John Kerry's Involuntary Separation From Service?

[Darthvoy]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: Vic

If you feel the need to wonder that, then you should also feel the need to wonder why George W. Bush took the fortunate son route and served in the National Guard, don't ya think?

*cough*Edwards?*cough* Kerry tried to go down the same path, but was denied...your point is what, Vic?

Why are you diverting the subject. Remember Cheney got something like 5 deferments...Why don't you ask why some of Bush's records "dissapeared". Does it not make you wonder? Are you a blind sheep?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
*cough*Edwards?*cough* Kerry tried to go down the same path, but was denied...your point is what, Vic?

Exactly that. The Bush crowd is exacting a double standard in this area, and I don't approve.

Think of it this way. If, in a criminal trial, an individual wishes to take the stand to testify against the accused, then that individual's own criminal record (if any) becomes fair game to be brought before the court and jury. If, however, the individual does not take the stand, then their criminal record (if any) is not fair game and cannot be entered into the record.
Same thing here IMO. If the Bush crowd wishes to attack Kerry on his military service, then Bush's own military service is fair game. And IMO Kerry's military service is FAR more admirable than Bush's cowardice. And because Kerry actually served overseas and in combat, then I believe that he was entitled to speak out against the war afterwards, having first proved himself that became his right to do so (and likewise, had he not served, he would have had no such right IMO).
Does this make sense (how could it not?)?

Long story short, if you and the rest of the Bush crowd wish to keep "denying" this argument, then you are simply continuing to exact that same double standard, and simply make yourselves look that much more foolish. Best for your cause if you would drop it, but (by all means) feel free to keep doing what you're doing as I believe in free speech and the value of the dissenting voice (even if you do not).

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Simply put, Bush signed the SF-180; did Kerry?

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: conjur
Swiftboat liar exposed:

http://news.globalfreepress.co...eSwiftBoatVetLiars.wmv



More on the swiftboat liars:

Larry Thurlow, one of the lying Swiftboat Veterans:
http://www.nationalreview.com/...k/york200407301059.asp

Thurlow says that Kerry's version of the events of March 13, 1969, is simply wrong. "His story is a total fabrication," Thurlow says. One of the Swift Boats did hit a mine that day, Thurlow says, but much of the rest of Kerry's story is inaccurate. "This thing about being under intense enemy fire is a falsehood...There was no fire off either bank [of the river]. This thing about getting Jim out of the river under a hail of bullets with these serious injuries is totally fabricated."

The lie exposed:
http://www.thehistorynet.com/a...yinvietnam/index3.html

Larry Thurlow received a bronze star for a fire fight he now says did not occur!



AND

George Elliott lying:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5694561/

HURLEY: This is from George Elliott, one of John Kerry?s commanders in Vietnam. This is the recommendation for the award of the Bronze Star. And he talks about a little bit in this.

Then he says: ?Shortly after starting their exit from this river, a mine detonated under one of the boats, PCF-3, lifting it two feet above the water and wounded everyone on board. Almost simultaneously, another mine detonated, close aboard PCF-94, knocking First Lieutenant Rassmann into the water and wounding Lieutenant J.G. Kerry in the right arm.? It goes on that PCF-4 provided cover fire, that they received sniper fire from the riverbanks. ?Lieutenant J.G. Kerry, from his exposed position on the bow of the boat, managed to pull Lieutenant Rassmann aboard despite the painful wound in his right arm.

?Meanwhile, PCF-94 gunners provided accurate suppressing fire.? It concludes by saying: ?Lieutenant J.G. Kerry proved himself to be calm, professional and highly courageous in the face of enemy fire.? That is signed by George Elliott, one of these same guys now who is saying, oh, but I remember it differently and I want to change my mind.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

What Elliott said in the ad is that Kerry "has not been honest about what happened in Viet Nam." In his original affidavit Elliott said Kerry had not been "forthright" in Vietnam. The only example he offered of Kerry not being "honest" or "forthright" was this: "For example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back.

In the Globe story, Elliott is quoted as saying it was a "terrible mistake" to sign that statement:

George Elliott (Globe account): It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here. . . . I knew it was wrong . . . In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com...ish/article_4998.shtml

Another prominent figure in the anti-Kerry book as well as the ad denouncing Kerry, retired Lt. Commander George Elliott, recanted his statement last week in interviews with at least two news sources and then recounted his recant. Elliott also supported Kerry in his 1996 campaign and told a Boston audience that he felt the Senator "deserved the medals he won in Vietnam."

O?Neill further destroyed his credibility by appearing on CNN after assuring the network he had not spoke out publicly about Kerry this year. CNN later had to retract their claim of an ?exclusive? interview after they learned O?Neill appeared on C-Span to discuss Kerry in March.

