Kerry: Unfit For Command - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

08/27/2004 01:49:00 PM · #326

Another vet, who actually served with Kerry, on his boat agreed to be interviewed.

Read the interview here

"Schachte said he has never been contacted by or talked to anybody in the Bush-Cheney campaign or any Republican organization."

If Kerry really wanted to help "prove" that the Swiftboat Vets for Truth weren't telling the truth, he could release all of his military medical records, including those related to his Purple Hearts. (But you won't see the liberal US media demanding that...)

MadMordegon

08/27/2004 02:00:12 PM · #327

Originally posted by EddyG:

Keep fighting that good fight Eddy.

08/27/2004 03:34:53 PM · #328

You'll find this and the rest of Mr. Kerry's military records at JohnKerry.com.

Message edited by author 2004-08-27 15:36:45.

08/27/2004 04:03:17 PM · #329

Chris Johnson, president of the Whitman Baseball and Softball Association, digs a footing Sunday, Aug. 22, 2004, in Whitman, Mass., for an additional panel for a memorial to each of the more than 900 soldiers killed in the war in Iraq. (AP Photo/Lisa Poole) [see article here]

Here's a better article.

..........

The latest casualty count for U.S. forces is 971 (incredibly, about a week ago, when I first posted the figure on this board, the count was 932).

Message edited by author 2004-08-29 12:49:50.

EddyG

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

08/27/2004 05:14:37 PM · #330

Originally posted by bdobe:

You'll find this and the rest of Mr. Kerry's military records at JohnKerry.com.

We've been through this before. Those are the records he has selectively chosen to release. He has not released the formal evaluations from superior officers or his complete, uncensored military file (which Bush has done). i.e., he has not signed a Standard Form 180 -- which in effect is a limited power of attorney that grants to third parties, including news organizations and individuals, the right to receive 100 percent of his military and medical records. Nice try to side-step the issue though.

Message edited by author 2004-08-27 17:17:49.

mrorange002

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

08/29/2004 10:00:23 AM · #331

A letter from Michael Moore to George W Bush:

I know you and I have had our differences in the past, and I realize I am the one who started this whole mess about "who did what" during Vietnam when I brought up that "deserter" nonsense back in January.Â But I have to hand it to you on what you have uncovered about John Kerry and his record in Vietnam. Kerry has tried to pass himself off as a war hero, but thanks to you and your friends, we now know the truth.

First of all, thank you for pointing out to all of us that Mr. Kerry was never struck by a BULLET. It was only SHRAPNEL that entered his body! I did not know that! Hell, what's the big deal about a bunch of large, sharp, metal shards ripping open your flesh? That happens to all of us! In my opinion, if you want a Purple Heart, you'd better be hit by a bullet -- with your name on it!

Secondly, thank you for sending Bob Dole out there and letting us know that Mr. Kerry, though wounded three times, actually "never spilled blood." When you are in the debates with Kerry, turn to him and say, "Dammit, Mr. Kerry, next time you want a Purple Heart, you better spill some American red blood! And I don't mean a few specks like those on O.J.'s socks -- we want to see a good pint or two of blood for each medal. In fact, I would have preferred that you had bled profusely, a big geyser of blood spewing out of your neck or something!" Then throw this one at him: "Senator Kerry, over 58,000 brave Americans gave their lives in Vietnam -- but YOU didn't. You only got WOUNDED! What do you have to say for yourself???" Lay that one on him and he won't know what to do.

And thanks, also, Mr. Bush, for exposing the fact that Mr. Kerry might have actually WOUNDED HIMSELF in order to get those shiny medals. Of course he did! How could the Viet Cong have hit him -- he was on a SWIFT boat! He was going too fast to be hit by enemy fire. He tried to blow himself up three different times just so he could go home and run for president someday. It's all so easy to see, now, what he was up to.

What would we do without you, Mr. Bush? Criticize you as we might, when it comes to pointing out other men's military records, there is no one who can touch your prowess. In 2000, you let out the rumor that your opponent John McCain might be "nuts" from the five years he spent in a POW camp. Then, in the 2002 elections, your team compared triple-amputee Sen. Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden, and that cost him the election. And now you are having the same impact on war hero John Kerry. Since you (oops, I mean "The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth!") started running those ads, Kerry's poll numbers have dropped (with veterans, he has lost 18 points in the last few weeks).

