Help Me Frag This Letter

[bleedingedge]

Boss (luckily, a liberal leaning centrist) got this from an ex-Marine buddy and sent it to me because he knows I love to get into fights.

I've already written a partial response attacking the most clearly egregious and ridiculous stuff, but I'm pretty unfamiliar with most of it, as Kerry's service record has never really interested me. text of letter follows. All help is greatly appreciated.

>MORE STOLEN VALOR
>
>My next 2 articles will be about presidential candidate Senator John Kerry.
>They are not intended to be "Kerry bashing." They are intended to present
>documented facts from reliable sources about Kerry. If you are offended by
>or can not handle "facts" please do not read these articles. Please be
>aware that most of the sources are members of the military, both officers
>and enlisted men who served with Kerry in Vietnam. I do not have the room
>to cite all the sources but will make them available to you upon request.
>
>I received a call from a very nice lady. She said that based on my obvious
>concern for and dedication to veterans, especially Vietnam veterans, she
>could not understand my "contempt" for John Kerry. She thought that I would
>support Kerry because of his war record in Vietnam. She felt I would be
>"excited" about a Vietnam veteran being our President. She asked a fair
>question and I can understand her confusion.
>
>I would be excited to see a Vietnam veteran become President as I'm sure
>any Vietnam vet would be. However, that veteran should be one that supports
>our military, our active duty servicemen and women and our veterans. John
>Kerry is just simply not that man, as he's proven time after time. As a
>veteran I can not support a man who spits in our faces then tries to use us
>to get elected.
>
>FACT--Kerry takes every opportunity he can to proclaim that he is a
>"Vietnam War hero" with a Silver Star, Bronze Star and 3 Purple Hearts. The
>next time you hear him talk of the above medals notice that he says he "won
>them." If you speak with any other veteran, who will even discuss their
>medals, they will state that they "were awarded" their medals. This small
>fact makes a big difference to most veterans and shows the character of the
>man.
>
>FACT--When Kerry returned from Vietnam he immediately joined and became one
>of the leaders of the Vietnam Veterans Against The War group (VVATW). They
>claimed to be an organization of Vietnam combat veterans concerned with
>bringing our troops home and exposing the atrocities we were committing
>against the Vietnamese people. When they reached a point where they were
>advocating the assassinations of US Senators and Congressmen who supported
>the war (Kerry states he was not a part of those discussions) they were
>investigated by the FBI. Those investigations revealed that many of the
>group were not even veterans, most of them had never served in combat and
>that many of them had been dishonorably discharged for drug and other
>criminal offenses. It is very obvious that their agenda was not ending the
>war. If you need proof go to their Website on the Internet and read about
>them. That might explain why he is not asking for their support now.
>
>FACT--In 1971 Kerry made his famous speech before the Senate where he
>accused Vietnam veterans of killing women, children, and civilians, of
>burning villages, torturing prisoners and destroying food supplies. He
>dishonored every man who proudly served in Vietnam. Kerry served only
>approximately 4 months on the Swift Boats. He never spent any time in
>country. He had no personal knowledge of any of the atrocities he spoke of.
>Also, ask yourself, if he did have knowledge why did he not report them?
>Was he able to document even one of the allegations he made?
>
>The only "atrocity" he saw was when he beached his boat, putting his entire
>crew at risk, and killed a wounded Vietnamese who had fired a rocket at
>him. Since when do we kill wounded enemies? By the way, he received his
>Silver Star, which he wrote himself up for, for that incident. His
>Commanding officer stated, "We didn't know whether to give him a medal or
>put him in a straight jacket. He kept running his boat aground and killing
>civilians."
>
>FACT--He states that he "never met or worked with Jane Fonda. You remember
>that she went to North Vietnam to show her support for the North Vietnamese
>during the war. While there she met our POWS then came back and stated that
>our POWS were lying about being tortured.
>
>There are pictures of Fonda introducing Kerry as a speaker, at an anti-war
>rally she held, in September 1970 at Valley Forge, where he was the
>featured speaker. Yet he continues to say he never met her.
>
>FACT--B.G. Burkett, who wrote the book "Stolen Valor" which is recognized
>as "The definitive history of falsified Vietnam War claims" states that
>"Kerry's former commanders in Vietnam have stated that his 3 Purple Hearts
>were self reported injuries that were virtually non-existent." Several of
>these commanders are preparing to go public about his medals this summer.
>
>Also, why won't he release his medical records showing the treatment he
>received for his "wounds?"
>
>FACT--When he spoke to the Senate we veterans were "baby killers and
>murderers" now suddenly when he wants to use us to get elected we are his
>"band of brothers."
>
>FACT--Also remember that when Kerry made his first march with the VVATW on
>October 15, 1968, in a pro Viet Cong rally, they marched under a Communist
>flag. Kerry was still on active duty, in the US Navy, when he made that
>march. He also was still on inactive reserve duty when he and the VVATW
>protested at and desecrated the Iwo Jima Memorial. Isn't that called
>treason?
>
>FACT--In his 1985 memoirs about the war North Vietnam Army General Vo
>Nnguyen Giap wrote, " If it weren't for organizations like Kerry's Vietnam
>Veterans Against The War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the United
>States." Think about this one for a second and consider how many of our
>servicemen died possibly as a result.
>
>FACT--Kerry makes a big deal of President Bush serving in the National
>Guard, saying National Guard duty was the same as "draft evading." Maybe he
>should tell that to the families of the thousands of National Guard
>members, who fought, were wounded and died in Vietnam and to the ones
>fighting in Iraq now. He also fails to mention that he requested a one-year
>delay in being drafted to go "to study in Paris." He joined the Navy when
>his request was denied.
>
>Besides, President Bush doesn't tell everyone what a war hero he is every
>chance he gets.
>
>He also fails to mention that he requested and was given a 6 month early
>release from the Navy "to run for office." How many other servicemen can
>you name whom was granted that request? Politics?
>
>Also, if he feels so strongly about draft evaders why did he never
>criticize Bill Clinton who openly evaded the draft? Politics?
>
>The above facts are documented from reliable sources. Many come from the
>men Kerry served with in Vietnam, officers and enlisted men. I will present
>more such facts in next weeks' article. Please read the above with an
>objective mind, regardless of your political affiliation, then make up your
>own mind if this is the man you want to be your Commander In Chief.
>

[wtmusic]

1. Too easy

"President Bush doesn't tell everyone what a war hero he is every
chance he gets".

Wonder why? :D

[bossfish]

2. Explain 'frag'...

if it means using it to wipe your ass....

The LAST thing Kerry has to do is 'explain' his days in Vietnam.

[bleedingedge]

13. "Frag", as far as I know,

means "to kill".

From what I know, it's a military term often used to indicate that a pain in the ass member of the military should be...um...dismissed from their service in this life i.e. "That guy is such a bastard. We should frag him". If I remember correctly, I think it came from the fact that the proscribed method of murder was to chuck a grenade into the barracks of the offender, thus "fragmenting" that person.

Keep in mind, all of this comes from comic books and movies 'cause I don't have military experience.

By the way, my friends and I used to use the euphemism "fragging the sarge" to indicate certain bathroom-related activites.

[bossfish]

22. Yeah, I know what "fragging" is...

on that subject, whatever happened to the soldier (marine?) who killed a number of his colleagues with the grenade in the opening days of the invasion?

Anyone ever hear more on that?

[bleedingedge]

23. Sorry. Didn't read the sarcasm into it. <eom>

[bossfish]

24. Oh, no worries whatsoever....

[Viking12]

3. Ask for references

The letter states: "I do not have the room to cite all the sources but will make them available to you upon request."

Call him on it.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

4. Just putting the word "FACT" in the article does not make it a fact.

Demand proof. Refuse to refute this until you have actual credible sources for these "Facts".
If the Reich-Wing (and their toadies) wants to put this out there, then it is up to them to PROVE it.