Elliott Praises Kerry in 1969 Report

Elliott had a much different opinion of Kerry at the time than in the ad. In a fitness report on Kerry, dated Dec. 18, 1969, he stated that "in a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action LTJG Kerry was unsurpassed...LTJG Kerry emerges as the acknowledged leader in his peer group."

Elliott also said he voted for Gore. I find that very hard to believe considering he's donated to the GOP. Elliott is a pathological liar. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.


AND

Hibbard has not revealed that he was Kerry's CO for only two weeks and never wrote a performance review for Kerry.


AND

Hoffman has been called a Kurtz-like psychopath.

Capt. Roy Hoffmann: "I told them you not only have authority," Hoffmann now says, "I damned well expect action. If there were men there and they didn?t kill them or capture them, you?d hear from me."

Also, Hoffman is a liar:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com...ish/article_4998.shtml

?They seek retribution by fabricating stories to destroy Kerry,? Brinkley says. ?Hoffman, in particular lacks credibility.?

On May 6, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Steve Schultze, interviewed Hoffman and wrote ?Hoffmann acknowledged he had no first-hand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims to valor and said that although Kerry was under his command, he really didn't know Kerry much personally.?

On August 5, however, Hoffman told Sean Hannity on his ABC radio show that "I knew him (Kerry) well, because I operated very closely with him and, uh, many of the operations, uh, most of the operations were-were conducted with multiple boats."

AND

Merrie Spaeth is the Communications Director for the Swiftboat Veterans group and is a staunch GOP supporter.


AND

Their website is funded by a Missouri Republican with close ties to John Ashcroft.


AND

http://www.newsmax.com/archive.../2004/5/4/132751.shtml

?It is our collective judgment that, upon your return from Vietnam, you grossly and knowingly distorted the conduct of the American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen of that war (including a betrayal of many of us, without regard for the danger your actions caused us.) Further, we believe that you have withheld and/or distorted material facts as to your own conduct in this war.?

But it is with regard to the latter sentence of the charge that O?Neill and others get vague.

When asked by NewsMax if they had in mind any potential smoking gun of distortion that might be revealed by an unfettered examination of Kerry?s military records, there was no answer forthcoming.

AND

Who is Steve Gardner?
Swift Boat Vet "eyewitness" was not present for events leading to Kerry's medals or Purple Hearts
http://mediamatters.org/items/200408240001

Gardner admitted that "he was not on the boat with Kerry during the incidents for which Kerry got his medals," reported The Columbus Dispatch on August 6. And as a guest on Michael Savage's radio show, Savage Nation, on August 2, Gardner said that of Kerry's three Purple Hearts, he could only attest to the first; Gardner later admitted to Savage that he was "not on the boat with him [Kerry]" when that injury occurred...

...in at least two interviews, Gardner has falsely claimed that he was present for the incidents leading to Kerry's receipt of awards...

...In an apparent attempt to substantiate his status as an eyewitness to key Kerry events, Gardner claimed on Scarborough Country, "[T]hat boat never left the dock that I wasn't aboard it with John Kerry, never. I was with that boat everywhere we went." Gardner went on to make assertions regarding the events that occurred on March 13, 1969, involving Kerry's rescue of Jim Rassmann, for which Kerry received the Bronze Star. Gardner claimed to know that Kerry fled the scene on the river that day while the other three boats stayed and that Kerry then "turned around and came all the way back to pick up Mr. Rassmann that he had thrown off his boat when he took off, when he fled down the canal." But later in the show, Gardner admitted to not being present that day. When Scarborough attempted to revisit the "March 13, 1969 incident," Gardner said, "I'm not going to deal with that. Because I wasn't there."...

...On the August 2 broadcast of Savage Nation, Gardner himself claimed that all of the wounds for which Kerry received Purple Hearts "were superficial wounds, and I mean very superficial, scratches. The very first one is the only one that I can actually attest to because I was there when that wound happened." But Gardner was not there when Kerry sustained that wound; as noted above, Gardner went on to admit: "I was not on the boat with him but I -- in the next three days following that, I was with him on the boat going to take our new position up down there on the seaward operations."

And John O'Neill in his lie:

Swift Boat Writer Lied on Cambodia Claim
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._boats_1&printer=1

This is about Kerrys separation from the military...not the swiftboat issue

It is more of the same liars making the same smears.

 

[Darthvoy]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Simply put, Bush signed the SF-180; did Kerry?

Your point? We don't have Bush's entire record because some of it dissapeared. Maybe Bush signed it knowing that the incriminating parts were taken out? Who knows....

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: BBond

That's the first page. There are three more. Go read them.

If you paid attention, I was the first one to post the link...

