Print media ignoring the Kerry Vietnam controversy-why?

[BRIANC1046]

Swift Vets Funded By Longtime Texas Bush Contributors

Fox News: "Many Of Them Are Republicans Who Have Contributed To And Backed Various Bush Campaigns And Causes Over The Decades" "Kerry's military service was an asset during the primaries; critics hoped to transform it into a liability now. The GOP says it's not involved with the veterans criticizing Kerry, but many of them are Republicans who have contributed to and backed various Bush campaigns and causes over the decades." [Fox News, Special Report, Cameron, 5/4/04]

Dallas Morning News: "Veterans' Group Critical of Kerry Backed by Bush Supporter." Bob Perry, a major supporter of President Bush and the Republican Party, is the biggest financial backer of a veterans group seeking to discredit Democrat John Kerry's military service, according to federal records. Perry, a Houston homebuilder, gave $100,000 to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that has been critical of Kerry's anti-war activities after he returned from Vietnam. That accounted for two-thirds of the organization's receipts to date. [DMN, Slater, 7/23/04]

Swift Vets Operated By Same People Who Tried to Discredit McCain in 2000

CBS News: "The Press Conference Was Set Up By The Same People Who Tried To Discredit John McCain's Reputation." "The [May, 2004 Swift Boat Veterans for Truth"] press conference was set up by the same people who tried to discredit John McCain's reputation in Vietnam service when McCain faced George W. Bush for the Republican nomination in 2000. It's the same strategy used to go after Georgia Senator Max Cleland, who lost three limbs in Vietnam." [CBS Evening News, Pitts, 5/4/04]

Salon.Com: "Same Vicious Techniques They Used Against McCain" "Behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are veteran corporate media consultant and Texas Republican activist Merrie Spaeth, who is listed as the group's media contact… In 2000, Spaeth participated in the most subterranean episode of the Republican primary contest when a shadowy group billed as 'Republicans for Clean Air' produced television ads falsely attacking the environmental record of Sen. John McCain in California, New York and Ohio. While the identity of those funding the supposedly 'independent' ads was carefully hidden, reporters soon learned that Republicans for Clean Air was simply Sam Wyly -- a big Bush contributor and beneficiary of Bush administration decisions in Texas -- and his brother, Charles, another Bush "Pioneer" contributor." [salon.com, Conalson, 5/4/04]

Swift Vets Hire Private Investigator to Dig Into Kerry's Past

Dallas Morning News: "P.I. Digs Into Kerry's War Past Group Defends Investigation; Veterans Say Comments Distorted." "Opponents of John Kerry have hired a Dallas-area private investigator to gather information aimed at discrediting his military service, say several veterans who served with the Massachusetts Democrat in Vietnam. Several veterans who have been contacted in recent days accused the private investigator, Tom Rupprath of Rockwall, of twisting their words to produce misleading and inaccurate accounts that call into doubt the medals Mr. Kerry received for his service. 'They're just distorting things,' said Jim Wasser, who served with Mr. Kerry. 'They have nothing to go after John Kerry for, so now they're trying to discredit him'." [DMN, Slater, 7/13/04]

Salon.com: "How Low Will the Swift Boat Veterans Sink?" A private detective retained by 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth'-- the Texas-based group seeking to discredit John Kerry's military record -- is contacting veterans who may have information about the incidents that led to Kerry's Vietnam decorations. According to a former Kerry crew member, several of the Massachusetts senator's old Navy comrades have refused to talk with the detective, a former FBI agent named Thomas Rupprath -- and some have complained that the detective tried to put damaging words in their mouths. Rupprath's efforts are clearly intended to discredit Kerry's military record, which should surprise nobody familiar with the 'Swift Boat' group. Its leaders are conservative Republicans embittered over Kerry's later antiwar activism." [salon.com, 7/13/04]

[igloo]

"As long as the DNC keeps showing pictures of Kerry in Vietnam, the issue will remain....."

ahh he was in vietnam. Like i said i do not care what these swift boat people say. He was there, he came back. I guess the things he said that he is trying to back up on, i mean look at it like this. He was 22 and just spent 4 months watching 18 year olds getting their arms and legs blown off. Maybe he said some shit then he regrets now. I will not hold that against him.

