SwiftVets.com

[ASPB]

Doug,

Here's my PUC from 595/153. As I think I've told you before all of my service was split between Giant Slingshot and the AO discussed in this citation. I never got "down to "IV" Corps.

[The bandit]

[ASPB]

ABarth,

Discrepancies noted in Kerry's record
Ex-skipper says website wrong
By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | April 23, 2004

WASHINGTON -- Vietnam combat records posted on John F. Kerry's campaign website for the month of January 1969 as evidence of his service aboard swift boat No. 94 describe action that occurred before Kerry was skipper of that craft, according to the officer who said he commanded the boat at the time.

On the site, the Massachusetts senator is described as the skipper of Navy boat No. 94 during several actions in late January 1969.

However, Edward Peck, who was the skipper of the 94 before Kerry took over, said combat reports posted by the campaign for January 1969 involve action when he was the skipper, not Kerry. Peck, who was seriously wounded in fighting that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, said he believes Kerry campaign aides made a mistake in claiming Kerry as skipper of the 94 at that time.

Military records Combat reports Command history (From johnkerry.com)



On the Kerry website, the report of the combat on that day on the 94 boat is posted as occurring during Kerry's time as skipper of the boat. Peck said Kerry replaced him after the Jan. 29, 1969, event.

"Those are definitely mine," Peck said, referring to the combat reports that the Kerry campaign posted as representing Kerry's action. "There is no doubt about it."

A Kerry campaign spokesman, Michael Meehan, said in an e-mail that the campaign had obtained the combat reports for the 94 from the Navy. He did not directly address the question of why the campaign describes Kerry being skipper of the 94 at a time when Peck says he commanded the boat.

The reports at issue are in a 20-page batch representing Kerry's combat in January 1969. The reports include references to some dramatic action, including an ambush of Patrol Craft Fast, or PCF, 94. In addition to posting the information online, the campaign sent out an e-mail yesterday afternoon repeating the claim that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 boat throughout January and describing action the campaign said Kerry experienced while commanding the craft.

For example, in a summary of action that occurred Jan. 26, 1969, the campaign says Kerry served on boat No. 94 alongside another boat, No. 66. "PCFs 94 and 66 escorted troops up the Ong Doc River early in the morning when they were ambushed by gun and rocket fire from approximately 40 men on both sides of the river," the campaign summary says. "Two B-40 rounds hit close to Kerry's boat, while PCF 66 received 2 B-40 rocket hits. Three men on PCF66 were wounded. A junk containing South Vietnamese troops was also sunk, killing 11 South Vietnamese troops. Intelligence reports after the mission indicated that the Viet Cong troops may have planned the ambush in advance."

Peck said he was the skipper of the 94 at this time and that Kerry was not on the craft. While combat reports show several boats traveling with the 94, the campaign website says only that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 and does not try to place him on the other boats.

In another report, the campaign summarizes action that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, this way: "While Kerry's boat and another [PCF72] were probing a canal along the river, Kerry's boat came under heavy fire and was hit by a B-40 rocket in the cabin area. One member of Kerry's crew -- Forward Gunner David Alston -- suffered shrapnel wounds in his head. His injuries were not considered serious and he was sent to the 29th Evac Hospital at Binh Thuy."

Peck said he was the skipper on this day as well. Peck was also injured in the ambush and was hospitalized.

As a result, Kerry then took over the crew, Peck said. The Navy combat report posted by the Kerry campaign states that Peck and Alston were injured in the same event. There is no mention of Kerry in that report.

Kerry's commanding officer, George Elliott, said in a telephone interview that he vividly recalls Peck's injury and hospitalization and Kerry's replacement of Peck. "I think somebody made a mistake who doesn't know" the timing of Kerry's service, Elliott said. Kerry was skipper of boat No. 44 in December and January before taking over command of the 94, he said.

Michael Kranish can be reached by e-mail at kranish@globe.com.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[abartholomaus]

And it is the first that I've heard that actually made sense. I've heard radio Talk show hosts mince it up, using little propaganda punch lines, but this is the first that I've heard using straight talk. You are very convincing. I get the impression you didn't just cut and paste that did you??

