Jump to content

Swift Boat Vets Vs. the Truth


BewareofNick
This topic is 6661 days old and is no longer open for new replies.  Replies are automatically disabled after two years of inactivity.  Please create a new topic instead of posting here.  

Recommended Posts

It started out as a way to counteract John Kerry's war record, and of course to sweep aside George Bush's dubious service in the National Guard. It seemed damning at first, all these vets coming out and saying Kerry lied. However, as time goes by, more and more of the SwiftBoat Vets are being revealed as liars themselves:

 

Another Swift Boat Vet Lied in Anti-Kerry Ad, Book[/font size]

 

By Staff and Wire Reports

Aug 19, 2004, 07:50

 

A Vietnam veteran who claims Sen. John Kerry lied about being under fire during a Mekong Delta engagement that won Kerry a Bronze Star was under constant fire himself during the same skirmish, according to the man's own medal citation.

The newly obtained records of Larry Thurlow show that he, like Kerry, won a Bronze Star in the engagement and that Thurlow's citation said he also was under attack.

 

Thurlow, also like Kerry, commanded a Navy Swift boat during the Vietnam War. Thurlow swore in an affidavit last month that Kerry was "not under fire" when he rescued Lt. James Rassmann from the Bay Hap River.

 

Thurlow's records, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, include references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at all five boats in the flotilla that day. In his Bronze Star citation, Thurlow is praised for helping a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."

 

The records said Thurlow's actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire," which Thurlow ignored in providing immediate assistance to the disabled boat and its crew.

 

Thurlow is a leading member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a public advocacy group of Vietnam veterans who have aired a television advertisement attacking Kerry's war record.

 

Kerry has described how his boat came under fire from the river banks after a mine explosion disabled another U.S. Swift boat. Kerry and members of his crew say the firing continued as Kerry leaned over to fish out Rassmann, who was blown overboard in another explosion.

 

Thurlow described Kerry's Bronze Star citation as "totally fabricated," saying "I never heard a shot."

 

Thurlow, a registered Republican, said he was angry with Kerry for his anti-war activities after his return to the United States, especially his claim that U.S. troops committed war crimes with the knowledge of their officers up the chain of command.

 

Thurlow said he got the award for helping to rescue the boat that was mined.

 

"This casts doubt on anybody's awards," he said. "It is sickening and disgusting."

 

He said he believed his own award would be "fraudulent" if it was based on coming under enemy fire.

 

"We weren't under fire," he insisted, speculating that Kerry could have been the source of at least some of the language used in the citation.

 

Thurlow said he lost his Bronze Star citation more than 20 years ago. He said he would not authorize release of his military records because he feared the Kerry campaign would discredit him.

 

Members of Kerry's crew have said Kerry is telling the truth. Rassmann said he has vivid memories of enemies firing at him from both banks.

 

The military record disputing Thurlow's account brings to four the number of "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" whose credibility have come under question. John O'Neill, leader of SBVT and co-author of the book, has been caught in several lies about his involvement in GOP political causes. Retired Admiral Roy Hoffman has given conflicting statements in newspaper interviews and former Lt. Cmdr. George Elliott recanted his statements in the book and then recanted his recant.

 

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_5063.shtml

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to be a genetic predisposition of the Bush Clan to use smears against their opponents. After all, winning, not the truth, is the benchmark. Willie Horton, the slurs against John McCain, the lies about Al Gore, and now the Not So Swift Veterans for Truth.

 

If the Democrats were as insidious as the Republicans, maybe they would be making ads that would give the public a little quiz:

 

Question: Name two well-known Americans who had a penchant for torturing and killing animals in their youth?

 

Answer: Jeffrey Dahmer and George W. Bush.

 

Question: Of the two mentioned in the previous answer, who was ultimately more deadly?

 

Answer: George W. Bush. Dahmer executed 16 people, Bush, 152 as governor of Texas.

 

Of course, many more have died as a result of George W. Bush's policies as president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Question: Of the two mentioned in the previous answer, who

>was ultimately more deadly?

>

>Answer: George W. Bush. Dahmer executed 16 people, Bush, 152

>as governor of Texas.

