SwiftVets.com

[ted]

I've been reading all this stuff. I have read everything on the SwiftVets site, seen the John O'Neill / Kerry debate on Cavett, read the PDF docs that the DoD released on Kerry and I just don't get it.

I seriously mean no offense to anyone in here, but what I do see is one giant conspiracy - what I mean is that if you are to believe what O'Neill and everyone else is saying, then you have to believe that Kerry volunteered to go to Vietnam in order to fake 3 injuries in order to get 3 purple hearts very quickly (so he could go home before he got killed), and as a bonuse, pick up a bronze star and silver star (both of which he basically lied about to get awarded anyway) all with the desire of besmirching the war effort and bad mouthing veterans in order to be able to go home and run for congress, the senate, and eventually President.

I'm sorry, it just doesnt' make sense to me. At first, this spring, it was "Kerry threw his medals away" and "Kerry rubbed elbows with Hanoi Jane". And now, not only did he fraternize with the enemy and march in protest marches waving the N. Vietnamese flag, and lie to congress - now he also premediated working the system in Vietnam, all somehow knowing he would never actually be killed in action the whole time.

I'm reminded of the movie "Contact" with Jodie Foster in which she discusses Occam's Razor with that minister guy(http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/OCCAMRAZ.html which of course was never designed to be applied to human nature or human actions per se, but I'm reminded of it anyway). The idea with Occam's Razor being that the simpliset and least complex answer is the correct one.

The idea that John Kerry could have manipulated the system to such a degree that he could convince gritty, principled Naval officers that he deserved these medals just doesn't make sense. If 30 years after the fact memories of Kerry being described as he is now were true, then how on earth could such salt of the earth, principled naval commanders ever allow themselves to honer such a ******* with a Bronze Star & Silver Star? It just doesn't make any sense. None at all.

I think the downfall of this attack on Kerry will be the result of what I would call "too much information", or "more information than be needed" that actually ends up discrediting the "claims" about Kerry.

For example, the recent Boston Globe interview with George Elliot that indicated that he signed his afadavit in haste and that he had made a mistake, only to learn a few hours later that (after being hounded by the press over his comments in the Globe) he essentially goes back on what was said in the Globe (and confirmed by the publisher no less) and signs another afadavit that says he was misquoted, but then also muddies the water of the whole incident anyway, as he goes out of his way to clarify that he had no personal knowledge that John Kerry "shot a VC in the back" but that basically he belived now (based upon the "evidence") that indeed, Kerry HAD shot a VC in the back, thus the reason why he said he should not have nominated Kerry for the Silver Start.

Interestingly, I find that in the official sliver star citation, it seems that the silver star was awarded to Kerry for his courage, bravery, gallantry, suprise move, tactics, "routing a score of enemy soldiers" (which doesn't mean kill necessarily) and then discovered an enemy cache of weapons etc etc (read about it here: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Silver_Star.pdf) NO WHERE in that citation does it mention a single thing about Kerry killing a VC, or killing a VC that Kerry claimed had a grenade launcher who was getting ready to launch that grenade at him. Kerry was awarded the sliver star for his overall actions that day, not for the specific killing of a VC. After all, in one of the fitreps on Kerry, it was noted that he had an "unofficial" count of some 20 VC killed, but he didn't get 20 sliver stars for that, so obviously silver stars weren't handed out based upon killing VCs.

And just for fun, let's take "Dr Letsons" incredible memory of John Kerry's wound that he treated that didn't deserve a purple heart. Does it make ANY sense to you at all that a medic would remember a wound that was so superficial as to be only treated with a bandaid? And to remember the EXACT date of the injury, the fact that the boat itself had no damage, that he knew exactly where the boat was patrolling on the night of December 2nd, 1968 AND to remember this in addition to remembering that Kerry's crewmates (remember, this is the MEDIC back at base, not a guy on the boat with them) didn't remember any enemy fire coming their way? Here you have a medic who remembers details 36 years after this "minor" injury such as:

"Some of his crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore. The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks."

