Medalgate heats up

[gcode]

Its looks like this controvery is not going away anytime soon.

I'm not a Vietnam vet, but I know there are many

on this forum,(both liberal and conservative)

What do you guys think about all this??

 

My personal view is that what either Kerry or Bush

did 40 years ago has very little to do with being President today. However if any of these charges

have any truth to them at all it says a lot about Kerry's character.

Investors Business Daily Article

 

Bob Dole weighs in

[MetalMarvels]

I don't really think that what either of them did or didn't do in a "police action" that ended several decades ago has much to do with their POLITICAL abilities in today's venue. I DO think that is an opportunity to look at their records (civilian as well as military) to help determine their moral character. If they are going to lie about something 40 years ago, what does that say about their reliability today.

 

Mr. Kerry could have received a Medal Of Honor and it would not change my opinion that he is unfit to govern - my opinion on that is based on his POLITICAL scorecard. He has consistantly said one thing while doing the opposite. I simply don't believe anything he has to say, unless I can back it up from an independant source.

 

I don't care if Mr. Bush spent his entire military career filing requisition forms - I do care about his POLITICAL actions over the past several years. He, at least, has been very predictable.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Kerry has been the one to tout his Vietnam bravery/medals/ribbons. They should be held up to the light of scrutiny. A group has put forth a substantial amount of evidence that contradicts Kerry's version. There have been no lawsuits from the Kerry camp charging Libel/Slander (which in this case) BOTH would/should apply if any of it is false.

 

On a side note. I'd like to know why Kerry is refusing to allow the publisher of his book that he wrote in the 70's to produce another run of that book. Seems like he should, unless he has something to hide.

 

JM2C

[Die Sinker]

As a Vietnam vet, I would like to recommend a site that is apolitical. It will explain why so many Vietnam veterans are so upset with Kerry.

 

www.swiftvets.com

[gcode]

Monday, Aug. 23, 2004 12:39 a.m. EDT

Hentoff: Kerry in War Record Cover-up

 

Longtime civil libertarian and columnist for the left-wing Village Voice, Nat Hentoff charged Sunday that the Kerry campaign is engaged in a transparent cover-up of the Massachusetts Democrat's war record and an attempt to muzzle freedom of speech.

 

In an interview with WABC Radio's Steve Malzberg, Hentoff noted that the Pentagon has responded to a Washington Post Freedom of Information Act request for Kerry's full military file by turning over just six pages of their 100-plus page Kerry dossier, with a spokesman explaining that Kerry himself wouldn't authorized the release of the full file.

 

Kerry has also refused to turn over diaries that the candidate kept during his Vietnam service, with the campaign insisting that an exclusive agreement with Kerry biographer Douglas Brinkley for his 2003 book "Tour of Duty" prevents any further disclosure.

But Hentoff said he wasn't buying that excuse, telling Malzberg, "I have done biographies of John Cardinal O'Connor and A.J. Muste and I've never heard of that kind of agreement."

 

"The question is, what is Kerry trying to hide?" said the Village Voice writer. "He claims he's interested in the truth. If he's interested in the truth, then release the records."

 

Hentoff said he's astounded at the media's response to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, whose eyewitness accounts have catapulted the issue of Kerry's war record to the top of the campaign agenda.

 

"I can't recall ever seeing such distortion of the motivations and the witnessing of these more than 200 Vietnam veterans," he complained.

 

Of Kerry's efforts to muzzle the Swiftvets by threatening lawsuits against TV stations who carry their ads, Hentoff said, "This tells you something about how a President Kerry is going to handle dissent."

[MetalMarvels]

I agree that if a person makes a claim, he should be ready and willing to substantiate it! Mr. Kerry has been FAR from willing to substantiate most (if not all) of the claims that he has made. ANY respect I might have had for him is gone due to his reactions to folks who very rightly called him on the details of some of his claims. Why hasn't Kerry had the text of his medal citation copied out for the press? He can get a copy from the archives if he doesn't remember where he put the one he was given - my dad had all of his for the Silver Stars, Bronze Stars, Air Medals, and other citations. Those are just something that most folks don't toss, BUT COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED!

 

Beyond what our political leaders have been up to, have any of you who are veterans of Vietnam had the opportunity to read a current-day history on the Vietnam conflict. Several of the "new" history texts that I have seen are so far off base that the term "revisionist" doesnt even begin to cover it.

 

Like many of you, I had my draft card in my wallet and fully expected my number to come rolling up in '72. Thank God it didn't. My dad had more than enough to say to me about his experiences from '67 and '68 while flying A1's with the 603rd ACS (call signs Hobo, Spad1 and Spad2). I miss you, Dad...

[gcode]

quote:

---

Like many of you, I had my draft card in my wallet and fully expected my number to come rolling up in '72

---

My memory of those days is a little hazy, but I

did register for the draft. I think they quit

drafting people about 6 weeks before I turned 18.

(Sept 1972)

 

edit:

I had some terrible fights with my parents over the draft. My dad is a Korean War vet and he wanted me to get in college for the deferment.

My mom wanted me to run for Canada and I just wanted to party

[Jim at Gentex]

I usually avoid the political threads, but I'm making an exception here because this debate is setting veterans at each other's throats which should never happen.

 

quote:

---

On a side note. I'd like to know why Kerry is refusing to allow the publisher of his book that he wrote in the 70's to produce another run of that book. Seems like he should, unless he has something to hide.

---

I reacll a bit of wisdom that goes something like: "If you always tell the truth, you don't have to worry about keeping your story straight."