 

Good point. I have always thought that when a person abducts innocent human beings and then slaughters them, that act is MORALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE from a person who is elected to be Governor of a state where vicious murderers are punished for their crimes by death after a JURY convicts them and then imposes that sentence.

 

There's really no differnce at all between Jeffrey Dahmer's murdering of innocent poeple and George Bush being governor of a state where a jury of 12 citizens sentences to death cold-blooded murderers for their crime.

 

You should alert the Kerry campaign immediately! They can base a great new slogan on it:

 

BUSH = JEFFREY DAHMER

Vote Kerry/Edwards 04

 

That can replace the old one that was so effective:

 

BUSH = HITLER

Vote Kerry/Edwards 04

 

Good job, Bucky!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Good point. I have always thought that when a person abducts

>innocent human beings and then slaughters them, that act is

>MORALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE from a person who is elected to be

>Governor of a state where vicious murderers are punished for

>their crimes by death after a JURY convicts them and then

>imposes that sentence.

 

There's really no differnce at all between Jeffrey Dahmer's

>murdering of innocent poeple and George Bush being governor of

>a state where a jury of 12 citizens sentences to death

>cold-blooded murderers for their crime.

>

 

Doug: You never disappoint when it comes to your sloppy reading skills. I guess that's why you're the quintessential Republican spin machine.

 

Note what I said in my post:

 

If the Democrats were as insidious as the Republicans, maybe they would be making ads that would give the public a little quiz:

 

 

The point is, the Democrats are not so sleazy to stoop to this kind of spurious argument. It is an example of the modus operandi of your beloved Republicans.

 

Do try to read and understand what was actually said, before you go off half-cocked and make a fool of yourself (again). On the other hand, just keep on making a fool of yourself. It's much more entertaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Merlin

Where did the smearing start? The Demo smear about Bush's National Guard record was being promoted by the Dems a year ago. Michael Moores collection of lying smears made him a hero to Dems. The smear about Bush's use of cocaine, based upon absoultely no evidence, has been around for 4 years. The Republicans are way behing in the smear race and can never catch up. But it was Kerry who chose to make his phonied-up war record the center of his campaign. Fortunately Bush has totally stayed out of the fray and has said repeatedly that Kerry's war record is not an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Where did the smearing start? The Demo smear about Bush's

>National Guard record was being promoted by the Dems a year

>ago. Michael Moores collection of lying smears made him a hero

>to Dems. The smear about Bush's use of cocaine, based upon

>absoultely no evidence, has been around for 4 years.

 

Let's not forget the lovely little disclosure of Bush's sealed 25-year-old DUI ticket which - oh, wow, what do you know? - just so happened to get leaked to the press about 72 hours prior to the 2000 election.

 

But as most everyone here will tell you, the Democrats don't engage in sleazy negative campaigning or the "politics of personal destruction." Only Republicans do that. When it SEEMS like the Democrats do it, it's different, because . . . well, becuase they're Democrats, and are therefore Good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again: All Repiglicans lie about everything all the time.

[/font size=+2]Military records support Kerry's account of Vietnam service[/font size]

 

 

BY Joseph L. Galloway

Knight Ridder Newspapers

 

WASHINGTON - Military records back John Kerry's account of his service in Vietnam and have backed at least two of his accusers into a corner.

 

Kerry this week was forced to defend himself against accusations by a group of fellow Navy veterans of Vietnam that he was a liar and a coward. The charges were made in a book and in an attack ad that polls show have chipped away at Kerry's standing with veterans in three critical states - West Virginia, Wisconsin and Ohio.

 

The long-ago Vietnam War has suddenly become a central issue in the presidential campaign. The attacks by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have called into account Kerry's conduct during the war, when he volunteered for one of the most dangerous duties - the so-called Brown Water Navy, which regularly penetrated Viet Cong-controlled territory via the maze of waterways in the sodden Mekong Delta.

 

Although the 15 veterans featured in the attack ad all state "I served with John Kerry," none of them served on the same boat with him. Those who did, such as retired Chief Petty Officer Del Sandusky, 60, of Clearwater, Fla., praise Kerry for his leadership and credit him with keeping them alive to make it home.

