This is starting to appear pathological:
Senator John F. Kerry is disputing an allegation made by a group of veterans opposed to his presidential candidacy that he never operated inside Cambodia during the Vietnam War.
In a just-published book, “Unfit for Command,” the veterans said that “Kerry was never in Cambodia during Christmas 1968, or at all during the Vietnam War” and that he “would have been court-martialed had he gone there.”
But the Kerry campaign said that the group, which calls itself Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, is wrong and that Kerry was inside Cambodia to drop off special forces on one mission and was at the border on other occasions.
“During John Kerry’s service in Vietnam, many times he was on or near the Cambodian border and on one occasion crossed into Cambodia at the request of members of a special operations group operating out of Ha Tien,” Kerry spokesman Michael Meehan said in a statement. The statement did not say when the cross-border mission took place.
Were you in Camodia or not, and prove it. Jeebus.
ape
How on earth is he supposed to prove it? Show his tranfer stubs?
THe original point of the matter was the question of whether the US was operating covertly in Cambodia (ie, without tickets). Does anyone now seriously contend that it wasn’t? O’Neill basically confessed his whole motivation on TV last friday, and it’s nothing to do with the details of Kerry’s service or whether the Navy’s procedure for awarding medals needs an overhawl. Nor yet the question of how many veterans should have their service re-assessed because they didn’t spend long enough ‘under fire’. As he makes clear, it is a long term emnity: “I first debated Kerry in 1971.” And the cause of it was Kerry’s belief that the war was a mistake and the allegation that this ‘stab in the back’ harmed the war effort: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/breakfast_with_frost/3570942.stm
And yes, loathe as I am to suggest pathological causes for political tactics, it is obvious that wrongfully and absurdly accusing the opposition of dishonesty is a at least deeply ingrained in the right-wing psyche.
RW
**How on earth is he supposed to prove it? Show his tranfer stubs?***
How’s about having one of the ‘band of brothers’ who served with him on the boats step forward & go on the record?
Tough to take the guy seriously when he’s already been caught lying his ass off over the Christmas eve story. Seared, indeed.
Steve Malynn
Units that crossed the border kept records. Classified records, but they exist. The stories just do not pass the smell test because the type of boat Kerry commanded was not suited for clandestine missions of any type.
Interestingly, if Kerry is telling the truth, he is breaching security laws.
ape
The ‘smell test’? Perhaps the accusations might pass the ‘smell test’ if rove, the bushies & their supporters could conduct a campaign without making up stuff to show that the opposition was a liar. Remember Gore? He was a pathological liar too. Summary here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,330871,00.html
Another one which Limbaugh peddled was the ‘McCain Feingold date innacuracy’ slur. Scoobie did him on that: http://www.scoobievslimbaugh.blogspot.com/
Many (the majority, I have no doubt) ex-serviceman resent Kerry for opposing the war in Vietnam. Fine. Argue about whether we should have been in Vietnam bombing Cambodian villages day after day. If you are a Christian, ask yourself how much napalm Jesus would have used. But drop the ‘pathological liar’ skit from the playbook because it’s looking a little old.
Todd
Somewhere in Ape’s brain the synapses just don’t fire on all cylinders. It’s pretty clear Kerry lied about the Christmas story. So he changes his story to says he was in Cambodia in January. However, this story just doesn’t make since, and may or may not turn out to be another lie.
So what do you do Ape? Trot out Rush Limbaugh. The point being????
As for vets opposing Kerry because of his anti-war activities–nice try.
Vets oppose him because he smeared his “Band of Brothers”, accusing of all kinds of atrocities. That’s why they hate him, not because he opposed the war.
But at least you have down the talking points. Whenver I see someone bring up Kerry’s slanders of his fellow vets on tv, his defenders respond just like you–he had every right to protest, blah, blah, without refuting the actual charge against him.
Steve
Log, speck eye. Sure this is dirty politics. But the Demos have done just as much. Look at the W. was AWOL story. The vague hints about what Bush knew about 9/11 prior to said event. Look at the attempts to link Bush and Bush alone to Enron (hint: Enron was in bed with everybody).
