SwiftVets.com

[ASPB]

Thurlow signs 180! Come on John!


By David Freddoso



Posted August 19, 2004

Former Vietnam Swift boat commander Larry Thurlow is rebutting a story on the front-page of this morning’s Washington Post while adamantly reiterating his charge that John Kerry did not come under hostile fire during a March 13, 1969 incident for which Kerry was awarded a Bronze Star and his third Purple Heart.

"Nobody received even a fragment of bullets going through the metal" of the five Swift Boats present for the incident, Thurlow told Human Events today. "Nobody was even ducking for cover."

In a piece headlined, "Records Counter a Critic of Kerry—Fellow Skipper's Citation Refers to Enemy Fire," the Post reported that the citation for the Bronze Star that Thurlow himself received for the 1969 incident contradicts Thurlow's charge that Kerry falsely claimed he came under enemy fire during that incident. The citation, the Post says, praises Thurlow "for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat 'despite enemy bullets flying about him.'"

Thurlow, however, says his own Bronze Star citation is wrong about "enemy bullets flying," although he did indeed board and prevent from sinking a Swift boat that had been damaged by a mine explosion and whose captain had suffered a concussion. Thurlow stands by an affidavit he signed on July 22, 2004 in which he says of the 1969 incident, "I never heard a shot."

Thurlow told the Post that if coming under enemy fire--rather than rescuing the damaged Swift boat--was the basis for his own Bronze Star award than the award was "fraudulent."

"In terms of receiving hostile fire, it's false," Thurlow told Human Events of his Bronze Star citation.

Why would Thurlow's Bronze Star citation be wrong about "enemy bullets flying"? Former Navy Commander George Elliott, who signed Thurlow's citation, told Human Events he based the claim that there was enemy fire that day on an after-action report that Thurlow and two other officers on the scene believe was written by Kerry. I got the information from the after-action report," said Elliott.

Thurlow and his colleagues have good reason to believe Kerry authored this report because, other than Thurlow, there were only four Swift boat commanders on the scene that day in 1969. One was Kerry. One was Donald Droz, who is now deceased. And the two others were Richard Pees and Jack Chenoweth, who back Thurlow's claim that there was no hostile fire that day.

Thurlow, Chenoweth and Pees all say they did not write the after-action report that said there was hostile fire. All say they believe Kerry wrote it. "Kerry campaign researchers dispute that assertion,” the Post reported this morning, "and there is no convincing documentary evidence to settle the claim."

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth—a group claiming that Kerry has been untruthful about his swift boat service, and to which Pees, Chenoweth and Thurlow belong—called again on Kerry to allow the Navy to independently release all of his military records by signing Standard Form 180, which he has thus far refused to do. A complete examination of his records, they said, could prove who wrote the report on which this commendation was based. It could also verify or falsify some of the Swift Boat Veterans' other claims that Kerry has been dishonest about his service.

Thurlow told Human Events that he will sign a Standard Form 180, allowing his own records to be publicly released.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[Marquis]

This is great! The SBVT might consider throwing a Form 180 PARTY! Everyone can sign one of the damn things, and then offer Kerry a nice fresh copy of his ouw to sign!

[Pete]

This has caught my interest, but I'm still trying to decide credibility.

I've read Commander Thurlow's citation on the net. I've also read Mr. Thurlow's response statement on this site.

Mr. Thurlow should directly reconcile the the citation and his acceptance of his bronze star at the time the events occurred vs. his recollections today. This is the critical credibility issue and his response does not squarely address it.

I don't know how the military works -- did he never see the citation? Was there no way to correct the record/reject the medal at the time?

I'm also disturbed by the implied challenge to the honor of Mr. Rassman. I'm inclined to believe that a special forces guy knows when he is being shot at. I've seen nothing indicating Mr. Rassman is a fraud.

Persuadable, but need more.

[cipher]

[jataylor11]

Okay Pete --- you don't know how the military works --- so open your mind and try to learn something by reading and asking to be educated --- not asking slanted questions

A substantial number of the people on this forum are military and you should ask them to explain how the military works ---

Also Rassmum may have been special forces --- but as I understand it he had the equivalent of a desk jockey job ---

The military has a way of weeding out the "weak sisters" --- even if it is letting them take their fraudulent PHs and go home after 4 months

[ASPB]

The Bronze Star debate has come down to "who wrote the After Action Report"

Let me add a little circumstantial evidence to the Bronze Star case. The Spot report for 13 Mar 69 uses the phrase "5000 metres". Agreed?

1. American educated naval officers don't use the term metre, especially with a French spelling.

2. The Navy uses the term yard (3 feet). There are 2000 yards (approx) in a nautical mile which is actually 6086 feet. So an American educated naval officer would have written 5000 yards. (2.5 nautical miles)

3. As Kerry was educated in French and Swiss schools in his formative years, who would you conclude wrote the Spot Report resulting in the awards and citations?

4. All 3 other OinC's still living say Kerry wrote the Spot Report. Hmmmm?

Think about it.....What are you going to believe? The Spot report or the 3 surviving officers on scene?

Tom the RiverRat.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[baldeagl]

Pete, I've done a great deal of research on these issues because, like you, I was skeptical at first. I am not now. You can view all of my research at my blog. I highly recommend that you start with the oldest posts first, because you will clearly see that I initially called the Swiftvets' claims "creepy", but I was convinced by the evidence.

