 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jack Mclaughlin
PO3
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 280
|
 Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:29 pm Post subject: Another Douglas Brinkley deception exposed |
 |
|
In Douglas Brinkley`s book, Tour of Duty, he portrays John Kerry as a gung-ho young officer eager to see some real combat when he arrived at Cam Ranh Bay Airport on Nov. 17, 1968. Cam Ranh was considered the " fun in the sun and surf division" and he wanted no part of such soft duty. He wanted an immediate transfer to see the real Vietnam and he wanted to avenge the death of his freind, Dick Pershing.
But just several weeks after his bravado exortations he missed an important officers meeting on Dec.5th 1968 where straws were to be drawn for an assignment to An Thoi, a known hot spot. When Kerry was informed he was the automatic choice to go for not showing up balked. He made it very clear to his superiors he didn`t want to go, in fact he loathed the very idea of having to go. He was told to pack his bags and the next day, Dec. 6th, 1968 he was on his way to An Thoi. So my question is this: Why does Brinkley include all the hyperbole about Kerry`s eagernous to see real combat when he knows Kerry is insincere by his very actions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:55 pm Post subject: Re: Another Douglas Brinkley deception exposed |
|
|
| Jack Mclaughlin wrote: |
But just several weeks after his bravado exortations he missed an important officers meeting on Dec.5th 1968 where straws were to be drawn for an assignment to An Thoi, a known hot spot. When Kerry was informed he was the automatic choice to go for not showing up balked. He made it very clear to his superiors he didn`t want to go, in fact he loathed the very idea of having to go. He was told to pack his bags and the next day, Dec. 6th, 1968 he was on his way to An Thoi. |
In another thread I asked
| Quote: | | Why was Kerry transferred from his original unit, Coastal 14, after only 18 days? |
This appears to answer that question, but could you please supply a reference or documentation? Where does this come from? Brinkley himself? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is interesting so I am just entering a post so I will be notified of response.
I am wondering of much of these new things that come up is stuff that inventive minds search to inject things not easily disproved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
waltjones
PO2
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 392
Location: 'bout 40 miles north of Seattle
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 6:12 pm Post subject: hard to disprove |
|
|
| Quote: | | I am wondering of much of these new things that come up is stuff that inventive minds search to inject things not easily disproved. |
That's a very good point, and speculation without evidence can discredit the discreditor. I believe there are plenty of verifiable negatives about Kerry without resorting to nasty speculation about things like medals, performance, transfers, etc. - unless one has personal knowledge of those things (like a lot of the Swifties!).
For those who notice this speculation, sometimes it's a consequence of the hate Vietnam vets feel over much more serious issues. I have tried very hard not to trash Kerry for things I can't prove, no matter how strange they seem. Anyway, that's just this VV's opinion .... Semper Fi!
_________________
Walt Jones (USMC, '65 - '69) It says much about the person who defends a man with no honor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack Mclaughlin
PO3
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 280
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 7:09 pm Post subject: for me#1you#10 and waltjones |
|
|
| For those who want to check the accuracy of my posting titled, [ Another Douglas Brinkley Deception Exposed ] read pages 134 thru 160 of Brinkley`s book, Tour of Duty. Then check his version with the public statements of Admiral Roy Hoffman. Tedd Peck who was there for the officers meeting on Dec. 5th, 1968 would be the best source for confirmation of what took place. I guess waltjones is the self appointed high priest for accuracy and all of us should clear our postings with him from here on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
waltjones
PO2
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 392
Location: 'bout 40 miles north of Seattle
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 7:26 pm Post subject: Not the high priest! |
|
|
to Jack Mclaughlin:
I'm sorry I gave that impression, Jack. That was just the way I feel about it, in terms of dealing with critics of our (VVs) position. You have high credibilty with me, Jack; it's other people I'm talking about. I apologize for not making this clear, and I certainly don't want to inhibit in any way what people want to say here - I'm far from being the high priest of accuracy! I know that, for myself, I tend to believe that Kerry is/was capable of just about anything, because of what he did to us and the way he did it. I hope this clears up what I was trying to say; thanks for letting me know. Semper Fi!
_________________
Walt Jones (USMC, '65 - '69) It says much about the person who defends a man with no honor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 7:27 pm Post subject: Re: hard to disprove |
|
|
| waltjones wrote: | | Quote: | | I am wondering of much of these new things that come up is stuff that inventive minds search to inject things not easily disproved. |
That's a very good point, and speculation without evidence can discredit the discreditor. I believe there are plenty of verifiable negatives about Kerry without resorting to nasty speculation about things like medals, performance, transfers, etc. - unless one has personal knowledge of those things (like a lot of the Swifties!).
