Transcript from the CNN piece on O’Neill
I love the off-hand way that Brown asks about that other tape that Mr. O’Neill’s publicist provided.
This is a classic case of “were you lying then or are you lying now?” for O’Neill. The contrast could not be less ambiguous. I can’t wait to see how he wriggles out of this one. I wonder why he won’t comment. He hasn’t been camera shy before.
O’Neill’s credibility is officially shit.
Injury by friendly fire counts? Doesn’t count? And, seems to me, that if a man is prone to accidental self-injury, removing him from proximity with weapons is prudent. Very prudent.
“Son, your intentions are good, but this is the second time you’ve thrown the pin and kept the grenade. Here’s your medals, adios, motherfucker, the plane is right over there…”
Can anyone recommend a good site that is keeping track of all the latest reversals and contradictions WRT the SBVT? Black is white and up is down and I just can’t keep track of who wasn’t really at the scene and who never served with Kerry and who has changed his story since then (also since 1996) and who is working for the Bush campaign.
I guess I need a play-by-play with a character list, maybe a nice chart or something. My poor little brain just can’t keep track of all the lies…
Well, there’s this place called the SDMB. Got kind of a conservative tilt, but still pretty objective…
You’re gonna make me go back through 15 whole pages and make notes? :eek:
I feel faint. I was hoping for some bullet points, or something.
Yes, it counts. Soldiers are not expected to be able to identify every piece of shrapnel that flies during an engagement. You get the PH either way.
More importantly, Kerry has never said it wasn’t friendly fire. All he knows is that something burned the crap out of his arm while they were opening up on some sampans. It sounds like his crewmates believe that there was return fire so it could have been hostile…or not. The Navy doesn’t care.
Let’s also remember that this was JFK’s first night in the Shit. It was dark. It sounds like they were all scared as hell. The first engagement with an enemy has got to be pretty rattling. It wouldn’t be surprising at all if a newbie took a little blowback and thought it was from the other guys…not that Kerry ever said that, and not that it’s relevant to the legitimacy of his PC.
Now, on a comparatively trivial note, one thing is confusing me.
[Columbo]Been bothering me, couldn’t sleep, can’t get rid of it, just one more question and I’ll stop bothering you…[/Lt. C]
So…while Kerry was in country, his CO was O’Neill? Or at least his reports went to O’Neill, O’Neill was who he reported to. And he was some distance away from the scene. After Kerry leaves, O’Neill comes down a peg? Now he’s doing what Kerry was doing before, and reporting to…who?
And does it strike anyone else that this move looks a lot like a demotion? From “supervising” Kerry to replacing him? From cushy, report reading desk to a boat in The Shit? Doesn’t usually work like that unless you, well, fuck up?
There’s a simple explanation for that:
Kerry wasn’t the only swifty to form a 30 year master plan during his time in Nam. Kerry plotted to become president. O’Neill plotted to fuck over Kerry’s plans. He took that “demotion” so that 30 years later he’d be in just the position he is today; the only man with the power to save America from the scheming of a diabolical lefty genius.
Got me. (Meaning, you caught me in an assumption).
I thought I remembered someone saying they were from an AK-47, but perhaps I was wrong.
Well then, if you’re not going to get snarkey, there’s no use in spoiling the snarkness quotient of this thread…
Well, I’m only talking about the .30 caliber holes, of course!
That ought to balance out any politeness…
We really should make an inventory. I’ll try to itemize some things but this is just a back of the envelope draft. I’m bound to forget some stuff.
[ul][li]Thurlow is contradicted by his own Medal citation.[/li][li]Coauthor Corsi = racist nutbag.[/li][li]Doctor that says he examined Kerry’s wound is not doctor of record, cannot prove he ever examined Kerry. [/li][li]Part of that doctor’s testimony relies on what he heard from a “witness” named Schachte who it turns out wasn’t a witness.[/li][li]Lying sack of Schachte[/li][li]The only other officer present at Kerry’s Silver Medal incident supports Kerry, repudiates Swifties.[/li][li]Two members of Bush campaign have been outed as being in cahoots with the Swifties[/li][li]Gardener wasn’t on the boat.[/li][li]The supremely ironic piece de resistance, John O’Neill suddenly has his own “Cambodia Problem.”[/li][li]various and sundry ties to Republican funding[/li][li]Official documentation and corroborating eyewitnesses which have been strikingly consistent in supporting John Kerry but have yet to yield anything fruitful for the Swifty side.[/li][li]Musical affadavits disavowing prior disavowels of prior affadavits[/li][li]Officers who praised John Kerry both during Vietnam and in the recent past suddenly changing their minds and deciding he’s the devil.[/ul][/li]What am I forgetting?
