Evelyn Pringle August 11, 2004
Questions about Bush's military service would likely be history if not for the new attacks on Kerry's war record by the latest Republican hit squad of "Truthful Vets." But, by the way it looks now, we will be comparing the military records of the candidates right up to election day.
Therefore, my newly formed group, "Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots," hereby calls on Bush to explain his whereabouts and activities for the period of time he was AWOL, and for him to repay the quarter of a million tax dollars wasted on his fighter pilot training.
As a member of "Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots," I want to remind voters that while Kerry was in Vietnam, doing whatever it was that the "Truthful Vets" imply he was doing over there, Bush was an AWOL, suspended fighter pilot, roaming around somewhere in between Alabama and Texas.
Nobody seems to know which State of the Union Bush was in or what shape he was in. Also, not one of the 700 members at the Alabama unit where he claims he served, remembers serving with him.
As for Kerry's whereabouts, we at least have him pinned down to a certain river in a jungle in Vietnam, and according to "Truthful Vets," he was in pretty good shape. Everyone remembers seeing him there, too.
Bush's records on the other hand, contain no explanation for his bizarre behavior during the last 18 months he was in the Guard, when he failed to show up for a yearly physical, got suspended from flying, and went for five months without attending a single drill.
While Bush swears he attended drills in Alabama, nobody has produced a single record to document his attendance.
Kerry is definitely the smartest of the two candidates, because, according to the "Truthful Vets," he somehow conned the military into awarding him five medals for bravery. And despite being in the swamps of Vietnam, Kerry's records show exactly where he was on any given date.
Somehow I don't think Kerry volunteered to go to Vietnam because he heard it was a fun place to party. He went and served in that hell-hole at a time when other young men looked for every way on earth not to. That fact alone makes John Kerry a war hero.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Showing posts with label AWOL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AWOL. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
CFHFP: Quotes and Opinions From Vets Who Served With Bush
Evelyn Pringle August 12, 2004
The latest smear on Kerry's war record comes from a group who call themselves, "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth." In response to their attacks my new group, Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots, comes forth to tell voters what vets who served with Bush have to say about him.
Bush claims he attended drills at the Dannelly Base in Alabama. During the 2000 campaign he said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time," he said. "I made up some missed weekends." "I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations."
The official records don't support his claims, they show a Sep 15, 1972, direct order for Bush to report for duty at Dannelly, "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on "7-8 October, and 4-5 November. He never showed up.
Retired General William Turnipseed, and his administrative officer, say Bush was not there. ''Had he reported in, I would have had some recall, and I do not,'' Turnipseed said, "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered."
But Bush keeps on saying he was there. When asked about Turnipseed's statements, he said, "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
If his memory is so good, then why can't he recall a single name out of the 700 men he served with? And why hasn't a single guy come forward to say he served with Bush?
Bush's superiors in Texas thought he was in Alabama. His yearly evaluation says, "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report," and a "civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama."
He wasn't in Texas and he wasn't in Alabama. So where was he?
We've heard from the Honest Vets, so Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots thinks voters should hear what Bush's fellow fighter pilots had to say about serving with him.
On Feb 13, 2004, the Memphis Flyer published interviews with 2 guardsmen from the Alabama unit where Bush says he served in 1972. Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop attended regular drills and are both absolutely certain that Bush never showed up for duty.
Mintz told the reporter, "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas. And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence. I was a young bachelor then. I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
When he didn't show, Mintz thought Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. No so, in campaign 2000, Bush was referring to Mintz's unit, and he's sticking to the same story in 2004.
Mintz spoke of his "negative reaction" to Bush's dishonesty. "You don't do that as an officer, you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen. This guy's got a lot of nerve," he said.
Mintz says there were only 25 or 30 pilots on base, "There's no doubt. I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever," he said. "And if he did any flying at all, on whatever kind of craft, that would have involved a great number of supportive personnel. It takes a lot of people to get a plane into the air. But nobody I can think of remembers him."
Mintz said, "(I) talked to one of my buddies the other day and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
His buddy is Paul Bishop. Bishop voted for Bush in 2000, but says he is now upset about Bush lying about serving in Alabama. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," he said.
Bishop claims he didn't pay attention to the lies during campaign 2000, but does since Bush went to war in Iraq. "It bothered me that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time. He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject. I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country," he said.
Bush better not count on getting votes from these 2 vets. When Bishop was asked if plans to vote for Bush, he said, "Naw, this goes to an integrity issue." And who will Bob Mintz be voting for? "Not for any Texas politicians," he says.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
The latest smear on Kerry's war record comes from a group who call themselves, "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth." In response to their attacks my new group, Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots, comes forth to tell voters what vets who served with Bush have to say about him.
Bush claims he attended drills at the Dannelly Base in Alabama. During the 2000 campaign he said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time," he said. "I made up some missed weekends." "I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations."
The official records don't support his claims, they show a Sep 15, 1972, direct order for Bush to report for duty at Dannelly, "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on "7-8 October, and 4-5 November. He never showed up.
Retired General William Turnipseed, and his administrative officer, say Bush was not there. ''Had he reported in, I would have had some recall, and I do not,'' Turnipseed said, "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered."
But Bush keeps on saying he was there. When asked about Turnipseed's statements, he said, "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
If his memory is so good, then why can't he recall a single name out of the 700 men he served with? And why hasn't a single guy come forward to say he served with Bush?
Bush's superiors in Texas thought he was in Alabama. His yearly evaluation says, "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report," and a "civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama."
He wasn't in Texas and he wasn't in Alabama. So where was he?
We've heard from the Honest Vets, so Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots thinks voters should hear what Bush's fellow fighter pilots had to say about serving with him.
On Feb 13, 2004, the Memphis Flyer published interviews with 2 guardsmen from the Alabama unit where Bush says he served in 1972. Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop attended regular drills and are both absolutely certain that Bush never showed up for duty.
Mintz told the reporter, "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas. And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence. I was a young bachelor then. I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
When he didn't show, Mintz thought Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. No so, in campaign 2000, Bush was referring to Mintz's unit, and he's sticking to the same story in 2004.
Mintz spoke of his "negative reaction" to Bush's dishonesty. "You don't do that as an officer, you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen. This guy's got a lot of nerve," he said.
Mintz says there were only 25 or 30 pilots on base, "There's no doubt. I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever," he said. "And if he did any flying at all, on whatever kind of craft, that would have involved a great number of supportive personnel. It takes a lot of people to get a plane into the air. But nobody I can think of remembers him."
Mintz said, "(I) talked to one of my buddies the other day and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
His buddy is Paul Bishop. Bishop voted for Bush in 2000, but says he is now upset about Bush lying about serving in Alabama. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," he said.
Bishop claims he didn't pay attention to the lies during campaign 2000, but does since Bush went to war in Iraq. "It bothered me that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time. He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject. I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country," he said.
Bush better not count on getting votes from these 2 vets. When Bishop was asked if plans to vote for Bush, he said, "Naw, this goes to an integrity issue." And who will Bob Mintz be voting for? "Not for any Texas politicians," he says.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots Ask Bush to Get Honest
Evelyn Pringle August 13, 2004
Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots call on Bush to explain how he could fail to show up for his annual physical, get suspended as a fighter pilot, and escape any discipline whatsoever.
First of all, let's put one theory to rest, any suggestion that he could simply decide to quit flying, with two years left on his commitment, after a quarter of a million dollars was invested in his training, is absurd. He needs to clear up this issue once and for all.
When Bush joined the guard, he said he had a goal of "making flying a lifetime pursuit," and signed a document stating, "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation."
Yet, even under the threat of being placed on active duty, he failed to show up. His 1972 suspension order states: "Verbal orders of the Comdr on 1 Aug 72 suspending 1STLT George W. Bush ... from flying status are confirmed ... Reason for Suspension: Failure to accomplish annual medical examination. Off will comply with para 2-10, AFM 35-13.
AFM 35-13 specifies that "When a Rated Officer Fails To Accomplish a Medical Examination Prescribed by AFM ... (1) The local commander ... will direct an investigation ... (2) will forward the report along with the command recommendation to USAFMPC/DPMAJD, Randolph AFB TX 78148 for final determination."
There is no record of the an investigation or a follow-up report. Two retired generals say it is unheard of for a pilot to miss a flight physical and not be investigated. "There is no excuse for that. Aviators just don't miss their flight physicals," said Major General Paul Weaver, retired director of the Air National Guard.
Brigadier General David McGinnis said that "Failure to take your flight physical is like a failure to show up for duty. It is an obligation you can't blow off," and that regulations would have required an investigation of the matter.
McGinnis says that Bush's superiors may have decided "to get him off the books, make his father happy, and hope no one would notice." But there still should have been a report. "If it didn't happen, that shows how far they were willing to stretch the rules to accommodate" then Lt Bush.
Over time, the Bush camp has given 3 different equally dishonest stories, about why he was suspended. First it was that he did not take the physical because his personal physician was in Houston. The Boston Globe put that lie to rest when it reported that "flight physicals can be administered only by certified Air Force flight surgeons, and some were assigned at the time to Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, where Bush was living."
On another date, his people told the London Times that he didn't have to take an exam, "As he was not flying, there was no reason for him to take the flight physical exam."
Then spokesman, Dan Bartlett, told reporters that Bush knew that he would be suspended because his paperwork hadn't caught up with him. "It was just a question of following the bureaucratic procedure of the time," Bartlett said. "He knew the suspension would have to take place."