[trotsky]

5. They are going to such extreme lengths to smear Kerry.

I'm sure Snopes will have something on this, but one thing sticks out for me - Kerry's "introduction" of Fonda at a rally. Wouldn't that be the forged photo?

[bleedingedge]

14. Yah, already smacked him up for that.

There is one photo where he's like three rows behind her at a rally, and that's the one from 1970 that he's talking about. He's basically taking that photo (which is real) and the BS photo and asserting they're from the same rally.

Here's what I wrote re: that.

"It is a FACT that Kerry and Fonda appear at a rally. He is sitting about three ROWS behind her. This is the 1970 meeting you reference. For more info: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/kerry.asp

Fonda does admit that both she and Kerry spoke at the rally. However, given her proximity to Kerry in this photo, it is entirely likely that she never personally met him. Think about the last time you went to a wedding. Did you personally meet the people who sat three rows in front of or behind you? And that's for people who all know one of the involved principles.

There is a picture of Kerry being introduced by Fonda at a separate rally. Know what? That picture is fabricated. Check out the FACTS: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/kerry2.asp

Finally, the rally at which Fonda and Kerry both appeared took place in 1970. Jane Fonda did not go to Vietnam until 1972. So you're essentially faulting Kerry for:
-appearing in the same place as Jane Fonda.
-appearing in a doctored, faked photograph with Jane Fonda.
-having some sort of tangential relationship with Jane Fonda two years before she engaged in acts of treason and sedition.

If you don't see why that's a load of horseshit, well, you're way to far gone at this point.

[July]

6. First impression: these are "facts," not facts.

Tell the writer/emailer to put up or shut up. S/he says these "facts" are documented from reliable sources. Where are the links?

I doubt the writer ever got the phone call that starts the piece out, and my fuzzy memory suggests that many of the claims here are false. Snopes is usually a good place to sort this type of thing out. (www.snopes.com ).

It's clearly a one-sided distortion. But you don't have to sort it out. Ask for the sources, and if they're not reliable, fairly mainstream ones, tell the writer his bias is showing.

[Bandit]

7. FACT : I'm a Vietnam Vet and this letter is bullshit

The author IMHO has never been to Vietnam.

[LynneSin]

8. I think SNOPES is your best resource for details

Here are some of the biggest items being circulated around about John Kerry. Some are true and some of them (like Jane Fonda introducing Kerry at an anti-war rally) are photoshopped fallacies

This is the so-called Jane Fonda/John Kerry photo that snopes showed was actually 2 photos photoshopped together
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/kerry2.asp



This snopes article talks about the validity of Kerry's medals and early departure from the military:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp


Claim: John Kerry's Vietnam War service medals (a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and three Purple Hearts) were earned under "fishy" circumstances.

Status: False.

Example:


This was written by a retired admiral and Annapolis graduate. The item offers no direct testimony about Kerry, but it does provide informed background useful in assessing what Kerry seems to have claimed for himself. It confirms information I have received from other sources.

Our media should be demanding that Senator Kerry open his service records in the same way they demanded that of President Bush regarding his NG service.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was in the Delta shortly after he left. I know that area well. I know the operations he was involved in well. I know the tactics and the doctrine used. I know the equipment. Although I was attached to CTF-116 (PBRs) I spent a fair amount of time with CTF-115 (swift boats), Kerry's command.

Here are my problems and suspicions:

(1) Kerry was in-country less than four months and collected, a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and three purple hearts. I never heard of anybody with any outfit I worked with (including SEAL One, the Sea Wolves, Riverines and the River Patrol Force) collecting that much hardware so fast, and for such pedestrian actions. The Swifts did a commendable job. But that duty wasn't the worst you could draw. They operated only along the coast and in the major rivers (Bassac and Mekong). The rough stuff in the hot areas was mainly handled by the smaller, faster PBRs.

(2) Three Purple Hearts, but no limp. All injuries so minor that no time lost from duty. Amazing luck. Or he was putting himself in for medals every time he bumped his head on the wheel house hatch? Combat on the boats was almost always at close range. You didn't have minor wounds. At least not often. Not three times in a row. Then he used the three purple hearts to request a trip home eight months before the end of his tour. Fishy.

(3) The details of the event for which he was given the Silver Star make no sense at all. Supposedly, a B-40 was fired at the boat and missed. Charlie jumps up with the launcher in his hand, the bow gunner knocks him down with the twin .50, Kerry beaches the boat, jumps off, shoots Charlie, and retreives the launcher. If true, he did everything wrong.

(a) Standard procedure when you took rocket fire was to put your stern to the action and go balls to the wall. A B-40 has the ballistic integrity of a frisbie after about 25 yards, so you put 50 yards or so between you and the beach and begin raking it with your .50's.

(b) Did you ever see anybody get knocked down with a .50 caliber round and get up? The guy was dead or dying. The rocket launcher was empty. There was no reason to go after him (except if you knew he was no danger to you just flopping around in the dust during his last few seconds on earth, and you wanted some derring do in your after-action report). And we didn't shoot wounded people. We had rules against that, too.

(c) Kerry got off the boat. This was a major breach of standing procedures. Nobody on a boat crew ever got off a boat in a hot area. EVER! The reason was simple. If you had somebody on the beach your boat was defenseless. It coudn't run and it couldn't return fire. It was stupid and it put his crew in danger. He should have been relieved and reprimanded. I never heard of any boat crewman ever leaving a boat during or after a firefight.

Something is fishy.

Here we have a JFK wannabe (the guy Halsey wanted to court martial for carelessly losing his boat and getting a couple people killed by running across the bow of a Jap destroyer) who is hardly in Vietnam long enough to get good tan, collects medals faster than Audie Murphy in a job where lots of medals weren't common, gets sent home eight months early, requests separation from active duty a few months after that so he can run for Congress, finds out war heros don't sell well in Massachusetts in 1970 so reinvents himself as Jane Fonda, throws his ribbons in the dirt with the cameras running to jump start his political career, gets Stillborn Pell to invite him to address Congress and Bobby Kennedy's speechwriter to do the heavy lifting, winds up in the Senate himself a few years later, votes against every major defense bill, says the CIA is irrelevant after the Wall came down, votes against the Gulf War, a big mistake since that turned out well, decides not to make the same mistake twice so votes for invading Iraq, but oops, that didn't turn out so well so he now says he really didn't mean for Bush to go to war when he voted to allow him to go to war.

I'm real glad you or I never had this guy covering our flanks in Vietnam. I sure don't want him as Commander in Chief. I hope that somebody from CTF-115 shows up with some facts challenging Kerry's Vietnam record. I know in my gut it's wildy inflated. And fishy.


Origins: In
Vietnam, Lieutenant John Kerry served aboard 50-foot aluminum boats known as PCFs (from "patrol craft fast") or "Swift boats" (supposedly an acronym for "Shallow Water Inshore Fast Tactical Craft"). Despite the implications contained in the piece quoted above ("that duty wasn't the worst you could draw"), Swift boat duty was plenty dangerous:
. . . two weeks after 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.

Originally designed to ferry oil workers to ocean rigs, swift boats offered flimsy protection. Because bullets could easily penetrate the hull, sailors hung flak jackets over the sides. The boat's loud engine invited ambushes. Speed was its saving grace — but that wasn't always an option in narrow, heavily mined canals.

