 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
fb274
Ensign
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 53
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:17 am Post subject: Jim Russell Letter inre "Rassman" - 13 Mar 69 |
 |
|
Just found "letter to Editor" authored by a Jim Russell in which he makes reference to the fact that he was on the "excursion" March 13, 1969 where Kerry was cited for valor. I don't know if this article has been reference previously on this site or not.
http://www.telluridegateway.com/articles/2004/08/20/news/opinion/opinion01.txt
Please move posting wherever applicable.
Thank you.
fb274
Note: Link repaired and topic edited |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, this has been cited as a source, before:
| Quote: | A veteran for truth
Dear Editor,
This letter is in response to the new attacks on John Kerry's war record by a group calling itself the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth." As for most veterans of any war and as people who know me will testify, it is not easy for me to talk about my experiences in Vietnam. However, because of these new ads and, I understand, a new book recently published by an old Charles Colson "Enemies List" hit man, I feel compelled to speak out. Unfortunately, the veterans featured in these attacks are being used by extreme right wing Bush supporters to spread their lies and malign John Kerry.
I feel that most of these veterans who are joining this attack are against Kerry for what he did after he was home from the war than for what he did in the war. If they are against him for his stance against the Vietnam War, that certainly is their right, but to spread lies and malicious innuendos about his time on the rivers of Vietnam is not morally right and does a disservice not only to Kerry, but to all those who served and were wounded or died in that war. The people who are using these veterans for their own means obviously do not care about that. They did the same thing to Senator John McCain and Congressman Max Cleland in 2000 with no remorse or care for the consequences.
To me what is worse is that by their silence, the current administration has not, with any real meaning, disavowed itself or distanced itself in anyway from any of these scurrilous attacks, past or present. I feel that this truly shows the Bush administration for what they really are and ultimately, who is truly responsible for these attacks.
Since I happened to be along on one of the "excursions" where the boats that we were on were attacked and after which Lt. Kerry was cited for valor, I thought it appropriate to give my recollection of that event. This happened on March 13, 1969. I was assigned as Psychological Operation Officer for the Swift Boat group out of An Thoi, Vietnam, from January 1969 to October 1969. As such, I was on No. 43 boat, skippered by Don Droz who was later that year killed by enemy fire. We were second in line while exiting the river and going through the opening in a fish trap when a mine blew up under the No. 3 boat directly in front of us and we started taking small arms fire from the beach. Almost immediately, another mine went off somewhere behind us. All boats, except the one hit, immediately wheeled toward the beach that most of the fire came from (a tactic devised by Lt. Kerry, I later learned) and commenced showering the beaches with so much lead, that it could probably be now mined there. The noise was of course, deafening.
Three things that are forever pictured in my mind since that day over 30 years ago are: (1) The No. 3, 50-foot long, Swift boat getting huge, huge air; John Kerry thought it was about two feet. (He was farther away from it than I). I think it was at least four feet and probably closer to six feet; (2) All the boats turning left and letting loose at the same time like a deadly, choreographed dance and; (3) A few minutes later, John Kerry bending over his boat picking up one of the rangers that we were ferrying from out of the water. All the time we were taking small arms fire from the beach; although because of our fusillade into the jungle, I don't think it was very accurate, thank God. Anyone who doesn't think that we were being fired upon must have been on a different river.
The picture I have in my mind of Kerry bending over from his boat picking some hapless guy out of the river while all hell was breaking loose around us, is a picture based on fact and it cannot be disputed or changed. It's a piece of history drawn in my mind that cannot be redrawn. Sorry, "Swift Boats Veterans for the Truth"- that is the truth.
To say that John Kerry or any of us were on that river to intentionally collect Purple Hearts really does every soldier and sailor, past and present, a disservice. We were going up those rivers (with an ongoing casualty rate of 86 percent at the time) on the orders of the same people who approved of Kerry's medals and who are now joining in the attacks against Kerry. Unbelievable.