So which is it, (a) his family physician wasn't in Alabama, (b) he didn't have to take it because he wasn't flying; or (3) the suspension was caused by a bureaucratic mix-up of paperwork?
At a later date, Bush said he quit flying because the plane he trained on was no longer in use. That was also a lie. His Unit flew the F-102 until 1974. His Texas commander, Retired Major Bobby Hodges said, "If he had come back to Houston, I would have kept him flying the 102 until he got out, but I don't remember him coming back at all."
To get into pilot training, Bush signed a pledge to fly for 5 years after he completed his training to ensure that tax dollars would be well-spent. He grossly violated that pledge and he should be required to repay taxpayers for the cost of his training.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots call on Bush to explain how he could fail to show up for his annual physical, get suspended as a fighter pilot, and escape any discipline whatsoever.
First of all, let's put one theory to rest, any suggestion that he could simply decide to quit flying, with two years left on his commitment, after a quarter of a million dollars was invested in his training, is absurd. He needs to clear up this issue once and for all.
When Bush joined the guard, he said he had a goal of "making flying a lifetime pursuit," and signed a document stating, "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation."
Yet, even under the threat of being placed on active duty, he failed to show up. His 1972 suspension order states: "Verbal orders of the Comdr on 1 Aug 72 suspending 1STLT George W. Bush ... from flying status are confirmed ... Reason for Suspension: Failure to accomplish annual medical examination. Off will comply with para 2-10, AFM 35-13.
AFM 35-13 specifies that "When a Rated Officer Fails To Accomplish a Medical Examination Prescribed by AFM ... (1) The local commander ... will direct an investigation ... (2) will forward the report along with the command recommendation to USAFMPC/DPMAJD, Randolph AFB TX 78148 for final determination."
There is no record of the an investigation or a follow-up report. Two retired generals say it is unheard of for a pilot to miss a flight physical and not be investigated. "There is no excuse for that. Aviators just don't miss their flight physicals," said Major General Paul Weaver, retired director of the Air National Guard.
Brigadier General David McGinnis said that "Failure to take your flight physical is like a failure to show up for duty. It is an obligation you can't blow off," and that regulations would have required an investigation of the matter.
McGinnis says that Bush's superiors may have decided "to get him off the books, make his father happy, and hope no one would notice." But there still should have been a report. "If it didn't happen, that shows how far they were willing to stretch the rules to accommodate" then Lt Bush.
Over time, the Bush camp has given 3 different equally dishonest stories, about why he was suspended. First it was that he did not take the physical because his personal physician was in Houston. The Boston Globe put that lie to rest when it reported that "flight physicals can be administered only by certified Air Force flight surgeons, and some were assigned at the time to Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, where Bush was living."
On another date, his people told the London Times that he didn't have to take an exam, "As he was not flying, there was no reason for him to take the flight physical exam."
Then spokesman, Dan Bartlett, told reporters that Bush knew that he would be suspended because his paperwork hadn't caught up with him. "It was just a question of following the bureaucratic procedure of the time," Bartlett said. "He knew the suspension would have to take place."
So which is it, (a) his family physician wasn't in Alabama, (b) he didn't have to take it because he wasn't flying; or (3) the suspension was caused by a bureaucratic mix-up of paperwork?
At a later date, Bush said he quit flying because the plane he trained on was no longer in use. That was also a lie. His Unit flew the F-102 until 1974. His Texas commander, Retired Major Bobby Hodges said, "If he had come back to Houston, I would have kept him flying the 102 until he got out, but I don't remember him coming back at all."
To get into pilot training, Bush signed a pledge to fly for 5 years after he completed his training to ensure that tax dollars would be well-spent. He grossly violated that pledge and he should be required to repay taxpayers for the cost of his training.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots May Have Answer to Bush AWOL Questions
Evelyn Pringle August 16, 2004
Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots has been monitoring the truth or falsity of statements made by John O'Neill, and members of his group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (AKA Lying Idiots), as they swooped across the airwaves on countless cable news programs this past week.
After reviewing the comments made by these liars, and in view of the compulsive, pathological lying that Bush engages in on a daily basis, I can't help but wonder if it comes natural for Texans to lie about whatever, whenever. They seem to have no shame.
It's easy to see why that sweet little Dixie Chick is so embarrassed that Bush comes from her home state. Bush and his gang do give Texas a bad name.
After listening to those guys ramble off lie after lie about John Kerry on the "reputable" cable news channels (giving steady publicity to the lies) for a solid week, Citizens has decided to go pubic with a story about Bush from a source that we deem every bit as credible as John O'Neill, and his band of Truthful Vets. In fact, our source is more credible because at least our source heard the story first-hand with his/her own ears.
Of course we fully realize that a story released by Citizens could never reach the millions upon millions of voters that watch CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. But just the same, we will attempt to get the story out to as many people as possible before the election.
The source provides an answer to our questions put forth to Bush, that have so far gone unanswered, which are: (1) where was Bush while he was AWOL for 5 months? (2) why did he fail to show up for his annual flight physical? and (3) why don't any of his fellow guardsmen remember him at the Alabama base.
To make sure that Citizens is not accused of putting its own spin on the revelations, the story is printed verbatim below:
"Ms. Pringle,
When the Bush-AWOL/deserter scandal first erupted months ago, I overheard [well, the person was talking loudly, so how could I help but hear?] an aide to a radical conservative congressperson run down exactly what happened to create this situation:
Bush was 'acting inappropriately' on the base in Texas, then was picked up on a DUI for alcohol and marijuana. In order to 'create a break in the record,' he was shipped off to Alabama for rehab. That is why he never showed up for his Guard duty - he was in reahb. That also refutes the spin that he had gone there to work on a congressional campaign [note: the campaign workers have said he only appeared at headquarters a few times, and they called him the 'souffle' because of the 'hot air' he spewed when he did show up].
The aide said Bush's advisors told him to keep this a secret. The aide did not agree with this advice. 'If he would reveal the truth now, it would be front page for a few weeks, back page for a few weeks, then disappear. But if it comes out closer to elections, there will be no time to spin it or overcome its damage. This, combined with Cheney's support for the Kurds would damage the campaign. Bush's AWOL and Cheney's support of Kurds may seem a non sequitur, but the aide apparently did not think so.
I have heard this aide discuss various issues - he is a wonk, a nerd who researches ad boredom, and does not seem to say something unless he knows it to factual and true from what he has learned from his studies.
Various journalists and groups have discussed Bush's alcohol and drug usage, and have discussed his AWOL - but they have not put the two together to create a thread to follow. They have asked 'where was he?' but have not investigated rehab in Alabama."
After receiving this information, I interviewed the source by phone. The story that he/she told sounded believable to me. Or, at least as believable as any of the statements made by the Honest Swift Boat Vets to the entire world over the past week.
Who knows, after reading this tip, maybe someone with investigative tools at their disposal will follow up and check out a few southern rehab centers. Which is the reason our source gave for sending the information to Citizens in the first place.
While on the phone with the source, I garnered more details about the story, that if made public, would definitely lead to the outing of the source. Therefore, being my last name is not Novak, that information is not included in this article.
He/She is reluctant to be identified, and for good reason, considering the fact that James Hatfield -- the last person to go public about Bush's drug use -- was found alone and dead in a motel room allegedly due to a drug overdose.
Hey what can I say? A suspicious suicide of a Bush-bashing guy named Hatfield is obviously not as important as a suicide by a guy named Foster. To my knowledge, there was no official investigation into Hatfield's death. But one thing is for sure, his book writing days about Bush came to an abrupt halt.
Having said all that, maybe I should start thanking my lucky stars that I'm not 6 feet under yet, or in the alternative, that Citizen's For Honest Fighter Pilots doesn't have a forwarding address in Cuba by now.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots has been monitoring the truth or falsity of statements made by John O'Neill, and members of his group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (AKA Lying Idiots), as they swooped across the airwaves on countless cable news programs this past week.
After reviewing the comments made by these liars, and in view of the compulsive, pathological lying that Bush engages in on a daily basis, I can't help but wonder if it comes natural for Texans to lie about whatever, whenever. They seem to have no shame.
It's easy to see why that sweet little Dixie Chick is so embarrassed that Bush comes from her home state. Bush and his gang do give Texas a bad name.
After listening to those guys ramble off lie after lie about John Kerry on the "reputable" cable news channels (giving steady publicity to the lies) for a solid week, Citizens has decided to go pubic with a story about Bush from a source that we deem every bit as credible as John O'Neill, and his band of Truthful Vets. In fact, our source is more credible because at least our source heard the story first-hand with his/her own ears.
Of course we fully realize that a story released by Citizens could never reach the millions upon millions of voters that watch CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. But just the same, we will attempt to get the story out to as many people as possible before the election.
The source provides an answer to our questions put forth to Bush, that have so far gone unanswered, which are: (1) where was Bush while he was AWOL for 5 months? (2) why did he fail to show up for his annual flight physical? and (3) why don't any of his fellow guardsmen remember him at the Alabama base.
To make sure that Citizens is not accused of putting its own spin on the revelations, the story is printed verbatim below:
"Ms. Pringle,
When the Bush-AWOL/deserter scandal first erupted months ago, I overheard [well, the person was talking loudly, so how could I help but hear?] an aide to a radical conservative congressperson run down exactly what happened to create this situation:
Bush was 'acting inappropriately' on the base in Texas, then was picked up on a DUI for alcohol and marijuana. In order to 'create a break in the record,' he was shipped off to Alabama for rehab. That is why he never showed up for his Guard duty - he was in reahb. That also refutes the spin that he had gone there to work on a congressional campaign [note: the campaign workers have said he only appeared at headquarters a few times, and they called him the 'souffle' because of the 'hot air' he spewed when he did show up].
