# Swift Boat Veterans for Truth



## Stephen (Aug 20, 2004)

I'm surprised that this hasn't been discussed yet, so I'll step on the landmine and mention it. 

For Immediate Release August 19, 2004 

Statement By Swift Boat Veterans for Truth Member Larry Thurlow 

I am convinced that the language used in my citation for a Bronze Star was language taken directly from John Kerry's report which falsely described the action on the Bay Hap River as action that saw small arms fire and automatic weapons fire from both banks of the river. 

To this day, I can say without a doubt in my mind, along with other accounts from my shipmates-there was no hostile enemy fire directed at my boat or at any of the five boats operating on the river that day. 

I submitted no paperwork for a medal nor did I file an after action report describing the incident. To my knowledge, John Kerry was the only officer who filed a report describing his version of the incidents that occurred on the river that day. 

It was not until I had left the Navy-approximately three months after I left the service-that I was notified that I was to receive a citation for my actions on that day. 

I believed then as I believe now that I received my Bronze Star for my efforts to rescue the injured crewmen from swift boat number three and to conduct damage control to prevent that boat from sinking. My boat and several other swift boats went to the aid of our fellow swift boat sailors whose craft was adrift and taking on water. We provided immediate rescue and damage control to prevent boat three from sinking and to offer immediate protection and comfort to the injured crew.

After the mine exploded, leaving swift boat three dead in the water, John Kerry's boat, which was on the opposite side of the river, fled the scene. US Army Special Forces officer Jim Rassmann, who was on Kerry's boat at the time, fell off the boat and into the water. Kerry's boat returned several minutes later-under no hail of enemy gunfire-to retrieve Rassmann from the river only seconds before another boat was going to pick him up.

Kerry campaign spokespersons have conflicting accounts of this incident-the latest one being that Kerry's boat did leave but only briefly and returned under withering enemy fire to rescue Mr. Rassmann. However, none of the other boats on the river that day reported enemy fire nor was anyone wounded by small arms action. The only damage on that day was done to boat three-a result of the underwater mine. None of the other swift boats received damage from enemy gunfire. 

And in a new development, Kerry campaign officials are now finally acknowledging that while Kerry's boat left the scene, none of the other boats on the river ever left the damaged swift boat. This is a direct contradiction to previous accounts made by Jim Rassmann in the Oregonian newspaper and a direct contradiction to the "No Man Left Behind" theme during the Democratic National Convention. 

These ever changing accounts of the Bay Hap River incident by Kerry campaign officials leave me asking one question. If no one ever left the scene of the Bay Hap River incident, how could anyone be left behind?


----------



## skican (Aug 20, 2004)

23 viewings and not one reply. I saw that article as well and was not going to touch it with a 10 foot pole! LOL

Thank god it's Friday!  :beer:


----------



## noreaster (Aug 22, 2004)

Folks there are more important issues than Bush and Kerry fiction or non-fiction war record accusations by the opposite side.   The real issues are more important.  

Anyone see 60 minutes tonight about Americans paying double for prescription drugs?

A drug made in Ireland shipped to Canada and USA should not cost DOUBLE the price in USA.  Who do you think will take on the Drug companies Kerry or Bush?  Its your money vote smart.


----------



## pedxing (Aug 23, 2004)

I don't know what happened in Kerry's four months in Vietnam, but I think the evidence is overwhelming that Kerry's version is closer to the truth.  

McCain has denounced Swift Boat Veterans,
George Elliott, One of the people cited in the attack book Unfit to Command, has that allegations he made were false and has admitted filing a false affidavit.

The people who served on Kerry's boat back his accounts to the hilt.

republican Sen. John Warner, an ex-Navy secretary under President Richard Nixon, backs Kerry on medals he received.

Thurlow, whose statement begins this thread - has military records which contradict his version of events.  It's hard to believe Thrulow didn't even notice the "under fire" part of his bronze medal citation until someone pointed out the contradiction.

William Rood, the other swift boat skipper still alive who was present during the events for which Kerry won his Silver Star - finally broke his silence and supports Kerry's account and his heroism.

