Let's get some perspective.
That's one centimeter, and one millimeter is one tenth that size.
I've endured bigger cuts doing lawnwork.
Posted on 08/22/2004 6:50:24 AM PDT by kattracks
It appears that there are two groups with diametrically opposed positions concerning the record of Kerry's military service in Vietnam. On the one hand there are 9 veterans who served with him on the two Swift boats (each with a crew of 4 men plus a Vietnamese interpreter) which he commanded over a 4 month period. The nine praise him unstintingly.On the other hand, there are more than 250 other veterans who either commanded him or served on the other boats of his squadron of 5 boats. They do not praise him, but rather assert that Kerry embellished and even fabricated parts of his record. The differences in the two groups' stories appear to be irreconcilable.
Much of the controversy concerns the gravity of the wounds for which Kerry received 3 Purple Hearts. Especially the first one has been subject to criticism, because it is reported to have required no hospitalization, indeed was treated by application of a band-aid.
This is the position taken by the one group which calls itself Swift Veterans for Truth (www.swiftvets.com). The allegation about the band-aid and other potentially damaging allegations are contained in the new book "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," by John E. O'Neill and Jerry Corsi.
The other group is called the Band of Brothers. Their accounts of Kerry’s coolness and bravery under fire are remarkably consistent.
In such a situation, I find that the best thing to do is to establish just one fact upon which both sides can agree, and proceed from that fact to build up a probable description of what actually happened.
We can thank the New York Times for providing us with such a fact.
In an op-ed in the NYT of 20 Aug., Kate Zernike and Jim Rutenberg examine the "Unfit for Command" book. They point out that a few of the 60 veterans, who now denounce Kerry and have put their views in sworn affidavits, spoke differently about Kerry a year ago. They also point out that Dr. Louis Letson, who swears he treated Kerry for his first wound for which he received a Purple Heart, did not sign the medical record, but rather some orderly did.
This may be correct, but that still leaves more than 50 other signers of affidavits and more than 150 other veterans who are cited in the book.
Nevertheless, Zernike and Rutenberg, perhaps inadvertently, have made a contribution toward helping us to begin to evaluate the accuracy of the Swifties’ charges against Kerry. I quote from the editorial:
"In the television commercial, Dr. Louis Letson looks into the camera and declares, 'I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury.' Dr. Letson does not dispute the wound - a piece of shrapnel above Mr. Kerry's left elbow - but he and others in the group argue that it was minor and self-inflicted."
There we have it. The wound was made by a piece of shrapnel which lodged above Kerry's left elbow.
This is significant because an assertion in an NYT editorial is as good as an announcement coming directly from the Kerry campaign. So far, Kerry's campaign website leaves us completely in the dark about such details.
You can confirm this for yourself by going to that website and clicking through to the file "Official naval records" (http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/militaryrecords_1.pdf). You will see that the file begins with a copy of the official notification to Kerry of 28 Feb. 1969 that he had received the award of a Purple Heart. I quote:
"On the behalf of the Chief of Naval Personnel, the commander U.S. Naval Support Activity, Saigon hereby awards you the Purple Heart for injuries received on 2 Dec. 1968."
There is no information in this notification concerning the nature or gravity of the wound, nor do the other documents contained this file provide details about this or the other two injuries. But now, thanks to the NYT, we know almost for certain at least how and where on his body Kerry suffered the first of the wounds.
There are several things Kerry could do to allay any suspicions about his record. He could show us the scar left behind on his arm above the elbow which a major wound would have left. Better still, he could release his complete military medical records.
While we wait for him to do that, we could probably agree on two more facts which result from a perusal of the last of the service record documents shown on Kerry's website. The incrovertible facts are that the date of the correspondance is missing, and that it is signed by Secretary of the Navy John Lehman.
The document refers to an incident which took place on 13 March 1969 in which Kerry allegedly brought the boat he commanded back into enemy fire in order to personally pull one of his crewman out of the water. For this deed Kerry was awarded a Bronze Star. Because the letterhead of this document is not shown, we cannot precisely ascertain the date this award was conferred upon him.
However, we can roughly determine the period. John Lehman served as Secretary of the Navy under President Reagan from 1981 to 1987. Kerry was thus awarded his Bronze Star years after the fact when he was either a public prosecutor (1976-1982), Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts (1983-1985) or a U.S. Senator (1985 until present).
