Media failed to find facts behind Bush's service record

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | February 11, 2004 | Thomas Lipscomb

[Hon]

Media failed to find facts behind Bush's service record

February 11, 2004

BY THOMAS LIPSCOMB

President Bush has had a rough 10 days, beginning with the Tim Russert "Meet the Press" interview on Feb. 1 of Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, who charged Bush was "AWOL" and "never served in the military." Only a week later, Bush asked to appear on Russert's show in a clear attempt to stem the damage from these charges. For over a week they were endlessly repeated and never analyzed by the news media.

But the only basis for these charges was summarized by London's Sunday Telegraph on Feb. 8: "If the Vietnam veteran John Kerry becomes the next president, there will be one man to thank above all others: retired Brig. Gen. William Turnipseed."

It all started with a report by the Boston Globe during the 2000 presidential election questioning Bush's National Guard service. Walter Robinson cited retired Turnipseed, of the Alabama Air National Guard, as his source.

But in an interview , Turnipseed states that Robinson's reporting of their conversation was either distorted or based upon his misunderstanding of how the military functioned at the time of Bush's service. For Bush to be "AWOL" or "away without leave," he would have had to have been assigned to a unit and under its command.

Turnipseed states Bush was never ordered to report to the Alabama Air National Guard. He points out that Bush never transferred from the Texas Air National Guard to the Alabama Air National Guard. He remained in the Texas Guard during his stay in Alabama. This was confirmed by the Texas Guard. And Turnipseed added that Bush was never under his command or any other officer in the Alabama Guard.

Turnipseed added that Bush was informed of the drill schedule of the Alabama Guard as a courtesy so he could get credit for drills while in Alabama for his service record in the Texas Guard. There was no compulsory attendance.This was also confirmed by the Texas Guard.

Sen. John Kerry got in on the act on Sunday, asking, "was he [Bush] present and active on duty in Alabama at the times he was supposed to be? I don't have the answer to that question." But as Turnipseed points out, Bush was never "supposed to be" anything in Alabama. And Kerry doesn't have "the answer" because he is taking advantage of a partisan political fantasy that has stayed aloft this long because of the lousy job done by the press in reporting on it.

Now, Robinson is beginning to have second thoughts. His latest column states: "President Bush received credit for attending Air National Guard drills in the fall of 1972 and spring of 1973 -- a period when his commanders have said he did not appear for duty at bases in Montgomery, Ala., and Houston -- according to two new documents obtained by the Globe." How could Robinson have gotten it so wrong?

The most charitable explanation for this distortion is the almost total ignorance the press of the realities of military service and its record-keeping. Yet Turnipseed has been repeatedly called by news organizations since the Globe reporting four years ago, and no one has chosen to correct the errors he has tried to point out or cover his denials.

The most startling aspect of this story is that the press has continually treated this affair as a political debate rather than a matter of fact.

An Air National Guard officer such as George Bush left an extensive paper trail of service. The vital summary sheet of a military record is a simple form called the DD214 or NGB 22. It covers all the basic questions being asked about Bush today. Every military veteran has one.

Kerry has one. On it are listed his dates of service, the nature of his discharge and the medals and service ribbons he has every reason to be proud of. It was filed away at the time of discharge and is almost impossible to alter.

Did a single member of the thousands in the press take the trouble to look up just one DD214 or NGB22 -- President Bush's?

Apparently not. And that is the saddest part of the story.

There was already an exhaustive look at Bush's National Guard records published and available on the Internet to any reporter who has written on this in the last week. None of whom bothered to look it up. It's title? "The Real Military Record of George W. Bush: Not Heroic, But Not AWOL, Either." It was "the first full chronology" and concludes "he did accumulate the days of service required of him for his ultimate honorable discharge."

The article included the pasteup pay records just released by the White House. It also included the "two new documents obtained by the Globe" by Robinson.

It was published four years ago in George Magazine. Its publisher was that well-known GOP supporter -- the late John F. Kennedy, Jr.

