Show Comments Here (48) |

Hide Comments

First I'd like to say thanks for hosting me in the MilBlogs circle.( I have commented on other posts, but I am not sure if I actually said thanks) My site gets traffic from great people due to MilBlogs.

Second, I have had a link to Wintersoldier since the day my blog went live. I also linked to Swiftvets.com a few days ago. I agree with you that the Swiftvets appear honest and genuine.

I will be linking each of your posts each day.

Thanks for doing what you do.

SlagleRock Out!

Posted by SlagleRock at August 10, 2004 04:03 AM

In my opinion, given enough facts to become reasonably informed, there is absolutely no reason why anypne presently serving or any vet NOT on Kerry's direct payroll would have any reason to vote for him.

He epitomizes fraud and has dishonored anyone who has ever served this country. He left our abandoned POW's and MIA's to die without hope in Vietnam. He is purely and utterly despicable.

Posted by recon at August 10, 2004 04:26 AM

The brutal smear tactics that were so effective against frightened young women may not work against Mr Mortensen. Lanny Davis and his scummy ilk still have Big Media on their side, but they're not bullying bimbos this time.

Posted by lyle at August 10, 2004 04:38 AM

re: Lanny Davis et al
They continue to make an issue about the swift vets never served on the same "ship". My understanding was that the swift boats went out on missions in groups of threes, and that the rest of the time they were based and bunked together. While on missions, they were usually not that far apart. So, these guys would have a fairly intimate knowledge of kerry. Much more so than, say, if two men served on different destroyers or aircraft carriers. Is that correct? If so, then this needs to be mentioned more often.

Posted by TrueReliever at August 10, 2004 07:11 AM

Thanks to you guys who served your country in Vietnam, the totalitarian invasion of southeast Asia was held there long enough for the USSR to suffocate itself. The free peoples of east Asia, and the Indian Ocean rim (the "seven tigers") are economic powerhouses now and are stabilizing finally an area that just a few decades ago was always starving or at war. You guys bought the time, and made this possible, and staved off what could've become another world war. History will be kind to the American effort in Vietnam, despite the many Americans who turned coat on it.

Most folks see clearly that you guys have every right to tell your story, just as Kerry has been telling and telling and telling his. And with him running for CIC, you are only doing your duty. Too bad you have to do it, but it was Kerry who set this situation up. Too bad you gotta be gutsy for your country all over again, in order to get a hearing, by having to brush up against the thug wing of the DNC. At least with the book coming out to identify you, you probably won't have to worry as much about accidents and falling out the windows of tall buildings and such. But you know better than most, there's more than one jungle out there.

Posted by Buddy Larsen at August 10, 2004 07:34 AM

Maybe this is nothing, maybe it's already known. I did some research yesterday following lots of links through left-wing sites and came upon this:
The VVAW still exists and it appears as if it is funded at least partially by the Tides Foundation. Check out link to the Military Law Task Force http://www.nlg.org/mltf/

From their "Overview" page:
"Those of us involved during the Vietnam War, in the resulting draft resistance, in Vietnam Veterans Against the War and other Veterans' rights organizations, Don't Ask Don’t Tell struggles, the "small wars" (Grenada, Kosovo, etc.), the "larger wars," and the Gulf War, all formed the MLTF to keep in contact and continue our work. Others have joined with us as time moved on and have provided political and legal direction to our work."

From the bottom of their main page:
"The Military Law Task Force wants to thank RESIST and the Tides Foundation for making this website possible."

More than just this, this site is creepy, encouraging every form of anti-military action: selective service and draft avoidance, anti-war protest while on active duty, protesting within the military, and subjects such as legal ways to twist military policy, even a section what I can only describe as loopholes in fragging laws.

Posted by MORSteve at August 10, 2004 08:54 AM

Remember, boyz, few if any doubt that South Vietnam would still be around, and prob one of the Asian economic "Tigers", if Nixon hadn't resigned - what matters about Watergate is that even after so many years the lawyers-investigators of the Fed OIC found nothing yet to implicate Nixon about the break-in. This means the DemLibs had the votes to impeach Nixon, BUT NOT THE EVIDENCE - out here in Asia-Pacific there are still many who respected Nixon and still do! America didn't find out until the mid-70's that it was actually winning the war against North Vietnam - even many Commies wondered why Nixon was so hated and forced to resign! KERRY AND HIS ANTI-AMERICAN ANTI-WAR AMERICAN LEFY BABBLESPEAK HAD AS MUCH TO DO WITH AIDING AND ABETTING NORTH VIETNAM AND THE COMMIE BLOCK AS COMMIE PROPANGANDA ITSELF!