 

"We are really upset at this stuff," Sandusky told Knight Ridder. "They are calling us all liars. They dishonor us and they dishonor all those who died over there. They are getting awfully desperate. Last year many of them were on board with us. Now they are telling outrageous lies."

 

Kerry has said that members of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth lied when they said he inflated his role in various combat actions in the Mekong Delta in 1968 and 1969 and had manipulated the award of three Purple Heart medals for wounds and Bronze and Silver Star medals for valor in combat.

 

Kerry released a stack of his military records - including after-action reports, citations for his medals, boat battle damage reports and his officer efficiency reports. These records - and the military records of at least one of his accusers - cast serious doubt on some of the more inflammatory charges raised by the group.

 

It didn't help the cause of the Swift Boat Veterans group that some of them, including their leader, retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffman, were on the record praising Kerry for his service in Vietnam.

 

Kerry's commanding officer in Vietnam, George Elliott, said in an attack ad: "John Kerry has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam."

 

But during the Vietnam War, Elliott recommended Kerry for the Silver and Bronze Star medals for valor in combat and gave him the highest possible praise in his officer efficiency reports.

 

"In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, LTjg Kerry was unsurpassed," Elliott wrote in 1969. He went on to rate Kerry as "calm, professional and highly courageous in the face of enemy fire."

 

Elliott added: "(Kerry) emerges as the acknowledged leader in his peer group." In 16 categories on Kerry's officer efficiency report, ranging from professional knowledge to moral courage to military bearing to reliability, Elliott gave Kerry the highest possible rating - "is not exceeded" - in 11 categories, and the second highest, "one of the top 10" in five other categories.

 

Elliott in 1996 supported Kerry in his re-election campaign for the Senate and during an appearance in Boston declared that Kerry had earned the Silver Star "for an act of courage."

 

Another critic, Larry Thurlow, a fellow Swift boat commander in the Mekong Delta in 1969, disputed Kerry's claim that his boat and others in the five-boat patrol came under enemy fire during a March 13, 1969, mission that earned Kerry a Bronze Star.

 

Thurlow said that although one of the Swift boats was disabled by a mine explosion, there was no enemy fire from shore, as Kerry and others testified, and that Kerry's account was "a total fabrication." Thurlow said in an affidavit: "I never heard a shot."

 

However, a citation for the Bronze Star with valor awarded to Thurlow for that same mission stated that his actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire which (Thurlow) completely ignored" while he provided assistance to the damaged Swift boat and the wounded aboard.

 

Thurlow said he had lost his medal citation for that incident over two decades ago and stood by his account that there was no enemy fire at the time.

 

His account was further called into question by a battle damage assessment report on another Swift boat, PCF-51, involved in the March 13 action. The report listed three .30-caliber bullet holes in the superstructure of the 50-foot patrol boat.

 

The Swift boat veterans also have cast doubt on Kerry's account that a second mine explosion damaged his boat, PCF-94, and blew an Army Special Forces officer, Jim Rassmann, overboard. Kerry's Bronze Star was awarded for his rescue of Rassmann, who credited Kerry with saving his life.

 

Among the records was a battle damage report filed the following day, March 14, which stated that PCF-94 had three windows blown out, radios and radar inoperable, the boat's auxiliary generator inoperable, screws curled and chipped, aft helm steerage control not working. The boat was judged incapable of executing patrols without repairs.

 

In the TV ad Swift Boat veteran Adrian Lonsdale declared Kerry "lacks the capacity to lead." Yet he, too, appeared to support Kerry in 1996, saying of him: "He was among the finest of those Swift boat drivers."

 

In a month when the Democratic nominee had hoped to avoid running any ads to conserve funds for the final sprint this fall, Kerry strategists instead prepared to spend nearly $200,000 responding to the attack ads of the veterans group in key states.

 

The bulk of the funding for the Swift Boat veterans' group comes from wealthy Texas Republicans.

 

A new ad was scheduled to begin running shortly, focusing this time on Kerry's testimony against the Vietnam War in 1971.