In todays papers, there is the story of Wayne Langhofer who was a gunner in the boat immediately behind Kerry's when Kerry earned his Bronze Star and third purple heart , coming out and backing Kerry's account.

In sum, it may be possible that Kerry embellished somewhere, but the key facts seem true.  Kerry volunteered for service in Vietnam and served heroically.  Bush ducked service in Vietnam, checked off that he would not volunteer to go - and then ducked his alternate service as well.  The contrast is striking.


----------



## noreaster (Aug 23, 2004)

Van Odell is a little too close to the president to say he is working completly on his own. 

Van Odell, member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth said he had met with Republican strategist Merrie Spaeth, a public relations consultant to his group, and once bought a home from Bob Perry, a large Republican donor from Texas and close associate of Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser.

Van Odell acknowledged he had no proof of his charge that then Navy Lt. Kerry, a Swift boat commander, fabricated the "after-action" report saying he faced enemy fire on March 13, 1969. 

Van Odell has spearheaded a campaign against Kerry's service record, said his was one of seven eye witness accounts and he was not being directed by the campaign of President Bush. “Our message is our message and no one tells us what to say," Odell told "Fox News Sunday."

Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan added his voice to that of Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a Vietnam veteran who has also unsuccessfully urged Bush to denounce the ads. 

'CHARACTER ASSASSINATION' DECRIED

"The president should do the responsible thing and take that ad off," Levin told CBS's "Face the Nation."

Lets move on and get back to REAL issues that impact the lives of most   Americans.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 23, 2004)

uphillklimber said:
			
		

> My biggest fear: With all the support that Clinton got for "not having sex with that woman" I fear that America will help get Kerry over.....


i'm not even touching the main topic of this thread, the real news speaks for itself for those who dig for real information and not just listen to what loud mouth is spouting off today.

but clinton getting support?  are you serious?  the man got dragged through the mud for having an affair.  politians have lied about much much worse than that.  our current president has pulled off some much bigger one's than lieing over an affair.  got WMD?


----------



## Greg (Aug 23, 2004)

riverc0il said:
			
		

> our current president has pulled off some much bigger one's than lieing over an affair.  got WMD?


Just curious. What proof is there that he specifically *lied*? Or even knowingly misled? I believe he was acting on the intelligence available at the time. Let's "dig for real information"...


----------



## smitty77 (Aug 24, 2004)

uphillklimber said:
			
		

> My take: He has reversed and contradicted himself so many times, I wouldn't trust him and can't vote for him. I doubt he's telling the truth, because of that.  In Bush's case, like him or his policies, or not. You do know exactly where this man stands. Personally, I like him and back him and his policies. Sure mistakes are made, but he stands up for them.



I tend to agree here.  I think I'm voting on "the evil you kow" principle.  I know Bush is for big business and big oil, and on some level I'm okay with that.  For the tax cuts that supposedly only helped the wealthy... Lets just say I received two tax credit checks from GWB and claimed my highest refunds ever, and I am by no means wealthy.

As for Kerry, he changes policy more often than I change my boxers (which for the record is at least once per day).  He also has a knack for hanging others out to dry after reaping benefits of his own.  How can he support stem-cell research (which I am all for) using live embryos, and yet claim he's against abortion by saying that life beings at conception?   :blink:


----------



## Stephen (Aug 24, 2004)

For me, the issue isn't what he did in Vietnam. It's what he did when he got back.

30 Years ago: I committed war atrocities.
Today: Vote for me cause I committed war atrocities.


----------



## Stephen (Aug 24, 2004)

Current IRS stats:

The top 20% of wage earners currently pay 80% of the country's tax burden.

The top 50% of wage earners currently pay 96.03% of the country's tax burden.

The wealthy get tax cuts because they are the ones paying tax.

I'm married with 3 kids. My wife is home schooling, so we live on one income. I claim married-10 and I STILL get everything back. I don't need  a tax cut, cause I don't PAY taxes...