Now i have not really heard what the swift boat people said, are the questioning his medals? Or are they pissed because of the shit he said when he got out?

That is fine that YOU do not care what the swift boat people say......there are plenty of pople who do.....and for one, it is an issue with independents....which means this matters, whether you like it or not...

And if you have not heard what the "swift people" have said, how can you have an objective opinion.....why don't you check it out, then form an opinion......

And that is great that you do not hold what Kerry said against him, but plenty of people do.....

BTW--I think everyone gets it. KERRY WAS IN VIETNAM.

But here is what YOU don't get...to repeat: As long as Kerry keeps saying he was in Vietnam and had three purple hearts, questions will arise because there are discrepancies......period.

Are the discrepancies some time ago...yes. But so was his service, was it not?

[igloo]

The Bush teeth story came out in February.. most people don't have any idea about what the story is.. you know what ..most people like I don't even care.. Don't try to compare the story on Bush's teeth to the attack on Kerry's military credibility.. Doesn't even compare..

you don't see Democrats talking about Bush's teeth because there are so many better things to attack Bush with!

Here's a fact for ya.. Kerry has 3 purple hearts.. Your not going to take them away from him.. If you look on johnkerry.com you will see the actual forms of reccomendations.. Each award was reccomended by a few different officers and each was signed with plenty of witness's.. That is a fact.. It SHOULD not be argued or questioned..

what could be questioned is if these purple hearts and his military experience prepare him to be Commander and Chief and do they prove he will be tough on national security..

And yes.. Like Bigpoppanilis stated.. The Swift boat veterans are funded from the same people that attacked Mccain's credibility on a number of issues.. I don't find them credible..

And I agree with Sobeton.. "the more often this is brought up the less significance it has".. I love to argue this issue.. it hurts the Bush campaign SO much! It just makes people wonder time and time again.. Kerry was in Vietnam while Bush was where?.. and he has the nerve to question him?!

let me leave you with this article once again..

"Don't try to compare the story on Bush's teeth to the attack on Kerry's military credibility.. Doesn't even compare.. "

Are you kidding me----the press and the DNC were all over this for months----months.....it is absolutely in the same ballpark......you are completely lost.

The fucking DNC was calling press conferences for Bush to release his medical records.....there was a wtich hunt for his dentist......get a clue son.

And the Dems gave up on it when the polls showed no one cared...

And for the love of God...NO FUCKING SHIT KERRY HAS SERVED AND HAS 3 PURPLE HEARTS..........

To repeat, because maybe if it is said enough times it could get through your skull: Kerry and his camp can't have it BOTH ways. There are LEGITIMATE questions with his services record, during and after. Case closed.

Not a witch hunt, not ridiculous assertions and accusation, but LEGITIMATE questions, that is worthy of exploring. ANd if you think that his purple hearts relate directly to being CIC, then absultely this issue is worthy of inspection. You do understand that right?

And the Swift Boat Veterans are not credible because they are funded by a douchebag?..........think about what you are saying......there are plenty of people in this country who are credible but can't get a platform because of funding....that does not mean what they are saying is wrong or innaccurate

To think that the Swift Boat group are all liars or not credible is absolutely ridiculous and blind....and destroys your credibility and opinion....now that is a fact......

And I agree with Sobeton.. "the more often this is brought up the less significance it has".. I love to argue this issue.. it hurts the Bush campaign SO much! It just makes people wonder time and time again.. Kerry was in Vietnam while Bush was where?.. and he has the nerve to question him?!

Another point you keep missing: This issue is resonating with UNDECIDEDs...get it?...understand?

It may lose significance for you, and those entrenched in the Kerry vote, but not for those on the fence.........

BTW--Show me once where Bush has questioned Kerry's services.....just once

You are so ridiculously blind on this issue it is unreal

BTW2--there are plenty of article that shoot the other way as well...I suggest you read them, maybe you can get some objectivity

[igloo]

erm...in case you havent noticed, Kerry condemned their recent ad campaign questioning Bush's war record.

