Kerry vs Swiftvets.com

[will work 4 food]

Whats the deal with these guys? Why are they so negative on Kerry?

WWW.swiftvets.com

They claim he was a loser in Vietnam..these are guys that served with him. I am really confused.

[Cha]

1. Kerry had guys who served with him at the convention...but

if some are republican than I would guess that they are lying..isn't that what republicans do?

[Hepburn]

2. From what I have seen...

...when they say they "served" with him, some of them only mean that they were in the same area. Most were nowhere near Kerry and during the war made no complaints about him. If the shit they are saying is true, then they are just as much to blame IMO for sitting back and doing nothing about him. I frankly do not believe one freaking word they say and I *think* that this site is connected with that scum bag John O'Niell.

[papau]

32. There is only one who actually served with Kerry for 2 months - and hates

Kerry

He was wounded - and is proud he never saw a medic! To him Kerry was a wimp.

He is all over right wing talk radio tonight.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

48. Hmmm...wonder why he only served two months with Kerry?...

Sounds like a malcontent to me.

[papau]

54. Don't know - tonight he was proud of the 2 months! - Kerry did not deserve

medals was his theme - not that Kerry was not brave.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

61. Who's fault is it that the individuals who ran the Swift Boats...

...got a ton of medals?

Maybe this guy and the rest of his group should be complaining about Kerry's commanding officers and everyone else up the chain that approved the awarding of the medals.

So, if he says that he was proud of his two month association with Kerry, does that seriously undermine the case set forward by SwiftBoats?

[wolfgirl]

3. Calm down...breathe in,

breathe out...
These guys didn't actually serve w/Kerry...they are RW idiots...

better now?

[are_we_united_yet]

57. Hey...

I do fell better. Thanks!

:)

[MooPie]

4. There's obviously a problem here

They only show two of his band of brothers supporting him. How come at least nine of them showed up last night? Hmmmmmmm, fuzzy math? Methinks this site is bull.

[RobertSeattle]

6. It's meaningless.

When you are an officer, you have your peers (fellow officers) and then you have your men (those who serve under your). The thoughts of those who served under you are far more important than your peers.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

38. Bingo. Nothing closer to the truth could be said this evening.

[West Coast Democrat]

11. I'm tempted to email this guy about it

[e-mail]

[sablescort]

5. Swiftvets.com is Repuke-controlled

and run by chickenshithawks....

[trof]

7. Yep. Pure Rove.

[West Coast Democrat]

8. A bunch of people who never met Kerry, no doubt

[Jo March]

9. These people served on the same boat

but not while Kerry was on the boat. It's like saying that I was stationed at Ft. Campbell with Jimi Hendrix. Jimi was stationed at Ft. Campbell as well. See how that works? Did I actually serve with Jimi? NO but it looks good on paper, doesn't it?

[will work 4 food]

12. good to know

I watched the entire convention. I liked what I saw. I really enjoyed getting to "know" JK and his family. I am definately voting for him.

This kind of stuff makes me even madder at that puke Bush. You should have seen him this morning; he was pathetic with his speech.

[mellowinman]

77. You served with Jimi?

That is so cool!

I play guitar, and people are always comparing me to Jimi Hendrix.

You can't imagine the number of times someone has said, "he's no Jimi Hendrix..."

Sorry; couldn't resist.

Back on topic; FUCK these swift boat shitheads!

[Swamp Rat]

10. Liars

I assume that they are getting paid somehow for this.

[vetwife]

15. The people on the Swift boat was on stage last night

These guys are paid by Rove and Co.

[Swamp Rat]

21. Yes, I know...

Wasn't Kerry wonderful? I watched it twice on CSPAN!

[vetwife]

25. He was terrific Swamp Rat....

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

70. See this article

for the ins and outs of how Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are being financed:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2004-07-29/feature.html

[Joanne98]

13. Part of the John O'Neill LIARS CLUB.

They're getting paid by the GOP. It's sad that Vietnam vets would stoop so low for money.

[oneighty]

22. They are Vietnam Vets

because they say so. They were in Swift boats because they say so.

How much you bet they will not prove it if asked.

180

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

71. See this article

for how the group developed and how it is funded. Interesting stuff:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2004-07-29/feature.html

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

14. This is potentially damaging...

..or at best muddling.

