Unfit for Command

I'm sure this would be devastating news to anyone running for president of the Swift Boat Commanders Tontine and Benevolent Society.

In other news, nine out of ten fighter pilots who successfully defended Texas against the Viet Cong support George W. Bush.

They're probably all voting for Nader, knowing their navalesque profession and his ideals...

Hey!

Leave Nader out of this.

Phony story re Kerry exposed
In "World Exclusive," Drudge dredged up discredited charge that Kerry filmed reenacted combat scenes for future political career
Media Matters - 7/28/04

On July 28, Internet gossip Matt Drudge revived and expanded on a discredited charge about Senator John Kerry (D-MA). On his highly trafficked website, The Drudge Report, Drudge reported that Kerry reenacted combat scenes on videotape during his service in the Vietnam War in order to enhance his future political ambitions. Drudge cited a 1996 Boston Globe article and two books by known Kerry-bashers: retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert "Buzz" Patterson and anti-Kerry group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth founder John O'Neill.

On September 7, 2002, The New York Times' current executive editor and then-columnist Bill Keller took up the issue of Kerry's wartime films and debunked the reenactment charge, which he wrote that he believed at first: "[R]elying on a report in the usually dependable Boston Globe, I mocked him for pulling out a movie camera after a shootout in the Mekong Delta and re-enacting the exploit, as if preening for campaign commercials to come."

Simply not true, Keller found after sitting through 40 minutes of footage in Kerry's office. Contrary to Drudge's assertion -- which apparently quoted O'Neill's upcoming book -- that Kerry would "reenact combat scenes where he would portray the hero," Keller wrote:

The first thing to be said is that the senator's movies are not self-aggrandizing. Mr. Kerry is hardly in the film, and never strikes so much as a heroic pose. These are the souvenirs of a 25-year-old guy sent to an exotic place on an otherworldly mission, who bought an 8-millimeter camera in the PX and shot a few hours of travelogue, most of it pretty boring if you didn't live through it.

Keller also wrote that, according to the Swift Boat Sailors Association, "a group of veterans who manned" the kind of riverboat that Kerry commanded, "lots of enlisted men did the same." Former Senator Max Cleland (D-GA), a strong Kerry supporter who lost three limbs in Vietnam, told Keller that he has hours of film from his service in Vietnam, which, Keller wrote, "he has had edited into a three minute meet-the-senator video."

As Media Matters for America has noted, both Patterson and O'Neill have a history of issuing false claims about Kerry. Patterson, author of the new book Reckless Disregard: How Liberal Democrats Undermine Our Military, Endanger Our Soldiers, and Jeopardize Our National Security (Regnery Publishing, 2004), severely distorted Kerry's record on defense spending, intelligence spending, and veterans' pay in two recent appearances on the FOX News Channel. Patterson also asserts in his book that "every terrorist" is "hoping" the Democrats win the upcoming U.S. election.

O'Neill's group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, was founded to discredit Kerry's record during and after his service in Vietnam. His book Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry is forthcoming from the conservative Regnery Publishing. As Media Matters for America has noted, O'Neill has long-standing ties to the GOP establishment, and O'Neill's own p.r. adviser has described O'Neill as sounding like "a crazed extremist." MMFA also noted O'Neill's participation in Republican efforts to smear Kerry, dating back to the Nixon administration.

Later in the day on July 28, FOX News Channel's chief political correspondent Carl Cameron repeated the Drudge story on FOX News Channel's Special Report with Brit Hume; he reported a "controversy" over Kerry's video footage from Vietnam, which "critics" charge showed Kerry and his crewmates "re-enacting Kerry's heroism for future political use." After quoting from the same 1996 Boston Globe article that Drudge cited, Cameron noted that the Kerry campaign "adamantly den[ies] there was any re-enactment." Cameron failed, however, to provide key details that support the campaign's denial.

?- A.S., M.K., & K.B.

Posted to the web on Thursday July 29, 2004 at 12:07 AM EST

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth



Open Letter to John Kerry








Graphic identifying the servicemen in the top photo

The mainstream media is gradually picking up the story. This has been floating around on the media fringe for awhile, but given that the Dems are touting Kerry's Vietnam duty as one of the most important thing that he has done and it qualifies him to be Commander in Chief much more than George Bush, it is inevitable that it will become an issue:

Kerry's exploits in Vietnam are disputed in best seller

By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Democrats capped Sen. John Kerry's presidential nomination last night by showing a Hollywood-produced movie of his life, featuring amateur film clips and testaments about his service in Vietnam as commander of a Navy river patrol boat.

But a group of former sailors who served with Mr. Kerry are telling a different story. Rather than depicting Mr. Kerry as a war hero, they are quoted in a new book accusing him of exaggerating and falsifying his experiences.

The group says that of 23 crew members photographed with Mr. Kerry more than 30 years ago in Vietnam, only one supports his presidential campaign. They will announce a nationwide campaign by "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" to tell the American public about what they say is Mr. Kerry's true war record.

The biographical movie shown last night, "A Remarkable Promise," shows "family and friends talking about the courage he has shown as a soldier and a veteran, the fights he has waged for middle-class values and the faith in family he has exhibited as a father and husband," the Kerry campaign said before its prime-time convention appearance.

