GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/10/29/the-clintonite-responses-of-our-readers-others/trackback/

  1. [...] Original post by GayPatriotWest [...]

    Pingback by Politics: 2008 HQ » Blog Archive » The Clintonite Responses of Some Readers (& Others) — October 29, 2007 @ 10:10 pm - October 29, 2007

  2. >I appreciate civil discourse
    How else are new ideas discovered and evolved? The most admired and civil intellectual conservatives, George Will, Buckley, Krauthammer, are the most persuasive. The Log Cabin seems reluctant to go the intellectual route. Why do they go negative like a Carville or Coulter?

    Comment by Geena the transgirl — October 29, 2007 @ 10:48 pm - October 29, 2007

  3. Sort of related, the full flower of Bush Derangement Syndrome.

    Bush has also damaged my mental health.

    After I actually took the trouble to inform myself about politics a couple years ago, and learned the true extent of the damage Bush has done to this country, I have a constant boiling rage inside me. Absolutely constant. Never ceases, though sometimes I can get it down to a simmer so I can go out in public and hang out with friends without doing something stupid. On top of the anger is a generous dose of fear and anxiety, coming directly from the Bush administration’s march to fascism.

    Frequently, I’m so intensely angry that I hit things. I just broke my bookshelf today because I hit it. My knuckles have decent callouses on them from hitting things, and various pieces of my property show signs of my rage.

    Look, I was a Clinton-hater. I was amazed that people fell for that slick, lying con-man. (Well, only about 43% of people who voted, but nonetheless). I believed he was thoroughly corrupt (and that belief has been vindicated repeatedly) and I believed his policies were bad for America. But I never let it affect my personal happiness. I certainly didn’t go around hitting things or suffering from “a constant boiling rage.” I don’t know of anyone else who did either.

    Comment by V the K — October 30, 2007 @ 7:35 am - October 30, 2007

  4. Here’s another gem from dKos: “Before my head began exploding a few years ago in response to Busharama, I’d exercise a lot… I mean, almost daily, joyous-type exericising. Now I come home with a slight frown on my face and come here to hear the news & be a mojo-mama even if too tired to comment, and hang for hours here and on other blogs, as if the light will shine again and I’ll be present to hear the BREAKING news about that.

    Bush, I blame you for my new-ish extra 20 pounds….”

    Yeah, I’m sure it has everything to do with BushCo nothing to do with you stuffing your face with Hot Pockets.

    Comment by V the K — October 30, 2007 @ 7:44 am - October 30, 2007

  5. It’s called hyperbole, V the K.

    Comment by KYKid — October 30, 2007 @ 8:31 am - October 30, 2007

  6. KYKid, you call it “hyperbole”… I call it “dead on right”. Sorry, but the FarLeft does seem to be more animated, more vociferous, more visceral about their collective sense of outrage against AllThingsBush that, as VdaK has noted elsewhere in this blog, they even want the Cheney grandchildren to suffer childhood illnesses in order to bring angst to that family, etc.

    Animated. Vociferous. Visceral. Just look at CodePink’s high jinks. Or MoveOn.Org

    I recall during the 1992 race the Clinton smear-machine (which worked so well on other targets and still operates today) started planting rumors in the press that Bush 41 had had an affair with a European diplomat and quasi-EEC functionary while serving in govt. It was a pale attempt at the “look, he does it too so it must be ok” childish rationalizations that afflict 7 year old kids trying to escape responsibility. Luckily, any reporter with even a bare knowledge of Bush 41 took a pass on the “free story”… and the attempt ended up dropping into the grocery store quality tabloid press. The same place where Hillary is routinely speculated upon as a lesbian and Area 51 has alien remnants.

    Nawh, KYKid, VdaK has it nailed dead on right with his example; unfortunately, on a 1,000 topics on any day in the FarLeft blogs you can find equally silly statements by other FarLefties. You only see it as hyperbole because you’d prefer not have the radical FarLeft’s loonie statements discredit your anti-Bush FarLeftisms tossed out here with regularity. And that’s not hyperbole, KYKid.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 30, 2007 @ 9:46 am - October 30, 2007

  7. First – a conservative disparaging the “attack the messenger” tactic is quite amusing. Isn’t that is rule number 1 in the right wing manual “How to Deny Reality” (see the attack on Al Gore below)

    Second – Mentioning Bush derangement syndrome in yet ANOTHER post slamming Clinton?
    Ha!
    Third – Go Big O!

    Comment by gil — October 30, 2007 @ 10:57 am - October 30, 2007

  8. The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 10/30/2007 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.

    Comment by David M — October 30, 2007 @ 11:13 am - October 30, 2007

  9. Newsflash to gil: you can address an issue and attack the messenger in the same post.

    Amazing I know.

    Comment by DoDoGuRu — October 30, 2007 @ 1:24 pm - October 30, 2007

  10. Oh and KYKid, for the record, even a moderate GOPer like Ford thought your man Bill Clinton was an addict, deep in denial and unable to admit he lied in a grand jury. No hyperbole here either; just straight facts.

    http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/10/29/from-the-grave-ford-calls-clinton-sex-addict/

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 30, 2007 @ 1:53 pm - October 30, 2007

  11. The thing is, the Clintonistas (and other lefties) shriek “smear” as soon as anyone tells the truth about them. (Like the Swiftboat Vets.) In fact, the word smear has come to mean “when a conservative reveals an inconvenient truth about a liberal.” Much like “racist” has come to mean “anyone who disagrees with a liberal.”

    Comment by V the K — October 30, 2007 @ 2:22 pm - October 30, 2007

  12. The Swiftboats????
    My god, are you still trying to rewrite the history of when you wholeheartedly supported the slander of a US Vet?
    Have you any shame at all?!?!
    Jim Rassmann (the solider whose life was saved by Kerry)
    William Rood Peter Upton Rich Baker
    And many others were actually with Kerry who say those hacks are political opportunities who dislike Kerry only because of his post war narrative, and so they lie about him now.
    Some of them are proven liars who swore affidavits that were not true, some either lied then, or are lying now.
    Hell, some of them have now been rewarded by the Bush Admin for their work in Smearing a Vet and getting him elected.

    No. The swift boats are the definition of smear…by hacks who claim to support the troops…
    This is the definition of “phony patriots”

    [Fine, then, if you think the Swift Boat Vets smeared Kerry, please reference specific remarks they made about that man's record and show how they were false. At the same time, please address the comments Kerry made publicly about war crimes alleged committed by US troops in Vietnam and show how that wasn't a smear. And then ask, how a man could run for president on his record as a veteran when he had first risen to national prominence by attacking the military and its record in Vietnam. Thanks, Dan]

    Comment by gil — October 30, 2007 @ 4:01 pm - October 30, 2007

  13. #12 (Dan’s Note)

    BOOSH!!

    Gillie’s another fine example of the BS liberals smear around in the hopes that some out there are just too damn stupid to know better. Classic DailyKook or Demonic Underwear.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 30, 2007 @ 5:13 pm - October 30, 2007

  14. [GPW to gil:] if you think the Swift Boat Vets smeared Kerry, please reference specific remarks they made about that man’s record and show how they were false.

    Exactly. Out in the reality-based community (as distinct from you, gil, and your community-based “reality”), something is a smear only if it’s untrue. If you know any statement in Swift Boat Vet advertisement, say, that wasn’t true about John Kerry, cough it up, so we can get into facts/cases. Just one will do.