You gotta remember that I wasn't even born when all this happened, so all I know is what I've heard from people I know. I've heard of people who have smuggled AK's (I can't remember the chinese variant) and other stuff. If Kerry does have a RPG tube he probably knows he could get in trouble for having it.

Beating up one lone rocket guy who shot his load seems pretty dishonorable. When you put it that way it does seem to make sense. He was show boating to get his medals and his recognition.

I there is one piece of the puzzle that I read about in the Boston Globe. Can't remember which article, but they interviewed one of the gunners that was on Kerry's boat. The guy was disgruntled, because he was wounded in action and Kerry wanted to turn back and get the guy medical treatment. The gunner said he wasn't badly wounded, but other crewmen said he was bleeding all over, and he had good warrior spirit. I'll try and find the article later today.


These are good questions.

Why hasn't Senator Kerry released the after-action reports for the events that lead to his so-called Silver Star? Where is the two witnesses statements required for the Silver Star? Where is the nomination form for the Silver Star? Was there ever an official investigation as required for a Silver Star? Why won't Senator Kerry simply sign a Standard Form 180 so anyone can obtain his military records so we wouldn't have to keep asking questions and filling in the blanks?

Why was Kerry the only one who received a medal for chasing the fleeing VC soldier? If Medeiros was really chasing behind him; then why wasn't he given a medal for risking his life behind Lt.(jg) Kerry? Why wasn't Tom Belodeau recognize for hitting the the enemy soldier, making Kerry's job much easier (at least it slowed down the VC would not have had more time to fire before Kerry caught up)?

Was there really a VC with a rocket launcher? In that same 2001 interview with CNN's Jonathan Karl there was this exchange:
KARL: And you still have the rocket launcher?

KERRY: I do have the rocket, yes, I do have the rocket. One of the SEALs disarmed it for me, and I brought it home.

Ask Senator Kerry to immediately produce the B-40 launcher he says he has at home before the media, and perhaps asked to explain how he was able to get such an prohibited item through military customs in Vietnam in 1969. The Military was very strict with inspections and with what you could take home with you. Military Customs would confiscate even spent .50 cal shells from those who tried to sneak them home through their baggage.
_________________
http://andyhome.webhop.org
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Mind

[abartholomaus]

No disrespect to Air Force and Naval personel, but I find their opinions to be a little distant from what happens on the ground.


I guess all Air Force personnel flew planes, and all Navy personnel were in ships, planes and submarines, huh? I guess that by that statement, only the personnel in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand that were in the Army and Marines were the only ones that understood what was happening, went into action, faced danger and combat, huh?


Whoa... There... War Dog. The last thing I wanted to do was push any buttons. You made your point man. My head swelled a little more than it should have. I apologize for disrespecting people who served in the Air Force and the Navy.

It's probably, a bit of envy and jealosy I hold as a ground pounder. You have to admit the Airforce facilities are very nice these days. I've heard about the accomodations in Afgahnistan, and Iraq are pretty posh compaired to the other services. Granted, I never had to sleep on the ground, much. My infantry friends usually had it the worst, but army motor pools bear a strong resemblence to a refugee camps.
_________________
http://andyhome.webhop.org
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Mind

[abartholomaus]

So this year we must choose between:
(A) J.F.K.

and

(B)G.W.B.

My level of doubt has never been so great.

This just goes to show how little difference in the polititions. I would have voted for Colen Powell. The man would have the presidency in the bag in 2000. He chickened out, because there are no sure things in politics.