Posted by JosephMendiola at August 10, 2004 09:04 AM

TrueReliever:

Regarding your question about the swiftboats, yes they did travel in groups. Here is an excerpt from a 1971 article about Kerry:

"John Kerry had to make a decision. The three gunboats snailing up the narrow ribbon of river in Vietnam were weighted down with 30 troops each...Kerry, the tactical officer for the mission...ordered the boats turned sharply right and beached."

Posted by Deus ex Macrame at August 10, 2004 11:01 AM

Sir:

I am a decorated vietnam vet with a 60% disability from a year in combat near the DMZ, where I lost many of my friends.

I really appreciate that you are exposing Kerry for the fraud that he is. We vietnam vets have had to live for the last 35 years with all his lies, that have so falsely colored our dedicated service in Vietnam.

I can never forget him with Jane Fonda and what awful damage they did to our country during the last 35 years. His picture is hanging in Hanoi for a very good reason. And now he is trying to claim credit for helping Vietnam vets.

Unbelievable! For 35 years I kept silent, but this stirs anger to the depth of my soul an I must speak not only for myself, but for my dead friends.

It is like with the former communists; the bigger the lie, the more easy it is to believe.

He helped the communists and every leftist cause that popped up across the world during his political career. Just read his record. There was never a "blame America first" cause that he didn't support!

I would like to pose a variation of the question Kerry said to the Congress during the Winter Hearings. The question is; how do you explain to your buddy whose name is on the Vietnam Wall, he was killed by the treason of another American soldier. HOW do you explain that shame?

An now Kerry imagines he can be the President of this great and noble country! NEVER, NEVER, NEVER.

Posted by ron van beek at August 10, 2004 02:23 PM

"...and that he recommended himself for 2 of his Purple Hearts for minor scratches that were probably self-inflicted and, more importantly, for the Silver Star."

Ya know, I got into a nice debate with someone over at, if I recall correctly, BLACKFIVE, last week about this. I had misread Black's original post about this Swift Boat Vets' axe, and thought that Black had stated that Kerry had put himself in for his Silver Star (SS), when in fact all Black stated was that Kerry wrote up the AfterAc report.

I went on a long diatribe about how, to anyone with any military expeience whatsoever, including Coasties - whom I have a helluva lot of respect for, this says ALL you need to know about him.

After it was pointed out to me that no one had said that Kerry had put himself in for his awards, I retracted and posted my mea maxima culpas.

If the quote I took out of the post is true:

I RETRACT MY RETRACTION!!!!

Posted by Capt Smythe at August 10, 2004 02:32 PM

They’re NeoCOMs, that’s what they are!

Like many of my friends who view things political from the dexterous side, I’ve been somewhat mystified by the way our brothers and sisters on the sinister side get all lathered up whenever they hear or utter the word NEOCON. Thinking that such a word could be used to fire up our troops in a similar manner, I now offer the word NEOCOM to describe our (loyal?) opposition. Following are characteristics I’ve observed of modern Democrat operatives:

1 – Like the OLDCOMS, they are never bothered by inconsistencies in their political arguments always picking the point that will gore our ox TODAY, exhibiting great alacrity in using the opposite point to gore our ox tomorrow.

2 - Like the OLDCOMS, they are committed to gaining control of all government power centers so they can direct and control all phases of private life. Karl Marx and Louis XIV are their Patron Saints. Hmm, no wonder they admire France and Germany so.

3 - Like the OLDCOMS, their intellectual Qaeda is the academy. Hmm, the fine German universities of the Weimar Republic were also the prime means to the ends of National Socialism that filled the empty heads of youths with foolishness that sent them off to willingly kill or die by the tens of millions.

4 - Like the OLDCOMS, their economics is really POLITICAL ECONOMICS that subordinates wealth building to political goals.

5 - Like the OLDCOMS, they feign humanitarianism in their expression of shock and horror at “innocent” deaths caused when America exerts its power to defend itself while urging “understanding” and “using subtlety” while ignoring the many orders of magnitude greater number of deaths inflicted in the name of “Liberation” like in North Korea, Cuba or China or by murderous but allied despots like Saddam Hussein.

6 – Like the OLDCOMS, even their mediocre lights like Barbra Streisand, Janine Garafolo and Alec Baldwin consider themselves intellectually superior to any Republicans, especially more so than President Bush and President Reagan.

7 – Like the OLDCOMS, even the most dissolute and venal spokesmen like Bill Clinton consider themselves morally superior to each and every Republican.

8 - Like the OLDCOMS, they consider their narrow minded perspective to be THE TRUTH while our more nuanced understanding are merely LIES.

I invite my kind readers to add their own observations of this strange phenomenon in the comments section below.

Prominent Neocoms include the myopic Paul Krugman...

http://pep.typepad.com/public_enquiry_project/2004/08/theyre_neocoms_.html

Posted by Adrian Spidle at August 10, 2004 03:06 PM

Thank you for the info. I was a corpsman aboard the Benewah in 1967,

Posted by Tom Sanko at August 10, 2004 04:04 PM

Did you hear the one about John Kerry?