The swift boat crew typically consisted of a college-educated skipper, such as Kerry, and five blue-collar sailors averaging 19 years old. The most vulnerable sailor sat in the "tub" — a squat nest that rose above the pilot house — and operated a pair of .50-caliber machine guns. Another gunner was in the rear. Kerry's mission was to wait until hidden Viet Cong guerrillas started shooting, then order his men to return fire.
It was not at all unusual that a Swift boat crew member might be wounded more than once in a relatively short period of time, or that injuries meriting the award of a Purple Heart might not be serious enough to require time off from duty. According to a Boston Globe overview of John Kerry's Vietnam experience:

Under Zumwalt's command, swift boats would aggressively engage the enemy. Zumwalt, who died in 2000, calculated in his autobiography that these men under his command had a 75 percent chance of being killed or wounded during a typical year.

"There were an awful lot of Purple Hearts — from shrapnel, some of those might have been M-40 grenades," said George Elliott, Kerry's commanding officer. "The Purple Hearts were coming down in boxes. Kerry, he had three Purple Hearts. None of them took him off duty. Not to belittle it, that was more the rule than the exception."
And according to Douglas Brinkley's history of John Kerry and the Vietnam War:
As generally understood, the Purple Heart is given to any U.S. citizen wounded in wartime service to the nation. Giving out Purple Hearts increased as the United States started sending Swifts up rivers. Sailors — no longer safe on aircraft carriers or battleships in the Gulf of Tonkin — were starting to bleed, a lot.
John Kerry was wounded in his first significant combat action, when he volunteered for a special mission on 2 December 1968:

"It was a half-assed action that hardly qualfied as combat, but it was my first, and that made it very exciting," . "Three of us, two enlisted men and myself, had stayed up all night in a Boston Whaler patrolling the shore off a Viet Cong-infested peninsula north of Cam Ranh . . . Most of the night had been spent being scared shitless by fisherman whom we would suddenly creep up on in the darkness. Once, one of the sailors was so startled by two men who surprised us as we came around a corner ten yards from the shore that he actually pulled the trigger on his machine gun. Fortunately for the two men, he had forgotten to switch off the safety . . ."

As it turned out, the two men really were just a pair of innocent fisherman who didn't know where one zone began and the other ended. Their papers were perfectly in order, if their night's fishing over. The fear was that they were VC. Allowing them to continue might have compromised the mission. For the next four hours Kerry's Boston Whaler, using paddles, brought boatloads of fisherman they found in sampans, all operating in a curfew zone, back to the Swift. It was tiring work. "We deposited them with the Swift boat that remained out in the deep water to give us cover," Kerry continued. "Then, very early in the morning, around 2:00 or 3:00, while it was still dark, we proceeded up the tiny inlet between the island and the peninsula to the point designated as our objective. The jungle closed in on us on both sides. It was scary as hell. You could hear yourself breathing. We were almost touching the shore. Suddenly, through the magnified moonlight of the infrared 'starlight scope,' I watched, mesmerized, as a group of sampans glided in toward the shore. We had been briefed that this was a favorite crossing area for VC trafficking contraband."

With its motor turned off, Kerry paddled the Boston Whaler out of the inlet into the beginning of the bay. Simultaneously the Vietnamese pulled their sampans up onto the beach and began to unload something; he couldn't tell what, so he decided to illuminate the proceedings with a flare. The entire sky seemed to explode into daylight. The men from the sampans bolted erect, stiff with shock for only an instant before they sprang for cover like a herd of panicked gazelles Kerry had once seen on TV's Wild Kingdom. "We opened fire," he went on. "The light from the flares started to fade, the air was full of explosions. My M-16 jammed, and as I bent down in the boat to grab another gun, a stinging piece of heat socked into my arm and just seemed to burn like hell. By this time one of the sailors had started the engine and we ran by the beach, strafing it. Then it was quiet.

"We stayed quiet and low because we did not want to illuminate ourselves at that point," Kerry explained. "In the dead of night, without any knowledge of what kind of force was there, we were not all about to go crawling on the beach to get our asses shot off. We were unprotected; we didn't have ammunition, we didn't have cover, we just weren't prepared for that . . . So we first shot the sampans so that they were destroyed and whatever was in them was destroyed." Then their cover boat warned of a possible VC ambush in the small channel they had to exit through, and Kerry and company departed the area.
The "stinging piece of heat" Kerry felt in his arm had been caused by a piece of shrapnel, a wound for which he was awarded a Purple Heart. The injury was not serious — Brinkley notes that Kerry went on a regular Swift boat patrol the next day with a bandage on his arm, and the Boston Globe quoted William Schachte, who oversaw the mission and went on to become a rear admiral, as recalling that "It was not a very serious wound at all."

Kerry earned his second Purple Heart while returning from a PCF mission up the Bo De River on 20 February 1969:

One of the mission's support helicopters had been hit by small-arms fire during the trip up the Bo De and the rest had returned with it to their base to refuel and get the damage inspected. While there the pilots found that they wouldn't be able to return to the Swifts for several more hours. "We therefore had a choice: to wait for what was not a confirmed return by the helos give any snipers more time to set up an ambush for our exit or we could take a chance and exit immediately without any cover," Kerry recorded in his notebook. "We chose the latter."

Just as they moved out onto the Cua Lon, at a junction known for unfriendliness in the past, kaboom! PCF-94 had taken a rocket-propelled grenade round off the port side, fired at them from the far left bank. Kerry felt a piece of hot shrapnel bore into his left leg. With blood running down the deck, the Swift managed to make an otherwise uneventful exit into the Gulf of Thailand, where they rendezvoused with a Coast Guard cutter. The injury Kerry suffered in that action earned his his second Purple Heart.
Brinkley noted that, as in the previous case, "Kerry's wound was not serious enough to require time off from duty."

Kerry earned his Silver Star on 28 February 1969, when he beached his craft and jumped off it with an M-16 rifle in hand to chase and shoot a guerrilla who was running into position to launch a B-40 rocket at Kerry's boat. Contrary to the account quoted above, Kerry did not shoot a "Charlie" who had "fired at the boat and missed," whose "rocket launcher was empty," and who was "already dead or dying" after being "knocked down with a .50 caliber round." Kerry's boat had been hit by a rocket fired by someone else — the guerrilla in question was still armed with a live B-40 and had only been clipped in the leg; when the guerrilla got up to run, Kerry assumed he was getting into position to launch a rocket and shot him:

On Feb. 28, 1969, Kerry's boat received word that a swift boat was being ambushed. As Kerry raced to the scene, his boat became another target, as a Viet Cong B-40 rocket blast shattered a window. Kerry could have ordered his crew to hit the enemy and run. But the skipper had a more aggressive reaction in mind. Beach the boat, Kerry ordered, and the craft's bow was quickly rammed upon the shoreline. Out of the bush appeared a teenager in a loin cloth, clutching a grenade launcher.

An enemy was just feet away, holding a weapon with enough firepower to blow up the boat. Kerry's forward gunner, Belodeau, shot and clipped the Viet Cong in the leg. Then Belodeau's gun jammed, according to other crewmates (Belodeau died in 1997). Medeiros tried to fire at the Viet Cong, but he couldn't get a shot off.

In an interview, Kerry added a chilling detail.

"This guy could have dispatched us in a second, but for . . . I'll never be able to explain, we were literally face to face, he with his B-40 rocket and us in our boat, and he didn't pull the trigger. I would not be here today talking to you if he had," Kerry recalled. "And Tommy clipped him, and he started going I thought it was over."

Instead, the guerrilla got up and started running. "We've got to get him, make sure he doesn't get behind the hut, and then we're in trouble," Kerry recalled.

So Kerry shot and killed the guerrilla. "I don't have a second's question about that, nor does anybody who was with me," he said. "He was running away with a live B-40, and, I thought, poised to turn around and fire it." Asked whether that meant Kerry shot the guerrilla in the back, Kerry said, "No, absolutely not. He was hurt, other guys were shooting from back, side, back. There is no, there is not a scintilla of question in any person's mind who was there this guy was dangerous, he was a combatant, he had an armed weapon."
Another member of the crew confirmed Kerry's account for the Boston Globe and expressed no doubt that Kerry's action had saved both the boat and its crew:

The crewman with the best view of the action was Frederic Short, the man in the tub operating the twin guns. Short had not talked to Kerry for 34 years, until after he was recently contacted by a Globe reporter. Kerry said he had "totally forgotten" Short was on board that day.