Thomas H. Lipscomb is chairman of the Center for the Digital Future in New York.

[Hon]

From the Telegraph just two days ago:

"If the Vietnam veteran John Kerry becomes the next president of the United States, there will one man to thank above all others: retired Brigadier General William Turnipseed."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/02/08/wvet08.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/02/08/ixnewstop.html

And yet Turnipseed NEVER said the things that have been constantly attributed to him. He has tried to correct the record, but he has been ignore.

I wonder why?

[Kozak]

Thats okay. We should thank them, and Kerry for opening the Vietnam window. It's now perfectly just and fair to highlight the KNOWN facts about Kerry's post Vietnam "service" in the Vietnam Vets Against the War, his senate record, his meetings with Danny Ortega, etc etc etc.

[geopyg]

I just got the tailend of an interview (MSNBC) where the guy was quoting out of a book that he wrote 4 years ago where the commander (Turnipseed?) said "I never saw him on base (in Alabama)". I seem to recall hearing/seeing last week where Turnipseed recently said that during that time period (early 70's), he (Turnipseed) was assigned to SAC (Coloradao?) and wasn't at the Alabama base much.

Heck, for all I know the original quote might have stated it, but only the first part made it into the book. "I never saw Bush on base"........as I was in Colorado for most of that time period.

[Hon]

As I've posted on this thread, Turnipseed says that he has consistently told reporters that he couldn't remember whether Bush reported for training to Turnipseed's unit or not.

Debunking The Bush AWOL Story - From The Horse's Mouth

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1073076/posts?page=1,50

It was over thirty years ago. Who would remember such a thing?

If Turnipseed has said he had remembered Bush, it would have been much more suspicious, if you ask me.

[cwb]

That's exactly right. They have now made 30-year old stories legitimate news items...just as they did with Bush's DUI a week before the 2000 election. I get a kick out of listening to Susan Estrich say that if Republicans want to bring up 30-year news stories, they do so at their own detriment. HELLO...it's been Democrats that have been doing that for years now...just as they did to Lott after his Thurmond blunder. Is it any wonder why Bush might not want to implicate any more people from 30-years ago who might corraborate his presence? The media would tear them to shreds, looking into their past from 30 years ago.

[SpinyNorman]

President Bush has had a rough 10 days, beginning with the Tim Russert "Meet the Press" interview on Feb. 1 of Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, who charged Bush was "AWOL" and "never served in the military." Only a week later, Bush asked to appear on Russert's show in a clear attempt to stem the damage from these charges. For over a week they were endlessly repeated and never analyzed by the news media.

Isn't it interesting how Tim Russert is always on Imus in the morning telling the world how great his research team is in ferreting out statements and documents, yet a simple Google search for a four year old George magazine article was beyond their capabilities?

[OXENinFLA]

Thansk for the heads up.

[Hon]

"Isn't it interesting how Tim Russert is always on Imus in the morning telling the world how great his research team is in ferreting out statements and documents, yet a simple Google search for a four year old George magazine article was beyond their capabilities?"

I sent what I heard from Turnipseed as well as the George article to Walter Robinson at the Boston Globe and the Ombudsman at the Boston Globe. I never heard back from either one of them.

What is hilarious, is that Turnipseed has gotten calls from reporters--like from the NY Times, who are referencing things I posted about him on FR.

It isn't about their inability to find this stuff out. The story is their UNWILLINGNESS to report the facts when they don't support their agenda.

[TASMANIANRED]

As well as his military records, I want to know about his purple hearts.

I know just about any injury in a combat zone qualifies but some injuries are more worthy than others.

Bob Dole walked around with a non functioning arm, Bob Carry is missing a leg, Cleland left 3 limbs.

I want to know if John F'n Kerry was for a wound that required a MD and stitches, or if a medic took a splinter out.

I have heard that 2 of the three injuries caused no down time....

[irv]

Media failed refused to find facts behind Bush's service record

They engage in obvious partisan propaganda, then act indignant when someone calls them biased. They ignore or bury pertinent facts, and act like there's something wrong with the rest of us for prefering Fox News.

