SwiftVets.com

[Anker-Klanker]

Kate, thank you for that 1996 quote from the Boston Globe:

[Wing Wiper]

[kate]

Anker-Klanker, the article that those quotes came from is saved. That and some others about skeery are in a thread in R&R Older Newspaper Articles

page 3 has articles related to Kerry's 1996 reelection campaign - Kerry's war record was an issue in that election
... see what was said then. Some insight into his (self-created) inner conflicts.

esp Oct 6, 22, 27
_________________
.
one of..... We The People

[Uisguex Jack]

I was having a nice Memorial day before reading this. This guy really is like ant's at a picnic.

[Navy wife]

I think you all will be interested in reading the post on the Democracy Project web site where Bruce Kessler brings to light Ms. Zernike's own words that contradict what she wrote about Cambodia. Check it out. http://www.democracy-project.com/

[mathman]

He's BAACK!!! ''

And I thought we had seen the last of him.
More lies. More distortions.
Photographs (of unknown provenance) showing events of dubious date, displayed to disprove challenges to his lies.
More obfuscation about Cambodia.
What is it with this guy?

Does he have the OJ disease? Has he talked himself into believing his own false story?

And he was chosen to run for President?

God help us all!

[Aristotle The Hun]

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2006/05/bring_it_on.html

[Aristotle The Hun]

Read it for yourself at the source

[mtboone]

"Oh, well - Zaladonis and Runyon emerged in April 2004 to defend Kerry's first Purple Heart, so I guess they remembered by then."

Zaladonis and Runyon are not the topic and should not be the topic. I feel angered that you are attacking them. They remember their time with Kerry and they just stated their statements. They have not attacked any of their Swift Mates to my knowledge and I will not allow anyone to speak unkindly towards them. They served and how they vote is their own decision, kerry and wade sanders is a different story, they attacked us personally and with threathen leagal action.

So please be careful how you talk about my Swift Mates.
_________________
Terry Boone PCF 90
Qui Nhon 68-69

[RiflemanDD730]

The controversy between William Schachte and two of John Kerry’s supporters (William Zaldonis and Patrick Runyon) concerning Kerry’s 1st Purple Heart may turn out to be very important to the SBVT. The issue is credibility.

Schachte claims to have been with Kerry during the incident. Zaldonis and Runyon say he was not there. Someone has the facts wrong, either intentionally or through faulty memory. If Zaldonis and Runyon are right the SBVT is likely to sustain a great loss of credibility.

If the SBVT loses credibility because of this side issue it will be very unfortunate because the 1st Purple Heart is one area where the facts strongly support the SBVT. In my FOIA request to the Naval Inspector General’s office for their documents concerning the 1st PH they confirmed that Kerry’s records did not contain the specific documents that normally authorize a PH. That is, his record did not contain a commanding officers request, an after action report, a casualty report or a witness report. The Naval IG reported that Kerry’s medals were properly awarded on the basis of the “presumption of regularity”, that is there was nothing in the record that indicated that he should not have received a medal and since he received it, it must be OK.

Again, someone has the facts wrong and if it’s Schachte it would be in the interest of the SBVT to find out and set the record straight so that the focus will remain on the real issues (hostile fire and gaming the system) rather than who was in the boat.

With regard to comments concerning Zaldonis and Runyon, whether they have attacked the SBVT in the past or not should have no bearing on questioning their veracity, likewise for Schachte. Facts are facts and if Zaldonis, Runyon or Schachte got them wrong then it’s too bad. Facts need to come out.

The SBVT may need to be very careful at this time. Kerry has initiated an attack on SBVT credibility and the MSM will probably support him. Getting it wrong on a side issue in the 1st PH incident instead of keeping focus on the documents could result in the SBVT being right but losing the PR battle.

[ncoic6]

Rifleman is 100% on target.

Both Schacte, on one hand, and Zaladonis & Runyon, on the other hand may honestly believe that their reminiscences are accurate. There is an incontrovertible clash in their stories and only one version can be correct (unless they are talking about two separate instances)

Whether Schacte was aboard or not is ultimately not dispositive as to whether the PH was justified - but will be treated as such by the MSM.