Well judging from the replies it needed to be posted again.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: conjur
Swiftboat liar exposed:

http://news.globalfreepress.co...eSwiftBoatVetLiars.wmv



More on the swiftboat liars:

Larry Thurlow, one of the lying Swiftboat Veterans:
http://www.nationalreview.com/...k/york200407301059.asp

Thurlow says that Kerry's version of the events of March 13, 1969, is simply wrong. "His story is a total fabrication," Thurlow says. One of the Swift Boats did hit a mine that day, Thurlow says, but much of the rest of Kerry's story is inaccurate. "This thing about being under intense enemy fire is a falsehood...There was no fire off either bank [of the river]. This thing about getting Jim out of the river under a hail of bullets with these serious injuries is totally fabricated."

The lie exposed:
http://www.thehistorynet.com/a...yinvietnam/index3.html

Larry Thurlow received a bronze star for a fire fight he now says did not occur!



AND

George Elliott lying:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5694561/

HURLEY: This is from George Elliott, one of John Kerry?s commanders in Vietnam. This is the recommendation for the award of the Bronze Star. And he talks about a little bit in this.

Then he says: ?Shortly after starting their exit from this river, a mine detonated under one of the boats, PCF-3, lifting it two feet above the water and wounded everyone on board. Almost simultaneously, another mine detonated, close aboard PCF-94, knocking First Lieutenant Rassmann into the water and wounding Lieutenant J.G. Kerry in the right arm.? It goes on that PCF-4 provided cover fire, that they received sniper fire from the riverbanks. ?Lieutenant J.G. Kerry, from his exposed position on the bow of the boat, managed to pull Lieutenant Rassmann aboard despite the painful wound in his right arm.

?Meanwhile, PCF-94 gunners provided accurate suppressing fire.? It concludes by saying: ?Lieutenant J.G. Kerry proved himself to be calm, professional and highly courageous in the face of enemy fire.? That is signed by George Elliott, one of these same guys now who is saying, oh, but I remember it differently and I want to change my mind.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

What Elliott said in the ad is that Kerry "has not been honest about what happened in Viet Nam." In his original affidavit Elliott said Kerry had not been "forthright" in Vietnam. The only example he offered of Kerry not being "honest" or "forthright" was this: "For example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back.

In the Globe story, Elliott is quoted as saying it was a "terrible mistake" to sign that statement:

George Elliott (Globe account): It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here. . . . I knew it was wrong . . . In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com...ish/article_4998.shtml

Another prominent figure in the anti-Kerry book as well as the ad denouncing Kerry, retired Lt. Commander George Elliott, recanted his statement last week in interviews with at least two news sources and then recounted his recant. Elliott also supported Kerry in his 1996 campaign and told a Boston audience that he felt the Senator "deserved the medals he won in Vietnam."

O?Neill further destroyed his credibility by appearing on CNN after assuring the network he had not spoke out publicly about Kerry this year. CNN later had to retract their claim of an ?exclusive? interview after they learned O?Neill appeared on C-Span to discuss Kerry in March.

Elliott Praises Kerry in 1969 Report

Elliott had a much different opinion of Kerry at the time than in the ad. In a fitness report on Kerry, dated Dec. 18, 1969, he stated that "in a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action LTJG Kerry was unsurpassed...LTJG Kerry emerges as the acknowledged leader in his peer group."

Elliott also said he voted for Gore. I find that very hard to believe considering he's donated to the GOP. Elliott is a pathological liar. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.


AND

Hibbard has not revealed that he was Kerry's CO for only two weeks and never wrote a performance review for Kerry.


AND

Hoffman has been called a Kurtz-like psychopath.

Capt. Roy Hoffmann: "I told them you not only have authority," Hoffmann now says, "I damned well expect action. If there were men there and they didn?t kill them or capture them, you?d hear from me."

Also, Hoffman is a liar:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com...ish/article_4998.shtml

?They seek retribution by fabricating stories to destroy Kerry,? Brinkley says. ?Hoffman, in particular lacks credibility.?

On May 6, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Steve Schultze, interviewed Hoffman and wrote ?Hoffmann acknowledged he had no first-hand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims to valor and said that although Kerry was under his command, he really didn't know Kerry much personally.?

On August 5, however, Hoffman told Sean Hannity on his ABC radio show that "I knew him (Kerry) well, because I operated very closely with him and, uh, many of the operations, uh, most of the operations were-were conducted with multiple boats."

AND

Merrie Spaeth is the Communications Director for the Swiftboat Veterans group and is a staunch GOP supporter.


AND

Their website is funded by a Missouri Republican with close ties to John Ashcroft.