So complaining about Right Wing Nut lies while being a Left Wing Loon is…well…amusing in a pathetic-no-life sort of way.
Oh yeah…this is the guy who invented the internet, right?
Scoobie needs to get a life and out of his mom’s basement.
I love all this misdirection here.
[ape imitation mode]
“Yeah? Well what about Limbaugh? Huh? He’s said some bad things that were not true! So leave Kerry alone. Tit-for-Tat. It is okay Kerry lied, because…becuase Limbaugh is a fat liar too. And don’t forget Gore. Bush is the Resident not the President. And Rove is a liar too, so Kerry is allowed to lie.[/end ape imitation mode]
Sheesh.
Todd
Oops–I shouldn’t have teased Ape about synapses not firing and then made several typos myself–irony!!! Feel free to feed me sh*t Ape!
Todd
Oops–I shouldn’t have teased Ape about synapses not firing and then made several typos myself–irony!!! Feel free to feed me sh*t Ape!
RW
Ape, you could get things off on the right track by being a little bit more honest, yourself:
Opposing the war?
You gonna go with that line?
You sure it wasn’t that he went on record as charging many of those folks as doing things worse than Genghis Khan? Or was that also on his Christmas eve seared memory that you don’t want to discuss?
James
This is an absolutely ludicrous affair, and you’re peddling bullshit, John.
The Swift Boat Vets did’t like Kerry’s anti-war position, plain and simple, and they don’t like his politics now. That’s fair enough, and they have every right not to. So do you. But to trot out this bullshit about his service is shameful and disprespectful to every veteran. And Todd and RW, the fact is that war atrocities WERE committed during Vietnam. We may not like it, and it may not reflect well on our armed forces, but it’s the truth nonetheless, and John Kerry is not to blame for pointing it out.
Here’s a guy who definitely served in Vietnam. He definitely received the Purple Hearts and the Bronze and Silver Stars. This much is undeniable, undisputed fact.
Now think back to the Bush National Guard deal. “Hey, he was honorably discharged, right? Good enough for me. If the Air National Guard gave him an honorable discharge for service, then by God he did his duty!” You take it on faith that the institution acted appropriately and rightly awarded Bush an honorable discharge.
Yet now, when the circumstances support a particular political ideology and preference, people are willing to be skeptical of the military’s judgment and decisions on the matter. They question the circumstances and validity of those decisions to award Lt. Kerry not one, but five medals. They now say, “Well, he didn’t really earn those medals, you know…” Did he receive the medals or not?
Now, I know your beef here is his supposed lie, and in pursuit of that agenda you have the audacity to demand that he somehow prove his whereabouts during a war over thirty years ago? It’s a completely unfair standard, and you know it. But hey, there’s an election coming up, and there’s work to be done.
Kerry claims to have been in Cambodia at Christmas time, and his opponents – with no proof whatsoever and no plausible argument against – claim otherwise. Think about how you might recall a wartime experience. I happen to believe that he was in Cambodia around Christmas of 1968. But just to entertain this notion a bit, is it possible that his recollection of his missions doesn’t completely comport with the actual facts? Of course it is. Consider how often we hear of eyewitness testimony in trials being disproven. Well-intentioned people are dead-certain they saw something with their own two eyes. Were these people liars? Some are, of course, but the vast majority are simply mistaken. Was there a sign on the riverside announcing Kerry’s arrival in Cambodia? Did he have a GPS unit equipped with border information? He’s running around in jungle rivers dropping people off here and there and getting shot at, for Christ’s sake, and twits like you demand he prove his whereabouts?
People like you and most of your audience will bend the circumstances (and yes, the left will too…) to fit your worldview even if it kills you. The plain fact is that your vote this coming election was never in question, and a story like this – no matter how rediculous or outrageous – will only cement your existing view. It’s all just ideological masturbation.
And when I come back tomorrow (I always do, damnit), you’ll still be in your little circle jerk, pumping away…
Rick
[/end ape imitation mode]
Steve,
I was hoping you’d get to the feces-flinging part first.