Given Kerry's penchant for overstatement, his ostensible repy to historian Brinkley on the circumstances surrounding PH No. 1 as a "half-assed action" suggests that there was less to this than met even Kerry's eye.

NCOIC6

[kate]

there is a recent (May) article & discussion, down the page a bit on this thread that may be of interest

Schachte ready to re-engage in Kerry Purple Heart dispute

[NortonPete]

I see everyones point but please reread the following.
Do not spend time questioning those who did their duty honorably

Here is a quote from Military Magazine http://www.milmag.com/
( Please subscribe )

Please read it and remember this SBVT strongest and everlasting TRUTH.

John O'Neill -- On the writing of "Unfit for Command"
Please reread this:

>The smallest reason it got written is the exaggeration of his service record. Candidly, when we sat and watched the exaggeration of a minor three-month record in Viet-Nam — the shortest to many of us — into some self-proclaimed war hero… it’s simply a fraud on the American people.

More significant to us though, than the exaggeration of his record, is his lies about our record.

We lost 55 people in Viet-Nam. We lost 58,000 among all of us. They were not the army of Genghis Khan, they were not war criminals, and John Kerry knew that about our unit even based on [his] short service.

The final and [main] reason we wrote this book is that we sincerely believe that this man would be a terrible Commander-in-Chief for our kids in a time of crisis for the United States; a time when we are fighting Islamic fascism — a shadowy, difficult foe — and we have kids in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The real reason we’re here is [that] so many of us had to ask ourselves “How could we ever talk to our kids, our grandkids, our nephews and nieces [if we] let this fellow be selected without at least letting the American people know the truth about it?”
>>>>>>continued...
His conduct in Viet-Nam, even for the short period he was there, was bizarre. He carried a camera everywhere. You all have seen the videotape where he marches around with the bandoleers and the gun and so on. It’s been shown 70-million-dollars worth. We didn’t have bandoleers, we didn’t march around with guns; we were on Swift Boats. It’s simply a fraud. The flight jacket with the patch and all the rest of it — we didn’t wear a flight jacket, the temperature was 95°. We never would have made it. I never saw a flight jacket in the area we were in.

His career was actually short and controversial. He arrived there and spent four months in Viet-Nam. He was the only one in the history of our unit in the Viet-Nam War to leave in less than the standard one-year, except for someone who was seriously wounded or killed. He did this by getting three very controversial Purple Hearts, invoking a rule, and heading for home at the end of three months of combat.

I won’t speak to the Purple Hearts individually because they are covered in the book and there is a limitation of time. Two of the three of them are clearly self-inflicted wounds. I don’t mean [that] he tried to wound himself; I mean [that] he wounded himself with grenades [which] he threw too close; there was no hostile fire. He then misreported those to the Navy and I believe that’s established by the documentation. For example, on the third occasion he admitted he wounded himself by throwing a grenade into some rice. Yet, [in] the official Navy Report from the Navy archives (which anybody can get), he reported to the United States Navy that it came from a water mine. It didn’t come from a water mine; it came from his own grenade.

----------------------------------------

Please reread this and refresh yourself with who you are dealing with.

[ncoic6]

NortonPete

Your sentiment is appreciated and most share the O'Neil summation as you have quoted it.

Yet, we are dealing with events from some time ago - for which a variety of memories, of varying acuity leave us with an incomplete picture. The documentary record is incomplete and remains to be supplemented.

We should ask for no less from our side than we expect from the other.

The issue has been heavily politicized, and the MSM has failed to give the subject a serious investigative treatment that it deserves.

If we take your initial words to heart - "do not spend time questioning those who did their duty honorably" - would that not also apply JFKerry and his crewmates?

If Kerry inflated his record, and gamed the system for an early out of VietNam, did he nonetheless serve honorably on a swift boat, brave hostile fire, earn the respect of his crewmates (save one)?

ncoic6

[LewWaters]

ncoic6 (and others), a good read concerning this has been written by Thomas Lipscomb and can be found and read at RealClearPolitics.

The Truth, John Kerry, and The New York Times

Excellent read!