Calling Kerry's bluff

[SuperScout]

Jean-Francois Kerry and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are at it again.

In October 2003, Kerry chose to make his disputed Vietnam war record as a Swift Boat “hero” the centerpiece of his campaign for the presidency. In doing so, he also called attention to his undisputed provision of “aid and comfort” to the enemy in time of war.

In response, a large contingent of Vietnam vets who also served on Swift Boats—some who served with Kerry, some who served in the same area as Kerry, and some who were Kerry’s former commanding officers (Grant Hibbard and George Elliott)—challenged Kerry’s record in a series of televised ads, and a book, Unfit for Command.

In all, more than 250 Swiftees, including Kerry’s entire chain of command, are on record as questioning his fitness to serve as Commander in Chief. Conversely, only three of Kerry’s 23 fellow officers-in-charge from Coastal Division 11 support him. The Swiftees claimed that Kerry was “unfit to serve” because of his “willful distortion of the conduct” of American servicemen in Vietnam, and the “withholding and/or distortion of material facts” regarding his own service. “The ads were produced to expose the braggart Kerry’s incautious claims about his service during the Vietnam War,” notes American Spectator editor R. Emmett Tyrrell. “That would be the war Kerry participated in briefly before coming home and traducing his fellow comrades in arms with vicious lies and distortions before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.”

The Swiftees’ challenge also highlighted Kerry’s participation with the radical “New Soldier” movement, but Kerry arrogantly brushed off the challenge—and his presidential aspirations were dashed.

Two weeks ago, billionaire entrepreneur T. Boone Pickens, who had funded part of the 2004 SBVT ad campaign, renewed the challenge by offering $1,000,000 to anyone who could disprove any of the accusations made by the Swiftees in that ad campaign.

That was the setup.

In a letter to Mr. Pickens, Kerry responded, “While I am prepared to show the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth lied on allegation after allegation, you have generously offered to pay one million dollars for just one thing that can be proven false. I am prepared to prove the lie beyond any reasonable doubt.”

Pickens countered Kerry: “In order to disprove the accuracy of the Swift Boat ads, I will ultimately need you to provide the following: 1) The journal you maintained during your service in Vietnam. 2) Your military record, specifically your service records for the years 1971-1978, and copies of all movies and tapes made during your service. When you have done so, if you can then prove anything in the ads was materially untrue, I will gladly award $1 million.”

That is the trap.

Of course, Kerry’s response has gotten plenty of media play in more than 300 articles sporting headlines like “Kerry Takes Vows to Disprove Swift Boat Claims,” and even Leftmedia editorials proclaiming, “Bravo, finally, for John Kerry. Beyond any doubt he served this country bravely...”

But no evidence refuting the Swiftees’ claims has been forthcoming, nor will it be. Kerry is banking on MSM credit for accepting the Pickens challenge without ever showing up. Kerry is now ducking the challenge, claiming that Pickens’s request for bona fide documentation constitutes “selectively backing away from your original challenge, retreat, a new bet, and changing the subject.” In other words, if Pickens won’t just accept Kerry’s word as fact, Kerry will not accept the challenge.

The debate about Kerry’s “hero” status, including questions such as why his Silver Star has three different citations (none of which account for the degree of valor commensurate with the award), will likely never be adequately resolved. In fact, Kerry’s refusal to release his DoD Standard Form 180 and DD214, accounting for all his military citations, records and discharge from the military, has fueled the debate.

Kerry requested an SF-180 back in 2005, and the Department of Defense quickly obliged, so why all the obfuscation—why not simply release the entirety of his records? Perhaps, because those records would create more questions than they answer? Kerry did provide some of his records to his hagiographer, Douglas Brinkley, and then claimed he could not release those records to the media because of an exclusive agreement with Brinkley. However, even Brinkley says that their agreement stipulates only that quotations from those records cite his book, not that Kerry was prohibited from releasing them otherwise.

