Kerry's problem with veterans (The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth)

wash times ^ | May 05, 2004 | editorial

[dennisw]

Nineteen of the 23 officers who served with John Kerry and every one of his commanding officers in Vietnam have signed a letter that says he is not fit to be commander in chief. In a press conference yesterday, members of The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth released the letter criticizing Mr. Kerry's slanderous statements about alleged widespread atrocities by American soldiers during the war. Being on the defense against fellow veterans could do serious damage to the Kerry campaign, especially as the country is at war again. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth could have impact because of the impressive number of veterans involved. Hundreds of Vietnam vets, from admirals to seamen, have signed the letter. According to John O'Neill, who was in Mr. Kerry's unit during the war, "[The signers] run across the entire spectrum of politics, specialities and political feelings about the war." This large group goes a long way toward countering the handful of veterans who have defended Mr. Kerry in commercials and on the stump.

[bitt]

" this Group was threaten with the IRS and are being called a bunch of alcoholics"

they get threatened while Jesse Jackson takes a bye....

[bitt]

they were not standing up for Kerry, they were reporting that there were NO atrocities committed - so they were standing up for themselves and the military, and inadvertantly had to help Alter Boy out of a jam...

Ironic that he makes the charges against his brothers 32 years ago, then has to have them prop him up in 1996 for the Senate race, then has to make charges against them again in 2004...if the internet was as well used in 1996, Mitt Romney would be Senator right now...

[GraceCoolidge]

they were not standing up for Kerry, they were reporting that there were NO atrocities committed - so they were standing up for themselves and the military, and inadvertantly had to help Alter Boy out of a jam...

Did you see the clips on Fox? They were pretty brief, but they looked to me like they were from Kerry campaign events/speeches. I just don't understand why, given that Kerry in 1971 so notoriously claimed all these atrocities, these veterans would, in 1996, state their defense of veterans at a Kerry campaign event. I can understand if they had spoken out then in a different forum, but to combine their rebuttal to atrocity claims (when the most famous of those claims had come from John Kerry) with support of John Kerry at Kerry's campaign event makes no sense to me. I mean, I assume John Kerry wouldn't feature veterans at his campaign events to show what a liar he was in 1971. So what am I missing? Did I misunderstand the clips I saw? I thought the Fox commentators were fairly clear that these veterans had supported Kerry's bids for office in the past. I hope there is an explanation for this seeming inconsistency which will prevent it from detracting from the importance of the news conference.

[pabianice]

When John Kerry Slandered Me

[ALOHA RONNIE]

...MONSOOR/MANSOOR IJAZ is still scheduled for his PRIVATE, not PUBLIC, 9/11 Commission Hearing this Friday, May 7th.

...CARL LIMBACHER is quoting him over on Newsmax.com as saying that he'll go to the PUBLIC directly with what he has to tell us if he doesn't get his PUBLIC Hearing Day on National TV, ala RICE.

...IJAZ's Newest bit, CLINTON personally rejected his plea to indict OSAMA bin LADEN after he gave him evidence of his being behind the BLACK HAWK DOWN Incident.

IJAZ = Most Feared Man in America, by the Democrats

And Boy, do they ever know it in an Election Year.

.

[dennisw]

I went and read that account from the ex Vietnam Navy vet who says J effin' Kerry slandered those who served back then.

[bitt]

what a great site!! Thanks!

At first I thought I was in a place I didn't want to be...lol...

[prairiebreeze]

Here is Talon News/ GOPUSA's report on the Swifties presser.

Veterans Group Confronts Kerry's Political Opportunism with Vietnam

Ping

[SkyPilot]

which explains why this Group was threaten with the IRS and are being called a bunch of alcoholics

By who?

[Mo1]

I don't think they said who .. but I think it's clear it's not from our side

Here is a post the mentions it

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1129629/posts?page=143#143

Tremendous effort to try to get people to not join our effort.

He mentions Kerry calling that admiral and speaking to him for about 45 minutes to try to get him to not do this.

Threatened their 50lc3 status (I didn't catch who--Kerry minions I gather, not Kerry himself)

143 posted on 05/04/2004 8:48:42 PM EDT by cyncooper

[cyncooper]

I know exactly who Craig Crawford is. I am pleased to see the Crawfords and Russerts, etc, who have gone for years disguised as "fair" journalists, revealed for the lying partisan hacks they really are.