I'm sorry if that is a little tangential.
_________________
http://andyhome.webhop.org
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Mind

[ASPB]

Abarth,

Ask retired Brig. Gen. William Turnipseed whether the press has accurately reported what he said about George W. Bush, and you'll get an earful. "No, I don't think they have," he begins. Turnipseed, the former head of the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group of the Alabama Air National Guard, was widely quoted as saying he never saw Bush in Alabama in 1972, and if the future president had been there, he would remember. In fact, Turnipseed says, he doesn't recall whether Bush was there or not; the young flier, then a complete unknown in Alabama, was never part of the 900-man 187th, so Turnipseed wouldn't have had much reason to notice him. But most reporters haven't been interested in Turnipseed's best recollection. "They don't understand the Guard, they don't want to understand the Guard, and they hate Bush," he says. "So when I say, ‘There's a good possibility that Bush showed up,' why would they put that in their articles?"

In recent weeks, Turnipseed has found himself in the middle of a battle in which Democrats have called the president a "deserter" who went "AWOL" for an entire year during his time in the Air National Guard. When Democrats made those accusations — amplified by extensive press coverage — the White House was slow to fight back, insisting that the issue, which came up in the 2000 campaign, was closed and did not merit a response. It was only after NBC's Tim Russert brought the story up during a one-hour interview with the president on February 8 that the White House changed course and released records of the president's Guard service.

Those records have not quieted the most determined of the president's enemies — no one who watches the Democratic opposition really believed they would — but they do make a strong case that Bush fulfilled his duties and met the requirements for Air National Guard officers during his service from 1968 to 1973. A look at those records, along with interviews with people who knew Bush at the time, suggests that after all the shouting is over, and some of the basic facts become known, this latest line of attack on the president will come to nothing.


FOUR YEARS OF FLYING

The controversy over Bush's service centers on what his critics call "the period in question," that is, the time from May 1972 until May 1973. What is not mentioned as often is that that period was in fact Bush's fifth year in the Guard, one that followed four years of often intense service. Also, what is not said is the war in Vietnam was virtually over.

Bush joined in May 1968. He went through six weeks of basic training — a full-time job — at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Tex. Then he underwent 53 weeks of flight training — again, full time — at Moody Air Force Base in Valdosta, Ga. Then he underwent 21 weeks of fighter interceptor training — full time — at Ellington Air Force Base in Houston. Counting other, shorter, postings in between, by the end of his training period Bush had served two years on active duty.

Certified to fly the F-102 fighter plane, Bush then began a period of frequent — usually weekly — flying. The F-102 was designed to shoot down other fighter planes, and the missions Bush flew were training flights, mostly over the Gulf of Mexico and often at night, in which pilots took turns being the predator and the prey."If you're going to practice how to shoot down another airplane, then you have to have another airplane up there to work on," recalls retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971. "He'd be the target for the first half of the mission, and then we'd switch."

During that period Bush's superiors gave him consistently high ratings as a pilot. "Lt. Bush is an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer," wrote one in a 1972 evaluation. Another evaluation, in 1971, called Bush "an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot" who "continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his proficiency even further." And a third rating, in 1970, said Bush "clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot" and was also "a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership."

All that flying involved quite a bit of work. "Being a pilot is more than just a monthly appearance," says Bob Harmon, a former Guard pilot who was a member of Bush's group in 1971 and 1972. "You cannot maintain your currency by doing just one drill a month. He was flying once or twice a week during that time, from May of 1971 until May of 1972." While the work was certainly not as dangerous as fighting in the jungles of Vietnam, it wasn't exactly safe, either. Harmon remembers a half-dozen Texas Air National Guard fliers who died in accidents over the years, in cluding one during the time Bush was flying. "This was not an endeavor without risk," Harmon notes.


THE MOVE TO ALABAMA

The records show that Bush kept up his rigorous schedule of flying through the spring of 1972: He was credited for duty on ten days in March of that year, and seven days in April. Then, as Bush began his fifth year of service in the Guard, he appears to have stepped back dramatically. The records indicate that he received no credit in May, June, July, August, and September 1972. In October, he was credited with two days, and in November he was credited with four. There were no days in December, and then six in January 1973. Then there were no days in February and March.