Some people have said, "Who are you, Mr. Bush, to attack these brave men considering you yourself have never seen combat -- in fact, you actively sought to avoid it." What your critics fail to understand is that even though your dad got you into a unit that would never be sent to Vietnam -- and even though you didn't show up for Guard duty for at least a year -- at least you were still IN FAVOR of the Vietnam War! Cowards like Clinton felt it was more important to be consistent (he opposed the war, thus he refused to go) than to be patriotic and two-faced.

The reason that I think you know so much about other men's war wounds is because, during your time in the Texas Air National Guard, you suffered so many of them yourself. Consider the paper cut you received on Sept. 22,1972, while stationed in Alabama, working on a Senate campaign for your dad's friend (when you were supposed to be on the Guard base). A campaign brochure appeared from nowhere, ambushing your right index finger, and blood trickled out onto your brand new argyle sweater.

Then there was the incident with the Crazy Glue when your fraternity brothers visited you one weekend at the base and glued your lips together while you were "passed out." Though initially considered "friendly fire," it was later ruled that you suffered severe post-traumatic stress disorder from the assault and required certain medicinal attention -- which, it seems, was provided by those same fraternity brethren.

But nothing matched your heroism when, on July 2, 1969, you sustained a massive head injury when enemy combatants from another Guard unit dropped a keg of Coors on your head during a reconnaissance mission at a nearby all-girls college. Fortunately, the cool, smooth fluids that poured out of the keg were exactly what was needed to revive you.

That you never got a Purple Heart for any of these incidents is a shame. I can fully appreciate your anger at Senator Kerry for the three he received.Â I mean, Kerry was a man of privilege, he could have gotten out just like you. Instead, he thinks he's going to gain points with the American people bragging about how he was getting shot at every day in the Mekong Delta. Ha! Is that the best he can do? Hell, I hear gunfire every night outside my apartment window! If he thinks he is going to impress anyone with the fact that he volunteered to go when he could have spent the Vietnam years on the family yacht, he should think again. That only shows how stupid he was!Â True-blue Americans want a president who knows how to pull strings and work the system and get away with doing as little work as possible!

So, to make it up to you, I have written some new ads you can use on TV.Â People will soon tire of the Swift Boat Veterans and you are going to need some fresh, punchier material. Feel free to use any of these:

ANNOUNCER: "When the bullets were flying all around him in Vietnam, what did John Kerry do? He said he leaned over the boat and 'pulled a man out of the river.'Â But, as we all know, men don't live in the river -- fish do. John Kerry knows how to tell a big fish tale. What he won't tell you is that when the enemy was shooting at him, he ducked. Do you want a president who will duck? Vote Bush."

ANNOUNCER: "Mr. Kerry's biggest supporter, Sen. Max Cleland, claims to have lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam. But he still has one arm! How did that happen? One word: Cowardice. When duty called, he was unwilling to give his last limb. Is that the type of selfishness you want hanging out in the White House? We think not. Vote for the man who would be willing to give America his right frontal lobe. Vote Bush."

Hope these help, Mr. Bush. And remember, when the American death toll in Iraq hits 1,000 during the Republican Convention, be sure to question whether those who died really did indeed "die" -- or were they just trying to get their faces on CNN's nightly tribute to fallen heroes? The 16 who've died so far this week were probably working hand in hand with the Kerry campaign to ruin your good time in New York. Stay consistent, sir, and always, ALWAYS question the veracity of anyone who risks their life for this country. It's the least they deserve.

Yours,

Michael Moore
mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com

P.S. George, I know you said you don't read the newspaper, but USA Today has given me credentials to the Republican Convention to write a guest column each day next week (Tuesday to Friday). If you don't want to read it, you and I will be in the same building so maybe I could come by and read it to you?

Lemme know ...

