Swift Boat Partisan Smear Campaign Circle Jerking

in a perfect world, this would bite bushco in the ass ... alas.

"Whatever"

QUOTE OF THE MONTH!

John Kerry's assertion about being in Cambodia during Christmas of 1968--"seared--seared" in his mind is almost certainly untrue, whether intentional or not. The Times article acknowledges this, and it gave the story legs it otherwise wouldn't have--it's been the focus of the Swift Boat losers all week.

Kerry continues to use his experience in Vietnam as a significant focus of his campaign--doesn't it seem logical that his opponents would turn their attention to it? If Kerry wants to start focusing on his leadership in the Senate (or anything but the war) then maybe his opponents will, too. Why does the medal-chucking Kerry keep bragging about his time in Vietnam, anyway? I have never understood this tact.

As for those dolts who are too lazy to be informed of their vote people who are "still on the fence or who haven't voted previously", I wouldn't worry that much about them Eisbar. They fall for the same shit on both sides of the fence, of which there's been plenty.

(the movie was gideon's day btw. oh and the priest eventually thwarts a murder attempt in his church by knocking down some thugs and thus earns the awe of the neighborhood boys.)

the fact that he could serve on a swift boat and come back alive, much less only slightly incoherent in his memories, is being a bit overlooked here.

Nothing against Kerry, but coming back alive often had a lot to do with luck more than skill in a Swift boat.

I really wish the Kerry team would be filing libel charges rather than proposing censorship.

I think it would be better for Kerry, if he is going to file charges, to wait until after the campaign. Or, if he wins, he can just do what Dubya does and round up all these guys and put 'em in a navy brig in South Carolina without access to council.

Both Mr. Hoffmann and Mr. Lonsdale had publicly lauded Mr. Kerry in the past. But the book, Mr. Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," while it burnished Mr. Kerry's reputation, portrayed the two men as reckless leaders whose military approach had led to the deaths of countless sailors and innocent civilians. Several Swift boat veterans compared Mr. Hoffmann to the bloodthirsty colonel in the film "Apocalypse Now" - the one who loves the smell of Napalm in the morning.

The two men were determined to set the record, as they saw it, straight.

"It was the admiral who started it and got the rest of us into it," Mr. Lonsdale said.

xpost

You sure you wanna defend these guys?

I wouldn't have posted Sludge if he wouldn't have directly referred to Salon.com. And I wouldn't call him one of my sources, seeing as I've probably been to his site less than 10 times in my life.

As for #1, "libel" is a more forceful suggestion that doesn't suggest oblique illigitmacy. "Libel" says, "Lay your cards on the table, punk. We've got the facts on our side and we're not gonna take it anymore. We're going to make you our bitch in a public forum."

Followed by, "Cunts."

A dem strategist on another board said that they're going to 'let the media handle it'.

MATTHEWS: Larry Thurlow, thank you very much for joining us tonight. I admire your service, certainly. Let me ask you, sir, about the quote that you have in this ad. It says—and these are your words, speaking them in the advertisement—“When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry.” Why do you say that?

LARRY THURLOW, ANTI-KERRY SWIFT BOAT VETERAN: Mr. Matthews, the main reason I say that is because it became apparent early on that John Kerry had a master plan that went far beyond the service in the swift boats, and because of the fact that he was trying to engineer a record, so to speak, for himself, he was not a trustworthy member of a very tightly-knit unit that counted on each other at every second. And once it became apparent that he had this plan that kind of excluded what was required of us at certain times, it became apparent to me that you could not count on him.

(later)

MATTHEWS: ... the Bronze Star. The Bronze Star, that you deserve the Bronze Star, you were awarded the Bronze Star, fair enough, and you say you were not under enemy fire. You‘re now saying that John Kerry doesn‘t deserve the Bronze Start because he wasn‘t under enemy fire. Aren‘t you both in the same boat? Didn‘t you both do about the same thing, both get same award? And why are you complaining that he doesn‘t deserve it, if you deserved it?

THURLOW: I felt like I got the award because I saved some people‘s lives and saved the boat. What I say...

MATTHEWS: Well, he saved Rassmann‘s life, according to Rassmann‘s own account.

THURLOW: OK...

MATTHEWS: Why doesn‘t he deserve the award?

THURLOW: Well, I—I don‘t—I‘m not quibbling about the award.
I‘m saying he lied about the...

MATTHEWS: Oh, yes, you are, sir!

(later)

MATTHEWS: You are out here in an advertisement saying, quote, “When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry.”

THURLOW: That‘s exactly right.

MATTHEWS: That‘s a pretty strong—because of what are you saying this?

THURLOW: Because he had this master plan that was...

MATTHEWS: You got—give me an example.

THURLOW: ... to promote his...

MATTHEWS: OK, let‘s to go your theory of the plan. Have you seen it written down? Have you heard him tell his account to someone? How do you know, in any real way, he had this plan?

THURLOW: Because of the fact that he engineered three Purple Heart incidences that allowed him to go home after he spent about one third of his tour there.

MATTHEWS: But that‘s your account of what happened. He was there for four months.

THURLOW: That‘s exactly right.

MATTHEWS: He did win the three Purple Hearts. He did get the Bronze and the Silver. And you say he had some plan to get an award as a battle hero ahead of time, but you can‘t tell me how you know he had this plan.

THURLOW: I know he had this plan because of what happened not only then but after the fact.

MATTHEWS: Did you have a plan to win the Bronze Star? You won the Bronze Star. Did you have a plan?

THURLOW: No, in fact, I didn‘t...

MATTHEWS: Why is winning the Bronze Star...

THURLOW: I didn‘t apply for it.

MATTHEWS: Why is winning the Bronze Star evidence of having had a plan to win one? I don‘t get it.

THURLOW: Well, I—we‘re not even talking about him having a plan to win the Bronze Star.

MATTHEWS: Can you honestly tell me now, sir, that you could swear in open court that you know that John Kerry, when he was a lieutenant JG in the same theater you were in had some plan for winning medals? Do you know that for a fact?

THURLOW: OK. In other words, present evidence that he had this plan?

MATTHEWS: Yes.

THURLOW: Of course, I couldn‘t.

MATTHEWS: Well, what...

THURLOW: I‘m basing it on my observations.

MATTHEWS: These are after-the-fact observations. You say he had a plan ahead of time to make himself a war hero to get elected to office.

THURLOW: I‘m saying that he had a plan that included not only being a war hero but getting an early out.

MATTHEWS: But you admit you have no tangible evidence.

THURLOW: I have my own personal observations.

MATTHEWS: Of what?

THURLOW: And you‘re right, it is not tangible evidence.

MATTHEWS: OK, so you don‘t. Let me ask you about...

THURLOW: I‘m not in a court of law here.

(later)

MATTHEWS: Should the president of the United States, who‘s running against John Kerry, have the—does he have the right, as we speak, as you see it, to raise this issue in debate, if it comes up?

THURLOW: Does the president...

MATTHEWS: Is he allowed to talk about it?