The dispute about Kerry’s Vietnam conduct and citations notwithstanding, the real issue is not Kerry’s service record, but his traitorous actions between 1971 to 1978, when he was discharged from the Navy—which is why Pickens asked for Kerry’s service records for those years. Was Kerry’s discharge revised in accordance with Jimmy Carter’s Executive Order 4483, which provided radical protestors and draft dodgers blanket pardons? Is that why his discharge was subject to review by a “board of officers” in accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163, which pertains to grounds for involuntary separation from military service?

Here is a sure bet: Kerry will not produce those records because he knows Pickens will use them to document our case against Kerry for treason, as outlined in the Petition to Investigate and Indict John F. Kerry for acts of treason. Kerry provided “aid and comfort” to the North Vietnamese enemy during the Vietnam War, meeting in Paris with NVA communists while he was a commissioned Navy officer.

He has supported Communist dictators in Nicaragua and Cuba, and, more recently, his flip-flopping on Iraq and claim that those serving there are “stuck in Iraq” because they are too ignorant to do anything else have served to stiffen our enemies’ resolve. At best, Kerry, by his own account of his actions and protests, violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy officer.

Most notable among his infractions would be the aforementioned meeting with North Vietnamese negotiators in 1970 and 1971, in which he willingly placed himself in violation of Article Three, Section Three of the U.S. Constitution, which defines treason as “giving aid and comfort” to the enemy in time of warfare.

The pertinent language states: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President... having previously taken an oath... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

It is likely that no action will be taken on the Petition to Investigate and Indict John F. Kerry for acts of treason while Kerry is a sitting senator, but if Pickens is able to obtain Kerry’s records and document his meetings with North Vietnamese principals, Kerry could be prosecuted for violations of Article Three, Section Three, and disqualified from any future campaign for national office.

Like Pickens, The Patriot is committed to holding Mr. Kerry accountable for his actions, as there is no statute of limitations for acts of treason. Indeed, we are all committed to serving Kerry with an irrevocable dishonorable discharge from public office.

Now, then, Mr. Kerry, about that million-dollar challenge from Mr. Pickens: We’re still waiting...

[exlrrp]

Its always amazed me how repuglicans can piss on Kerry's war record when Bush's discharge shows he got NO medals at all in "5 years 4 months and 5 days." But thanks for bringing up the topic of Presidential candidate's miltary records, I always enjoy exposing all the fraud around Bush's records

Why don't you explain why your hero george Bush's discharge http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/ANG22.gif shows he received NO medals at all? Thats right none at all--you know as well as me that TAFCS and TAFMS are not medals--why are they there in his medals box? With NO medals? Not even the NDSM? Youre not going to try and claim TAFCS and TAFMS were medals are you? Why is there no colon and number after the TAFCS and TAFMS indicating time spent in that category? Why did Martin just type those in and not the colns and num bers that go with them?


Could you explain that big fat NONE in capital letters in the qualification box? Could you explain the contradiction between that and the AFSC box: 1125D? You can't BE a pilot, 1125D if you have NO qualifications at all and haven't taken your physical---this is a HUGE anomaly and completely unexplained. Could you explain why Bush is still listed as a pilot on this discharge when he hadn't taken his physical in over a year and a half, hadn't flown for a year and a half and had been suspended from flying for over a year?

Bush evidently lost his pilot's status when he was suspended from flying on August 1st 1972. http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/grounded.gif At that point he should have been reassigned but was not--they kept him falsely listed as a pilot--and PAID as a pilot!-- for over a year after he had been suspended from flying! Want to explain why they continued to pay Bush pilots pay--with flight pay--for over a year AFTER he was suspended from flying? (answer: its FRAUD!! Embezzlement too--unless you think someone should have been paid flight pay AFTER he was suspended from flying)

AFM 35-13 para 2-11 (available here: http://www.glcq.com/regs/35-13_1971.pdf ) says, and I quote: "... The original aeronautical order that placed a rated officer on flying status to fly regularly and frequently will remain valid untill the officer....D) is suspended from flying staus under Para 2-29..." Bush was suspended on August 1st, 1972, so the order that put him on flight status was canceled that day.