He got his Purple Heart’s the old fashioned way, a bump, a scratch, and Quaker Puffed Rice - shot from guns.

Release the Records

Posted by M. Simon at August 10, 2004 04:13 PM

JosephMendiola,

Nixon created a lot of enemies in America.

Here is a typical gambit. He was discussing drugs with Haldeman (I think) and said something like:

"You know pot is probably no worse than alcohol but we are going to go after it big time because it is a favorite of our enemies".

Whatever the correctness of his policies the above is no way to get the objectives accomplished.

Minor rant: drug policy has always been a way for the in group to go after the out group (Prof. Charles Whitebread has a lot of interesting things to say about this - google him).

Posted by M. Simon at August 10, 2004 04:42 PM

There is a guy named Don here:

http://www.command-post.org/2004/2_archives/014354.html

Who seems like a vet who is giving some pretty good support for the Kerry position. Perhaps some one might care to point out his errors if any. Or mistakes in his point of view.

Posted by M. Simon at August 10, 2004 04:56 PM

BTW your clock is still GMT +1

Posted by M. Simon at August 10, 2004 04:58 PM

MORSteve,

I think it is better to have the misfits out.

Those guys are doing us a service.

Posted by M. Simon at August 10, 2004 05:21 PM

These are interesting thoughts & ideas for research. I would like to add some information to the debate, it is about how we where at war in America during the "Vietnam Era." It is true that vast amount of money and energy was placed in America from Communist countries for the purpose of disrupting our society and the eventual over throw of Democracy. Many anti war protest had been funded and organized by forigne anti-American groups that used hippies (including Kerry) as there man power. Kerry excelled in this role. The interesting aspect of this is that it has been proven by ex-KGB, FBI and CIA officers that the primary leaders of these groups had direct funding from Communist countries and given talking points written by KGB officers.

I hope that many of the protestors, including John Kerry where simply duped into the movement not knowing about the true leaders of such organizations. Either way his actions disqualifies him from my the Office of President because he was duped by the communist or he knowing supported them; take your pick.

These are my thoughts based on the following sources: Red Horizons: The True Story of Nicolae and Elena Ceausescus' Crimes, Lifestyle, and Corruption by Ion Mihai Pacepa and Operation Solo by John Barron. They are amazing books to read. Mr. Pacepa is also a contributing writer to National Review and I think the Wall Street Journal.

Well, if you read these books you will never think kindly of the folks involved the war protest while providing a completely new view point of our history.

Thank you for your time.

Posted by EMD at August 10, 2004 07:35 PM

It's not whether the anti-Kerry SwiftVets and other Viet vets are telling the truth, but rather it's:

WHY DO TWO OUT OF EVERY THREE VIETNAM VETS HATE JOHN KERRY?

What does this say about his leadership ability?

Would our military follow his orders with enthusiasm?

If he ever became president, would he, could he defend America from ther evil men committed to our destruction?

Make no mistake...

AL QAEDA IS CAPABLE OF DESTROYING OUR NATION.

People in the know think they already have several suitcase nukes. If placed strategically in NYC, DC, Chicago, LA, etc. not only would they kill untold millions but they would empoverish us all and leave us almost helpless.

The Swifties and Viet Vets should be considered like the canaries in the coal mine.

We ignore them at our peril.

We need a President who will defend America and doesn't give a crap about what the EuroSocialist eunichs in France and Germany think about us. They are like your wife during...

http://pep.typepad.com/public_enquiry_project/2004/08/its_not_whether.html

Posted by Adrian Spidle at August 10, 2004 07:51 PM

Anyone who uses the terms "JFnK" or "Dimocrats" is a blatant partisan and whatever they say is to be taken with a giant grain of salt.

It's just the same as the idiots who use the terms "shrub" and "wingnuts".

Its unhinged.

Posted by jay at August 10, 2004 08:05 PM

It's just the same as persons who use the term "idiots." Whatever they say is to be taken with a giant grain of salt.

Posted by cptcrash at August 10, 2004 09:00 PM

Anyone got a horse block handy? I feel the need for large quantities of sodium chloride lately...

J.

Posted by JLawson at August 10, 2004 09:35 PM

Jay,

I agree with you on "Dimocrats" (and Dhimmicrats), but hating John Kerry (and writing JFnK) does not have to rely on a partisan motive. Naturally, now that he's the Dem standard-bearer, most Dems will back him for that reason, and most Reps oppose him, but in Massachusetts contempt for Kerry is longstanding and bipartisan and has little to do with how liberal he is. Indeed, while many old-time liberals still love Kennedy despite (or is it because of) his personal failings, nobody loved or trusted JFnK except for Teresa.

