John Kerry and Vietnam

Great Debates
481

What hysteria, Sam? Who has been “hysterical”? And who’s character is being abused? Yours? Yes, you are being chided, derided and mocked. But it is not your character that is in question, it is your judgement, your adamant and entirely misplaced loyalty.

After all of this, you end up with “could have”, “might have”, “perhaps”…

I excerpt this editorial, from the Boston Globe
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2004/08/22/big_lies_for_bush?mode=PF

Just so. Why is it permissable, in your mind, to bring forth such damning allegations without proof. Solid proof, incontrovertible proof, the kind of proof required to damn a man’s reputation? Even you are forced to admit that the evidence is somewhere between inconclusive and flimsy.

In comparison, the evidence that GeeDubya was a privileged slacker who took advantage of powerful connections to avoid the sort of sacrifice that Kerry volunteered…let me emphasize that: volunteered!..to undertake. On his behalf, due to your admiration for his character and his accomplishments, you are willing to bend over backwards and bite your own heels. That we might believe that GeeDubya did even an acceptable job in performance of duty. Not an admirable job, not praiseworthy, just one not worthy of contempt.

And what does it say about GeeDubya’s character now? That he is perfectly willing to permit the lowest and most degrading attacks conceivable on a political enemy. And let the record show: not for the first time.

He does it because he gets away with it. Every time. And he doesn’t get away with it because of people like me, Sam. He gets away with it because of people like you.

482

And here’s my prediction, since you’re all clamoring to hear it…

When that new ad gets out, the one with John McCain accusing GeeDubya of dirty politics back in 2000, when it begins to sink in around the cable blather stations that, yes, indeed, the Swifties are full of shit,and the political advantage turns sour…say, in the next day or two…

GeeDuyba will condemn the Swifties ads in a blubbering paen to civility and propriety, and call on Kerry to cease and desist these disgraceful assaults! (or, in other words, “Uncle!”) He will not explain why it took him so long. He will take no follow up questions. This fellow, Perry? Maybe we’ve met, got so many supporters, hard to keep track.

And, hey! Ain’t it great about the Iraqi soccer team!..

Bet me.

483

Fuck the character assasinations, and bless you, Sam, for going to the bone for the meat.

There’s too many “Kerrioonies” here to expect objective treatment; i.e, “Kerry, right or wrong” supporters. (Like Moonies, for Sun Myung Moon). And thank you for reporting what they never would.

484

Snake, Sam, have you read the Washington Post story? The Swifties version depends entirely on putting the most vilest possible subjective interpretation on the various versions of the Bronze Star incident. The hostile fire flap seems to have been put to bed, but now Sam is concentrating on how far down river Kerry took his boat before turning back for Rassmunson, and why. One view is that Kerry was trying to get on the flank of an ambush, the other that he was running away and then had a change of heart. Let me suggest that it is inconceivable that if anybody really thought at the time that Kerry had cut and run he ever would have been retained in command. There are any number of former junior officers out there who spent their combat tour counting footlockers after failing to show the appropriate amount of grit under fire.

The whole thing has now taken on a life of its own. The Presidents reaction to the demonstrability falsity of the Swifties attack is now an issue that may be more important than the initial flap. The President’s silence now can be seen as just as telling of his character as his decision to take the NG route out of the war in the first place.

485

The only “evidence”, not “proof”, I have is, as I have said, Kerry’s own actions. He brought along his 8mm movie camera, as others did. But where he seperated himself from the others, Kerry, as has been reported, “reenacted” events for the camera. Lo and behold, the films are available for his presidential campaign. Now, how did these films become available to the Kerry campaign?

Did campaign staffers ask, “Say, you wouldn’t happen to have some film that documents your valor in Viet Nam, would you?”

Or, did Kerry say to his staff, “Hey, I just happen to have some films that you might put to good use.”?

Dopers often bandy about “Occam’s Razor” on these boards, now’s a good time to use it.

You mean when something like this is “pointed out”…

Yeah, I have “dissappeared” on occasion, but not because of something that may have been “pointed out”, but only because of the time wasted on nothing more than pissin’ contests.

Sorry, I didn’t mean you in particular, I was just referrring to the “we Dopers” attitude that is prevalent on these boards.