That meant Bush was taken off flight status on August 1st, 1972. That means he lost his flight pay. Yet Rufus Martin, personnel offficer for the 187th, still certifies him to be a pilot "on-fly" 8 months later on this document: http://www.glcq.com/docs/points_1973...andwritten.pdf Thats a falsification, isn't it ? Certifying Bush to be a pilot this whole year when he didn't fly ANY of it and was suspended for 8 months of it!! If Bush got paid for ANY of this year under the false claim he was a "pilot on-fly" than thats emebezzlement, isn't it? He certainly wasn't, according to the regulations. And Martin knew for sure that Bush HAD been suspended, his signature is one one of the suspension confirmation documents: http://www.glcq.com/docs/(72-09-05)f...atus_order.pdf So its not a mistake, its a falsification.

And it turns out Bush DID get paid this year for "being a pilot.": here's his pay records: http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/g...milpay-p1.html --the ONLY record of his attendance after Apr 16, 1972. How did that work? The only two units he could have been participating in (the 111th TXANG and the 187th ALANG)have NO records of Bush's attendance but his pay records show him getting paid as a pilot (he's ONLY listed as a pilot throughout) FOR 52 DAYS AFTER HE'D BEEN SUSPENDED FROM FLYING!!!

Furthermore, Martin's falsely lists Bush as "Pilot on-fly" and awards him 56 points for this year. But thats completely false because Bush was suspended from flying, taken off flight status on 8/1/72. he COULD NOT have done the work he is credited with doing, ebven if he did show up, because he was suspended from doing it. So these 56 points are fraudulent because Bush DEFINITELY was not a pilot all this year--whether he showed up or not. (And his superiors say definitely he didn't ! See: http://www.glcq.com/docs/(73-05-02)o...t_observed.pdf "Lt Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of this report..." )
Notice in that OETR they completely ignore the fact that he was suspended from flying on April 1st of that year--this is supposed to be a pilot's evaluation form!! why would they deliberately conceal the fact that he had been suspended from flying? Thats obviously why they refused to sign it!! Its false!!

Compare to previous OETR that they did sign: http://www.glcq.com/docs/(72-05-26)oetr_1972.pdf This is a very curious document also because it says, 6 weeks AFTER Bush quit flying forever, that " Lt Bush should be retained in his present assignment..." Bush's liars say his superiors OKed him to quit flying and go to ALabama but ALL the available evidence says they wanted him to stay where he was. If hs F102 was going obsolete and they were releasing him for that reason, they would say it here--and they don't!!


Bush's discharge is fraudulent and so was the way his corrupt superiors got him out of the service. Bush embezzled federal money when he cashed checks for pilots work--with flight pay--that even he doesn't claim he did. aAccording to his liars, the TXANG let him go on a cost cuttigg measure because his plane was going obsolete. But the facts show they hired a captain (Jan P Linke) to fly his airplane after he walked away from it, and continued to pay him as a pilot for what he describes as "back office paperwork." Its hardly a costcutting measure to replace a 1st LT with a Captain and still pay the LT flight pay for doing "back office paperwork,", is it? but thats what the documents show happened.


Bush's discharge is a fraud and was obtained fraudulently. he ghosted his last 18 months while his corrrupt superiors kept paying him and discharged him illegally. So thanks for opening up this topic again, I have a lot more to say about it, a lot more documents tro show you proveing my case.

You voted for a weasel that couldn't even put an NDSM on his discharge, with NONE in his quaifications box in capital letters and yet still piss all over a Vietnam veterans medals. Shame on you.

.

