|
SwiftVets.com Service to Country
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
shawa CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 2004
|
Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 9:33 pm Post subject: What Kerry Really Did in Vietnam |
|
|
Excerpt:
Zumwalt: "Kerry's Record Will Haunt Him"
A former assistant secretary of defense and Fletcher School of Diplomacy professor,W. Scott Thompson, recalled a conversation with the late Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt Jr. that clearly had a slightly different take on Kerry's recollection of their discussions: "[T]he fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations,Admiral Elmo Zumwalt,told me --30 years ago when he was still CNO [chief naval officer in Vietnam] that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam,just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass,by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets. "We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control", the admiral said. "Bud" Zumwalt got it right when he assessed Kerry as having large ambitions --but promised that his career in Vietnam would haunt him if he were ever on the national stage."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just came across this story. Interesting read, but I don't know how valid
it is. Has anyone read this book?
Hail, the Conquering War Criminal Comes!
What Kerry Really Did in Vietnam
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
http://counterpunch.org/cockburn07292004.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10 Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004 Posts: 6503
|
Posted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
One thing fersure, the authors have a boatload of more info on the peculiar Mr. Kerry. Hopefully they'll be inspired to do a followup. I'd LOVE to read it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SBD Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004 Posts: 1022
|
Posted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a Lipscomb story with the same quote as well as a reference to a letter Kerry wrote to accuse Bush of attacking his war record while President Bush had never even mentioned Kerry or Vietnam.
SBD
The New York Sun February 27, 2004 Friday
Setting Straight Kerry's War Record
BYLINE: By THOMAS LIPSCOMB
Senator Kerry recently wrote a letter to President Bush complaining, "You and your campaign have initiated a widespread attack on my service in Vietnam, my decision to speak out to end that war," and warning, "I will not sit back and allow my patriotism to be challenged."
In the absence of any evidence from Mr. Kerry of an attack from the Bush campaign, Mr. Kerry seems to have originated his own doctrine of "pre-emption." How valid are his concerns?
No one denies Mr. Kerry's four bemedaled months in "Swiftboats" or his seven-months' service as an electrical officer on board the USS Gridley, during its cruises back and forth to California, or even his months as an admiral's aide in Brooklyn, before he was able get out of the Navy six months early to run for office.
Taking a look at Mr. Kerry's much-promoted Vietnam service, his military record was, indeed, remarkable in many ways. Last week, the former assistant secretary of defense and Fletcher School of Diplomacy professor, W. Scott Thompson, recalled a conversation with the late Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt Jr. that clearly had a slightly different take on Mr. Kerry's recollection of their discussions:
"[T]he fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, told me - 30 years ago when he was still CNO - that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam, just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass, by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets. 'We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control,' the admiral said. 'Bud' Zumwalt got it right when he assessed Kerry as having large ambitions - but promised that his career in Vietnam would haunt him if he were ever on the national stage." And this statement was made despite the fact Zumwalt had personally pinned a Silver Star on Mr. Kerry.
Mr. Kerry was assigned to Swiftboat 44 on December 1, 1968. Within 24 hours, he had his first Purple Heart. Mr. Kerry accumulated three Purple Hearts in four months with not even a day of duty lost from wounds, according to his training officer. It's a pity one cannot read his Purple Heart medical treatment reports which have been withheld from the public. The only person preventing their release is Mr. Kerry.
By his own admission during those four months, Mr. Kerry continually kept ramming his Swiftboat onto an enemy-held shore on assorted occasions alone and with a few men, killing civilians and even a wounded enemy soldier. One can begin to appreciate Zumwalt's problem with Mr. Kerry as commander of an unarmored craft dependent upon speed of maneuver to keep it and its crew from being shot to pieces.
Mr. Kerry now refers to those civilian deaths as "accidents of war." And within four days of his third Purple Heart, Mr. Kerry applied to take advantage of a technicality which allowed him to request immediate transfer to a stateside post.
Once back in the States, Mr. Kerry joined "the struggle for our veterans," as he called it last week in Atlanta, by joining a scruffy organization called the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. The VVAW's executive director, Al Hubbard, supposedly a former Air Force captain wounded in Vietnam, quickly appointed Mr. Kerry to the executive committee.