I would hope that the American public sees these evil extreme right wing attacks for what they really are and also pray that the veterans being used by these unpatriotic right wing extremist political operatives will divorce themselves immediately from them and speak to the real issues as to why they oppose John Kerry. I just don't understand how anyone can align themselves with those who intentionally and gleefully painted a decorated triple amputee (Max Cleland) from Vietnam as unpatriotic. I think that this is the most disastrous, un-American thing that can be done to our servicemen and women, especially now with another unending war going on. Your ends cannot possibly justify these means. Come on!
Jim Russell
Vietnam veteran,
USN (1966-71) |
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Um... If I remember correctly, I think we pretty soundly smothered that poor little paper with factual rebuttal. LOL!
It doesn't appear that any of the rebuttals were printed, just with a casual glance.
But, come on.... Telluride? I'd expect the Berkeley Freep to post a rebuttal before I'd expect anything anti-Kerry to be printed in Telluride, no matter how truthful! 
I think I'd fall outta my chair!
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm confoosed...this "letter to the editor" is dated today  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cipher
Vice Admiral
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 902
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
You ARE confused!
That letter was printed 20 Aug 04.
And thoroughly fisked to death and beyond. It's bogus.
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
air_vet
PO2
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Posts: 374
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Me#1You#10 wrote: | | I'm confoosed...this "letter to the editor" is dated today |
Actually, if you look at the TOP of the web page you will see "2004/8/20 - tha's the ACTUAL date of the letter.
The 25 Sept thing is just today's date (the date that active page was generated). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh dear, an Emily Litella moment  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 1451
Location: Queen Creek, Arizona
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:55 am Post subject: Re: Jim Russell Op-ed inre "Rassman" - 13 Mar 69 |
|
|
| fb274 wrote: | Just found "letter to Editor" authored by a Jim Russell in which he makes reference to the fact that he was on the "excursion" March 13, 1969 where Kerry was cited for valor. I don't know if this article has been reference previously on this site or not.
|
thanks for the read.... I hadn't seen this article before.... what a piece of work ! such original phrasing he uses...... 
that day must have been 'seared, seared' into his memory !
_________________
Stevie
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage
morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should
be arrested, exiled or hanged. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Some more examples of Kerry's support in Telluride:
SEARCH RESULTS
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lance_Flatchew
Ensign
Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 53
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 12:36 pm Post subject: Some clues to his motivation |
|
|
http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2004/08/the_new_jim_rus.html
Some clues to his motivation can be found in his railing:
"...the veterans featured in these attacks are being used by extreme right wing Bush supporters to spread their lies and malign John Kerry."
"...They did the same thing to Senator John McCain and Congressman Max Cleland in 2000 with no remorse or care for the consequences."
John McCain was unfairly targeted phone dialing operation that was not approved by the campaign. It ceased as soon as the campaign found out about it.
I live in Atlanta, Max was victim of his own liberal voting record. He was voting right down the Tom Dashcle line. Of course when you attack a liberal on his liberal voting record against home land security for instance, you are attacking their patriotism.
Max you lost because you were a "liberal". And how can you support Kerry, you lost three limbs and never got a purple heart because your wounds were not recieved in combat. Kerry got at least two that were for band aid treated injuries that were not received in combat.
Hey, Kerry give Max one of your extra purple heart why don't you. I don't know how you can even look him in the eye.
The bottom line is, this guy is a "liberal" using his Kerry "butt kissing" recall to insure himself a invitation to Kerry's Inauguration A-list parties and possibly a job in the administration.
| Quote: | Sunday, August 22, 2004
The new Jim Russell version of the Bay Hap River action, the Rassmann rescue, and Kerry's Bronze Star
Stop the presses! I actually agree for once with Josh Marshall!
