SwiftVets.com

[efuseakay]

Well, apparently he has spoken out after all... now the only question is, how bad did the media twist his words?

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040826/ap_on_el_pr/swiftboat_witness_2

Quote:

Thurlow, who has been prominent among a group of veterans challenging the Democratic presidential candidate's record, has said there was no enemy fire during the incident. Lambert, however, supports the Navy account that says all five swiftboats in the task force "came under small arms and automatic weapon fire from the river banks" when the mine detonated.

"I thought we were under fire, I believed we were under fire," Lambert said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

"Thurlow was far too distracted with rescue efforts to even realize he was under fire. He was concentrating on trying to save lives.

Now, someone tell me what the heck is wrong with that statement vs. the title of the article...

"I thought we were... I believed we were..."

vs.

Swiftboat Crewman: Kerry Boat Under Fire

Ugh...

[Twidget]

I think he's probably right. Here's my thoughts on what may have happened:

- Mine is detonated under the #3 boat, sending people flying and damaging the boat

- Gunners open fire on both banks instinctively

- Hostile fire comes from one bank (two would be stupid, they'd hit each other)

- Kerry takes off, and Rassman falls off (possibly after the boat hits an obstruction)

- Only people watching that one bank see any fire; the fire is inaccurate and quickly stops

- Outgoing fire lasts for between 40 and 120 seconds

- Thurlow races to the rescue of #3

- After outgoing fire ceases, boats start picking up survivors

- Kerry returns after a few moments, with no gunfire at this point, and pulls Rassman out of the water

[Polaris]

Twidget,

Yep, that's the model/hypothesis I came up with in another thread. Point is, though that by the time Kerry came back to rescue Rasmann he was not under hostile fire...and thus did not deserve a medal (or a purple heart for that matter).
_________________
-Polaris

Truth is Beauty

[EODARMY]

BOY, THAT REALLY HELPED. NOTHING HERE BUT IT IT COULD JUST AS EASILY SUPPORT THE sbvft. HELL YES THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE UNDER FIRE WHICH IS WHY THEY CUT LOOSE. I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYONE SAY THAT ONCE THE SWIFTEES STOPPED FIRING THEY WERE STILL RECEIVING INCOMING!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND WHY WOULD ONE EVEN BEGIN RESCUE OPS IF ONE REALLY THOUGHT THEY WERE IN A KILL ZONE. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN AS THEY SAID "THE MAD MINUTE" AND TO HELL WITH RESURE OPS. GOT TO TAKE CARE OF THE LIVING FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

[openfish24]

A total of three (THREE) bullet holes in five boats that stayed in the same area for one hour and a half. It is not possible. That is of course assuming those three holes were not from the previous days action.


Pete Bartow
USMC 75-80

[baldeagl]

Whether or not the boats were under fire or not isn't even relevant. That's nothing but a MSM/Democrat smokescreen to distract you from the real issue.

What is relevant is that Kerry lied about the incident. First of all, Kerry claims several mines when everyone else except Rassmann and the "band of brothers" says there was one. And even the "band of brothers" isn't sure about that. Some now say it may have been a rocket.

Secondly, Kerry fled the scene, which he has now admitted, and left the three remaining boats to save the crew of the 3 boat and salvage the boat.

Now look at what Lambert says:

1) I thought we were under fire, I believed we were under fire," - this is not the same as a definitive "we were under fire". So Lambert's recollection doesn't refute Thurlow's or O'Dell's, who was in a much better position to see than Lambert. Remember, O'Dell was in the tub, 14 ft above the deck. Lambart was the radarman, and was on the deck, probably near the bow.

2) Lambert didn't see that rescue because Kerry was farther down the river and "I was busy pulling my own boat officer (Thurlow) out of the water." Here Lambert confirms the Swiftvets' account. Kerry was so far downstream that Lambert couldn't even see Kerry or Rassmann.

Now think about this for a minute. If neither Kerry nor Rassmann were visible to the other boats, then how in the hell could they have been under fire, even if the other boats were? There's only one way. There had to be "5000 metres" of enemy fire, as Kerry claims. That's the only way that Kerry can have Rassmann under fire at the same time that the others are under fire.

3) Lambert retired in 1978 as a chief petty officer with 22 years of service and three tours in Vietnam. He does not remember ever meeting Kerry.

Get it? Lambert remembers nothing about Kerry. Why is this? Because Kerry wasn't memorable that day. That's a far cry from a Bronze Star hero. Lambert remembers Thurlow trying to save the 3 boat. He remembers him having to fish Thurlow out of the water. All these things confirm the Swiftvets' story.

You can bet I'll be blogging this tonight. It's just more evidence that the Swiftvets are telling the truth.
_________________
antimedia
USN OST-6 68-74
http://antimedia.blogspot.com/

[EODARMY]

He can't even remember Kerry? Doesn't say much for Kerry or his heroric actions.

[Polaris]

Everyone,

Lambert's new testimony adds evidence to a hypothesis/model I have been forming.

What if a small group (2-3) VC did remotely detonate that mine under PCF-3. They then fired a few quick hasty shots as they got the hell out of dodge...wise of them because they had to know that the suviving boats would open up with 50 caliber fire.

The surviving OICs don't remember the scattered enemy fire which may have only lasted a few seconds because of their proximity to the 50 cal weapons and the fact that the fire was militarily ineffective. However, Lambert and Sandursky from another point of view thought they might have heard some enemy fire.

LT (jg) Thurlow immediately dives in to rescue the personelle on PCF-3 while the initial fire was still going on. LT (jg) Kerry comes back about 10 minutes later (this is the fastest he could have gone 5000 meters and back in) and rescues Rasmann...but by that time the fire is over.

Conclusion: Thurlow's citation is completely accurate. So is Lambert's. This is also consistant with the command log, the three bullet holes in Thurlow's boat, and the TF report. It is also consistant with Rasmann's testimony and the testimony of all the other "pro-Kerry" witnesses.

However, it still backs the scenario put forth in Unfit for Command...and Kerry is still not entitled to the BS and Purples heart. IMHO this is probably what happened or something very much like it.
_________________
-Polaris

Truth is Beauty

[Herb]

[SF]

Isn't Lambert the guy named as witness on the report on the incident (or maybe it was another document)?

[Polaris]

Lambert is the listed witness on the bronze star citation for Thurlow.
_________________
-Polaris

Truth is Beauty

[rparrott21]

And to think Thurlow and Kerry both got a bronze, with the real hero that day was Thurlow and the others...not chicken Kerry..

[Beldar]

Lambert's quoted at more length in his local paper:

http://www.mailtribune.com/archive/2004/0826/local/stories/01local.htm

He's not a Kerry supporter.

My blogpost about it is at http://www.beldar.org/beldarblog/2004/08/lambertlambeau_.html

[tvaughan]

[igor]