Posted on 08/19/2004 9:33:21 PM PDT by onyx eyes
No, to polish his public personna yet a bit more in anticipation for this run for Pres.
NO DOUBT, IN MY BOOK.
YES! SKERRY LIED ABOUT AT LEAST 2 OF HIS PURPLE HEARTS. THAT THEY WERE FROM ENEMY FIRE--WHEN THEY WERE NOT.
And he's running around implying they were a big deal when they were bandaid stuff.
AGREED.
I think we would do well to snow Lehman with emails to that effect.
Wonder what his email is.
AND THIS FACT HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT OUT NEAR ENOUGH.
My apologies. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
So now, I'm wondering the same thing you are, the difference in the citations between Hyland and Zumwalt.
In the thread you linked to, you claim that the Hyland and Zumwalt versions were issued in relatively quick succession. May I ask what makes you believe that? I didn't see any of the documents actually dated.
Qwinn
GRIDLEY Crew members (67-68) say Kerry exaggerated in TOUR OF DUTY
"...John Kerry and I were shipmates in the guided missile cruiser USS
Gridley (CG-21) in 1967 and 1968. He served as First Lieutenant, the
officer in charge of the deck division, and I was Executive Officer,
or second in command..."
"...But there is also no doubt in my mind that his anti-war
activities while our troops were still fighting, dying and being
tortured in filthy Vietnam prisons were despicable.
For that reason, even aside from his anti-defense voting record in
the Senate, he is one ex-shipmate that I could never support as
commander-in-chief of the armed forces."
J. F. Kelly, Jr.
USS Gridley (CG-21) Executive Officer in 1967 and 1968.
GRIDLEY Website page on John Kerry
http://home.nycap.rr.com/pwcarter/the%20kerry%20page.html
Other crew members speak about John Kerry
(Looks like Kerry's shipmates, who did serve with him,
say he lied and told whoopers about his time on the GRIDLEY.
Remember these are not Swift Boat Vets,
BUT Kerry's crewmates who served with him on the GRIDLEY)
Examples follow:
"As everyone must surely know by now, John F. Kerry came on board
GRIDLEY as a boot Ensign when we returned from our 1967 Westpac
Cruise. He remained on GRIDLEY through the 1968 cruise. Politics
aside, shipmates of the time who have read TOUR OF DUTY, the
authorized campaign biography, will have something to say about the
chapter on GRIDLEY. "
1. Kerry never talked about his time on GRIDLEY. He says on page
74 that it is because “nothing much of note” happened while
he was
onboard. He uses words like monotony and tedious, when, despite
being a boot ensign he was given every opportunity for responsibility
by Captain Slifer and Commander Kelly (XO). He came aboard
designated for Electrical Officer (80100), a grunt position in the
Engineering Department and spent four months in that position. He
was assigned duty as First Lieutenant, as Commander Kelly recalls,
because of his knowledge of seamanship and his experiences with small
boats and sailing. Besides being responsible for the decks of the
ship, the First Lieutenant is also responsible for the ship’s
small
boats. He also was assigned collateral duties as Public Affairs
Officer. Despite all the responsibilities he was given, he gives the
impression that serving on GRIDLEY was somehow beneath him. He
certainly had less of an opportunity to collect “gongs” there.
2. Page 78 – “motivate 400 swabbies” – The First
Lieutenant is
responsible only for the personnel of 1st Division, not the entire
crew. 1st Division had a roster of about 30 in 1968. To the extent
that other divisions had responsibility for deck space, their
officers would have been responsible for motivating them.
3. Page 87 has Kerry “shuttling sailors and provisions”
between
GRIDLEY and KITTY HAWK in a small motor whaleboat out in the Gulf of
Tonkin. The regular method of travel between the two ships was via
helo. That is how I went over to the KITTY HAWK. If such an event
did occur, it would have been unusual and hardly a shuttle.
4. Later on page 87 Kerry talks about Olongapo in the Philippines.
He talks about bloated corpses floating in the river and starving
women with babies dying of malnutrition. Now Olongapo was a wild and
wooly town that existed solely for the entertainment of the US Navy,
but in over three years of calling there, I never saw a single
instance of either thing happening. Kerry uncovered this in his
first visit. If this was from his letters home then he was certainly
writing for dramatic effect. Balderdash.
5. The trip to Danang – GRIDLEY went into Danang for briefings
before going to Northern SAR. This section is so full of hyperbole
that the urge to giggle is almost uncontrollable. “The panic and
pressure onboard GRIDLEY, strapping on a .45, wondering if I would
have to use it, B-52’s howling overhead”. A B-52 over Danang
would
have been so high that only contrails would have been visible, cloud
cover permitting. David Simons confirmed my recollection that during
our brief stay in Danang Harbor, the sky was overcast to the point of
being ominous.
More seriously, no one can remember John Kerry going ashore. I was
part of the shore party that went to Monkey Mountain. We were taken
in a screened in truck (to protect against grenades being tossed in)
and made to unload our .45’s. The driver said that he did not
want
us newbies to shoot anyone by accident.
Neither Commander Kelly nor LCDR Rueckert (Kerry’s immediate
boss)
can recall approving a trip ashore for Ensign Kerry. The author uses
remarks of David Simons IC2 as a lead in to the Danang section. I
spoke to David and he has no personal knowledge of Kerry going ashore
at all. He did talk to a researcher and made some generic remarks
about Danang but had never discussed Danang with Kerry. He recalls
arguing with the researcher because he tried to put the
words “cowboy” in his mouth, which ended up in the book.