I think the purpose here is to give Bush supporters someway to rationalize their opposition to Kerry.

The idea is to neutralize Kerrys miltiary record, by providing this alternative, negative perspective.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

30. A pack of lies is not "potentially damaging".

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

72. It'll never work

see this article, which is in this weeks Dallas Observer:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2004-07-29/feature.html

[Media_Lies_Daily]

16. No, those guys DID NOT serve with Kerry....

...the only guys that served with Kerry were on the stage last night.

[RetroLounge]

17. These guys are a bunch of sorry Repukes

My guess is most of them never even served anywhere near Kerry.

Jealousy and ego are their biggest problem.

Ignore them. I read a little of their forum. It's a shame more of them didn't use the GI Bill to go to college. It'a like FreeRepug with Camo hats. Sad.

This O'Neil asswipe did dirty work for Nixon against Kerry, and got his hat handed to him on National Television by a true Hero. I saw the clip the other night. It wasn't even a fair fight.

O'Neil is a right-wing stooge. If it wasn't for John Kerry, no one would even know his fucking name.

RL

[OKNancy]

18. What I want to know is - who is their

publicist- because we've probably had twenty posts on the same subject in the past two days.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

73. Here is a great article

with all the financial nitty-gritty of them.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2004-07-29/feature.html

Dallas Observer, this week's issue.

GREAT article.

[Immad2]

19. Here's the low down on them

swiftboatvets

[blm]

20. Guess you DIDN'T watch the convention? They are lying and YOU know it.

They have been working against Kerry since Nixon WH and it's ON the Nixon tapes.

O'Neill is a liar. Why don't you question HIS veracity and his motives?

Gee, what's with the name? You think people will subjugate themselves to you just to reply politely?

[Sparkly]

23. "served with him?"

Do they actually claim that?!

[PhuLoi]

24. Only three types of Vets For Bush (a rerun of my previous post)

1. Non-combat branch: Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard. Those for whom the extent of exposure to personal risk was limited to retrieving the dropped soap. Frequently lifers.

2. REMFs (Rear Eschelon Mother Fuckers), Army, Marines that were stationed way back in the rear with the gear. Never heard a shot fired.

3. Genuinely psychotic sociopaths that enjoyed killing. Typically spent their down time blowing up frogs with firecrackers.

I am deliberately excluding pathological liars that merely buy the vet bumper stickers and play the role. I have even known them to go so far as to get tattoos with military logos. Pathetic bastards.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

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

[DoomFook]

27. These are the guys

that killed babies in Viet Nam and should have been executed. They are all freepers and dug up by Rove and Cheney.

[Sparkly]

28. Nobody is saying they "killed babies"

and that is the point. VVAW wasn't about maligning other soldiers; it was about holding the government accountable and ending the war.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

29. They are implying Kerry was doing something like this.

friom the site (Kerrys callsign was "Boston Strangler"):

""Working with call sign “Boston Strangler” became problematical. “I had a lot of trouble getting him to follow orders,” recalls Wright. “He had a different view of leadership and operations. Those of us with direct experience working with Kerry found him difficult and oriented towards his personal, rather than unit goals and objectives. I believed that overall responsibility rested squarely on the shoulders of the OIC or OTC in a free-fire zone. You had to be right (before opening fire).

Kerry seemed to believe there were no rules in a free-fire zone and you were supposed to kill anyone. I didn’t see it that way.”

In Wright’s view, it was important that the enemy understood that Swift boats were a competent, effective force that could dominate his location. To do that, you also had to control the people and their actions; to have them accept Swift boat crews and their authority. You couldn’t achieve that by indiscriminate use of weapons in free fire zones. It got to a point where Wright told his divisional commander he no longer wanted Kerry in his boat group, so he was re-assigned to another one. “I had an idea of his actions but didn’t have to be responsible for him.”

This implys that Kerry was sort of a loose canon and was indiscriminately shooting up free fire zones.

And, this is sort of interesting as Kerry was supposedlythn part of that Winter Soldier thing where he testified to witnessing 'war crimes"...so I do wonder a bit whats up w. Kerry in Vietnam.

[Sparkly]

33. All performance reviews of Kerry's service by his superiors

were stellar. This is all nonsense.

A "free fire zone" means considering everybody there hostile. John O'Neill himself admitted in that infamous Dick Cavett appearance that he participated in them.