    You might learn something, once we do get into the facts. I’ll help you: You can find all the Swift Boat Vet advertisements at this link: http://swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=Ads
    Find one untrue statement.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 30, 2007 @ 6:07 pm - October 30, 2007

  15. John Kerry never refuted the Swiftboat vets.

    John Kerry never sued the Swiftboat vets for slander.

    John Kerry never released his military records for public review.

    And here’s the best part, Silly Person rants “are you still trying to rewrite the history of when you wholeheartedly supported the slander of a US Vet?’ and then proceeds to slander the Swiftboat veterans as hacks, liars, and political opportunists.

    A good laugh from Silly Person, it makes the time I spend here all worthwhile.

    Comment by V the K — October 30, 2007 @ 6:21 pm - October 30, 2007

  16. Meet the Press, January 30, 2005: Tim Russert asks John Kerry if he will sign Form 180 to release his military records. John Kerry says: “Yes I will.”

    Typically, Kerry then says that he will require “them” (Swift Boat vets?) to also release their records.

    Undoubtedly, Kerry sees this as a quid pro quo and is holding his own action until every single one of “them” has complied. Of course Kerry has never released the total list of “them.”

    Weasel. Remember that he would never reveal how he would do “it” smarter because he didn’t want to give even one glimmer of his colossal brilliance away?

    Comment by Heliotrope — October 30, 2007 @ 6:33 pm - October 30, 2007

  17. Silly Person rants “are you still trying to rewrite the history of when you wholeheartedly supported the slander of a US Vet?’ and then proceeds to slander the Swiftboat veterans as… liars…

    Exactly. To call the Swift Vets liars, is itself a lie – and thus a slander or smear (since it is untrue) of America’s great veterans, to whom we owe our freedom.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 30, 2007 @ 6:59 pm - October 30, 2007

  18. One must remember that, in gil’s mind, the only true patriots are those who slander and spread negative propaganda about US troops.

    Such as Scott Beauchamp.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 30, 2007 @ 8:12 pm - October 30, 2007

  19. I think the Silly One is only bashing the Swiftboat vets because their “narrative” is different than his own.

    Comment by V the K — October 30, 2007 @ 9:20 pm - October 30, 2007

  20. GPW:
    O’Niel lied about their not being any bullet holes in the boats
    He lied about his former offers being either anti or neutral to Kerry
    Larry Thurlow own post action reports prove he was liar
    Alfred French lied in an affidavit about personal knowledge and now he says “that’s what I heard”
    George Elliot has consistent contradicted himself
    They lied about their allegiances to their republican party
    I could go on and on and on

    But instead I will let a someone else speak:

    Rassmann: Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river and a second explosion followed moments later. The second blast blew me off John’s swift boat, PCF-94, throwing me into the river. Fearing that the other boats would run me over, I swam to the bottom of the river and stayed there as long as I could hold my breath.

    When I surfaced, all the swift boats had left, and I was alone taking fire from both banks. To avoid the incoming fire I repeatedly swam under water as long as I could hold my breath, attempting to make it to the north bank of the river. I thought I would die right there. The odds were against me avoiding the incoming fire and, even if I made it out of the river, I thought I thought I’d be captured and executed. Kerry must have seen me in the water and directed his driver, Del Sandusky, to turn the boat around. Kerry’s boat ran up to me in the water, bow on, and I was able to climb up a cargo net to the lip of the deck. But, because I was nearly upside down, I couldn’t make it over the edge of the deck. This left me hanging out in the open, a perfect target. John, already wounded by the explosion that threw me off his boat, came out onto the bow, exposing himself to the fire directed at us from the jungle, and pulled me aboard.

    Yet you wankers call him a liar….
    Phony patriots. Every one of you.

    [Until you provide a link to statements made by the Swift Boat Vets and actual facts at odds with those statements (or TV ads, etc.), I won't take you seriously. And you haven't even mentioned the comment I made about Kerry's smearing the troops. --Dan]

    Comment by gil — October 30, 2007 @ 10:31 pm - October 30, 2007

  21. gil, how interesting that you have not bothered to cite one single, specific claim of the Swift Vets that is/was untrue. You obviously don’t know the material you’re trying to argue about. You try to quote Rassmann, but in reference to…..what????????

    Instead, gil, you mindlessly assert that a large group of honored veterans are liars. gil, stop slandering our vets!

    And do you deny that John Kerry slandered – that is, lied about – an entire generation of vets? Do you deny Kerry’s own words – his provably false words, that are part of the U.S. Congressional Record?

    Still, I’m amazed you even had someone supply you the Rassmann quote. Needless to say, Rassmann’s accounts are legitimately to be disputed – by other eyewitnesses. Repeat, the Swift Vets were eyewitnesses. You were not.

    For other eyewitness testimony on the matters involving Rassmann – once you figure out what the hell they are, LOL :-) – you may see the documentaries here:
    http://swiftvets.com/swiftvetsandpows/

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 31, 2007 @ 12:18 am - October 31, 2007

  22. Now, what I came to say:

    Here is an example of a veteran against a particular war, who does it right. His name is Richard Peters. He led, and may still lead, IVAW (Iraq Veterans Against the War). He doesn’t resort to despicable, gil / Kerry / TNR slanders on our troops. And he opposes those who do. I honor his service – and his commitment to the the truth, at least when it comes to our troops.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 31, 2007 @ 12:23 am - October 31, 2007

  23. (re: #21, for clarity: I’m saying that stuff like “O’Niel lied about their not being any bullet holes in the boats” is in no way specific. What bullet holes? What boats? What incident? Related to what, of Kerry’s record? What citation or link can gil give, that others may know? Nothing. Just the frothing spittle of another slanderer.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 31, 2007 @ 12:31 am - October 31, 2007

  24. Rassmann debunked: Go to http://www.swiftvets.com, Enter the main site, hit Discussion forum, hit Search, type ‘rassmann’, hit Search. Read from the back, moving forward in time.

    Rassman doesn’t have to be a liar here; he could easily have been confused by the fog of war. He has only Kerry to back up his account. While the Swifties have, like, 10 eyewitnesses.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 31, 2007 @ 2:39 am - October 31, 2007

  25. I wonder if gi

    Comment by V the K — October 31, 2007 @ 5:18 am - October 31, 2007

  26. (Thanks, cat)

    I wonder if the Silly Person would believe one of Larry Craig’s cronies insisting he wasn’t gay against ten eyewitnesses who saw him drop trou in a Fire Island rest area.

    The Silly One just can’t deal with “narratives” that don’t fit his worldview.

    Comment by V the K — October 31, 2007 @ 5:21 am - October 31, 2007

  27. I gave you countless examples of Swift Boaters lies.
    (Every time I use links my comments get stuck in limbo)
    Google those names or not, I don’t care.

    Why would Rasmussen lie? What is his motivation? And you are wrong when you say he only has to rely on Kerry. William Rood, Peter Upton, Rich Baker and many others who were on kis boat back kerry.
    On the other hand, why would the swift boaters lie when they got piles of money from Bush supporters, and got plum jobs from the Bush administration….
    You can deny all you want ILC.
    It only makes your patriotism more phony.
    and V
    I am glad you bring up “narrative”
    What drove the swift boaters is their hatred of Kerry talking about his view of what was going on over there post service. Not his active service, but his post service narrative. Everything he said was given extra scrutiny and even pictures were doctored showing him with Jane Fonda….he is yet another vet dragged through the mud because of his narrative (attack the messenger, not the message, Rule # 1 of the right wing “How to Deny Reality Manual”)
    #26 –
    I would believe Craig if the people who were actually in the stall backed him. Especially if some of his accusers signed affidavits that they retracted (Elliot and French) or if they all originally backed him in their post action reports but later in the face of big money, retracted them (Thurlow) or if the people who accused him lied about supporting his enemies (O’Neil)

    Comment by gil — October 31, 2007 @ 10:13 am - October 31, 2007

  28. I gave you countless examples of Swift Boaters lies.

    Technically true. Zero is not a counting number.