James, you are certainly welcome to spring a woodie over Jean Francois Kerry’s rich fantasy life, but don’t tag us right-wingers with *YOUR* sex life.
Cordially…
Todd
Well, James, I suggest you read my post again. I never said there weren’t atrocities in Vietnam. But they were the exception, not the rule, and sorry, it is a slander on Vietnam vets to claim otherwise.
Kerry testified that he and his crewmates committed atrocities and tthat atrocities were widespread. Why shouldn’t vets be pissed about that as there’s pretty good evidence he lied about it to boost his standing in the anti-war movement. (I’m not going to get into this–just do some research into the Winter Soldiers Project which featured “veterans” who had never been to Vietnam testifying to atrocities they had witnessed.)
I’m not questioning Kerry’s medals. I posted days ago on this site–I give Kerry the benefit of the doubt on the medals. I’m using the same standard I used with Bush–he was honorably discharged and Kerry was awarded his medals. Unless there’s overwhelming DOCUMENTARY evidence to the contrary, Kerry got his medals fair and square and Bush wasn’t AWOL.
Good for John Kerry. He was very brave and honorable under fire, but that doesn’t change the fact that the evidence is pretty overwhelming he made up the story about Christmas in Cambodia.
Here’s your “plausible argument”:
The fact that his campaign has changed the story is an admission he wasn’t in Cambodia.
On December 23, 1968 the U.S. government finally secured the release, after a five-month diplomatic stand-off, of 11 Americans whose U.S. Army utility landing craft had made a navigational error and strayed into Cambodian waters. Prince Sihanouk had rejected U.S. apologies and threatened to try the men under Cambodian law. It’s unlikely, 24 hours after their release, anyone in Washington was thinking, ”Hey, we need to send that hotshot Kerry in there.” (Credit to Mark Steyn)
None of the vets from his boat that support him have come forward to back him up on it–again that indicates to me pretty clearly he wasn’t in Cambodia.
One of the vets who did serve on the Swiftboat under Kerry states flat out it didn’t happen. (Granted, he’s one of the “Swifties for Truth” or whatever it’s called–so you can take his credibility for what’s it’s worth.)
There was nothing in Douglas Brinkley’s hagiographic book about Kerry’s being in Cambodia.
One other point about the Christmas story:
I think I’ve proven pretty definitively he wasn’t in Cambodia on Christmas 1968–his own campaign basically admits it.
Now, I’d be willing to agree with you, that yes, maybe he just got his dates mixed up. But Kerry said the memory was “seared” into his brain. Kerry SAID it was Christmas–an important and memorable time of year.
Let me ask you James, if you spent a Christmas in a war zone, do you really think you would confuse that day with another? Does that really pass the giggle test to you? Use your common sense James.
Face it James–he lied. You can argue it’s not that big a deal, but there’s no other explanation. In the whole scheme of a presidential election–it probably isn’t a big deal. It’s a bit unseemly, especially since Kerry was using this fable for political purposes on the floor of the Senate, but it doesn’t disqualify him for the presidency.
Now, you’ll notice–I didn’t accuse him of lying about being in Cambodia in January. I don’t know if he was or wasn’t. But since he lied once and has changed his story, I’m suspicious. But I’m more than willing to look at his evidence.
I think I’ve answered most of your criticisms. And I think I’ve also made pretty clear–I’m not a big partisan. I’m not voting for either Bush or Kerry this year.
Who’s the “twit” now?
RW
Er, James, you’re oh-for-the-day.
I’m on record (@ my own site) as saying that the military’s designation of Kerry’s status & Bush’s status was good enough for me. Please point me to the prominent lefty blogger who didn’t push the AWOL angle, please (then we’ll discuss the DNC’s chairman going on record as saying he was AWOL).
Secondly, my saying that there is crime in Atlanta is different than saying that the citizens of Atlanta are murderers on par with Genghis Khan. Please, can we dispense with the spin? Kerry himself has distanced himself from his testimony (on MTP).