Posted by AKDave at August 10, 2004 09:37 PM

I can certainally understand hating John Kerry. I don't like him one bit myself. I just observe the use of silly nicknames that really betray the lack of objectivity of the speaker. I really do consider JFnK as a tell-tale sign of someone who is picking up on another's talking-points.

Posted by jay at August 10, 2004 10:17 PM

Well, we can certainly see how level-headed this guy is when he says Kerry is a Marxist and calls the Democrats the Dimocrats. What a knucklehead! This is the sort of stuff the press plays up??? Idiotic!

Posted by wilson at August 11, 2004 02:02 AM

What are "eunichs"? Wasn't that the name of a character Carol Burnett played on her show -- an old grandmother or something?

And I love the idea that 'few doubt that South Vietnam would still be around.' Yeah, few teevee-watching dope fiends, perhaps. Every new thug we tried to install saw the government collapsing underneath him more quickly. There is even some doubt whether the actual land itself-the soil and rocks-would still exist if we had stayed, as those on the side of continued fighting were willing to inflict almost any horror in order to hold back the inevitable.

I'm not rosy-eyed commie-hugger. But it's ludicrous to say that there was any hope for the murderous regime we tried to prop up in Vietnam. The real question is whether the aftermath of the war might have been somewhat less violent and whether the country might have shrugged off its evil communist regime more quickly had it not been subjected to 20 years of colonial warfare by the French and the hawks that controlled American foreign policy.

Posted by wilson at August 11, 2004 02:10 AM

Kerry keeps sending his people out to say the SwiftVets can't talk about his time in Vietnam because "they didn't serve with him."

But Kerry's been happy for Max Cleland to travel and speak about "John's service." Cleland even spoke at the Democratic convention.

Does anyone know whether Kerry and Cleland ever came within 50 miles of each other in Vietnam?

How do Cleland and Kerry's dates of service in Vietnam match up?

Posted by John at August 11, 2004 02:22 AM

M. Simon -

I've always heard, "put your money where your mouth is" or where your heart is. The MLTF is not only anti-war, but also anti-military; it's all over their site. I also submit this:

The Institute for Public Accuracy, a leftist group once funded by a foundation headed by Bill Moyers, responded with a release highlighting Luke Hiken of the Military Law Task Force of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) as an "expert" for the media to consult on "fragging" (a soldier killing a commanding officer.)
Hiken had attended the 1971 trial of Billy Smith, a G.I. tried on U.S. soil for "fragging" two officers during the Vietnam War. The NLG features a Web site for its Military Law Task Force that hails Smith as someone who "exemplified" the revolutionary spirit of Che Guevara.
http://www.aim.org/aim_report_print/211_0_4_0/

My rhetorical questions to you are: Should such an organization which actively promotes anarchy within the U.S. Military organization be described as performing any kind of service to the Common Good of the United States?

If Ms Kerry Heinz is willing to fund such an organization, do you really believe that the Kerry Heinz's should even be considered for the office of President? Kerry Heinz as First Lady?

Posted by MORSteve at August 11, 2004 03:56 AM

wilson,

I'm with you. Our #1 problem in Nam was the corrupt government we inherited from the French.

Still doesn't make the slaughter of 3 million by the communists preferable.

==============================

Why is Mr. Honesty silent?

Form 180. Release the records.

Posted by M. Simon at August 11, 2004 03:58 AM

In lieu of a Form 180, Alexander Cockburn has a long article here http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=2214 with information I haven't seen elsewhere on the web about Kerry's Vietnam.
You might have to take a shower afterwards, but it's worth at least a skim.

Posted by MORSteve at August 11, 2004 05:27 AM

I keep reading the Democrats are "extreme left", which rang a bell from way back in the 1950s. A high-up member of the American Communist Party said, then, that they had given up with trying to win at the polls and were infilterating the Democratic party, which was closer to their ideals. They felt success would be easier to achive with "hidden" communists in the DC.

It looks like they have done exactly that.

Posted by Jim Martin at August 11, 2004 06:10 AM

Carter was our first communist President.

Ramsey Clark - AG?

Look at him now.

Form 180. Release the Records.

Posted by M. Simon at August 11, 2004 09:22 AM

MORSteve,

I'm from that era and hung out in hard left/anarcho circles in those days. I am quite familiar with their kind.

I can also tell you that in those days there were a LOT of sKerrys in the field who deserved fragging. Sad fookin shit. It was a very ugly time. And our political leaders were incompetent. Totally. LBJ? Nixon - yech! Ford - 0 Carter the communist. Things went bad from the time Kennedy was killed til Regan (I was about 10 days into Navy boot camp at that time in Southern California).

But we had a lot of ugly shit going on in this country - Jim Crow was on the top of the list.