And don't forget that Letson didn't tell ANYONE about this incident until just this year. Remember, he said he went and told his local Democratic committee during the primaries that they "had a problem" with Kerry that they needed to know about. So he has been sitting on this breaking news for nearly 36 years - never telling anyone about it and yet he can remember it in detail as if it was yesterday. And a wound so superficial as to not require any treatment other than a bandaid.

Again, it just doesn't make sense. Remember, tons of Swift Boat vets who were there at the time (that is in Coastal 11) have stated that they got lots of wounds worse than Kerry's that they never got purple hearts for - so presumably Dr. Letson would have treated tons of wounds worse than Kerry's scratch - yet he remembers Kerry's scratch with such detail.

It just doesn't add up. There is just too much going against all these claims about Kerry.

And it's funny, the more I read about this stuff, the more I read about these claims, the more it makes me wonder if some people just don't want us to know that underneath that anti-war activist Kerry that we all remember so well (apparently) there is really a true bona fida war hero who volunteered his life for his country, was wounded in action, and more than earned the right to speak up about the unjust nature of that war - no matter if you disagree with him or not.

Ok, how long until you delete this post? Notice: I'm not trolling, I'm not attacking anybody personally here - I'm just pointing out my own personal exploration of this issue.

[kmudd]

Kerry claimed that there was a system wide top to bottom system of committing of war crimes.Without a doubt this is not true.Kerry claimed war crimes were ordered from the very top leaders.If this is so why didn't all the reporters who were traveling with so many of the troops find many more war crimes? So did Kerry lie about War Crimes ?

For years Kerry has claimed Nixon ordering him secretly into Cambodia in Christmas of 1968 is what turned him into not trusting the goverment. Nixon was not even president in 1968. So this can't be true.

If Kerry if so sure he is in the right he should release all of his Navy records.But he is refusing to do so. So there must be a reason why.

[scotty61]

Of course Kerry didn't go to Vietnam to get 3 PHs, Bronze and Silver Stars. He went because he wanted to feather his political bed and those are what he wound up with. He is not the first to do so and probably will not be the last. What is problematic is that the actions on the citations do not jive with eye-witnesses.

As for Dr Letson, Kerry may well have stood out in his memory because he wanted a PH for a very minor wound and as such was quite unusual.

[kmudd]

Kerry might have stood out because the guys with Kerry kept saying Kerry was the next JFK.

Another lie of Kerry was he was shot at Khmer Rouge while he was in Cambodia.The Khmer Rouge had not even formed at that time. So that had to be a lie. And why would there be South Vietnamese in Cambodia getting drunk at Christmas in 1968 ?

[ted]

[Me#1You#10]

Ted...

It is almost 3AM my time and I've just briefly scanned your message. I transitioned into scan mode from read mode after your first paragraph in which you stated...

[tvaughan]

Ted,

If you have questions then you've come to the right place. But if you've come to add some spin then you will find your time here pretty frustrating.

Saying Kerry's comments were out of context might fly with people who don't know the original context to begin with, but with people who are VERY aware of Kerry's activities, you will find your explanations will not be effective at making us unlearn what we already know.

And you are right, the simplest answer is probably the right one.

So which is more simple? One man lying who has known to lie in the past, or two hundred men lying in unison?
_________________
Talking point #1: Sign 180
Talking point #2: Sign 180
Talking point #3: Sign 180

[lrb111]

so presumably Dr. Letson would have treated tons of wounds worse than Kerry's scratch - yet he remembers Kerry's scratch with such detail. >>>>

Several things were fairly out of the ordinary. First most folks with "wounds"like kerry's just picked the offending particle out and went on.
The doctor was probably used to wounds that might be more serious, neve getting attention at all.

Second his crew mentioning they had not received any hostile fire, but this guy wants medic attention, and the med report to relfect it. Remember this was for a wound that at one time was described, that kerry would have "worked" to keep the offensive piece from simply Falling out.
Extraordinarily silly that he would want a doc to do it.

Third;y in the face of this silliness, his crew tells the doc, he is going to be the next JFK. But here he was demanding the treatment.
Quite unlike JFKs truly heroic behavior.

