came secondhand from "friends."
Above is a common form of how Media Matters lies; they use a straw-man, in this case Alfred J. French. There are two reasons why they used Mr. French.
The first reason is that when Kerry could not stand toe- to-toe, accusation-to-accusation against the Swift Vets, he sent his own investigators to dig up facts. What facts? Not facts about what was said in "Unfit for Command", but personal facts on members of the Swift Vets. Mr. French is chosen as a convenient straw-man, because in Kerry's dirt-digging they found a current-era incident when he (French) had been less than truthful about a statement he had made about his marriage.
But, the most important reason why they use the straw-man French is that he and his statements are not required for the claims in "Unfit for Command" regarding the incident that French said he had knowledge of. "Media Matters" cannot go directly to the source, "Unfit for Command", because that source is not dependent on French.
MM3-1 [1]"George Elliott was Kerry's former commanding officer in Vietnam and, in early 2004, told USA Today he had no qualms about Kerry's actions that earned him the Silver Star in Vietnam. "This was an exemplary action," he said. "There's no question about."
MM3-2 [2]"Elliott then flip-flopped and claimed in the Swift Boat ad that "John Kerry has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam."
MM3-3 [3]"Elliott then flip-flopped again when, just days after the first Swift Boat ad aired, he confessed to The Boston Globe that his involvement in the Kerry attack was "a terrible mistake" and said, "I'm the one in trouble here. ... I knew it was wrong. ... In a hurry I signed [an affidavit] and faxed it back. That was a mistake."
MM3-4 [4]"But Elliott flip-flopped yet again -- days later, he announced that he stood by claims that Kerry "had not been honest" about Vietnam.
The above four items represent another form of how "Media Matters" lies; they either take things out of context or be sure to not put them in context - just make sure the reader does not know the context.
The context of items [2] and [4] is not about specific individual events or actions. They concern the entire Kerry record, and not only that record in the Vietnam war theater itself but the public misrepresentations Kerry made about himself, about his own experiences and his presentation of the lies and misrepresentations of others, in testimony he gave in Congress; representing those lies as facts. Elliot's statements in [2] and [4] are not referring to a specific Silver Medal that Kerry received.
The context of items [1] and [3] is specifically about a Silver Medal that Kerry received. The problem for commanders who must approve and forward endorsements for medals is they are often not the witnesses of the relevant events and generally must rely on the action reports (and the authors of the action reports) on which the citation is based. From that perspective, Elliot's comment in item [1] made sense.
The comment in item [3] is made from a realization of Elliot's about the recommendation he signed for the Silver Medal - he signed the recommendation (as most commanders did) without actually knowing the facts from any source other than what was written in the recommendation he rubber stamped, and because he did not personally know the facts, he should not have signed the affidavit. And what were his final comments at the time, on the subject of the affidavit and Kerry's award. Elliot as said: "I simply have no reason for these guys [the Swift Vets] to be lying, and if they are lying in concert, it is one hell of a conspiracy. So, on the basis of all of the information that has come out, I have chosen to believe the other men" [the Swift Vets]. And the publisher of "Unfit for Command", speaking for Elliot, said at the time: "Elliott indicates that a Silver Star recommendation would not have been made by him had he been aware of the actual facts." The only facts that Elliot had been presented with originally, when he signed and forwarded the citation, had been authored, in the action report on which it was based, by Kerry.
MM4-1 "Dr. Louis Letson appeared in the first Swift Boat commercial and announced, 'I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart, because I treated him for that injury.' In another affidavit, Letson claimed Kerry's wound was too small to justify a medal."
MM4-2 "But Navy guidelines during the Vietnam War for Purple Hearts did not take into account the size of the wound when awarding the honor, which meant Letson's claim was irrelevant.
Here "Media Matters" removes from the context the fact that regardless of "Navy guidelines [for Purple Hearts] during the Vietnam War", those same guidelines required a medical review to confirm that the "wound" met the entirety of those guidelines and "Dr. Louis Letson" had in fact seen Kerry upon Kerry's complaint of the "wound" and determined it did not meet the entirety of the medical requirements for him to recommend a Purple Heart.
MM2-3 "Also, Kerry's medical records indicate Letson did not sign off as the "person administering treatment" on the night of the injury, which raised doubts about whether Letson ever even treated Kerry.
It is not a contradiction at all that Letson did not treat Kerry, in that incident. There is no question that Letson saw Kerry, he was the medical officer on duty whom Kerry would have seen. And, yes, precisely because Letson did not see the "wound" as requiring any serious treatment he did not sign as the "person administering treatment, for that incident. [My recollection, from reading Unfit for Command, is that Letson dismissed him and told him to go put a band-aid on it, it wasn't even bleeding.] Obviously, on Letson's rebuke, Kerry went and found a willing corpsman to sign the form.
MM5-1 "During the 2004 campaign, retired Cmdr. Adrian Lonsdale claimed that Kerry "lacks the capacity to lead."
MM5-2 "But during Kerry's 1996 Senate race, according to reports from ABC News and the Air Force Times, Lonsdale lauded Kerry's bravery during Vietnam: "It was because of the bravery and the courage of the young officers that ran boats ... the swift boats and the Coast Guard cutters, and Senator Kerry was no exception."