Short had joined Kerry's crew just two weeks earlier, as a last-minute replacement, and he was as green as the Arkansas grass of his home. He said he didn't realize that he should have carried an M-16 rifle, figuring the tub's machine guns would be enough. But as Kerry stood face to face with the guerrilla carrying the rocket, Short realized his predicament. With the boat beached and the bow tilted up, a guard rail prevented him from taking aim at the enemy. For a terrifying moment, the guerrilla looked straight at Short with the rocket.

Short believes the guerrilla didn't fire because he was too close and needed to be a suitable distance to hit the boat squarely and avoid ricochet debris. Short tried to protect his skipper.

"I laid in fire with the twin .50s, and he got behind a hootch," recalled Short. "I laid 50 rounds in there, and Mr. Kerry went in. Rounds were coming everywhere. We were getting fire from both sides of the river. It was a canal. We were receiving fire from the opposite bank, also, and there was no way I could bring my guns to bear on that."

Short said there is "no doubt" that Kerry saved the boat and crew. "That was a him-or-us thing, that was a loaded weapon with a shape charge on it . . . It could pierce a tank. I wouldn't have been here talking to you. I probably prayed more up that creek than a Southern Baptist church does in a month."

Charles Gibson, who served on Kerry's boat that day because he was on a one-week indoctrination course, said Kerry's action was dangerous but necessary. "Every day you wake up and say, 'How the hell did we get out of that alive?'" Gibson said. "Kerry was a good leader. He knew what he was doing."
Although Kerry's superiors were somewhat concerned about the issue of his leaving his boat unattended, they nonetheless found his actions courageous and worthy of commendation:

When Kerry returned to his base, his commanding officer, George Elliott, raised an issue with Kerry: the fine line between whether the action merited a medal or a court-martial.

"When came back from the well-publicized action where he beached his boat in middle of ambush and chased a VC around a hootch and ended his life, when came back and I heard his debrief, I said, 'John, I don't know whether you should be court-martialed or given a medal, court-martialed for leaving your ship, your post,'" Elliott recalled in an interview.

"But I ended up writing it up for a Silver Star, which is well deserved, and I have no regrets or second thoughts at all about that," Elliott said. A Silver Star, which the Navy said is its fifth-highest medal, commends distinctive gallantry in action.

Asked why he had raised the issue of a court-martial, Elliott said he did so "half tongue-in-cheek, because there was never any question I wanted him to realize I didn't want him to leave his boat unattended. That was in context of big-ship Navy — my background. A C.O. never leaves his ship in battle or anything else. I realize this, first of all, it was pretty courageous to turn into an ambush even though you usually find no more than two or three people there. On the other hand, on an operation some time later, down on the very tip of the peninsula, we had lost one boat and several men in a big operation, and they were hit by a lot more than two or three people."

Elliott stressed that he never questioned Kerry's decision to kill the Viet Cong, and he appeared in Boston at Kerry's side during the 1996 Senate race to back up that aspect of Kerry's action.

"I don't think they were exactly ready to court-martial him," said Wade Sanders, who commanded a swift boat that sometimes accompanied Kerry's vessel, and who later became deputy assistant secretary of the Navy. "I can only say from the certainty borne of experience that there must have been some rumbling about, 'What are we going to do with this guy, he turned his boat,' and I can hear the words, 'He endangered his crew.' But from our position, the tactic to take is whatever action is best designed to eliminate the enemy threat, which is what he did."

Indeed, the Silver Star citation makes clear that Kerry's performance on that day was both extraordinary and risky. "With utter disregard for his own safety and the enemy rockets," the citation says, Kerry "again ordered a charge on the enemy, beached his boat only 10 feet from the Viet Cong rocket position and personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy . . . The extraordinary daring and personal courage of Lt. Kerry in attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire were responsible for the highly successful mission."
Kerry was injured yet again on 13 March 1969, in an action for which he was awarded both a Bronze Star and his third Purple Heart. According to Kerry's Bronze Star citation (signed by Admiral Zumwalt himself):

Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry was serving as an Officer-in-Charge of Inshore Patrol Craft 94, one of five boats conducting a Sealords operation in the Bay Hap River. While exiting the river, a mine detonated under another Inshore Patrol Craft and almost simultaneously, another mine detonated wounding Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry in the right arm. In addition, all units began receiving small arms and automatic weapons fire from the river banks. When Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry discovered he had a man overboard, he returned upriver to assist. The man in the water was receiving sniper fire from both banks. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain and with disregard for his personal safety, he pulled the man aboard. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry then directed his boat to return to and assist the other damaged boat to safety. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry's calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.
According to the Boston Globe, this was the only one of Kerry's three Purple Heart injuries that caused him to miss any days of service:

Kerry had been wounded three times and received three Purple Hearts. Asked about the severity of the wounds, Kerry said that one of them cost him about two days of service, and that the other two did not interrupt his duty. "Walking wounded," as Kerry put it. A shrapnel wound in his left arm gave Kerry pain for years. Kerry declined a request from the Globe to sign a waiver authorizing the release of military documents that are covered under the Privacy Act and that might shed more light on the extent of the treatment Kerry needed as a result of the wounds.
Although there was no hard-and-fast rule, U.S. military procedure generally allowed any serviceman who received three Purple Hearts to request reassignment away from a combat zone, so Kerry talked to Commodore Charles F. Horne, an administrative official and commander of the coastal squadron in which he served. Four days after Kerry took his third hit of shrapnel, Horne forwarded a request on Kerry's behalf to the Navy Bureau of Personnel asking that Kerry be reassigned to "duty as a personal aide in Boston, New York, or Washington, D.C." Soon afterwards Kerry was transferred to Cam Ranh Bay to await further orders, and within a month he had been reassigned as a personal aide and flag lieutenant to Rear Admiral Walter F. Schlech, Jr. with the Military Sea Transportation Service based in Brooklyn, New York.

Kerry served with Admiral Schlech until the end of 1969, when requested an early discharge from the Navy in order to run for a Massachusetts congressional seat. Admiral Schlech approved the request, and on 3 January 1970 Kerry received an honorable discharge, six months early.

According to policy - anyone who received 3 purple hearts could request duty away from military combat and possible early dismissal. Kerry has not done anything wrong in his service. He served his term, got injured and ended his career on a legitimate note

[REVOLT823]

9. He wrote himself up for the Silver Star?

I was in the Marine Corps for 6 years and to my recollection you cannot write yourself up for a commendation, especially for something as distinguished as the Silver Star. That would have to be done by asuperior officer.

Also, his three Purple Hearts were from self-reported injuries? What injury isn't self-reported, aka "Medic, I need a Medic!!" This statement is completely without merit. Are all of the troops to wander around bleeding until someone else notices there wounds so they won't be self-promoting themselves for a Purple Heart? What a jackass statement!! I believe the basis for receiving a Purple Heart is that you have to receive medical attention for the wound in question, irregardless of it was life threatening or not. Purple Hearts are automatically rewarded based on that treatment, to my knowledge no superior officer has to recommend you. The Navy deemed that Kerry was wounded to the extent laid out for all servicemen.

Also, he beached his boat. While I have never been on a River Patrol Boat, it seems to me that it wouldn't be very hard to beach one as you are patrolling in sometimes unfamiliar waterways and evading fire from the shore, so I can see where you would occassionally run aground.