Belated awards of medals for bravery in combat to politicians are always suspect, but Kerry could help us out here too by providing us with more information. The date of the document would perhaps demonstrate that he was only a relatively unknown prosecutor when he received the medal, and not a Lieutenant Governor or U.S. Senator.
Really, all of this is too easy. The omission of the letterhead seems amateurish at first glance, but only at first glance. At second glance it could seem that someone with his and/or her sights set on the election in 2008 has arranged for us to discover discrepancies in Kerry's record which will contribute to his loss, just as Gore was meant to barely lose in 2000.
The real question is – Does Kerry know what is going on? If he does, he has missed his calling. He could have changed the world, or played at it, by becoming a star in Hollow Wood.
---------------
Bob Redman operates the website "Don't Move On" at www.dontmoveon.org.
It would seem to be TOO easy for author Redman, who insists on making it hard. The omission of the letterhead on the Kerry website is deliberate, yes. Whatever the date on the letter may be, it is necessarily years after the end of the war and recognizeable by anyone as such, whereas the name "John Lehman" in the office of Secretary of the Navy does not for most people trigger the same realization. Lurch's Bronze Star is obviously the result of a post-war lobbying campaign by ... someone who wanted him to have another medal. It is better for someone if this isn't too obvious.
ping
Kerry titles his book "Tour of Duty" for his service in Vietnam. He also claims that he had TWO tours of duty in Vietnam (because of his time on the USS Gridley)
Kerry twists the truth so much, you have to watch EVERY WORD HE SAYS. He will lie to you and weave a story (lie) so subtly that you are unaware that he is taking you down the prim-rosed path.
Here is the truth as compared to Kerry's lies. KERRY NEVER EVEN SERVED ONE TOUR IN VIETNAM. HE IS A LIER.
Yes he was in Vietnam (for 4 months) and yes he was on the deep water coast of Vietnam on the USS Gridley (for 5 weeks)but he did not serve a tour in Vietnam.
A Tour in the Nam was 12 months, one year, 365 days, one circle around the sun. Guys would count down the days until their time was up. It was a big deal. When you only had a few weeks to go until your year was up, you were "SHORT", going home soon.
This issue is important for this reason. John Kerry knows that he didn't serve a Tour, let alone TWO Tours, yet he brazenly reports that he did, he lies. Kerry lies about almost everything. That's my point. He can not be trusted.
One might argue 'Well, the time that Kerry spent in Nam was HIS tour, so what is the big deal". If that is your argument then Kerry should have named his book "My Time in Nam" or something. Not lie and give the impression that he spent a tour in Nam. AND, there is NO excuse for his claim for TWO TOURS in Nam, my God. What a lier.
Kerry's lies smack of Michael Mooreism.
As far as Unfit for Command is concerned, I have read it. The Swifties could give a crap less if John Kerry got medals, their issue is the same as what I explained above (and the fact that Kerry smeared their good name with lies) and that is that Kerry can not be trusted. He is unfit for command.
If that is true, and I want to emphasize that my look at all of this is relatively recent, the speculation that the reason he has not released his military records is that he received some kind of unsatisfactory conduct discharge, takes on considerably more force.
We've seen how far he can throw a baseball. How far could he throw a grenade in Dec. 1968?
"If that is true, and I want to emphasize that my look at all of this is relatively recent, the speculation that the reason he has not released his military records is that he received some kind of unsatisfactory conduct discharge, takes on considerably more force."
I understand that Kerry was re-assigned as an aide to an Admiral where he served for several months before requesting an early discharge to run for Congress. One normally doesn't re-assign some one facing an 'unsatisfactory conduct discharge' as an Aide to an Admiral.
He made up the Christmas in Cambodia story. Only some sociopathic personality would promote a lie like that. I've heard the excuse today that he believed his own lie so that was understandable.
No, it isn't. That excuse is just plain scary. Christmas in Cambodia is enough for me.
