October 26, 2004

Kerry and Swifties

Response to thread at Marc Cooper's blog

---------------------

Isn't it amazing how eyewitness testimony by combat veterans is ignored or automatically treated as lies by Kerry partisans.

The world is not that simple. I'd like to clear up some misunderstandings.

The person who spent the most time working on the same boat as Kerry was Steve Gardner. He is one of the people who condemns Kerry. He was the gunner on Kerry's boat, sitting in the gun tub feet from Kerry.

The veterans who support Kerry are his enlisted crew, not officers. Some of them barely served with him - the two guys who spoke at the Democratic Convention had between them 6 days with Kerry. We don't know what their relationship with Kerry is, whether there were any promises, etc, because the pro-Kerry media won't investigate it. But Kerry did arrange for his crew to have non-combat assignments when he left. That's a good way to buy future support.

Those who attack Kerry were officers. They included the entire chain of command of Kerry. Overall, it includes most of the officers in the command, with only one or two supporting him.

Those who call these folks liars should tell us why. There are 60 members of the Swift Boat Vets who actually knew Kerry in Vietnam. Do they all have some nefarious reason for lying? Kerry's supporters get to campaign with him, and get to be famous. They have motive to lie. Furthermore, from an enlisted man's view Kerry may have looked very different than from officers. His job was not to gain popularity with his crew.

For those who just brush off the Swiftee charges, the burden of proof is on them because Kerry refuses to release relevant records, although he has been asked to sign a Form 180 since May. What does he have to hide? Anybody care to answer that? How can you be confident that Kerry and 10 guys are telling the truth while 60 guys, with nothing to gain, are lying and expending a lot of effort to get out the word as they see it? They aren't hiding any records, but Kerry is.

As a Vietnam veteran, and someone who knows some Swiftvets, I think those who are attacking these eyewitnesses are out of line. They don't have evidence for their attacks, but they are calling these eye witnesses liars. In the military, and especially in the officer corps, there is a strong respect for honor, and that includes truthfullness. It requires a substantial conspiracy, held together for 6 months, to explain their charges as being lies.

Again, why did all these people join together to lie? I have never seen an explanation that comes anywhere close to being satisfactory. All republicans? No, they aren't. All Bush supporters? Even John O'Neil is not a Bush supporter.

If you choose not to believe the 60 witnesses, look at the available paperwork on Purple Heart #1. You will notice that some forms that are needed have not been revealed. That is because one of them shows that Kerry got the award, 3 months later after those who had turned it down had left, from an unknown officer in Saigon who had no direct information about the event. The 3 month delay and having the award come from outside the unit is a dead give-away that it was bogus.

I was in Cam Rahn Bay 2 months before Kerry got his "wound" at Cam Rahn Bay. It was the safest place in 'Nam - especially because at the end of 1968 the VC was not just defeated, but destroyed. People in the jungles took R&R at Cam Rahn on the becahes! Not exactly crawling with VC. Kerry wounded himself in an attack on people who did not fire back.

The issue of the Swift Boat people has been muddied by the press. There has not been a balanced public presentation of the charges and countercharges. But the second purple heart and bronze star can also be thrown into serious question by physical evidence that has been documented: the lack of bullet holes in the boats. In that incident, PCF #3 was hit by a mine, and all aboard were seriously injured. This was on a mission with 5 boats. They immediate opened up on both banks with heavy machine gun fire on the possibility that the mine was part of an ambush. Then they ceased fire, rescued the people in the water, and spent over an hour salvaging the damaged boat. This would not have been possible under fire. During this event, Kerry rescued a green beret who had fallen into the water. That person claims he was under fire, but he was hardly in a position to know whether fire was inbound or outbound.

So we have actions that took over an hour in an area supposedly under fire (if you believe Kerry) and no bullet holes in boats made out of thin aluminum (actually one had 3 holes in the gun tub, from action the previous day when the gunner was wounded).

A single AK burst would have put a bunch of holes in the boats. A period of sustained fire would have put a lot of holes in the boats.

A few other points. I have not heard it charged that Kerry's actions caused the POWs to be tortured. The POWs don't say that. They say that Kerry's speech was used as part of the psychological campaign to get them to confess to being war criminals (torture was part of that, of course, but no cause and effect). They also are angry because they withstood years of torture to avoid giving the communists the propaganda about war crimes that John Kerry gave them for free. You can understand that they might be a bit hacked off about that. I went through POW training (SERE school) and learned, among many other things, that propaganda statement by prisoners are more highly prized than military secrets!

Someone said that Kerry wasn't talking about all vets. Yes, he was. The implications (and the speech is full of them, like any good propaganda) were that war crimes were widespread, normal practice. That means anyone who believed him would suspect every vet of being a baby killer. One of the more amusing things is that he claimed using fifty caliber machine guns against people (instead of vehicles or fortifications) was a war crime. In fact, that was a widespread myth in Vietnam, caused by a temporary shortage of .50 caliber ammunition, resulting in orders not to use that weapon against people.

Kerry also worked with the enemy, meeting them twice (once secretly) at least while a member of the VVAW. This may explain some odd charges in his speech, as they may have been wanted by the Vietnamese communist propagandists.

On John O'Neil - he is one of the kindest persons I have ever met. In 1971 he wasn't some sort of Nixon shill. He was already speaking out against the anti-war people. Colson found him and invited him to the white house, to motivate him. O'Neil interests and Nixon's coincided - they both wanted to counter the incorrect information being spread about the war. Using that vague associated with Nixon to tar Kerry is right in the fine tradition of McCarthyism - guilt by association. I have zero respect for those who use this argument. First, it is unfair, and second, it is illogical.

O'Neil is a very well respected corporate law practitioner in Houston. He is respected both for his abilities in litigation, and because he is known to be absolutely honest. This latter comes from others in Houston.

If one believes any of the Swiftboat Vets charges, then one sees a very ugly picture. I can see why Kerry partisans don't want this information to be true. But the grounds for denying it are so thin as to be pathetic.

So tell me, why are 60 Swiftboat combat veterans lying about Kerry? Kerry has obvious reasons to lie, but why these guys?

Kerry supporters have tried to do to the Swifties what Kerry did to us: take away our honor, cause others to see us in a poor light, and generally smear us.

The Swifties were determined enough to ignore threats of lawsuit (the normal Kerry campaign first response to anything) bcause they knew that in court they would prevail on the facts. They were determined enough to go several times to DC for the filming of the advertisements. These guys aren't lying, but they certainly are angry at what one of their own did, during and after the war.

Posted by John Moore at October 26, 2004 07:44 PM | TrackBack
Comments
Post a comment









Remember personal info?