THURLOW: You talking about President Bush?

MATTHEWS: That‘s right.

THURLOW: Does he have the right to bring it up?

MATTHEWS: Yes.

THURLOW: President Bush wasn‘t there. So why would he bring it up?

MATTHEWS: No, no. I‘m talking about, is he allowed to raise what you‘ve said about your fellow officer? Is he allowed to go into the debate and say, I hear from your fellow officers that you were not the hero you claim to be? Is that a fair enough tack for the president to take in this campaign? Is it a legitimate issue? You‘re raising it as a campaign issue. I‘m asking you, if it‘s a campaign issue, why can‘t both candidates talk about it? That‘s all I‘m asking.

THURLOW: No, I‘m not—I‘m raising the campaign—the reason I‘ve raised this issue is because I want the American people to hear the truth that I know...

MATTHEWS: Right, but you‘re...

THURLOW: ... and then let them make a decision.

MATTHEWS: But isn‘t it fair to say you‘re doing this because John Kerry is a candidate for president?

THURLOW: Yes.

MATTHEWS: OK.

(later)

MATTHEWS: Well, of course. Of course. That‘s fair enough. But is it fair enough for the president to counter-charge and say he doesn‘t believe John Kerry‘s the hero he claimed to be at the Democratic convention?

THURLOW: I don‘t think so because he wasn‘t there. He doesn‘t have the evidence I do.

MATTHEWS: Is he allowed to believe you?

THURLOW: He‘s allowed to believe whoever he wants.

MATTHEWS: In other words, you want everybody in the country...

THURLOW: He‘s an American citizen.

MATTHEWS: ... to believe what you‘re saying right now, Mr. Thurlow...

THURLOW: Certainly.

MATTHEWS: ... but not to let the president of the United States count on it as a campaign issue.

THURLOW: That‘s entirely up to him. I‘m telling you...

MATTHEWS: Oh, it is up to him. OK. I‘m (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Why do you think it‘s OK for a person who didn‘t serve in Vietnam to criticize someone who did?

THURLOW: I did serve in Vietnam.

MATTHEWS: I‘m asking you about the president. You said it‘s up to him. If it‘s up to the president whether to attack John Kerry for being in Vietnam, what did he over there, is it OK with you, that a guy who didn‘t serve criticizes a guy who did?

THURLOW: Well, I don‘t know that he has criticized...

MATTHEWS: As a veteran.

THURLOW: As a veteran?

MATTHEWS: I‘m just asking you a simple question. Is this a campaign issue for both candidates to contend with or isn‘t it?

THURLOW: Well, it‘s a campaign...

MATTHEWS: Or is it just you against John Kerry as a side shot at one of the candidates?

THURLOW: ... issue that John Kerry ran out there. And the thing I think is that the president wouldn‘t have any—you know, what would he base...

MATTHEWS: OK, let me ask you this...

THURLOW: ... the statements on?

MATTHEWS: ... very simply. If President Bush the other—is asked a question, he come out and says, Well, I hear from this fellow officer, in fact, he was the commander of the swift boat, the head of the team—he says this guy didn‘t deserve all the acclaim he got at the convention. Would that be OK with you?

THURLOW: Well, it would be OK with me if he wanted to do it, but why would he want to do it?

MATTHEWS: To defeat his opponent.

THURLOW: He‘s got—he‘s got...

MATTHEWS: The same reason you want to defeat this guy. You don‘t think he should be president.

THURLOW: Well—that‘s exactly right. I don‘t think he should be president.

MATTHEWS: Well, that‘s fair enough. There‘s nothing wrong with it. Say it—you have a million times in this country a free opportunity to say so. I‘m asking you...

THURLOW: You‘re—you‘re exactly right.

MATTHEWS: ... should George Bush be allowed to raise this issue in the campaign?

THURLOW: If he wants to, he...

MATTHEWS: Otherwise, it‘s just you.

THURLOW: ... certainly should be able to.

MATTHEWS: In other words, it‘s OK, for you, for a guy who didn‘t serve in Vietnam to attack a guy who did? That‘s all I want to know.

THURLOW: Well, I don‘t think a guy that didn‘t serve in Vietnam should attack some guy‘s record that did serve in Vietnam, if he has no personal knowledge of it.

(later)

MATTHEWS: The problem is, you haven‘t produced any personal knowledge about this plan you talked about, Mr. Thurlow, and that‘s the problem tonight.

THURLOW: No, what I—what I...

MATTHEWS: This plan has not been authenticated. That‘s the concern I have. Anyway, thanks for coming on.

The Bronze Star controversy is also a major focus of an anti-Kerry book by John E. O'Neill, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," which will hit No. 2 on The Post's bestseller list this weekend.

...Money has poured into Swift Boat Veterans for Truth since the group launched its television advertisement attacking Kerry earlier this month. According to O'Neill, the group has received more than $450,000 over the past two weeks, mainly in small contributions.

That seems kind of moronic .. even if you're an avid Bush supporter, first of all, this group has been discredited. Secondly, what do they need money for now? They got their message out. I don't see them having much in the way of a second act.

Over Half Of American Think Iraq Had WMD's, Linked To Al Queda, Involved With 9/11

It might be smarter to give money to some other, less controversial group (if one exists) than to give to the Bush Campaign, yes .. or even a brand new group that does the same smear tactics.. My point was, if swiftboat veterans come up with a new commercial that "John Kerry's lyin'" - everyone would say, "yeah, we heard you the first time." Or if they start saying, "John Kerry's fiscal policy is all wrong" - people would say, "what do swiftboat veterans know about economics? I don't get it." ..so the morons should instead give their money to Iraq War Veterans Who Swear There's an al_Qaeda Tie.

Anyway, I think the swiftboat veterans dudes idea has run its course.

HAhahahahahaha

YAY! a Talking Point!

She's a doorknob.

alex more polite than me SHOCKA!

August 21, 2004

The commander of a Navy swift boat who served alongside Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry during the Vietnam War stepped forward Saturday to dispute attacks challenging Kerry's integrity and war record.

William Rood, an editor on the Chicago Tribune's metropolitan desk, said he broke 35 years of silence about the Feb. 28, 1969, mission that resulted in Kerry's receiving a Silver Star because recent portrayals of Kerry's actions published in the best-selling book "Unfit for Command" are wrong and smear the reputations of veterans who served with Kerry.

Rood, who commanded one of three swift boats during that 1969 mission, said Kerry came under rocket and automatic weapons fire from Viet Cong forces and that Kerry devised an aggressive attack strategy that was praised by their superiors. He called allegations that Kerry's accomplishments were "overblown" untrue.

"The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there," Rood said in a 1,700-word first-person account published in Sunday's Tribune.

Rood's recollection of what happened on that day at the southern tip of South Vietnam was backed by key military documents, including his citation for a Bronze Star he earned in the battle and a glowing after-action report written by the Navy captain who commanded his and Kerry's task force, who is now a critic of the Democratic candidate.