You need to ask this guy if he ever served in Vietnam and if he was ever wounded. If not, he needs to shut the fuck up like the rest of the war hawks who promote war but are too good to pick up a rifle and march into harm's way.

[Bandit]

12. Actually it is the medical person treating you that puts you in for purple

heart and the commanding officer either approves it or not. The wounded person does not do anything.

[TX-RAT]

10. Great, more third party posting.

[bleedingedge]

17. WTF Does That Mean?

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fob]

11. Just pick one, the Fonda one will do and show that it's bush*it, then

call him on the "proof" that's readily available. You may alos want to add that wince they provided completely false info as facts, that their credibility is now zero and there is no way to trust any of the other "facts" as actual facts. Now if they spent an equal amount of time researching shrubby* and provided the likns to their info, you MAY be able to believe them again, maybe.

There are PHOTOSHOPPEDpictures of Fonda introducing Kerry as a speaker, at an anti-war rally she held, in September 1970 at Valley Forge, where he was the featured speaker. Yet he continues to say he never met her.

One of the other DUers here has the debunking info on this posted already

[AP]

15. It's amazing people would blame Kerry for prolonging the war...

...when it's an undisputed fact that Kissinger was engaged in back-door negotiations with the NV encouraging them not to negotiate peace with Johnson because he told them Nixon would give them a better deal. (Which Nixon didn't do.)

Johnson had tapes of Kissinger operatives negotiating and McCarthy refused to use them during the '68 campaign.

Clinton writes about this in My Life. I believe he calls this behaviour by Kissinger "treasonous" -- yet people are worked up about Kerry criticizing that war?

Come on!

Hendrik Hertzberg was on Fresh Air yesterday talking about Vietnam. He says he ranks high anyone who either served or who protested. He says Kerry did both, so nobody ranks higher than Kerry (and he says McCain has the same attitude). He ranks very low people who signed up for the national guard through family connections (Bush and Quayle) so that they could get photos for their campaign brochures of themselves in uniforms knowing they'd never have to serve.

[trof]

16. "The above facts are documented from reliable sources."

Gee. Guess I'll have to tke his word for it, since he doesn't list any. I'm sure he's an honorable person.

Oh, did you know Geroge Bush* pushed his wheelchair-bound mother-in-law down the stairs last week? This is documented from reliable sources.
Trust me.

[GoBucksBeatBush]

20. here's some other refutations of this crap...

Bullshit:
>--Kerry takes every opportunity he can to proclaim that he is a
>"Vietnam War hero" with a Silver Star, Bronze Star and 3 Purple Hearts.>>

Fact: he doesn't ever mention the loaded term "hero," he only references his vietnam service, and that's only b/c smirky mcwarhardon has tried to claim the mantle of "war president" and the dumbass press has swallowed it. coke-snorter made Vietnam service a campaign issue, not Kerry.

Bullshit:
>>The next time you hear him talk of the above medals notice that he says he "won
>them." If you speak with any other veteran, who will even discuss their
>medals, they will state that they "were awarded" their medals. This small
>fact makes a big difference to most veterans and shows the character of the man.>>

Fact: from Kerry's website, verbatum:
"John Kerry volunteered for service in the Navy during the Vietnam War, where he served as skipper of a Swift Boat. Lt. Kerry was awarded the Silver Star, Bronze Star with V, three awards of the Purple Heart, Combat Action Ribbon, Navy Presidential Unit Citation, Navy Unit Commendation Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and the Vietnam Campaign Medal."

it seems to me that making a claim like "he only talks about WINNING medals" is just stupid, b/c it's so easily refuted.
as for the character of a man: well, there's always the TANG records that would prove that Bush wasn't AWOL. Oh wait....nevermind.

Bullshit:
"--In 1971 Kerry made his famous speech before the Senate where he
>accused Vietnam veterans of killing women, children, and civilians, of
>burning villages, torturing prisoners and destroying food supplies. He
>dishonored every man who proudly served in Vietnam.


Fact: Kerry did NOT use such a broad brush to paint ALL Vietnam vets in such a light, as the statement above would have one believe. The historical record bears Kerry out: it's a verifiable FACT that some U.S. soldiers did, in fact, commit the kinds of acts about which Kerry testified. "Pacifying" a village = clearing it and burning it down. a well-known and frequently used tactic in winning hearts and minds was to destroy rice caches found that perhaps indicated that a village was at least in contact with the NLF and/or NVA. and i'm sure no american's ever cut off ears of dead enemy nor pushed bound prisoners out of helos during interrogation. not trying to dishonor those who acted honorably but let's call a historical spade a spade, shall we?


Bullshit:
"Kerry served only approximately 4 months on the Swift Boats. He never spent any time in country."

Fact: ok, so which is it? either he was in the theater for 4 months or he wasn't. unlike pResident happycrack's magical disappearing act, records can prove and verify that Kerry was where he was supposed to be, when ordered to be there, doing what he was supposed to do. "in country" (unless i'm mistaken here, would welcome any correction by a nam vet who says otherwise) simply meant that you were in vietnam, not that you actually had your boots on the ground every single day. by that defintion, the chopper pilots who spent time in the air were not "in country" when flying either. stupidass analysis.


Bullshit:
"He had no personal knowledge of any of the atrocities he spoke of.
>Also, ask yourself, if he did have knowledge why did he not report them?
>Was he able to document even one of the allegations he made?"

Fact: I'm not specifically familiar with the detailed, specific, exact testimony that kerry gave to Congress, but as I taught my students while still teaching h.s. history, when you see definitives like "any" in a statement like the first sentence here, your bullshit sensors should go crazy. very easy to disprove a statement with definitives: come up with one single example that doesn't comport with the statement, and you've proved the false nature of the statement. to say that Kerry had no knowledge of ANY atrocities is making a pretty bold statement, and one that i'm sure is easily disproved with a closer look at the record.



Bullshit:
>The only "atrocity" he saw was when he beached his boat, putting his entire crew at risk, and killed a wounded Vietnamese who had fired a rocket at
>him. Since when do we kill wounded enemies?"

Fact: ummm....yeah, i'm pretty sure i'm going to take the word of Kerry's crew on this one, as they all attest that kerry saved their lives that day by his decisive actions, by beaching the boat and chasing down the enemy soldier. no one will ever know, except for kerry, EXACTLY what happened behind that hut, so unless you're going to smear ALL soldiers who kill in the fog of war as criminals, then back the fuck up on this accusation. i also have it on good authority that wounded enemies are killed rather regularly on the battlefield during combat actions. again: who do you believe, a douchebag who's already proven himself to be full of shit (see above deconstructions" or the guys who fought with kerry and verify the accounts about this particular incident?


Bullshit:
>>By the way, he received his Silver Star, which he wrote himself up for, for that incident. His Commanding officer stated, "We didn't know whether to give him a medal or put him in a straight jacket. He kept running his boat aground and killing
>civilians."

Fact: i believe another post here has already covered the issue of putting onesself in for a medal. can't do it. i'd also be curious to see the context and the verifiable veracity of the supposed quote from his CO. i've never seen it, nor heard it, but it sounds like pure horsehockey to me.

Bullshit:
"FACT--He states that he "never met or worked with Jane Fonda." You remember that she went to North Vietnam to show her support for the North Vietnamese during the war. While there she met our POWS then came back and stated that our POWS were lying about being tortured."

yes, we're all familiar with ms. fonda's actions, but this miserable attempt to say kerry=fonda is rovian bullshit at its finest. props to the freepers for having the two braincells to rub together in order to figure out how to photoshop pictures.

btw: i'm not old enough to have been there/done that at that period in our country's history, but it seems to me that at least fonda cared enough about what was going on halfway around the globe to try to find out what the proverbial other side of the story is. not saying that her end result was positive or that she couldn't have gone about demonstrating her opposition to the war in more productive ways, but at least she was willing to go see Nam first hand and then base her opinions based on that, rather than on government propaganda. i could be way off base here, however, and i know most nam vets would disagree wholeheartedly with me, which i can understand. it's just that today, you have people in a similar vein, like sean penn, who went to iraq before our invasion, and tried to report what he'd seen there, but was dismissed as a "hanoi jane" and thus ignored. likewise with jim mcdermott, scott ritter, and others who had feet on ground in iraq before the war, called the admininstration on their bullshit, and were shoved aside by the press with their war hardon. just my $.02 aside...


