Posted on 05/27/2006 10:22:00 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Kerry Pressing Swiftboat Case, Long After Loss By KATE ZERNIKE
John Kerry starts by showing the entry in a log he kept from 1969: "Feb 12: 0800 run to Cambodia."
He moves on to the photographs: his boat leaving the base at Ha Tien, Vietnam; the harbor; the mountains fading frame by frame as the boat heads north; the special operations team the boat was ferrying across the border; the men reading maps and setting off flares.
"They gave me a hat," Mr. Kerry says. "I have the hat to this day," he declares, rising to pull it from his briefcase. "I have the hat."
Three decades after the Vietnam War and nearly two years after Mr. Kerry's failed presidential bid, most Americans have probably forgotten why it ever mattered whether he went to Cambodia or that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth accused him of making it all up, saying he was dishonest and lacked patriotism.
But among those who were on the frontlines of the 2004 campaign, the battle over Mr. Kerry's wartime service continues, out of the limelight but in some ways more heatedly — because unlike then, Mr. Kerry has fully engaged in the fight. Only those on Mr. Kerry's side, however, have gathered new evidence to prove their case.
The Swift boat group continues to spend money on Washington consultants, according to public records, and last fall it gave $100,000 to a group that promptly sued Mr. Kerry, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, for allegedly interfering with the release of a film that was critical of him.
Some of the principals behind the Swift boat group continue to press their claims.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I just looked it up. He signed 3 SF-180s. One for a Boston Globe reporter, Michael K. , one to an AP reporter, Glenn Johnson, and a third to Los Angeles Times reporter, Steve B. (You'd think someone in Kerry's office would have a typewriter, but the forms are handwritten. Obviously one was filled partially filled in, then photo copied and the 3 different names filled in, and the names are hard to read in the on line versions. In the third you can see evidence of white out being used, because you can't read what was written on top of it, although by inference from the other two, it was "Los Angeles Times".
"May we see your discharge papers, Senator?"
He's having Jesse Macbeth fix his DD214.
Hat made of tin foil
Does Kerry know Jesse Macbeth? They seem to have a lot in common!
Does this mean that Kerry will sign his Form-180?
"Well Frenchy maybe it's time you brought those liars to court."
Discovery on a case like this would be fun fun fun. The man is a damned liar.
PS
Sign the form 180 and we will go away. :)
well, he said he has the hat, so that proves it!
It wasn't the WaPo,but the even more solidly leftist/anti-American AP, Boston Globe and LA times, and even then, only to a single reporter of each organization. The link to the SF-180s is here, although I'm sure there are other places to find copies.
The Times’ white alleged reporter who dramatically botched a story, was Kate Zernike; the story was on the reaction, or lack thereof, to the June, 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the Boys Scouts of America’s ban on gay scout leaders. Kate Zernike’s August 29, 2000 front page story, reported that “corporate and governmental support for the organization had slipped markedly,” citing the withdrawal of monetary support by Chase Manhattan, Merill Lynch and Textron. As William McGowan chronicles in Coloring the News, Zernike was found to have written one falsehood after another, including her suggestion that many parents of boy scouts were opposed to the policy, and that, as McGowan put it, “a grassroots rebellion … could be in the offing.”
“Not a week later, though, the Times was forced to run a mortifying, five-paragraph correction undercutting almost every one of Zernike’s contentions.”
Was Kate Zernike fired? Not at all. Was she reprimanded? Of course not. On the contrary, if anything, in supporting the campaign against Boy Scouts of America led by the mainstream media’s “gay mafia,” Zernike’s lies enhanced her standing at the Times.
http://tinyurl.com/s82c4
Not quite. He signed 3 SF-180s. Each was for a one time release of his entire record, but only to 3 individual reporters, one each from AP, Boston Globe, and LA Times.
A basically dishonest act, IMHO, quite in keeping with his past actions.
Yeah, a hat. I guess that hat proves he was a highly competent boat commander and war hero after all, in spite of scores of eyewitness accounts to the contrary. I got to gets me one of them there magical hats, I wants to hang out at the local Legion hall and brag about howze I got wounded in the butt by some grains of rice. If I got the hat nobody can call my bluff.
No wonder the guy's a loser, he hasn't got a lick of common sense.
Nah, the Herald is the wrong fish wrap, it was the Boston Globe.
Despite these facts, Zernike amazingly concluded that “What has surprised many is the support among students” for the initiative—a contention evidenced only by some “opinion pieces or letters to the editor supporting the new plan in...the student newspaper.” She dismissed the many more student letters that defended Dartmouth's Greek as “hate mail.”
Zernike heralded Wright as a “hero,” who courageously fought the forces of “conservatism and bigotry” at Dartmouth College.
It is unsurprising, then, that most students and alumni have ceased to rely on The Boston Globe for credible information about Dartmouth and the new residential life plan. But that doesn't mean Kate Zernike has stopped writing about it.
http://tinyurl.com/rvycf
Hey, Kerry: release all the records and let the facts speak for themselves!! No more spin, no more weasel words, just release every last document and let others make up their own minds. Why is it so difficult for you to do that?
All very well for Kerry and SBVT to trade lawsuits. But when is President Bush going to chime in with his lawsuit against CBS over the fraudulent "TANG memos" hit piece? That is what makes such a joke of McCain-Feingold: tell the truth about a Democrat and you get sued by him; lie like a rug about a Republican and there are no consequences to your company.All very well to speak of the First Amendment, but if you are going to sign McCain-Feingold you are certifying that journalism is objective (since McCain-Feingold presumes to restrict all but journalists from talking about politicians during election season). If that CBS report was objective, we shouldn't have voted for Bush's re-election.
Bush actually owes it to us to sue the socks off of CBS. Just like he owes it to the uniformed military to defend his own actions and, except in cases of courts martial, their actions in carrying out his orders.
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.