Mr. Kerry participated with the VVAW at agitprop rallies such as Valley Forge and the "Winter Soldier" guerrilla theater atrocity trials in Detroit, finally testifying in April 1971 before the Senate as an authority on the war crimes his fellow American servicemen had committed in Vietnam.
Outside of his own "accidents of war," there is no evidence that Mr. Kerry had then or has now the least idea what may or may not have been the realities of ground combat. However, he had no problem reeling off
for the Senate a series of unproven, secondhand allegations that would have been perfectly at home at the Nuremberg trials indicting his fellow veterans.
Mr. Kerry stated there were "war crimes committed in Southeast Asia...not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-today basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do." Then Mr. Kerry got specific:
"They had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam...we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions; in the use of free-fire zones, harassment interdiction fire, search-and-destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, all accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam."
In other words, My Lai was just another day in the life of the Vietnam War.
This wasn't a one-time occasion. The VVAW had been peddling this line from the day Mr. Kerry joined them and had been publishing charges like this for the previous two years. Mr. Kerry repeated them on "Meet the Press" with Al Hubbard, who was found to be a total fraud and who never served in Vietnam, much less was wounded. However, Mr. Kerry has never renounced the charges he made.
Recently, his fellow VVAW supporter, Jane Fonda, has tried to minimize a potentially damaging picture of him a few rows behind her at the three-day VVAW Valley Forge rally in September 1970.And many members of the press fell for the line that it was accidental or coincidental, including Fox's Chris Wallace and ABC's Tim Russert.
However, there were only eight or nine speakers that day, including Donald Sutherland, Mark Lane, Bella Abzug, and Ms. Fonda. And far from being a casual audience member, Mr. Kerry, an executive committee member, not Ms. Fonda, was the lead speaker.
Ms. Fonda had been funding VVAW events since before Mr. Kerry joined its executive committee. At Valley Forge, Ms. Fonda said: "...My Lai was not an isolated incident but rather a way of life for many of our military."
Their appearance together in that picture may be a lot of things, but it was not a coincidence.
Mr. Kerry has already confessed his complicity in killing civilians as "accidents of war." However, he has offered a classic Nuremberg defense that this was not only a commonplace occurrence throughout the Vietnam War, but he was carrying out a policy "with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."
His commander of naval operations in Vietnam, who specifically designed the mission that Mr. Kerry and the other Swiftboat commanders executed, Admiral Zumwalt, clearly disagreed. An examination of the truth behind this disagreement is not an attack on Mr. Kerry. It is a matter of vital historical interest.
SBD |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nutcase Seaman Recruit
Joined: 24 Jan 2005 Posts: 22 Location: TEXAS
|
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject: Yes W. Scott Thompson is intersting |
|
|
He wrote a "op ed" thing for the "Jarkata Times" back before the
election,,
He knew Kerry's first wife Julia well,, and he and the Zoomwalts ,
Kerrys went to the same " parties ect" and W. Scott Thompson in
that "op ed" said,,, Zoomwalt would not shake Kerry's hand.
Plus,, added something about a "Christmas gift" from Julia
"musical note pads of "Don Gevonia" the aria where the Don's
servent " sings of the Don's many conquest in Spain"
and adds,,,, Something who's meaning was not lost on me"""
W. Scott Thompson will not answer e's from us little people,,
but I think Kerry etal have him under "watch". As he knows much.
He seems to think that Kerry did Julia very bad, and that Kerry is not
close to a real gentleman.....
This is the "East Coast Elite" and they are about to turn on Kerry
as he is giving all of them a bad name.. soon he will not get any
invites as this new wife ,, has not enough "blue blood" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jalexson PO3
Joined: 11 May 2004 Posts: 272 Location: Hutchinson, Kansas
|
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 9:09 pm Post subject: Re: Yes W. Scott Thompson is intersting |
|
|
nutcase wrote: |
This is the "East Coast Elite" and they are about to turn on Kerry
as he is giving all of them a bad name.. soon he will not get any
invites as this new wife ,, has not enough "blue blood" |
We can only hope so. _________________ "That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoe making and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poor house."
-- Mark Twain |
|
Back to top |
|
|
shawa CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 2004
|
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Thompson article from Sept. 9, 2004
http://www.thejakartapost.com/yesterdaydetail.asp?fileid=20040909.E03
Quote: | Why my acquaintance John Kerry can lose
Opinion and Editorial - September 09, 2004
W. Scott Thompson, Gianyar, Bali
He's smart and good-looking. He's both a patrician, Jewish, and Irish, oxymoronic in American establishment circles. He's rich, my he is rich! -- if you include his wife's billion, they would be by ten times the richest presidential couple in American history.