The change was the result of Bush's decision to go to Alabama to work on the Senate campaign of Republican Winton Blount. With an obligation to the Guard, Bush asked to perform equivalent service in Alabama. That was not an unusual request, given that members of the Guard, like everyone else, often moved around the country. "It was a common thing," recalls Brigadier General Turnipseed. "If we had had a guy in Houston, he could have made equivalent training with Bush's unit. It was so common that the guy who wrote the letter telling Bush to come didn't even tell me about it."

The president's critics have charged that he did not show up for service — was "AWOL" — in Alabama. Bush says he did serve, and his case is supported by records showing that he was paid and given retirement credit for days of service while he was known to be in Alabama. The records also show that Bush received a dental examination on January 6, 1973, at Dannelly Air National Guard base, home of the 187th (January 6 was one of the days that pay records show Bush receiving credit for service). And while a number of Guard members at the base say they do not remember seeing Bush among the roughly 900 men who served there during that time, another member, a retired lieutenant named John Calhoun, says he remembers seeing Bush at the base several times.

What seems most likely is that Bush was indeed at Dannelly, but there was not very much for a non-flying pilot to do. Flying fighter jets involves constant practice and training; Bush had to know when he left Texas that he would no longer be able to engage in either one very often, which meant that he would essentially leave flying, at least for some substantial period of time. In addition, the 187th could not accommodate another pilot, at least regularly. "He was not going to fly," says Turnipseed. "We didn't have enough airplanes or sorties to handle our own pilots, so we wouldn't have done it for some guy passing through."

On the other hand, showing up for drills was still meeting one's responsibility to the Guard. And, as 1973 went along, the evidence suggests that Bush stepped up his work to make up for the time he had missed earlier. In April of that year, he received credit for two days; in May, he received credit for 14 days; in June, five days; and in July, 19 days. That was the last service Bush performed in the Guard. Later that year, he asked for and received permission to leave the Guard early so he could attend Harvard Business School. He was given an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months, and five days of his original six-year commitment.

The records indicate that, despite his move to Alabama, Bush met his obligation to the Guard in the 1972-73 year. At that time, Guardsmen were awarded points based on the days they reported for duty each year. They were given 15 points just for being in the Guard, and were then required to accumulate a total of 50 points to satisfy the annual requirement. In his first four years of service, Bush piled up lots of points; he earned 253 points in his first year, 340 in his second, 137 in his third, and 112 in his fourth. For the year from May 1972 to May 1973, records show Bush earned 56 points, a much smaller total, but more than the minimum requirement (his service was measured on a May-to-May basis because he first joined the Guard in that month in 1968).

Bush then racked up another 56 points in June and July of 1973, which met the minimum requirement for the 1973-74 year, which was Bush's last year of service. Together, the record "clearly shows that First Lieutenant George W. Bush has satisfactory years for both '72-'73 and '73-'74, which proves that he completed his military obligation in a satisfactory manner," says retired Lt. Col. Albert Lloyd, a Guard personnel officer who reviewed the records at the request of the White House.

All in all, the documents show that Bush served intensively for four years and then let up in his fifth and sixth years, although he still did enough to meet Guard requirements. The records also suggest that Bush's superiors were not only happy with his performance from 1968 to 1972, but also happy with his decision to go to Alabama. Indeed, Bush's evaluating officer wrote in May 1972 that "Lt. Bush is very active in civic affairs in the community and manifests a deep interest in the operation of our government. He has recently accepted the position as campaign manager for a candidate for United States Senate. He is a good representative of the military and Air National Guard in the business world."

Beyond their apparent hope that Bush would be a good ambassador for the Guard, Bush's superiors might have been happy with his decision to go into politics for another reason: They simply had more people than they needed. "In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots," says Campenni. "The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In '72 or '73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem."


THE UNENDING ATTACK

Despite the evidence, Democrats have continued to accuse the president of shirking his duty during his Guard career. "He went to Alabama for one year," Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe said on ABC on February 1. "He didn't show up. Call it whatever you want, AWOL, it doesn't matter." After Bush made his Guard records public, McAuliffe released a statement saying the documents "create more questions than answers." Other Democrats, as well as an energetic team of liberal columnists and bloggers, echoed McAuliffe's comments.

