Audio of a Vietnam Swift Boat vet saying Kerry RAN under fire....hear it this thread.

This audio is of a Vietnam Swift Boat vet telling his story, as told on CNN "InsidePolitic's Judy Woodruff's", of how John Kerry ran during a firefight. John Kerry received a medal for actions that he took to save the life of a SF soldier while under enemy fire on this operation. Hear the audio this thread........ Click link.

photos.imageevent.com...


hooah


(edited to replace audio link)

[edit on 12-8-2004 by Firebase]

Didn't the accuser actually withdraw those accusations earlier today?

Originally posted by Nerdling
Didn't the accuser actually withdraw those accusations earlier today?

Uuuuuh....NO, he didn't.

One of the Vets did take back his statments.

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
One of the Vets did take back his statments.

Ah, i thought i read that this afternoon on Yahoo.

I'll try and find it when i can get a minute.

I listened to the audio. If you listen to the end, you hear the speaker clearly state that Kerry's boat returned, and Kerry rescued Rassman from the water. Kerry was the man who actually rescued the man in the water. When the initial mine exploded, Kerry made a tactical decision to maneuver his boat to get troops ashore away from the ambush, not knowing the magnitude of a possible ambush. He immediately returned and performed a rescue, for which he received a Bronze Star. To characterize Kerry's actions as running is absurd. You can read a very detailed account of that day at the following link.

John Kerry's Final Mission in Vietnam

Here is a brief excerpt.

Almost casually, the Swifts formed up and headed out from the village. The five boats had gone about half a mile when the blast came. Right where they had been hit on an earlier mission, a mine exploded directly beneath Lieutenant James Rassman's PCF-3 near Kerry's port side. Rassman's Swift lifted about two feet up out of the water, engulfed in mud and spray, then settled, rocking so hard from side to side that the boat started zigzagging from the banks to the middle of the river. Everybody on board PCF-3 was wounded. "At the same moment, we came under a hail of small-arms fire from both banks," Kerry recorded in his journal. "I turned the boat into the fire on the left with the intention of trying to get the troops ashore on the outskirts of the ambush, but Sandusky, who was driving the boat and who had his eyes glued on the crippled 3 boat, pointed out to me how badly hit they had been. We veered back toward her then and tried to provide cover from the engaged side. Suddenly another explosion went off right beside us, and the concussion threw me violently against the bulkhead on the door, and I smashed my arm. At the same instant, Jim Rassman was blown overboard, although nobody knew it. But we continued sidling up to the 3, and as we came closer I could see that her twin-.50 mount over the pilothouse had been completely blown out of its stand and had landed on the gunner. No one was moving on the stern. [PCF-3 crewman] Ken Tryner, on his first real river expedition, was kneeling dazed in the doorway with a small trickle of blood down his face, aimlessly firing his M-79."

If you listened to the audio, it should be clear to you that this is the same incident described in the audio.



[edit on 8/7/2004 by donguillermo]

Another sad example of Politics these days, voters who don't care will glance at the tv and absorb either sides dirty deeds, and vote based on negative ads, without taking the time to really looking to the issues. Ohhhhh America, give me hamburger, fries, supersized, and coke.

The fact is, nobody knows what's going on with that guy who retracted his statement.

NYT

That guy flip-flops more than Bush!

These SwiftVets have been debunked so many times. McCain says it's bs. The Whitehouse says it's bs. The only people pumping this story up are the people scrambling to find some kind of reason to keep Bush in office.

Who the hell wouldn't try to avoid enemy fire anyway?

Originally posted by curme
The fact is, nobody knows what's going on with that guy who retracted his statement.

NYT

That guy flip-flops more than Bush!

You should really say that guy flip-flops more then Bush and Kerry or really any politician. They have all changed their opinions on one subject or another

I don't get this whole method of singling out a person in Vietnam for their actions as being inapropriate.....running for president or not......almost all the soldiers who fought in Vietnam would be under heavy fire from the media if this were the case....

I can't stand these types of attacks - these Republicans who bash people b/c they made a mistake while serving their country during a war that was lost, unorganized and fought by men with little or no military expereince....and you think this is a fair arguement?

You bash liberals b/c we support a more free-will based country that prevents these kinds of accidents from happening by having people who choose to be in the army and by serving their country by fighting and dying for our freedom?

Who's side are you on?

[edit on 8/7/2004 by EnronOutrunHomerun]

Originally posted by curme
The fact is, nobody knows what's going on with that guy who retracted his statement.

NYT

That guy flip-flops more than Bush!

These SwiftVets have been debunked so many times. McCain says it's bs. The Whitehouse says it's bs. The only people pumping this story up are the people scrambling to find some kind of reason to keep Bush in office.