Dr. Marshall's Talking Points Memo today links a letter to the editor in the Telluride Daily Planet (I didn't make that up; who knew all these years that Superman's "Metropolis" was actually in Colorado?) from a Mr. Jim Russell, who says he was a first-person witness to the Bay Hap River action that resulted in Sen. Kerry's Bronze Star. Of this, Dr. Marshall writes,
Now, the demand for folks who were on that piece of water that day must be pretty intense at the moment. And it would seem odd that anyone at this point has yet to be contacted and chatted up by the press.
I have no way of knowing whether this guy was where he says he was on that day. And it could be a hoax. But I did call the editor of the paper, Suzanne Cheavens. She says she knows the guy (small town, I guess), knows he's a Vietnam vet, and vouched for his credibility.
Some reporter should see if they can track this down and confirm or dispute that he was there on the day in question.
I agree.
On to the substance of what Mr. Russell wrote:
This happened on March 13, 1969. I was assigned as Psychological Operation Officer for the Swift Boat group out of An Thoi, Vietnam, from January 1969 to October 1969. As such, I was on No. 43 boat, skippered by Don Droz who was later that year killed by enemy fire. We were second in line while exiting the river and going through the opening in a fish trap when a mine blew up under the No. 3 boat directly in front of us and we started taking small arms fire from the beach. Almost immediately, another mine went off somewhere behind us. All boats, except the one hit, immediately wheeled toward the beach that most of the fire came from (a tactic devised by Lt. Kerry, I later learned) and commenced showering the beaches with so much lead, that it could probably be now mined there. The noise was of course, deafening.
Three things that are forever pictured in my mind since that day over 30 years ago are: (1) The No. 3, 50-foot long, Swift boat getting huge, huge air; John Kerry thought it was about two feet. (He was farther away from it than I). I think it was at least four feet and probably closer to six feet; (2) All the boats turning left and letting loose at the same time like a deadly, choreographed dance and; (3) A few minutes later, John Kerry bending over his boat picking up one of the rangers that we were ferrying from out of the water. All the time we were taking small arms fire from the beach; although because of our fusillade into the jungle, I don't think it was very accurate, thank God. Anyone who doesn't think that we were being fired upon must have been on a different river.
Let's assume at least for the moment that Mr. Russell was indeed on Lt. Droz' PCF 43. Kerry's defenders will doubtless want to highlight Mr. Russell's statement that "we started taking small arms fire from the beach" immediately after the mine explosion.
But other parts of Mr. Russell's version immediately strike me as rather odd:
As far as I know, no other eyewitness has claimed that after the first mine exploded under PCF 3, "[a]lmost immediately, another mine went off somewhere behind us." (Emphasis added.) Kerry and his partisans have at various times claimed that there was another explosion near PCF 94, Kerry's boat — perhaps another mine or, per Sandusky's latest guess, a rocket, that may or may not have been responsible for Rassmann going overboard — but after that boat had sped off some considerable distance ahead (downriver, to the southeast), not behind.
Mr. Russell describes Sen. Kerry as rescuing a "ranger"; Mr. Rassmann was not a ranger as I understand it, but rather Special Forces (Green Beret).
Mr. Russell says that "[a]ll boats, except the one hit, immediately wheeled toward the beach that most of the fire came from ... and commenced showering the beaches." He repeats this, asserting that "forever pictured in my mind" (presumably not, however, "seared — seared") since that day has been the image of "[a]ll the boats turning left and letting loose at the same time like a deadly, choreographed dance." But everyone else, including Sen. Kerry and his crew, seems to agree that Sen. Kerry's boat left the immediate area for at least some period immediately after the mine blast under PCF 3, while the remaining three boats laid down suppressive fire. And how could Mr. Russell have missed this? PCF 43 was right behind Kerry's PCF 94, according to other accounts.