Message edited by author 2004-08-29 10:01:21.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/29/2004 10:39:30 AM · #332

Seems President Bush disagrees with Eddy

Bush says Kerry was 'more heroic' than he was.

at least he seems to be trying to rise above this records silliness on both sides.

Message edited by author 2004-08-29 10:42:04.

mrorange002

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

08/29/2004 12:52:57 PM · #333

an interesting photo montage of soldiers who have died in Iraq

MadMordegon

08/29/2004 01:20:03 PM · #334

Originally posted by Gordon:

Seems President Bush disagrees with Eddy

Bush says Kerry was 'more heroic' than he was.

at least he seems to be trying to rise above this records silliness on both sides.

I guess there is some honesty somewhere in there.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

08/29/2004 10:51:45 PM · #335

From the Congressional Record, Jan 28, 1998 ( do a search for and select the Congressional Record January 28 1998, page down to and select Thomas M. Bilodeau, then select Kerry )

John Kerry requested consent for the text of his eulogy for Thomas Bilodeau ( a deceased swift boat veteran ), originally delivered on Nov, 10, 1977, be entered into the Congressional Record. A part of that text reads as follows :

"There was the time we were carrying special forces up a river and a mine exploded under our boat sending it 2 feet into the air. We were receiving incoming rocket and small arms fire and Tommy was returning fire with his M-60 machine gun when it literally broke apart in his hands. He was left holding the pieces unable to fire back while one of the Green Berets walked along the edge of the boat to get Tommy another M-60. As he was doing so, the boat made a high speed turn to starboard and the Green Beret kept going--straight into the river."

If this account refers to the same incident in which PCF-3 was damaged by a mine, and in which a Green Beret named Jim Rassman was saved by John Kerry, after having been "knocked" overboard, and for which Kerry was awarded the Bronze Star and a Purple Heart...then John Kerry has some explaining to do - his statements then and those since then do not agree - - - Then it was "our boat", now it is PCF-3; then it was a "high speed turn to starboard" that knocked the Green Beret overboard, now it was either a second mine or a rocket. Let's see how the media handle this one - and how/if Kerry handles it.

Ron

Message edited by author 2004-08-29 22:56:25.

08/30/2004 04:53:54 AM · #336

Originally posted by EddyG:

Originally posted by bdobe:
You'll find this and the rest of Mr. Kerry's military records at JohnKerry.com.

We've been through this before. Those are the records he has selectively chosen to release. He has not released the formal evaluations from superior officers or his complete, uncensored military file (which Bush has done). i.e., he has not signed a Standard Form 180 -- which in effect is a limited power of attorney that grants to third parties, including news organizations and individuals, the right to receive 100 percent of his military and medical records. Nice try to side-step the issue though.

EddyG,

This is incredibly pathetic... I understand that in the right-wing radio and FauxNews circle there's all this talk about Standard Form 180... well, let me call bullshit on that. First of all, no matter how many records Mr. Kerry releases, you and those that share your world view, will not be satisfied. It's clear that the only thing that will satisfy you and the dishonorable members of the SBV group is the complete humiliation of Mr. Kerry: a good and honorable man that has served our country as an officer in the Navy, a prosecutor, and in state and federal elected offices. Now, after admitting that only this, Mr. Kerry's humiliation and Mr. Bush's reelection, will satisfy you, I hope that we can debate what's really relevant and what this election will hinge on: Mr. Bush's record as president. Of course, to do so, you'll have to do better than merely mischaracterize the Census figures on poverty that was released on Friday:

Originally posted by EddyG:

According to U.S. Census Bureau Data, the U.S. hasn't seen such low "poverty" levels since the end of the Carter years -- well over a generation ago.

Breaking the data down by presidential term:

Reagan I 14.7%
Reagan II 13.5%
Bush 13.8%
Clinton I 14.3%
Clinton II 12.3%
Bush 11.9%

However, the very figures/source you provided did not support your conclusion:

This is a screen shot of the site that EddyG provided a link to. I added the names of the respective administrations, and color coded them:

Reagan: Turquoise
Bush I: Baby Blue
Clinton: Red
Bush II: Pink

Note that it doesn't seem to support the conclusion that EddyG draws from it. Moreover, EddyG and RonB, do miss the forest for the trees [referencing an earlier post]; because what's truly important about these figures is the trend line. Note how during the Clinton administration poverty rates progressively declined. Conversely, under Mr. Bush II, the trend line is reversed. Therefore, the point of the figures is that Mr. Bush's economic policies have failed to create the jobs promised and, in stead, have caused a net negative effect on the overall economy.