[Bill Farnie]

This is old news. I don't like Kerry and what he did and said in his testimony before congress but I don't think his service should be challenged. The way I look at it is that Kerry went to Vietnam, and I don't care if he was there only a day .. for he did volunteer for the swift boats which was a sure ticket to RVN. There weren't any swift boats patrolling the rivers and coast line of the USA. Bush joined the NG which all of us VN Vets know was done by many to try and get out of serving in RVN. And it's my belief that he did join the NG for just that reason.

[Robert Ryan]

Since he served in Vietnam I will acknowledge him as a brother vet, but he is polictican and therefore I have no respect for him or any other politican especially Ron Paul who is running for pres on the Rep Ticket.

[exlrrp]

I demand an explanation!! You seem to know so much about other people's records, how about explaining the record of the guy you voted for?

I want simple answers to simple questions like:

!)Why are there NO medals at all on Bush's discharge? He was supposed to be the Pride of the TXANG yet his discharge shows NO medals at all, not even the NDSM. In this official picture http://www.glcq.com/docs/(undated)photo.pdf Bush is wearing two medals: the NDSM and a pistol quaification badge--where are the orders for these and why are they not on Bush's disharge?? If you can't produce them, than Bush is wearing unauthorized medals. Why are TAFCS and TAFMS in his medals box when they aren't medals?

2) Why does it say NONE in capital letters in Bush's qualification box on his discharge? This is in direct contradiction to the AFSC box which calls him a 1125D Pilot. You can't BE a pilot when you have NO qualifications at all, don't fly and don't take your physical, which was Bush's case as of the date of this discharge.
Bush lost all his qualfications on August 1st, 1972 when he was suspended for failing to take his physical and regulations (cited above) REQUIRED him to be taken off flight status. yet 8 months later we have this document http://www.glcq.com/docs/points_1973...andwritten.pdf where Rufus Martin "certifies correct" that Bush was a "pilot on-fly" this whole year when he didn't fly at all and was suspended for 8 months of it, which is not mentioned at all. Whats the explanation fior this?

3) Why doesn't Bush's OETR that covers this year http://www.glcq.com/docs/(73-05-02)o...t_observed.pdf say he was suspended from flying? Thats an important material fact concerning a pilots performance that has been deliberately left out--that makes this false! Why is this report unsigned?? His previous 2 OETRS were signed. It also says that Bush hadn't been observed this whole year--but they SUSPENDED HIM FROM FLYING THIS YEAR! On August 1st 1972, according to this: http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/grounded.gif "...Verbal orders of the Cmdr suspending 1st Lt george W Bush.....from flying status are confirmed." "Verbal orders" means that Bush and Killian were face to face on 8/1/72---therefore the statement on the OETR that Bush "has not been observed" this entire year is false--they sure looked at him on that day or this confirmation document is false. Also where is the order this confirmation document is confirming? Thats supposed to be in the records too: http://www.glcq.com/regs/35-13_1971.pdf AFM 35-13 Para 2-10B2"...CBPOSA will insure that the unit personnel record copy of an aeronautical order that....imposes or revokes... a suspension will be acknowleged by the person concerned to indicate time and date of receipt off orders." The confirmation document orders Bush to sign the order "...officer will comply with Para 2-10, AFM 35-13..." Where is that signed order that's supposed to be in Bush's records? The one Marian Knox said she typed? Why is this not in Bush's records when regulations demand it be?

4) Why did Bush falsify this document? http://www.glcq.com/docs/(72-05-24)t...pplication.pdf On it, Bush certifies as "true and correct to the best of my knowledge" that he had been through NO military school ("none") and his AFSC (MOS for Army) was 1125B, in 2 places--this is false: his AFSC was 1125D and you can't be ANY kind of pilot if you haven't been through ANY school at all.
Please explain why Bush has his name signed to such an obvious lie.