 

Maybe Kerry did exaggerate about his exploits in the service...but as James aptly points out, HE is the one saying his Vietnam service qualifies him as a military leader, so that statement alone opens the door to scrutiny.

 

Look, as far as I'm concerned Kerry's honorable discharge is the same as Bush's, my own, and anyone else who ever put on a uniform, regardless of branch, length of service, or when or where they served, or what their job was when they served. The point is that they served. I realize that combat veterans have a unique perspective, but I don't think the character of someone's service is any more or less honorable based upon when and where they served, or whether or not they were fired upon. The truth is that both Kerry and Bush served in the US military and were both honorably discharged. We can debate the details to death, but we can't change the basic truth.

 

The real issue here is not military service. It really surprises me that many of the same people who defended Bill Clinton's lack of military service as irrelevant for being president are now willing to criticize the character and integrity George Bush's honorable service. Enough is enough. Let's debate the issues and quit sniping at candidates' military service records. It is counterproductive and silly.

 

IMHO the issue here is credibility and consistency. I believe that George Bush has been more credible and consistent in his positions on the major issues, and that John Kerry's message tends to fluctuate depending upon who he is talking to. (Example: the SUV statement...all for them when addressing auto workers, but backing away from the issue when addressing environmentalists.) I am also pro life which is a huge issue for me. Bush's personal beliefs in this area are well documented and unchanged. I think the "I'm personally morally opposed to abortion but I vote for it anyway" position is a cop out. I was always taught to say what I mean and mean what I say, so when I look for a candidate for any political office I tend to look for someone who closely parallels that position. For me, Bush is the clear choice and will get my vote in November.

 

Please forgive my rambling on...I know people will disagree with me, but that's what makes this country great.

[CAM-mando]

This was published on factcheck.org yesterday.

 

Update: Two New Witnesses Contradict Kerry's Swift Boat Critics

 

08.22.2004

 

We have updated our Aug. 6 article on the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad to include two new accounts that surfaced Aug. 22. One supported Kerry's account of the actions for which he was awarded the Silver Star, and the other supported Kerry's account of receiving enemy fire during the rescue for which Kerry was awarded the Bronze Star.

 

The Silver Star section has been updated to include the following:

 

On Aug. 22 an officer who was present supported Kerry's version, breaking a 35-year silence. William B. Rood commanded another Swift Boat during the same operation and was awarded the Bronze Star himself for his role in attacking the Viet Cong ambushers. He said Kerry and he went ashore at the same time after being attacked by several Viet Cong onshore.

Rood said he was the only other officer present. Rood is now an editor on the metropolitan desk of the Chicago Tribune, which published his first-person account of the incident in its Sunday edition. Rood said he had refused all interviews about Kerry's war record, even from reporters for his own paper, until motivated to speak up because Kerry's critics are telling "stories I know to be untrue" and "their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us."

 

Rood described two Viet Cong ambushes, both of them routed using a tactic devised by Kerry who was in tactical command of a three-boat operation. At the second ambush only the Rood and Kerry boats were attacked.

 

Rood: Kerry, followed by one member of his crew, jumped ashore and chased a VC behind a hooch--a thatched hut--maybe 15 yards inland from the ambush site. Some who were there that day recall the man being wounded as he ran. Neither I nor Jerry Leeds, our boat's leading petty officer with whom I've checked my recollection of all these events, recalls that, which is no surprise. Recollections of those who go through experiences like that frequently differ.

 

With our troops involved in the sweep of the first ambush site, Richard Lamberson, a member of my crew, and I also went ashore to search the area. I was checking out the inside of the hooch when I heard gunfire nearby.

 

Not long after that, Kerry returned, reporting that he had killed the man he chased behind the hooch. He also had picked up a loaded B-40 rocket launcher, which we took back to our base in An Thoi after the operation.

 

Rood disputed an account of the incident given by John O'Neill in his book "Unfit for Command," which describes the man Kerry chased as a "teenager" in a "loincloth." Rood said, "I have no idea how old the gunner Kerry chased that day was, but both Leeds and I recall that he was a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore."

 

Also, the Bronze Star section has been updated to include the following:

 

On Aug. 22 the Washington Post quoted a new eyewitness in support of Kerry's version. The Post said it had independently contacted Wayne D. Langhofer, who manned a machine gun aboard PCF-43, the boat directly behind Kerry's, and that Langhofer said he distinctly remembered the "clack, clack, clack" of enemy AK-47 assault rifles.

 

Langhofer: There was a lot of firing going on, and it came from both sides of the river.

 

CAM

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

So, with the above being said, that would/should give the Kerry camp good ammo for a libel/slander which the Swiftvets welcome wouldn't you say???

[MetalMarvels]

+1000 to Jim

 

quote:

---

IMHO the issue here is credibility and consistency.

---

Exactly! I do not want a person in the office of the presidency who consistently contradicts himself and has proven to be less than honest about his own actions. I will not vote for Mr. Kerry.....My vote will be with Mr. Bush this fall.

[dan m]

I don't claim to be very intelligent especially when it comes to politics. What I don’t understand is why someone would want to base his campaign on what he did in a war that happened 40 years ago. As far as I know wars are no longer fought the same way, the world is no longer run the same way. Who really cares what John Kerry did for 4 months during the time he was in the Vietnam War. As I see it this country has a lot more issues to worry about than someone’s past service record. How Many times’s is John Kerry going to say he has a plan for change but doesn’t say what his plan consists of? In my opinion John Kerry doesn’t know what the people want to hear about the current issues so he doesn’t know what lies to tell. Just my 2 cents worth.