Really, we lost Vietnam because of Jim Crow (that made all the ugly stories believable - I mean people capable of apartheid were capable of anything including murder Cheney, Schwerner, Goodman) and bad leaders.

If we don't clean up the drug prohibition mess we are leaving an opening for the scum to do it to us again. I know how they operate. I was inside the machine.

So back OnTopic. A sound military well led has nothing to fear from fragging or desertion. Or communists.

If we keep improving ourselves we have nothing to fear from these crooks. They feed on our mistakes. We make fewer they have less to eat.

If the communists are gaining ground it is because we have left them an opening - like Jim Crow morphing into drug prohibition - which ensnares mostly minorities and the poor.

Look up Prof. Charles Whitebread if you want to learn more.

========================

Mr. Honesty nees to come clean.

Form 180. Release the Records.

Posted by M. Simon at August 11, 2004 09:44 AM

MORSteve asks:

"My rhetorical questions to you are: Should such an organization which actively promotes anarchy within the U.S. Military organization be described as performing any kind of service to the Common Good of the United States?"

Objectively yes - it smokes out problems. Subjectively the SOBs should rot in hell.

"If Ms Kerry Heinz is willing to fund such an organization, do you really believe that the Kerry Heinz's should even be considered for the office of President? Kerry Heinz as First Lady?"

Nope. And this ought to get more air. You know it. You're hot about it. Push it.

===========================

Mr. Honesty needs to come clean.

Form 180. Release the Records.

Posted by M. Simon at August 11, 2004 09:54 AM

Un-Fit to Command or gulluzing booze at Marty's in Mobile to drunk to fly,an assigned Guard Mission.You are so far of base that i would be willing to send you fifty cents so you can go down to the nearest 7-11 and re-charge the air in your head.

Posted by John Kaiser at August 13, 2004 03:59 AM

Spamming the comments with your tinfoil-hattery (unrelated to the main topic, I might add) just pisses people off. Putting so many distortions, conspiracy theories, and outright lies into one package makes it impossible to provide a proper fisking without hiring out a team of researchers.

And frankly my dear, you aren't worth the effort.

Posted by Ryan Waxx at August 14, 2004 05:24 PM

JFK claims encounters with Khmer Rouge in Cambodia - in early 1969. Is this plausible?

Posted by LarryH at August 15, 2004 02:00 PM

Readers who are already familiar with the smear job pulled by the "Swift Boat Vets Against Kerry" will probably want to skip this piece; you’ve already spent the last couple of days alternating between grinning in disbelief and shaking your head in disgust. The rest of you, gather ‘round, because Uncle Zepp is gonna tell you a story.

There was this guy, a Vietnam Vet, who was approached in 1971 by Charles Colson, who was then one of Nixon’s nastiest hatchetmen. The guy, one John Ellis O'Neill, had formed a group called "Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace." This group was formed to counter the much vaster "Vietnam Veterans Against the War," who had basically taken over the anti-war movement in recent years. Nixon was dismayed, both by the size of the anti-war movement, and the fact that they had found a charismatic and fearless representative to expound their views before Congress, Lieutenant John F. Kerry.

Colson wanted O’Neill to do anything possible to discredit Kerry. He wrote, "Let's destroy this young demagogue before he becomes another Ralph Nader." Colson did everything he could to boost O’Neill and his group of vets (the term, "Astroturf political groups" didn’t exist yet, but the VVJP definitely fit the description). They even arranged a meeting with the President so they could shake hands and Nixon could tell them what brave patriots they were and all the rest of it. O’Neill’s moment of glory came when he got to debate John Kerry about the war on the old Dick Cavett Show. The tone taken by each man is illustrated by the following quotes:

O’Neill: "Mr. Kerry is the type of person who lives and survives only on the war weariness and fears of the American people. This is the same little man who on nationwide television in April spoke of, quote, crimes committed on a day to day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

Kerry: "We believe as veterans who took part in this war we have nothing to gain by coming back here and talking about those things that have happened except to try and point the way to America, to try and say, here is where we went wrong, and we’ve got to change."

In the end, the disgraceful war staggered to a disgraceful end, and the disgraceful Nixon presidency also staggered to a disgraceful end. Kerry went on to law school and then became a prosecuting attorney. O’Neill clerked for William Rehnquist for a year, and then wound up in the law firm of Clements, O'Neill, Pierce, Wilson and Fulkerson. His partners included Margaret A. Wilson, who was George Putsch’s general counsel, and the late Tex Lezer, champion of conservative causes and, like O’Neill, a permanent Kerry enemy. He, in turn, was married to one Merrie Spaeth. Her name will appear several times more.

For the next 25 years, O’Neill was a generally apolitical and obscure cog on one of the right wing’s legal apparatuses, while Kerry went into politics and eventually became a United States Senator.