5) Please explain the line on his discharge that says "...Officer has a six year service obligation..and has completed 5 years 4 months and 5 days..." That meams he didn't finish his commitment unless you think "5 years 4 months and 5 days" equals 6 years.

6) Please explain why Bush wasn't there to sign his discharge. Also explain why he moved to Mass BEFORE he applied for his discharge, when he had no authorization at all to do so.

7) Please: Splane to me how the F102 supposedly going obsolete had anything to do with Bush's quitting flying. There's not one single document in hs record that says or even implies this--to the contrary, as cited in the post above, the only opinion we have from his superiors says "Lt Bush should remain in his present assignment." yet he did not, he went to Alabaam against the expressed wishes of his superiors--and they went along with it!! Explain that, please!
Also if his plane was "going obsolete," why did they hire a replacement for Bush when Bush quit flying? If letting him go was a "cost cutting measure, why did they keep Bush listed and PAID as a piliot for a year (52 paid days) after they suspended him?

8)Looking at Bush's pay records,sited above, the ONLY record of his atttendance afte 4/16/72, there's many gaps in attendance, including a 6 months gap---yet there's no paperwork at all to cover this, no leave requests or approvals--pleasse explain how and why this happened

I got a lot more plain and simple questions based on Bush's documents --they scrambled them all up when they released them to hide this stuff but it doesnt work. the crimes are still visible, very visible.

Bush didn't game his way out of the system, his corrupt superiors did it for him. BUt as his pay records show, he was STILL getting pilots pay, WITH FLIGHT PAY--for 52 days after he was suspended from flying based on the false claim that he ws still a pilot after he had been suspended.
Want to explain why thats not fraud and embezzzlement??

One more question: http://www.glcq.com/docs/BushGuardmay4.pdf This document purports to be an official TXANG order: it has lettterhead of a TXANG unit, purports to be an official order to a federally recognized officer from his commander and its apparently signed full signature by the TXANG commander. I don't have to tell you that the TXANG is a federal unit. So tell us all: why did CBS 'investigate" this to try and determine its authenticity--and the TXANG never did? Don't they have an IG and a CID? then why did they let a civilian news agency "investigate" this and did nothing about it themselves? if forged, this LIBELS Bush and his entire chain of command through the use of forged federal TXANG documents--and the TXANG has never done anything about it.
Want to explain that?
(I didn't think so)

[SuperScout]

Here's your reply: if you think you have such irrefutable "evidence" of some felonious action, why not just trot your hateful little ass down to some federal attorney's office, or to some other law enforcement agency, and ask them to press charges? And then go slap yourself for trying to hijack my thread which all about the phoniness of your hero John "did I ever tell you I was a Vietnam veteran?" Kerry?

I for one don't automatically give carte blanche of anyone, just because they served any time whatsoever in Vietnam. For Kerry, it's the same thing: BFD. But what the scurrilous MF did AFTER he left Vietnam are actions that can only be described as treasonous. What Kerry did in Vietnam is old news; what and how he's attempting to heap scorn on our current crop of warriors is still treasonous.

[reconeil]

SuperScout,

Even though disgusting being reminded by yours and MANY others' honest, verified and/or documented exposures of the longtime character failings of JFKerry, such totally understandable. Hey,...shouldn't he too be forever exposed just like his similarly treasonable fool soulmate: "Hanoi Jane", is often?

However, and what I will never understand are that even some Vietnam War Veterans actually stick-up for The Phoney? Used to believe that Vietnam War Veterans (of all people) could easily destinguish whom were actually political phonies & wannabes, better than most? Guess just not so for some?

After all, such despicably leftist bent politicians were the main reason why the overwhelmingly superior, battlefield victorious and brave & courageous U.S. Military were ordered to haul-ass, leave many friends & allies to their obviously deadly fates, and pretty-much turned a likely Victory into a resounding Defeat, INSTEAD. Absolutely Amazing!!!