Rood's previously untold story and the documents shed new light on a key historical event that has taken center stage in an extraordinary political and media firestorm generated by a group calling itself the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Allegations in the book, co-authored by one of the leaders of the group, accuse Kerry of being a coward who fabricated wartime events and used comrades for his "insatiable appetite for medals." The allegations have fueled a nearly two-week-long TV ad campaign against the Democratic nominee. Talk radio and cable news channels have feasted on the story.

Animosity from some veterans toward Kerry goes back more than 30 years, when Kerry returned from Vietnam to take a leadership role in the anti-war group Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Anger reached a boiling point with Kerry's presidential nomination and his own highlighting of his service during the war, a centerpiece of his campaign strategy against President Bush, who spent the war stateside in the Air National Guard in Texas and Alabama.

Many know of ads

A poll released Friday by the National Annenberg Election Survey reported that more than half the country has heard about or seen TV ads attacking Kerry's war record, a remarkable impact for ads that have appeared in only a handful of states.

Kerry strongly disputes the allegations. Last week he called on the White House to denounce the TV ads and accused Bush of relying on the Vietnam veterans "to do his dirty work." On Thursday, Kerry challenged Bush to a debate on their respective war records. Democrats point to unresolved questions about whether Bush in fact served all the time he was credited with serving in Alabama.

The Bush campaign has denied any association with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth but so far has refused to condemn the book and the group's TV ads. A report in Friday's New York Times disclosed connections between the anti-Kerry vets and the Bush family, Bush's chief political aide Karl Rove and several high-ranking Texas Republicans. Some of the recent accounts from veterans critical of Kerry have been contradicted by their own earlier statements, the Times reported.

Rood's account also sharply contradicts the version currently put forth by the anti-Kerry veterans. Rood, 61, wrote that Kerry had personally contacted him and other crew members in recent days asking that they go public with their accounts of what happened on that day.

Rood said that, ever since the war, he had "wanted to put it all behind us—the rivers, the ambushes, the killing. … I have refused all requests for interviews about Kerry's service—even those from reporters at the Chicago Tribune."

"I can't pretend those calls [from Kerry] had no effect on me, but that is not why I am writing this," Rood said. "What matters most to me is that this is hurting crewmen who are not public figures and who deserved to be honored for what they did. My intent is to tell the story here and to never again talk publicly about it."

Rood declined requests from a Tribune reporter to be interviewed for this article. Rood wrote that he could testify only to the February 1969 mission and not to any of the other battlefield decorations challenged by Kerry's critics—a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts—because Rood was not an eyewitness to those engagements.

Ambush scenario

In February 1969, Rood was a lieutenant junior grade commanding PCF-23, one of the three 50-foot aluminum swift boats that carried troops up the Dong Cung, a tributary of the Bay Hap River. Kerry commanded another boat, PCF-94 and Lt. j.g. Donald Droz, who was killed in action six weeks later, commanded PCF-43. Ambushes from Viet Cong fighters were common because the noise from boats, powered by twin diesel engines, practically invited gunfire. Ambushes, Rood said, "were a virtual certainty."

Before this day's mission, though, Kerry, the tactical commander of the mission, discussed with Rood and Droz a change in response to the anticipated ambushes: If possible, turn into the fire once it is identified and attack the ambushers, Rood recalled Kerry saying. The boats followed that new tactic with great success, Rood said, and the mission was highly praised.

In the book "Unfit for Command," Kerry's critics maintained otherwise. The book's authors, John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi, wrote that Kerry's attack on the Viet Cong ambush displayed "stupidity, not courage." The book was published by Regnery, a conservative publisher that has brought into print many books critical of Democratic politicians and policies.

"The only explanation for what Kerry did is the same justification that characterizes his entire short Vietnam adventure: the pursuit of medals and ribbons," wrote Corsi and O'Neill. Later in the war, O'Neill commanded the same Swift boat Kerry had led. O'Neill is now a leader of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

In the book, O'Neill and Corsi said Kerry chased down a "young Viet Cong in a loincloth … clutching a grenade launcher which may or may not have been loaded."

Rood recalled the fleeing Viet Cong was "a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore." There were other attackers as well, he said, and his boat and Kerry's boat took significant fire.

After the attack, the task force commanding officer, then-Capt. Roy Hoffmann, sent a message of congratulations to the three swift boats, saying their charge of the ambushers was a "shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy" and that it "may be the most efficacious [method] of dealing with small numbers of ambushers," Rood said.

In the official after-action message, obtained by the Tribune, Hoffmann wrote that the tactics developed and executed by Kerry, Rood and Droz were "immensely effictive [sic]" and that "this operation did unreparable [sic] damage to the enemy in this area."

"Well done," Hoffmann concluded in his message.

Change of story

But more than three decades later, Hoffmann, now a retired rear admiral, has changed his story. Today he is one of Kerry's most vocal critics, saying the attacks against the ambushers 35 years ago call into question Kerry's judgment and show his tendency to be impulsive.

Rood challenges that criticism, recalling that the direction for the actions they took on the river that day came from the highest ranks of the Navy command in Vietnam.

"What we did on Feb. 28, 1969, was well in line with the tone set by our top commanders," Rood said.

Asked for his response to Rood's account, O'Neill argued that the former swift boat skipper's version of events is not substantially different from what appeared in his book. The account of the Feb. 28 attack draws heavily on reporting from The Boston Globe, O'Neill said.

He said the congratulatory note from Hoffmann was based on the belief that Kerry was under heavy fire from the Viet Cong. But O'Neill claimed that "didn't happen." Had Hoffmann known the true circumstances of events that day, O'Neill said, he would not have issued the congratulatory note. Attempts to reach Hoffmann for comment were unsuccessful.

In his eyewitness account, Rood describes coming under rocket and automatic weapons fire from Viet Cong on the riverbank during two separate ambushes of his boat and Kerry's boat.

Praise for the mission led by Kerry came from Navy commanders who far outranked Hoffmann. Rood won a Bronze Star for his actions on that day. The Bronze Star citation from the late Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, then commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Vietnam, singled out the tactic used by the boats and said the Viet Cong were "caught completely off guard."

Longtime debate

The war about the war between O'Neill and Kerry has raged for more than three decades. O'Neill, who became a lawyer in Houston after returning from Vietnam, was recruited by the Nixon administration in 1971 to serve as a political counterweight to Kerry, who by then had left the military and was a vocal critic of the war.

The two debated the war on the Dick Cavett television show in 1971, with O'Neill accusing Kerry of the "attempted murder of the reputations of 2½ million" Vietnam veterans.

Rood acknowledged in his first-person account that there could always be errors in recollection, especially with the passage of more than three decades. His Bronze Star citation, he said, misidentifies the river where the main action occurred.

That mistake, he said, is a "cautionary note for those trying to piece it all together. There's no final authority on something that happened so long ago—not the documents and not even the strained recollections of those of us who were there.

"But I know that what some people are saying now is wrong," Rood wrote. "While they mean to hurt Kerry, what they're saying impugns others who are not in the public eye."