To address your specific question about Rassmann, the facts as we know them are:

1) A mine went off under PCF-3
2) Three of the boats immediately opened fire to suppress any potential enemy fire
3) Rassmann fell off of PCF-94 (Kerry's boat)
4) By his own account, he stayed under water to avoid being hit by "enemy" fire
5) Rassmann "came up for air" at least five times before he was "rescued"

Those are the facts that are verifiable at this point. The rest is he said/she said - but I now trust and believe the Swiftvets' version.

If Rassmann fell off the boat just as the others opened fire, and came up for air while the boats were still firing and then immediately went back under water (which he himself has stated he did) then how could he possibly know where the fire was coming from?

I think Rassmann is confused and misremembering and, because he trusts Kerry, he's acceptiing Kerry's version of events. One of my blog posts lists every known account that Rassmann have given to the press. If you read all of them, I mean really read them, you will see that Rassmann can't even remember which boat he was on.

Be skeptical, but do the research. You will discover that the Swiftvets are telling the truth.
_________________
antimedia
USN OST-6 68-74
http://antimedia.blogspot.com/

[dcrhere]

[Pete]

Thanks. A lot to sift through and I will continue to see what shakes out.

Replying to the prior post, I don't believe I have a slant, but also don't think either Kerry or SBVT should get a free pass. I'm asking questions because I do have an open mind.

My struggle is reconciling the record made when memories were fresh with 30-year aged memory.

If the citation language was unknown to Mr. Thurlow, he becomes a much more credible witness to me than if he knew of it and let the record stand 30 years ago.

It sounds like some soldiers never even see their citations; it would be helpful to know if this is true in Mr. Thurlow's case.

[manofaiki]

Thurlow mentioned on one of the shows he was on by phone last night - he was on two that I saw, Joe Scarborourgh and I believe Hannity and Colmes or Bill O'Reilly - that the other 3 boats spent an hour and a half securing PCF 3, keeping it from sinking.

If enemy fire was coming at these guys from the banks, all these boats should be riddled with holes. At least one of the more than 21 men on the scene should have suffered a obvious gunshot wound.

All these stationary boats sitting there for an hour and a half would have been an easy target for enemy shooting under cover from both sides of the river, which is what Kerry is claiming happened.

Rassman is confused because at the time the mine went off and blew PCF 3 out of the water and threw some of it's crew into the river, the three boats that stayed IMMEDIATELY laid down suppressive fire at the banks in case there were any enemy there about to open up.

Of all the men on the scene, over 14 say there was never any return fire from the banks. When they got no fire back, the three boats stopped firing long before Kerry managed to turn his boat around and come back.

Kerry has changed his story several times over the past few days. The Switfvets haven't changed one damn thing.

What does that tell you?

manofaiki
_________________
"If any man has not the stomach for this fight, let him depart from us.! We would not die in that man's company!"

You bugged out in Vietnam - so we don't need you commanding us in the War on Terror!

So get lost, John Kerry!!!!!

[Jack Lewis]

Thurlow needs to be prepared for the Liberal double standard. While Liberals scream that Kerry's war service should not be questioned because he's a vet -- the war service of every single SwiftVet is scrutinized with dripping latex gloves. Thurlow's 180 form will allow Kerry's people to twist any and everything into claims against him -- ignoring their precious rule about criticizing a vet, and ignoring Kerry's cowardice is keeping his own records sealed.
_________________
Truth, sir, is a cow which will yield such people no more milk; and so they are gone to milk the bull.
--David Hume

[HardCorps]

Hey Pete your question is perfectly logical and I wish more people were open minded like yourself. Manofailki is totally correct in his post. The most air tight fact of every claim is the "physical evidence" Kerry claims 3.2 miles of intense gunfire and rockets on a canal that is 75 yards wide. All 5 boats were there for over an hour and there are no bullet holes or wounded other than from the mine. I have read Kerry's After action on that day and there is no mention of bullet holes in the maintenance report. In the other claims look at the physical evidence or lack there of first and then the circumstances described by Kerry.

Also Rassman is UNIJURED in the water for about 5 minutes with 3 other men and this Green Beret can't climb a 6 ft cargo net to save his life?. He would not even graduate from Marine Boot Camp (seriously). More important is his interview film for the DNC- what does he do when he gets back aboard? Nothing for the next hour - Doesn’t grab his weapon and shoot back, call for air or arty. What he does do is write an officer of the same rank a Silver Star which combined with the phony After Action + Kerry’s self inflicted wound from earlier that day = Bronze Star and trip home. I want to know what Rassman's awards are and who wrote them.

As far as Thurlow, what happened to his Bronze star citation is common upon a transfer, I'm still waiting on a citation certificate from last March, yet the award is in my records already. Be advised however The enemy fire is not central to Thurlow's award as what he did by jumping on an out of control boat, full of fuel and ammo with a gapping hole caused by the enemy is for real. The enemy fire however is vital for Kerry's Award. The after action for the incident strangely focuses on PCF-94 Kerry’s boat and this is where the non-existent intense enemy fire comes from.
_________________
__________________________
-USMC - Always Faithful
-Platoon Cmdr - Somalia
-ANGLICO FAC - Iraqi Freedom

[Scott]

[producehawk]

tells me he's a liar or as orielly would say "an embellisher"

[Gozer]

Hear hear.

As Rush said, "It's just like a little kid." A lying child will change his story eight times before finally telling the truth. I think it'll take quite a few more tellings before Kerry comes clean. (If at all.)
_________________
--------
Give em hell Swifties!

Four more in '04!