Stephen


----------



## Jaytrek57 (Aug 24, 2004)

The issue pertaining to this thread, for me is this. Kerry served. Bush, Rumsfield, Cheney, etc did not. 

I favor Bush on many more issues than Kerry. I am pleased he finally told those running the neg ads (Swift Boats) to stop it.

It is IMHO a tactical mistake for Republicans to go after Kerry on his military service. Bush (handlers) would be wise to avoid a pissing contest in this matter, esp. if comparing services records. If anyone thinks he (Bush) did not get special treatment during this time (draft), well I don't think that is objective/honest.

I'm still on the fence....the debates will be quite educational.


----------



## smitty77 (Aug 24, 2004)

Jaytrek57 said:
			
		

> I favor Bush on many more issues than Kerry. I am pleased he finally told those running the neg ads (Swift Boats) to stop it.


And I wish Kerry would prompt the people at Move-On.org to do just that.  Move on.  What's fair is fair.



			
				Jaytrek57 said:
			
		

> It is IMHO a tactical mistake for Republicans to go after Kerry on his military service.


I agree, but Kerry instigated this by so strongly touting his war record.  If I recall, he proclaimed he was "reporting for duty" at the DNC and later prompted GW Bush to "bring it on".  Now that it's being "brought" in the old fashioned mud-slinging way, he's runnning for cover and telling everyone to cease fire.  What next?  Go to congress and ask "How do you ask a rich man from Massachusetts to run for president?  How do you ask him to uncover all of this past to be used as campain fodder?"


----------



## Stephen (Aug 24, 2004)

Neither Bush nor Kerry can tell a 527 to stop running ads. It is against the campaign law for a candidate to coordinate/control/influence a 527 in any way.

And now I see this posted at Drudge:



> Kerry's campaign now says is possible first Purple Heart was awarded for unintentional self-inflicted wound...
> 
> 
> Kerry received Purple Heart for wounds suffered on 12/2/68...
> ...



The reason Kerry can't respond is that his whole platform is "3 Purple Hearts for President". Take that away and you've got...


----------



## Jaytrek57 (Aug 24, 2004)

Stephen..Interesting. good post.

Then should Bush be held accountable for violating campain laws? Because he did tell them to stop running "that ad, every other ad."


----------



## Stephen (Aug 24, 2004)

Jaytrek57 said:
			
		

> Stephen..Interesting. good post.
> 
> Then should Bush be held accountable for violating campain laws? Because he did tell them to stop running "that ad, every other ad."



If so, then Kerry, Edwards and Dean should be held for conspiracy to do the same since they pressured Bush to do it.   

-Stephen


----------



## noreaster (Aug 25, 2004)

Over the last twenty years, the political landscape has changed dramatically. A high-tech climate has encouraged negative, issueless campaigns which have left voters with little guidance in making the informed choices necessary to successful self-government. During the political campaign season, Americans find themselves assaulted from all sides by hype, baiting, mudslinging, and rumor-mongering, all in the name of the "democratic process".

What ever you do don't listen to Geroge Bush tell you about John Kerry and don't listen to John Kerry tell you about George Bush. Don't listen to private groups with negative attack adds that have no proof to back it up, which goes for both sides.   Stick to the issues. 

John Kerry - http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/economy/

George W Bush- http://www.georgewbush.com/Agenda/

The Issues on CNN - http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/issues/


----------



## Stephen (Aug 25, 2004)

Huzzah, noreaster! 

I feel the debates will be critical, because we'll (hopefully) weed through the crap and get down to real agendas.

-Stephen


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 25, 2004)

I'm jumping into this conversation at a late point, but with regards to the Swift Boat Vets, my concern is that they readily say who they are against (we hate Kerry), which turns me off to their viewpoint.  It would have been better for their effort to say, "we are for a leader with integrity..." rather than saying, "John Kerry was a lier."


----------



## pedxing (Aug 28, 2004)

Uphill:  I just saw a link to Kerry's War records.  I'm not sure what else anyone wants to have released:  http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_records.html

BTW: I keep seeing more and more about the anti-Kerry Swift Boat Veterans ) being caught in lies.


----------