Again, like the cases above, when remarks have no context or the context is removed; they can be conflated to mean whatever you want. The context of the 1996 comments from Lonsdale at MM5-2 above relate to the officers of the swift boats, Kerry included, and their "bravery and courage". The comment from Lonsdale at MM5-1 above, from 2004, relates to leadership in general, and particular as would be needed by the Commander in Chief and Lonsdale, in that context, clearly acknowledges, in his view, that Kerry lacks the requisite leadership capacity for that role.
MM6-1 "Also in 1996, Lonsdale explained to reporters that Vietnam War medals were only awarded if battle events were corroborated by others."
MM6-2 His explanation completely contradicted later claims by the Swift Boat Veterans that Kerry won his awards only because he was able to write up false reports and fool his commanders.
Any contradiction here is between Lonsdale's opinion (regarding the awarding medals) and the facts, and not just in the case of Kerry's medals. As already noted above, Kerry's onetime commander, Elliot, has acknowledged that other than what someone presented in a citation put before him, he had no independent knowledge (outside of that citation) if what was presented was true or not. The system relies on the Navy code of honor (which in Kerry's case, from what had been documented in Unfit for Command, was a questionable thing to do).
MM7 - Media Matters makes some references to comments made by Thurlow. I will come back to them after I have a chance to go back to the records.
MM8 "Upset by what he was hearing about the Swift Boat allegations regarding Kerry's Bronze Star, and that he did not deserve it because he was not under enemy fire, Jim Russell, a witness to the event, wrote to The Daily Planet of Telluride, Colorado, to dispute the Swift Boat Veterans' claims: "Forever pictured in my mind since that day over 30 years ago [is] John Kerry bending over his boat picking up one of the rangers that we were ferrying from out of the water. All the time we were taking small arms fire from the beach."
The problem with Jim Russel's statement is that the crews of the other boats in the team of swift boats, at the scene, in the same area in sight of Kerry's boat do not confirm his story, about what was taking place when the rescue of the ranger was taking place. Again, (as "Media Matters" and the other swift vet hit teams like to do) by disassociating the team context in which the swift boats operated, all other witnesses in the nearby swift boats can be ignored.
MM9 "Like Thurlow, Swift Boat leader and Unfit for Command co-author John O'Neill was emphatic that Kerry didn't deserve his Bronze Star medal for saving Rassmann out of the Bay Hap River because Kerry wasn't under enemy fire. As proof, O'Neill told Fox News, "There's not a bullet hole in any of those three boats, not one." In fact, a report on the battle damage to a boat that motored upriver alongside Kerry's on March 13, 1969, made reference to "three 30 cal bullet holes about super structure."
There is no contextual and factual reference to when the "three 30 caliber bullet holes" occurred. Was it before or after the incident in question?
MM10-1 "Kerry's former commander, retired Adm. Roy Hoffmann told The Boston Globe in June 2003 that Kerry's Silver Star was the product of "guts" and that he 'admire[d] that.' The next year though, Hoffman helped form the Swift Boat Veterans group."
MM10-2 "According to a May 6, 2004, article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the former commander 'acknowledged he had no first-hand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims to valor and said that although Kerry was under his command, he really didn't know Kerry much personally.' "....."The next month, Hoffmann reiterated, 'I did not know Kerry personally. I didn't ride the boat with him.' "
MM10-3 "I August 2004 though, when the first Swift Boat ad began to air, Hoffmann updated his Vietnam memories, telling Fox News, "I knew [Kerry] well, because I operated very closely with him."
"Media Matters" sees contradictions where they don't exist. To be commanding officer on a little swift boat did take guts. "Guts" and honesty do not automatically follow each other. Commander Hoffman did not know most of his swift boat commanders, on a really personal level, the way he would have known his peers. As he said (because of his position), in his role he was not out on the day-day-engagements of the swift boats, on the waterways of Vietnam. He could never have known Kerry as an intimate, the way Kerry's peers did (the majority of whom scorned him). But, in the operational sense, in the sense of duties and responsibilities, he would come to know most of his commanders very well, because he would make assignments and get their action reports when they returned to base. In that sense, in the operational sense, he would know all his commanders pretty well. I think all Hoffman is really saying is that if any of his subordinate officers were asking him to go relax and have some beers, (and get to know each other) it would not have been John Kerry.
Anyone remember this interview with John O'neill, the author of "Unfit for Command"? Liberals sure like to call people "liars".
Media Matters? Well, that makes it all pretty credible! Yeah! Right! Kerry could never disprove the Swifties. God bless the Swifties!
What is with the time warp the Dems live in? The last debate I thought Edwards, Obama, Biden and The Beast were running against Bush/Cheney. Now the Swift Boat issue in headlines again.
I thought we were supposed to MoveOn?
What an ignorant response.
Mr. Wade, trumping out a couple of friends of John Kerry does NOTHING to discredit the dozens and dozens of Swiftboat veterans who stand absolutely behind their testimony regarding the actions of Mr. Kerry. Are you foolish enough to believe that all these decorated servicemen are liars?
What a phony, pathetic, weakling, liberal artice.
What a bunch of lowlifes.
good points.
David Wade and the rest of the Kerry camp can attempt to revise history all they want. The Swiftboat campaign finished his chance to ever be President of the United States. They know it and will be bitter forever. Good, I hope it hurts!
I was listening to a Boston based talk show at the time (2003-2004), and there were a series of callers. One got three letters from Kerry flip-flopping each time, don’t remember exactly the topic, but probably the WOT or Iraq, another caller said he called Kerry’s office on something, and was told that “Sen. Kerry was voting whatever way Sen. Kennedy was, so call that office...”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