Lastly,
Ahem, in this case, James, the “opponents” include the same United States government that you (and I) give credence to when it comes to Kerry’s medals. Either you stay intellectually consistent & Kerry should either should provide proof or you admit he’s lying his ass off OR you now decide that the US military’s records are a credible source only when you find it convenient. There is no middle ground.
Look, I admire Kerry’s service, but he’s been caught lying on this, there’s no two ways about it. I don’t think it disqualifies him from running or anything, but dishonest spinning won’t help, and that’s all that’s left to do. He’s been caught RED HANDED (pun intended). :) I’m still waiting to judge all this stuff from the swifties, but thus far I haven’t seen them lie about anything & Kerry’s LIED HIS ASS OFF ABOUT CHRISTMAS EVE IN CAMBODIA (his staff is already beginning the liesspin). It ain’t looking good for your cause.
I look forward to your response, although I’m somewhat troubled by your mental images you’ve commented about……:)
James
Todd and RW:
First, sorry for the “twits” comment. Naturally I didn’t mean you two specifically, but rather those that would attempt to diminish Kerry’s service or claim that he somehow didn’t earn his recognition or wasn’t in Vietnam long enough, etc.
I appreciate the comments, and will look further into the evidence you both cite. Unfortunately, I haven’t the time at the moment to do so – late for a 4:00 meeting.
I’m open to more information, but the Swift Vet deal still bothers me.
(I’m also getting creeped out by the imagery. I wish I hadn’t posted it…;-)
JPS
James:
re “those that would attempt to diminish Kerry’s service or claim that he somehow didn’t earn his recognition or wasn’t in Vietnam long enough, etc.”
I would be happy to stipulate (in part through sheer exhaustion, and my distaste for questioning any veteran’s record) that Kerry’s Vietnam service was indeed heroic.
I’d much rather talk about his record as MA Lt. Gov., or especially as a senator, or what concretely his policies would have been had he been president, or what concretely he’ll do if he gets the job he seeks.
Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to want to talk about any of that.
mac
Buddy, if Kerry really was in Cambodia, he’s playing it exactly right. Keep the attention on “serving in Cambodia” for as long as possible. Keep feeding out the rope.
Than yank it up short, just a few weeks before the election, with a big 5 page spread.
pj
Keep focusing on the trivia like Cambodia on Christmas Eve vs. February in a recollection from 18 years ago because the story of the Swift Boat Perjurers for Bush continue to fall apart.
First Elliot backs out of his affidavit.
Now, as I predicted in your comments last week, Thurlow’s own Bronze Star letter has surfaced and its shows he’s lying. He got a bronze star for bravery in the same fire fight as Kerry. The Washington Post got a copy under the FOIA, It states that Thurlow and all other units (i.e., Kerry) were constantly under fire.
To recap, every guy on Kerry’s boat says they were under fire.
Rassmann says he was under fire and believed he was a dead man.
The reports from that night, which were the responsiblity of Thurlow to submit, state that all units were under fire.
Thurlow got the Bronze Star for being under fire and his letter from 35 years ago confirms it. He proudly accepted the medal.
35 years later, in the middle of a presidential campaign, Thurlow’s story is now that there was no enemy fire.
But you believe Thurlow’s 2004 account.
By associating with such viscious smear artists, you are condoning the most fowl, awful, below the belt crap ever performed in history of a presidential election.
Nothing has ever been this
low.
RW
pj,
If it turns out they’re lying, I’m sure John and others (myself included) will chime in. We have been consistent.
Having someone who accused the president of sending soldiers to their deaths in order to enrich his oil buddies who then sat in the executive box seats at the Dem convention (that would be the face of the Democratic party, Michael Moore) is the low that all other slime is aiming for, though. Why are you guys embracing him, again?
Dean
Elliott backed away from his affidavit? pj, what’s the date of that source?
I know the Boston Globe REPORTED that he had backed away from his affidavit—only to have Elliott then say that that was NOT what he was doing at all.