Posted on 08/07/2004 3:39:49 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
In Vietnam, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and Dallas attorney John E. O'Neill commanded the same Swift boat, although not at the same time.
Two years later they debated bitterly on national TV about America's conduct in that war.
This week they're the focus of an equally bitter continuation of that conflict.
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group O'Neill helped form, has taken out $500,000 in TV advertising challenging Kerry's highly decorated war record, claiming stories of his heroism were fabricated, and that he wasn't entitled to two of the three Purple Hearts or the Bronze and Silver stars he was awarded.
From his earliest campaign ads, including at least two aired in Tucson, through his rousing speech at the Democratic National Convention, Kerry has highlighted his service in Vietnam as evidence of his leadership ability, particularly at a time of war.
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads, running in Ohio, Wisconsin and West Virginia, but not Arizona, say the group formed to "provide solid factual information" about Kerry's tour of duty.
The group includes veterans who served on Swift boats in Vietnam, including some of the commanders who recommended Kerry for the awards they now say he didn't deserve.
Although none served under his command, they say they were close enough to the 1969 events - in some cases within 50 yards - to know the truth.
Although they aren't affiliated with the Republican Party, they are backed by several of the party's longtime big contributors and activists.
A number of them have acknowledged they are still bitter toward Kerry for his highly vocal role more than 30 years ago in Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and his 1971 statements that American soldiers, himself included, committed war crimes in Vietnam.
The anti-Kerry ads are something of a role-reversal from a few months ago, when some top Democratic leaders were questioning President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard during Vietnam.
Although the National Guard has been a prime source of personnel for Iraq, in the Vietnam era it was generally seen as an alternative to being drafted and sent to Vietnam.
In February, Kerry asked his Democratic colleagues to stop challenging Bush on that issue, but stopped short of repudiating their charges.
Similarly, the Bush White House has neither endorsed nor denounced the ad criticizing Kerry's war record, nor asked the group to withdraw it.
Thirty-seven years after the fact the challenge against Kerry's service boils down to one side's word versus the other's. Military records and statements by most crewmen who served with him support Kerry's side, while the recollections of nearly 200 veterans who served at the same time disagree.
This is what is known about the points raised in the dueling TV versions of history:
Kerry enlisted in 1966, while still a student at Yale. He volunteered to go to Vietnam and to command a Swift boat.
President Bush enlisted in the National Guard in 1968.
John O'Neill, one of the founders of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, took over Kerry's command when Kerry was sent home after being awarded his third Purple Heart.
White House tapes from 1971 show O'Neill was recruited by Chuck Colson, then an aide to Republican President Nixon, to debate Kerry on the Dick Cavett Show over Kerry's claims Americans were committing war crimes, and to appear at news conferences. Colson was later convicted for his role in Watergate.
Merrie Spaeth, the anti-Kerry group's Dallas-based media representative, is a former White House media director under Republican President Reagan. She was a communications consultant to Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr during his investigation of Democratic President Bill Clinton. She gave a maximum $2,000 to the Bush re-election campaign, and has given about $5,000 to other national GOP candidates since 2000.
As of their last campaign finance filing, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth received $100,000 of their $158,000 in contributions from Bob J. Perry, a Houston home builder. He has contributed at least $260,000 to national Republican candidates and organizations over the last five years. He also gave maximum $2,000 contributions to the Bush 2004 re-election campaign and to Attorney General John Ashcroft's unsuccessful U.S. Senate campaign in 2000.
Significant political contributions could be found for only two leaders of the anti-Kerry group.
Eleven of the 12 men who actually served with Kerry support his version of events, according to Scripps Howard News Service.
Although none of Kerry's detractors served on the same boat, retired Adm. Roy F. Hoffmann said they were operating 25 to 50 yards away, while others have described the distance as "a few yards." By contrast, "Tour of Duty," a Kerry biography, describes his wounds and the rescue of Army Special Forces Lt. Jim Rassmann that resulted in one Purple Heart and his Bronze Star as happening "several hundred yards" from the second boat involved.
The detractors also deny Kerry was under enemy fire when he pulled Rassmann from a river, a claim Rassmann disputes and that is inconsistent with the Navy citation accompanying the award. Rassman is featured in pro-Kerry ads.