It was the inordinantly silly juxtapositions of what kerry wanted vs the scope of the need.

fwiw, Vets in all forces took Purple Hearts considerably more seriously.
_________________
said Democratic Chairman Terry McAuliffe. "It is inexcusable to mock service and sacrifice."
well, when even the DNC can see it,,,,, then kerry is toast.

[Indianbaboon]

call me a sadist, but when I think of a purple heart, I think of the wound that goes with it.

Every vet that has been willing to mention his purple hearts or talk abt vietnam is also willing to show the scar that goes along with it.

i got a friend with half a butt cheek and half a foot. No need to see the two PHs. I got friends with surgical scars, shrapnel you can feel under the skin, etc.

where, pray tell, exactly are Kerry's war wounds?

Vietnam was a JUNGLE. I bet you the average 11B would get three scratches as big as Kerry's three within minutes of a patrol, just from the branches.

To me, what he asked for PHs for is demonstration enough of his lying.

I mean, really, you say 3 PHs, like all PHs were created equal. And, time was they used to be. But Kerry has changed all that.

[tvaughan]

[Paul Woll]

You seem to have forgotten that Kerry said in 1986: "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling, and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."

However, the boats' mission changed after Kerry made his decision, and they were tasked with more dangerous river patrols. After that he was no longer happy with being "involved". He heard about the 3 purple hearts rule and used that as an easy out. He only served 4 months, can you really believe he actually earned all of those medals in that time?

He exits the war and then immediately starts tearing at the war effort and claiming all these war crimes that none of the other 250 or so swift boat vets can remember. He fabricates stories that help him push his agenda. He is good at that.

This year alone...
KERRY LIED - during a recent South Florida stop when he said he voted for the 1997 Helms-Burton Act, which was designed to discourage foreign investment in Cuba by punishing foreign companies investing in property confiscated from Americans. He lied about how he voted to get Cuban Americans to vote for him.

KERRY LIED - about his own history on Yucca Mountain...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1190406/posts
in order to gain votes in Nevada.

KERRY LIED - about blacks in prison versus college, John Kerry had claimed, in a Columbus, Ohio, speech, that more black Americans are in prison than in college. Blogger Clyde Middleton has the numbers:

The US [Department of Justice] tells us the number of blacks incarcerated at mid-year 2002 (page 11, Table 13): 818,900 black men; 65,600 black women; total 884,500 blacks.

The US Census Bureau tells us the number of blacks in college during 2002: 802,000 black men; 1,476,000 black women; total 2,278,000 blacks.

KERRY LIED ABOUT HIS VOTE....
Officially announcing his candidacy for president, Senator John kerry stood in front of the USS Yorktown and lied about his vote in favor of the Joint Resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. Kerry asserted in his announcement that he voted in favor of "threatening" to use force against Iraq. Either John Kerry believes Americans cannot read or he cannot do so himself. The resolution contains the statement "The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate..."

KERRY LIED ABOUT HIS ANTI-WAR ACTIVITIES
A Vietnam War historian and supporter of Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry has told CNSNews.com that Kerry is lying about key events related to his anti-war activities in 1971.
Kerry said he hasn't spoken to former anti-war associate Al Hubbard since the two men appeared side by side on national television in April 1971, but according to author Gerald Nicosia, that assertion is wrong. So is Kerry's insistence that he did not attend a November 1971 meeting of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, at which group members discussed the possibility of assassinating U.S. senators who were still supporting the war in Vietnam, Nicosia said.

Nicosia backed up his comments regarding Kerry's presence at the November 1971 meeting by providing CNSNews.com with the FBI's redacted files about that meeting.


KERRY LIED About CAMBODIA.
How can a christmas day event be seared into your memory and then all of a sudden you are saying, oh yeah, it was a different day.