The aide said Bush's advisors told him to keep this a secret. The aide did not agree with this advice. 'If he would reveal the truth now, it would be front page for a few weeks, back page for a few weeks, then disappear. But if it comes out closer to elections, there will be no time to spin it or overcome its damage. This, combined with Cheney's support for the Kurds would damage the campaign. Bush's AWOL and Cheney's support of Kurds may seem a non sequitur, but the aide apparently did not think so.
I have heard this aide discuss various issues - he is a wonk, a nerd who researches ad boredom, and does not seem to say something unless he knows it to factual and true from what he has learned from his studies.
Various journalists and groups have discussed Bush's alcohol and drug usage, and have discussed his AWOL - but they have not put the two together to create a thread to follow. They have asked 'where was he?' but have not investigated rehab in Alabama."
After receiving this information, I interviewed the source by phone. The story that he/she told sounded believable to me. Or, at least as believable as any of the statements made by the Honest Swift Boat Vets to the entire world over the past week.
Who knows, after reading this tip, maybe someone with investigative tools at their disposal will follow up and check out a few southern rehab centers. Which is the reason our source gave for sending the information to Citizens in the first place.
While on the phone with the source, I garnered more details about the story, that if made public, would definitely lead to the outing of the source. Therefore, being my last name is not Novak, that information is not included in this article.
He/She is reluctant to be identified, and for good reason, considering the fact that James Hatfield -- the last person to go public about Bush's drug use -- was found alone and dead in a motel room allegedly due to a drug overdose.
Hey what can I say? A suspicious suicide of a Bush-bashing guy named Hatfield is obviously not as important as a suicide by a guy named Foster. To my knowledge, there was no official investigation into Hatfield's death. But one thing is for sure, his book writing days about Bush came to an abrupt halt.
Having said all that, maybe I should start thanking my lucky stars that I'm not 6 feet under yet, or in the alternative, that Citizen's For Honest Fighter Pilots doesn't have a forwarding address in Cuba by now.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots Call for Investigation Of Conduct by Swift Boat Veterans For Truth In Vietnam
Evelyn Pringle August 31, 2004
Somebody needs to tell members of the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth that they can't have it both ways. They either falsified facts about war-time events in official records, reports and citations 35 years ago in Vietnam; or they are lying now.
Official Naval records obtained by various media organizations, reveal that several members of that group actually wrote the reports and recommendations that led to Kerry being awarded his 5 medals. Some even wrote the citations that accompany the medals.
If Kerry was awarded undeserved medals, they were part of a scheme that allowed it.
So, which is it? Were they lying back then or are they lying now? I think its safe to say that either way, such conduct would be illegal and would represent a grave breach of the military code of conduct.
Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots calls for an investigation into the Conduct of the Swift Boat Veteran's For Truth during the war in Vietnam. Maybe its time for some of these lying criminals to be arrested, or in the alternative court marshaled.
The Return Of Nixon Hit Man O'Neill
John Kerry is a war hero unlike any other. In a matter of a few short years, he fought the Viet Cong on one side of the world, and the Nixon White House on the other, and withstood the heat of battle on both sides of the globe.
Thirty years later, it looks like former Nixon hit-man John O'Neill has decided to take another crack at Kerry. Only this time, on behalf of Bush, a worse crook than even Nixon. I guess he didn't learn his lesson the first time.
I recently reviewed the debate between O'Neill and Kerry on the Dick Cavett show. Kerry made a fool of O'Neill when he was Nixon's hired gun, and he'll make a fool of him again. I am going to thoroughly enjoy watching Kerry knock that shameless Republican liar back into the political gutter from which he came for the second time in one lifetime.
Premature Political Assassination
O'Neill and Swift Boat Veterans for Bullcrap have attempted to politically assassinate Kerry before he even takes office, with lies in TV ads and public interviews and in a book called "Unfit for Command."
O'Neill co-authored the book with the now infamous "Internet Bigot Corsi", that accuses Kerry of being a coward who fabricated wartime battles and used fellow crewmen for his "insatiable appetite for medals," and claims that Kerry's attack a Viet Cong displayed "stupidity, not courage," and that, "the only explanation for what Kerry did is the same justification that characterizes his entire short Vietnam adventure: the pursuit of medals and ribbons."
I learned something from the book. I never realized that fighting in Vietnam was an "adventure." I wonder if the families of the soldiers that were killed over there ever realized that. And hey, let's go talk to all the soldiers who survived Vietnam about how much fun they had on their adventure.
The Swiftvet's TV Ads
O'Neill's (aka, Bush's) web site calls group members Swiftvets. Well the first TV ad aired by the Swiftvets, amounted to 60 seconds of unsubstantiated lies. It began by showing John Edwards urging people to talk to "the men who served with" Kerry. Several Swiftvets then appeared on the screen, and said they "served with" Kerry.
This was deceitful because they knew full well that Edwards was talking about crewmates who were with Kerry on his swift boat. The Swiftvets featured in the ads may have been in Vietnam, but they never set foot on Kerry's boat.
The ad went far beyond mere exaggerations. It implied that people who weren't present at events were eyewitnesses to them and that Kerry intentionally injured himself so that he would be awarded medals and escape Vietnam.
The ad included generalized slanderous statements like: "You could not count on John Kerry," "John Kerry is no war hero," "John Kerry has not been honest," "John Kerry cannot be trusted," "He is lying about his record," and "He lacks the capacity to lead."
Swiftvet Louis Letson said: "I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury," implying that he has firsthand knowledge of the injury when he did not.
In the LA Times, Letson claimed said he "learned from some medical corpsmen that other crewmen had confided that there was no exchange of fire and that Kerry had accidentally wounded himself as he fired at the guerrillas. Letson said he didn't know if the crewmen giving this account were in the boat with Kerry or on other boats."
This means he went on national TV and tarnished Kerry's military service record by repeating third-hand hearsay, when by his own admission, Letson didn't even know the identity or location of any firsthand source.
Fellow Kerry crewman James Rassmann says the Swiftvet's attacks are worse than those waged in 1971 on Nixon's behalf. "This time their attacks are more vicious, their lies cut deep and are directed not just at John Kerry, but at me and each of his crewmates as well. This hate-filled ad asserts that I was not under fire; it questions my words and Navy records. This smear campaign has been launched by people without decency, people who don't understand the bond of those who serve in combat," he said.
Then O'Neill, went on the CNN's Crossfire, and said there "are more than 60 people that served with John Kerry that contributed to this book." That was also a blatant lie.
Only one Swiftvet ever served on Kerry's boat, Steve Gardner. And even he wasn't on it during any battle that led to Kerry being awarded medals, according to Media Matters.
David Wade was on Kerry's boat and he aptly describes the Swiftvet stories as "a false, lying smear campaign against a decorated combat veteran," and added, "This is the ugly fact of the Bush attack machine questioning John Kerry's patriotism."
December 12, 1968 Kerry's First Purple Heart
Pat Runyon was with Kerry on the mission for which Kerry was awarded his first Purple Heart. On August 21, 2004, Runyon told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that he has no doubt that Kerry was injured in a firefight and deserved the Purple Heart.
Runyon was not a regular member of Kerry's crew but was somehow chosen for the mission. He says their boat carried only 3 men, Kerry, Bill Zaladonis, and himself.
Runyon said Kerry was hit in the arm when shooting broke out from a vessel that tried to avoid an inspection. He said he remembers it well because it was the first time he had ever been in combat. "I hadn't seen any kind of action or anything," he said.
Runyon explained how the SwiftVets tried to trick him into making false statements about Kerry. He told the Kansas City Star that a guy called who he thought was from a pro-Kerry group and that he was happy to give a statement about the night Kerry earned his Purple Heart. The guy told Runyon that he would e-mail the statement for him to sign.
When the statement arrived, all of his references to combat were deleted. "It made it sound like I didn't believe we got any return fire," Runyon said. "He made it sound like it was a normal operation," when he says, "It was the scariest night of my life."
The Swiftvet's book claims a William Schachte was on Kerry's boat that night. That story is false. When asked to verify who was on the boat, Bill Zaladonis said, "myself, Pat Runyon, and John Kerry; we were the only ones in the skimmer." And Runyon agreed, "there definitely was not a fourth," he said.
All of the men who witnessed the ambush and came forward to defend Kerry have given descriptions of the event that match the official version in the Navy-certified record.
And, not one had a bad word to say about Kerry. Runyon described the John Kerry he served under in Vietnam, "I saw a nice, quiet guy who knew he was in command and didn't flaunt it. He could make a decision, and he made the right one because we got out of there alive," he told the Plain Dealer.
February 28, 1969 Kerry's Silver Star
Simply put, John Kerry was awarded the Silver Star for beaching his swift boat at the location where enemy fire appeared to be coming from, and jumping ashore to kill a Viet Cong guerrilla who was armed with a rocket propelled grenade.
On August 21, 2004, William Rood, editor at the Chicago Tribune, said he was breaking his 35 year silence to defend Kerry against Republican critics of the mission that resulted in Kerry being awarded a Silver Star. He commanded one of the 3 swift boats that came under fire from Viet Cong forces on February 28, 1969.