QUOTE]

In case you have not noticed, or perhaps can not understand the dynamics, the Kerry condemning was of the recent ad, which was disgusting...in the hope that Bush would come down harder on the Swift Boats......pure political play by Kerry, but maybe some more credibility if he asked that the ad not be put out there in the first place--don't you think?

[igloo]

the cambodia mission story if I’m not mistaken involved particular dates. I believe Kerry said it was around christmas time; however it was really around the beginning of january. nothing starling about confusing dates. in his testimony before the senate (you should really read the transcript it's online) he spoke of crimes described by fellow veterans who opposed the war. he never admitted committing war crimes. why would you incriminate yourself by admitting to a war crime; which you could be imprisoned for? doesn’t seem very rationale to me. Kerry has always maintained, when he testified his choice of words was poor, but he stood behind the claims he raised.

you are probably right the truth probably falls somewhere in the middle, and I would say the same with regard to swift boat veterans for truth claims. is Kerry being a bit shady and vague? I would say so. conversely the same can be said of Bush. they both have questionable character traits IMO..

I know you won’t believe this, but I’m not interested Bush’s military service. he served and that’s it. once again Iraq, Terrorism, The Economy, etc are more important to me then Kerry’s Vietnam days or Bush’s teeth, etc.

Kerry did admit he committed atrocities...and I saw a recent intervuew with him--and he did not stand behind the claims he made,at all.

Kerry testified before Congress on April 22, 1971, that his fellow sailors and soldiers had "raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks and generally ravaged the countryside of Vietnam. ... " A few days later, Kerry went on "Meet the Press" saying that he, personally, had "committed atrocities" in Vietnam, as well as accusing other American servicemen -- the men he now refers to as his "band of brothers" -- of doing the same.

I believe the Cambodia thing is about dates, and whether they were ever in Cambodia at all.....who knows what the real thruth, and as a standalone issue this is defintely no big deal, but when you add it with all the other issues, it is becomes an issue

I agree with you, I believe there are more important issues...I have always stated that......and I have always stated that I give Kerry every bit of credit for serving...for volunteering.....

My main point though is there can not be hysteria from Kerry backers if his record (especially afterwards) is questioned, because he is running on a Vietnam platform to justify him being a worthy CIC........especially if those doing the questioning are Vietnam veterans......can't have it both ways.......and if the roles were reversed, the media and the DNC would be having a filed day...I can only imagine the ads moveon.org would have came up with..

[igloo]

Like I said, truth somewhere in the middle:

Military records counter a Kerry critic

Fellow skipper's citation refers to enemy fireBy Michael Dobbs

Updated: 11:12 p.m. ET Aug. 18, 2004WASHINGTON - Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own version of events.

advertisement

In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."

• More politics news

As one of five Swift boat skippers who led the raid up the Bay Hap River, Thurlow was a direct participant in the disputed events. He is also a leading member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a public advocacy group of Vietnam veterans dismayed by Kerry's subsequent antiwar activities, which has aired a controversial television advertisement attacking his war record.

In interviews and written reminiscences, Kerry has described how his 50-foot patrol boat came under fire from the banks of the Bay Hap after a mine explosion disabled another U.S. patrol boat. According to Kerry and members of his crew, the firing continued as an injured Kerry leaned over the bow of his ship to rescue a Special Forces officer who was blown overboard in a second explosion.

'Constant enemy small arms fire'

Last month, Thurlow swore in an affidavit that Kerry was "not under fire" when he fished Lt. James Rassmann out of the water. He described Kerry's Bronze Star citation, which says that all units involved came under "small arms and automatic weapons fire," as "totally fabricated."

"I never heard a shot," Thurlow said in his affidavit, which was released by Swift Boats Veterans for Truth. The group claims the backing of more than 250 Vietnam veterans, including a majority of Kerry's fellow boat commanders.

A document recommending Thurlow for the Bronze Star noted that all his actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire which LTJG THURLOW completely ignored in providing immediate assistance" to the disabled boat and its crew. The citation states that all other units in the flotilla also came under fire.

"It's like a Hollywood presentation here, which wasn't the case," Thurlow said last night after being read the full text of his Bronze Star citation. "My personal feeling was always that I got the award for coming to the rescue of the boat that was mined. This casts doubt on anybody's awards. It is sickening and disgusting."

