Bush AWOL documents fake?

"I - did - not -have - textual - relations - with - those - documents!"

Heh, heh. Good one, T.

For a more completely researched account of what W was up to back then, check out today's NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/politics/campaign/20bama.html?hp

Wireservice, hot off the ticker, so no link yet ... but certain soon to be everywhere, though:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/kerry_navy_awards

WASHINGTON - The Navy's chief investigator concluded Friday that procedures were followed properly in the approval of Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites)'s Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals, according to an internal Navy memo.

Vice Adm. R.A. Route, the Navy inspector general, conducted the review of Kerry's Vietnam-ear military service awards at the request of Judicial Watch, a public interest group. The group has also asked for the release of additional records documenting the Democratic presidential candidate's military service.

Judicial Watch had requested in August that the Navy open an investigation of the matter, but Route said in an internal memo obtained by The Associated Press that he saw no reason for a full-scale probe.

"Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval process was properly followed," Route wrote in the memo sent Friday to Navy Secretary Gordon England.

"In particular, the senior officers who awarded the medals were properly delegated authority to do so. In addition, we found that they correctly followed the procedures in place at the time for approving these awards."

Some veterans have challenged Kerry's version of the circumstances surrounding the incident that led to his Silver Star award for battlefield heroism, as well as his three Purple Heart medals.

The Silver Star was awarded for his actions in pursuit of enemy forces while commander of swift boat unit PCF-94 in Vietnam in February 1969.

Judicial Watch also asked the Navy inspector general to investigate Kerry's anti-war activities after he returned from Vietnam and left active duty.

The group's president, Tom Fitton, called Route's review a "whitewash" and said Judicial Watch would "appeal as appropriate."

"The Navy IG obviously is afraid of the political ramifications of a thorough investigation into a presidential candidate's service record," Fitton said in a statement.

Route concluded that there was no justification for looking further into the decisions to award the medals or the anti-war activities.

"Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30 years ago would not be productive," he wrote. "The passage of time would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of the time in which the events took place.

"Our review also considered the fact that Senator Kerry's post-active duty activities were public and that military and civilian officials were aware of his actions at the time. For these reasons, I have determined that Senator Kerry's awards were properly approved and will take no further action in this matter."

re: The blogger article of Dook's

So who cares Dook? Does it matter what his politics are? He helped blow the whistle on a fraud being perpetrated on the public. I don't care if he were a communist. What he discovered and reported was correct, so I don't understand the need to point out that he is a republican.

Sure, CoastalRat...

Brilliant comment, that Dook. So answer the question. Why does it matter? Unless of course you believe that all citizens should just bow down at the alter of News Media Reporting and worship all they say as truth and not question things, particularly those things that are anti-republican.

Yeah, Dookie ... you figured it out ... it was Rove all along ... just one more dirty Republican trick perpetrated on the wholesome, truthloving Democrats.

On the otherhand, a different take would be that a gaggle of other-than-liberal denizens of the internet in a matter of minutes exposed an incredibly clumsy fraud on which Rather and CBS had gambled much, and, in so doing, the debunkers of the fraud have put end to the "Bush Shirked" meme. Right or wrong, the public is going to see any further promotion of the meme as mere partisan sniping.

And the legal ramifications have yet to come to play ... there's gonna be a buncha inconvenience to a buncha Bush detractors outta this ... bet on it. Burkett, Barnes, Rather, and crew have in a few days and with no expenditure done more damage to Kerry's prospects than has the entire Republican campaign machine and the Millions of dollars it has spent over the past year.

BTW ... all the Navy Inspector General said was that the paperwork filed was filed according to then-proper procedure. The paperwork was done right. Nothing was said regarding the accuracy of the the paperwork regarding the relevant incidents.

CBS seems to be proposing "Burkett fingered as the fallguy. We were duped. Its over. Get over it." ... hmmmmm .... somehow, I doubt the sharks are gonna settle for that. There's blood in the water, and the feeding frenzy is just getting under way.

Was there supposed to be anything 'new' in those documents? No? Just confirmation of old news. That's certainly how factcheck seems to be looking at this.

Exactly. The lies didn't work four years ago and they're not working now.

amazing

This is what I've been looking for:



(From the NYT link -- thanks, D'art.)

JW, as I just said elsewhere, whatever attempts at explaining this 4 years ago were made without the benefit of records that were released by the White House this year.

Of course, challenging Kerry's military service is immoral.

Challenging it? No. Smearing, yes. The difference? Factual content.

Meanwhile, I realize this goes around and around and around, and I have gone on record saying that I think BOTH (SBVfT, ANG questions) are immaterial and don't matter a whit to me in terms of who I will vote for and why. But if SBVfT was treated so credibly, and so many people talked about "yes but it shows his character and character matters to me", it's pretty hard to say this isn't relevant.

It IS immoral.

Why? Because the vast majority of those challenging his service record actually have a problem with his post war activities; but instead of attacking him on that, they try to paint the man as a traitor during the war, because it makes him look a lot worse than just yelling at him for protesting the war.

Cycloptichorn

Believe it or not, not everyone believes what's printed in the NYT. The Democrats tried this tack four years ago and it was largely ignored then, as now.

As for the Swiftboat Vets, I and others have long believed that they earned this chance at vindication. Even if not everything they have said is believed by everyone, their right to finally be heard is long overdue.

God bless them.