SwiftVets.com

[hiyall]

I humbly disagree with your appeal to deal with issues not trade insults remark. The implication is that the testimony of the Swiftvets contained in their book "Unfit for Command" is merely insults and not an issue to be considered in this Presidential race.

What issue or issues may I ask, Senator McCain is/are more important than the character of a would-be President? It seems that the testimony of the Swiftvets directly addresses the issue of the character of Senator Kerry.

I, personally, have no first hand knowledge to support or refute the between the Kerry versions and the Swiftvet's versions of events.

I surmise that Senator McCain has no first hand knowledge either and if so, what makes Senator McCain so certain that an issue of character is not involved here or that the Swiftvets version of the events are not more accurate than Senator Kerry's.

1)It appears that Kerry through his campaign spokesman have already backed away from the "Christmas in Cambodia" campaign even though this rendention of the incident is well documented in print.

2)Kerry's claim that he was not present during a particular Anti-War planning meeting (in Kansas City if I remember correctly) where some illegal and evil plans were discussed that involved assassination of then Government offical(s) ... has been demonstrably refuted by facts.

3) The book "Unfit for Command" appears to be both well documented and consistent in the portrayal of the character of then Lt. Kerry by a diverse group of eyewitnesses.

4) It would not be out of character for Lt. Kerry to game the system by embellishing and submitting his own medal recommendations, if he indeed did go back with a camera later to record home movies that "recreated" the events as he wished them to be remembered.

5) Since I was in the Army and not familiar with Swift boat tactics - I cannot comment on the PF 3 incident other to note the discrepancy of all the boats but Lt. Kerry's staying with the damaged boat to begin to administer first aid and recovery of wounded and then Lt. Kerry's boat returning later to pull Mr. Rasmussan from the water. What would be the tactic called for had there been incomming enemy fire? How would that differ from an incident where a mine caused the damage and no incomming fire was present?

6) Am I to presume that with the massive small arms hostile fire that was incomming from both banks of the river left no damage on any of the five boats involved in the rescue mission? That is a real stretch in my opinion.

7) It seems that Senator Kerry's (and the Swiftvet's) release of their military records via a form 180 would enable reporters and historians to gain a clearer insight into the discrepancies between the versions of the incidents talked about by both sides. If Senator Kerry did indeed falsify military documents and reports in order to gain Medals and the Honor and Appreciation that is bestowed, then for me, it would be a core issue of the Presidential race.


At this point, with the documentation, diversity of witnesses, and the fact that Senator Kerry has already been caught with misstatements (the Anti-War meeting and the Christmas Cambodia visit) that are being revisioned and refloated - it seems that the Swiftvets are more credible. If so, then their testimony strikes at the heart of Senator Kerry's character and ability to serve as President. I cannot imagine that if the testimony is true, how someone with that track record of deceit and anti-government planning activity would even pass muster to gain adequate security clearance to view classified documents.

Any Navy veterans ... please feel free to correct any mistakes this ol' grunt has made in this post.