Thurlow said he would consider his award "fraudulent" if coming under enemy fire was the basis for it. "I am here to state that we weren't under fire," he said. He speculated that Kerry could have been the source of at least some of the language used in the citation.

In a telephone interview Tuesday evening after he attended a Swift Boat Veterans strategy session in an Arlington hotel, Thurlow said he lost his Bronze Star citation more than 20 years ago. He said he was unwilling to authorize release of his military records because he feared attempts by the Kerry campaign to discredit him and other anti-Kerry veterans.

The Post filed an independent request for the documents with the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, which is the central repository for veterans' records. The documents were faxed to The Post by officials at the records center yesterday.

Thurlow and other anti-Kerry veterans have repeatedly alleged that Kerry was the author of an after-action report that described how his boat came under enemy fire. Kerry campaign researchers dispute that assertion, and there is no convincing documentary evidence to settle the argument. As the senior skipper in the flotilla, Thurlow might have been expected to write the after-action report for March 13, but he said that Kerry routinely "duked the system" to present his version of events.

For much of the episode, Kerry was not in a position to know firsthand what was happening on Thurlow's boat, as Kerry's boat had sped down the river after the mine exploded under another boat. He later returned to provide assistance to the stricken boat.

Thurlow, an oil industry worker and former teacher in Kansas, said he was angry with Kerry for his antiwar activities on his return to the United States and particularly Kerry's claim before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that U.S. troops in Vietnam had committed war crimes "with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

Anti-Kerry TV ad

" 'Upset' is too mild a word," said Thurlow, a registered Republican, of his reaction to Kerry then. "He did it strictly for his own personal political gain, and it directly affected every single one of us as we were trying to put our lives together."

Two other Swift boat skippers who were direct participants in the March 13, 1969, mine explosion on the Bay Hap, Jack Chenoweth and Richard Pees, have said they do not remember coming under "enemy fire." A fourth commander, Don Droz, who was one of Kerry's closest friends in Vietnam, was killed in action a month later.

The incident featured prominently in an anti-Kerry television ad produced by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth earlier this month. "John Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star," says Van Odell, a gunner on PCF-23, one of the boats that came to the rescue of the stricken boat. "I know. I was there."

The Bronze Star controversy is also a major focus of an anti-Kerry book by John E. O'Neill, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," which will hit No. 2 on The Post's bestseller list this weekend. The book accuses Kerry of "fleeing the scene" and lying repeatedly about his role.

Members of Kerry's crew have come to his defense, as has Rassmann, the Special Forces officer whom he fished from the river. Rassmann says he has vivid memories of being fired at from both banks after he fell into the river and as Kerry came to his rescue. The two had an emotional reunion on the eve of the Iowa Democratic caucuses in January, an event that some political analysts believe helped swing votes to Kerry at a crucial time.

The Bronze Star recommendations for both Kerry and Thurlow were signed by Lt. Cmdr. George M. Elliott, who received reports on the incident from his base in the Gulf of Thailand. Elliott is a supporter of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and has questioned Kerry's actions in Vietnam. But he has refused repeated requests for an interview after issuing conflicting statements to the Boston Globe about whether Kerry deserved a Silver Star. He was unreachable last night.

Money has poured into Swift Boat Veterans for Truth since the group launched its television advertisement attacking Kerry earlier this month. According to O'Neill, the group has received more than $450,000 over the past two weeks, mainly in small contributions. The Dallas Morning News reported yesterday that the organization has also received two $100,000 checks from Houston home builder Bob Perry, who backed George W. Bush's campaigns for Texas governor and for president.

Bush campaign officials have said they have no connection to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which is not permitted to coordinate its activities with a presidential campaign under federal election law.

[igloo]

Truth somewhere in the middle:

Kerry war journal

contradicts key claim?

At least 9 days after Purple Heart,

wrote he had not 'been shot at yet'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: August 17, 2004

8:00 p.m. Eastern

By Art Moore

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

A previously unnoticed passage in John Kerry's approved war biography, citing his own journals, appears to contradict the senator's claim he won his first Purple Heart as a result of an injury sustained under enemy fire.