    Comment by V the K — October 31, 2007 @ 10:39 am - October 31, 2007

  29. Why would Rasmussen lie?

    Wow. Now it’s “Rasmussen”. And never mind that at #24, I had said:

    Rassmann doesn’t have to be a liar here; he could easily have been confused by the fog of war.

    Which gil would or should know, if bothered to dig into the incident’s details and conflicting eyewitness accounts. But I guess it doesn’t matter, since this “discussion” is really about the frothing spittle – oops, excuse me, the “narratives” – of military- and veteran-slanderers, such as gil.

    …William Rood, Peter Upton, Rich Baker and many others [specifically back up Rassmann, and would be in any sort of position to]…

    …the swift boaters… got plum jobs from the Bush administration…

    …even pictures were doctored showing Kerry with Jane Fonda…

    Now those are whopping lies. Pharmaceutical-grade!!!

    At http://www.swiftvets.com, no pictures were doctored; any picture they have of the young Kerry in the same frame as Jane Fonda is real. They were, after all, two of THE most prominent war protestors of the time.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 31, 2007 @ 11:17 am - October 31, 2007

  30. Just for the record, what else someone might need to know about the Rassmann / Bronze Star incident:

    - By his own account, Rassmann was keeping his head under water as much as possible (once he fell in because of the mine explosion) and only coming up for air. So he would have no way of knowing what the action was, after he was in the water.

    - Swift Boats laid down suppressive fire (of possible enemy). Rassmann, with his head under water, mis-interpreted and mis-reported that as enemy fire. No living, above-water eyewitness remembers any actual enemy fire being involved in the incident (after the initial, passive mine explosion).

    - All physical damage reports that day from the five (5) Swift Boats involved in the incident showed NO enemy fire. (In the reporting standards of the time, when bullets hit the boats, they had to count the holes and include in their damage reports. No PCF skipper had any to report.)

    - Kerry’s Bronze Star was not written up nor awarded at the time of the incident. It was done years later, by a friendly Navy bureaucrat who checked none of the alleged facts with anyone who was present that day (except Kerry).

    Learn anything, gil? No, I knew you couldn’t.

    The above can all be dug up from various interview tidbits floating about the Web from various eyewitnesses. I did the exercise back in 2004. I’m typing from old notes I took at the time. Don’t have time to repeat the exercise, but there’s the hints for what you could look for.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 31, 2007 @ 11:31 am - October 31, 2007

  31. But wow, this is fun, revisiting old times!

    Here is a documentary about the Rassmann / Bronze Star incident:
    http://swiftvets.com/swiftvetsandpows/quicktimestream320/nmlbstr320.mov

    Synopsis: Five boats moving together. A mine went off under PCF-3. There was no enemy fire. (Thurlow’s boat, alone, reported 3 bullet holes – from an action on the previous day!) And of 60 men, not one wound from enemy fire. Rassman was on Kerry’s boat. Rassman stood up to look at what was happening to PCF-3, just as Kerry’s driver hit the throttle to run away, throwing Rassmann in the water. The other boats didn’t run away. Another PCF approached Rassmann to pick him up. Just at that moment, Kerry rather irresponsibly zoomed back and cut off the other boat, so (Kerry) could pick up Rassman. Then Kerry had himself transferred and evacuated out, claiming to be wounded (but exaggerating, if not lying). Kerry wrote the after-action report, praising himself and falsely claiming there was 5000 meters of enemy fire. And years after, got himself a Bronze Star.

    By my count, the Swifties marshal 6 eyewitnesses: Dick Pease, Jack Chenowith, Bruce Vorpahl, Bob Hornburger, Van O’dell, Larry Thurlow. Plus 2 people knowledgeable of the after-action reports: Troy Jenkins and Admiral Hoffman.

    Now, was I there? Do I personally know that account is true? Of course not. But against those 8 witnesses and record experts, Kerry can place only himself – a proven, self-interested liar on other occasions – and *one guy*, Rassmann, who by his own account was keeping his head under water and not witnessing the action.

    Do the math.

    In his intro to the documentary, O’Neill says to Kerry:

    You took the tragedy of other people and tried to portray yourself as a hero, in circumstances where your conduct was dishonorable and your actions were cowardly.

    He said it on the record, in public. Has Kerry ever sued him? No. Will Kerry ever? No.

    OK, gotta stop! :-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 31, 2007 @ 12:36 pm - October 31, 2007

  32. All right… I am sick of this too
    But you got to go more websites other than just the swiftboat.com
    JIM RASSMANN
    http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005460
    Robert E. Lambert
    http://archive.mailtribune.com/archive/2004/0826/local/stories/01local.htm
    Jim Russell
    http://www.telluridegateway.com/articles/2004/08/20/news/opinion/opinion01.txt

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html
    quote:
    “The Kerry and anti-Kerry camps differ sharply on whether the flotilla came under enemy fire after the explosion that crippled the 3 boat. Everybody aboard Kerry’s boat, including Rassmann, says there was fire from both riverbanks, and the official after-action report speaks of all boats receiving “heavy a/w [automatic weapons] and s/a [small arms] from both banks.” The Bronze Star citations for Kerry and Thurlow also speak of prolonged enemy fire.
    A report on “battle damage” to Thurlow’s boat mentions “three 30 cal bullet holes about super structure.” According to Thurlow, at least one of the bullet holes was the result of action the previous day, when he ran into another Vietcong ambush.”
    Then:
    Rassmann said, “are not just questioning Kerry’s account, they are questioning my account. I take that very personally. No one can tell me that we were not under fire. I saw it, I heard the splashes, and I was scared to death. For them to come back 35 years after the fact to tarnish not only Kerry’s record, but my veracity, is unconscionable.”
    There was a lot of firing going on, and it came from both sides of the river,” said Wayne D. Langhofer, who manned a machine gun aboard PCF-43, the boat that was directly behind Kerry’s.
    Langhofer said he distinctly remembered the “clack, clack, clack” of enemy AK-47s, as well as muzzle flashes from the riverbanks. Langhofer, who now works at a Kansas gunpowder plant, said he was approached several months ago by leaders of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth but declined their requests to speak out against Kerry.
    Then:
    Much of the debate over who is telling the truth boils down to whether the two-page after-action report and other Navy records are accurate or whether they have been embellished by Kerry or someone else. In “Unfit for Command,” O’Neill describes the after-action report as “Kerry’s report.” He contends that language in Thurlow’s Bronze Star citation referring to “enemy bullets flying about him” must also have come from “Kerry’s after-action report.”
    O’Neill has said that the initials “KJW” on the bottom of the report “identified” it as having been written by Kerry. It is unclear why this should be so, as Kerry’s initials are JFK. A review of other Swift boat after-action reports at the Naval Historical Center here reveals several that include the initials “KJW” but describe incidents at which Kerry was not present.
    Other Swift boat veterans, including Thurlow and Chenoweth, have said they believe that Kerry wrote the March 13 report. “I didn’t like to write reports,” said Thurlow, who was the senior officer in the five-boat flotilla. “John would write the thing up in longhand, and it would then be typed up and sent up the line.”
    Even if Kerry did write the March 13 after-action report, it seems unlikely that he would have been the source of the information about “enemy bullets” flying around Thurlow. The official witness to those events, according to Thurlow’s medal recommendation form, was his own leading petty officer, Robert Lambert, who himself won a Bronze Star for “courage under fire” in going to Thurlow’s rescue after he fell into the river. Lambert, who lives in California, declined to comment.
    In a telephone interview, the head of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, retired Adm. Roy Hoffmann, who commanded all Swift boats in Vietnam, said he believed that Kerry wrote the March 13 after-action report on the basis of numerical identifiers at the top of the form. He later acknowledged that the numbers referred to the Swift boat unit, and not to Kerry personally. “It’s not cast-iron,” he said.
    “A lot of people just can’t forgive and forget,” countered Kerry crew member Medeiros. “He was a great commander. I would have no trouble following him anywhere.”
    http://homepage.mac.com/chinesemac/kerry_medals/truth.html
    “the enlisted men who served with Kerry. They are overwhelmingly in favor of him, ten to one.* These are the men who best knew him as a commander. O’Neill describes them as “a handful of crewmen” [p. 8] who were “swayed by Kerry during his many post-Vietnam years of solicitation aimed at gaining the support of his crew.” [p. 72] Not only is that a lie, but it also disrespects these veterans, all of whom volunteered to serve in Vietnam”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/28/washington/28kerry.html?pagewanted=print