These people have their own agenda.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

36. Why don't you go to Kerry's website and do some reading...

I suggest that you start with Kerry's service record and the evaluations he got from his commanding officers. You don't get those kinds of evals by being a loose cannon.

How anyone can seriously look at this crap after seeing and hearing from the REAL guys last night that actually served with Kerry in Vietnam is beyond my scope of understanding.

If I remember correctly, this isn't the first time you've asked questions about Kerry based on extremely questionable sources. Tell you what...if you've got a problem with Kerry's war record, why don't you go vote for the other guy or just stay home?

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

39. You need to provide answers to this stuff.

Just making huffy comments about "questionable sources" and then telling me to bug-off aint going to make this stuff go away.

If this stuff gets traction Kerry and his campaign is going to have to address it...

Yeah, we saw the real guys, but we are also hearing, on that site, from some apparent real guys, too (and I'm not talking about O'Neill) , so this rasies questions.

If you dont llke the questions, tough. They are out there.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

52. You're the one that apparently "needs to provide answers"....

You do know the guy that's behind this effort don't you? His name is John O'Neill, and he definitely has an agenda. Read the information on the website linked below:

<http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=John_E._O'Neill>

Now I definitely know that you're going to be very disappointed.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

74. Check out this article Waverley

from this week's Dallas Observer:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2004-07-29/feature.html

[latebloomer]

37. Here is an attack on Kerry's war service from the left

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07292004.html

FYI

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

41. thanks...

...this is really interesting.

[Sparkly]

42. Easy to find innuendo on anybody, about anything, on the internet

Read this carefully for the sources. There are long narratives without any sources given; others that are these people saying what a Boston Globe writer says somebody else said -- lots of room for inaccuracy.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

47. See my post #46....you might find that "really interesting", too....

...then again, based on your other posts, you may find it to be personally disappointing.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

46. I notice they pulled a "Woodward" for a portion of the article...

...and by "pulling a Woodward", I mean that just like Woodward has on at least three different instances, the individual noted below presents information that cannot be verified by any independent source

Excerpt:

A former assistant secretary of defense and Fletcher School of Diplomacy professor,W. Scott Thompson, recalled a conversation with the late Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt Jr. that clearly had a slightly different take on Kerry's recollection of their discussions: "he fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations,Admiral Elmo Zumwalt,told me --30 years ago when he was still CNO that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam,just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass,by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets. "We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control", the admiral said. "Bud" Zumwalt got it right when he assessed Kerry as having large ambitions --but promised that his career in Vietnam would haunt him if he were ever on the national stage."

Two points:

1. How convenient is it for Thompson that no independent source exists that can verify his version of this story?

2. I also find it interesting that Kerry's officer evals spoke of Kerry in glowing terms. As a former Naval officer myself, I know for a fact that any officer behaving as described above would have found themselves in front of a courts-martial or riding a desk in the rear.

Here is some additional information on W. Scott Thompson:

<http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/resource/speeches/1982/81282a.htm>

"Nominations & Appointments, August 12, 1982

Nomination of W. Scott Thompson To Be an Associate Director of the International Communication Agency
August 12, 1982

The President today announced his intention to nominate W. Scott Thompson to be an Associate Director of the International Communication Agency (United States Information Agency). He would succeed Robert John Hughes.

He has been serving as associate professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy since 1969. He serves on the board of the Foreign Policy Research Institute and the board of editors of ORBIS, International Security Review, and Conflict. He was a research fellow at the Center for International Affairs, Harvard University, in 1979 - 1980. He was Assistant to the Secretary of Defense while serving as a White House fellow in 1975 - 1976. He held research fellowships at the University of the Philippines and the National Strategy Information Center.

Dr. Thompson graduated from Stanford University (B.A., 1963) and Balliol College, Oxford University (D. Phil., 1967). He is married, has three children, and resides in Chestnut Hill, Mass. He was born January 1, 1942."