There is no mystery about the “gruesome site of a pile of dead
VC.”
We saw no sign of anything like this. However, our escort to Monkey
Mountain did tell us how the VC bodies were stacked up on the
LZ’s
after the TET Offensive, which had been several months before.
Ensign Kerry would have been told this story by members of the shore
party.
If, indeed, he got to the pier, because he was in charge of the
motor whaleboat, it certainly would not have been within his purview
to wander Danang, eating dog meat and drinking beer in a bar (under
arms). It also seems amazing that he had all these observations on
Vietnam in such a brief visit.
6. In command – Again with the hyperbole. Kerry makes much
about
being “in charge” of the ship after the Captain and XO. The
OOD is
in charge of the operation of the ship during his four hour watch but
hardly in charge of the ship. Kerry qualified almost immediately as
OOD(P), in port OOD but that is a given. For much of his time
onboard he would have been Junior Officer of the Deck when underway.
Although his fitness report as of 22 March says "he is qualified as
OOD(I) now" (Independent steaming – with no ships or land
anywhere
near) , only OOD(P) is listed under duties. His Fitness Report from
July 1968 lists two months as OOD(I) which would mean he qualified
after leaving the war zone.
YEAH! I've wondered that tooo about Berger.
And agree on your first paragraph, too.
Have long speculated that Lehman may well be, probably is in the puppet master's camp anyway.
Sigh.
Actually, come to think of it, if you're right and the "different" citation, the Zumwalt one, came out -after- the Hyland one, then I would think that (prior to Lehman) the most recent citation would be considered the "official" one. Perhaps the reason for Lehman to effectively re-issue the Hyland citation (which was originally first) was to give it greater credibility and "official"ness?
The whole thing's very bizarre, who can make sense of the motives?
Qwinn
Mr. Hume, today you had a military analyst on your show talking about the Swift controversy and you asked him where a curious journalist would go to find Kerry's records. I hope that that was a serious question and that a Fox journalist will take the time to look. The other organizations are in full attack mode on the messengers and are trying to discredit them instead of addressing their charges. I hope FOX will be at least one news organization that investigates Kerry's claims. Thanks
LOL.
YUP!
i STILL contend that a prophetic prediction some months ago is correct.
That it would look darker and darker but that God would pull it through in the end.
It wasn't clear if that was about the USA or the election. I think it's about both to a degree but that Bush will end up winning in at least a moderate landslide.
Good insight.
But, would his CO's knowing what a Dillbo he was, have put him in tactical command? I guess it's a matter of record. Why would they? Hoping he'd screw up enough in that position to get rid of him that way? Was it a rotational thing?
Good idea and writing.
I sure like Brit.
Hate he lost his son to the puppet masters games.
If my understanding and guessing are right.
>>>In the thread you linked to, you claim that the Hyland and Zumwalt versions were issued in relatively quick succession. May I ask what makes you believe that? I didn't see any of the documents actually dated.
I don't know how quick... but it had to be within a year or so (I assume less... but have no basis).
The Zumwalt citation signature block has him as Commander Naval Forces - Vietnam. He left that position on May 15, 1970.
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq93-1.htm
In September 1968 he became Commander Naval Forces, Vietnam and Chief of the Naval Advisory Group, U. S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam. President Richard M. Nixon nominated him as Chief of Naval Operations on 14 April 1970. Upon being relieved as Commander Naval Forces, Vietnam, on 15 May 1970, he was awarded a Gold Star in lieu of a second Distinguished Service Medal for exceptionally meritorious service. He assumed command as Chief of Naval Operations on 1 July 1970 and retired from that position on 1 July 1974. In 1976, he unsuccessfully ran as a Democratic candidate for the Senate from Virginia. Later he held the presidency of the American Medical Building Corporation in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
>>>The whole thing's very bizarre, who can make sense of the motives?
Who knows! When you figure it out, ping me, okay? ;-)
Well, alright, that didn't come out right ;) Obviously, KERRY'S motive is to become leader of the free world, heh. And it wouldn't be hard to figure out Lehman's motives either. The question to me is the Navy's motives in authorizing the Hyland and Zumwalt citations so close together.
My current question - are we just taking Kerry's word that the Hyland citation came -first-? I have no doubt that the Zumwalt citation actually came out during the Vietnam war, but on what do we base the assumption that the Hyland one came out before it?
Qwinn
Forgive me... now I think I messed up. I hadn't looked at these in detail for a couple weeks.
My assumption then was that the Zumwalt citation was first, then Hyland. I based this solely on rank (Hyland being senior to Zumwalt). Below for reference are the dates Hyland was in the position noted.
Also... the Zumwalt version is the most descriptive about the events of the day (boat numbers, the KIA, etc). The Hyland and Lehman versions are stripped down in detail with some fluffy language added. That supported the conclusion of the Zumwalt version being first, revised by Hyland... and then largely copied by Lehman. Again... I have no way of knowing the motives... If I had to guess, I would say they were trying to delete something that was said in the first one, rather than embellish the latter version.
http://www.cpf.navy.mil/facts/formercincs.html
Commander in Chief
United States Pacific Fleet
Admiral John J. HYLAND, USN
30 November 1967 - 5 December 1970
Too much tinfoil? Here's my summary:
There are 3 citations. See Link for text and source:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1189369/posts?page=25#25
Zumwalt left his post in May 1970.
Hyland left his post in December 1970.
Therefore, 2 of the 3 citations had to be awarded in 1970 or prior.
The Lehman version is almost identical to the Hyland version.
In substance, it revised nothing.
It is still a curiosity as to why it was created some 14 years later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.