Bullshit:
"There are pictures of Fonda introducing Kerry as a speaker, at an anti-war rally she held, in September 1970 at Valley Forge, where he was the featured speaker. Yet he continues to say he never met her.>>

Fact: I think this one's been deconstructed already, vis a vis the snopes postings copied here.
moving on...



Bullshit:
"FACT--B.G. Burkett, who wrote the book "Stolen Valor" which is recognized as "The definitive history of falsified Vietnam War claims" states that "Kerry's former commanders in Vietnam have stated that his 3 Purple Hearts were self reported injuries that were virtually non-existent." Several of these commanders are preparing to go public about his medals this summer.
>
>Also, why won't he release his medical records showing the treatment he
>received for his "wounds?"

Fact: the "commanders" which this supposed authoritative book quotes were in fact:
1. a republinazi in houston who did command swift boats in vietnam, but not until 4-6 months AFTER KERRY LEFT THE THEATER, who therefore has no basis for an assessment of Kerry's performance, and
2. a doctor in country at the time, but not the one who actually treated kerry for his wounds.

also, either you're wounded or you're not, there is no "virtually" about it. kerry was treated for injuries recieved during combat, 'nuff said. and after all, we're dealing with a party that would slander a triple amputee like max cleland by saying that he was just having a beer with the boys when he was "stupid enough to pick up a grenade." if cleland's wounds supposedly don't qualify as being "legitimate" then why would we expect the republinazis to view kerry's as any more so?

further, although i'm not sure if kerry has released the medical records of his wounds, perhaps those might come after a release of all medical records, drug tests, etc. of bush's time in the TANG, along with the explaination of why a highly trained pilot, in whom hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars had been invested, was allowed to simply walk away from it all by not taking a physical. i'm not sure the republinazis want to get into a battle of disclosure on these issues...


Bullshit:
"FACT--When he spoke to the Senate we veterans were "baby killers and
>murderers" now suddenly when he wants to use us to get elected we are his "band of brothers."

Fact: simply put, SOME U.S. soldiers were as described. to claim otherwise is simply incorrect. project Phoenix, anyone? my lai, anyone? not painting a broad picture here, but let's again resort to the historical record, shall we? were babies killed by some u.s. soldiers during the course of the war? undoubtedly. were some killings during the war better classified as "murders"? likewise. On the same token, however, i just can't fathom how veterans can come to the conclusion that they'd rather have a draft-dodging AWOL cokehead lead them than a man in the same position of priviledge who instead volunteered to go to Vietnam, in fact requesting some of the most dangerous naval duty available during that war.



Bullshit:
"FACT--Also remember that when Kerry made his first march with the VVATW on
>October 15, 1968, in a pro Viet Cong rally, they marched under a Communist
>flag. Kerry was still on active duty, in the US Navy, when he made that
>march. He also was still on inactive reserve duty when he and the VVATW
>protested at and desecrated the Iwo Jima Memorial. Isn't that called
>treason?

Fact: The NLF was a nationalist organization first, communist second. (btw: similarly, the guerilla fighters in iraq currently are nationalists first as well, muslims second. yet we remain mystified why anyone wouldn't want our benevolent occupation? mystifying...). so to claim that the NLF flag was a "communist" flag ignores historical reality. it's also my understanding that kerry was open with his CO's about what he was doing vis a vis opposition to the war. don't know anything about the supposed desecration of the iwo jima memorial, but given the word "desecration" is used here, i'm guessing that's not accurate, loaded term that it is. further, in answer to the rhetorical question, no, protest is not treason. it's actually the height of patriotic activity, as tommy jefferson referred to in his "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" comment, as well as his little note in the dec. of independence that effectively states that it's a citizen's duty to call the government out when the government is acting contrary to what the citizens believe. don't believe the lie that dissent is unpatriotic.


Bullshit:
"FACT--In his 1985 memoirs about the war North Vietnam Army General Vo Nnguyen Giap wrote, " If it weren't for organizations like Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against The War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the United
>States." Think about this one for a second and consider how many of our
>servicemen died possibly as a result.

Fact:
1. i'd be interested to see where this exact quote, including the specific reference to kerry, is to be found in any such memoirs. seems like this would be easily proved or disproved one way or the other. i also think that's one man's opinion, and one man who didn't have any authority to make such a decision, and it ignores the LONG historical record that belies such a statement: the vietnamese have a centuries-long history of waging war against various colonizers, imperialists, and other such occupation forces. never once were they unsucessful in the long run. the japanese, the french, the u.s.: each eventually said "ahh, fuck it" and left, allowing the vietnamese the novel concept of self-rule. just years earlier, in 1954, the vietnamese had driven the french out: surely that experience was fresh enough in vietnamese minds that the americans were viewed as no different in terms of the tiger vs. the elephant. bit the elephant in the same place enough times, and the elephant will eventually bleed to death, albiet slowly. it took us twenty-plus years (1954-1975) to come to the same conclusion that the british did in the 1770s, the same realization that the japanese and then the french did in the 1900s, and the same realization that we will eventually have to face in iraq: where else are the people of the occupied country going to go? what else are they going to do besides strive for the autonomy and independence that they crave? it's a losing war to fight against such notions on foreign soil. but i digress...simply stated, i don't believe such a quote exists, and if it does, it's disingenuous at best and ignores the realities on the ground in Vietnam from 1954-1975 that there was no way we could win a war when there was no way to define what "winning" meant. it was just a question of how long we'd be there and how many soldiers, sailors, and airmen died in the meantime.

Bullshit:
>FACT--Kerry makes a big deal of President Bush serving in the National Guard, saying National Guard duty was the same as "draft evading." Maybe he should tell that to the families of the thousands of National Guard members, who fought, were wounded and died in Vietnam and to the ones fighting in Iraq now."

Fact: there's a HUGE difference in how the Guard is used (and abused) today (ironically by those that used the Guard as a shelter from service in vietnam when they were faced with the choice), with how the Guard was used in the Nam era. take a look at Bush's application: he deliberatly indicated that he did NOT want to be assigned to overseas duty. It's a generally known and accepted fact that the Champaign Unit based at Ellington to which Bush was assigned was a hiding place for the sons of Texas's ruling elite (from BOTH parties) to avoid the draft. the unit was at 115% capacity when Bush applied, but somehow he jumped the line and got himself in. i'm sure it had nothing to do with family connections or anything. but hey, perhaps georgie kept the NVA out of dallas, and did a damn fine job of it too. if you talk to almost any individual who volunteered to serve in the Guard at that time (especially ones whose student deferments were about to run out, or who had low draft numbers), while simultaneously checking the box requesting to NOT be assigned overseas, my personal opinion is that if any of these people say that they were doing so out of a desire to serve, they're full of shit. sorry if that offends anyone, but again, let's call a spade a spade, shall we?
As for the abuse of the guard by Bush in Iraq...well, that's a different subject for a different post, but suffice it to say that we cannot continue on the present course and still maintain troop levels as desired. mathematically impossible.

Bullshit:
"He also fails to mention that he requested a one-year
>delay in being drafted to go "to study in Paris." He joined the >Navy when his request was denied.
>

Truth: and so? tricky dick kept up his request for deferrment five times, and when the last deferment ran out, he went and got himself hitched and knocked her up real quick. a legitimate request to go educate oneself, and when that's denied, Kerry volunteered. note that was not a request to not be drafted on kerry's part, only a one-year delay. i.e. he would return to be inducted. you also don't just 'join the navy' and immediately end up an officer.