 

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/9455159.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Where did the smearing start? The Demo smear about Bush's

>National Guard record was being promoted by the Dems a year

>ago. Michael Moores collection of lying smears made him a hero

>to Dems. The smear about Bush's use of cocaine, based upon

>absoultely no evidence, has been around for 4 years. The

>Republicans are way behing in the smear race and can never

>catch up. But it was Kerry who chose to make his phonied-up

>war record the center of his campaign. Fortunately Bush has

>totally stayed out of the fray and has said repeatedly that

>Kerry's war record is not an issue.

 

Way behind? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA! Karl Rove has been at it since Shrubya was Governor of Texass.

 

As you can see below, the OFFICIAL RECORD backs up everything Kerry said.

 

Bush stays out of the fray because Dick F'n Cheney and Rove handle all the dirty work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More Swift Boat lies:

 

CNN's Newsnight played the O'Neill-Nixon tape, with text graphic on screen:

O'NEILL: I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border on the water.

NIXON: In a swift boat?

O'NEILL: Yes, sir.

 

And here is O'Neil this week:

 

JOHN O'NEILL: The whole country's watching him avoid the question. You asked about Cambodia. How do I know he's not in Cambodia? I was on the same river, George. I was there two months after him. Our patrol area ran to Sedek, it was 50 miles from Cambodia. There isn't any watery border. The Mekong River's like the Mississippi. There were gunboats stationed right up there to stop people from coming. And our boats didn't go north of, only slightly north of Sedek. So it was a made up story. He's told it over 50 times, George, that was on the floor of the Senate. He wrote articles about it, it was a malicious story because it painted all the guys above him, all of the commanding officers, in effect, as war criminals, that had ordered him into a neutral country, it was a lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even More Swift Boat Lies

 

The lies of John O'Neill: An MMFA analysis

 

 

Swift Boat Vets' founder has told repeated untruths about himself, Swift Boat Vets, Unfit for Command

 

 

 

O'Neill (left) with national disgrace Richard Nixon (center) and Charles Colson (right).

Repiglicans don't age well, do they?

 

For the past several weeks, John E. O'Neill has lied repeatedly about himself, his organization, and his book. He's lied about being a Republican from Texas, lied about his political involvement, lied about his ties to the Nixon White House, lied about his campaign contributions, lied about his co-author, and lied about the makeup of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT), the anti-Kerry group he founded.

 

O'Neill lied when he said Swift Boat Vets "have no partisan ties"; member in new ad was Bush-Cheney campaign official

 

O'Neill said on CNN on August 11, "[T]he people in our organization have no partisan ties, we didn't campaign in the last four elections for Democrats, by and large we didn't campaign for anybody."

 

That's a lie. The new Swift Boat Veterans for Truth advertisement, unveiled August 20, features Ken Cordier criticizing Kerry. Cordier is identified in the ad as "P.O.W., Dec. 1966 - Mar. 1973."

 

But Cordier isn't just a former prisoner of war. He was also a member of the Bush-Cheney '04 National Veterans Steering Committee until controversy over his dual role with the campaign and the SBVT led to his resignation. The Bush-Cheney '04 campaign website suddenly -- mysteriously -- omits Cordier's name from the list of Steering Committee members, presumably in an effort to hide ties between the campaign and this 527 advertising. But images from a cached copy of the page, as well as a list of committee members, prove his membership.

 

Cordier was also named to a Bush administration POW Advisory Committee.

 

Cordier's involvement with the Bush campaign is not a new development. In September 2000, Dick Cheney personally announced Cordier's selection as Vice-Chair of the Veterans for Bush-Cheney '00.

 

O'Neill lied about being a "Republican from Texas"

 

During an August 12 appearance on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, O'Neill claimed, "I'm not a Republican from Texas. That's just not true."

 

O'Neill is, in fact, from Texas. And he has given more than $14,000 in federal contributions to Republican candidates and causes since 1990, including $1,000 to George H. W. Bush in 1992. And he hasn't made any federal contributions to Democratic candidates or causes during that time. And he voted in the 1998 Republican state primary.

 

O'Neill lied about his political involvement

 

On the August 12 edition of CNN's Crossfire, O'Neill claimed he has had "no serious involvement in politics of any kind in over 32 years."

 

In fact, O'Neill has made more than $14,000 in federal contributions to Republican candidates and causes since 1990; most people would consider giving $14,000 a "serious" involvement.