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer

CRAWFORD, Texas - A volunteer for John Kerry said Friday he picked up a flier in a Bush-Cheney campaign office in Gainesville, Fla., promoting Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group the Bush campaign has insisted for weeks it has no connection to.

The Kerry campaign e-mailed the flier to news organizations Friday, declaring that the Bush-Cheney campaign was "busted" for coordinating "in their smear campaign against John Kerry."

At Bush-Cheney campaign headquarters outside Washington, spokesman Steve Schmidt said: "The Bush-Cheney campaign has nothing to do with that piece of paper. ... I don't know how it showed up at the campaign headquarters."

"The Bush-Cheney campaign would object to any flier like this being displayed in any Republican headquarters," said Schmidt. He characterized the campaign operation in Gainesville where the flier was found as county GOP offices used by Bush-Cheney volunteers.

The flier distributed at Alachua County Republican Party headquarters promotes a weekend rally sponsored by "Swift Boat Vets for Truth" and other groups.

Bill Shilling, a Kerry volunteer in Gainesville, says he went to the GOP offices there Thursday and picked up the flier from a pile of literature on the table.

"The flier they gave me was on the same table as some Bush-Cheney bumper stickers," said Shilling. "I asked them if the Swift boat veterans were coming to Gainesville, and the woman I talked to said yes."

Shilling said he went back to Kerry headquarters and turned over the flier.

"I thought there was supposed to be some separation between Bush-Cheney and the Swift boat controversy but I didn't understand there was a big deal about this," said Shilling. "I think this whole thing attacking Kerry's war record is a diversion by Bush-Cheney from the real issues of the campaign."

Financed by a Texas businessman with longtime ties to prominent Republicans in the state, including President Bush, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth sponsored an ad featuring several Vietnam veterans who accuse Kerry of lying about the circumstances surrounding events for which he won his medals. Kerry received a Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts while in Vietnam.

The anti-Kerry group distributed a second commercial to the news media and said it would begin airing the ad next week in Pennsylvania, Nevada and New Mexico, the last a state Bush plans to visit next Thursday. The ad intersperses clips of a youthful Kerry talking about war atrocities during an appearance before Congress in 1971 with images of veterans condemning his testimony.

The Kerry campaign filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was illegally coordinating its efforts with the Bush-Cheney campaign.

The Kerry campaign cited recent press reports and the group's own statements. The Bush campaign denied the allegation, as did the organization that aired the ad.

It's a zillion words long. But well worth the read.

I think roger adultery likes the repulican idea and so do you.

RA, on his attaining ecstasy thread, says he doesn't actually like and doesn't really want to vote for bush.

would you tell me how you feel?

The anti-Kerry ad begins with footage of Sen. John Edwards, Kerry's running mate, saying, "If you have any question about what John Kerry's made of, just spend three minutes with the men who served with him 30 years ago."

Then eight words appear on the screen -- "Here's what those men think about John Kerry" -- and the allegations begin. They include comments such as: "John Kerry betrayed the men and women he served with in Vietnam," and "He lacks the capacity to lead."

This ad forces the viewer to accept that the intended referents of "the men who served with him 30 years ago" in Edwards's remark are "those men" in the ad.

I don't know where Edwards's statement was taken from, but say it was used to introduce some veterans who served on Kerry's boat, and Edwards intended to refer to those men by the description, "the men who served with him 30 years ago." Then even if the men who appear in the ad satisfy the description Edwards uses, they are not the men Edwards was referring to. In that case, the ad forces the viewer to accept a false presupposition.

The ad blurs the distinction between the reliability of different sources of information: the men who served on Kerry's boat and the men who didn't.

The catalyst for the formation of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was the mounting anger among several Navy veterans to the publication last spring of "Tour of Duty," an authorized biography of Kerry's Vietnam stint by historian Douglas Brinkley.

The most vocal of these veterans was retired Rear Adm. Roy F. Hoffmann, a Virginian who headed Swift boat missions under Operation Sealords, a late-1960s effort to cut Viet Cong supply routes along remote canals and rivers in Vietnam's southern peninsula.

Hoffmann, who had granted a 45-minute interview to Brinkley during a 2003 reunion of Swift boat sailors in Norfolk, grew incensed after reading that he was a "hawkish" commander with a "taste for the more unsavory aspects of warfare."

By February, Hoffman was calling other veterans to ask if they'd read the book and pressing them to join him in his efforts to respond to it. In mid-April, he flew to Houston and met with a dozen other Swift boat veterans.

According to several attendees, some of those at the nine-hour meeting declined to join in with Hoffmann. They empathized with his anger toward Kerry's antiwar stance, but were reluctant to openly question the background of Kerry's awards or criticize his service record.

Not saying we're any better like in our army luv, but the political culture of the USA, combined with the media culture (liberal my fucking cock) makes me absolutely terrifed of the US. I genuinely fear for the kind of planet I'll be living in if the neo-cons get another 4 years.

But both the Kerry and anti-Kerry camps continue to deny or ignore requests for other relevant documents, including Kerry's personal reminiscences (shared only with biographer Brinkley), the boat log of PCF-94 compiled by Medeiros (shared only with Brinkley) and the Chenoweth diary.

Although Kerry campaign officials insist that they have published Kerry's full military records on their Web site (with the exception of medical records shown briefly to reporters earlier this year), they have not permitted independent access to his original Navy records. A Freedom of Information Act request by The Post for Kerry's records produced six pages of information. A spokesman for the Navy Personnel Command, Mike McClellan, said he was not authorized to release the full file, which consists of at least a hundred pages.

When you stall about releasing information, the press begins to wonder what you are hiding.

I think roger adultery likes the repulican idea and so do you

RJG, I'm not sure what you are referring to here, but I wish Bush would issue a statement to distance himself from this, (I'm not voting for Bush, I never have and never would) just as I continue to wish that Kerry would make more legal threats.

but the Bush military records story (they still haven't released all of them) has no legs? you can see where the Kerry people might be going with this, yes?

I think that gabbneb's post suggests that Brinkley's book makes Vietnam veterans, in general, look bad.

I don't think he made veterans in general look bad, just this one guy, and maybe some others. Doug Brinkley is a professor at the University of New Orleans. He has written many books, some co-authored with the popular former historian Stephen Ambrose, on popular, often political, topics, including Henry Ford, D-Day, Rosa Parks, Jimmy Carter, FDR, and JFK and also otherwise associates his name with such topics by authoring introductions to re-released original books or appearing on television or conducting history-oriented bus tours to discuss popular, often countercultural figures or events like JFK Jr., Jack Kerouac, Ken Kesey, and Edward Abbey. What I'm implying is that he's maybe not as scholarly as other historians. I assume that the Kerry campaign sought him out to write, or actively cooperated in his writing of, the book, which could be expected to be a relatively glowing account of the candidate. My point is that in doing so the Kerry people took the risk that he would say something about someone else that would come back to hurt them.