Bullshit:
"Besides, President Bush doesn't tell everyone what a war hero he is every chance he gets.

Truth:
well, you finally got one right. then again, b/c to claim as such would be so egregious of a lie that even the puppy press would have to call shrub on the lie. if one was never in a war (by one's own choice and evasive actions), then one can't be a war hero. there may have been some combat with a line of coke on a mirror vs. bush's brain crying out for help, but that's somewhat different.
However, the insinuation here is that Kerry DOES "tell everyone what a war hero he is"...which again, is simply bullshit. it's one thing to say "i was there, i know what it's like, my opponent doesn't" and quite another to lay claim to war hero status, which Kerry has NEVER done.


Bullshit:
>He also fails to mention that he requested and was given a 6 month early release from the Navy "to run for office." How many other servicemen can you name whom was granted that request? Politics?"

Fact: ummmm...i suppose you're not counting bush as a "serviceman" then, as his request to be reassigned to Alabama was due to a desire to work on a campaign for one of daddy's buddies. The question is how many serviceman made that request? I don't buy that Kerry's request was for early release "to run for office," but is that any better than a request for early release (after recieving pilot's training) because one intends to go to business school? how many servicemen got THAT request approved? you don't just tell the military "i'm not coming back b/c i'm going to business school" or "i'm leaving b/c i want to run for office." finally, which of these is the more service-oriented calling: to go fire spitballs at b-school classmates and make comments to the effect that "poor people are poor b/c they're lazy and dumb" as bush is reported to have done with at harvard, or to get one's law degree, work as a prosecutor, and then run for office to help effect positive change on a national level? your answer is illustritive of a great many facets of your character...


Bullshit:
>Also, if he feels so strongly about draft evaders why did he never
>criticize Bill Clinton who openly evaded the draft? Politics?
>


Fact: ahhh, there it is. never a rant against librul commie democrats without an attempt at taking a shot at the Clinis. Clinton didn't "openly evade the draft" any more than Crashcart cheny (FIVE student deferments), ashcroft (deferment to teach business school classes), lush rimjob (medical deferment for an ass boil), rummy (deferment b/c he's a pompus asshat), and others among the current crop of chickenhawk neocons. It's not a question of whether one avoided the draft or not: it's a question of whether one vocally, and actively supported and promoted, then and now, the use of military force and violence to solve problems while simultaneously doing everything possible to avoid serving themselves. if one was against the vietnam war, and avoided serving, by whatever method available to them, how is that inconsistent with their beliefs and what they stand for? it's the glaring hypocrisy of the chickenhawks like bush that is, and deserves do be, called out by Kerry and others who did serve.


Bullshit:
>The above facts are documented from reliable sources. Many come from the men Kerry served with in Vietnam, officers and enlisted men.

Fact: I've already addressed this supposed fact. It's bullshit, to the core, propogated by men with strong economic and political incentive to slander Kerry.


Bullshit:
>>I will present more such facts in next weeks' article.

Fact: bring it one fuckface. but you'd best bring FACTS next time, not the weak-ass conjecture, rumor, and outright lies spewed above. If you wanna run, let's run, but don't start what you can't finish.

Bullshit:
>Please read the above with an objective mind, regardless of your political affiliation, then make up your
>own mind if this is the man you want to be your Commander In Chief.

Fact:
Pot, meet kettle. kettle, pot.

[bleedingedge]

21. Thanks, but unfortunately...

I thought the thread had seen all the action it was going to get, so I went ahead and cobbled together a reply. It's already been sent out. I didn't respond to everything in it because, well, I'm real tired of fighting this battle.

Here's my reply to the original sender.

***
>Please read the above with an objective mind, regardless of your political affiliation

Oh, yes sir, will do. Just as you wrote it with an open mind. And the concept that you could write this and yet not include sources (which you had to use in order to research the article anyway) is ludicrous. Asking people to read with an "objective mind" when you judiciously omit sources is pretty ridiculous. Next time your kid has to write a research paper, tell him/her to include that sort of drivel at the top, see what the teacher has to say.

To begin, here are some FACTS about President Bush and the military:

FACT: Bush has not attended one - not one, not a single - military funeral for the 800+ dead men and women of the U.S. armed forces. He has not even witnessed the unloading of flag-draped coffins on their return to the States for burial.
Both of the articles below contain quotes from veterans and families of slain veterans re: this behavior by Bush.
http://www.alternet.org/story/17079
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A40317-2003Sep7¬Found=true

FACT: Bush's 2004 budget proposes increasing the costs of health care for some veterans.
http://www.iht.com/articles/123594.html


FACT: Bush "threatened to veto the Defense Authorization Bill if the House and Senate did not eliminate full pension benefits for disabled military retirees."
http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?file=article&name=News&op=modload&sid=218

FACT: Bush formally opposed proposals to provide health insurance for those in the Nat. Guard and Reserves (Gannett News Service, 10/23/2003, unfortunately, their site appears to be down so I can't get the link).

FACT: Bush's fiscal year 2004 budget includes:
"funding levels nearly $2 billion below the budget resolution recommendation approved by the House three months ago."
"increase co-payments for prescription drugs and outpatient visits "
"charge certain veterans a $250 annual enrollment tax to get their health care at VA.”
This information comes from the Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA).
http://www.pva.org/newsroom/PR2003/pr03055.htm

FACT: Bush invited our enemies to "bring it on". This despite the fact the he himself had never seen combat and was no less than 1000 miles from the turmoil of Iraq. I wonder if he considers it brought now that 800+ men and women, civilian and military, have died for his soundbitten bravado.
http://www.denverpost.com/framework/0,1413,36~29805~1914909,00.html

FACT: In the preparation for the Iraq War, Bush ignored the Powell Doctrine. The Powell Doctrine was crafted by Colin Powell, a decorated, highly qualified military leader. The Doctrine was Powell's response to the Vietnam War mistakes and called for, among other things, overwhelming force in the war against Iraq, in order to limit U.S. military casulaties. Instead, Bush favored the concept of a small, quick-moving military force. This agenda was put forth by Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Cheney. NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THESE MEN HAS MILITARY SERVICE. Bush ignored the seasoned advice of an accomplished military mind in favor of the masturbatory fantasies of war-mongers who had only engaged in war as an academic exercise. And the result is 800+ dead men and women.

Here's a nice big fat juicy list of the various ways in which Bush has "supported" the military.
http://www.kintera.com/AccountTempFiles/cf/%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/bushtroops.htm

Now, as to the body of your letter:

Since, you've offered, I would like to request your source on the following:

>FACT--Kerry takes every opportunity he can to proclaim that he is a
>"Vietnam War hero" with a Silver Star, Bronze Star and 3 Purple Hearts.

I would like your source for Kerry himself using the phrase "Vietnam War hero", seeing as how you have chosen to place it in quotes and also state that he proclaims it himself. Please cite the article in which this statement, made by Kerry, appears. I'm sure you'll be happy to provide me with the requested citation, just to shut me up.

As for your second fact: So Kerry joins a group which is supposed to be composed of war veterans. It turns out some of them weren't. And this reflects poorly on Kerry why? So if you join a group whose membership is suspect, this is somehow a mark against you? Guilt by broad association, then? Does this mean it's OK for me to loathe any anonymous Republican solely because Newt Gingrich (a one time Republican leader) served divorce papers to his wife while she was in the hospital for cancer? Or that it's OK for me to think all of Cheney's associates are gutless chickenhawks (see below)?