He hasn't enunciated any particularly novel proposals in foreign policy -- certainly none affecting us in Asia -- but if only because he would sweep the White House clean of its scalawags, he would stop the rot. He may claim to have only trivial differences with Bush on Iraq; but everyone knows he is a multilateralist and would never have gone almost alone into the present war, as the neoconservatives surrounding Bush demanded. Economic policy would go back to fundamentals, and at the least, huge handouts to the rich would end.
Yet even with the polls showing a tight race, most pros, including those around Kerry, seem still to believe that Bush will win. There are at least four basic reasons among those commonly given, the last two having directly to do with Kerry himself.
The first is that Americans rally to a war president, and for better or worse we are at war. Sensible people believe that Osama bin Laden, no fool, on the sound Leninist precept "the worse the better", must surely prefer Bush and could hand him a second term with a large attack in October. Anyway, if Osama doesn't, the more paranoid are confident, Vice President Dick Cheney will arrange it for him.
The second argument is that Bush, with his pick-up truck and folksy tone, is more keyed to middle America, where the votes are. In the end, when people go into the counting house, as opposed to speaking to the pollsters, they vote their comfort level. Bush policies have deeply divided the country's elites, but the "great unwashed" in pivotal states no doubt in their hearts feel more at home with him.
The third factor is the sense of unease with Kerry himself. There are several dimensions to this. I have to confess that for a decade I knew him and his first wife fairly well, living in the same suburb of Boston, taking our children to the same schools.
Although no doubt I too shall vote for him, it will be with misgivings. Politicians are opportunistic by trade, but Kerry is that by temperament. Our Irish maids wouldn't work when he came to the house, for they felt he had pandered excessively to the black voters, who in their view had destroyed their communities. Admiral Zumwalt, then the chief of the American navy, while our guest refused even to shake hands with Kerry, later explaining that Kerry's behavior in Vietnam -- where Zumwalt at that time had been commander -- was so execrable. Everyone seems to have a complaint about Kerry's excess of opportunism.
There is the corollary issue of whether his wife is an asset or a debit to the campaign. At a Washington dinner party, a prominent Kerry supporter and friend commented that "that is the question that always arises in a couple where one is strong...and one is weak." Everyone at the table knew who the "weak" one was. Opportunistic...and weak. It doesn't play.
Finally, there remains the shadow of an "October surprise." Obviously the first republican salvo struck Kerry at his supposed strongest -- his fighting record. Whence the thinly veiled group formed to attack Kerry's Vietnam record ("Swift boat Veterans for truth") , which at the very least has prevented the Kerry campaign from surfing on his "take-charge" image -- and getting a free ride on his battle decorations. And I suspect that a second salvo is being thrust down into the guns.
In the 1980s, Julia, the first Mrs. Kerry, sent as a birthday present a stack of memo pads with my name and address. But in the background was musical notation. And in thoughtful recognition of my operatic interests, she had sent pads that had the splendid and amusing aria from Don Giovanni where the valet Leporello lists the don's conquests: 1003 in Spain, for example. A rather unsubtle message. In these days, there may be more tolerance for such behavior. But not in the Bible Belt. Brace yourself for innuendo backed with testimonials that John Kerry has been worse than just a bad boy while serving in high places. How Karl Rove and other Bush advisers plan to bring this off this remains to be seen. But no one in Washington will be surprised.
So John Kerry is riding as high as he is more out of disquiet with Bush than from any enthusiasm for him personally, or for his policies (or lack thereof). I recall running into Lt. Gov. Kerry in Washington, in the 1980s, when I was serving in a sub-cabinet position in the Reagan administration. We shook hands and then he said, warmly, "let's have lunch," gripping my shoulder, and while raking the room over my other shoulder for anyone more important. He had not looked me in the eye. If he becomes president, whom will he be looking over people's shoulders to find? That is the quandary most people find themselves in as they contemplate making him the most powerful man in the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. W. Scott Thompson, D. Phil. is Adjunct Professor of International Politics, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Medford, MA. The views expressed are personal. | [/quote] |
|
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
|