There is no 'deeply ingrained sanctity of the military' in America writ large (though there is for many Americans), and there is certainly no taboo in opposing the military specifically or generally. Yes we, like almost every other country, are not pacifists and have a military. Because of our outsized power and influence, we tend to use it, sometimes for good and sometimes for ill. Other countries without our power or influence often complain when we use it (usually when we are using it for ill) and also often complain when we don't use it (usually when we are failing to use it for good).

Regardless, this debate does not have to do with the 'sanctity of the military'. Rather, it discusses the appropriate level of respect for an individual who could have avoided military service because of his social class but volunteered to participate out of a belief in equity, who was a decisive commander in protecting his troops while carrying out missions, and who returned home to lead a political movement speaking out against an unjust war into the committee rooms of Congress.

perhaps the prosecutor and trial lawyer are allowing opposing counsel to open the door to the use of character evidence?

Which records are you referring to specifically?

Yo Ned, back in my younger days I dated a woman who was twice as liberal as Gabbneb, a real Kool-Aid drinker of socialism whom I think saw me as someone she could enlighten. This was back in my Bush days, and she worked for Dukakis (and later on, hilariously, in Washington for Tom Harkin), expounding to me about the "Massachusettes Miracle" and how Dukakis would be an excellent diplomat to the world with his ability to speak four languages. Needless to say, I don't think Gabbneb and I would work out too well given my impulse to pester progressives liberals. Unless he has great tits, that is.

But if you want him to authorize something he hasn't, how about the Sixty pages of Mr. Bush's medical file and some other records [that] were excluded on privacy grounds? Or his W-2s showing Alabama National Guard payments? Or maybe he can rescind the Defense Dept's order to the TANG that it not discuss Bush's records with the press? Or, to the extent they exist and are separable (which seems likely given the state court AP suit), military records protected by Bush's failure to sign the written confidentiality waiver request by the AP? Since that article, the Pentagon has released payroll records and announced that the federal ANG records are dupes. Doesn't sound like he's signed anything.

It's not like the Bush records released so far have established that he was not awol. In fact, some say they show conclusively that he was treated by the Air Force as a deserter. If you read the "DID BUSH’S REHABILITATION REALLY HAPPEN?" section of that page, this strange letter takes on some interesting connotations.

And if you're going to credit mere allegations, you have to credit those of George Conn (now quasi-retracted, perhaps under pressure) and Bill Burkett that Joe Allbaugh and Dan Bartlett coordinated destruction of certain Bush paper records in 1997.

And the Boston Globe reminds journalists that they don't merely sit in the middle of a see-saw

As for your consipratorial fervor on Bush being AWOL, I'm really not inclined to start siding with the Internet Kook Squad or Michael Moore or, god forbid, Kevin Drum, and take their bait hook, line, and sinker. That said, if there are documents related to this subject that would prove his innocence (or guilt) further, then Bush should release them or the press should badger him for them relentlessly. Honestly, I'm not all that suspicious that these unreleased records will prove anything one way or the other, but it seems reasonable that the public should know what is in them. The same is true for any candidate running for office.

no, you asked "what records has he not authorized release of?" you raised a presumption and asked me to do the work to knock it down.

if there are documents related to this subject that would prove his innocence (or guilt) further, then Bush should release them or the press should badger him for them relentlessly

a lawsuit isn't good enough for you?

since we're making assumptions, I assume you hold the same standards for all records pertaining to John Kerry--you've been strangely quiet on this aspect.

I don't know what 'standards' I'm supposed to hold or have been quiet about - do I run afoul of these 'standards' if I agree that kerry's records should be disclosed when Bush's are disclosed? I personally don't care if Kerry opens records or not, because nothing in them could change who I'm voting for. But regardless, I find no reason to open them, because I see no open questions requiring resolution.

I personally don't care if Kerry opens records or not, because nothing in them could change who I'm voting for

Classic--which is why, to you and Dr. Marshall, there are no open questions.

The Liars are also making allegations about Kerry's Purple Hearts--I'm not really sure why Kerry won't authorize independent access to his military and medical records, but according to the Post, he won't. My suspicion on that aspect is that there is nothing there either, but I am quite surprised Kerry has let the issue take on any water at all. Then again, this whole issue looks to be gone by Labor Day and that's when we can all be more devoted to focusing our energy on hating Chimp instead of being distracted by the VRWC.

The other thing is that if this becomes a race defined only by strength vs weakness, as Bush (or maybe more accurately, Rove) so desperately wants it to be, the bully wins that contest every time.

in terms of political phallic innuendo?

so when did Michael Moore, Howard Dean or Teddy Kennedy produce anti-Bush campaign ads?

You could put together a really nice info-graphic linking every single member of the GOP to Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden and the dudes who stole Munch's The Scream if you wanted to. Wouldn't mean that anyone should believe it.

* ...as if it wasn't before...

Dole Questions Kerry's Vietnam Wounds

57 minutes ago

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer

CRAWFORD, Texas - Former Republican Sen. Bob Dole suggested Sunday that John Kerry (news - web sites) apologize for past testimony before Congress about alleged atrocities during the Vietnam War and joined critics of the Democratic presidential candidate who say he received an early exit from combat for "superficial wounds."

[...]

Dole told CNN's "Late Edition" that he warned Kerry months ago about going "too far" and that the Democrat may have himself to blame for the current situation, in which polls show him losing support among veterans.

"One day he's saying that we were shooting civilians, cutting off their ears, cutting off their heads, throwing away his medals or his ribbons," Dole said. "The next day he's standing there, `I want to be president because I'm a Vietnam veteran.' Maybe he should apologize to all the other 2.5 million veterans who served. He wasn't the only one in Vietnam," said Dole, whose World War II wounds left him without the use of his right arm.

Dole added: "And here's, you know, a good guy, a good friend. I respect his record. But three Purple Hearts and never bled that I know of. I mean, they're all superficial wounds. Three Purple Hearts and you're out..."

Note: this is better when delivered in Norm McDonald's Bob Dole voice.

Bush Denounces Ads by Outside Groups
11 minutes ago

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer

CRAWFORD, Texas - President Bush denounced TV ads by outside groups attacking both John Kerry and himself on Monday and called for a halt to all such political efforts. "I think they're bad for the system," he said.

The president made his comments as the Kerry campaign fought back against charges made by an outside group that the Democratic senator had lied about wartime events in Vietnam for which he received five medals.

In a conference call with reporters arranged by aides to the Democratic presidential candidate, Navy swift boat officers Rich McCann, Jim Russell and Rich Baker said Kerry acted honorably and bravely and was well qualified to be the nation's commander in chief.

"He was the most aggressive officer in charge of swift boats," Baker said.

Additionally, crewmate Del Sandusky said at a news conference in Harrisburg, Pa., that he personally witnessed the battle action for which Kerry received Silver and Bronze stars and two of his three Purple Hearts.

"He deserved every one of his medals," Sandusky, a retired computer repairman who drove Kerry's boat for nearly three months.

The attack on Kerry's war record has dominated the presidential campaign in the days since Swift Boat Veterans For Truth began airing its commercial in three states.