No, you got it bass-ackwards. It is neo-conservativism that has infected the Republican party with policies that are not traditionally of the Republican party. In the same context, neo-liberalism would be policies that are not traditionally Democratic, but are now espoused by the Democratic Party. Your usage would imply that both neo-conservatism and neo-liberalsim are perversions of the Republican Party, but I can understand that. You are such a partisan, that the Democratic Party is never at fault.

Yeah, I remember, but something you may not remember, Ronald Regan used to be a Democrat. When switching to the Republican Party, he remarked, "I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Party left me."In other words, the party became “neo-democratic”. A new version of the Democratic party.

Exactly!!The funny thing is, Kerry supporters are so myopic, they just can’t see that it is a particularly odious display of hypocrisy that is causing grief to the Kerry campaign.

The comparison of Bob Dole’s record of service and Bill Clinton’s evasion of Viet Nam service was not to be considered relevant to a Presidential campaign.

But now, John Kerry,s record of service and George W. Bush’s service in the Guard to evade Viet Nam service is relevant to a Presidential campaign.

When John Kerry strode up to the podium, gave a half-assed salute and announced, “Reporting for duty”, my stomach turned.

486

If the evidence supporting a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda-9/11 were half so strong as the evidence connecting George Bush and the SBVT smear campaign, I’d have supported the invasion of Iraq.

487

Those of you who think that the New York Times has ‘proven’ a connection between Bush and the Swiftboat Vets, I have a question: Have you ever played “Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon?” It’s a good example of how easy it is to draw spurious connections between people. I’ve looked at the ‘evidence’, and it strikes me as exactly that sort of faulty analysis.

But if we’re going to do that, the Democrats are far more guilty than the Republicans. Have a look at this chart (which I just saw on the SBVFT message board). It shows a series of revolving doors between various Kerry officials and 527 organizations. For example, Zack Exley was the Internet Coordinator for MoveOn.org. He then moved into the Kerry campaign and serves the same function. Jim Jordan was Kerry’s campaign manager, and now he’s a spokesman for the Media Fund, an anti-Bush 527. The Media Fund itself is largely the creation of Harold Ickes, formerly of the Clinton Administration and a close personal friend of Mary Beth Cahill, the campaign manager for Kerry/Edwards.

The primary ‘connection’ in the Bush case is that John O’Neill, who wrote a book about Kerry’s Vietnam experience, happens to know a real estate guy who is also friends with Karl Rove. And yet, I haven’t seen the New York Times’ deep expose’ of the connections between Kerry/Edwards and the Media Fund and MoveOn. Not surprised, of course.

488

The reason why this thread is so long is not only because of the evolution of lies from the Shifties and their defenders, but also because each one needs to be repeatedly debunked.

Razorsharp, the lie about the re-enactments was debunked long ago, and already depantsed within this thread. Please read this from the comprehensive eRiposte collection. I recommend that you read the rest.

http://swiftvets.eriposte.com/kerryother.htm#KERRYOTHER1

489

Something else I learned on the talking heads shows today was that another of Kerry’s fraggers, Robert Lambert, also won a bronze star that day, and from eRiposte:

Also, Thurlow and Sam Stone have claimed that there was no battle damage to the boats, which O’Neill repeated today, but the battle damage report to Thurlow’s boat indicates three bullet holes.

This is coalescing well around the truth that these Shiftie guys are despicable lying sacks, that they are working with the Bush administration, and that these types of attacks are Bush’s old tricks of the type he used to smear John McCain, as McCain himself has said (both in 2000 and when he denounced the Shifties recently). I agree with elucidator that Bush will piously denounce them when he thinks the stink is coming too close, but I think that Rove has waited too long on that note. Couldn’t happen to a nicer piece of compassionate conservative.

490

Yeah. The SBVT say that the bullet holes were old damage from previous missions. Who knows?

Don’t you find it odd that Kerry says he drove through 3,000 meters of ‘withering fire from both banks’, and yet there were no bullet holes in his boat? The river was only 75 yards wide, meaning he could be no farther than 35 meters from any bank. Were these the world’s worst ambushers?

And how do you explain that the other three boats sat right in the middle of the ‘kill zone’ for AN HOUR AND A HALF, and no one got a scratch? How does that happen? These boats are not armored, and an AK-47 round goes right through them.

How do you explain that three other men were in the water, and none of them remember bullets slapping the water around them like Rassmann does?