John Kerry receving medal for Vietnam service.

Kerry, who served as commander of a Navy swift boat, has insisted he was wounded by enemy fire Dec. 2, 1968, when he and two other men took a smaller vessel, a Boston Whaler, on a patrol north of his base at Cam Ranh Bay.

But Douglas Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," for which Kerry supplied his journals and letters, indicates that as Kerry set out on a subsequent mission, he had not yet been under enemy fire.

While the date of the four-day excursion on PCF-44 [Patrol Craft Fast] is not specified, Brinkley notes it commenced when Kerry "had just turned 25, on Dec. 11, 1968," which was nine days after the incident in which he claimed he had been wounded by enemy fire.

Brinkley recounts the outset of that mid-December journey, which included a crew of radarman James Wasser, engineman William Zaladonis, gunner's mate Stephen Gardner and boatswain's mates Drew Whitlow and Stephen Hatch:

"They pulled away from the pier at Cat Lo with spirits high, feeling satisfied with the way things were going for them. They had no lust for battle, but they also were were not afraid. Kerry wrote in his notebook, 'A cocky feeling of invincibility accompanied us up the Long Tau shipping channel because we hadn't been shot at yet, and Americans at war who haven't been shot at are allowed to be cocky.'"

The diary entry apparently confirms assertions made by Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth, a group of more than 250 vets opposing his presidential candidacy who served in the Naval operation that patrolled the rivers and canals of the Mekong Delta area controlled by North Vietnam.

Kerry has made his four months of service in Vietnam a central theme in his campaign, arguing his purported war heroics help qualify him to be commander in chief.

In the swift-boat group's newly published book, "Unfit for Command," authors John O'Neill, who took over command of Kerry's boat, and Jerome Corsi assert the wound for which Kerry received his medal actually was caused by him firing an M-79 grenade launcher too close, "causing a tiny piece of shrapnel (one to two centimeters) to barely stick in his arm."

SPONSORED LINKS

Magazine Subscriptions at Great Prices

Stay informed with one of over 1500 discount magazine subscriptions offered by Discount Magazine Publications. From world news to fashion, we have what you need to stay current in today's trends.

www.shopmags.com

The New York Times Home Delivery

Uncover financial insights for your business daily with The New York Times - the authority on market trend news and analysis. Now delivered to your home or business starting at $2.40/wk.

www.nytimes.com/sb-subscription

Could the "we" to which Kerry referred in his notebook entry have meant only that his crew, rather than Kerry in particular, had not encountered enemy fire?

At least one other PCF-44 crew member was with Kerry during the Boston Whaler incident, Zaldonis, according to the Boston Globe's account of the story.

Whatever the case, Corsi told WorldNetDaily he believes the apparent contradiction in Kerry's journal, as presented by Brinkley, deserves a response.

"We're not interested in charges that cannot be documented," he added.

The Kerry campaign's press staff has not answered WND's request for a response.

Corsi contends Kerry has a "pattern" of equivocation, "distinguishing and extending" his answers to charges, including responses to alleged participation in a 1971 Kansas City meeting of Vietnam Veterans Against the War where a plot to assassinate seven U.S. senators was considered.

"Finally, he said he was there, but he doesn't remember it," Corsi said.

Last week, Kerry was forced to revise his decades-long contention he was on a secret mission in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968.

"Tour of Duty" author Brinkley is reported to be writing a piece for the New Yorker saying it actually was January 1969 when Kerry was sent into Cambodia, not December 1968.

As WorldNetDaily reported, the authors of "Unfit for Command" claim that despite the senator's many public references to spending Christmas Eve in Cambodia – including a1986 speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate – the candidate was never in Vietnam's neighboring country. Rather, they say he was more than 50 miles from the Cambodian border at Sa Dec.

'Dear diary moment'

Conservative commentator and attorney Chris Horner, a defender of the swift-boats group who alerted WND to the diary entry, called it a "stunning" revelation.

On recent television and radio appearances, he said, claims made by eyewitnesses to events surrounding the first Purple Heart have been countered by "surrogates of Kerry" who do not address the substance of the charges.