With polls suggesting Kerry's standing was beginning to slip — at least among veterans — the Democrat last week called on Bush to call for the ads to be pulled from the air. He also accused Bush of allowing front groups to "do his dirty work."

Bush's campaign heatedly denied any connection with the anti-Kerry group, and called on the Democratic challenger to join the president in a call for all outside groups to pull their ads.

Bush has himself been subjected to a multimillion-dollar barrage of attack ads aired by groups seeking to help Kerry win the White House.

Underscoring the impact of the anti-Kerry ad, the Democratic National Committee began airing a commercial last week that offered a testimonial to Kerry's fitness for national command.

And in a shift in strategy, Kerry's campaign has responded with two commercials, despite plans to preserve its campaign funds for the general election campaign.

Kerry running mate John Edwards said Sunday that Bush needed to tell the veterans group to pull its anti-Kerry ads. Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona has said the tactics are the same kind used on him and asked the president to denounce them.

The White House says it denounces all attack ads against both candidates by outside groups, while refusing to get specific about condemning the veterans group's advertising.

"The president ... and (political adviser) Karl Rove have flipped back to the well-worn smear page of their campaign playbook, last used against John McCain in 2000," Kerry's campaign said in a statement Sunday. Voters want to hear about the issues, "not lies and smears, and it's time the president realized that."

A new Kerry campaign ad says Bush smeared McCain four years ago and "Now, he's doing it to John Kerry."

A former Vietnam prisoner of war, McCain lost the South Carolina Republican primary in 2000 after Bush supporters accused him of opposing legislation to help military veterans. McCain never recovered from that primary loss.

Former Sen. Bob Dole, a World War II veteran and 1996 Republican presidential nominee, suggested Kerry apologize for his 1971 testimony to Congress about atrocities U.S. soldiers allegedly committed in Vietnam.

Dole, who has a disabled right arm from war wounds, said Kerry received an early exit from combat for "superficial wounds." He called on the nominee to release all of his Vietnam service records.

Dole told CNN's "Late Edition" in relation to Kerry: "I respect his record. But three Purple Hearts and never bled that I know of. I mean, they're all superficial wounds. Three Purple Hearts and you're out."

Crewmate Sandusky said Monday, "I was there when he got wounded. I saw the blood. I don't care what Dole said."

So they need to vocally, repeatedly connect Bush with the concept of the smear. Dukakis tried turning the other cheek and lost a lot for it when W.'s dad through shit his way in 88.

I haven't done any polling, but I expect that "undecided" means "apatheic" in most cases.

August 23, 2004
Bush Denounces Outside Groups' Influence on Campaign
By MARIA NEWMAN

President Bush, who has refused for weeks to condemn a veterans' group's television commercials attacking John Kerry's military service in Vietnam, today said the group and others running independent advertisements should stop running them.

But Mr. Bush, speaking at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., stopped short of directly asking the group to withdraw its ad. He also did not address an assertion made in a new Kerry television ad that the veteran's group is a `front group" for the Bush campaign.

And in response to reporters' questions, the president once again condemned the so-called 527 groups, which can raise unlimited donations and run ads, but cannot directly coordinate their efforts with the campaigns. One of them, called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, has been running an anti-Kerry ad that has accused Mr. Kerry, the Democratic nominee, of lying about activities in Vietnam that won him four medals. But this time Mr. Bush went a bit farther, and said the ads run by such groups should be stopped.

"All of them," the president said, when asked whether he specifically meant that the veteran's group's ad against Mr. Kerry should be stopped. "That means that ad, every other ad. Absolutely. I don't think we ought to have 527's. I can't be more plain about it, and I wish — I hope my opponent joins me in saying — condemning these activities of the 527's. It's — I think they're bad for the system."

Mr. Bush was asked whether he agreed with the charges made in the ads by the anti-Kerry group that the Democratic nominee had portrayed his war record inaccurately.

"I think Senator Kerry served admirably, and he ought to be proud of his record," Mr. Bush said. "But the question is who's best to lead the country in the war on terror, who can handle the responsibilities of the commander in chief, who's got a clear vision of the risks that the country faces."

The issue of Mr. Kerry's war record continued to dominate the campaign just before the Republican convention to renominate Mr. Bush convenes in New York City next week.

Mr. Kerry and his campaign launched an offensive last week against the Swift Boat group's ads that reached its zenith in an advertisement released Sunday that accuses the Bush campaign of "smears" and "lies" against his Democratic opponent.

In the new ad, a narrator says that four years ago, Mr. Bush smeared Senator John McCain of Arizona, a former Vietnam prisoner of war who was then seeking the Republican nomination for president, and "now, he's doing it to John Kerry."

Mr. McCain lost the South Carolina Republican primary in 2000 after Mr. Bush supporters accused him of opposing legislation to help military veterans. Mr. McCain never recovered from that primary loss.

Today the Kerry campaign arranged for a conference call with several Vietnam veterans, including Senator Jack Reed, who defended Mr. Kerry's war record, including the three Purple Hearts he was awarded.

"John Kerry is lucky to be alive today," former lieutenant Rich Baker said in the conference call. "The fourth Purple Heart could have been an AK-47 through the heart."

And in a speech that he will make in New York tomorrow, Mr. Kerry is expected to continue to talk about the history of dirty tricks that Republicans have waged against political opponents of Mr. Bush and his father for several years.

this is the archetypal bush quote. say something without saying it. take the high ground explicitly and the low ground implicitly.

"Like many of my generation, I was skeptical of America's involvement in Vietnam and why the conflict concerned myself, my family, or my community. And while many good men used whatever means they had to avoid traveling halfway around the world to defend an ideal that wasn't -- to my eyes -- even being threatened, I elected to volunteer to fight because my father's military experiences instilled in me a sense of duty.

"While I served in Vietnam, I had the fortune to fight alongside men like me, who weren't sure what the battle was for, but who were determined to win it, simply because that's how young men see the world. I volunteered to command a Swift boat, which came to be one of the war's most dangerous and difficult jobs, and I would not have survived had it not been for the crew who served with me. We always looked out for one another.

"I was injured in Vietnam three times, and I received Purple Hearts for each injury before returning to the US. But my injuries were minor compared to the psychological, political and moral damage that the unjust war inflicted upon my fellow veterans and the country at large. I felt angered and betrayed by my government, and did what I felt was my duty: speak out against the atrocities that we had been ordered to commit in Vietnam in hopes of bringing our soldiers home.

"I can understand why many of the fellow veterans were upset with me. They took my statements personally, and not as the indictments of an out-of-touch government, which is how they were intended. It was not a just war, and it never would have been, in victory or defeat.

"The importance of this tale is that above my own personal feelings, I appealed to a sense of civic duty to defend my country, something I was taught by my parents to do. For those Americans who chose to use influential connections and other means to avoid the jungles of Vietnam, I say this: I don't condemn or condone your actions. I understood how you felt. I was with you in spirit. No one wants to die so young, with so much promise left unfulfilled.