To me, it seems like the most likely explanation for Rassmann’s recollection is that he hit the water and was disoriented, and when he surfaced he hear massive gunfire and thought he was in the middle of a huge firefight. He was not a Swiftee, so he may not have understood the doctrine of immediately firing blind at the river banks in case the mine was a setup for an ambush. So to him, it probably sounded like all hell had broken loose.

On the other hand, another Swiftee there that day also says there was fire from the river banks.

But I simply cannot figure out how this matches with the fact that there were no furter casualties and at most three bullet holes in one boat and none in the others. The various competing facts just can’t be reconciled. So I still don’t know what to believe.

One thing we do know - Kerry and Rassman’s “No man left behind” story is clearly false. They both said everyone left Rassman behind, until Kerry went back. Now it’s clear that none of the other boats left the scene, but Kerry did. The only reason he had to go back for Rassmann was because he left in the first place.

491

Ahh, but I was right to be skeptical of the Saddam/9-11 connection, and I was right to be skeptical of the “grave and gathering dangers” posed by Iraq’s WMD’s. I’ll stick by my own analysis of the situation, rather than allow myself to be disillusioned by the mere fact that other people are easily drawn into making foolish errors in judgement.

492

So, the people reporting battle damage were also lying? I think by now you are getting into the same territory seethruart had with the Nasa photos of the moon: to “prove” that there where alien crafts in every photo of the moon, he had to declare as a lie, not only the record, but also the way the record was obtained, and then, even the people involved in making the record.

Sam, awhile ago you mentioned the blowback of this would be terrible for Bush, Just today even Fox news dumped on the swift flip-floppers, as the Daily Kos mentioned:

http://www.dailykos.com/

Six degrees of Kevin Bacon?

Bush gets toasted with less than 2. And when he still at this date, refuses to condemn those dishonorable soldiers, Bush becomes one too. Again, when even Fox news dumps on them, the writing is on the wall: the Blowback has begun.

493

I think Rassmann would remember if he had to dodge bulletes or not. That’s the kind of thing you don’t forget. Insinuations about Rassmann being “confuse” are simply self-serving, grasping and frankly slanderous to Rassmann. And it’s not only Rassmann who says there was enemy fire from the shores. The other guys on Kerry’s boat say it too. Thurlow’s own medal citation says it. Thurlow’s boat had bullet holes. The presence of armed VCs on the shore was confirmed independently of the Swift Boat flotilla.

It’s also true that Kerry went back into the kill zone under heavy fire to save Rassmann’s life. You’re getting desperate, Sam. Now all you’ve got left is unsupported insinuations about how far Kerry’s boat went up the river before he knew he had a man overboard. Are you serious? This is something you think the election should be about?

I’m still waiting for an explanation as to why Thurlow did not dispute his own medal citation.

This isn’t the Swifties against Kerry, it’s the Swifties against the official Navy record. So far, everything that can be checked favors Kerry and hurts the Swifties. We have also now established beyond any credible doubt that this is a front group for Bush. If this was being done to a Republican war hero by Democrats the Republicans would be apopleptic with rage.

The bottom line is that Kerry volunteered for two tours of Vietnam, served honorably, was decorated for valor and was wounded three times. I can’t tell you how offensive I find it for someone who’s never been in a war to question the legitimacy of someone else’s war wounds. The Sleaze Boat Liars for Bush are coming apart at the seams more and more every day. You’d do well to distance yourself from them now before it really gets embarrassing.

494

Then how’d he get there first, Sam? If he scooted away at the first hint of danger, hauled ass to save ass, and then, in a fit of remorse, turned back…how’d he get to Rassman before anyone else did, since, as you say, they were still on the spot?

As far as bullet holes go…what, these boats are made of cheese? An AK-47 will punch a hole in the boats bulkhead? OK, maybe, but at what range? Muzzle velocity and impact velocity being, necessarily, different.

My expertise in ballistics is limited, due mostly to scrupulously avoiding any contact. But my understanding is that the AK 47 is an assault rifle, intended for short-range use. It was not intended for use in punching holes in boats, but punching holes in people. Which are softer.

You keep bringing up the uncertainty of the evidence at hand, as if somehow this allows you to draw the worse possible conclusion and pretend that the evidence supports that conclusion. Contradictory evidence cannot support any conclusion whatsoever.

What is reprehensible about the Swifties propaganda assault is not simply that they cannot prove their case. It is that being unable to prove thier case they advance it anyway!