"Self-Inflicted"does not(necessarily)imply that it was sustained "Intentionally".Max Cleland (after exiting a helicopter)picked up a grenade that he assumed he had(unintentionally)dropped.The grenade exploded costing Mr.Cleland a number of limbs,Clearly,this is an example of an"S.I.W".Kerry is supposed to have fired a grenade-launcher at what he thought was enemy movement.The grenade exploded very near his boat and he suffered an injury caused by a small piece of shrapnel.This wound was (clearly)not intentional,but also it did NOT result from coming into contact with the enemy.Therefor,it does NOT merit The Purple Heart!!Max Cleland(by the way)did NOT receive The Purple Heart for depriving himself of the use of his legs and one arm!!!
"At second glance it could seem that someone with his and/or her sights set on the election in 2008 has arranged for us to discover discrepancies in Kerry's record which will contribute to his loss, just as Gore was meant to barely lose in 2000."
Actually, Wesley Clark, commonly perceived as the Clinton's entry into the 2004 race, stated that he wasn't concerned at being behind Kerry during the primaries since the Kerry campaign would implode due to explosive revealations to come. This book wasn't written overnight. It took awhile to write the book, arrange a publisher, get it edited, etc. One can only wonder if the Clinton's new this was coming. You'll note they have stayed out of this dog fight.
Expect to see an ACE bandage on the left elbow and a pronounced limp from the leg carrying the shrapnel.
Kerry. It is remarkable given the times that someone of his "class" even got to Vietnam. Some of us served once, resigned, then were forced to return again. His collection of medals, one month of orienttion and 90 days of service (one patrol), and then departure. Wow. Hero? Nope. Fourflusher? Yep. Typical for "professional" politician. I bet Al Gore is happy they have someone else to "examine" these days.
God knows I hope this Kerry doesn't become a President.
Anybody who has an ounce of sense, and half the voters don't, will question Kerry's stay in Vietnam for only four months, winning his so called medals of honor in that time. In his own words to Dick Cavett, while lying through his teeth about our brave American soldiers, "I was a war criminal, too" - meaning that he participated in cutting heads off, rape, plunder and the other crimes which he stated in his appearance before the congressional committee. Mind you, he did all this in 3 or 4 months. If Kerry is not a liar then Bill Clinton is as pure as the driven snow.
They fact that he came home after four months, and slandered our soldiers he left behind alone would cause me to vote for George Bush - but then I am a logical person. I call things as I see them, and I am usually right on.
Click here to check out my web site dedicated to exposing Hillary.
No.
He was "re-assigned" (to the admiral's aide billet he specifically requested back in New England).
THEN, after less than a year's service in New England, and with time left on his contract, he "quit" that position EARLY to go campaign for Congress.
Let's get some perspective.
That's one centimeter, and one millimeter is one tenth that size.
I've endured bigger cuts doing lawnwork.
I think you're mistaken. Kerry shamelessly used his "heroic" sservice in Vietnam to cover his later treason. Now that serious questions have been raised about his "heroism" people are likely to be far more willing to look at his actual treason, which, combined with an absolutely consistent communistic legislative record for his entire career, show that his election would be a catastrophe for America and Americans.
Great site. I've dropped by before and been enraged anew by Hill's arrogance and evil plans. Oh, to be a fly in the wall at Chappaqua...and Nantucket. She's got to be getting desperate phone calls from RAT higherups and operatives. There's plan A. where Kerry goes down in flames, becomes totally irrelevant forever, and she inherits the party. Then there's plan B. where he just might win, God help the country. Hill can't possibly think she'd be electable in 8 more years. That's a lot of road under them tires! Plus she'd have to run for reelection in NY in 20006, and if Rudi takes her on, she's toast with no base to run from. (Plastic surgery hasn't reached the point where her face will look anything but weird. Maybe Hill's hoping for a miracle, but look at Nancy Pelosi. Popeye doesn't begin to describe that woman's face.)
LOL
The beauty is, Kerry mentioned he wanted a Purple Heart for it. They laughed at him, and he proceeded to write it up himself.
Commander Grant Hibbard, page #38, UNFIT FOR COMMAND:
"Q: How did Kerry get a Purple Heart from the incident then?"
"GH: I don't know. It beats me. I know I didn't recommend him for a Purple Heart. Kerry probably wrote up the paperwork and recommended himself, that's all I can figure out. If it ever came across my desk, I don't have any recollection of it. Kerry didn't get my signature. I said "no way" and told him to get out of my office."
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.