For those who notice this speculation, sometimes it's a consequence of the hate Vietnam vets feel over much more serious issues. I have tried very hard not to trash Kerry for things I can't prove, no matter how strange they seem. Anyway, that's just this VV's opinion .... Semper Fi! |
Brings to mind I was going to look up and save this time of a POW who was made part of an ant-Hanoi Jane story. He did not care for being used so by the anti-jane folks and said that he thought there was plenty enough that was actual to condemn her about without making stuff up.
Hell, maybe whoever originated that email that goes around from tiem to time was a pro-jane figuring that when folks found what was lie they might dismiss some of the rest that was actual. - I doubt that but it is a thought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 8:14 pm Post subject: Re: Not the high priest! |
|
|
| waltjones wrote: | to Jack Mclaughlin:
I'm sorry I gave that impression, Jack. That was just the way I feel about it, in terms of dealing with critics of our (VVs) position. You have high credibilty with me, Jack; it's other people I'm talking about. I apologize for not making this clear, and I certainly don't want to inhibit in any way what people want to say here - I'm far from being the high priest of accuracy! I know that, for myself, I tend to believe that Kerry is/was capable of just about anything, because of what he did to us and the way he did it. I hope this clears up what I was trying to say; thanks for letting me know. Semper Fi! |
I am bad with names and keep forgetting to write down yours and at least one other person who I might disagree with but find actually worth talking to - rather than at. 
Oh well .... If I was aware of Kerry back then I am sure that I thought him one of them 'soodo intullectulz' who might be basically right about something but I didn't like the punk anyway.
I dunno. I probably was aware of him back then - his pic looked vaguely familiar when I saw his younger image when he got in the pres' running.
He sure wasn't my favorite contender - nor second - not third - ...? Of serious contenders I was one way and another whether I disfavored him or Dean the more. - "Yeeeeaaaa" kinda settled that.
Damn! Was trying to think of how to mention someone from my personal past who came to quite respectable career - actually I can think of a few but to say much might manage to associate one with myself who I think might have become actual respectable person.
LOL - Saul of Tarsus had quite a past before he became Paul.
Of course Kerry is no Paul and Paul regretted deaths he caused while Kerry only claims regret for overstatements made in anger.
Had it been Democracy back then there likely would not have been a lot of Christians who would have voted him to become head of their church.
Of course Paul may well have been someone on a guilt trip for the evils he had done and had some hallucinations of his god telling him to do stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 8:57 pm Post subject: Re: for me#1you#10 and waltjones |
|
|
First, thanks for posting that info...it appears to fill another void in my understanding of Kerry's service.
| Jack Mclaughlin wrote: | | For those who want to check the accuracy of my posting titled, [ Another Douglas Brinkley Deception Exposed ] read pages 134 thru 160 of Brinkley`s book, Tour of Duty. |
Jack, in the future, it would save a lot of trouble and googling if you would source information (with links if you have them) in the first place. This is a most contentious topic, and, I'm afraid, sourcing is almost mandatory to establish credibility.
| Quote: |
Then check his version with the public statements of Admiral Roy Hoffman. Tedd Peck who was there for the officers meeting on Dec. 5th, 1968 would be the best source for confirmation of what took place. |
Again, I'm not doubting your credibility, but others will. Not only do I not have access to Brinkley's book, but, in reading your post, I had no idea (and still have no idea) whether you were quoting or paraphrasing, nor the source for your assertion, though I assumed it might be from Brinkley's book.
Suggesting that a reader ferret out the information themselves is OK, I guess, but wouldn't properly attributed quotes and/or links be a much more effective way to support your assertions?
| Quote: | | I guess waltjones is the self appointed high priest for accuracy and all of us should clear our postings with him from here on. |
I'm sorry, but I somewhat agree with his observations to a degree, although I DO believe Kerry perverted and manipulated the PH criteria and those are fair game for examination, especially PH#1. As far as the Bronze Star with "V" and the Silver Star are concerned, those may well be the Navy's own "self-inflicted wound", but I'll no longer question the judgement of those good men who submitted him for it.
Hopefully this doesn't dissuade you from furthur postings. Your post was quite informative, at least to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack Mclaughlin
PO3
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 280
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To waltjones:
Sorry if I misinterpreted your admonition and you have my apologies. I know others like me#1you#10 were wondering about those first 18 days at Cam Ranh Bay so I read all I could about it. My main gripe is with Douglas Brinkley who has been trashing Viet Vets for Truth on the cable networks.I am not willing to accept his version for what happened during the officers meeting on Dec. 5th. If Tedd Peck and/or Commander Horne finds this thread and is kind enough to respond I`ll gladly accept their version. They were there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Sun May 23, 2004 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
In post #1 where does Douglas Brinkley's writing stop and Jack McLaughlin's begin? Without a link to a reputable news source, it looks like Tedd Peck's accusation is just more NewsMax or FreeRepublic nonsense.
If there anything anti-Kerry that you guys won't slurp up without a second thought? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