[cyncooper]

I don't think they said who .. but I think it's clear it's not from our side

Exactly. O'Neill mentioned it as he listed the various types of pressure their group had received to not hold this press conference. One thing was the 45 min call from Kerry to the Admiral, then O'Neill mentioned the tax-exempt status being threatened.

Is there a transcript? I haven't checked their site yet, but maybe it's at this group's website.

[cyncooper]

I have heard from various freepers about this Fox report but have not seen it myself.

I do know that watching this event, there is zero doubt in my mind who the credible party is, and it is this swift boat group.

I'm sure the fact that Kerry is now running for POTUS and hence Commander in Chief is the one major factor here.

[kabar]

The trolls must be out. Kerry requested the support of fellow veterans to defend him against charges that Kerry committed war crimes. The veterans correctly stated that he didn't commit war crimes. Subsquently, Kerry appeared on MTP and in his biography "Tour of Duty" and reversed his position and asserted that war crimes were committed by him and his colleagues. It is Kerry who is being inconsistent.

[Peach]

Great article; thanks for the link.

[SkyPilot]

Let me know if I am breathing "Black Helicopter" fumes, but I believe there are cracks afoot in the Democrats camp.

1. BJ Bill is releasing his letter to Penthouse....errrr....aheem.....book entitled "My Life" in June. The timing is horrible for the Kerry campaign, and the Clintons know this.

2. Hillary dealt with any opponent with ruthless personal attacks and venom. Her approach was pure evil, but more often than not effective. She lived, breathed, and slept revenge when she was threatened.

3. The Kerry campaign is in big trouble--and even ABCCBSAPCNNMSNBC know it. When Jay Leno is making more sense than Kerry's press agent, the media smell the fear.

4. The Kerry collapse is not recieving the attention it should because of the Iraqi abuse stories. But today, apologies were given, Rumsfeld met the media yesterday, and the story will die down very soon.

One of two possible scenarios: either Kerry will ask the Clintons for help, or the Clintons will make a move against Kerry if things don't improve.

I predict he will turn to Hillary as his VP by mid-June.

[Mo1]

I predict he will turn to Hillary as his VP by mid-June.

I'd say that's a pretty good bet

[GraceCoolidge]

Thank you for the clarification, but I have to admit I am still confused. Perhaps I didn't pay close enough attention to what the Fox clips purported to be showing. I am pretty sure that Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony included those horrible statements about all the atrocities committed "in a style reminiscent of Genghis Khan" and with the awareness of all levels of command. I still cannot understand why these veterans would support him in 1996, given that fact. Did Kerry recant in some way between 1971 and 1996? I understand the position of these veterans that Kerry did not commit war crimes, but the fact remains (I think) that Kerry had already been out there since 1971 trying to build a record that he and his fellow servicemen did commit war crimes in Vietnam (as part of his liberal anti-war activist pandering phase). Certainly Kerry being inconsistent is no surprise, but I continue to think that the past support of these veterans for Kerry, well subsequent to Kerry's own bashing of the military and his fellow veterans, is going to dilute the power of this story. Is there a mistake in my timeline? Did I misunderstand the date of the video clips on Fox? I really wanted this story to have legs, but I'm concerned that its effect is going to be easily blunted by the Kerry camp.

[prairiebreeze]

How would you feel about folks grabbing your tagline for a few days or rest of this week as a FR demonstration of solidarity with the swiftboat vets? I'd pass the idea around with kudo's to you if you think it's a good idea.

Prairie

[TomEwall]

I saw the clips, and my recollection is the support was back in the 70's, not in 1996. The statements supporting Kerry were supporting his actions in Viet Nam. An officer said something like Kerry was quicker than most to accept and take responsibility.

The guy who opposed Kerry in '71 regarding the anti-vet statements, still opposes him and I don't think has ever said anything postive about Kerry.

The commanding officer who said the positive things about Kerry and responsibility said he refused Kerry's request for a Purple Heart, and doesn't know how he got it for what he called "that scratch."