Now, as for the issue of Mr. Kerry's military records vs. Mr. Bush's military records: I think that the charges that the SBV members are making is the biggest crock of shit. And, as I mentioned to you when you first created this thread (in response to which I started Bush: Flip Flopper in Chief), these charges have the potential to back fire against Mr. Bush: BIG TIME. Well, little by little we're starting to see that come about: 46% of Americans belive that Mr. Bush's campaign is behind the SBV ads (see converted PDF into HTML here, or view the original PDF here). Of course, you'll not be surprised to learn that I'm part of that 46% that belive that Mr. Bush & Co. are behind the ads, and with plenty of reason:

Any student of Bush family campaigns could have seen the swift boat shiv shining a mile away. This old family has traditions - horseshoes, fishing, bad syntax and having the help do the dirty work in campaigns as well as the kitchen. And they are very good at getting jobs done without leaving fingerprints, without compromising their patrician image and their alleged character.
read the rest here, from CBSNews.com

I'll grant you that 46% is not a majority; however, as long as the SBV group is out there, making those charges, the public will be reminded, again-and-again, that the same tactics have been used by Bush & Co. before -- I certainly don't think that it's good for a Commander-in-Chief to appear to be behind the attacks against one of his own, someone under his chain-of-command (which Mr. Kerry is under, as a veteran and a Senator). As a former Marine that, luckily, served in peace time, I respect and honor anybody that wore the uniform in combat -- it's the least we owe them. If I disagree with a combat veteran's political position I will respectfully make sure he knows; however, I'll never question his honor nor love of country.

Look, even Mr. Bush has recognized that the SBV attack ads will only carry him so far, that's why he has started to distance himself from the group:

"I think him going to Vietnam was more heroic than my flying fighter jets," said Bush, who served in the Texas Air National Guard. "He was in harm's way and I wasn't. On the other hand, I served my country. Had my unit been called up, I would have gone."
See the rest here

EddyG, I don't know whether you served in the military or not; if you did, I would hope that you share my respect for combat vets and, if you didn't, please honor those that served our country in combat... you may disagree with their policies (it's your right), but don't question their morals, their love of country, nor their integrity... it's the least they deserve.

Message edited by author 2004-08-30 04:55:34.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

08/30/2004 08:36:36 AM · #337

Originally posted by bdobe:

EddyG, I don't know whether you served in the military or not; if you did, I would hope that you share my respect for combat vets and, if you didn't, please honor those that served our country in combat... you may disagree with their policies (it's your right), but don't question their morals, their love of country, nor their integrity... it's the least they deserve.

Bdobe, why do you reserve your respect for only "combat" vets? What about the hundreds of thousands of military veterans who did NOT go into "combat", but only served in non-combat tasks in far off places, separated from their loved ones? I, myself, spent an entire year-plus on a 100-man Radar station on the DEW line - on a little peninsula jutting into the Bering Sea, 25 miles above the Arctic Circle. Do I not deserve respect? Is it because I did not serve in combat the reason why you feel MY morals, MY love of country, MY integrity can be questioned? Am I not deserving?

Ron

EddyG

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

08/30/2004 08:58:09 AM · #338

Originally posted by bdobe:

Note how during the Clinton administration poverty rates progressively declined. Conversely, under Mr. Bush II, the trend line is reversed.

You seem to forgetting one very important differrence between the Clinton administration and the Bush II administration: one had to and still is dealing with the aftermath of the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor. Do you really think such an event has no impact on the economy?

My assessment of the poverty rate of each presidency term is still 100% accurate.

Originally posted by bdobe:

I would hope that you share my respect for combat vets and, if you didn't, please honor those that served our country in combat... you may disagree with their policies (it's your right), but don't question their morals, their love of country, nor their integrity... it's the least they deserve.

