SwiftVets.com

[Sgt-Keeper]

Excellent Post.
Due to the SBVs, I have been able to convince two die hard Kerry supporters that the evidence points to a person of at least questionable character & now they will not vote for him. These are life long Dems. too.
Major, find someone to talk to. My demons from 1965-66 were finally excised after more than 35 years, 3 marriages..... Wish I would have done it sooner. But, better late than never. My kids don't know what I went through, but I put it all down in a file on the computer. It took 6 months, but my wife finally read all of it. We don't talk about it, but she knows. And that alone helped.
The talking heads were discussing the SWVs again this morning on talk radio in Chicago. Some good, some bad. Either way, all I could think about was Kirk Douglas in "Spartacus" when the Romans came to the prison to execute him. They called out, "who is Spartacus?", and person after person answered, "I am Spartacus". So when the media disrespects the efforts of the SBVs, insinuating that they are not telling the truth or are shills for Bush, I will say, "not true! I am a SWV too. I had boots in-country". Thanks SBVs.
_________________
Fix the problem, not the blame.
USMC E5 Nam vet 65-66

[Reg]

Grant, as impressive as your post is it would be alot more effective if you included the source for each assertion. Direct quotes from primary sources would also be very useful.

Also you don't include eye witnesses that say there was fire during that engagement. It reads like the prosecutors brief... which is fine as long as that goes... but it leaves you open to attack.

Suggestion: Include sources and evidence that contradicts your thesis. Show why the contra evidence is wrong. It will add to your credibility.

[JROTC]

Major, I concur with others above and can only add - words are not enough - thank you for your Service.

I've copied one of your "Facts" that common sense cannot refute. This last Sunday, Mr. Odell hinted - stated - it on Fox, but it was a point that was totally blown over, or swept under.

To think that four PCF's - three of them working to rescue one's crew members and ship - with at least 24 sailors (4 X 6) for over an hour and NO ONE WAS SHOT!!!

25.) The "Battle Damage" report of March 13, 1969 does not reflect any bullet damage to any of the 5 Swift boats. The lack of any bullet holes in any of the five Swift boats following the incident presents reliable forensic evidence that there was no enemy weapons fire. Also, none of the personnel involved in the incident received any bullet wounds during the incident. In a waterway less than 75 yards wide, if the enemy on both sides of the river were in covered positions with clear fields of fire, the enemy could not possibly miss hitting the 50 foot long aluminum boats. Rassmann and many others would be dead considering the length of time the boats were present supporting Swift boat PCF-3.

P.S. Please consider adding that "Tour of Duty" tells of Mr. Kerry stating that "all five PCF's left" Thank you again!

[Jack Mclaughlin]

Grant, your account of the March 13th 1969 incident is so comprehensive I often refer back to it. It is too bad it will never make it to MSM newspapers or magazines. In your account you did not mention the post incident search on the two river banks for enemy activity or failure to locate recent empty shell casings. Can you shed some light on this? This discussion was renewed on another thread after Robert Lambert`s recent statement.

[MJB]

Bump, Grant! I also would like to see this sourced and "stickied". Incredibly useful - thanks for your hard work on this.

MJB