    Mr. Kerry’s defenders have received help from unlikely sources, including some who were originally aligned with the Swift boat group but later objected to its accusations against Mr. Kerry. One of them, Steve Hayes, was an early member of the group. A former sailor, he was a longtime friend and employee of William Franke, one of the group’s founders, and he supported the push to have Mr. Kerry release his military files. But Mr. Hayes came to believe that the group was twisting Mr. Kerry’s record.

    “The mantra was just ‘We want to set the record straight,’ ” Mr. Hayes said this month. “It became clear to me that it was morphing from an organization to set the record straight into a highly political vendetta. They knew it was not the truth.”

    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=1692
    band of anti-Kerry veterans funded by Republican donors–who call themselves Swift Boat Veterans for Truth–have claimed that there was no enemy fire when Kerry pulled Rassmann into his boat and that Kerry did not deserve the Bronze Star he won for this incident. Although the citation for Kerry’s Bronze Star notes he rescued Rassmann in the face of sniper fire and Kerry, Rassmann and PCF-94 crew members all say Rassmann was under fire when Kerry pulled him aboard, the anti-Kerry vets insist that was not how it happened, that there was no enemy fire. Their campaign against Kerry took a hit yesterday when The Washington Post disclosed that the military records of Larry Thurlow–a leader of the anti-Kerry outfit who also won a Bronze Star for actions taken during this engagement–contradict Thurlow’s claim that there was no enemy fire at the time

    Doctored Photo:
    http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_kerry_fonda.htm

    Plumb jobs:
    Sam Fox Ambassador to Belgium gave the Swift Boat liars 50,000
    Kenneth Cordier and Paul Galanti
    http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2004/sep/04/two_antikerry_veterans/
    Two former Vietnam prisoners of war who appear in ads attacking Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry were appointed by the Bush administration to a panel advising the Department of Veterans Affairs

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 12:53 pm - November 1, 2007

  33. FILTER

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 1:01 pm - November 1, 2007

  34. http://homepage.mac.com/chinesemac/kerry_medals/truth.html
    “the enlisted men who served with Kerry. They are overwhelmingly in favor of him, ten to one.* These are the men who best knew him as a commander. O’Neill describes them as “a handful of crewmen” [p. 8] who were “swayed by Kerry during his many post-Vietnam years of solicitation aimed at gaining the support of his crew.” [p. 72] Not only is that a lie, but it also disrespects these veterans, all of whom volunteered to serve in Vietnam”

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 1:02 pm - November 1, 2007

  35. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/28/washington/28kerry.html?pagewanted=print

    Mr. Kerry’s defenders have received help from unlikely sources, including some who were originally aligned with the Swift boat group but later objected to its accusations against Mr. Kerry. One of them, Steve Hayes, was an early member of the group. A former sailor, he was a longtime friend and employee of William Franke, one of the group’s founders, and he supported the push to have Mr. Kerry release his military files. But Mr. Hayes came to believe that the group was twisting Mr. Kerry’s record.

    “The mantra was just ‘We want to set the record straight,’ ” Mr. Hayes said this month. “It became clear to me that it was morphing from an organization to set the record straight into a highly political vendetta. They knew it was not the truth.”

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 1:03 pm - November 1, 2007

  36. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html
    quote:
    “The Kerry and anti-Kerry camps differ sharply on whether the flotilla came under enemy fire after the explosion that crippled the 3 boat. Everybody aboard Kerry’s boat, including Rassmann, says there was fire from both riverbanks, and the official after-action report speaks of all boats receiving “heavy a/w [automatic weapons] and s/a [small arms] from both banks.” The Bronze Star citations for Kerry and Thurlow also speak of prolonged enemy fire.
    A report on “battle damage” to Thurlow’s boat mentions “three 30 cal bullet holes about super structure.”

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 1:03 pm - November 1, 2007

  37. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=1692
    band of anti-Kerry veterans funded by Republican donors–who call themselves Swift Boat Veterans for Truth–have claimed that there was no enemy fire when Kerry pulled Rassmann into his boat and that Kerry did not deserve the Bronze Star he won for this incident. Although the citation for Kerry’s Bronze Star notes he rescued Rassmann in the face of sniper fire and Kerry, Rassmann and PCF-94 crew members all say Rassmann was under fire when Kerry pulled him aboard, the anti-Kerry vets insist that was not how it happened, that there was no enemy fire. Their campaign against Kerry took a hit yesterday when The Washington Post disclosed that the military records of Larry Thurlow–a leader of the anti-Kerry outfit who also won a Bronze Star for actions taken during this engagement–contradict Thurlow’s claim that there was no enemy fire at the time

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 1:04 pm - November 1, 2007

  38. Doctored Photo:
    http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_kerry_fonda.htm

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 1:04 pm - November 1, 2007

  39. Uhg!
    Damn filter…
    I have spent too much energy on this.
    Use other websites outside of the swift boaters and you might figure it out…
    It would be nice to see you actually research this then come back with a public apology to Kerry…
    so tired…I want to sleep…

    Comment by gil — November 1, 2007 @ 1:06 pm - November 1, 2007

  40. Oh Christ who cares..

    Libs.. always fighting the fight from 4 years ago.

    Comment by Vince P — November 1, 2007 @ 1:10 pm - November 1, 2007

  41. Gil, for all the time and energy you spent on this, you have yet to establish that the Swift Boat Vets smeared Kerry.

    All you need do is provide their actual words and provide evidence showing that those specific allegations were false. Basically to do something similar to what Dave Kope did when pointing out the deceits in Michael Moore‘s movie.

    You provide lots of links, but in my cursory reading of each piece, I see a lot of generalities and deference to the Massachusetts Senator, but little actual confrontation with the specifics of the Swift Boat Vets accusations.

    And you link one guy, Mr. Lambert who faults Kerry for what he said when he returned the US after his brief service in Vietnam. Does that count as a smear or no?

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 1, 2007 @ 1:51 pm - November 1, 2007

  42. gil, all that I have already answered.

    That Kerry wrote his own after-action reports has been substantiated by other records analysts than what you’ve misquoted. And Rassmann, by his own account, was keeping himself under water as much as possible. Nearly all the other eyewitnesses say there wasn’t any enemy fire. Only Kerry’s paid supporters from his boat claim there was any enemy fire. No damage reports nor medical reports consistent with enemy fire have ever emerged from that incident.