 

O'Neill denied making thousands of dollars in contributions to GOP; FEC records contradict him

 

When FOX News Channel managing editor and chief Washington correspondent Brit Hume asked O'Neill to respond to "allegations" that he has made more than $14,000 in federal contributions to Republican candidates and causes since 1990, O'Neill responded by saying "that is not true. ... Actually, about half of them were mine." When Hume asked about "the other $7,000," O'Neill claimed: "Those are actually funds, as nearly as I can tell, that were given my -- by some -- my law partner who has almost the same name, Edward J. O'Neill. I simply didn't give them. I would have been happy to give them. I just didn't."

 

O'Neill's claim that "Edward J. O'Neill," not he, made the contributions, is contradicted by Federal Election Commission records, which clearly list the contributor as John O'Neill, not Edward O'Neill. Edward O'Neill made his own contributions, which are listed under his name.

 

It's worth remembering that if Edward O'Neill actually made the contributions in his law partner's name, it would be a violation of federal election law.

 

O'Neill lied about ties to Nixon White House

 

After Chris Matthews said to O'Neill, "You go back to the Nixon era, when Nixon was looking for someone. [Chuck] Colson and those guys were looking for somebody to debunk the Kerry record, because all the records show they were scared to death of this guy. And you played that role," O'Neill replied, "That's just not true."

 

O'Neill was lying.

 

Former Nixon special counsel Chuck Colson has said that Kerry was an "articulate" and "credible leader" of those veterans calling for an end to the Vietnam War and therefore "an immediate target of the Nixon administration." As such, the Nixon administration found it necessary to "create a counterfoil" to Kerry. Colson recounted, "We found a vet named John O'Neill and formed a group called Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace. We had O'Neill meet the President, and we did everything we could do to boost his group." Articles from the April 21 edition of the Houston Chronicle and the June 17, 2003, edition of The Boston Globe confirm close ties between O'Neill and the Nixon administration.

 

http://mediamatters.org/items/200408250002

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Dear BewareOfNick:

 

What do you think about Kerry lying about being in Cambodia for Christmas in 1968?

 

You know the story I'm talking about, right? The one that was "seared....seared" into John Kerry's memory. The story he's now had to retract as being incorrectly "seared....seared" into his memory.

 

We'll start with that little "discredited Swift Boat Veterns" charge and then move onto others, ok?

 

Curiously yours,

 

FFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was listening to the Weekend with Mike Mconnell on Premire Radio Networks (another Repiglican show) and there is apparently a guy who has actual photos of Kerry and others in Cambodia at the end of December. He is apparently in the process of getting these autheticated and then published in the New York Times.

 

Next thing you know, someone will have actual photos of Bush in Alabama in the National Guard!

 

So why is it, FFF, that if Kerry "lies" it's a scandal, but if Shrubya lies it's a "smear"?

 

Perhaps you could start with that little question and then move forward.

 

Inquisitively yours,

 

Neal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>What do you think about Kerry lying about being in Cambodia

>for Christmas in 1968?

 

 

What do you think of O'Neill getting caught telling the same story?

 

==John O'Neill, {leader of the Swiftie vendetta}, wrote that Kerry lied when he said he was in Cambodia as part of a secret war linked to Vietnam. No Americans were in Cambodia, O'Neill has said. But O'Neill told {President Richard} Nixon in 1971 that he was also "in Cambodia."

 

O'Neill said his statements have remained consistent, that he was speaking in general terms to Nixon and meant that he was near Cambodia, not across the border. ==

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oneill28aug28,1,1938784.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My goodness! O'Neill caught in yet ANOTHER lie??? How unshocking. This Swift Boat group has truly blown up in the Repiglicans faces. I think perhaps it's time for a group called Alabama National Guard Vets for the Truth. At least then we'd actually be dealing with the Truth instead of more Swift boat Lies.

 

Unsurprisingly yours,

 

Neal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

In addition, if the moderators feel someone is reporting content simply because if it’s political stance (such as but not limited to reporting it as off topic but not other off topic replies by those that agree with your stance), the reporting person may receive a warning as well.

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...