As to credibility issues…the witnesses against Kerry have contradicted thier own testimony, as has been amply demonstrated here. Has Rassman? Or any of the other crewmen with Kerry? Do they talk out of both sides of their mouth as do Mssrs. Elliot, Lonsdale, et. al.?

495

It is amazing that much of the current debate regarding the candidates for presidency involves what happened in Vietnam many years ago, particularly when there are issues regarding the economy, civil liberties, healthcare, the Iraq war and national security that are so pressing and important. This election may define the course that this country takes in the future, and we (joe public) are so easily duped into debating the merits of often baseless and slanderous claims about each candidate’s past. We have more important things to debate than the military records of each candidate! A lot is at stake!

496

I realise this cite from the Los Angeles Times is just another post from a Kerry defender. However the cite is a personal report from one of the few people who were actually on scene and involved in the action for which Kerry got a Silver Star.

The story is by William B. Rood, Night City Editor of the Chicago Tribune. Now I’m aware that the Trib is well-known as a liberal rag and not to be trusted, but Rood was commanding officer of one of the three swift boats involved in the action.

Here are some excerpts:

"There were three Swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam more than 35 years ago — three officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened on Feb. 28, 1969.

One is John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate who won a Silver Star for what happened on that date. I am the other."

“But Kerry’s critics, armed with stories I know to be untrue, have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown. The critics have taken pains to say they’re not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It’s gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there. [emphasis added]”

Rood’s comment is the crux of the matter. With one exception that I’m aware of, none of the Swifties was on scene at the time of the action. Rood sounds pissed that his record is also being smudged by Monday Morning Quarterbacks and detractors and who can blame him?

And notice that he calls the Swifites liars by stating that they tell “accounts we know to be untrue.” In my mind that’s the definition of a liar.

Rood also exposes the duplicity in today’s words of Ret. Adm. Hoffman.
"… Kerry, who had tactical command of that particular operation, had talked to Droz [Commanding officer of the third boat who was killed not long after] and me beforehand about not responding the way the boats usually did to an ambush.

We agreed that if we were not crippled by the initial volley and had a clear fix on the location of the ambush, we would turn directly into it, focusing the boats’ twin .50-caliber machine guns on the attackers and beaching the boats. We told our crews about the plan.

Our initial reports of the day’s action caused an immediate response from our task force headquarters in Cam Ranh Bay.

Known over radio circuits by the call sign ‘Latch,’ then-Capt. and now retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, the task force commander, fired off a message congratulating the three Swift boats, saying at one point that the tactic of charging the ambushes was a “shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy” and that it ‘may be the most efficacious method of dealing with small numbers of ambushers.’

Hoffmann has become a leading critic of Kerry’s and now says that what the boats did on that day demonstrated Kerry’s inclination to be impulsive to a fault.

Our decision to use that tactic under the right circumstances was not impulsive but was the result of discussions well beforehand and a mutual agreement of all three boat officers."

There has been more than enough of the crap. Accounts at the time, although we have the word of no less a personnage than a temporary replacement company clerk of the era says that “… military reports are notoriously inaccurate and incomplete.”, all agree that the action of the 3 boat commanders at the time was exemplary and in keeping with the offensive spirit that Viet Nam navy commander Adm. Elmo Zumwalt encouraged at the time. In addition, the printed edition of the Times has a copy of Hoffman’s congratulatory message to the three boat commanders that states that:

“1. THE COMPLETEL SUCCESSFUL RAID AND LAND SWEEP CONDUCTED ALONG THE RACH DONG CUNG WHICH DEMONSTRATED SUPERB COORDINATION AND AGRESSIVE TACTICS STANDS AS A SHINING EXAMPLE OF COMPLETELY OVERWHELMING THE ENEMY.”

In my view Hoffman is an asshole who has disgraced himself and brought uncertainty as to the actions of Viet Nam vets everywhere in casting doubt upon the on-scene and then-current accounts by post hoc lying for political advantage.

I think what Kerry did in testifying before Congress as to actual events in Viet Nam that were less and shining examples of US behavior pales by comparison. Kerry was trying to do what he could to correct what he saw as a wrong approach. Hoffman is trying to justify a personal attack by completely changing his mind and even claiming that he performed his duties in Viet Nam as Commander, Task Force 115 in a slipshod manner. At least that’s my conclusion when you compare his statements of today with the laudatory message portion quoted above.