<http://www.cia-on-campus.org/tufts.edu/roosa.html>

"Another faculty group at Fletcher consists of those who specialize in strategic studies and who, though they have not necessarily served in government, are nonetheless well-known in government circles. They are affiliated with Fletcher's Program in International Security Studies and with a think tank associated with the school, the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. Their courses, too, would be useful to students wanting to enter the intelligence community. Uri Ra'anen heads the Fletcher program, and Robert Pfaltzgraff heads the Institute. The two, who have collaborated on several books, served on Ronald Reagan's advisory team on foreign policy and intelligence during the 1980 campaign, although they insisted they did not want government posts. One strategist who did join the Reagan Administration was W. Scott Thompson, a former assistant to the secretary of defense, who took the post of associate director for programs at USIA at a time when that agency has been increasingly used for propaganda and political-action projects that might in earlier times have been carried out by the CIA."

Thompson was no "leftist", that's for sure. And that makes me very curious about the article itself. If they failed to independently verify a source like Thompson, what else may be questionable about this article?

[Sparkly]

49. Tom Belodeau, who's also an indirect source, is also dead

And Zumwalt signed his bronze star citation.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

31. That was a very poor response, IMHO. I really don't think you...

...know what you're talking about.

[BeatleBoot]

34. Why is everyone with under 250 posts concerned over this?

I gotta a hunch, but hey...

:hurts:

[Sparkly]

35. I know what you mean.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

53. We've gotten an infestation since early this morning...

...we'd better call Terminix.

[Sparkly]

55. Or Tom Delay

who'll gas his own people.

I guess I missed the other threads.

[texas1928]

40. So for them to serve on the same swift boat all at the same time

There were 20 officers on one boat? Talk about all chiefs and no indians. This is so far fetched that I have to so no, I don't beleive it. These guys are out to make John Kerry look bad. Swift boats ussually patrol in groups of two, or three. so they would have not all been together at one time.

[SoCalDem]

43. Here's the "deal" with them.. They are a bunch of 50-somethings

who are enjoying the free trips and meals, and the excitement of a campaign.. They are happy to have people talk to them.. At the stage of life they are at..they probably have a wife who's sick of them..kids who just bug them for money...jobs that are boring, and they are too young to retire from..bills out the wazoo, and this is a welcome break from their hum-drum lives.. All they have to do to cash in...is to tell lies about someone they did not even know.

[Connie_Corleone]

44. Most of these guys didn't know Kerry.

They just happened to be swiftboat captains during or after Kerry was in Vietnam. The ones that did know Kerry, only knew about him. They didn't know him personally.

There's only one person who was on the same boat with Kerry who doesn't like him. I've heard him on some shows and he just sounds like he's jealous or has a chip on his shoulder. He is the ONLY one who was actually on the boat with Kerry who has anything negative to say about him.

I'll take the word of the other vets who knew Kerry personally on that swiftboat and were on stage with him last night over these idiots anyday.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

45. DU vs posters pimping the RW swiftvets

What's the deal with these guys?

How come they always don't realize that the swiftvets didn't actually serve with JK? How come they post these threads and don't return or respond when their questions have been more than adequately answered and debunked?:shrug:

Some claim they are losers for posting this tripe on DU. I am really confused.

[RetroLounge]

50. They're too busy cackling to their FR friends?

just a guess...

RL

[Sparkly]

51. Hey, FR says bad things about Kerry!

These things are out there, we need to answer them! Go read it, this could be really bad! Think of it, right here on the internet, there are people who are saying bad things about Kerry -- it's disastrous! I haven't seen anything this earth-shattering since I learned the Clintons murdered Vince Foster!!

[Xenus Sister]

56. I'm VERY interested

because it's being brought up. Here's an example at the Straight Dope Message Board:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=268822

Check out Post #21

No one has come back at this, and I'm not qualified to do it. Saying "aw, they're just a bunch of right-wing poopyheads" isn't going to do it.

[Sparkly]

58. They did "come back at" it

These are not men who served with John Kerry, except perhaps one. All of Kerry's military records are at his website. Snopes and other sites deal with this, as well. Do some research. This group is the direct descendant of Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace, a group propped up and used by Nixon.

Do you choose to believe all the lies about the Clintons, too? It's on the same level.

[Xenus Sister]

59. I know!

Lordy, I know it's a bunch of crap, I'm just saying that there should be easy ways to come back at this with facts and cites so we can smack this shit upside the head.

"Snopes and other sites deal with this, as well."

Well, see, I didn't know that. Such an answer within the first few posts would have been enough to let us know that there ARE places to go for answers.

"Do you choose to believe all the lies about the Clintons, too?"