Perhaps the most impressive accomplishment of Bush's detractors is that they managed to sell the idea — mostly unchallenged in the press — that Bush's Air National Guard service consisted of one year during which he didn't show up for duty. Far fewer people asked the question: Just how did Bush become a fighter pilot in the first place? Didn't that involve, say, years of work? Bush's four years of service prior to May 1972 were simply airbrushed out of the picture because many reporters did not believe they were part of the story.

It also seems likely that some of Bush's adversaries used the Guard issue as a way to get at other questions about the president. The Guard record was said to have a bearing on Bush's credibility, on the war in Iraq, on his fitness to lead. In addition, some journalists were nearly obsessed with forcing the president to release medical records from his time in the Guard because they hoped those records might reveal some evidence of drug use. The White House did not release the full set of medical records but did allow reporters to view them; the documents were entirely unexcep tional and contained nothing about drug use.

While all that was going on, both the White House and the Bush reelection campaign seemed consistently to underestimate the ferocity and resolve of the president's adversaries. For weeks, as the controversy grew, the president did nothing to defend himself. Those who wanted to speak up in his defense, like William Campenni and Bob Harmon, were not contacted by the White House; instead, they decided to go public on their own. Even when John Calhoun, the man who remembers Bush in Alabama, sent the White House an e-mail saying he had useful information, he received a stock response, without any indication the White House was interested in what he had to say.

Now the evidence is public; anyone who is interested in learning about Bush's service can do so. In the end, the president had the facts on his side. But he also had the good fortune to have the allegiance of men who feel so intensely about the Guard and their service that they wanted to speak out even if the White House didn't seem to care. Men like Campenni and Harmon were deeply offended when Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry equated Guard service during the Vietnam War with fleeing the country or going to jail. That was simply too much. "I'm not a Bushie," says Harmon. "The thing that got a few of us crawling out from under a rock, at no instigation from the White House, was that Guard service was being portrayed as being like a draft dodger."

Hattip: NRO Online
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[abartholomaus]

He dodged the draft through his connections. The Bushes go way back, and you will really have to pull out a good one to change my mind on Bush.

There is plenty of stuff out there about how Bush got in the Guard. 1972 and '73 are not the only suspicious dates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm

You have gotten me to doubt Kerry a little bit, but my suspicion on Bush is pretty damn firm.

What brought me here was some simple inconsistancies about some accusations that were made by the Kerry campaign. The Kerry campaign accused Bush of being liberal with the black Marker, but the same is also true of Kerry's use of the marker. He blacked out a very important number on all his evidence. It looked suspicious.

Now, with that said. I think there is no doubt that Bushes past is just as suspicious. That's why his military records were eaten by a goblin in the DOD.

I can accept the fact that both the Blue and the Red are snakelike. They ARE politicians, aren't they? I have agreed with your suspicians, and agreed there is suspicious information out there. I noticed a lot of accusations that are Political. You accuse the Democrats of posting all sorts of half-lies and missinformation. That is a given. The Republicans do the same. I am interested only in impartial information. When you start accusing the media and the Democrats I want to turn you off, because you start sounding like that blow hard Rush Limbaugh.
_________________
http://andyhome.webhop.org
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Mind

[abartholomaus]

What kind of proof is a pay stub???

Not much. I've had Screwed up L.E.S.'s many a time, and I have been payed extra on a couple of occations. I told them I was over payed so I wouldn't get screwed later, and I have seen people get screwed.

His pay records don't mean he was there, and his missing paperwork leads to many more questions than answers.

So you have managed to show that Kerry's military history has as many quirks as Bushes. I guess it is all a mater of opinion in the end.
_________________
http://andyhome.webhop.org
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Mind

[ASPB]

[abartholomaus]

[neverforget]

I still think Kerry is crazier than a hoot owl (narcissistic personality disorder), and a traitor to our country and to those in the military who served in combat during Vietnam or in any war.