In fairness, politicians or political leaders have never PERMITTED The U.S. Military to achieve TOTAL VICTORY over ANYONE for over 60 years, and/or since WWII. Guess that just no longer politically-correct and/or: "Sensitive" & "Tolerant" to win & achieve TOTAL VICTORY over ANYONE? Enemies might no longer like US (both ways).

Still, even the slightest comparison of President Bush's verified Vietnam Era Military Record to that of inately lifelong political climber JFKerry, is utter nonsense. Comparing Bush's Military Record to that of Kerry's, makes about as much sense as comparing Bush's Military Record to those of either Bill ("I despise The Military) & Hillary Rodham C. and Barack Hussein O.

Besides, Bush would never have had the unmitigated gall of conjuring-up such an UNBELIEVABLY HEROIC 3-4 month Vietnam Tour of Duty,...as did: "Rambo Kerry".

Nor would Bush ever have had the audacity to APPLY FOR (previously unheard of) THREE Purple Hearts & A Silver Star Commendation, while never once ambulatory or hospitalized. An actual Field Dispensary Physician's comment was: "Saw worse wounds from A Rose Bush".

Bush would never have belittled, demeaned & insulted the memory of Easy Company of The 506th, by referring to an extremely small group of supportive veterans or political hacks as his: "Band of Brothers". YEAH, SURE. All the other 3-400 NON-Supportive of Kerry: "Swift Boaters" are liars, and only his teeny-weeney little: "Band of Brothers" MUST be believed???

Also, and what certainly of most importance for ALL Americans (civilian, military & veteran alike) to realize, is that how-in-the-hell can ANYONE actually trust or believe JFKerry & like-minded Left, about ANYTHING? Makes infinitely more sense believing in The ACLU, Chavez, Penn, Soros, Jane Fonda or Rosie O'Donnel.

Then too, Kerry and all others alluded to see absolutely nothing wrong with daily & treasonably undermining America in general and The Commander-In-Chief & U.S. Military, EVEN DURING WARTIME. Must all be planning on converting to Islam, or honestly believe that all wealthy capitulators will not be slaughtered by Fanatical Islam??

Whatever, and solely from A Veteran's perspective, I'm sure glad that I never had to serve under any officers like the glory hungry phoney, Lt. JFKerry. Fortunately, served only under The Finest, Honest & Honorable Officers, instead.

Neil

[Tamaroa]

From a Veteran's perspective and one who served during the Viet Nam era (but lucky enough not to have gone there) I have two issues with Kerry, forget the decorations, etc. My problem is his referring to the Westpac cruise as a combat tour when they were only "in theatre" for a couple of months cruising off the coast. The other thing that really bothers me is that after his first 4 months on PBR's, he took off and left his crew behind. I know technically that if you got three purple hearts you could leave and choose your own station. But what kind of message does that send to the crew you were with. I personally think those purple hearts were trumped up so he could be a hero then get out while the gettin' was good. I personally could not leave my crew behind like that.

Bill

[sfc_darrel]

http://www.democracy-project.com/archives/003560.html

[reconeil]

Bill,
Don't believe it very wise for ANYONE to: "forget the decorations, etc", and especially those ACTUALLY & SERIOUSLY wounded in battle and families of those killed in battle.

JFKerry demeaned & belittled ALL Battlefield Decorations by duplicitously & ridiculously: "APPLYING FOR (previously unheard of)" 3 Purple Hearts & A Silver Star.
True Heroes are solely AWARDED Commendations after verification of courageous acts.

True Heroes don't annoy and pretty-much shamelessly plead & grovel for such from superiors,...
as did Lt. "Rambo" (?supposedly?) JFKerry.

Neil

P.S., Bill.
Also, let's not forget: "etc." and other etceteras like lying, deceiving & making up false stories for The U.S. Congress DURING WARTIME, as touched upon by; "THANK YOU!!!...Senator John Kerry", towards bottom of commentary listing on www.wowcopy.com .