"So finally, you have an eyewitness in a dear diary moment, saying, 'Dear diary, I still haven't been shot at,' confirming what the Swiftees have been saying," observed Horner, who has defended the group's claims in recent appearances on television news shows.

"Admittedly the source is questionable – John Kerry – but it at last provides a witness from his camp to address the charges that his first Purple Heart resulted from a scratch borne of his own fire," Horner said.

Swift boat veteran John O'Neill, co-author of "Unfit for Command." (Fox News Channel)

Kerry's journal entry indicating he had not yet been fired upon is noted in a soon-to-be released book by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, editors of the left-leaning, alternative newsletter Counterpunch. In an excerpt of their book, they write regarding Kerry's first Purple Heart, "there's no evidence that anyone had fired back, or that Kerry had been in combat, as becomes obvious when we read an entry from his diary about a subsequent excursion, written on December 11, 1968, nine days after the incident that got Kerry his medal."

Enemy fire?

According to "Unfit for Command," Kerry's initial requests to receive a Purple Heart for the wound were flatly rejected.

In "Tour of Duty," Brinkley quotes Kerry as saying he and his comrades were "scared s---less" that night, thinking fishermen in sampans might be Viet Cong.

When some of the sampan occupants began unloading something on the beach, Kerry lit a flare, causing the startled men on shore to run for cover. That's when Kerry says he and the other Americans began firing.

Said Kerry in "Tour of Duty":

My M-16 jammed, and as I bent down in the boat to grab another gun, a stinging piece of heat socked into my arm and just seemed to burn like hell. By this time one of the sailors had started the engine and we ran by the beach, strafing it. Then it was quiet.

O'Neill and Corsi, however, claim there is no evidence whatsoever Kerry took any enemy fire that night.

Patrick Runyon was operating the engine on the Boston whaler during the incident.

"I can't say for sure that we got return fire or how [Kerry] got nicked," Runyon is quoted as saying in "Unfit for Command." "I couldn't say one way or the other. I know he did get nicked, a scrape on the arm."

Wrote O'Neill: "In a separate conversation, Runyon related that he never knew Kerry was wounded. So even in the [boston] Globe biography accounting, it was not clear that there was any enemy fire, just a question about how Kerry might have been hit with shrapnel."

The book also asserts another one of Kerry's three Purple Hearts was self-inflicted.

[igloo]

ELECTION 2004

Kerry damage control on Cambodia story

Senator's supporters now saying trip in January 1969, not Christmas 1968

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: August 13, 2004

3:00 p.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

John Kerry continues to play damage control on his decades-long contention he was on a secret mission in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968, as word comes the author of a positive account of his Vietnam duty is preparing a column to explain the candidate's suspect story.

According to the Drudge Report, historian Doug Brinkley, author of "Tour of Duty," is writing a piece for the New Yorker saying it was actually January 1969 when Kerry was sent into Cambodia, not December 1968.

SPONSORED LINKS

Magazine Subscriptions at Great Prices

Stay informed with one of over 1500 discount magazine subscriptions offered by Discount Magazine Publications. From world news to fashion, we have what you need to stay current in today's trends.

www.shopmags.com

The New York Times Home Delivery

Uncover financial insights for your business daily with The New York Times - the authority on market trend news and analysis. Now delivered to your home or business starting at $2.40/wk.

www.nytimes.com/sb-subscription

Kerry spent four months in Vietnam as skipper of a SWIFT Boat before returning to the U.S. and becoming a vocal leader of the anti-war movement.

As WorldNetDaily reported, the authors of the best-selling book "Unfit for Command," which refutes many of Kerry's war stories, claim that despite the senator's 1986 speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate mentioning spending Christmas Eve in Cambodia, the candidate was never in Vietnam's neighboring country. Rather, they say he was over 50 miles from the Cambodian border at Sa Dec.

"I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting in a gunboat in Cambodia," said Kerry on the Senate floor. "I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States tell the American people I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have the memory which is seared – seared – in me. … "

Other references to the Cambodia trip appeared in the Boston Herald in 1979, a 1992 Associated Press story and a 2003 piece in the Washington Post.