"For those Americans who used influential connections and other means to avoid the jungles of Vietnam, and who know assail my war record in a bid to maintain their stranglehold on the White House, I say this: I'm glad you weren't fighting next to me in Vietnam, because your actions to this day show a selfishness that is antithetical to true patriotism. I resent how you mislead us, the American people, to send, once again, more of our young Americans into harm for a cause that was hardly just or 'imminent.' Mr. Bush, when you ran for the presidency in 2000, you said you wanted to bring honor and dignity to the White House. Well, Mr. President, I'm running today for the very same reason."

Lawyer Advising Vets Quits Bush Campaign

5 minutes ago

By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - An election lawyer for President Bush (news - web sites) who also has been advising a veterans group running TV ads against Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) resigned Wednesday from Bush's campaign.

"I cannot begin to express my sadness that my legal representations have become a distraction from the critical issues at hand in this election," Benjamin Ginsberg wrote in a resignation letter to Bush released by the campaign...

oh FUCK YOU AND DIE for chrissakes.

But, yes, more pistol-whipping is always a good thing.

anyway if he weren't wrong about so much else there's this to condemn him forever:

A JON STEWART MOMENT: The funniest guy on television (after Bill Maher)...

"i don't find that interesting at all "

(I know I'm easily amused, sorry)

Yeah, I’m constantly fascinated by the Republican fantasy that if they can just peel off one Democrat-leaning minority group, they can put a lock on the electorate. Maybe their big grasp at Latino constituencies will work out, I dunno. But at present it’s sort of pathetic that their best grab for the black vote isn’t to verbalize some way in which they represent the interests of black people—it’s to run this whole pimp routine that goes “the Democrats don’t appreciate you, girl, they take you for granted, know what I’m saying, you gotta run with a real player and put them back in line,” like they’re genuinely suggesting that black people vote Republican solely for the purpose of cementing their influence within the Democratic party.

After reading amateurist's Bush quote and the letter from the Texas vets, I can see how the Republicans can make the left look elitist and condescending. I don't agree with Sullivan that often but I refuse to immediately be so impolite as to imply he's not sincere.

I think Senator Kerry served admirably, and he ought to be proud of his record," Mr. Bush said. "But the question is who's best to lead the country in the war on terror, who can handle the responsibilities of the commander in chief, who's got a clear vision of the risks that the country faces."

Bush's point is perfectly valid and if this were 1996 we'd be making the same kind of point. Here's something that respectfully replies to his statement:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040901faessay83504/stephen-e-flynn/the-neglected-home-front.html

I was not implying insincerity, necessarily; blount's point is not necessarily inconsistent with mine. I am not concerned with politesse given Sullivan's and Bush's opinions.

Bush's point is perfectly valid

Absolutely not. Bush's surrogates are straight-up lying to damage Kerry's credibility on unrelated matters. Bush's point is not a question - which of us is better to lead the war on terror (to me, it's quite obviously Kerry) - it's an implicit assertion, building upon the uncriticized content of the swift boat ads (he criticized only their formal legality, despite the fact that he signed the legislation that enabled them), that Kerry is not up to the job and Bush is.

If Bush genuinely believes he's better for the War on Terra, let him state it. I, for one, do not agree with him but I think he believes it. He has not come out against the swiftboaters primarily because the issue is still afloat, Christmas in Cambodia, anti-war activism, etc.... The scariest thing in his non-eschewal of the swiftboaters was his claim that when he signed the legislation he did not realize that 527s were in there. Still, if it's really all about the best man for the job, Kerry has got to take a couple of risks after the Rep. Convention and start talking about some specifics that make him a different, better candidate than Bush.

WASHINGTON - The chief critic of John Kerry's military record told President Nixon in 1971 that he had been in Cambodia in a swift boat during the Vietnam War — a claim at odds with his recent statements that he was not.

"I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border," said John E. O'Neill in a conversation that was taped by the former president's secret recording system. The tape is stored at the National Archives in College Park, Md.

In an interview with The Associated Press on Wednesday, O'Neill did not dispute what he said to Nixon, but insisted he was never actually in Cambodia.

"I think I made it very clear that I was on the border, which is exactly where I was for three months. I was about 100 yards from Cambodia," O'Neill said in clarifying the June 16, 1971, conversation with Nixon.

Chad Clanton, a spokesman for the Democratic presidential candidate, said the tape "is just the latest in a long line of lies and false statements from a group trying to smear John Kerry's military service. Again, they're being proven liars with their own words. It's time for President Bush to stand up and specifically condemn this smear."

O'Neill served in Vietnam from 1969-70 and says in a recent book that he took command of Kerry's swift boat after the future Massachusetts senator returned home from the war.

O'Neill has emerged as a leading figure in the attacks on Kerry's war record. He is co-author of "Unfit for Command," which accuses Kerry of lying about his record, and is a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which has aired two television commercials harshly critical of Kerry.

In the book, O'Neill wrote that Kerry's accounts of having been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve of 1968 "are complete lies."

"... Kerry was never ordered into Cambodia by anyone and would have been court-martialed had he gone there," he wrote. O'Neill wrote that the Navy positioned its own craft along the border area to make sure no American vessels strayed across the border from Vietnam.

In an interview Sunday on ABC's "This Week" O'Neill said: "Our boats didn't go north of, only slightly north of Sedek," which he said was about 50 miles from the Cambodian border.

Kerry's campaign has acknowledged that he may not have been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve of 1968, as he has previously stated. The campaign says Kerry does recall being on patrol along the Cambodia-Vietnam border on that date, although it's unclear if he crossed into Cambodia.

Referring to the tape of the Oval Office meeting with Nixon, O'Neill criticized Kerry for making claims, including in the Senate, that he was in Cambodia.

"I've never represented on the floor of the Senate, or told people 50 times like John Kerry did that I was in Cambodia. That never happened. And I don't think he was ever there either," O'Neill said.

The snippet of taped conversation surfaced after more than a week of controversy surrounding claims that Kerry lied about his actions in a war in which he won five military medals. The Democrat and his allies have vigorously attacked such claims as a smear, laboring to undermine the charges as well as cast doubt on the men who are making them.

For his part, Kerry accused the swift boat group of being a "front group" that was doing Bush's dirty work.

The Bush campaign denies any involvement with Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

___

Associated Press writer Jennifer C. Kerr contributed to this report.

http://www.film.queensu.ca/Critical/Photos/Apoc/Apoc600.JPG

Thanks for the pointer hstencil.

Kerry applied for the medals, if I understand it correctly, they'd just turn around and say that he applied for medals he knew he shouldn't have.

Damn Liberals

Reconstructing one day on a Swift boat

Posted: Saturday September 4th, 2004, 9:30 PM
Last Updated: Saturday September 4th, 2004, 9:30 PM
Bill Means needed to talk to me, he said. Right away.

I didn't ask why; I figured it had something to do with Vietnam. We'd talked briefly a couple of months earlier about the war and about Swift boats. Thirty-five years ago, as a Navy seaman, Means had patrolled the southern coastline of the South China Sea and the mangrove-dense rivers of the country's interior -- 12 months in all, mostly spent in the pilot house of one of those 55-foot, aluminum-hulled Navy fighting boats.