KERRY LIED ABOUT MEETING WITH NORTH VIETNAMESE
Newly released FBI files reveal that presumed Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry attended a second meeting with North Vietnamese communists in Paris in the early 1970s. Kerry has previously admitted to meeting only once with the North Vietnamese delegations in 1970.
According to the FBI files, Kerry met with representatives from the North Vietnamese government in Paris in 1971 in an effort to secure the release of captured American prisoners of war. Kerry has previously acknowledged meeting "both delegations" of Vietnamese communists in Paris in 1970, but has said nothing of the 1971 meeting.

KERRY LIED ABOUT HIS RELEASE OF MILITARY RECORDS.
RUSSERT: “Would you agree to release all your military records?”
KERRY: “I have. I’ve shown them – they’re available to you to come and look at.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/18/04)
FACT: Kerry Has Not Released All Military Records. “The day after John F. Kerry said he would make all of his military records available for inspection at his campaign headquarters, a spokesman said the senator would not release any new documents, leaving undisclosed many of Kerry’s evaluations by his Navy commanding officers, some medical records, and possibly other material. …[W]hen a reporter showed up yesterday morning to review the documents, the campaign staff declined, saying all requests must go through the press spokesman, Michael Meehan. Late yesterday, Meehan said the only records available would be those already released to this newspaper.”

I find it hard to believe that any rational person can read the following cover letter
http://www.swiftvets.com/article.php?story=20040808144320243
and not come to the conclusion that Kerry lied about his 3rd Purple heart. He definitely (by his own words) did not receive the wounds from the mine explosion, but instead from a rice bin explosion. (This was in the complete absence of any enemy fire.)

If you have problems comprehending things, I recommend reading the following topic. That goes into this in great detail.
http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2628


******
YOUR COMMENT:The idea that John Kerry could have manipulated the system to such a degree that he could convince gritty, principled Naval officers that he deserved these medals just doesn't make sense. If 30 years after the fact memories of Kerry being described as he is now were true, then how on earth could such salt of the earth, principled naval commanders ever allow themselves to honer such a ******* with a Bronze Star & Silver Star? It just doesn't make any sense. None at all.

If you read the faqs, cover letters, etc. You will see that the system was not that hard to manipulate, there is a degree of honor that is associated with it. That seems to be lacking from a certain individual.
******

YOUR COMMENT:
So he has been sitting on this breaking news for nearly 36 years - never telling anyone about it and yet he can remember it in detail as if it was yesterday. And a wound so superficial as to not require any treatment other than a bandaid. Again, it just doesn't make sense. Remember, tons of Swift Boat vets who were there at the time (that is in Coastal 11) have stated that they got lots of wounds worse than Kerry's that they never got purple hearts for - so presumably Dr. Letson would have treated tons of wounds worse than Kerry's scratch - yet he remembers Kerry's scratch with such detail.

RESPONSE:
First, there is a difference between being president and running for senator. One is more of a commanding position. These men are claiming he is unfit for command, which is why they are speaking up now. Surely, you would remember a guy who is trying to get a purple heart for a splinter. That would be a very memorable occurrence.

**************
YOUR COMMENT:
And it's funny, the more I read about this stuff, the more I read about these claims, the more it makes me wonder if some people just don't want us to know that underneath that anti-war activist Kerry that we all remember so well (apparently) there is really a true bona fida war hero who volunteered his life for his country, was wounded in action, and more than earned the right to speak up about the unjust nature of that war - no matter if you disagree with him or not.

I doubt it. A hero, wouldn't sign up for an easy ride, and when the going gets rough he tries to get out. A hero when leaving the war wouldn't try to sabotage the war effort as soon as he got home. It seems more likely, that you are in denial and your wishful thinking is making you want to believe there is more to Kerry. There is. He is a fraud, a liar, who will go behind US policymakers backs to do whatever he wants. He demonstrated this with his "supposed" foreign leaders who want him to be president, he did this by saying that certain foreign countries will help the war effort if he is elected, he did this by meeting with North Vietnamese.


AS FOR HIS MEDALS.
He testified before congress and then led a group of veterans against the war outside and they all threw their medals away. Mysteriously the medals now hang in Kerrys Senate office when asked about this he said oh I didn't throw my medals I threw someone elses (real stand up Guy).