In April, when it became clear that Kerry was going to be the Democratic nominee in the Presidential elections, the right wing blew the dust off O’Neill’s container and led him, blinking and scowling, into the light to square off once again against his foe from thirty years past.

O’Neill, still steaming over the effrontery of Kerry in describing war crimes and other atrocities committed by US troops (Colin Powell described the same things, but apparently it’s ok if a conservative does it) was more than up for the task of rekindling his thirty year feud, and, in conjunction with Gannon Industries, a big Putsch supporter, set up "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth." This groups’ existence was announced in May, when right wing operative Merrie Spaeth (remember Merrie? Widow of the late Tex, O’Neill’s late law partner) arranged a press conference, seeing to it that outfits such as Drudge, Fox, NewsMax, Free Republic, Washington Times and Regnery Publishing were there.

At this point, there’s nothing unusual about the story. The right wing is constantly dragging old warriors back for carefully orchestrated promotions in the right wing echo chamber of newly-founded astroturf groups. In the normal course of events, the group would get a blaze of publicity from the Scaife, Aielles and Murdoch empires, along with the Drudge Report, and they would hope the real media would notice and report on it. Eventually, a right wing hack or two would write a book about the group for Regnery Press, Scaife or someone would make bulk purchases in order to push the book into the top twenty sales, and a new right wing propaganda piece would be born. These carefully orchestrated hit pieces have been run, over and over, attacking the Clintons, and any and all liberals and moderates that the right thinks needs to be destroyed.

And sure enough, Hannity and O’Reilly and Limbaugh and Scarsborough and all the rest praised the group to the skies, incorrectly describing them as "crewmates" and superior officers of Kerry, and assuring one and all that Kerry was a phony who didn’t deserve the medals he threw away.

This time, things went catastrophically wrong.

First, questions were raised about the group’s basis for their claims. A group of people who said they were Kerry’s crewmates had appeared at the Democratic convention, and a quick check showed they WERE his crewmates, and the people at "Swift Boats" were not. In fact, most of them didn’t even know Kerry over in Vietnam, hadn’t heard of him until he appeared before Congress in 1971. None of them – not one – had actually served with Kerry on Kerry’s boat.

Then there was the nature of the accusations. Claims were made that Kerry had somehow put in himself for his medals, that he had received purple hearts for minor scratches, even that he had self-inflicted wounds in order to get medals. Talk like this doesn’t sit well with vets, and to top it off, here were Kerry’s real crewmates, staunchly defending their Lieutenant.

Then one of the star witnesses to the entire Kerry affaire, one George Elliott, had said that Kerry, who was then under his command, didn’t deserve the silver star. According to Elliott, Kerry "lied about what occurred in Vietnam. . . for example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back."

This was tried out on the under-the-media-radar area of Free Republic, Usenet, and other internet conversation areas, and while people asked why Elliott, as commanding officer, put Kerry up for a silver star he felt he didn’t deserve, right wingers noted approvingly that the accusation caused consternation among the hated liberals and Democrats. They decided it was good to go, and made a TV ad and had a hack "co-write" [ghost-write] a book for Regnery Publishing.

At which point, the whole smear job blew apart. Elliott, in an interview with the Boston Globe, said, "I still don't think he shot the guy in the back. It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here."

Reporters quickly discovered that none of the group had actually served with Kerry. Some never even met him under any circumstances. The ones who had were all at the convention, supporting him. Ooops.

John McCain, Republican Senator from Arizona, said of the ad, "I deplore this kind of politics. I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable." He went on to say he couldn’t believe the President could be involved in such a cheap stunt. The White House hurriedly put out a memo denying any involvement with the ad while failing to condemn it, which is their usual feint-and-jab response when called on dirty tricks.

Alert reporters noticed that Merrie Spaeth, along with the law offices of Stevens, Reed, Curcio & Potham, had been involved in the smear campaigns against John McCain in the South Carolina primary in 2000, and the Max Cleland campaign in 2002 in Georgia. The woman apparently doesn’t mind pissing on war vets if it’s for a good, partisan cause. McCain himself drew a sharp focus on the White House by reminding everyone that he had been subject to the same sort of smear in 2000, when he was accused of, among other things, betraying his prison mates to the North Vietnamese in return for favors.

Then there was the matter of the BOOK. "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry." Everyone knows that O’Neill is the supposed author. But the fellow who "co-wrote" it was one Jerome R. Corsi, PhD. And Corsi, it seems, is what can be best described as a vicious right wing crackpot. Media Matters, David Brock’s outfit, looked into Corsi, and discovered that he was an active participant in the lunatic-fringe "Free Republic" website. Posting under the name "jrlc" he opined that Kerry was secretly Jewish (apparently this is a grave character flaw in Corsi’s eyes) and usually referred to the Senator as "John F*ing Commie Kerry" (For full details about this guy and a list of the utterly insane stuff he posts , go to http://mediamatters.org/items/200408060010 ).