About a week ago, we made tentative plans to talk again. Then I didn't hear from him until he called abruptly, urgency in his voice.

We sat down together and, agitated and emotional, he laid it all out for me.

It bothered him, seeing Vietnam brought back into play as a political game piece. The left had done it to war veterans three decades ago. Returning servicemen had been vilified -- spat upon, in fact, as if they'd been the architects of U.S. foreign policy rather than just the young men and women obligated by law and duty to carry it out.

Now the right had seized upon the Vietnam War, too -- specifically the role, in uniform and out, of Sen. John Kerry. And to Means, it seemed just as wrong.

Means, a 55-year-old investigator for several Bakersfield law firms, was particularly annoyed by the words of one retired admiral. Roy F. "Latch" Hoffman, one of the co-founders of the pro-George W. Bush group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, had publicly criticized Kerry, a former Swift boat commander, for having brought back stories about alleged war crimes by U.S. forces -- often carried out, Kerry said in 1971, "with the full awareness of officers at all levels."

Seemed to him, Means said, his own Swift boat crew had come close to committing a war crime themselves one day. A senior officer, hitching a ride up the coast aboard their Swift boat, had ordered the crew to fire on a small group of unarmed Vietnamese fishermen working their nets in unrestricted waters, Means said. The boat's commanding officer had refused to comply.

Was that the way the boat's commander remembered the incident too, all these years later? Means had to know.

So he got on the Internet and hunted down Thomas W.L. "Tad" McCall, the retired Navy captain who'd commanded Means' boat, PCF 88, as a newly minted ensign. Means called him.

Not only did McCall remember the day in question, and that confrontation off the coast of South Vietnam, he remembered the name of the officer who had given the command to shoot: "Latch" Hoffman himself, then a Navy captain in charge of the entire Swift boat task force in Vietnam.

The next morning Means told me the whole story. Then I called McCall myself.

McCall, now 60, remembers March 14, 1969, because it was his 25th birthday. He'd only been running a Swift boat for a few weeks, having arrived in Vietnam in January 1969, the same month as Means.

At the time, McCall said, the Navy was having trouble finding qualified officers to command those hazardous-duty patrol boats; lieutenant j.g.'s were in increasingly short supply. McCall, the son of Oregon's sitting governor, Republican Tom McCall, was only an ensign. That, the Navy was beginning to realize, would have to do.

"I was really green," said McCall, who joined the Navy as an enlisted man in 1967 and retired in March 1992 as a captain and a JAG, or military attorney.

McCall's crew was supposed to be off duty that day. But McCall was told Hoffman needed a ride up the coast to the base at Nha Trang to visit a seriously wounded Navy SEAL.

"I was excited, nervous and kind of pleased we were going to get to take the commander of the task force up the coast, an hour and a half each way," McCall said. "A beautiful trip, an honor for us. The crew didn't think it was an honor, though. They thought it was a pain in the butt."

Hoffman got to the boat at mid-morning, a distinguished-looking officer in brown camouflage.

From the start, Hoffman made it clear the trip would be no pleasure cruise. He wanted to search every Vietnamese boat they passed, it seemed. McCall protested mildly; he knew many of those boats from having patrolled those same waters almost daily.

Then Hoffman set his attention on a small cluster of fishing boats, four small vessels with perhaps 10 fishermen, about 1,000 yards offshore. "We had seen them in the water there many, many times," McCall said. "They were fishing at a good fishing place ... in traditional fishing waters. 'Another patrol is coming up behind us soon,' I told him. 'We're taking you for a ride, not patrolling.'"

But Hoffman ordered a crewman to hail the fishing boats on a bullhorn. The fishermen didn't respond. So Hoffman ordered a crewman to fire his M-16 in their direction, splashing the water around them. The fishermen, perhaps not understanding what they were supposed to do, still didn't respond.

"Shoot closer," McCall remembers Hoffman saying.

"I can't shoot closer, sir, I'll hit them," the crewman said.

"Well, do it," Hoffman said.

The meaning of those words were clear to everyone aboard PCF 88, McCall said. Hoffman was ordering the fishing party destroyed, the fishermen killed.

The officers argued policy; McCall realized it was ultimately his call.

He ordered his men to stand down, leave the fishermen alone and move on. He sent Hoffman below deck, and the captain, cursing, complied.

"From that day on," said Means, who witnessed the exchange from his post at the wheel, "McCall was our hero."

When McCall got back to the base at Cam Ranh Bay, he was told he would receive an administrative punishment -- a 30-day benching known as being "in hack," for which official records were not kept.

"There was no animosity afterward," McCall said, noting that when Hoffman left Vietnam, the sailors at Cam Ranh Bay threw him a party.

"I think, if I remember right, he gave me a hug," McCall said. "He was a rascal, a colorful guy. We had an amicable parting of the ways. I just thought his leadership at the time was misguided."

Hoffman did not return my e-mail message asking for his comment.

After leaving the Navy, McCall served as a deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force, a civilian post, from 1994 to 2001. Since that time he has worked as a consultant to the Army on environmental matters.

He has been approached by representatives of the Kerry campaign about telling his story, he said. He's not particularly political, so he's not interested.

Means feels the same -- to a point.

"We weren't Republicans and Democrats on those Swift boats," he said. "We were (expletive) trying to stay alive. (Things) happened, but we can't go back and reconstruct it from 35 years ago."

But if others, whatever their motivation, insist on trying to do so now, Means is willing to try too. In his view, his commanding officer did the right thing 35 years ago by speaking up. Speaking up himself, Bill Means believes, is the least he can do today.

Navy probes Kerry medals
By Julian Coman
Columbus, Ohio
September 6, 2004

The Pentagon has ordered an investigation into the awarding of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's five Vietnam War decorations.

The highly unusual inquiry is to be carried out by the Inspector-General's Office of the US Navy. Senator Kerry served as a Swift boat captain for four months in 1968, serving two tours of duty in Vietnam...

...But to the consternation of campaign strategists, the navy has agreed to a request by Judicial Watch, a bipartisan lobby group, for a full inquiry.

Judicial Watch wants the navy to report before the elections, but navy officials are so far refusing to give a timetable for the inquiry.

In an August letter to the Pentagon, group president Tom Fitton requested an inquiry into the "determination and final disposition of the awards granted to Lieutenant (junior grade) John Forbes Kerry, US Naval Reserve", in response to the Swift boat veterans' allegations.

Confirming the inquiry, a naval spokesman said: "It is the responsibility of all personnel to correct errors in official records."

Kerry is being punked repeatedly and as far as I can tell, nearly consensually. Unless we get to a "have you no sense of decency?" moment, the water is swirling down the shitter.

So that means that Kerry and Dubya are going to face off in a pistol duel, resulting in the latter instead taking down Bush père?

http://www.william-petersen.com/skulls/skulls13.jpg
"Pacey, I feel your pain"