    A report on “battle damage” to Thurlow’s boat mentions “three 30 cal bullet holes about super structure.” According to Thurlow, at least one of the bullet holes was the result of action the previous day, when he ran into another Vietcong ambush.”

    EXACTLY as I said. Thurlow was the only one to report any bullet holes AND THEY CAME FROM THE PREVIOUS DAY’S ACTION.

    Rassmann said, “are not just questioning Kerry’s account, they are questioning my account. I take that very personally. No one can tell me that we were not under fire. I saw it, I heard the splashes, and I was scared to death. For them to come back 35 years after the fact…

    Rassmann will have to deal with it. There is such a thing as “the fog of war”. Rassmann, by his own account, kept himself under water. Multiple other eyewitnesses were there too. You and Rassmann are questioning the veracity of all of their accounts. Where’s your sympathy for those veterans, gilllie?

    …the military records of Larry Thurlow–a leader of the anti-Kerry outfit who also won a Bronze Star for actions taken during this engagement–contradict Thurlow’s claim that there was no enemy fire at the time…

    Since Kerry and Thurlow had both won Bronze Stars, why don’t you believe Thurlow?

    Why would you call Thurlow a liar – when there are zero, repeat ZERO, damage and/or medical reports to support Kerry’s lies? Thurlow has gone on the record that his citation statement (the account of “facts” in it) was written without his knowledge and he strongly disagrees with it.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 1, 2007 @ 2:17 pm - November 1, 2007

  43. As for the “Doctored Photo”: I can see there was a lot of controversy about one fake that was put out there, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Swift Vets. You slandered those honorable veterans, gil, when you tried to say it was them. I have literally never seen that photo in connection with any Swift Vet ad or activity.

    There is a photo of Kerry and Fonda being at the same rally that is 100% real, and is the one I have always referred to. The moderation filter is not letting me post the link. It’s on Snopes. I will make a separate effort to post the link.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 1, 2007 @ 2:22 pm - November 1, 2007

  44. As for the alleged “plumb jobs to Swift Vets”: Read your own article, gil. What rubbish!!! You implied that actual Swift Vets were financially rewarded for the efforts they made in the 2004 campaign. But what does your article really say? It says that two trememdously honorable POWs, not Swift Vets – Ken Cordier and Paul Galanti – served legitimately on a POW-related task force before courting any controversy in the 2004 campaign. Big whooping deal.

    And let’s be clear on something: They had a right to hate Kerry. During their torture in Vietnam, they had to listen to tapes of Kerry slandering their entire generation of Veterans before Congress as baby-killers.

    Meanwhile, out in the real world, actual Swift Vets lost jobs because they had the courage and daring to confront the world about what a sleazy, disgusting liar and fraud John Kerry was and is.

    ——————————————-
    Let’s wrap up. gil, you obviously haven’t learned a thing. With you it’s all froth and spittle, froth and spittle, froth and spittle. Some 250+ actual Swift Vets served the nation in 2004 with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth… and you slander them all as liars, because their “narrative” doesn’t conveniently agree with yours. gil, stop slandering our veterans!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 1, 2007 @ 2:23 pm - November 1, 2007

  45. The filter just won’t accept a post that has the Snopes link! Let me go about this another way. Try this Google search.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 1, 2007 @ 2:26 pm - November 1, 2007

  46. Then click on the top link (the one ending in kerry – dot – asp).

    Look carefully, gil. Kerry is right above Fonda’s head. This is the only photo the Swift Vets have ever noted or used, and it is, as Snopes says, absolutely true.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 1, 2007 @ 2:26 pm - November 1, 2007

  47. Per Snopes, Jane Fonda had this to say about that photo:

    “We were at a rally for veterans at the same time. I spoke, Donald Sutherland spoke, John Kerry spoke at the end.”

    She embeds it in a lot of other spin about how it shouldn’t matter. But there it is. She says the photo is real. No doctoring.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 1, 2007 @ 2:40 pm - November 1, 2007

  48. One last summation.

    The “photo issue” is really minor – except it goes to questions of veracity, credibility, etc. And people skim these threads fast, so let me sum it up clearly.

    1) gil and I are evidently talking about 2 different photos.

    2) The photo I talk about and linked, of Kerry and Fonda, is quite real.

    3) The photo gil is talking about, apparently was concocted by someone – and was exposed – and was never once used, in any Swift Vet material I know of.

    4) At #27, gil said “What drove the swift boaters is their hatred of Kerry… even pictures were doctored.” Notwithstanding his slippery use of the passive voice there, gil implies that the Swift Vets doctored photos. (Or readily used same?)

    5) And that is a pharmaceutical-grade falsehood. And a slander of 250+ honorable veterans who lost jobs in some instances because they were brave enough to try to tell the general public what they knew of Kerry’s Vietnam service.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 1, 2007 @ 7:15 pm - November 1, 2007

  49. GPW -
    Come on! I expect greater intellectual honesty from you.
    All the links I provide directly show that the Swift Boaters are slandering Kerry. All empirical evidence shows they are liars…
    The claim about no gun fire – Obviously there was, the post action reports show that.
    The claim about Kerry writing his own post action reports – what a whopper!
    The claim about the Zero Damage to the boats which now they say “Came earlier”
    The claim about Kerry’s fellow officers not supporting him
    The claim about Kerry influencing his boat mates to support Kerry– Lambert dislikes Kerry but still supports his point of view.
    The claim about Rasmussen being “under the water” the whole time – That’s not even logical.
    Etc. Etc. Etc.
    The only thing the Swifites have right is they don’t like his post war actions.

    Thus in your phony patriot view point, its justified to lie about him

    ILC -
    My point about the Dr.ed Photos of Kerry was merely to elaborate on how ready conservatives are to drag Kerry through the mud.
    – Thanks for giving the opportunity to clarifiy
    Since that is the only point you took issue with, I take it you are in full agreement with me?

    Kerry and other liberal soldiers and vets await your apology

    [Go back and read what I requested. Not to provide paraphrased accounts of what they Swift Boat Vets said, but to provide actual links to actual quotes they made, the text for example of their TV ads and specific documentation descrediting those statements. If you're so certain you're right, certain enough to demand my apology, then simply provide their words in context and provide facts to counter those words. And that you haven't done -- Dan]

    Comment by gil — November 2, 2007 @ 1:47 pm - November 2, 2007

  50. Gil, thank you for those links detailing the lies of the swiftboaters. After proding you to provide links/facts, the Feys here won’t read those links. Why, Miss Mary, they’ve got the only link they want — Swiftvets.com. Did you read them posting and re-posting that site name? Gay monkeys see no, hear no…nothing to upset the partisan orthodoxy.

    Anyway, it was fun to observe the Feys fall silent after your postings of links. Flee, run away time at the old campground.

    Comment by KYKid — November 3, 2007 @ 7:23 am - November 3, 2007

  51. gil, again: All your crap, I’ve answered. You haven’t offered single, specific quote from a Swift Vet as an example of that honorable veteran lying.

    The claim about no gun fire – Obviously there was, the post action reports show that.

    NO. THEY. DON’T.

    That’s the point. Your stuff has not mentioned a single post-action report that shows damage or enemy fire in the Rassmann incident. Only Thurlow’s report mentions a paltry number of bullet holes and by your own quotations, Thurlow’s damage was from the previous day’s action.

    The claim about Kerry’s fellow officers not supporting him…

    Since every officer in Kerry’s chain of command was with the Swift Vets, and nearly all of his officer-peers, how would that be a questionable claim?

    Do you not understand, gil, the difference between enlisted men and officers?

    The claim about Rasmussen being “under the water” the whole time – That’s not even logical.

