SwiftVets.com

[SangRun Hunter]

My quick e-mail.

You should at least hold off on John Kerry's service accounts until he is willing to sign the 180 form releasing his real records.

And No, He has not released all of his records. The Department of the Navy stated that in August.

The Swifvets have yet to be officially challenged by Kerry of their book or claims which should tell someone they are telling the truth.
_________________
Mad as Hell!

[katagious]

I've spent a lot of time looking through the site here and it's still very confusing to me, I'm sure it's even more so to others who've spent less time. Most people just don't have time to sieve through the forum and the multitude of pages here. The FAQ is good but it doesn't neccesarily address things like "snopes" in a manner that will stop the damage it does and I don't think you should under estimate snopes impact. It's the #1 reference I get when I attempt to stick up for what others keep calling "the swift boat liars". I really think it needs to be addressed line by line. I'd love to do it myself but, when I try it just seems very difficult to do the way that she has laid everything out. (I'm willing to try, I'm just not sure of the correct response)

The 1st thing I wondered is where the email came from and who is the "retired admiral" It's seems almost too easy for someone to associate the "Admiral" mentioned in this "email" with the Rear Admiral Hoffman.

Anyone have a clue as to where the email originated?

2nd- Is everything in the email correct in regards to what the SBVT's are stating?

If not, can we put a correction here for the email portion? If yes, then can we go onto line by line response to her debunking?

Please?


*edit to add- I think also that emails and letter will get a better response if it's been debunked line by line particularly if she feels that it's been laid to rest. (So to speak)

[Me#1You#10]

Given that article, Snopes is relegated to the same propagandist category as factcheck.org....and this topic is locked.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

First of all, the email here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp was posted by an anonymous former Rear Admiral prior to Feb 2004.

The email was not written by any of the Swifts - it clearly states that the author is a former PBR officer.

Swifts didn't put the letter out (and to my unpracticed eye, it contains a couple of claims that are exactly contradictory to Swifts' allegations and intents) and we shouldn't treat it as if they did.

The sources snopes used to "debunk" this letter are dubious at best and demonstrate the partisan intent of the article.

That particular page was last updated in February - obviously before Swifts was even formed as an organization.

My instinct? Let that one stand, even though the conclusion "False," is mistaken.

It wasn't long after I joined this board that I attempted to go through her debunking of the letter line by line, going beyond that email - even including documentation and many outside sources and never heard a word back from her.

She attempts a half-azzed debunking of SBVFT here:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp and the partisanship is again, loud and clear.

She is clearly more interested in promoting her politics than the truth.

If she chooses to sell her integrity for politics, that's her choice - my attitude is that we can't win them all.

We give it our best shot and then we let it go and move on to potentially more fruitful grounds.

JM2¢, as usual.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother