jcookc6

Again, The Boston Globe, when your own paper starts finding out things like this, you know you are in trouble.

Discrepancies noted in Kerry's record
Ex-skipper says website wrong
By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | April 23, 2004

WASHINGTON -- Vietnam combat records posted on John F. Kerry's campaign website for the month of January 1969 as evidence of his service aboard swift boat No. 94 describe action that occurred before Kerry was skipper of that craft, according to the officer who said he commanded the boat at the time.

On the site, the Massachusetts senator is described as the skipper of Navy boat No. 94 during several actions in late January 1969.

However, Edward Peck, who was the skipper of the 94 before Kerry took over, said combat reports posted by the campaign for January 1969 involve action when he was the skipper, not Kerry. Peck, who was seriously wounded in fighting that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, said he believes Kerry campaign aides made a mistake in claiming Kerry as skipper of the 94 at that time.

On the Kerry website, the report of the combat on that day on the 94 boat is posted as occurring during Kerry's time as skipper of the boat. Peck said Kerry replaced him after the Jan. 29, 1969, event.

"Those are definitely mine," Peck said, referring to the combat reports that the Kerry campaign posted as representing Kerry's action. "There is no doubt about it."

A Kerry campaign spokesman, Michael Meehan, said in an e-mail that the campaign had obtained the combat reports for the 94 from the Navy. He did not directly address the question of why the campaign describes Kerry being skipper of the 94 at a time when Peck says he commanded the boat.

The reports at issue are in a 20-page batch representing Kerry's combat in January 1969. The reports include references to some dramatic action, including an ambush of Patrol Craft Fast, or PCF, 94. In addition to posting the information online, the campaign sent out an e-mail yesterday afternoon repeating the claim that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 boat throughout January and describing action the campaign said Kerry experienced while commanding the craft.

For example, in a summary of action that occurred Jan. 26, 1969, the campaign says Kerry served on boat No. 94 alongside another boat, No. 66. "PCFs 94 and 66 escorted troops up the Ong Doc River early in the morning when they were ambushed by gun and rocket fire from approximately 40 men on both sides of the river," the campaign summary says. "Two B-40 rounds hit close to Kerry's boat, while PCF 66 received 2 B-40 rocket hits. Three men on PCF66 were wounded. A junk containing South Vietnamese troops was also sunk, killing 11 South Vietnamese troops. Intelligence reports after the mission indicated that the Viet Cong troops may have planned the ambush in advance."

Peck said he was the skipper of the 94 at this time and that Kerry was not on the craft. While combat reports show several boats traveling with the 94, the campaign website says only that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 and does not try to place him on the other boats.

In another report, the campaign summarizes action that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, this way: "While Kerry's boat and another [PCF72] were probing a canal along the river, Kerry's boat came under heavy fire and was hit by a B-40 rocket in the cabin area. One member of Kerry's crew -- Forward Gunner David Alston -- suffered shrapnel wounds in his head. His injuries were not considered serious and he was sent to the 29th Evac Hospital at Binh Thuy."

Peck said he was the skipper on this day as well. Peck was also injured in the ambush and was hospitalized.

As a result, Kerry then took over the crew, Peck said. The Navy combat report posted by the Kerry campaign states that Peck and Alston were injured in the same event. There is no mention of Kerry in that report.

Kerry's commanding officer, George Elliott, said in a telephone interview that he vividly recalls Peck's injury and hospitalization and Kerry's replacement of Peck. "I think somebody made a mistake who doesn't know" the timing of Kerry's service, Elliott said. Kerry was skipper of boat No. 44 in December and January before taking over command of the 94, he said.

Michael Kranish can be reached by e-mail at kranish@globe.com.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/...kerrys_record/

onetime2

I think this says it all. Seems to be just a mistake made by campaign staff assuming Kerry was the commander for these actions at that time. Nothing even worth talking about.

The simple fact is, Kerry went to Vietnam, fought honorably and effectively on many occassions and then came home to campaign against the war because that's where his beliefs lead him.

Support him or not but every detail (or incomplete detail) is not a story (I say the same about those criticizing Bush along similar lines).

__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

iccky

Yeah, from the looks of it, Kerry took over January 29th. the staff probablly just heard January, and assumed he commanded the boat for all of January. Its sad when our campaigns become about little nitpicky details like this instead of things that matter (no, I wasn't particularly happy when Bush was forced to release his dental records).

Assumeing, of course, they issue a correction and apology.

Sparhawk

The thread title is appropriate if you apply it to the poster, who seems to be making a habit of posting nitpicky articles about Kerry's service in Vietnam. How about some real substance next time, eh jcookc6?

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

seretogis

Ouch!

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

Lebell

I don't have a problem with the article, but this I have a problem with:

Sparhawk,

You could have just said something like, "This is just another anti-Kerry article with no substance" and made your point.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Sparhawk

I apologize for making my point in an uncivilized way. But Lebell, this is what I have a problem with:

The more you embellish, the worse it gets!
John "The War Hero" Kerry
Another article for Democratic Frontrunner to Waffle on
Another Article on Your Democratic Canidate from the DNC's favorite Paper the Glob
Harvard Crimson article about Kerry from 1970
Interesting article about JF Kerry's tactics
Good article on the "War Hero"
Bring it on and don't let the door hit you
John Kerry's Forehead? Why won't he tell us his Secret?

I mean really, "John Kerry's Forehead? Why won't he tell us his Secret?" and consistently putting "War Hero" in quotes? I expect more from my fellow patriots on the other side of the aisle.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Kadath

Nah, never mind. Everything is okay here.

__________________
it's quiet in here

jcookc6

I have been calling him the "War Hero" because that is what he has been known as in Massachusetts for years. The 2 nicknames he has are "War Hero" and "Live Shot".

Sparhawk

For fun I checked these out:

"Live Shot" from msnbc and boston globe
Couldn't find anything about "War Hero." It might have something to do with the fact that he is a genuine War Hero, though. I did find another nickname, though "Just For Kerry," based off his initials, which he said was invented by a mean-spirited Boston Globe columnist.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

jcookc6

you got the gist.

tecoyah

jcookc6- just curious.....how long did you serve in Viet Nam?
Sorry, I just couldn't resist.

NY Roast-
After a complete review of the presidents war record, a glaring discrepancy has come to light.
George W. Bush, while in the Texas Air Nat'l Guard, was claimed to have had three(3) cavities and a loose filling. However, this reporter has found that the level of decay in his left upper bicuscus, was not so severe as to merit the term "Cavity". In fact Dr. theodore biswell, the base dentist remembers specifically the decay was only superficial and did not require the use of drill or filling. Further investigation shows Mr. Bush was regularly late for his appointments, and was entirely absent from scheduled appointments on at least one occasion.
"We expect some level of tardiness from pilots here on the base", Mr. Biswell was quoted as saying."But this guy was only seen on base two or three times a year, and then only for the free dental check ups". A spokesman for Mr Bush explained," Don't you want a president with a pretty smile, this man does after all represent the United States of America".

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Lebell

Sparhawk,

Believe it or not, I understand the point you are making.

There are many topics that I think are done to death as well posters that are narrowly focused (from all points of the political spectrum).

Still, I put up with it so long as it takes a new angle, and that I think is what jcook6 has done.

Sure, he bashes Kerry, but he is doing it with different news articles on different topics.

Are they petty?

Well, that seems to be a good topic for debate.

But I would be remiss if I didn't say that you aren't forced to open his threads and read them


cheers,

-lebell

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

guthmund

If I may borrow a catchphrase....BRILLIANT!

The level of "nitpicky" I've seen in some of these articles is appalling. If you're going to be a Kerry detractor, find something that matters. He's a politician....I'm sure there are some legitimate issues that ol' "live shot" has "waffled on." Put those up, let's discuss them.

To resort to this stuff.

Putting crap like this up here only serves to further polarize the board and, in the end, only serves to lower the collective IQ of it's participants.

Spreading stupidity makes my wookiee cry.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

mml

While these "nitpicky" articles do get annoying, let's be honest, there have been just as many going the other way. Besides, I like to know what the wackos on the right are thinking, I already know what the wackos on the left are thinking.

__________________
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
-Douglas Adams

HarmlessRabbit

compare:

and:

So conservative trolling is ok, but liberal zippy comebacks are not? OH THE HUMANITY. THE MODS ARE BIASED.

Personally, I click and open conservative troll articles like jcooks' so I can read Sparhawk's zippy comebacks.

jcookc6

I was in the same branch of Service as J.F. Kerry(no nicknames) was, The United States Naval Reserve. I didnt have a choice to go anyplace and ended up in the Middle East. by the Way, Kerry was born 6 days after me, so I have been aware of him for all of this stuff. You know, the anti war stuff, and his years in public office. Most people probably never heard of him, other than a mention of something in the senate. But then again he has been mainly invisable there, hardly ever shows up for votes, and never sponsers any legislation of note.

HarmlessRabbit

Funny. This list:
http://kerry.senate.gov/bandwidth/is...islation.html#
seems awfully long for someone who doesn't sponsor anything.

analog

I think that the following:

is not trolling, in my opinion.

The reason? It calls the subject matter into question by asserting it can be debated. It does not attack the poster him- or herself as to their posting "habits", and calling them "nitpicky".

I don't think this is an example of bias at all.

Lebell

Yup, Guilty as charged.

There, are we all happy now?

Next.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

tecoyah

Oh my God!!! The mods are human.
*sweeps up the shattered image of perfection*

I really hope you guys/girls are there to shut me up before I get myself into trouble (which will eventually happen on this forum).

And having a Bias against needless pettiness, seems to me a good trait in a Moderator.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

HarmlessRabbit

Here's the best part, my post mimicing jcook's that I posted as a test got moved to tilted humor by Analog.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...threadid=53480

So conservative outrageous claim = defended by mods as ok.

Liberal outrageous claim = censored by moving to tilted humor.

I SEE HOW IT IS NOW. HELP HELP I'M BEING OPPRESSED.

Lebell

It's the violence inherent in the system, you know...

Besides, you'll have to take that up with analog.

We don't coordinate our oppression.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

HarmlessRabbit

There's not a big TFP star-chamber where you plot your assaults against liberals?

I had visions of a big room with a bunch of large displays, low lights and cigars all around.

Sparhawk

Something like this?

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Lebell

That's planned for TFP v4.0


This is our current "Star Chamber"






For some odd reason, the meeting attendance has been down.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

dy156

Back on topic, I almost created a new thread, but it's pretty much the same type of thing. I watch Good Morning America every morning, because we only have one local channel with a morning show, and it's on ABC. To my suprise, there was a pretty intense grilling (for GMA) of Kerry about the throwing-his-medals story. Though it doesn't mention it in this (text below) article, I heard him say on a clip from a local talk show at the time that he threw his actual medals. He's been saying, and said again in the interview today that he threw his ribbons but someone else's medals, and tried to explain that ribons and medals are interchangeable, and were both symbols of his country. It looks to me like he either embellished then or is denying now what he did.

I thought it was admirable when he said a few months ago that Bush's national guard record was not relevant, and it appeared that he was trying to step above the Democratic campaigners digging for dirt. However, in this interview he said several times that (paraphrased) this was just an attack by the campaign of a man that has not answered questions about his whereabouts in his national guard service during that time. So much for being above the fray.

This should go a long way toward fending off charges of ABC news having a liberal bias, because I thought it made Kerry look REAL bad. Then again, this story may not have "legs" and blow over. What do ya'll think?

smooth

How does this make Kerry look bad?

What significance are you attaching to this latest story that you posted?

I can't understand if people are really trying to convince me about Kerry's integrity based on a single line of commentary from over 20 years ago. If that's what you want to base your vote on, that's fine with me--it's none of my business what your reasons are.

If you want to hold criticism of Bush up as an example, I draw a distinction, however, between accusations of being AWOL and wanting to find out if they were true and lying, mispeaking, or being misunderstood about whether one tossed his medals (AFAIK, only some very far-fetched commentators have questioned whether they were earned) or someone else's. For one, the latter isn't illegal.

But it doesn't matter to me. I didn't base my vote, even partially, on whether Bush was AWOL. To my mind, it didn't even become an issue until various right-wing voices began questioning the integrity and patriotism of Democrats. IIRC, that's about the time Kerry made his service become an issue.

So I find it bizarre that you criticise Kerry for "switching" stances regarding whether Bush's military career was relevant. He thought it wasn't germaine then, nor have I seen him use it as an issue now. But he certainly has a right to defend himself, in my eyes, against allegations that he is weak on defense, unpatriotic, doesn't care about the troops, and etc.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

dy156

Smooth:

Say what you want about Bush, I don't think anyone questions his steadfastness, resolve, and firm convictions. On the other hand, not only has Kerry waffled back and forth on many issues, but he has so many stories about what happened, and his answers are so nuanced that his credibility can be questioned.

Though Charlie Gibson wisely did not, he would have been within his journalistic rights, after reading Kerry's statements recently about his medals incident, and then playing the clip, to ask Kerry, "so were you lying then or are you lying now?" Kerry was caught in an absolute contradiction, and responded by going after Bush's national guard service, just months after he had stated that it wasn't relevant, and criticizing those that were bringing it up. This was yet another change in one of his positions.

He was not accused of being weak on defense, unpatriotic, or not caring about the troops.
He was being accused, albeit impliedly, of changing his story to be politically expedient at the time.

MSD

Yeah, all those neo-cons like me