    Agree with you there, because no one has made that claim. Here’s what Rassmann’s own account said:

    “I swam to the bottom of the river and stayed there as long as I could hold my breath…I repeatedly swam under water as long as I could hold my breath.”

    And here’s how I then characterized it:

    “By his own account, Rassmann was keeping his head under water as much as possible (once he fell in because of the mine explosion) and only coming up for air.”

    OK, gil? Can you read?

    Moving right along…

    ILC: Since [the red herring about doctored photos] is the only point you took issue with, I take it you are in full agreement with me?

    Question answered. You can’t read. You really lack basic literacy, evidently.

    —————————–

    In conclusion, gil: Your tactic has been to mindlessly repeat mantras like “oneill lied about the bullet holes”, without offering a single quote of O’Neill’s where he lied about anything. (O’Neill follows Thurlow’s account on the bullet holes, which is the account supported by evidence.) Similarly, with your other mantric slurs.

    You have shown you are able to cut-and-paste accounts of people who disagree with the Swift Vets, or who presume to dispute the Swift Vets’ eyewitness accounts. But that’s not showing anybody lied. In addition to being evidently unable to read, you seem confused about what it is to show someone lied.

    gil, at this point, you should be looking in the mirror and seriously asking yourself:

    Why do I (gil) hate America’s veterans so much? Why do I (gil) have such a burning, pathetic need to slander and disbelieve and group of 250+ honorable American veterans? Why am I, gil, in fact a “phony patriot”?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 10:29 am - November 3, 2007

  52. P.S. And where is Kerry’s 180 form, releasing his records to the public? (Not just a couple ultra-friendly reporters.) That would clear all this up.

    And where are Kerry’s lawsuits against the Swift Vets? Answer: Nowhere. Kerry cannot afford to have testimony taken under oath, or to have his records come out.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 10:40 am - November 3, 2007

  53. For those interested – On Kerry’s writing his own, fraudulent report of the Rassmann incident (forming the basis for Kerry’s own medal). Here is a link:
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20041101/ai_n12565662

    Some key points:

    The report in question described a mission of five swift boats ambushed by a mine explosion that seriously damaged one boat while the swift boats received heavy fire from both banks. The fire continued for three miles, the report said. Roy Hoffman, the admiral who commanded the swift boats in Vietnam, finds that detail alone absurd… “There was never an incident under my command in all of Vietnam where my boats were engaged by continuous fire from both banks of a half mile in length, much less three.”

    The report mentions two other mines detonating as well. So according to this report, which now stands as the official Navy record, this swift boat mission concluded by running a three-mile gantlet of enemy fire from both banks, the detonation of three mines, and yet the only casualties occurred on the boat that hit the first mine. The boats managed to escape and, even more miraculously, retrieve the sinking boat, PCF-3, without getting a single bullet hole [ed: from that day's incident] in any vessel or crew member.

    “It is miraculous all right because it never happened,” recalls Larry Thurlow, a Kerry critic who commanded the mission. “PCF-3 hit a mine; all of my boats directed suppressing fire on both banks [ed: explaining why people did hear gunfire]… But after a couple of minutes, we ceased firing and took steps to aid the sinking PCF-3 and its injured crew members. There was never a shot fired at us… if we had been facing gunfire from both sides of three miles of riverbank, I would have called in the standby air support. I didn’t.”

    After he returned to the United States the following month, Thurlow was surprised to find that he had received a Bronze Star himself because of his activities described in the after-action report. When Thurlow first saw the report last July [2004], he didn’t recognize the mission it described…

    As the commander of the mission, normally Thurlow would have filed the disputed after-action report. But he denies writing it. And the after-action report supports his denial. It was written by someone designated “TE 194.5.4.4/1.”

    An operations order by Adm. Hoffman two months earlier set the format for the designation.
    [followed by technical blah, blah, blah]…
    “TE” refers to a “task element”…
    The last “1″ indicates someone other than the commander of the mission. If the report had been submitted by the mission commander, in this case Thurlow… the sender would have been “CTE 194.5.4.4.”

    … the report in question was sent from the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Spencer, Lonsdale’s command ship, at 11:20 that night.

    Only three of the officers on the mission that day were on the Spencer, John Kerry, Dick Pease and Donald Droz. Droz took the wounded from the mine explosion to be examined and treated at the Spencer, including the third officer, the severely wounded Dick Pease… leaving only Kerry aboard the Spencer at the time the message was sent at 11:20 p.m…

    Thurlow adds, “I never liked the paperwork anyway. I was happy to have Kerry write them up.”

    The head of the Operational Archives Branch of the Naval Historical Center in Washington, Kathy Lloyd, has verified [how to interpret the sender designation]…

    …the report completely leaves out how Kerry’s own boat, PCF-94, ran [away] down river leaving James Rassmann overboard and the other three boats to deal with the ambush and the sinking PCF-3. All of the living boat commanders on that mission… agree that the report is a fraudulent misrepresentation of an action they remember well…

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 11:55 am - November 3, 2007

  54. Sorry, should have highlighted that ending bit:

    All of the living boat commanders on that mission agree that the report is a fraudulent misrepresentation of an action they remember well.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 11:59 am - November 3, 2007

  55. As for this:

    Kerry and other liberal soldiers and vets await your apology

    Umm… gil-the-slanderer-who-can’t-read, we’re still waiting for yours. For your nonstop slanders of a group of 250+ honorable veterans in this thread.

    And America is still waiting for Kerry’s apology. For his slandering the service of an entire generation of U.S. veterans. Put up or shut up.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 1:18 pm - November 3, 2007

  56. Ugh.
    This is sickening. SICKENING that you can’t simply admit what is so obvious.
    Geez…

    I quote:
    Whom does it make sense to believe, the men who served and fought in close company with Kerry and who back his Navy-certified record? Or the veterans who didn’t actually serve under Kerry and who, admittedly angry over his subsequent antiwar activities, are now trying to discredit him? To ask that question is to answer it.”

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:05 pm - November 3, 2007

  57. here is the evidence about O’Niel lieing about Bullut holes:
    O’NEILL: [video clip] This is a 75-yard-wide creek that these boats are on.
    They were on this creek, rescuing the three-boat for a period of an hour
    and a half. Not a single person was wounded after the original mine explosion.
    There’s not a bullet hole in any of those three or four boats, not one.

    COLMES: Now, that’s at variance with a number of reports that’s come out.
    Let me show you what the Los Angeles Times reported: “A damage survey filed with
    the Navy report said that three of the five boats involved sustained ‘battle damage,’
    and [Swift Boat Vets member Larry] Thurlow’s boat had .30 caliber bullet holes about
    super structure.” And other reports, damage reports and after action reports,
    similarly say that there was damage to those boats.

    Its they only now say “that came later”

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:06 pm - November 3, 2007

  58. More Oneil and Colmes:
    COLMES: Mr. O’Neill, on your website at one point, you showed a photo of 19 officers from your division. The group — you said that only one man in the picture that supported Kerry. A couple of others were neutral, you said. Two of those have come forward. Let me show you what they have said. One of them said — Rich McCann says,
    “I was never neutral about Kerry as president. If the question is whether John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief, my answer is absolutely.” Another guy named Rich Baker comes forward, and USA Today reports today that Baker says he was never contacted by your group. “Kerry is very well fit for command. He was one of the most courageous and aggressive swift boat captains in the division.”

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:08 pm - November 3, 2007

  59. Even more:
    COLMES: What I want to know, this is all about credibility, and you have put people up on your site who have since come forward. A number of people have changed their stories. Last time you were on, I confronted you with some of those people. And now more people come forward and say, “We were never contacted.” Or “I’m not neutral about John Kerry,” as your site suggests.” So what does that say about the credibility of the Swift Boat Vets?

    O’NEILL: I think we showed those people as having no opinion. That was based on our best information. As soon as they expressed an opinion and decided to, we shifted and showed them favorable to Kerry.

    The count now, Alan, of the people who served right with him is 17 think he’s unfit, and only four, with these guys, think he’s fit.

    When Colmes pointed out that “[a]ll of the people who were actually on his actual boat, as we pointed out many times, with the exception of one, [Stephen] Gardner, support him,” O’Neill falsely claimed, “That’s not right either.”

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:08 pm - November 3, 2007

  60. Thurlow:
    #1 For him to be credible you have to assume he had no idea why he got the Bronze Star – not plausible
    #2 His own crewmate, Lambert, disputes his account. Lambert did not support Kerry
    #3 His claim of Kerry writing the post action reports is disputed by the actual reports. Someone named KJW wrote them, and those initials appear on reports where Kerry was not around
    #5 He already lied on the Chris Mathews show about Kerry’s purple heart.

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:11 pm - November 3, 2007

  61. More lies:
    “He is lying about his record,” said Ensign Al French
    - How would he know, He wasn’t even there. He LIED on an affidavit!

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:12 pm - November 3, 2007

  62. Another Anti-Kerry Vet supports Kerry’s version:
    Larry Clayton Lee of Franklin County, Kentucky, is a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. He says he doesn’t like Kerry because of Kerry’s antiwar activities in the 1970s. However, Lee corroborates Kerry’s account of the day he won a Silver Star
    More:
    “I was there,” crew mate Del Sandusky told CNN. “I saw the bullets skimming across the water. I saw the firefight gun flashes from the jungle. I know the firefight and the ambush we were in.” Another crew mate, James Wasser, told ABC: “What boat were you riding on? Because you weren’t there — we were.”
    More:
    “”He and another officer now say we weren’t under fire at that time,” Lambert said Wednesday afternoon. “Well, I sure was under the impression we were.”

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:15 pm - November 3, 2007

  63. More benifiting:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47542-2004Aug30.html

    Also:
    Sam Fox, the one of the head money men was offered an ambassadorship to Belgium

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:16 pm - November 3, 2007

  64. Even more support:
    More Support:

    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.

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:16 pm - November 3, 2007

  65. So
    there it is
    Conclusive, empirical evidence (unlike your article by the hilarious Thomas Lipscomb )
    1. All post action reports support Kerry
    2. Damage reports support Kerry
    3. The lies about Kerry being KJW are thoroughly debunked
    4. I have shown that indeed the swifites are liars.
    5. The slandering of Rasmussen is further debunked
    6. Eyewitness accounts by people who do not like Kerry still support Kerry.

    Its done. You can continue to go off in your world of conjecture and fantasy in the attempt to try and disprove your phony patriotism.
    I don’t care anymore.

    Comment by gil — November 3, 2007 @ 5:22 pm - November 3, 2007

  66. gil, thank you for FINALLY offering a specific quote. And – as expected – you come up empty.

    I cannot believe how readily (not to use other, harsher words) you mis-interpret plain English in front of your eyes. Let’s look at the quote of O’Neill. I’ll add emphasis in the right place, OK?

    “There’s not a bullet hole in any of ***those three or four boats***, not one.”

    There were five boats on the mission, gil. *****FIVE***** boats.
    And O’Neill obviously knows that. Therefore – O’Neill is talking about the ***other three or four*** boats on the mission ***apart from Thurlow’s***, that had no damage. While putting Thurlow’s boat in a different category. Ya think?

    As to Colmes blustering about an LA Times article that says multiple boats were damaged: All I can say is, the LA Times is famous for its sloppy reporting and bias, and Colmes likewise. Cough up the LA Times article link. Then let’s match it against all of the other researcher and eyewitnesses / veterans who say it was only Thurlow’s boat, and see who makes more sense. OK?

    Bottom line: You have caught O’Neill in NO lie. As for this:

    Its they only now say “that came later”

    Bzzzzzzzzzzzzt. No one says Thurlow’s 3 bullet holes “came later”. They say, came earlier. From the PREVIOUS DAY’S action. Try READING MY COMMENTS BEFORE ATTEMPTING AN ANSWER, next time.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 5:31 pm - November 3, 2007

  67. Filter caught a refutation of #56-57 – hopefully it will appear soon.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 5:34 pm - November 3, 2007

  68. Make that #56 alone. As for #57, the photo showing how nearly all of Kerry’s fellow officers opposed him, repeat opposed – All you have to do, gil, is look at the photo yourself. Here’s a link:

    http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=SwiftPhoto

    Dare you look? Because they discuss themselves their quick correction to Rich Baker’s status as soon as they became aware of that fact on Aug. 23, 2004.

    Bottom line: Colmes blustering at O’Neill again… and O’Neill comes out unscathed. His group was and is committed to truth and facts.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 5:39 pm - November 3, 2007

  69. As for this at #58:

    When Colmes pointed out that “[a]ll of the people who were actually on his actual boat, as we pointed out many times, with the exception of one, [Stephen] Gardner, support him,” O’Neill falsely claimed, “That’s not right either.”

    Sounds like your own interpretation. And we’ve seen how well *those* go. Full transcript ***and link***, please.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 5:42 pm - November 3, 2007

  70. As for these bizarre assertions of yours:

    “Thurlow:
    #1 For him to be credible you have to assume he had no idea why he got the Bronze Star – not plausible”

    On the contrary. Thurlow gave the explanation in what I quoted at #52. I’ll give it again for you:

    After he returned to the United States the following month, Thurlow was surprised to find that he had received a Bronze Star himself because of his activities described in the after-action report. When Thurlow first saw the report last July [2004], he didn’t recognize the mission it described…

    OK? There it is. Have you read it, this time?

    As for this assertion:

    “#2 His own crewmate, Lambert, disputes his account. Lambert did not support Kerry”

    OK, let’s talk about Lambert. You gave a link earlier. Here is what your own link says, gil:

    The boat was commanded by Navy Lt. Larry Thurlow… “He and another officer now say we weren’t under fire at that time,” Lambert said Wednesday afternoon. “Well, I sure was under the impression we were.”
    … a mine explosion… rocked another swift boat on that day 35 years ago. “Anytime you are blown out of the water like that, they always follow that up with small arms fire,” he said.

    Who is “they”, here? I’ve already mentioned how **the Swift boats themselves** Lambert said that while he disagrees with Thurlow… he and the crew liked and respected him. “He was an excellent officer,” he said. “[Thurlow] was absolutely professional all the way. I would have went anywhere with him, he was that good.”Whoopsie. Looks like Thurlow is a credible witness, after all.

    Now what else?

    [Lambert] flipped to a photograph of a bullet hole in the side of his swift boat — PCF-51. “That’s the bullet hole they keep talking about that they got the day before in the 51 boat

    Whoopsie. Looks like the damage to the boat **did happen the day before**, after all.

    What else?

    Lambert does take issue with Kerry’s opposition to the Vietnam War once he returned to the states.

    “That [ed: Kerry's slandering an entire generation of vets] was absolutely reprehensible…

    Where is Kerry’s apology, gil? America is waiting.

    As for this bizarre assertion:

    #3 His claim of Kerry writing the post action reports is disputed by the actual reports. Someone named KJW wrote them, and those initials appear on reports where Kerry was not around.