I also remember Ted Peck, Captain (USN-Retired) stating very clearly the Brinkley book was full of mistakes and attributed events and operations to Kerry, rather than to Peck. And, perhaps also as important, he said he told Kerry to keep his boat at least a 1000 yards away from his, because he was too dangerous (read never knew what he was going to do) to be around.

Regarding posting of inaccurate events, operations, timelines, etc. on Kerry's website, and then correcting them when enough heck is raised by knowing people, my belief is that this was/is no more inadvertent than Berger stuffing classified documents down his pants or in his socks. It is done so no one can keep documented evidence of what they try to get away with. That is, not releasing any of the hard copy to the press; not that most of them would do anything anyway.

[Doc Jerry]

Aborthalomaus:

What I truly find amazing is that you are:

1) putting so much effort into an issue about Bush that has already been resolved, and

2) you appear to completely neglect the fact that Kerry:

..........Slandered an entire generation of veterans (those who served
before you, since you indicate you were not even born yet)
..........Has never apologized for maligning all those Vietnam vets
..........Voted for the war in Iraq, but voted against additional funding for
the troops.
..........Introduced bills on several occasions that would have drastically
cut intelligence funding (fortunately, his bills were never passed
because most people in congress believed the bills were not
intelligent).
..........Consistently voted against military pay raises.
..........Stabbed POW/MIA's in the back by supporting a Vietnam
Communist regime (as outlined in a piece by the "Village Voice"
about 5 months ago). Stabbed American Vietnamese in the back
(as outlined in the same piece).
..........As everyone knows by know, he's been indecisive on almost
every major issue confronting the country (i.e., voting for
then being against -- Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, Abortion,
etc. Too many to list here).

And you want to spend time on the issue of whether Bush put in enough time in the ANG? Give us a break. You need some medication for your obsessive-compulsive attachment to this issue. It's a non-issue. Get over it.

[abartholomaus]

Posted on Mon, Sep. 29, 2003

Marchers Demand U.S. Pullout From Iraq

PAUL CHAVEZ

Associated Press

LOS ANGELES - Anti-war protesters on both coasts took to the streets to denounce President Bush and demand a pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq.

Rallies were held Sunday in Los Angeles, Boston and San Francisco, and followed international protests Saturday in London, Athens, Paris and other cities.

"George Bush, Uncle Sam, Iraq will be your Vietnam!" some of the estimated 3,000 demonstrators chanted while walking down Los Angeles' Sunset Boulevard. No arrests or injuries were reported.

"We are supposed to be a democratic, free nation and I want to express my feelings against this criminal administration," said Pilar Happori, 58, of Garden Grove. "This is a dangerous administration for destroying not only the U.S., but the world."

In Boston, an estimated 150 protesters marched behind a pickup truck from the city's Copley Square to the Park Plaza Hotel. No arrests were reported.

At a rally following the march in Los Angeles, Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said that U.S. troops should be pulled out of Iraq and replaced by international forces.

"We need to get the U.N. in and the U.S. out," Kucinich said. "There can be a way to extricate this nation from the quicksand of Iraq."

Disabled Vietnam veteran Ron Kovic, author of "Born on the Fourth of July," addressed the rally, saying "the same government that paralyzed me and put me in this wheelchair" was killing American and Iraqi boys.

Fernando Suarez del Solar, of Escondido, whose 20-year-old son died in March while fighting in Iraq, led the crowd in chants of "Bring them home now!"

"My son was a peace lover. He was a soldier for peace, not for oil," said Suarez, holding a picture of his son in his Marine uniform.

Code Pink, a women's pro-peace group, unveiled a 40-foot-long "pink slip" during the rally that read, "Rumsfeld, you're dishonorably discharged" - a reference to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Demonstrators in both Boston and Los Angeles also included the Palestinian cause at their rallies. Several coffins were rolled through the streets by supporters of the free Palestine movement.
_________________
http://andyhome.webhop.org
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Mind

[carpro]