Not only has this smear attempt backfired and made all the right people look stupid and ridiculous, but if Putsch doesn’t condemn it in strong terms, he will lose a lot of military votes, and it almost certainly will ruin any hope he has of winning this election. It may put him so far behind he won’t even be able to steal it.

Others on the right wing may have already realized this. When researching for material about Corsi and his book, I went to Regnery’s Press website. I found no mention of the book anywhere on the site, which is a very strange omission for a publisher to make regarding a book where all the other promotions, including TV ads and interviews on Faux, are in full swing.

But then, this isn’t the first time Regnery Press has engaged in the Stalinesque habit of making books and authors "unhappen." You can search in vain for their all-time best selling author, the man who wrote three of their top five best sellers: David Brock.

That Regnery has dropped the promotion is the best evidence yet that this is a smear job that backfired. My prediction: if you hear anything more about the Swift Boat Veterans, it won’t be from the GOP and their vast right wing echo chamber.

ADDENDUMS: Three days after this was published, Regnery Publishing apparently had a change of heart and started promoting the "Swift Boats" book, writing, "BOMBSHELL! Unfit for Command—the book John Kerry doesn’t want you to read—uncovers the truth about Kerry’s fraudulent “military career.”August 11, 2004

Presidential candidate John Kerry can’t stop talking about the three Purple Hearts he earned in Vietnam, and neither can his former comrades. Combat veteran John O’Neill and historian Jerome Corsi bring forth Unfit for Command—revealing the shocking truth about John Kerry and the grave implications it has for his presidency. O’Neill, a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, brings to his account the overwhelming support of countless veterans who knew and served with Kerry in Vietnam. A must-read for the 2004 election!

ADDENDUM2: More on Gannon Industries:

From my email, a post at Democratic Underground:

They are run by this guy, among others:

William Edward Franke

William Edward Franke is a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth,
established May 4, 2004, in opposition to John Forbes Kerry's candidacy
for U.S. presidential election, 2004.

William Edward Franke, ENS, Officer in Charge of PCF 56 served in
Vietnam 2/69-9/69 at Cat Lo/An Thoi. Weymouth (Wey) Symmes served under
Franke at that time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 14, 2004, Joe Conason writes in Salon:

"Franke is well known in Missouri as a longtime Republican Party
activist and financier. In 1976, he managed John Danforth's victorious
Senate campaign; two years later, he ran unsuccessfully for Congress. He
also failed in an attempt to resuscitate the defunct St. Louis
Globe-Democrat (which was, despite its name, a staunchly Republican
newspaper) in 1986. Before the Globe-Democrat finally went under in
1987, Franke had obtained a commitment from the state industrial
development authority -- all of whose members were appointed by then
Gov. John Ashcroft -- to raise $9 million in tax-exempt revenue bonds to
keep the paper afloat.

"Last June, Franke gave the maximum $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney '04 Inc.
campaign, and he has since donated an additional $2,000 to House
Majority Leader Tom DeLay's political action committee, Americans for a
Republican Majority, and $2,000 more to Keep Our Majority, the PAC
operated by House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Franke is currently President and Chief Executive Officer of
Gannon International.

======================================================================

The Gannon Technologies Group "provides hardware configurations,
software, and services to digitize massive databases for both internal
information management and presentation across the Internet. If the
Internet is the super highway, The Gannon Technologies Group produces
the products carried along that highway.

"The Gannon Technologies Group has provided the software support and
services for several United States federal and state agencies, including
an extensive staffing commitment to the Anti-Trust Division of the
United States Department of Justice.

"The Gannon Technologies Group created the electronic databases for
citizenship records for two Central American countries.

"The Gannon Technologies Group has provided critical technical support
and created electronic databases for several high profile matters,
including the Office of Special Counsel for the Branch Davidian (Waco,
Texas) Investigation and the Federal Election Commission's investigation
of political fundraising practices."

Posted by D. Harrington at August 18, 2004 12:20 AM

You guys are a disgrace to our country,everyone knows Bush is going to lose the election,why the need to degrade a fellow combatant,who had to endure a catastrophic miscalculation by our leaders in a difficult time in our country! Us real VETS believe John Kerry (OR) George Bush should be commended for going to fight for OUR AND YOUR FREEDOM, no matter what the circumstances! Of course George Bush HAS NO SERVICE RECORD to run on,therefore he must try to degrade JOHN KERRYS RECORD,WATCH YOUR BACK OR YOU MAY FALL OFF THE PARADE FLOAT NEXT,THEN (YOU) MAY BE DEGRADED FOR BRINGING PEACE IN THE WORLD!U.S.Army Veteran,Reforger 76, Gary Brazel.