Another good find, curme. The New York Times story says the Boston Globe is standing by its story. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is claiming that Commander Elliott has repudiated the Boston Globe story. According to the New York Times, Commander Elliott is refusing to comment. If he is repudiating the Boston Globe story, why won't he comment?

The New York Times story has some more interesting tidbits.

The party and the Kerry campaign have released bits of information that they say show connections between Mr. Bush and the anti-Kerry group, mostly by noting that Bob J. Perry, a Texas developer whose path has frequently crossed that of Karl Rove, Mr. Bush's top political strategist, donated $100,000 to the Swift boat group.

On CNN, Steve Elmendorf, Mr. Kerry's deputy campaign manager, said the commercial was the product of "Rove-Bush cronies" and called upon the White House and Bush campaign to repudiate it. Bush campaign officials declined to do so, noting that Mr. Kerry has not disavowed hard-hitting advertisements against Mr. Bush run by outside groups like Moveon.org.

Nicolle Devenish, Mr. Bush's communications director, said that while Mr. Rove and Mr. Perry were friends, Mr. Rove had said that they had not spoken in the last year or so.

The Kerry campaign also noted that the public relations firm for the Swift boat group lists among its clients the Republican National Committee, though Mike Russell, an executive at the firm, Creative Response Concepts, said it had not worked for the party in at least seven years.

I am a veteran, my only potential problem with J. Kerry, concerning the Vietnam War is this:

While I can understand his opposition to the war, (I know that the gov't used our soldiers as pawns in polls), what bothers me is the claims he criticized the soldiers serving in the war. I have heard claims that Kerry did this, but I haven't seen it come from his mouth. If you have access to this evidence please let me know, because I really don't want to prejudge him on what I have heard. Maybe it is me but I know in my heart, having served in combat, that I would never denegrate the service of our soldiers, especially while they were still in harms way.

It may not be an important issue to you but to me, if you would turn your back on those who are fighting for your country, you do not deserve to be the leader of those who you have condemned.

I have found a transcript of Kerry's testimony to the Senate Foreign Relation's Committee, and nothing in this testimony suggests Kerry accused the US military of atrocities. He does refer to vets in the US who admitted commiting these acts but he does not claim that troops still fighting in Vietnam were committing these same acts.


He refers to 150 vets who testified to atrocities, but who did they testify to? Who are these people? This was not explained in his hearing.


Anybody who can clear this up please help, as I seek the truth.

Another Swift Boat vet speaks about the things John Kerry did after returning home and telling LIES concerning the war crimes he claims he saw in Vietnam while with the Swift Boat groups. He blames Kerry for the suicides of two fellow swift boat vets.

photos.imageevent.com...

JacKatMtn says

He refers to 150 vets who testified to atrocities, but who did they testify to? Who are these people? This was not explained in his hearing.

Anybody who can clear this up please help, as I seek the truth.

That would be the Winter Soldier Investigation, conducted in 1971. You can read the testimony here.

Winter Soldier Investigation

As you noted, Kerry was merely repeating the testimony of other Viet Nam Veterans. People who claim Kerry called American soldiers war criminals and baby killers are just lying. He was repeating what other veterans had said. The same people claim that Kerry admitted that he had also committed horrific war crimes. As far as I know, that is not true. Kerry has admitted to participating in such questionable activities as free fire zones and search and destroy missions. But I do not believe he has ever admitted to committing war crimes and atrocities of a specific nature. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Much of the hostility towards Kerry is a result of his Senate testimony. The result is that groups like Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are sliming Kerry's war record, in an attempt to discredit him. Why don't they attack his Senate testimony? Because they know it is true.

Kerry has said something to the effect that he is sorry if anyone is offended by his Senate testimony, but the fact of the matter is that war crimes and atrocities did occur in Viet Nam. People should deal with that fact and stop attacking and sliming Kerry.

I suppose much of Kerry's issues over his record come from so many people speaking a different story than he does. Sure there is a handful of Vets supporting him, but if that were Bush...people would say Bush's people "got to them" or that the "Bush crime family" paid them off, with no evidence at all. When it comes to Kerry on the other hand, well...all of those people speaking ill of him are just lying.

Why the spin?

One Kerry's record are his Purple Hearts. Here is what a Doctor said in treating Kerry's wound:

I have a very clear memory of an incident which occurred while I was the Medical Officer at Naval Support Facility, Cam Ranh Bay.
John Kerry was a (jg), the OinC or skipper of a Swift boat, newly arrived in Vietnam. On the night of December 2, he was on patrol north of Cam Ranh, up near Nha Trang area. The next day he came to sick bay, the medical facility, for treatment of a wound that had occurred that night.