Rood said portrayals of Kerry's actions in "Unfit for Command" are wrong and smear the reputations of those who served alongside of him. "The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there."
"There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam -- three officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened," Rood wrote. "One is John Kerry ... I am the other."
"Kerry's critics ... have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown," Rood said. In one passage, the book says Kerry's Silver Star came for "facing a single, wounded young Viet Cong fleeing in a loincloth."
According to Rood, the guy was not a teenager in a loincloth and was not alone. "He was a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore. There were others who fled. There was also firing from the tree line well behind the spider holes and, at one point, from the opposite riverbank, as well. It was not the work of just one attacker."
"What matters most to me is that this is hurting crewmen who are not public figures and who deserved to be honored for what they did," Rood said. His memory of the event is substantiated by military documents, including his own citation for a Bronze Star and an after-action report written by the captain who commanded his and Kerry's task force.
Other vets who were actually with Kerry on his boat on February 28, 1969, also came forward to tell what happened in an appearance on Ted Coppel's Nightline.
According to David Alston ambush attacks were common. "We'd be on patrol for a day or two, sometimes on a special operation. Sometimes just on a regular patrol up and down the river. But mostly, it was special op." He says, "Going in a river, you know, the enemy hears you. He knows you're coming. You don't know where he is," Alston recalled.
Fred Short feels lucky to be alive. "I am here in front of you today because of what Senator John Kerry did that day in leading a landing party ashore and taking out the combatant with an RPG [rocket propelled grenade] who was going to take me out," he said. "If it was not for John Kerry, my name would be on a wall [Vietnam Memorial]."
The other 2 men agreed. "If this guy would have got up, and he had a clear shot at us, we would have been history," Gene Thorson said, "These people weren't there with John Kerry, we were. If it wasn't for some of his decisions, we would probably be some of the names in that wall," Thorson said, "I respect him very much."
What Was Said Back In 1969?
The Swiftvets have repeatedly alleged that Kerry wrote his own after-action combat reports and that he either falsely documented the events or exaggerated his injuries. However, to this very day, they have not produced a single official document to substantiate those claims.
According to Rood, immediately after the attack, then-Capt. Roy Hoffmann, sent a message of congratulations to the three swift boats, saying the mission was a 'shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy' and that it 'may be the most efficacious [method] of dealing with small numbers of ambushers'," he said.
In the official after-action message, obtained by the Chicago Tribune, Hoffmann wrote that the tactics developed and executed by Kerry, Rood and Droz were 'immensely effictive [sic]' and that 'this operation did unreparable [sic] damage to the enemy in this area'. 'Well done,' Hoffmann concluded in his message.
But here it is 35 years later, and Swiftvet Hoffmann now says that Kerry's attacks against the ambushers showed his tendency to be impulsive.
Hoffman obviously forgot that he had already admitted in an interview with a reporter from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, that he had no first-hand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims to valor and that although Kerry was under his command, he really didn't know Kerry much personally.
Jim Wasser served 6 weeks with Kerry in Vietnam, and countered Hoffman's criticism in his interview with the Journal-Sentinel. "We got under fire and I trusted John Kerry with my life," he said. "He made good command decisions. He never put us in harm's way" recklessly. Wasser said the criticism from Hoffmann's group was politically motivated.
Rood also challenges this criticism, recalling that "the direction for the actions they took on the river that day came from the highest ranks of the Navy command in Vietnam." And that the way Kerry fought that day was well in line with the tone set by top commanders, proven by the fact that Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, the commander of the Naval forces in Vietnam, flew down to their base to personally pin the Silver Star on Kerry, and the assorted Bronze Stars on the rest of the men.
George Elliott is the officer who recommended Kerry for the Silver Star. He praised Kerry in officer efficiency reports and said: "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed. ..." And that Kerry was "calm, professional and highly courageous in the face of enemy fire."
In 1996, Elliott went to Boston to support Kerry's reelection effort, and told reporters at a news conference that the action that won Kerry a Silver Star was "an act of courage," and that Kerry "deserved the medals he won in Vietnam."
He even appeared in an October 1996 campaign video and said, "the fact that he chased an armed enemy down is not something to be looked down upon, but it was an act of courage."
However, in the TV ad, now that he's a Swiftvet, Elliott said Kerry "has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam." So what are we to believe? The story he told 35 years ago or 8 years ago or the one he told in the ad?
Del Sandusky - With Kerry Through It All In Vietnam
At a recent news conference in Harrisburg, PA, another Kerry crewmate, Del Sandusky told reporters that he personally witnessed the battles for which Kerry received the Silver Star, Bronze stars and 3 Purple Hearts, and said, "he deserved every one of his medals."
"I knew a lot of boat officers in my two an a half years in Vietnam," and "John Kerry was the last one and he was the best one," Sandusky said.
He remembers Vietnam like it was yesterday. "We were in ambushes and firefights, you know, one, two, three, four times a day," he recalled. Like the others, he described how a Viet Cong came out of a spider hole with the rocket. "Kerry jumped out of the boat, ran into the jungle and shot him. That is how he earned the Silver Star. He made decisions every night that kept us alive -- got us out of there in one piece."
Sandusky told the audience that this kind of Bush attacks is nothing new. "They did it to John McCain in South Carolina in 2000, they did it to Max Cleland in Georgia," he said.
"They've spent $500,000 on a smear campaign -- an effort to distort the truth. They are calling us all liars," Sandusky said. "They dishonor us, and they dishonor all those who died over there."
"I've spent time with veterans in 27 states and they are fed up with Bush," Sandusky said. "The veterans don't respect a draft dodger."
William Sweidel, a Korean War Vet, also spoke at the rally. He said that although he voted for both Bushes for president, he will now support Kerry. "I called the campaign to express outrage. I was disappointed. I was diminished," Sweidel said. "Nobody was talking about how it was hurting all veterans to have them criticize Kerry's medals. The whole system is now suspect based on what these people are saying. It's pernicious."
March 13, 1969 - Kerry's Bronze Star
Kerry's recommendation for the Bronze Star is once again signed by Elliot, and the accompanying citation is signed by the Secretary of the Navy and the Commander of the US Naval Forces in Vietnam. If the Swiftvets are to be believed, somebody needs to help me understand how on earth Kerry could persuade these high-ranking officials to issue fraudulent citations for medals that were undeserved, because I just don't get it.
On August 10, 2004, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial by James Rassmann that said, "I came to know Lt. John Kerry during the spring of 1969 ... I worked with him on many operations and saw firsthand his leadership, courage and decision-making ability under fire."
He said that on March 13, 1969, John Kerry's courage and leadership saved my life. Rassmann has vivid memories of being fired at as Kerry came to his rescue. "John, already wounded by the explosion that threw me off his boat, came out onto the bow, exposing himself to the fire directed at us from the jungle, and pulled me aboard," he says.
"All these Viet Cong were shooting at me," Rassmann said. "I expected I'd be shot. When he pulled me out of the river, he risked his life to save mine," he said. According to all members of Kerry's crew, the firing did continue as Kerry rescued Rassmann.
Rassmann and Kerry's version of the attack is backed up by Sandusky, who told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, "I saw the gunflashes shooting at us from the shore. I saw the rounds hitting the water."
At a 1996 Kerry campaign news conference, Adrian Longsdale spoke of the bravado and courage of Swift boat officers and said: "Senator Kerry was no exception. He was among the finest of those Swift boat drivers."
However, since that time, Longsdale became a Swiftvet, appeared in their ad, and said Kerry "lacks the capacity to lead." So what's true? The story he told for 35 years or 8 years ago or the tall tale he's spewing now?
My All-Time Favorite Swift Boat Liar
My all-time favorite Swiftvet liar is Larry Thurlow. He was a skipper on one of the boats on the night that Kerry saved Rassmann life for which he was awarded the Bronze Star. Thurlow also was awarded a Bronze Star for his actions in that battle.
Thurlow disputes the claim that they came under fire during the mission. In fact, in a recent affidavit, he swears that Kerry was "not under fire" when he pulled Rassmann out of the river. He says Kerry's Bronze Star citation is "totally fabricated," and states, "I never heard a shot." (Which led me to think that the poor guy was deaf).
For 3 solid weeks, Thurlow has been all over the airwaves making the claim that there was no enemy fire. Yet when asked to release his own records from that night he refused. So the Washington Post filed an FOIA request and got them from the National Personnel Records Center. And low and behold, Thurlow's records specifically detail "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units."
Now here's where the group's wide-spread web of deceit really starts to unravel.
According to an August 27, 2004 article by the Associated Press, another vet who was in Vietnam that night has come forward. His name is Robert Lambert and he just happened to serve on Thurlow's boat on the night in question. In fact, as it turns out, Lambert saved Thurlow's life by pulling him out of the river after he fell overboard.
Thurlow's recommendation for the Bronze Star was signed by fellow Swiftvet George Elliott, just like Kerry's was. But here's the kicker, Thurlow's lists Robert Lambert as the only witness to the event.
And guess what? Lambert was also awarded a Bronze Star and his citation includes the same description as the others and the Navy report that says all 5 Swift Boats "came under small arms and automatic weapon fire from the river banks" when the mine detonated.
But it even gets better. In the AP article, Lambert described the firefight that Thurlow swore under oath never took place. "When they blew the 3-boat, everyone opened up on the banks with everything they had," he said. "That was the normal procedure. When they came after you, they came after you. Somebody on shore blew that mine." He said, "There was always a firefight after a mine detonation."
Thurlow needs to explain why his under oath statement is in total contradiction with the assertions of both of the witnesses who were listed in the citations by his Swiftvet buddy Elliott, who are both on record saying they were under enemy fire that night.
Rassmann is angry. He says, "no one can tell me that we were not under fire. I saw it, I heard the splashes, and I was scared to death. For them to come back 35 years after the fact to tarnish not only Kerry's record, but my veracity, is unconscionable," he says.
More Vietnam Vets Have Come Forward
Many other vets who were present during the March 13, 1969 ambush have come forward to verify the events that have been challenged. In a conference call with the Washington Post, Swift Boat officers Rich McCann, Jim Russell and Rich Baker all vouched for Kerry and said that he had acted honorably and bravely and was well qualified to be President.
The Post reported that when McCann saw that the Swift Vets had identified him on its Web site as being "neutral" on Kerry, he was furious. Kerry's commendation record "has stood for 35 years and suddenly you've got people coming forward saying, 'Well, I've had second thoughts about this,' " McCann said. "That is dishonoring not only John Kerry, it is dishonoring all veterans."
"He (Kerry) was the most aggressive officer in charge of Swift Boats," Baker said, "with no disrespect to anyone out there, the whole Swift boat operation took courage and guts every time you stepped on those boats. But John Kerry was one step above the rest of us."
"John Kerry is lucky to be alive today, the fourth Purple Heart could have been an AK-47 through his heart," according to Baker.
Wayne Langhofer, another participant in the battle that night, told the Post, "There was a lot of firing going on, and it came from both sides of the river." He was on the boat right behind Kerry's and distinctly remembered the "clack, clack, clack" of enemy AK-47s, as well as muzzle flashes from the riverbanks.
Langhofer told the Post that he too was approached several months ago by leaders of the Swiftvets group, wanting him to speak out against Kerry and he refused.
Jim Russell was a skipper on another boat on March 13, 1969, and described how Kerry rescued Rassmann in the Telluride Daily Planet, "The picture I have in my mind of Kerry bending over from his boat picking some hapless guy out of the river while all hell was breaking loose around us, is a picture based on fact and it cannot be disputed or changed. It's a piece of history drawn in my mind that cannot be redrawn," he said.
So Who's Lying?
After the Washington Post dug up Thurlow's Bronze Star Citation, he invented a convenient little story to try to cover his butt. He told the Kansas City Star that he had not seen his citation since 1969, and although he admits that he noticed the errors when he got it, he thought, "If nobody else is going to know, and if my family thinks it's really neat, and I don't think I'm going to run for president in 30 years, what's the point?"
According to the Star, Thurlow's story is also at odds with battle damage reports. The report for his boat listed three .30-caliber bullet holes, and the report for Kerry's boat listed three blown-out windows, inoperable radios and radar, an inoperable auxiliary generator, chipped and curled propulsion screws, and an aft helm steerage control that was not working. It was judged incapable of executing patrols without repairs.
When questioned about what he said happened verses what the damage reports showed, Thurlow's answer was once again that Kerry probably wrote those reports.
Rassmann was 100% right when he said, "These gentlemen appear to be making this up as they go along and they are not keeping their stories straight."
I'm beginning to wonder if Thurlow is drunk all the time or what. Even after being confronted with his citation that praised him for providing aid "despite enemy bullets flying about him," Thurlow turned around and told the Washington Post, "I am here to state that we weren't under fire." I can't decide whether the guy is nuts or drunk.
Well Thurlow can state whatever he wants to the Post, but he's got some other explaining to do as well. Because as it stands right now, according to Thurlow's own version of events, Kerry somehow conned the US Navy into awarding undeserved combat medals to himself, Thurlow, and Lambert, for heroic actions in a battle that never happened.
And then we've got Thurlow's Swiftvet buddy, George Elliot, who apparently was signing fraudulent documents left and right back in 1969, to help Kerry convince the top brass that the bogus combat missions did take place to get them to award all those medal.
This is serious stuff here. Let's get the investigation started right now.
For starters, I want Thurlow to give us the names of everyone involved in this big lie. If there is any truth to these tales, heads should roll. I would assume that it is highly illegal to falsify military combat records.
I say lets get to the bottom of this once and for all. Let's investigate every allegation made against Kerry. But if the allegations are true, it means these Swiftvets conspired with Kerry to get awarded medals that they now admit were undeserved. So I guess we shall have to prosecute the Swiftvets right along with Kerry for their own involvement in the grand scheme that they claim took place 35 years ago in Vietnam.
Latest Official Record Verifies Ambush Took Place
According to the August 25, 2004 Boston Globe, the Navy task force overseeing Kerry's swift boat squadron reported that his group of boats came under enemy fire during a March 13, 1969 incident. The report from Task Force 115, found by The Associated Press during a search of Navy archives, is the latest document to surface that supports Kerry's description of the event.
It twice mentions the ambush and both times calls it "an enemy initiated firefight" that included automatic weapons fire and underwater mines used against a group of five boats, which means Kerry earned the Bronze Star and Purple Heart he was awarded for bravery.
Expert Says Claim That Kerry Wrote Reports Not Possible
On August 25, 2004 CNSNews.com, reported that Foster Wright, the former executive officer of the Navy's Coastal Division 13 during the Vietnam War dismissed accusations that Kerry wrote his own after-action reports and citations in order to obtain medals.
In responding to the Swiftvet's allegations, Wright said, "You don't get to request a Purple Heart, you don't get to write up your own Bronze Star citation, you don't get to write up your citation for your Silver Star," he said. "That's done by other people. For this to be questioned is ludicrous."
In a follow-up interview with CNSNews, Wright said, "I saw how these things went up the line," he said. "You can't sit down and write your own citations. It's just not done."
Wright says soldiers can not manipulate the process. "Let's say you have a four or five-boat raid. One guy has to be in charge. It's usually the senior guy or the most experienced guy. He would be responsible for collecting the information," Wright said. "But each of the other officers would have to put out a spot report as well. They couldn't be different by day and night. People would get upset with you and [ask] which one of these is true."
Wright also dismissed the assertion that Kerry had some kind of pre-ordained plan to go to Vietnam and get awarded medals to make himself a war hero. "You can't go there (Vietnam) and plan to be wounded in the context of running for the presidency 35 years later. It's ridiculous," he said.
Wright believes the Swiftvets have knowingly distorted the facts. "I don't believe this is misperception," Wright said. "I think this is a coordinated attack."
There Ought To Be A Law Against This
If there is not one already, there ought be a law against veteran's intentionally lying and distorting the facts about historical military events. Not only to make sure that nothing like this happens to another political candidate; but to make sure that the honorable service records of innocent soldiers, who may have served with a politician, are not destroyed along with that of the targeted candidate.
None of the men who served with Kerry over in that hell-hole deserved to have their honor and integrity thrown into question by malicious lies published in a book written by a political hit-squad on behalf of a draft-dodging military coward like Bush.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Founder of Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots
Somebody needs to tell members of the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth that they can't have it both ways. They either falsified facts about war-time events in official records, reports and citations 35 years ago in Vietnam; or they are lying now.
Official Naval records obtained by various media organizations, reveal that several members of that group actually wrote the reports and recommendations that led to Kerry being awarded his 5 medals. Some even wrote the citations that accompany the medals.
If Kerry was awarded undeserved medals, they were part of a scheme that allowed it.
So, which is it? Were they lying back then or are they lying now? I think its safe to say that either way, such conduct would be illegal and would represent a grave breach of the military code of conduct.
Citizens For Honest Fighter Pilots calls for an investigation into the Conduct of the Swift Boat Veteran's For Truth during the war in Vietnam. Maybe its time for some of these lying criminals to be arrested, or in the alternative court marshaled.
The Return Of Nixon Hit Man O'Neill
John Kerry is a war hero unlike any other. In a matter of a few short years, he fought the Viet Cong on one side of the world, and the Nixon White House on the other, and withstood the heat of battle on both sides of the globe.
Thirty years later, it looks like former Nixon hit-man John O'Neill has decided to take another crack at Kerry. Only this time, on behalf of Bush, a worse crook than even Nixon. I guess he didn't learn his lesson the first time.
I recently reviewed the debate between O'Neill and Kerry on the Dick Cavett show. Kerry made a fool of O'Neill when he was Nixon's hired gun, and he'll make a fool of him again. I am going to thoroughly enjoy watching Kerry knock that shameless Republican liar back into the political gutter from which he came for the second time in one lifetime.
Premature Political Assassination
O'Neill and Swift Boat Veterans for Bullcrap have attempted to politically assassinate Kerry before he even takes office, with lies in TV ads and public interviews and in a book called "Unfit for Command."
O'Neill co-authored the book with the now infamous "Internet Bigot Corsi", that accuses Kerry of being a coward who fabricated wartime battles and used fellow crewmen for his "insatiable appetite for medals," and claims that Kerry's attack a Viet Cong displayed "stupidity, not courage," and that, "the only explanation for what Kerry did is the same justification that characterizes his entire short Vietnam adventure: the pursuit of medals and ribbons."
I learned something from the book. I never realized that fighting in Vietnam was an "adventure." I wonder if the families of the soldiers that were killed over there ever realized that. And hey, let's go talk to all the soldiers who survived Vietnam about how much fun they had on their adventure.
The Swiftvet's TV Ads
O'Neill's (aka, Bush's) web site calls group members Swiftvets. Well the first TV ad aired by the Swiftvets, amounted to 60 seconds of unsubstantiated lies. It began by showing John Edwards urging people to talk to "the men who served with" Kerry. Several Swiftvets then appeared on the screen, and said they "served with" Kerry.
This was deceitful because they knew full well that Edwards was talking about crewmates who were with Kerry on his swift boat. The Swiftvets featured in the ads may have been in Vietnam, but they never set foot on Kerry's boat.
The ad went far beyond mere exaggerations. It implied that people who weren't present at events were eyewitnesses to them and that Kerry intentionally injured himself so that he would be awarded medals and escape Vietnam.
The ad included generalized slanderous statements like: "You could not count on John Kerry," "John Kerry is no war hero," "John Kerry has not been honest," "John Kerry cannot be trusted," "He is lying about his record," and "He lacks the capacity to lead."
Swiftvet Louis Letson said: "I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury," implying that he has firsthand knowledge of the injury when he did not.
In the LA Times, Letson claimed said he "learned from some medical corpsmen that other crewmen had confided that there was no exchange of fire and that Kerry had accidentally wounded himself as he fired at the guerrillas. Letson said he didn't know if the crewmen giving this account were in the boat with Kerry or on other boats."
This means he went on national TV and tarnished Kerry's military service record by repeating third-hand hearsay, when by his own admission, Letson didn't even know the identity or location of any firsthand source.
Fellow Kerry crewman James Rassmann says the Swiftvet's attacks are worse than those waged in 1971 on Nixon's behalf. "This time their attacks are more vicious, their lies cut deep and are directed not just at John Kerry, but at me and each of his crewmates as well. This hate-filled ad asserts that I was not under fire; it questions my words and Navy records. This smear campaign has been launched by people without decency, people who don't understand the bond of those who serve in combat," he said.
Then O'Neill, went on the CNN's Crossfire, and said there "are more than 60 people that served with John Kerry that contributed to this book." That was also a blatant lie.
Only one Swiftvet ever served on Kerry's boat, Steve Gardner. And even he wasn't on it during any battle that led to Kerry being awarded medals, according to Media Matters.
David Wade was on Kerry's boat and he aptly describes the Swiftvet stories as "a false, lying smear campaign against a decorated combat veteran," and added, "This is the ugly fact of the Bush attack machine questioning John Kerry's patriotism."
December 12, 1968 Kerry's First Purple Heart
Pat Runyon was with Kerry on the mission for which Kerry was awarded his first Purple Heart. On August 21, 2004, Runyon told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that he has no doubt that Kerry was injured in a firefight and deserved the Purple Heart.
Runyon was not a regular member of Kerry's crew but was somehow chosen for the mission. He says their boat carried only 3 men, Kerry, Bill Zaladonis, and himself.
Runyon said Kerry was hit in the arm when shooting broke out from a vessel that tried to avoid an inspection. He said he remembers it well because it was the first time he had ever been in combat. "I hadn't seen any kind of action or anything," he said.
Runyon explained how the SwiftVets tried to trick him into making false statements about Kerry. He told the Kansas City Star that a guy called who he thought was from a pro-Kerry group and that he was happy to give a statement about the night Kerry earned his Purple Heart. The guy told Runyon that he would e-mail the statement for him to sign.
When the statement arrived, all of his references to combat were deleted. "It made it sound like I didn't believe we got any return fire," Runyon said. "He made it sound like it was a normal operation," when he says, "It was the scariest night of my life."
The Swiftvet's book claims a William Schachte was on Kerry's boat that night. That story is false. When asked to verify who was on the boat, Bill Zaladonis said, "myself, Pat Runyon, and John Kerry; we were the only ones in the skimmer." And Runyon agreed, "there definitely was not a fourth," he said.
All of the men who witnessed the ambush and came forward to defend Kerry have given descriptions of the event that match the official version in the Navy-certified record.
And, not one had a bad word to say about Kerry. Runyon described the John Kerry he served under in Vietnam, "I saw a nice, quiet guy who knew he was in command and didn't flaunt it. He could make a decision, and he made the right one because we got out of there alive," he told the Plain Dealer.
February 28, 1969 Kerry's Silver Star
Simply put, John Kerry was awarded the Silver Star for beaching his swift boat at the location where enemy fire appeared to be coming from, and jumping ashore to kill a Viet Cong guerrilla who was armed with a rocket propelled grenade.
On August 21, 2004, William Rood, editor at the Chicago Tribune, said he was breaking his 35 year silence to defend Kerry against Republican critics of the mission that resulted in Kerry being awarded a Silver Star. He commanded one of the 3 swift boats that came under fire from Viet Cong forces on February 28, 1969.
Rood said portrayals of Kerry's actions in "Unfit for Command" are wrong and smear the reputations of those who served alongside of him. "The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there."
"There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam -- three officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened," Rood wrote. "One is John Kerry ... I am the other."
"Kerry's critics ... have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown," Rood said. In one passage, the book says Kerry's Silver Star came for "facing a single, wounded young Viet Cong fleeing in a loincloth."
According to Rood, the guy was not a teenager in a loincloth and was not alone. "He was a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore. There were others who fled. There was also firing from the tree line well behind the spider holes and, at one point, from the opposite riverbank, as well. It was not the work of just one attacker."
"What matters most to me is that this is hurting crewmen who are not public figures and who deserved to be honored for what they did," Rood said. His memory of the event is substantiated by military documents, including his own citation for a Bronze Star and an after-action report written by the captain who commanded his and Kerry's task force.
Other vets who were actually with Kerry on his boat on February 28, 1969, also came forward to tell what happened in an appearance on Ted Coppel's Nightline.
According to David Alston ambush attacks were common. "We'd be on patrol for a day or two, sometimes on a special operation. Sometimes just on a regular patrol up and down the river. But mostly, it was special op." He says, "Going in a river, you know, the enemy hears you. He knows you're coming. You don't know where he is," Alston recalled.
Fred Short feels lucky to be alive. "I am here in front of you today because of what Senator John Kerry did that day in leading a landing party ashore and taking out the combatant with an RPG [rocket propelled grenade] who was going to take me out," he said. "If it was not for John Kerry, my name would be on a wall [Vietnam Memorial]."
The other 2 men agreed. "If this guy would have got up, and he had a clear shot at us, we would have been history," Gene Thorson said, "These people weren't there with John Kerry, we were. If it wasn't for some of his decisions, we would probably be some of the names in that wall," Thorson said, "I respect him very much."
What Was Said Back In 1969?
The Swiftvets have repeatedly alleged that Kerry wrote his own after-action combat reports and that he either falsely documented the events or exaggerated his injuries. However, to this very day, they have not produced a single official document to substantiate those claims.
According to Rood, immediately after the attack, then-Capt. Roy Hoffmann, sent a message of congratulations to the three swift boats, saying the mission was a 'shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy' and that it 'may be the most efficacious [method] of dealing with small numbers of ambushers'," he said.
In the official after-action message, obtained by the Chicago Tribune, Hoffmann wrote that the tactics developed and executed by Kerry, Rood and Droz were 'immensely effictive [sic]' and that 'this operation did unreparable [sic] damage to the enemy in this area'. 'Well done,' Hoffmann concluded in his message.
But here it is 35 years later, and Swiftvet Hoffmann now says that Kerry's attacks against the ambushers showed his tendency to be impulsive.
Hoffman obviously forgot that he had already admitted in an interview with a reporter from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, that he had no first-hand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims to valor and that although Kerry was under his command, he really didn't know Kerry much personally.
Jim Wasser served 6 weeks with Kerry in Vietnam, and countered Hoffman's criticism in his interview with the Journal-Sentinel. "We got under fire and I trusted John Kerry with my life," he said. "He made good command decisions. He never put us in harm's way" recklessly. Wasser said the criticism from Hoffmann's group was politically motivated.
Rood also challenges this criticism, recalling that "the direction for the actions they took on the river that day came from the highest ranks of the Navy command in Vietnam." And that the way Kerry fought that day was well in line with the tone set by top commanders, proven by the fact that Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, the commander of the Naval forces in Vietnam, flew down to their base to personally pin the Silver Star on Kerry, and the assorted Bronze Stars on the rest of the men.
George Elliott is the officer who recommended Kerry for the Silver Star. He praised Kerry in officer efficiency reports and said: "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed. ..." And that Kerry was "calm, professional and highly courageous in the face of enemy fire."
In 1996, Elliott went to Boston to support Kerry's reelection effort, and told reporters at a news conference that the action that won Kerry a Silver Star was "an act of courage," and that Kerry "deserved the medals he won in Vietnam."
He even appeared in an October 1996 campaign video and said, "the fact that he chased an armed enemy down is not something to be looked down upon, but it was an act of courage."
However, in the TV ad, now that he's a Swiftvet, Elliott said Kerry "has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam." So what are we to believe? The story he told 35 years ago or 8 years ago or the one he told in the ad?
Del Sandusky - With Kerry Through It All In Vietnam
At a recent news conference in Harrisburg, PA, another Kerry crewmate, Del Sandusky told reporters that he personally witnessed the battles for which Kerry received the Silver Star, Bronze stars and 3 Purple Hearts, and said, "he deserved every one of his medals."
"I knew a lot of boat officers in my two an a half years in Vietnam," and "John Kerry was the last one and he was the best one," Sandusky said.
He remembers Vietnam like it was yesterday. "We were in ambushes and firefights, you know, one, two, three, four times a day," he recalled. Like the others, he described how a Viet Cong came out of a spider hole with the rocket. "Kerry jumped out of the boat, ran into the jungle and shot him. That is how he earned the Silver Star. He made decisions every night that kept us alive -- got us out of there in one piece."
Sandusky told the audience that this kind of Bush attacks is nothing new. "They did it to John McCain in South Carolina in 2000, they did it to Max Cleland in Georgia," he said.
"They've spent $500,000 on a smear campaign -- an effort to distort the truth. They are calling us all liars," Sandusky said. "They dishonor us, and they dishonor all those who died over there."
"I've spent time with veterans in 27 states and they are fed up with Bush," Sandusky said. "The veterans don't respect a draft dodger."
William Sweidel, a Korean War Vet, also spoke at the rally. He said that although he voted for both Bushes for president, he will now support Kerry. "I called the campaign to express outrage. I was disappointed. I was diminished," Sweidel said. "Nobody was talking about how it was hurting all veterans to have them criticize Kerry's medals. The whole system is now suspect based on what these people are saying. It's pernicious."
March 13, 1969 - Kerry's Bronze Star
Kerry's recommendation for the Bronze Star is once again signed by Elliot, and the accompanying citation is signed by the Secretary of the Navy and the Commander of the US Naval Forces in Vietnam. If the Swiftvets are to be believed, somebody needs to help me understand how on earth Kerry could persuade these high-ranking officials to issue fraudulent citations for medals that were undeserved, because I just don't get it.
On August 10, 2004, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial by James Rassmann that said, "I came to know Lt. John Kerry during the spring of 1969 ... I worked with him on many operations and saw firsthand his leadership, courage and decision-making ability under fire."
He said that on March 13, 1969, John Kerry's courage and leadership saved my life. Rassmann has vivid memories of being fired at as Kerry came to his rescue. "John, already wounded by the explosion that threw me off his boat, came out onto the bow, exposing himself to the fire directed at us from the jungle, and pulled me aboard," he says.
"All these Viet Cong were shooting at me," Rassmann said. "I expected I'd be shot. When he pulled me out of the river, he risked his life to save mine," he said. According to all members of Kerry's crew, the firing did continue as Kerry rescued Rassmann.
Rassmann and Kerry's version of the attack is backed up by Sandusky, who told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, "I saw the gunflashes shooting at us from the shore. I saw the rounds hitting the water."
At a 1996 Kerry campaign news conference, Adrian Longsdale spoke of the bravado and courage of Swift boat officers and said: "Senator Kerry was no exception. He was among the finest of those Swift boat drivers."
However, since that time, Longsdale became a Swiftvet, appeared in their ad, and said Kerry "lacks the capacity to lead." So what's true? The story he told for 35 years or 8 years ago or the tall tale he's spewing now?
My All-Time Favorite Swift Boat Liar
My all-time favorite Swiftvet liar is Larry Thurlow. He was a skipper on one of the boats on the night that Kerry saved Rassmann life for which he was awarded the Bronze Star. Thurlow also was awarded a Bronze Star for his actions in that battle.
Thurlow disputes the claim that they came under fire during the mission. In fact, in a recent affidavit, he swears that Kerry was "not under fire" when he pulled Rassmann out of the river. He says Kerry's Bronze Star citation is "totally fabricated," and states, "I never heard a shot." (Which led me to think that the poor guy was deaf).
For 3 solid weeks, Thurlow has been all over the airwaves making the claim that there was no enemy fire. Yet when asked to release his own records from that night he refused. So the Washington Post filed an FOIA request and got them from the National Personnel Records Center. And low and behold, Thurlow's records specifically detail "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units."
Now here's where the group's wide-spread web of deceit really starts to unravel.
According to an August 27, 2004 article by the Associated Press, another vet who was in Vietnam that night has come forward. His name is Robert Lambert and he just happened to serve on Thurlow's boat on the night in question. In fact, as it turns out, Lambert saved Thurlow's life by pulling him out of the river after he fell overboard.
Thurlow's recommendation for the Bronze Star was signed by fellow Swiftvet George Elliott, just like Kerry's was. But here's the kicker, Thurlow's lists Robert Lambert as the only witness to the event.
And guess what? Lambert was also awarded a Bronze Star and his citation includes the same description as the others and the Navy report that says all 5 Swift Boats "came under small arms and automatic weapon fire from the river banks" when the mine detonated.
But it even gets better. In the AP article, Lambert described the firefight that Thurlow swore under oath never took place. "When they blew the 3-boat, everyone opened up on the banks with everything they had," he said. "That was the normal procedure. When they came after you, they came after you. Somebody on shore blew that mine." He said, "There was always a firefight after a mine detonation."
Thurlow needs to explain why his under oath statement is in total contradiction with the assertions of both of the witnesses who were listed in the citations by his Swiftvet buddy Elliott, who are both on record saying they were under enemy fire that night.
Rassmann is angry. He says, "no one can tell me that we were not under fire. I saw it, I heard the splashes, and I was scared to death. For them to come back 35 years after the fact to tarnish not only Kerry's record, but my veracity, is unconscionable," he says.
More Vietnam Vets Have Come Forward
Many other vets who were present during the March 13, 1969 ambush have come forward to verify the events that have been challenged. In a conference call with the Washington Post, Swift Boat officers Rich McCann, Jim Russell and Rich Baker all vouched for Kerry and said that he had acted honorably and bravely and was well qualified to be President.
The Post reported that when McCann saw that the Swift Vets had identified him on its Web site as being "neutral" on Kerry, he was furious. Kerry's commendation record "has stood for 35 years and suddenly you've got people coming forward saying, 'Well, I've had second thoughts about this,' " McCann said. "That is dishonoring not only John Kerry, it is dishonoring all veterans."
"He (Kerry) was the most aggressive officer in charge of Swift Boats," Baker said, "with no disrespect to anyone out there, the whole Swift boat operation took courage and guts every time you stepped on those boats. But John Kerry was one step above the rest of us."
"John Kerry is lucky to be alive today, the fourth Purple Heart could have been an AK-47 through his heart," according to Baker.
Wayne Langhofer, another participant in the battle that night, told the Post, "There was a lot of firing going on, and it came from both sides of the river." He was on the boat right behind Kerry's and distinctly remembered the "clack, clack, clack" of enemy AK-47s, as well as muzzle flashes from the riverbanks.
Langhofer told the Post that he too was approached several months ago by leaders of the Swiftvets group, wanting him to speak out against Kerry and he refused.
Jim Russell was a skipper on another boat on March 13, 1969, and described how Kerry rescued Rassmann in the Telluride Daily Planet, "The picture I have in my mind of Kerry bending over from his boat picking some hapless guy out of the river while all hell was breaking loose around us, is a picture based on fact and it cannot be disputed or changed. It's a piece of history drawn in my mind that cannot be redrawn," he said.
So Who's Lying?
After the Washington Post dug up Thurlow's Bronze Star Citation, he invented a convenient little story to try to cover his butt. He told the Kansas City Star that he had not seen his citation since 1969, and although he admits that he noticed the errors when he got it, he thought, "If nobody else is going to know, and if my family thinks it's really neat, and I don't think I'm going to run for president in 30 years, what's the point?"
According to the Star, Thurlow's story is also at odds with battle damage reports. The report for his boat listed three .30-caliber bullet holes, and the report for Kerry's boat listed three blown-out windows, inoperable radios and radar, an inoperable auxiliary generator, chipped and curled propulsion screws, and an aft helm steerage control that was not working. It was judged incapable of executing patrols without repairs.
When questioned about what he said happened verses what the damage reports showed, Thurlow's answer was once again that Kerry probably wrote those reports.
Rassmann was 100% right when he said, "These gentlemen appear to be making this up as they go along and they are not keeping their stories straight."
I'm beginning to wonder if Thurlow is drunk all the time or what. Even after being confronted with his citation that praised him for providing aid "despite enemy bullets flying about him," Thurlow turned around and told the Washington Post, "I am here to state that we weren't under fire." I can't decide whether the guy is nuts or drunk.
Well Thurlow can state whatever he wants to the Post, but he's got some other explaining to do as well. Because as it stands right now, according to Thurlow's own version of events, Kerry somehow conned the US Navy into awarding undeserved combat medals to himself, Thurlow, and Lambert, for heroic actions in a battle that never happened.
And then we've got Thurlow's Swiftvet buddy, George Elliot, who apparently was signing fraudulent documents left and right back in 1969, to help Kerry convince the top brass that the bogus combat missions did take place to get them to award all those medal.
This is serious stuff here. Let's get the investigation started right now.
For starters, I want Thurlow to give us the names of everyone involved in this big lie. If there is any truth to these tales, heads should roll. I would assume that it is highly illegal to falsify military combat records.
I say lets get to the bottom of this once and for all. Let's investigate every allegation made against Kerry. But if the allegations are true, it means these Swiftvets conspired with Kerry to get awarded medals that they now admit were undeserved. So I guess we shall have to prosecute the Swiftvets right along with Kerry for their own involvement in the grand scheme that they claim took place 35 years ago in Vietnam.
Latest Official Record Verifies Ambush Took Place
According to the August 25, 2004 Boston Globe, the Navy task force overseeing Kerry's swift boat squadron reported that his group of boats came under enemy fire during a March 13, 1969 incident. The report from Task Force 115, found by The Associated Press during a search of Navy archives, is the latest document to surface that supports Kerry's description of the event.