In a May interview with the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Hoffmann said he didn't have any firsthand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims.
A sworn statement by Dr. Louis Letson claims he treated Kerry for a shrapnel wound in the arm that led to his first Purple Heart. He described the wound as a "slight injury" and says a Kerry crewman told him there was no hostile fire and the shrapnel was from a grenade Kerry had thrown himself.
But military medical records provided by the Kerry campaign to the nonpartisan Annenberg Institute show he was treated by a J.C. Carreon, not Letson, and Kerry crewmates deny talking to Letson.
Navy Lt. Commander Grant Hibbard, Kerry's former commander, who appears in the anti-Kerry ad, signed a statement saying he turned down the request for Kerry's first Purple Heart because the wound was insignificant. But in a Boston Globe interview in April, Hibbard acknowledged he eventually acquiesced to the award, despite having questions.
Also, Hibbard's statement describing the wound as "a tiny scratch, less than from a rose thorn" is inconsistent with Letson's description of it as shrapnel lodged in the arm.
Much of Hibbard's statement is devoted to criticizing Kerry for "betrayal of his shipmates" for his anti-war activities after returning from Vietnam.
Former Lt. Commander George Elliott, another former Kerry commander who appears in the anti-Kerry ad, retracted his comments Thursday, saying he made "a terrible mistake" when he said Kerry didn't deserve a Silver Star for shooting a Viet Cong who was carrying a rocket launcher.
It was Elliott who glowingly recommended Kerry for that award in 1969, and he said he still believes Kerry deserves it. He also recommended Kerry for the Bronze Star.
Elliott said he felt pressured to sign the statement presented by the group because it was rushing to put out an anti-Kerry book before the election.
Contact reporter Joe Burchell at 573-4244 or jburchell@azstarnet.com.
Yeah, I noticed they pushed all of the Democrat hate buttons, even mentioning Ken Starr, a woman who worked for him, and even how much money she contributed.
If I'm not mistaken, kerry is the one who ALWAYS mentions that he served in Vietnam.
37 years after Nam, and he brings it up time and time again. Now that someone is calling his service and awards questionable, he is crying foul. Well DUH!
The media are truly enemies of the Republic.
Wrong. Steven Gardner served under Kerry for 2 1/2 months as his gunner and is part of the SBVFT. I wonder why the MST doesn't interview him. I heard Gardner on Savage last night and he was quite credible.
IIRC, it's not true that Colson "recruited" O'Neill.
O'Neill came to the attention of the WH because he already was out and about making speeches. And he'd been on Cavett several times before the notable debate with Kerry.
By the way, re. Kerry's service records... I was thinking how nice it would be for everyone to send him a Form 180 (or whatever it is) to release his records. I am half tempted to contact his campaign and ask for the materials to make a contribution, then just put the form into the envelope and mail it back to him.
I wrote the following Letter to the Editor on the "Ads debate Kerry's military record" article.
---
There are several errors, omissions or biases in your article.
You wrote: "Although none served under his command,..." and "Although none of Kerry's detractors served on the same boat".
That is inaccurate. Steve Gardner, one of the "detractors" who disputes the circumstances surrounding at least one of Kerry's medals, served on Kerry's boat as a machine gunner.
You wrote: "But military medical records provided by the Kerry campaign to the nonpartisan Annenberg Institute show he was treated by a J.C. Carreon, not Letson, and Kerry crewmates deny talking to Letson."
Dr. Letson treated Kerry. J.C. Carreon, an enlisted hospital corpsman who worked with Dr. Letson at the time, most likely completed the paperwork. It was common practice for enlisted men and women in the medical field to fill out the required record entries. I did when I served in the U. S. Navy medical and dental fields.
You wrote: "Hibbard's statement describing the wound as "a tiny scratch, less than from a rose thorn" is inconsistent with Letson's description of it as shrapnel lodged in the arm. "
I heard Dr. Letson describe the shrapnel injury he treated, and his description was consistent with "a tiny scratch, less than from a rose thorn". Dr. Letson stated the shrapnel was barely hanging from a tiny wound. He used a pair of tweezers to remove the shrapnel -- no anesthesia required and no time off required. It was a scratch! Dr. Letson stated he was astonished when he heard much later that Kerry had applied for and received a Purple Heart for the wound.