    Huh??? Who said, or cares, anything about some KJW nonsense? Let me re-quote the real evidence from #52 proving Kerry wrote the report:

    It was written by someone designated “TE 194.5.4.4/1.”

    An operations order by Adm. Hoffman two months earlier set the format for the designation.
    [followed by technical blah, blah, blah]…
    “TE” refers to a “task element”…
    The last “1″ indicates someone other than the commander of the mission. If the report had been submitted by the mission commander, in this case Thurlow… the sender would have been “CTE 194.5.4.4.”

    … the report in question was sent from the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Spencer, Lonsdale’s command ship, at 11:20 that night.

    Only three of the officers on the mission that day were on the Spencer, John Kerry, Dick Pease and Donald Droz. Droz took the wounded from the mine explosion to be examined and treated at the Spencer, including the third officer, the severely wounded Dick Pease… leaving only Kerry aboard the Spencer at the time the message was sent at 11:20 p.m…

    OK? There it is. Have you read it, this time?

    As for this bizarre assertion:

    #5 He already lied on the Chris Mathews show about Kerry’s purple heart.

    Says you. Worthless without transcript **and link**. Please note: I know Chris Mathews is absolutely nutso on the topic of the Swifties; transcript or video of **him** frothing and foaming won’t count. Stick to what Thurlow said or didn’t say.

    Bottom line: Looks like Thurlow is still perfectly credible, after all.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 6:07 pm - November 3, 2007

  71. Comment got chopped. The garbled section about halfway down should read like this:
    ——————————

    Who is “they”, here? I’ve already mentioned how **the Swift boats themselves** would open fire if they were hit by a mine. Looks like Lambert is unsure and speculating, as to where the fire (that he heard) really came from.

    What else does Lambert have to say?

    Lambert said that while he disagrees with Thurlow… he and the crew liked and respected him. “He was an excellent officer,” he said. “[Thurlow] was absolutely professional all the way. I would have went anywhere with him, he was that good.”

    Whoopsie. Looks like Thurlow is a credible witness, after all.

    —————————————-

    resume with “What else?” and “Lambert does take issue with Kerry’s opposition…”

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 6:13 pm - November 3, 2007

  72. As for this:

    “He is lying about his record,” said Ensign Al French.
    - How would he know? [said gil] He wasn’t even there.

    Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! Wrong answer. View this picture again, gil:

    http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=SwiftPhoto

    Note “Al French” in the upper right corner. Looks like he was there. (I mean, unless you want to try to claimed a faked photo again, LOL :-) )

    He LIED on an affidavit!

    What affadavit? What lie? Prove it, jerk.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 6:16 pm - November 3, 2007

  73. Will try to wrap this up.

    #62 – WTF??? You quote Lee as a Swift Vet telling the truth, not as lying. Then immediately switch to… Sandusky! (I thought Lee was your topic?)

    #63 – So what are you saying? That if any Vietnam veteran who served with Kerry (or in Schachte’s case, was his commander) supported Bush after 9-11 or has in any way been connected with Washington, DC lobbying or activities in the Bush years, his first-hand accounts of Kerry must necessasrily be dishonorable lies? (Unless they are positive, of course.)

    Pathetic, gil. You are pathetic! These 250+ men served their country in Vietnam, with honor.

    #64 – WTF??? In reference to what? Not the Rassman / Thurlow incident. Rood wasn’t even way part of that.

    As for your words at #56, gil:

    Whom does it make sense to believe, 250+ men who served and fought in close company with Kerry – which is what the Swift Vets are? Or There, fixed it for you.

    Overall conclusion:

    - We’ve asked you again and again to come up with specific Swift Vet statements that would be “lies”. It took you over 50 posts to do it. When you finally did, you came up empty. (In some cases, presenting incoherence and/or not even understanding the material.)

    - You have taken a group of 250+ honorable veterans and smeared them all as liars. (And won’t apologize.)

    - You whole effort in this thread is to excuse and defend a sleazebag, John Kerry, who even by your own quotations or admission (in certain places), slandered an entire generation of American veterans.

    gil, you are disgusting.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 6:34 pm - November 3, 2007

  74. Sorry, will try that last block again with formatting.
    ——————————————–
    As for your words at #56, gil:

    Whom does it make sense to believe, 250+ men who served and fought in close company with Kerry – which is what the Swift Vets are? Or There, fixed it for you.

    Overall conclusion:

    - We’ve asked you again and again to come up with specific Swift Vet statements that would be “lies”. It took you over 50 posts to do it. When you finally did, you came up empty. (In some cases, presenting incoherence and/or not even understanding the material.)

    - You have taken a group of 250+ honorable veterans and smeared them all as liars. (And won’t apologize.)

    - You whole effort in this thread is to excuse and defend a sleazebag, John Kerry, who slandered an entire generation of American veterans. (And won’t apologize.)

    gil: You are disgusting.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 6:38 pm - November 3, 2007

  75. The filter is what’s making the formatting bad. (Same error, twice now.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 6:39 pm - November 3, 2007

  76. (One more try. I won’t let this filter beat me.)

    As for your words at #56, gil:

    Whom does it make sense to believe, 250+ men who served and fought in close company with Kerry – which is what the Swift Vets are? Or less than 15 men who also served and fought in close company with Kerry, but got jobs (Sandusky) and perks from his campaign? To ask the question, is to answer it.

    There, fixed it for you.

    Overall conclusion:

    - We’ve asked you again and again to come up with specific Swift Vet statements that would be “lies”. It took you over 50 posts to do it. When you finally did, you came up empty. (In some cases, presenting incoherence and/or not even understanding the material.)

    - You have taken a group of 250+ honorable veterans and smeared them all as liars. (And won’t apologize.)

    - You whole effort in this thread is to excuse and defend a sleazebag, John Kerry, who slandered an entire generation of American veterans. (And won’t apologize.)

    gil: You are disgusting.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 6:41 pm - November 3, 2007

  77. P.S. And where is Kerry’s 180 form, releasing his records to the public? (Not just a couple ultra-friendly reporters.) That would clear all this up.

    And where are Kerry’s lawsuits against the Swift Vets? Answer: Nowhere. Kerry cannot afford to have testimony taken under oath, or to have his records come out.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 7:50 pm - November 3, 2007

  78. P.P.S. I am gonna give gil one tiny point here: Lambert would be an example of *one person* other than the Kerry’s shmoozed, co-ordinated, paid, etc. campaign supporters who believes there was enemy fire in the Rassmann – Thurlow incident.

    Having said that: Lambert is still significantly outnumbered by the other eyewitnesses. His detached, theoretical way of putting it, “Anytime you are [hit by a mine] they always follow that up with small arms,” is hardly you-are-there testimony, and so not enough to outweigh all of them.

    Even if there were a few enemy shots – plainly ineffective, since no one had a bullet wound from that day – Kerry’s claim of a 5000 meter gauntlet of enemy fire – that he alone dared to run – is all-but-certainly a pharmaceutical-grade lie that he told to get his medal, and again before the nation in 2004, to get the Presidency.

    The Swift Vets didn’t smear Kerry. Kerry smeared them. (Plus their entire generation of veterans.) Now, in 2007, gil is here to repeat the smears.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 3, 2007 @ 8:22 pm - November 3, 2007

  79. Way to go gil! Mr. I Know Everything About Everything Because I Can Google just blew himself up in a link-driven craze. Awesome work gil.

    Comment by KYKid — November 4, 2007 @ 7:38 pm - November 4, 2007

  80. And KYKid, we know you’re a sockpuppet.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 7, 2008 @ 4:11 pm - January 7, 2008

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.362 Powered by Wordpress