The film was produced by James Moll, a partner of director Steven Spielberg.

The book, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," from Regnery Publishing, is written by John E. O'Neill. Mr. O'Neill served in Vietnam at the same time as Mr. Kerry and followed him as commander on the swift boat.

Mr. O'Neill, riled by what he considered Mr. Kerry's false charge in 1971 of widespread war crimes committed by U.S. troops, has waged a public debate with the politician dating back to the "Dick Cavett Show" that year.

The book quotes Mr. Kerry's fellow combatants as saying two of his Purple Hearts came from friendly fire, not the enemy. The veterans also will dispute other stories Mr. Kerry has told.

"Unfit for Command" will not be released until Sept. 25, but the online Drudge Report yesterday broke news of what it called a "bombshell book." The book hit No. 2 on Amazon.com's best-seller list. Radio and TV hosts were clamoring for Mr. O'Neill to appear.

Regnery, which boasts a long list of best-selling conservative books, has put a tight hold on information until the official release.

Some of the book's charges have been aired by Veterans for Truth.

Retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, who commanded Mr. Kerry's task force in Vietnam, is one of the book's sources.

Adm. Hoffmann said yesterday he has supplied several instances of Mr. Kerry's purported lies. One example, he said, is Mr. Kerry's contention that he warned admirals of the folly of a certain river operation. Adm. Hoffmann said he and others were at the meeting, and that Mr. Kerry never made such a statement.

"The real truth is he didn't say a ... word," Adm. Hoffmann said.

Mr. Hoffmann is chairman of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which plans what it calls a grass-roots campaign.

"We're going to tell the truth ?- the fact that he was a perpetual, habitual liar," Adm. Hoffmann said. "I don't care whether it was perjury or lying before the Senate of the United States, or that two of his Purple Hearts are at least very specious, if not absolutely false, because he filed false after-action reports."
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040729-111509-4130r.htm

The Washington Times is now the mainstream media???

Yup. It has a pretty respectable circulation. Being definitely slanted conservative, it is far more likely to report a story like this than is the leftwing media; however, the leftwing has to maintain some degree of objectivity, so as more report, sooner or later all them have to deal with it.

It's possible this one will die on the vine, of course, but with the book coming out, and if the accounts are correct that the large majority of Kerry's crewmates agree that he is mostly fabricating his Vietnam experience, the story is likely to have legs.

I think it will take more than words to convince anyone that these people have nothing more than an agenda in "telling the truth."

What agenda would Kerry's crewmates--those who were there on the boat with him--have other than telling the truth?

Though it wasn't all that big a deal, it has already been proved that Kerry lied about the ribbon/medal throwing episode. It was no big deal other than it showed he will lie for political expediency.

So what is it about him that makes you so sure he is telling the truth about the other especially when all but one or two who were on the boat with him say he's making it up?

The Washington Times is owned, of course, by the Rev. Moon, who just made waves by having himself crowned in a ceremony in a Congressional office. Something about him being the messiah...

It is true that the Moonies own the lion's share of Washington Times stock along with many other business entities; however most of the Times investigative reporters are syndicated and write for lots of different media sources.

Which of his crewmates -- the people who actually served on the same boat, at the same time, as Kerry -- contributed to this book?


See question above.

As the book isn't out yet, all is pretty much hearsay at this point. But apparently at least 11 of Kerry's crewmates who were on the boat with him are on the record as saying he isn't telling it like it was. Apparently two crewmates initially opposed him but, after some armtwisting from the campaign, have since agreed to stand with him in the campaign.

I don't know if the story is true or not and only bring it up because it is being put out there and the book is scheduled for a fall release--could this be the "October surprise?" of the 2004 campaign?

At any rate, if the story is credible, it will have legs.

Then I suggest you stop citing rumors and bald conjecture as facts.

In the meantime, here's some information about John O'Neill and "his" organization. Disinfopedia: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth

How about showing me where I posted any of this as 'truth' other than the fact that its out there and my opinion that, if true, the story will have legs?

Are you suggesting that nothing in the news should be posted on A2K unless it is verified beyond question that it is the truth? Would you want to put all your posts to that test?

If I were conservative, I’d just stay away from the whole Vietnam thing. Kerry requested to go, he fought and killed somewhere around 20 VC during that time, and while under fire from VC, he ordered his swift boat to go in and save another solder who was in the water (Kerry's metal has a “V” for valor as a result).

Whats that? He didn’t stay long enough? He wasn’t hurt enough? He actually spoke out against a war that he himself fought, killed and was injured in? Cry me a friggin’ river. I would say “just cut it out”, but I hope you all continue with this nonsense. The more you bring up the issue, the more you Bush lovers make the president look like the pampered, protected party boy that he was during that time.

Whats that about Kerry’s medals? Tell you what, show me the ones that Bush earned and we’ll talk. The only shots Bush ever took during 'Nam were at parties. Sucks to be you.

The medals he rejected and symbolically threw away? The same heroics that he decried in the time following his return from the war?

I would not begrudge Kerry his service. He served valiantly and he should be proud of his service. But, what has he done to prove himself in the 30 years since?

I wouldn't hesitate to put Joe's posts to that test. What would be the point of posting rumours about possible rumours?