You wrote: "Former Lt. Commander George Elliott, another former Kerry commander who appears in the anti-Kerry ad, retracted his comments Thursday, saying he made "a terrible mistake" when he said Kerry didn't deserve a Silver Star for shooting a Viet Cong who was carrying a rocket launcher . . . Elliott said he felt pressured to sign the statement presented by the group because it was rushing to put out an anti-Kerry book before the election."
That statement came from a recent Boston Globe article. Elliot said in a more recent affidavit that the Boston Globe reporter misquoted him. Elliot stands by everything he said in the ad.
You wrote: "Although the National Guard has been a prime source of personnel for Iraq, in the Vietnam era it was generally seen as an alternative to being drafted and sent to Vietnam . . . President Bush enlisted in the National Guard in 1968."
The continual implication of this DNC talking point is that President Bush avoided Vietnam by joining the National Guard. The truth is the NG unit Bush signed up for was in combat in Vietnam at the time he signed up, and anyone joining that unit at that time would reasonably expect to be in combat when they continued their long, difficult fighter pilot training (The biased media - no one - ever mentions how difficult it is to become a U.S. military fighter pilot. That would destroy the "Bush is stupid" myth).
You went into great detail about the (so far minor) fund-raising of the swift boat veterans in a what I perceive to be a biased attempt to smear them. If you have went into the same detail on the $50+ million dollars raised by 527's to smear President Bush, then I apologize for my insinuation.
The media really is show it's true colors here. Forget all the he said/he said stuff for a moment. How cannot they not question the contradictions in "Tour of Duty, the Kranish Globe bio, and Kerry's statements to congress. How can they not wonder why Kerry won't release his full records? They are circling the wagons in defense of "their" war hero.
"As for the ominous Houston homebuilder, why can't the guy fund this group if he so chooses?"
To whom did they expect the Swifties to go for help, the DNC? And of course the use of the term "recruited" is meant to have sinister overtones.
The US NAVY RECORDS DEPARTMENT has John F. Kerry's old record SOMEWHERE....he does not have to release it for it to become public.....IMHO
What Irks me, is that the Media want to skewer Viet Nam Vets, who served this Country, but not John Kerry because ....he is DEMOCRAT SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS. SHHHHEEESH..talk about a double standard. MCCain himself gets to be above the fray...because he is a Senator...WELL I AM HERE TO TELL YOU , JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE A SENATOR ..DOES NOT GET YOU A "GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD".
Not to mention the use of the word "home builder"! I am sure that to the liberals, that smacks of some kind of self-employed, income producing, environment destroying, and quite possibly church-attending wacko!!!
That's the point. The media cannot defend his lies to the Senate panel. If they try, he'll sink further. By contrast, they can defend his "heroism," because they refuse to demand his medical records.
Newt is right. The vets must attack what Kerry did after the war. Getting into his service record may only create a backlash for Kerry.
I pray that his "atrocities" will be phase II before it's too late.
LOL. BTW, I just heard the Fox and Friends mention that one of the Swifties in the ad had recanted what he said about Kerry. As I understand it, this has been proven false. Does Fox not have this information? Oh, and some media consultant on the program says Bush should come out and condemn the ad and declare Kerry a war hero, and that Bush "probably" had the power to get it pulled. Right! Bush should trash these vets. I don't see that happening, and I wonder what "power" the president has to tell people what they can and cannot say.
#28 is a great post. Terse and to the point. Thanks.
In the Rassmann incident, what were the nature
of Kerry's wounds?
Oh, but media experts are rushing to get on tv and warn republicans that this ad deflects the public's attention from the issues. Kerry is running on his military service record. If phony, it should be exposed. We're at war, and Kerry's fitness to lead this country as CinC matters. Well, never mind, media experts warn, Bush has 'military experience issues' that might embarrass him. Best to drop this ad. Besides, McCain thinks we shouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole, and in most military matters, he gets the last word, so I guess that's that. Oh, well, Howie Noneck Dean says the terror threat is baloney, just put out there by Bush for political reasons to scare us into voting for him. Gee, that makes me feel better. He had me really going there for a minute. So we're okay, guys. Nothing to worry about.
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.