[EscapedDutch]

JP

[Hon]

To its credit, the Boston Globe asked Kerry to give them a waiver so that they could check into his medical records concerning his three Purple Hearts. Kerry REFUSED.

BTW, Kerry's commanding officer said that Kerry did not lose ANY duty days due to injury.

Also, the action that got him a Silver Star--his chasing down a wounded Vietcong on foot--happened just a few days after he was supposedly wounded in the thigh by shrapnel.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Is anyone getting the feeling that McAuliffe is setting Kerry up for a fall? Hillary to makeup please....

[cwb]

Hey, here comes the very incriminations I'm talking about. This is from some journalist named Jack Kelly, and he's like the 3rd one that questions Kerry's "hero" status. I have to note that it is sad that it has come to this...but Kerry has no one to blame but himself for making this the centerpiece of his campaign...especially after impugning Bush's service when he gave Clinton, a draft dodger, a pass:

"This is the action on Feb. 28, 1969, for which Kerry was awarded the Silver Star: A Viet Cong fired a B-40 rocket at Kerry's boat, Patrol Craft Fast-94. Tom Belodeau, manning the twin 50-caliber machine guns at the rear of the boat, opened fire on the VC, wounding him. The VC fled behind a hooch. Kerry ordered PCF-94 to shore, leaped out of the boat, pursued the VC, and finished him off.

I can envision grizzled infantrymen shaking their heads. "He got the Silver Star for that?"

Kerry had an advantage most servicemen do not. Medal recommendations have to be made by the commanding officer of the unit in which the heroism took place. Kerry was the commander of PCF-94. Presumably, Kerry's medal recommendation was made by the commander of the squadron to which PCF-94 belonged. But Kerry's commander wasn't there. The evidence he had of the heroism of Lt (jg) John F. Kerry came chiefly from the after action report of Lt. (jg) John F. Kerry.

Shortly after being awarded the Silver Star, Kerry took advantage of a provision in Navy regulations that permits a sailor who has been wounded three times to obtain early release from his combat tour. For Kerry — since his wounds were so minor — this was taking advantage of a technicality. There is nothing wrong with this. Many officers similarly situated would have done the same. But it wasn't heroic.

To recap: Kerry was a double volunteer. As a swift boat commander, he was brave and able. But I am unaware of any soldier or Marine who was awarded a decoration of any kind — much less the Silver Star — just for killing a wounded man who was running away."

[axel f]

Dang it, I've done some searching, but I can't find a quote from the N. Vietnamese leader who credited the VVAW for helping to defeat us. I KNOW I heard this. I'm at work and don't have a lot of time to do the research. I'll keep at it though.

[Charles Martel]

It would be great to find a citation where a Vietnamese credited the VVAW. That would be very enlightening.

Yes, it certainly would be interesting, to say the least. For now, does anyone know if THIS is true? Hmmm...

[Hon]

I'm sure you didn't imagine Rush saying it. I've seen other threads where it is mentioned.

Keep looking. It's probably out there. Certainly it is true. Let's hope the North Vietnamese were gracious enough to thank them.

[Conspiracy Guy]

When all is said and done, I'd like to leave Kerry's service record out as an issue. This is due to my respect for veterans. But since he has made it an issue so will I.

Dear Senator Kerry,

Thank you for your service. Now with that said, I'd like to add. Take your lying socialist America hating crap and eat it.

Sincerely

Conspiracy Guy

[Hon]

"For now, does anyone know if THIS is true?"

Yeah, that website is substantially true. Here is a good site which talks about how the VVAW has evolved over the years with links to the VVA:

http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/Winter_Soldier/VVAW_entry.html

But there are two VVA, it would seem. One good, one bad. The bad one is the one that is the current incarnation of the VVAW.

[Hon]

BTW, coincidentally enough, the person who wrote the article starting this thread had a hand in forming the VVA, which to some extent was founded to counter the VVAW.