Posted by ArmyVet Gary Brazel at August 19, 2004 09:20 PM

How many supporters of the "Swifties" were living during the Vietnam Conflict? How many of you lost good friends in Vietnam? I was 18 in 1968 and have very clear memories. One of my close high school friends was killed by so-called 'friendly fire' in early 1969 while serving in Vietnam. He had been there only a few months. Indeed, it was possible to have been wounded and/or killed on one's very first day in Vietnam. (I suggest that those who doubt this might want to interview wounded veterans of the current Gulf War who were 'in country' only days before being hit.)

Several other good friends who served in the U.S. military came back from Vietnam physically and/or psychologically scarred for life. My young husband, who had a very low draft lottery number, would surely have been drafted and sent to Vietnam had he not developed high blood pressure out of sheer anxiety about it all.

Why would I have wanted to support the Vietnam war in the late 1960s and early 1970s, knowing that my younger brothers would soon be in line to be drafted? Why would I have wanted to support Nixon's decision to bomb Cambodia and spread the war there? Yes, I joined peace demonstrations; many of those walking alongside me were veterans who had survived Vietnam.

Not everyone who lived through that era (least of all those Vietnamese civilians who survived) is blowing half of the hot air that some bloggers are blowing. Not everyone felt the same, acted the same, nor believed the same--then nor now.

Free speech is alive and well in America. Get used to it. And be grateful if you didn't have to put yourself in harm's way as many veterans and civilians have done. Talk is very, very cheap.

Posted by Fair and Balanced at August 22, 2004 02:29 AM

Fair and Balanced:

Us veterans are well aware that free speech is alive an well - and that's exactly what the swifts are all about. We veterans fought to keep free speech, and will continue to do so, in spite of Senator Kerry's attempts to stifle it.

Lenin called people like you "useful fools". Your Vietnam protests, however well intentioned, led to more deaths, not less. It's sad you haven't grown to realize that, but our defense of free speech benefits you too, and we wouldn't have it any other way.

Sleep well.

Posted by Ol Sarge at August 22, 2004 01:04 PM

As a Nam vet, 4 months in Nam means a helluva lot more than "drunk in Alabama!" and the 5 Deferment Kid!! Bush is a lamer who had to be "born again" to try to overcome his personalweaknesses.

The GOP has really scaped the bottom of the bucket......that's why I got out. The Chickenhawk Party needs to dump these losers and start anew with McCain or someone else with class and a full complement of brain cells.

Posted by Andy at August 22, 2004 09:50 PM

Andy are you one of the 12 "Nam vets" who support Kerry?

Tell us the truth, did you guys really cut the gooks ears off?

Posted by Wow at August 22, 2004 09:59 PM

Ol Sarge,
Learn to spell. "alive an well"
Your post makes you sound like a useless fool.
Patriots for peace come in many colors.

Posted by Fair and Balanced at August 24, 2004 05:16 PM

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/begoodsmilepretty
"Be Good, Smile Pretty" is the recent documentary made by the daughter of a swift boat captain who was killed in Vietnam in March 1969. I recommend that everyone who thinks he/she knows The Truth view this documentary because it reveals a lot about the anguish that those vets who survived Vietnam (and the children of those vets who didn't survive) often feel, even to this day.

My hunch is that many of the "Swift Boat Vets for Truth" are trying to cope with survivor's guilt and one way they attempt to exorcise their own inner demons is by trying to demonize somebody else (John Kerry). And folks who feel the need to demonize others who post here also have some demons to exorcise.

Posted by Fair and Balanced at August 24, 2004 05:17 PM

What people seem to forget is that when Kerry testified before the Senate committee, the gallery gave him a standing ovation. There was more than one uniform in the gallery. The real truth is Dubya lost his medical to fly, be cause he refused to take a drug/alcohol test.

Didn't Bush want to cut VA benefits last year? Didn't Bush send us to Iraq under manned? Plyaing politics with GIs lives, just like McNamara.

I'm with Andy. If Bush is so good, why ain't he leading by 15 points?

Posted by weezl at August 25, 2004 02:05 AM

First off, I support the military. I support the military by; 1.)doing my best personal work on military vessels when called out to work on them. 2.)insisting that our troops get the best equipment for their work. 3.)insisting that no cowboy gets away with sending our sons and daughters into a minefield to get re-elected.

I don't expect y'all to agree with that last point.

Posted by Richar44d at August 26, 2004 06:19 PM

No problem, vote Nader if you must.

Posted by Greyhawk at August 31, 2004 11:18 PM Hide Comments | Show/Add Comments in Popup Window(48) | (Note: You must refresh main page to view newly posted comments here)