Several analysts have pointed out inconsistencies in Kerry's accounts, one being the fact that he references President Nixon in the Senate floor speech even though Nixon wasn't sworn into office until January 1969.

After repeated attempts by this and other media outlets to seek a response from the Kerry campaign, the national director of Veterans for Kerry, John Hurley, told Fox News this week Kerry simply got the date of the Cambodia trip wrong.

"I think the date is what's inaccurate, that it was just not Christmas Eve Day," he told the news channel.

Another defense claims Kerry was near the border at Christmastime but not actually in Cambodia.

Columnist Norman Tucker writes about the January adjustment of the story:

In an attempt at damage control of Kerry's "seared in me" memory, the revelation has just now been made that he had misspoken and that it is now "seared" in him that he was really in Cambodia not on Christmas of 1968 but in January 1969. His four-month "tour of duty" does not leave much of a time frame for adjustment.

The problem for Kerry is that President Nixon did not even begin to bomb Cambodia until March of 1969 and did not send in troops there until April of 1970. It is hard to imagine just how Kerry got "ordered" there over two years before that date.

Kerry left Vietnam in March 1969 after receiving his third Purple Heart.

Retired Foreign Service Officer Andrew Antippas wrote today in a Washington Times op-ed piece:

"I served as a Foreign Service officer in the American embassy in Saigon from March 1968 to February 1970 and subsequently at the American embassy in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, from 1970 to 1972. My job in the political section of our embassy in Saigon was to be the 'Cambodia Man.' My principal tasks were to follow border incidents involving U.S. forces along the Cambodian border."

Antippas adds, "As U.S. forces in 1966 and 1967 progressively pushed the Vietnamese ... U.S. commanders sought permission for 'hot pursuit' operations against Communist forces attacking from Cambodian territory. This always was denied, much to the military's frustration." He notes that "concerning the assertion that Mr. Kerry was shot at by the Khmer Rouge during his Christmas 1968 visit to Cambodia, it should be noted that the Khmer Rouge didn't take the field until the Easter Offensive of 1972."

Concludes Antippas: "The bottom line of all this is that ... between 1961 and 1975, there was ongoing attention and scrutiny paid to the border because of the political sensitivities over the neutrality of the Cambodians. While things may have happened that no one ever found out about in Saigon, the Cambodians yelled bloody murder to the world press and the ICC whenever they found Americans trespassing."

[bigpoppanils]

erm...in case you havent noticed, Kerry condemned their recent ad campaign questioning Bush's war record.

QUOTE]

In case you have not noticed, or perhaps can not understand the dynamics, the Kerry condemning was of the recent ad, which was disgusting...in the hope that Bush would come down harder on the Swift Boats

1. How do you know kerry did it for that purpose?

2. come down harder? in case you havent noticed, Bush hasnt said anything on the issue.

[igloo]

1. How do you know kerry did it for that purpose?

2. come down harder? in case you havent noticed, Bush hasnt said anything on the issue.

(1)...Politics 101 son, politics 101...be real. Actually, I just saw a DEM strategist say it was a briiliant political stroke by Kerry because he condemns something that is absurd, and it may box Bush into condeming something that is legitimate.

(2) Wrong again son. I have seen Bush myself twice in recent days say Kerry should honored and proud for his military service......he stopped short of slamming Swift Boats, because he can't call them liars, can he?....but he did say 527's are out of control, and did make mention to the brutal attacks against him.

His press secretary has also repeatedly distanced the WHite House from the ads........

If you are going to come out me, you have to come stronger than this son

[bigpoppanils]

he stopped short of slamming Swift Boats, because he can't call them liars, can he

given the flip flopping that the members of swift boats have done he certainly can.

[igloo]

given the flip flopping that the members of swift boats have done he certainly can.

Are you sure you want to use the word flip flop?

[bigpoppanils]

Are you sure you want to use the word flip flop?

yes i do.

I hear the Bush fans crapping on kerry all the time for flip-flopping. But when any right-leaning or right wing person or organization does so, I hear very little about it beyond "its different".

[igloo]

yes i do.