I think I worded my post wrong. Heaven help me if I in any way come off as a freeper-type. I've been voting a straight Democratic ticket since Jimmy Carter's presidency. I meant that I was interested because *I* wanted to know where to go to get information to counteract such crap, not that I believed it because no one had come back at it.

Pardon me while I faint and cry a bit for, even for a second, being thought of as anything less than a devoted liberal.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

62. This link was posted earlier in the thread but you couldn't be bothered

to click on it I guess, so here it is again.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405040004

[Xenus Sister]

64. I am sorry

I missed it. My apologies.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

66. Sorry some of us get short tempered with all the "innocent" disruptors

about. "Hey what's all this about Kerry was a traitorous coward during Vietnam? Can someone explain it so I can argue with my freeper friend?"

No hard feelings.

[Sparkly]

63. Here's a head start

http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/service_timeline.html
http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_records.html
(other links to reports on this page, as well)

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/kerry.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry#Military_Service
(many links here)

[Media_Lies_Daily]

65. And here's another link that I found by doing a simple Google search....

<http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=John_E._O%27Neill>

If the the corect page fails to come up (it happens), simply type in the following name in the search block in the upper right-hand corner of the webpage: John E. O'Neill.

This page is filled with links about the origins of John O'Neill and the SwiftBoats.

[JohnLocke]

60. These are NOT the men who served with him.

ALL of John Kerry's crew support him, and several regularly campaign with him.

[DemoTex]

67. I'm running for the US Senate next time around.

My name is William McLean Tippins. I am a Democrat and a Vietnam veteran. I'm bullshitting about running. But I'm not bullshitting about my name. It is free and clear. I could run if I wanted to. No DUI's. Clear title to a DD-214. Start digging the dirt on me, assholes. Yeah, yeah, I know. I got drunk on the set with the Auburn Knights at the Standard Club in Montgomery in 1966. I still put down a great bass line, drunk as a lord. Dig deep. Maybe I will run! I'm cleaner than Bu$h by a mile. I can't touch John Kerry, though.

[Cats Against Frist]

68. The People Running the Site/Org are not the people in the picture

That's very important -- because I think they're trying to imply that they are. Also, six people in the picture are dead.

Third, this is headed by that O'Neill character, which I would assume that anyone who has followed this story knows he considers Kerry his nemesis, and like all arch-enemies, truth or honesty doesn't have to have anything to do with how you take them down.

Fourth. I have been hearing about the My Lai Massacre for years -- so it is pretty certain that some terrible things took place.

These are nothing but another set of partisans, probably prodded by Rove, with high chins and chips on their shoulders.

I'm not saying that Kerry is the BIGGEST war hero in the world -- but he sure beats Chimp, hands down -- and since when do we rank our war heroes according to the type of wounds they sustain. By GOP logic, anyone who doesn't come back from Iraq without FOUR FULL LIMBS MISSING (hold my breath as I wish for death) shouldn't be honored.

Does that make any sense to anyone?


***edited because I can't number my points, correctly

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

69. Here's a fairly balanced article about them

from the Dallas Observer, an "alternative weekly paper". It's a good publication:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2004-07-29/feature.html

Check it out. Gives you the ins and outs on who is backing this group, which is both eye-opening and NOT surprising at all. They have an axe to grind and a MAJOR case of sour grapes. Their "arguments" are bullshit and some of the pettiest, emptiest shit I have ever heard.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

75. Kicking this

because I want any freeper disruptors, lurkers or anyone else here to see this article and read about how this group got started:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2004-07-29/feature.html

They are totally backed by bush supporters. No shocker. They have an axe to grind and they are hoping this will work. In my opinion and others I have talked to who are pretty nonpartisan it makes Swift Boat Vets for Truth look INCREDIBLY petty and like BIG time assholes.

But you know, judge for yourself.

I think O'Neill never got over having Kerry hand him his ASS on the Dick Cavett show in 1971. I saw the entire show and it was a rout.

[yardwork]

76. Freepers and disruptors who come over here to post "innocent" lies

can go take a flying leap. Get a real job.

I'm not singling anybody out in particular. I'm just saying.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

78. I agree

and I must add I also think the Dallas Observer article is a very good read for Kerry supporters, as well. Really makes those Swift Boat for "Truth" guys look like a bunch of asswipes, in my opinion.

But more importantly it sheds light on their birth as an organization. Eyebrow-lifting stuff.