These requirements are from the my cite in the above post. #8 is the one that covers friendly fire and accidents.
Eligibility for Purple Heart:
3. Criteria: a. The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to any member of an Armed Force who, while serving with the U.S. Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed, or who has died or may hereafter die after being wounded;
(1) In any action against an enemy of the United States;
(2) In any action with an opposing armed force of a foreign country in which the Armed Forces of the United States are or have been engaged;
(3) While serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party;
(4) As a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed forces;
(5) As the result of an act of any hostile foreign force;
(6) After 28 March 1973, as a result of an international terrorist attack against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the United States, recognized as such an attack by the Secretary of the department concerned, or jointly by the Secretaries of the departments concerned if persons from more than one department are wounded in the attack; or,
(7) After 28 March 1973, as a result of military operations, while serving outside the territory of the United States as part of a peacekeeping force.
(8) After 7 December 1941, by weapon fire while directly engaged in armed conflict, regardless of the fire causing the wound.
(9) While held as a prisoner of war or while being taken captive.
b. A wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer.Thanks for the back-up Dio. I said the same thing five pages ago and everyone jumped on me for beong anti-kerry. Go figure. I think you have more credibility than I with this crowd; that is the doctrine. In a combat situation where there is a reasonable expectation of fire going both ways, an injury from bullets or schrapnel that has reasonable expectation of coming from enemy sources is assumed to have done so.
I just wanted to highlight this.
[ul]
[li]Damning eyewitness French lying[/li][li]Thurlow reveals psychic powers[/li][li]Swiftys PR outfit same bunch gave McCain anal probe[/li][li]Texans[/li][/ul]
For the record, I think you’ve been misunderstood by some in this thread. For some reason one or two posters seem to think that you’re Kerry bashing but I haven’t seen it that way at all. I think you’re just giving us the benefit of your own experiences and I saw some of what you said about sloppy record keeping, easy Purple Hearts, etc. as more of a defense of Kerry’s record as being typical rather than attacking it as fraudulent.
You’re off the hook. Saw cable news show, displayed released document, talked about damage report to boat, specificly states “.30 calibre” holes.
(Of course, you know, this means you my bitch…)
Several media organisations including my beloved Salon, are flatly indicating the S-Vs are a GOP organisation.
I haven’t seen anything to support that. Now as a lark, credit me with some native cunning. Am I missing something?
On preview, how would you prove a disallowed relationship between the 2? Alternatively, is there any truth to Sam’s belief that they would carry on as is, even if their campaign was proving detrimental to Bush.
My preliminary view is that the S-Vs are coalesced around the principle of unseating Kerry, rather than having a truthful and public discussion of facts and opinions.
Sev, that’s my impression too as to the rank and file Swifties. I think most of them are just pissed about Winter Soldier. But two separate Bush campaigners have now been tied to the Swifties in the las few days. One of them was giving them legal advice. I think it’s pretty clear along with all the circumstantial connections (Rove, Texans, etc.) that the Bush campaign has been channeling at least some indirect support to these guys (leaving plausible deniability for the Smirk himself, of course).
Cute, Minty, I’ll bet some people even believed you.
For the record, I’ve posted on this board before about the presence of U.S., troops in Cambodia and Laos in 1968.
In November 1968 there was an official incursion Northward along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, starting in Cambodia and ending in Laos. The 4th Infantry Division was the prime mover in this ‘clean sweep,’ which was primerily to make contact with enemy whenever possible and to make the road impassable as much as we were able, in blowing deep trenches, creating abitis across the road, destroying bridges and timber road reinforcement, etc.
I personally never made it into Cambodia, my unit replaced the other unit just coming out of Cambodia, and continued up into Laos for about four days. The cambodian contingent made major contact, and evidently the word went up to pull back, cause we met no resistance.
We were there for Thanksgiving, 1968, when then President Johnson promised that "all troops in VietNam would have turkey for Thanksgiving dinner…
We joked about it. Haw, haw haw, since we were in laos, we didn’t count, right?
However, half past sunset we heard choppers. They located our position and dropped insulated containers of hot turkey, gravy, stuffing, cranberry and potatoes… God bless General Stone (who we usually thought of as an asshole).
The point is that in 1968 going into Cambodia, and even Laos was not unthinkable, and I have no clue why people are flip-flopping on it. (unless I get a knock on my door late tonight…)
Now, who’s first to yell “cite?” and accuse my story of being anti-Kerry?
I’ve read the Salon article now.
Summary: Why aren’t the SVs talking about the Winter Soldier Testimony? A: It’s all true.
DtC I suppose the killer question is: Could Rove pull the plug?