Trust me, I have the utmost respect for the men and women who have served and currently serve in our Armed Forces. The ironic part is that the man you want to be Commander In Chief doesn't.

From the epilogue of the book "The New Soldier", written by John Kerry:

``We will not quickly join those who march on Veteran's Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the "greater glory of the United States".''

``We will not readily join the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars...''

``We will not uphold traditions which decorously memorialize that which was base and grim''

And the cover of his book (which you can see for yourself at the link above) shows utter disrespect for our country, with an upside-down American flag, and completely mocks the over 6,800 men who gave their lives at the battle of Iwo Jima.

So go ahead and continue to place Kerry on some high pedestal as someone you want to honor. I won't. I think he is a two-faced flip-flopper who will do none of things he purports to promise, and at the same time turn the American military into a weak pawn instead of the last remaining global super-power. And personally, that is what I call bullshit.

Message edited by author 2004-08-30 08:59:00.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/30/2004 09:02:02 AM · #339

Originally posted by RonB:

Originally posted by bdobe:
EddyG, I don't know whether you served in the military or not; if you did, I would hope that you share my respect for combat vets and, if you didn't, please honor those that served our country in combat... you may disagree with their policies (it's your right), but don't question their morals, their love of country, nor their integrity... it's the least they deserve.

Bdobe, why do you reserve your respect for only "combat" vets? What about the hundreds of thousands of military veterans who did NOT go into "combat", but only served in non-combat tasks in far off places, separated from their loved ones? I, myself, spent an entire year-plus on a 100-man Radar station on the DEW line - on a little peninsula jutting into the Bering Sea, 25 miles above the Arctic Circle. Do I not deserve respect? Is it because I did not serve in combat the reason why you feel MY morals, MY love of country, MY integrity can be questioned? Am I not deserving?

Ron

That 'only' you add in there is quite a stretch. Just because you weren't included in the original statement, does not automatically mean you are excluded. His statement refers to combat vets, who appear to be the main front under attack by the SBFV group and the subject of this thread.

I personally have a lot of respect for anyone willing to stand up and fight for their country and what they believe in. In many cases I certainly don't support the cause they are fighting for, but that is a different issue.

However, that respect would no doubt include a lot of groups that many in this thread would certainly have a hard time supporting.

Message edited by author 2004-08-30 09:06:07.

08/30/2004 12:05:51 PM · #340

Ron,

Here's what I wrote:

Originally posted by bdobe:

As a former Marine that, luckily, served in peace time, I respect and honor anybody that wore the uniform in combat -- it's the least we owe them. If I disagree with a combat veteran's political position I will respectfully make sure he knows; however, I'll never question his honor nor love of country.

I don't know how you read into it that I "only" respect combat vets. As I mentioned, I'm not a combat vet.

Originally posted by RonB:

As an enlisted man, the worst things I had to face were hard-chargin' Drill Instructors and long and tedious periods of "idle" time. I'm being fecious, of course; however, it partly explains why I hold special respect for combat vets. This, obviously, does not diminish your service, nor my service nor anybody else's service.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

08/30/2004 06:06:14 PM · #341

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Nobody nominates themselves for metals, so how could Kerry have lied to receive his metals?

From the Congressional Record, April 22, 1971

Senator SYMINGTON. Mr. Kerry, from your experience in Vietnam do you think it is possible for the President or Congress to get accurate and undistorted information through official military channels.

(Shouts of "No" from, the audience.)

Mr. KERRY. I don't know -

Senator SYMINGTON. I am beginning to think you have some supporters here.

Mr. KERRY. I don't know where they came from, sir, maybe Vietnam.

I had direct experience with that. Senator, I had direct experience with that and I can recall often sending in the spot reports which we made after each mission; and including the GDA, gunfire damage assessments, in which we would say, maybe 15 sampans sunk or whatever it was. And I often read about my own missions in the Stars and Stripes and the very mission we had been on had been doubled in figures and tripled in figures.

