SwiftVets.com

[RocketFett]

heisest, the problem with that whole rassman rant is this.

One, he is being PAID by the kerry campaign as a member of the campaign team. Credibility anyone?

Two, as ArmyWife mentioned, and he himself said in that rant, he is Army, not Navy. He knew kerry a total of about an hour before that instance, and was likely passed out in the water while kerry was fleeinig the scene of the battle. There is no reason to believe that his assessment of kerry should be taken more seriously or believed more than the hundreds of men who served with kerry, know what a joke he is, know first hand about what a liar he is, and know his lack of character and honor from actually serving those three months with him. rassmen simply is not in a possition and did no thave the time with kerry to be considered a credible character witness for kerry. It has been proven that he wouldn't have been thrown into the water in the first place if kerry had not so recklessly and cowardly taken his boat so suddenly away from the kill zone when shots were being fired. I wonder how much rassman is being paid by the kerry campaign?

The SWIFT Vets aren't seeing any money from the book or the ad, and frankly, they've established themselves in life and don't need a payola to speak the truth, they're brave enough to do it for free. kerry is such a soft target when it comes to the truth, and every day he gives the SBVT more credibility because he simply cannot dispute their claims.

Three, even Rassman says that kerry "returned" to pick him up. How can one "return" if they hadn't left? Again it has clearly been proven that kerry's boat was NOT the only one there. The other boats were there and never did leave in the first place. They picked up all the other personnel out of the water themselves already, and one of them would have gotten rassman, so there was no need to kerry to bring his yellow butt back to the scene. There are more holes in the kerry/rassman telling of that incident than in a ten pound block of swiss cheese. Holes that just do not jibe with the after action reports, and the first hand accounts of the other people that were there.

But honestly, the argument for me ends with the facts that rassman is being paid by the kerry campaign, the SBVT are not being paid by the Bush campaign, or the proceeds from the book, kerry FLATLY REFUSES to sign a simple two page document to release his FULL AND COMPLETE military records which would show who is telling the truth, and finally the holes in his story which people have made very clear, which do not jibe with ANY of the other first hand accounts. kerry has given NO kind of satisfactory answer to these issues.

[lee]

I've posted this question on one of the other subject topics. I understand that at least three crewmen from the #3 boat were thrown into the water when it hit the mine. Thurlow and OICs from the other boats surrounded and protected the disabled boat (from potential or actual hostile fire?) and proceeded to pick up the three crewmen and were about to pick up Rassman when "Mighty Mouse" Kerry finally returns to the scene and "heroically" fishes Rassman out of the water. My question is, did the other OIC's and their crews get medal write-ups for picking the other three crewmen from boat #3 out of the water in the midst of "sustained and ferocious hostile fire"?? I suspect not. It would appear that Lt. Kerry considered himself the only hero that day and that only Lt. Kerry and the compliant Lt. Rassman had the literary skills and lack of integrity to embellish the day's event into something that it was not.
_________________
redclay

[Beldar]

I apologize if it's already been linked elsewhere, but for any who may be interested, on Tuesday I posted a lengthy, very critical response to Mr. Rassman on my blog: Fisking Rassman's WSJ op-ed. I'm pleased that it's gotten several thousand "hits" since it's been up.

[RocketFett]

Navy, that's been one of the funniest things to me with all this is the fact that all these people coming out against the SBVT ad and now the book, thought it was just all fine and dandy when moore and soros were ripping President Bush a new one with their democrat donated soft money and hamaas funded crockumentaries and venomous attack ads made with no evidence to back them up. But now that the shoe is on the other foot, and their candidate is the one having his ox gored, and especially because it's a massive group of people who actually know kerry, and they're putting forward facts and evidence that kerry can't afford to address, suddenly now they don't like the sour taste of the medicine that they've been handing out for the past three years. This is a classic example of "what goes around comes around" and "you can dish it out but you can't take it" in kerry and his campaigns case. I LOVE IT!!! AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

[MacvTm 19]

WBAY will accept the Swift Boat Veteran advertising. Don Carmichael



-----Original Message-----
From: Switchboard
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 7:10 AM
To: Carmichael, Don; Jaeger, Melissa; Krieghoff, Robert
Subject: FW: swift boat ad



-----Original Message-----
From: Copeskey622@cs.com [mailto:Copeskey622@cs.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 9:40 PM
To: Switchboard
Subject: swift boat ad


You may have shut us down in the 70's but you will not shut us down now. As a Vietnam veteran that served 2 tours in Vietnam, thats 2 years, not 4 months as Hanoi John did, it is a disgrace to see your station fold under the pressure of the Democrats. What the hell happen to free speech. I am in the progress of notifying the Veterans group in Wisconsin to start a boycott of all that advertise on your station. The Vietnam Veterans will not have the truth hid this time. We have heard enough of John Kerry's lies in the 70's, we will not stand idle now. Its time to find out what John (Hanoi) Kerry really is. A TRAITOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!
_________________
Vietnam Vet with 2 tours in Nam. Served while Hanoi John was waving his NVA flag in the states. He is a Traitor to all Vietnam Vets.

[0302]

Most vets are republicans.
AND an OVERWHELMING majority of former military officers are republican, too.

It should come as no surprise that INDIVIDUAL republicans would finacially support this or any other veteran's group.
Just as, ONCE AGAIN, a huge majority of veterans will vote republican.
Just as they did in the previous election, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that.....

[Guammie]

I am an independent, not registered with either party. My political leanings are libertarian. I have sent monetary support to the Swiftvets. If I had the money, I would underwrite them completely. Would that make them libertarians? I don't think so.