I hear the Bush fans crapping on kerry all the time for flip-flopping. But when any right-leaning or right wing person or organization does so, I hear very little about it beyond "its different".

umm..Kerry does flip flop......I wouldn't say Bush fans crap on him about that like it is some fantasy...he is a flip flopper---no disputing that....

And to say the Swift Boat gents are flip floppers is an extreme overstatement and poor comparison by you....I know one guy retracted a statement, then retracted his retraction, and is now hiding...but let's not get crazy (unless you want to bring up Kerry's flip-flopping on the very same issue)...

Any other half sentences you want to grab from my posts to challenge, while ignoring your statements that were proved inaccurate?

[jtk4]

i want to know how close these boats were to kerry's to say that he was not under fire. This was 40 fuckin years ago i doubt people can remember clearly what happened mostly being in that hell hole.

I was not forming opinions really, i was just saying that he was there and i did not care about the medals. So unless these guys were saying he was doing paperwork and not going anywhere where there was danger, i personally do not care. Others might, but they are stupid and should concentrate on the bigger issues that effect them.

[igloo]

I posted this seperately, when I should have posted this here.....To my point about the hypocrisy and bias against Bush...

TV Gives No Respect to Swift

Boat Vets for Truth

Back in February, the three broadcast networks were obsessed with the story of President Bush’s National Guard service. But in May, when John Kerry’s former Navy colleagues from Vietnam went to the National Press Club to charge that Kerry’s tales of heroism as a Swift Boat commander were highly exaggerated, those same networks acted as if their job was to bury the news, not report it.

Back on May 4, ABC and NBC ignored the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth’s press conference, while CBS’s Byron Pitts claimed the veterans had merely “unleashed decades of bitterness.†His Evening News story ignored Kerry’s record, but challenged his critics: “If you think this is just a concerned group of veterans, think again.â€

Even though the Swift Vets have now published a book, Unfit for Command, and sponsored a TV ad, the networks still aren’t investigating their charges. MRC analysts examined ABC, CBS and NBC’s morning and evening news shows. They found 75 stories this year questioning Bush’s National Guard service, but only nine detailing any of the Swift Vets’ anti-Kerry charges, an eight-to-one disparity. But the networks’ double standard runs far deeper than the amount of coverage:

• Partisanship: The “AWOL†story got its legs February 1 when Democratic boss Terry McAuliffe appeared on ABC’s This Week to declare how he wants a debate in which “John Kerry, a war hero with a chest full of medals, is standing next to George Bush, a man who was AWOL in the Alabama National Guard,†and reporters began badgering the White House to prove McAuliffe’s charges false. But the hint of a GOP connection to the Swift Vets has reporters holding their noses. The first mention of the Swift Vets on NBC Nightly News came on August 6 when Andrea Mitchell complained the groups’ anti-Kerry “ad is paid for by Bush contributors using a loophole in the McCain- Feingold law.†Mitchell’s story did not examine the vets’ charges against Kerry, just complained about the fact that they could get them on TV.

• Evidence. Reporters put the onus on Bush to prove the critics wrong. “Given the absence of any witnesses who could fill in those gaps and corroborate the President’s recollection,“ ABC’s Terry Moran insisted on February 10, “the issue is not going to go away.†CBS was even more demanding (see box).

But holes in Kerry’s record aren’t treated as suspicious. On the issue of Kerry’s first wound in 1968, then-Coastal Division 14 Commander Grant Hibbard says Kerry came to his office asking for a Purple Heart for what amounted to a scratch. As recounted in Unfit for Command (page 38), “I told Kerry to ‘forget it.’ There was no hostile fire, the injury was self-inflicted for all I knew, besides it was nothing more than a scratch. Kerry wasn’t getting a Purple Heart recommendation from me.†But when the issue became news in April, the networks made it a one-day story, even though the records Kerry released failed to include the paperwork supporting the Purple Heart award.

• Enthusiasm. On February 10, White House reporters badgered Press Secretary Scott McClellan for 30 minutes, demanding detailed proof that everything Bush said in the past was true. But the networks now call the Swift Vets’ ad “ugly,†and reporters’ demand is for Bush to condemn it, not Kerry to factually rebut it.

— Rich Noyes