Enough already. Those whose “stomach turned” at Kerry’s convention salute should have puked their guts out at Bush bounding onto the flight deck in front of the huge “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED” sign, or saying “Bring it on!” Unless they were besotted with partisan admiration of the Playboy in Chief.

497

So, you admit that you have nothing. Well, except for the lies that you’re spreading around inre Kerry and what you refer to as his “reenactments”.

So, for those playing at home: Razorsharp has absolutely nothing except old and discredited information. Gotta say, Jasper, looks like you’re gettin’ yer ass handed to you.

I don’t know if they did or not. Do you?

Y’know, a little something else that gets bandied about is a call for a cite when someone is obviously talking outta his or her ass. So, y’gotta cite for any of your bullshit? You remember, the bullshit about Kerry “reenacting” heroic exploits for his home movies? Anything? At all? Anywhere? Maybe even something that’s barely credible this time. Since you had absolutely no luck whatsoever with “somewhat credible”. And “mostly credible” seems to be out of your grasp.

And you keep telling yourself that. After all, someday it might just come true. Until then, though, I find myself hanging out here waiting for something that resembles evidence. Remember evidence? Sweet, delicious evidence?

Horsehit, Sparky. You got called and you were sitting on a pair of crap. Just admit that you were talking outta your ass. It’s not nearly as hard as you believe. And it’s ever so freeing.

Okay, I’ll bite. I’m certainly what would be considered a Kerry supporter. So, how is it that I’m myopic? Or hypocritical? Or (especially) odious? And how is my pointing out the lies and bullshit from such as you and the Swifties causing grief to Kerry’s campaign?

Which is why it never came up. You remember that, right? How it was a nonstarter as an issue? Ah, those were the days. . .free as the wind I was! And Dole was bagging on Clinton for bailing out Mexico. A simpler time. One less fractious and partisan.

Yeah, it sucks. But the Swifties are probably the wrong people to throw in with if you want to appear above the fray. O’ course, Bush fils hasn’t done a damned thing to denounce them and their lies, and here we are: Swifties lying about what happened. Well, and layering a commercial as if they are uniformly denouncing Kerry for his cowardice (said cowardice does not exist, not in reality, not even in your universe). My goodness gracious! It looks like a big steaming pile of crap that will be flung at Bush fils! Oh! Frabjous day!

Well then, you’re gonna be shittin’ yourself when he wins in November 2004 and takes the oath. Promise me that you’ll reenact the moment after the fact and make the tape available. Please? I’m making Bambi eyes, here. And it’s ever so hard to deny Bambi eyes. . .

498

:applause:

Great post David Simmons!

As someone said once:

“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is pulling its boots on”*

But for this blowback, this is OK, the truth has the combat boots on now!

Time to kick some swift butts!!
*[sub]http://www.twainquotes.com/Lies.html

[/sub]

499

Because, after all, they are just like Sam Stone. Tireless champions for the truth. Willing to wade through as much crap as Karl Rove deems necessary to fight for the cause. Or The Cause, depending on where you stand. Simply because their previous claims have been shown to be lies and slander does not mean that they (and Sam Stone, natch) will not keep looking for that one miniscule speck of what might pass for truth (but only if you tart said speck up like a whore and make it ride an old fashioned bicycle that’s been painted pink and orange). Sam, face it, this thing is gonna blow up and cover you in it’s stinking essence.

Well, it’s obvious that they fell overboard; and when they surfaced they were confused and disoriented. It was only Rassmann who recalls correctly what happened. Those other men are simply confused. Don’t get me wrong, they were brave and selfless, but I know that if I were to fall out of a boat, and heard firing when I surfaced that I would probably think that it was my shipmates laying down suppressing fire. Y’know, instead of thinking that people were shooting at us. It’s just a natural mistake on their part.

Yep, because in the heat of the moment, there’s no one who’ll go all weird and goosey like a Green Beret. Happens quite often, in fact.

Which has been made all too clear.

So why didn’t one of the other boats pick up that big silly Green Beret? After all, they were right there.

500

No! No! Don’t you get it?!

Kerry, knowing he would be running for president 35 years later, and ever mindful of the main chance, colluded with those other swift boat captains to give him the big rescue so that he would be able to pull Rassman out of his back pocket when the time came!

See?! See?! Kerry’s the mastermiiiiind, mannn!