KERRY IS A JOKE.

[hanna]

Ohhhhhhhhhh a troll we get to play with. What fun. Ok, how about the fact that generally when someone is telling the truth, the basic tenaments of their story don't change no matter how many times they tell it. However, in the case of Mr. Rasmussen, that is not the case. I submit the following for your reading pleasure.

Rassmann's river patrol of Swift boats had been blown out of the water in a barrage of fire from Viet Cong AK-47s and rocket launchers. He had come up for air, taking sniper fire from both banks, sure "my ticket was punched.''
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/08/MNGKO4RLT71.DTL
On March 13, 1969, Rassmann, a Green Beret, was traveling down the Bay Hap river in a boat behind Kerry’s when both were ambushed by exploding land mines and enemy fire coming from the shore. Kerry was hit in the arm, while a mine blew Rassmann’s boat out of the water. With enemy fire coming from both sides of the river and swift boats evacuating from the area, Kerry’s crew chose to turn their boat toward the ambush to save Rassmann.
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0117d.html

Rassmann, a first lieutenant in the Army special forces, was eating a chocolate chip cookie on Kerry’s patrol boat as it pulled back from a fire fight when a nearby boat hit a mine. During the ensuing combat, Kerry’s boat was rocked by another explosion, which injured Kerry and tossed Rassmann into the water.
http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/html/2004/07/22/76146.php
While returning from a SEA LORDS operation along the Bay Hap River, a mine detonated under another swift boat. Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river, and a second explosion followed moments later. The second blast blew me off John's swift boat, PCF-94, throwing me into the river. Fearing that the other boats would run me over, I swam to the bottom of the river and stayed there as long as I could hold my breath.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005460
The group had already lost one soldier that day. As they sped down the river, one boat was blown out of the water, and then another. An explosion wounded Kerry in the arm and threw Rassmann into the river. Rassmann dove to the bottom to avoid being run over by the other boats. When he surfaced, he saw the convoy had gone ahead.

Viet Cong snipers fired at him, and Rassmann submerged over and over to avoid being hit. The bullets came from both banks, and Rassmann had nowhere to go. He began thinking his time had come, but the fifth time he came up, he saw the convoy had turned around. Kerry had ordered the boats back to pick up the man overboard.

http://www.htmlhelponline.com/kerry/news1.html

When a fleet of Swift boats came under heavy fire from AK-47s and rocket launchers on shore, several of the boats were blown to a shambles, and Rassman was thrown overboard. He swam through sniper fire coming from both banks of the river, but there was nowhere to go. Kerry turned his boat and headed into the barrage, toward the floundering Rassman. Though his own right arm had already been hit by shrapnel, Kerry left his pilothouse and pulled Rasmussen out of the water as his crew returned a hail of gun and rocket fire.

I don't have time to point out all the lies in this diatribe.

[GoophyDog]

Ted; I want to congratulate you on a very articulate post. You obviously spent some serious time in formulating your thoughts and expressing your reasoning.

John Kerry was, from the very first, against the war in Vietnam. I cite his commencement speach. Perhaps his view was changed though through his discussions with his peers at the time. From the Boston Globe series done on him, Kerry mentions he was in class with the likes of Patton and several others who had already expressed their intention on joining the service.

Kerry joined the Navy and picked up a commission. From his own words he was not interested in becoming a pilot, even though he was already experienced in that regard, but rather wanted to go to sea. I won't question his motivation for this even if the obvious safe choice was sea duty.

After the Gridley arrived off the coast of Vietnam I'm sure John Kerry observed what was then the "skate duty" of the coastal patrols ie; swift boats. Since rotation was coming up, yes, he volunteered for that duty. Again, I won't question his motivation since I can't get into his head and he hasn't really addressed this issue. Unfortunately, two weeks later, the mission was changed and the swift boat tasking became VERY dangerous.