Mr. Russell describes as another memory that the boats "wheeled toward the beach." I'm left wondering whether he read, and perhaps read too much into, Mr. Rood's account of the Silver Star ambushes, and been influenced by that. No other witness, as far as I can recall, has claimed that during the Bay Hap River action, any boats turned toward either shore; and based on my admittedly limited understanding of their configurations, that actually would have reduced, rather than increased, the amount of firepower any of them could have brought to bear on shorebound attackers.
Mr. Russell twice refers to "small arms fire from the beach" — not both shores, as various Kerry supporters have claimed at various times. He's specific — it was the "left" shore.
Although he describes PCF 94's and Kerry's rescue of Rassmann as "a few minutes later," he insists that "all that time" they were taking small arms fire. He presumably explains the absense of wounded Americans or bullet holes in their boats with the assertion that "because of our fusillade into the jungle, I don't think it was very accurate, thank God." So if Mr. Russell's recollection is accurate, one or more VC from one beach fired small arms more or less continuously for several minutes at the three swift boats that were stationary around the stricken PCF 3 — inaccurately, and notwithstanding suppressive fire from twin .50-caliber machine guns and other formidable weapons aboard each of at least three swift boats. If so, these were indeed persistent, brave, and very, very lucky VC sniper(s), albeit very inaccurate ones, to keep firing wildly (and thereby drawing countering suppressive fire), yet to no good effect, in the face of that kind of return fire.
Mr. Russell says nothing about the rescue efforts for PCF 3 and its injured crewmen, although presumably he would have been in the middle of that during the hour and a half it took to secure the wounded and overboard sailors and rig PCF 3 for towing back to base. Although his account is silent on the subject, it seems fair to presume that at some point, the shooting must have died down.
I confess I don't quite know what to make of this. For Lt. Kerry's rescue of Rassmann to be deemed significantly more valorous than Sen. Kerry's rescue of Licorice the Unlucky Hamster some years later, the key question is whether he braved enemy fire to do so. Mr. Russell can be added to the list of eyewitnesses who claim that he did, I suppose, assuming his bona fides check out.
The balance of Mr. Russell's letter to the editor is an impassioned plea to the SwiftVets to stop questioning Sen. Kerry's combat record, which he characterizes as " evil extreme right wing attacks." He believes that the SwiftVets "are being used by these unpatriotic right wing extremist political operatives," and that since the Bush administration hasn't "disavowed itself or distanced itself in anyway from any of these scurrilous attacks, past or present," therefore the Bush administration is "truly responsible for these attacks." Okay, that's fine; like anyone else, Mr. Russell's entitled to have his own politics and perhaps it's to his credit that he makes no effort to conceal them. I'm unpersuaded, but then I have obviously different political views; and I no more dismiss out of hand Mr. Russell's factual recollections because of his obviously pro-Kerry politics than I'd dismiss any of the SwiftVets' recollections simply because in their personal politics they may support Dubya.
Rather, it's the internal inconsistencies in Mr. Russell's own story, and the inconsistencies between it and other pro-Kerry witnesses, that I'd suggest are far more relevant to the question of his, and their, credibility. So far, Mr. Russell's seems to be yet another mutually inconsistent accounting for events, even among the Kerry supporters — which frankly detracts somewhat from the credibility of all of them.
Update: A reader points out that both Mr. Rood's and Mr. Russell's accounts are in the Sunday versions of their respective newspapers' online editions. I don't know whether Mr. Rood's version, which was available over the internet by at least mid-day yesterday (Saturday), had appeared before Mr. Russell's letter to the editor was submitted or went to press. My speculation that one influenced the other was based on Mr. Russell's "I later learned" parenthetical, and may be entirely off-base. (I've also made a slight edit to my description of the weaponry aboard the swift boats which I think makes it more accurate.) |
_________________
http://www.tangate.com
Yes, you can lie about your war record. You can lie about spending Christmas in Cambodia. You can lie about ... atrocities of your fellow soldiers. But we are going to nail you on tangate 04. |
|
| 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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