The story he told was different from what his crewmen had to say about that night. According to Kerry, they had been engaged in a fire fight, receiving small arms fire from on shore. He said that his injury resulted from this enemy action.

Some of his crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore. The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks.

That seemed to fit the injury which I treated.

What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry's arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle.

I simply removed the piece of metal by lifting it out of the skin with forceps. I doubt that it penetrated more than 3 or 4 mm. It did not require probing to find it, did not require any anesthesia to remove it, and did not require any sutures to close the wound.

The wound was covered with a bandaid.

Not [sic] other injuries were reported and I do not recall that there was any reported damage to the boat.

www.nationalreview.com...

Again, if that was Bush...it would be ok to question and in fact call him a liar. In this case obviously, the doctor is mistaken, right? And in an article from the New York Sun.

�[T]he fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations,Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, told me � 30 years ago when he was still CNO �that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam, just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass, by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets.�We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control,� the admiral said. �Bud� Zumwalt got it right when he assessed Kerry as having large ambitions � but promised that his career in Vietnam would haunt him if he were ever on the national stage.� And this statement was made despite the fact Zumwalt had personally pinned a Silver Star on Mr. Kerry.

Mr. Kerry was assigned to Swiftboat 44 on December 1, 1968. Within 24 hours, he had his first Purple Heart. Mr. Kerry accumulated three Purple Hearts in four months with not even a day of duty lost from wounds, according to his training officer. It�s a pity one cannot read his Purple Heart medical treatment reports which have been withheld from the public. The only person preventing their release is Mr. Kerry.

Yet another person of high repute stating Kerry's behavior and that he killed "non-military" targets. Is the Admiral lying too? Also note that regarding his Purple Hearts, Kerry is keeping those secret...why? If that were Bush, well...you know what people would say.

By his own admission during those four months, Mr. Kerry continually kept ramming his Swiftboat onto an enemy-held shore on assorted occasions alone and with a few men, killing civilians and even a wounded enemy soldier. One can begin to appreciate Zumwalt�s problem with Mr. Kerry as commander of an unarmored craft dependent upon speed of maneuver to keep it and its crew from being shot to pieces.

Mr. Kerry now refers to those civilian deaths as �accidents of war.�And within four days of his third Purple Heart, Mr. Kerry applied to take advantage of a technicality which allowed him to request immediate transfer to a stateside post.

www.freerepublic.com...

By his own admission he had "accidents" by killing civilians, but again...if anyone else states that, they must be lying. He admits to it and others mention it. Why do they have no credibility when Kerry himself supports some of what they say? More spin...

"In my specific, personal experience in both coastal and river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw or heard anything remotely resembling the atrocities described by Senator Kerry. If I had, it would have been my obligation to report them in writing to a higher authority, and I would certainly have done that. If Senator Kerry actually witnessed or participated in these atrocities or, as he described them, 'war crimes,' he was obligated to report them. That he did not until later when it suited his political purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst kind. That he would malign my service and that of his fellow sailors with no regard for the truth makes him totally unqualified to serve as Commander-in-Chief."

-- Jeffrey Wainscott

www.swiftvets.com...

He would have been obligated to report them. Anyone in the military knows that. This is the same as the recent prison scandal. Obligated to report it, but they didn't and now they are on trial. He said nothing at the time until he returned. Why? Possibly trying to further his career in the military? Trying to get a higher rank? Once he returned, using it for political gain? Seems that Kerry is at least manipulative or as the quote above states...opportunistic.

Now, all of this related to Bush? People would burn him just like he gets burned for not showing up or gets burned because he didn't panic and run out of the room on 9/11. All this related to Kerry? Well, they are all lying, have it out for him, distorting, etc, etc, etc.

How dare we question Kerry it seems. How dare we question the events. Oh the spin is in full effect...

Of course rather than just say, good points and maybe we should question his character the same as we question Bush's character, the spinsters will just come out with full defense. Wonder what they are so afraid of, the truth?

Originally posted by Firebase
Another Swift Boat vet speaks about the things John Kerry did after returning home and telling LIES concerning the war crimes he claims he saw in Vietnam while with the Swift Boat groups. He blames Kerry for the suicides of two fellow swift boat vets.

photos.imageevent.com...

Excuse me, it is Richard Omara, the gentleman in the video, who is lying. At the beginning of the video, he states that Kerry labelled all Viet Nam Veterans as thugs and murderers. Kerry never said that, and Omara's statement is a gross mischaracterization of what Kerry did say. This is just one more example of the fact that it is the Swift Boat Veterans who are lying, not Kerry.

Contrary to what you say, Omara does not blame Kerry specifically for the suicides. He blames the antiwar movement in general.