Ah, but opportunity reared its head and having studied at the feet of some really savvy political leaders, John Kerry seized it. From the book 'Unfit for Command" we see after action reports that, to put it gently, were highly embelished, favoring and forwarding a perception of heroism that seemed boundless. The embelishments were to such an extent that other participants, once they were given the opportunity to read them decided to speak up, which is what we're seeing now with many others coming forward. With the added attention, those 3 purple hearts and 2 citations do come under the magnifying glass.

A little over 120 days later, John Kerry left the theater for one of the cushiest jobs a junior officer can get, that of an aide to a support center admiral. I'm sure it was simply coincidence that the assignment was close to home which allowed him to scope out potential political offices in his home state. I cite his request for an early release to run for office. That move was another political education for him since he quickly discovered that his name was not well known and as such he didn't have a chance in an established political machine that was Massachusetts. He had been away from his mentors too long so he knew he had to seek a way to bring attention on himself.

What did John Kerry do? The VVAW organization and his participation in it have been discussed enough. I will however address your contention that Kerry's statements have been taken out of context. I can not, for the life of me see where "I personally took part in war crimes..."(sic) is out of context. The testimony was spoken in a frank manner often using very descriptive words. However, I must point out that Kerry did not quote all of the statements he gathered at Winter Soldier. No where in his testimony did he repeat his witnesses' references to boot camp as beginner genocide (see video, winter solder investigation). Further, in his testimony he doesn't restrict it to just 100 or so "soldiers" but addresses ALL. Interestingly enough, you do the same by stating these actions are a systematic problem in Iraq - something totally unproven, without merit and untrue. One must be careful when painting with such a broad brush.

This missive is already quite long so the flips and flops regarding medals or was it ribbons being tossed over the fence need not be mentioned nor the in Cambodia or near Cambodia, Christmas or later. They simply point to the continuing pattern.

Until this year, John Kerry presented only a small problem isolated in a small state, covered as a junior senator whose attendance and voting record were less than earth shattering or influencial. I'm not surprised that honorable veterans had chosen to let by-gones be by-gones while Kerry remained inside his box. Unfortunately, he's come out of the box and is pursuing the highest elected office in the land so yes, these same honorable veterans who have already demonstrated their love of country feel duty bound to come forward. They've come from all walks of life and political affiliations for one purpose - to relate to their fellow countrymen that this one person is not fit to hold the office for which he seeks.

Concern is an extremely strong motivator and one that will surely bring back memories of one's youth spent in such horrific circumstances as is war. No Ted, its not surprising that these memories have returned to these men about one man. What is unfortunate is that I'm sure memories of lost friends and the utter hell that war is were also brought back, not just the few isolated ones involving John Kerry.

Ted, please forgive me, I'm sure you caught the pattern but others might not so I'll lay it out here:

John Kerry stated he was against the war in Vietnam yet lacked the conviction to truely pursue its protest and instead joined.

John Kerry, already an accomplished pilot, chose the safer course and chose sea duty.

John Kerry was failing as a surface combatant, saw what appeared to be safe duty in something he was familiar with (yatching) so opted for the swift boats.

John Kerry served approximately 33% of a tour, embelished and perhaps filed false after action reports, claimed injury and used a little known loophole to remove himself from danger.

John Kerry presented false testimony before congress condemming his fellow servicemen.

John Kerry met and had dialog with representatives of a country with which the United States was, at that time, at war.

John Kerry has made public statements for over 30 years citing activities he participated in that he has since ammended, corrected, or denied when confronted with the facts.

Ted, my greatest fear is what this man could do to our country at this, probably the most serious of times. The United States can not afford and must not tolerate a leader who so well demonstrates lack of conviction, dishonesty, and pure self interest as John Kerry. Kerry is seeking the highest office in our land and as a candidate, just as George Bush, deserves the closest of scrutinies. You may dismiss or belittle the facts in this forum all you want but they will not be ignored, nor will they go away because what they are is what makes John Kerry what he is.
_________________
Why ask? Because it needs asking.

[Indianbaboon]

didn't have time to read all of your post mr. keppner,but Kerry did in fact address the issue of why he chose swift boats in 1986. He said he didn't want to go to war and chose swifts because they were a safe assignment...

that changed two weeks later.

[rbshirley]