The intelligence missions themselves are based on very, very flimsy information. Several friends of mine were intelligence officers and I think you should have them comein sometime to testify. Once in Saigon I was visiting this friend of mine and he gave me a complete rundown on how the entire intelligence system should be re-set up on all of its problems, namely, that you give a young guy a certain amount of money, he goes out, sets up his own contacts under the table, gets intelligence, comes in. It is not reliable; everybody is feeding each other double intelligence, and I think that is what comes back to this country.

I also think men in the military, sir, as do men in many other things, have a tendency to report what they want to report and see what they want to see. And this is a very serious thing because I know on several visits - Secretary Laird came to Vietnam once and they staged an entire invasion for him. When the initial force at Dang Tam, it was the 9th Infantry when it was still there - when the initial recon platoon went out and met with resistance, they changed the entire operation the night before and sent them down into the South China Seas so they would not run into resistance and the Secretary would have a chance to see how smoothly the war was going.

I know General Wheeler came over at one point and a major in Saigon escorted him around. General Wheeler went out to the field and saw 12 pacification leaders and asked about 10 of them how things were going and they all said, "It is really going pretty badly." The 11th one said, "It couldn't be better, General. We are really doing the thing here to win the war." And the General said, "I am finally glad to find somebody who knows what he is talking about." (Laughter.)

This is the kind of problem that you have. I think that the intelligence which finally reaches the White House does have serious problems with it in that I think you know full well, I know certainly from my experience, I served as aide to an admiral in my last days in the Navy before I was discharged, and I have seen exactly what the response is up the echelon, the chain of command, and how things get distorted and people say to the man above him what is needed to be said, to keep everybody happy, and so I don't - I think the entire thing is distorted. ( emphasis added )

Ron

10/15/2004 10:40:09 AM · #342

new update Re Swift Boat claims:

ABC NEWS goes to Viet Nam and talks to the Viet Cong who were actually the enemy during the controversial firefights.

Long story short: Kerry told the truth, Swift boat Veterans are liars

//abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Vote2004/story?id=166434&page=1

Russell2566

10/15/2004 10:58:49 AM · #343

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Amazing how quick you are to call them liars because the news story written by ANDREW MORSE says so... I could probably go back and get the exact opposite story fromt he same people... The story it's self if you read it without praying it saves Kerry from looking even more pathetic, is pretty suspect and doesn't REALLY proove anyone wrong. It looked more like a twist of facts than actual facts...

BTW: I'm also way more likely to believe any vetran over an ABC reported...

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

10/15/2004 11:24:44 AM · #344

Originally posted by Russell2566:

BTW: I'm also way more likely to believe any vetran over an ABC reported...

So you believe Kerry in the first place, rather than the article then ?

10/15/2004 11:51:35 AM · #345

And, it seems, it actually gets worse.

from the blog of Kevin Drum, on the same Nightline story:

But there was also this:

Back in Tran Thoi, villager Nguyen Van Khoai said that about six months ago he was visited by an American who described himself as a Swift boat veteran and told him another American from the Swift boats was running for president of the United States. Nguyen said the man was accompanied by a cameraman.

"They say he didn't do anything to deserve the medal," Nguyen said. "The other day, they came and asked me the questions and I said that the recognition for the medal is up to the U.S.A."

He said that, after they met, the Swift Boat veteran and the cameraman turned around and went back down the river. Nightline has not been able to identify the men.

Unbelievable. The SBVT folks, hoping to dig up dirt on Kerry, interviewed these villagers six months ago and have known the truth all along.

It wasn't just a case of differing recollections in the heat of the battle. They knew the truth. But they went ahead and told their lies anyway.

What a revolting bunch of men. What a disgusting, repellent, sleazy operation. And now Sinclair Broadcasting is about to air their movie.

Even worse, we still have three weeks to go. I wonder how much lower the Bush team and their surrogates can sink in that time?

10/15/2004 11:55:37 AM · #346

Originally posted by Russell2566:

Amazing how quick you are to call them liars because the news story written by ANDREW MORSE says so... .

I'm not quick to call them liars. They have been exposed as liars every which way from Adam for the past two months. They have been exposed as connected and funded by the Bush campaign for the past two months as well.

This story is just another nail in their coffin.

Why do you defend them despite all contrary evidence?