You accuse Kerry of "telling LIES concerning the war crimes he claims he saw in Vietnam while with the Swift Boat groups." JacKatMtn has provided a link to Kerry's Senate testimony. I would like for you to point out one example of such a lie.

The problem here is that the Swift Boat Veterans are lying about Kerry's Viet Nam service, and they are lying about his Senate testimony. You are assisting these dishonest and dishonorable men by making false claims that Kerry told lies about war crimes he claims he saw in Viet Nam. I expect some specific examples of such lies by Kerry, or I expect a retraction of your libelous accusation against Kerry. I won't hold my breath.

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
I suppose much of Kerry's issues over his record come from so many people speaking a different story than he does. Sure there is a handful of Vets supporting him,

Excuse me, eleven men actually served on the same swift boat with John Kerry. Ten of them support Kerry strongly and make positive statements about Kerry's military record. One of them, Steven Gardner, is a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Which is a handful, ten or one?

but if that were Bush...people would say Bush's people "got to them" or that the "Bush crime family" paid them off, with no evidence at all.

You have no argument, so you construct a hypothetical situation, then give your opinion about what people would say. Pathetic.

When it comes to Kerry on the other hand, well...all of those people speaking ill of him are just lying.

That's because they are lying. According to the Boston Globe, Commander Elliott has repudiated the affidavit he signed for the Swift Boat Veterans. According to the New York Times, he is refusing comment on whether the Boston Globe story is true.

Larry Thurlow, the Swift Boat Veteran in the first audio, is also lying when he says Kerry fled the area. I provided evidence for that in a previous post. Thurlow also lied in that audio when he said there was no ambush and no enemy fire. Please read the following detailed account of the day in question.

John Kerry's Final Mission in Vietnam

It is clear that there was enemy fire. Now this account is largely based on the journal Kerry kept contemporaneous with events. Which is more likely to be accurate, Kerry's contemporary record of events, or Thurlow's obviously politically motivated recollection 35 years later?

Richard Omara, another Swift Boat Veteran, also lied in the above linked video. He said Kerry labelled all Viet Nam Veterans as thugs and murders. Kerry never said anything like that, in his Senate testimony or elsewhere.

One Kerry's record are his Purple Hearts. Here is what a Doctor said in treating Kerry's wound:

You are referring to Louis Letson, who is also a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. You don't mention that, and neither does the National Review article you quote. The fact is, Dr. Letson did not sign the medical report on the treatment of Kerry's injury.

On May 6, New York Post Washington bureau chief Deborah Orin repeated Dr. Louis Letson's claims that Senator John Kerry got his first Purple Heart for a non-combat wound -- despite reports in The New York Times and Los Angeles Times one day earlier that, according to the Kerry campaign, Letson was not the medical official who signed Kerry's medical records for the wound.

Orin wrote, "Dr. Letson said the wound was minor 'like a splinter'. Kerry's crew members said they thought it was caused when he fired a mortar at close range at some rocks and a fragment ricocheted back from the mortar round and hit him." But Orin did not include a response from the Kerry campaign. The day before, The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times did, reporting that Kerry campaign spokesperson Michael Meehan noted that a medical official other than Letson signed the "sick call sheet" summarizing treatment of Kerry's wound; Letson claims to remember treating Kerry's wound.

Also on May 6, the New York Post reprinted a May 4 National Review Online report by National Review White House correspondent Byron York that presented Letson's wholly unverified account.

Neither the New York Post nor York reported the fact that Letson is a member of the newly formed group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth; the group held a press conference on May 4 to discredit Kerry's record during and after his service in Vietnam.

NY POST MUM ON "DOC" DOCS

The New York Times article is archived, but here is the relevant quote from the Los Angeles Times.

Meehan questioned Letson's role, saying a J.C. Carreon signed Kerry's medical report of the wound. "This gentleman is not the man who is on the report," he said.

Letson said Carreon, a lower-ranking "hospitalman," was "present at the time and he, in fact, made the entry into Lt. Kerry's medical record which has only recently been made available to the public." Letson, 63, was a Navy lieutenant as well as a medical officer at the time.

Crew Contradicted Kerry Over Battle, Doctor Alleges

So Dr. Letson admits that someone else made the entry in Kerry's medical record and signed it. There is no documentary evidence that Dr. Letson treated Kerry's wound. Dr. Letson is a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

I will continue my analysis and rebuttal of your post in a future post.


[edit on 8/7/2004 by donguillermo]

[edit on 8/7/2004 by donguillermo]

As of late, I have been hearing the democrats smearing the Vets against Kerry. Why is it that if a vet is for Kerry, he is a heroic patriot, but if Vets are against Kerry, they are somehome lesser soldiers? Is not everyone entitled to their opinion and version of the events the witnessed?