AND

http://www.newsmax.com/archive.../2004/5/4/132751.shtml

?It is our collective judgment that, upon your return from Vietnam, you grossly and knowingly distorted the conduct of the American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen of that war (including a betrayal of many of us, without regard for the danger your actions caused us.) Further, we believe that you have withheld and/or distorted material facts as to your own conduct in this war.?

But it is with regard to the latter sentence of the charge that O?Neill and others get vague.

When asked by NewsMax if they had in mind any potential smoking gun of distortion that might be revealed by an unfettered examination of Kerry?s military records, there was no answer forthcoming.

AND

Who is Steve Gardner?
Swift Boat Vet "eyewitness" was not present for events leading to Kerry's medals or Purple Hearts
http://mediamatters.org/items/200408240001

Gardner admitted that "he was not on the boat with Kerry during the incidents for which Kerry got his medals," reported The Columbus Dispatch on August 6. And as a guest on Michael Savage's radio show, Savage Nation, on August 2, Gardner said that of Kerry's three Purple Hearts, he could only attest to the first; Gardner later admitted to Savage that he was "not on the boat with him [Kerry]" when that injury occurred...

...in at least two interviews, Gardner has falsely claimed that he was present for the incidents leading to Kerry's receipt of awards...

...In an apparent attempt to substantiate his status as an eyewitness to key Kerry events, Gardner claimed on Scarborough Country, "[T]hat boat never left the dock that I wasn't aboard it with John Kerry, never. I was with that boat everywhere we went." Gardner went on to make assertions regarding the events that occurred on March 13, 1969, involving Kerry's rescue of Jim Rassmann, for which Kerry received the Bronze Star. Gardner claimed to know that Kerry fled the scene on the river that day while the other three boats stayed and that Kerry then "turned around and came all the way back to pick up Mr. Rassmann that he had thrown off his boat when he took off, when he fled down the canal." But later in the show, Gardner admitted to not being present that day. When Scarborough attempted to revisit the "March 13, 1969 incident," Gardner said, "I'm not going to deal with that. Because I wasn't there."...

...On the August 2 broadcast of Savage Nation, Gardner himself claimed that all of the wounds for which Kerry received Purple Hearts "were superficial wounds, and I mean very superficial, scratches. The very first one is the only one that I can actually attest to because I was there when that wound happened." But Gardner was not there when Kerry sustained that wound; as noted above, Gardner went on to admit: "I was not on the boat with him but I -- in the next three days following that, I was with him on the boat going to take our new position up down there on the seaward operations."

And John O'Neill in his lie:

Swift Boat Writer Lied on Cambodia Claim
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._boats_1&printer=1

nothings sadder then the desperation of conservatives to believe the words of proven liars people who claim to believe that the ability to trust a mans word is the measure of a man.

the insane beliefs permiating the middle east are easier to understand in this light.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Simply put, Bush signed the SF-180; did Kerry?

Exactly. Sign the form john.

CsG

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: Darthvoy

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Simply put, Bush signed the SF-180; did Kerry?

Your point? We don't have Bush's entire record because some of it dissapeared. Maybe Bush signed it knowing that the incriminating parts were taken out? Who knows....

I love it, I direct question & a response, completely avoiding the question.

 

[Darthvoy]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Darthvoy

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Simply put, Bush signed the SF-180; did Kerry?

Your point? We don't have Bush's entire record because some of it dissapeared. Maybe Bush signed it knowing that the incriminating parts were taken out? Who knows....

I love it, I direct question & a response, completely avoiding the question.

And you didn't answer mine. Are you a blind sheep? Have you not questioned what happened to Bush's mysteiously missing record and what it contained? Or do you only question Kerry's? I have questioned both, and frankly don't care. What ever they did back then doesn't matter to me. I fully understand your logic though, but you fail to realize that it undermines Bush's record, and apparently, you have no problem with that because it helps you cause.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Darthvoy

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Darthvoy

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Simply put, Bush signed the SF-180; did Kerry?

Your point? We don't have Bush's entire record because some of it dissapeared. Maybe Bush signed it knowing that the incriminating parts were taken out? Who knows....

I love it, I direct question & a response, completely avoiding the question.

And you didn't answer mine. Are you a blind sheep? Have you not questioned what happened to Bush's mysteiously missing record and what it contained? Or do you only question Kerry's? I have questioned both, and frankly don't care. What ever they did back then doesn't matter to me. I fully understand your logic though, but you fail to realize that it undermines Bush's record, and apparently, you have no problem with that because it helps you cause.

I'll answer.
No.
Yes I have - Bush signed the 180 so the question no longer exists.
Nope, equally. kerry should sign a 180.


Will kerry please just sign the damn form already so we don't have to continue with these questions?

CsG