Additionally, Kerry himself has distanced himself from this group, as you state in your own words: "That might explain why he is not asking for their support now." So let me get this straight:
Kerry should NOT ask for their support because the group was discredited.
BUT
Kerry should be faulted for not asking for their support.

Seems to me that he's damned if he do, damned if he don't. If he was requesting their endorsement, you'd find fault with that too, right? But since he hasn't asked for their support, that's an issue as well. Seems your main beef with him is that he doesn't have a time machine.

Your third fact suffers from the same logical errors: Kerry shouldn't have reported about atrocities, and yet you question why he didn't report those atrocities if he knew about them. So which way do you want it, dude? Do you want to pillory him because he DID testify or do you want to villify him because he DIDN'T? Oh wait, let me guess: it doesn't matter, just so long as you can find a position from which to be against him.

>There are pictures of Fonda introducing Kerry as a speaker, at an anti-war
>rally she held, in September 1970 at Valley Forge

Nice try at some actual facts, but you've gotten it wrong. Here's the truth:

It is a FACT that Kerry and Fonda were at the same anti-war rally in 1970. He is sitting about three ROWS behind her. This is the 1970 meeting you reference. For more info: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/kerry.asp

It is a FACT that both Fonda and Kerry spoke at the rally. However, given her proximity to Kerry in this photo, it is entirely likely that she never personally met him. Think about the last time you went to a wedding. Did you personally meet the people who sat three rows in front of or behind you?

There is also a (fake) picture of Kerry being introduced by Fonda at a separate rally. Know what? That picture is fabricated. Check it out: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/kerry2.asp

Finally, the rally at which Fonda and Kerry both appeared took place in 1970, as I said above. Jane Fonda did not go to Vietnam until 1972. So you're essentially faulting Kerry for:
-appearing in the same place as Jane Fonda.
-appearing in a doctored, faked photograph with Jane Fonda.
-having some sort of tangential relationship with Jane Fonda two years before she engaged in acts of treason and sedition.

Once again, braod guilt by association. If you don't see why that's a load of horseshit, well, you're way too far gone at this point.

>FACT--Kerry makes a big deal of President Bush serving in the National
>Guard, saying National Guard duty was the same as "draft evading."

As above, I'd like to see the direct quote from Kerry in which he says something akin to "enlisting in the NG was draft evasion". If he says Bush's enlistment in the Guard was draft evasion, that's an entirely different sentiment and a dishonest way of using the quote.

>Besides, President Bush doesn't tell everyone what a war hero he is every
>chance he gets.

I wonder if this could be because Bush never did anything to be called a war hero. Maybe that's why. Maybe that has something to do with it. Maybe it has to do with the fact that Bush never left the country in his service, never came under enemy fire and, for that matter, never seems to have completed his service. His flight records are missing, his CO's say they don't remember seeing him on base (backed up by reports written contemporaneously) and the only records that could definitively prove his service have - SHOCKING! - been destroyed. Yeah, you're right, he doesn't go around proclaiming himself a war hero. Neither do I. Because I'm not. Because he's not.

And again, I want to see the quote where Kerry calls himself a hero.

>He also fails to mention that he requested and was given a 6 month early
>release from the Navy "to run for office." How many other servicemen can
>you name whom was granted that request? Politics?

Ooh, ooh! Pick me! I can name one: George Walker Bush, who requested an early leave from the TANG to enroll in school. And who, by the way, made the request and then immediately left the service, in violation of uniform code which states that any serviceman requesting early discharge MUST continue to serve until such request is granted. Check Bush's records: you'll find that he left the service ASAP upon submission of his request and that the final discharge notice was not signed by him because he was not around to sign it!

Of course, conservatives like Ann Coulter let Bush off the hook for this because the war in Vietnam was winding down so his early release wasn't a big deal. These are the very same conservatives who have bug in backside about "moral relativism": it's OK to get out of the service early *relative to the military situation at the time*.

Additionally, at least Kerry went through proper channels when he wanted out. Not Bush, who bailed on the TANG so's he could work on the political campaign for a friend of his dad: "For the first four months of this time period , when Bush was working on the U.S. Senate campaign of Winton Blount in Alabama...he did not have orders to be at any unit anywhere." From http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/3671

So not only did Bush eventually get discharged early, he appears to have just done whatever the hell he wanted while he served, bounding from one post to another.

>Also, why won't he release his medical records showing the treatment he
>received for his "wounds?"

Maybe those records were destroyed. Or is that the sort of excuse that only works for Bush?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/09/politics/campaign/09records.html

>"Kerry's former commanders in Vietnam have stated that his 3 Purple Hearts
>were self reported injuries that were virtually non-existent."

Well, that's just too much tonnage of crap for me to deal with. Luckily, somebody has already done it for me.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp

>FACT--In his 1985 memoirs about the war North Vietnam Army General Vo
>Nnguyen Giap wrote, " If it weren't for organizations like Kerry's Vietnam
>Veterans Against The War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the United
>States." Think about this one for a second and consider how many of our
>servicemen died possibly as a result.

See "Bring It On", above.

>march. He also was still on inactive reserve duty when he and the VVATW
>protested at and desecrated the Iwo Jima Memorial. Isn't that called
>treason?

The picture "desecrating" the Iwo Jima memorial was satire or parody and hardly rises to the level of desecration.

As for your charge of treason: provide me with a source, the section in the uniformed code of conduct, in which it states that inactive reservists are not allowed protest. I'm not familiar with that section so I'd be interested to see it. It would also be a very useful section in determining the validity of your point. See how useful it is to just include the references anyway?

And I know you're all atwitter over the upside down flag in the picture as well, and I'm sure you'll read that as the ultimate desecration of the flag. Actually, rasing the flag upside down is an accepted method of signaling distress. Given that Kerry's group was opposed to the Vietnam war, this is a symbolic use of the flag to indicate their distress (not to mention the general distress in the country caused by the war).

>FACT--Kerry makes a big deal of President Bush serving in the National
>Guard, saying National Guard duty was the same as "draft evading." Maybe he
>should tell that to the families of the thousands of National Guard
>members, who fought, were wounded and died in Vietnam and to the ones
>fighting in Iraq now. He also fails to mention that he requested a one-year
>delay in being drafted to go "to study in Paris." He joined the Navy when
>his request was denied.

Yeah, somebody else who often fails to mention deferrments is Dick Cheney. He got five - count 'em FIVE - deferrments and has publicly said he didn't fight in Vietnam because "he had other priorities". Of course, this hasn't stopped him from being a relentless proponent of war - any war - now that he's well beyond the age of service.
Turns out that one of those - at least - was an education deferment Cheney "earned" as a student at a Wyoming Community College. Which he never attended. Which was a coupl'a states away from his actual home at the time.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2097365/
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Politicians/DickCheney_VN_Hypocrisy.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/01/politics/campaign/01CHEN.html?ex=1398830400&en=1c0259e620183dd6&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

But nevermind that. Let's focus on how Kerry actually *DID* serve BUT maybe didn't really want to.

>Also, if he feels so strongly about draft evaders why did he never
>criticize Bill Clinton who openly evaded the draft? Politics?

Yeah, probably. It's probably the same reason Bush insinuated that his 2000 Republican Primary opponent, John McCain, might be nuts from VC torture. It's probably the same reason Bush said of McCain "Do we really want another politician in the White House America can't trust?". And yet today, he uses McCain in his campaign ads.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/649237.stm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-07-05-bush-mccain_x.htm

If Bush felt in 2000 that McCain was not trustworthy, why would Bush use McCain in his ads. Politics? So what's your point? That Kerry plays politics? And Bush doesn't? Bwah HAHAHAHAHA! Good one.

Bye Bye.
***

[GoBucksBeatBush]

25. well done...

with sourced material and all. good on ya!

[sniffa]

26. awesome! keep us updated

if this continues. :D