It twice mentions the ambush and both times calls it "an enemy initiated firefight" that included automatic weapons fire and underwater mines used against a group of five boats, which means Kerry earned the Bronze Star and Purple Heart he was awarded for bravery.
Expert Says Claim That Kerry Wrote Reports Not Possible
On August 25, 2004 CNSNews.com, reported that Foster Wright, the former executive officer of the Navy's Coastal Division 13 during the Vietnam War dismissed accusations that Kerry wrote his own after-action reports and citations in order to obtain medals.
In responding to the Swiftvet's allegations, Wright said, "You don't get to request a Purple Heart, you don't get to write up your own Bronze Star citation, you don't get to write up your citation for your Silver Star," he said. "That's done by other people. For this to be questioned is ludicrous."
In a follow-up interview with CNSNews, Wright said, "I saw how these things went up the line," he said. "You can't sit down and write your own citations. It's just not done."
Wright says soldiers can not manipulate the process. "Let's say you have a four or five-boat raid. One guy has to be in charge. It's usually the senior guy or the most experienced guy. He would be responsible for collecting the information," Wright said. "But each of the other officers would have to put out a spot report as well. They couldn't be different by day and night. People would get upset with you and [ask] which one of these is true."
Wright also dismissed the assertion that Kerry had some kind of pre-ordained plan to go to Vietnam and get awarded medals to make himself a war hero. "You can't go there (Vietnam) and plan to be wounded in the context of running for the presidency 35 years later. It's ridiculous," he said.
Wright believes the Swiftvets have knowingly distorted the facts. "I don't believe this is misperception," Wright said. "I think this is a coordinated attack."
There Ought To Be A Law Against This
If there is not one already, there ought be a law against veteran's intentionally lying and distorting the facts about historical military events. Not only to make sure that nothing like this happens to another political candidate; but to make sure that the honorable service records of innocent soldiers, who may have served with a politician, are not destroyed along with that of the targeted candidate.
None of the men who served with Kerry over in that hell-hole deserved to have their honor and integrity thrown into question by malicious lies published in a book written by a political hit-squad on behalf of a draft-dodging military coward like Bush.
Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, OH
Founder of Citizens for Honest Fighter Pilots
Sunday, August 1, 2010
What Qualifies Bush to Lead Iraq War?
May 29, 2007
he tax dollar funded photo op of Bush landing on an aircraft carrier all dressed up in a flightsuit to announce Mission Accomplished was a desperate attempt to give the illusion that Bush actually did serve his country in the military and to bolster his image as a self-described "war president."
This country is now paying a heavy price for Bush's lack of military experience, and his taunting invitation of "bring it on," that has resulted in a never ending stream of challengers traveling to Iraq to teach our loudmouth President a lesson.
When evaluating Bush's performance as the Commander-in-Chief leading the Iraq war, it might be helpful to take another look at his years of service in military, or lack thereof.
The story of the draft-dodger in the White House who keeps sending more troops off to die in Iraq began in 1968 while the Viet Nam war raging and his student deferment ended, meaning it would only be a matter of time before he would be drafted.
However, his father jumped in to save him from that certain fate by lining up a slot in the Texas Air National Guard to make sure that sonny boy remained far away from Nam.
Of course for his part, Bush, the honest guy that Americans have come to know, has always denied that he received any help. "There was no special treatment," he said when running for governor in 1993. "They were looking for pilots and I was honored to serve."
"I can just tell you," he mumbled to reporters during campaign 2000, "from my perspective, I never asked for, I don't believe I received special treatment."
To put the whole special treatment debate in perspective, it should be noted that at the time Bush was accepted in the Texas Air National Guard, there was a waiting list of roughly 500 men and it usually took about a year and a half to get to the top of the list.
When asked about the waiting list issue, Bush spokesman at the time, David Beckwith, claimed that Bush was more qualified. "A lot of people weren't qualified" he said, "so special commissions were offered to those willing to undergo the extra training required."
However, Charles Shoemake, chief of personnel at the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980, publicly denied that there was a shortage of pilots or qualified applicants. "We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified," he said.
Any claim that Bush was more qualified than 500 other men is laughable being he only scored 25% on the Pilot Aptitude Test, which happens to be the lowest score permitted for a wannabe pilot at the time.
The truth was finally revealed in 1999, when Ben Barnes, former Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, said that he helped Bush get in the Guard at the request of Bush family friend, Sid Adger, according to an account of the events in a statement released after Barnes testified in a deposition for a federal lawsuit in September 1999.
Barnes also testified that he had met with a top Bush adviser to discuss the matter of rebutting rumors that Bush got special treatment, and to prove that the meeting took place, Barnes produced a note from Bush himself thanking him for his help in rebutting rumors that Bush's father had helped find a slot for his son in the Guard.
And true to form, with full knowledge that he wrote the note, on September 9, 2000, that pathological liar Bush still claimed, "No Bush ever asked Sid Adger to help."
Bush also claims that he got no special treatment when he received a direct appointment to Second Lt right out of basic training without having to go through officer candidate school which cleared the way for a slot in pilot training school. "Our information is there was absolutely no special deal," said Bush spokesman Beckwith.
However, in the September 1999 deposition Barnes testified that after receiving a request from Adger, he called Gen James Rose and recommended Bush for a pilot position.
When Bush joined the Guard his stated goal was "making flying a lifetime pursuit," and he signed a document that stated: "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation."
Based on that statement alone, Bush should have been shipped to Viet Nam in 1972 when he was permitted to move to Alabama to work on a political campaign and was ordered to attend drills at Dannelly Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama from May 1972 to November 1972, and went AWOL.
There is no record that Bush ever showed up. During the 2000 campaign, Bush claimed he attended drills at Dannelly and said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time."
"I made up some missed weekends," he said, "I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes.".
"I fulfilled my obligations," he stated.
His spokesman Dan Bartlett also vouched for the tall tale. "He specifically recalls pulling duty in Alabama," Bartlett said, "he did his drills."
Although there is no record of Bush being at Dannelly, there is plenty of evidence to prove that he was supposed to be. For instance, military records show a September 15, 1972, order stating: "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on "7-8 October, and 4-5 November."
In later interviews, Turnipseed and his administrative officer, Kenneth Lottsaid, said Bush never showed up. "Had he reported in I would have had some recall, and I do not," Turnipsee said. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there, If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered," he stated.
When questioned by reporters about Tunispeed's interview, the truthful and honest coward now sitting in the White House, brushed him off by saying: "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
By far the most colorful comments about Bush being AWOL were quotes in the February 13, 2004 Memphis Flyer, from interviews with 2 former guardsmen, Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop, who were members of the Alabama unit when Bush claimed he was there.
These men did attend drills in the summer of 1972 and both said they were certain Bush was not there. "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas," Mintz said. "And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence."
"I was a young bachelor then," he recalled, "I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
Mintz said the squadron only had 25 or 30 pilots and told the Flyer, "There's no doubt I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever."
He said, at the time he assumed that Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. Previously a Republican, Mintz also discussed his reaction to outright dissembling by Bush. "You don't do that as an officer," he said, "you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen."
"This guy's got a lot of nerve," Mintz said.
Mintz told the Flyer that no members of the Alabama unit remembered Bush being there. "I talked to one of my buddies the other day" he said, "and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
That buddy was Paul Bishop, who at the time of the interview was a pilot for a charter airline that was flying war supplies into Iraq. He was also a veteran of the first Gulf War and voted for Bush in 2000. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," Bishop said.
He told the Flyer that he did not pay much attention to Bush's claims in the 2000 campaign, but he had since the Iraq war started. "It bothered me," he said, "that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time."
"He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject," he stated, "I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country."
This interview with the Flyer is 3 years old and back then Bishop was already saying that he disapproved of the way Bush was handling the war and believed the problem was due to Bush's lack of combat experience. "I think a commander-in-chief who sends his men off to war ought to be a veteran who has seen the sting of battle," he said.
"In Iraq we have a bunch of great soldiers," he stated, "but they are not policemen. ... right now it's costing us an American life a day. ... We've got an over-extended Guard and reserve."
It would be interesting to hear what Mr Bishop has to say about Bush these days.
In light of his obviously low IQ, it could honestly be said that Bush simply can not remember the name of every guardsman in Alabama, but according to a spokesman for the Alabama Guard, there were 600 to 700 members in that unit and Bush can not remember one name, and amazingly, not one Alabama guardsman has come forward to proudly announce that he served his country right along side the current President of the US.
In any event, first hand sitings would be impossible to find because Bush's own military records prove he was AWOL in Alabama and Texas. In the fall of 1972 after the election Bush reportedly did return to Texas but not to Ellington Air Force Base.
On May 2, 1973, his Superior Officers at Ellington, Jerry Killian and William Harris, stated they were unable to complete Bush's "yearly" evaluation because: "Lt Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of this report."
Which means a year after he trotted off to Alabama, and 7 months after he returned to Texas, Bush's commanding officers in Texas still thought he was in Alabama. The report said Bush "cleared this base on 15 May 1972, and has been performing equivalent training in a non-flying status with the 187 TAC RECON GP, Dannelly Ang Base, Alabama."
Americans should tell members of Congress to consider the military service record of the man deciding the fate of our young men and women in Iraq before granting his next request for funding to keep them there until hell freezes over apparently.
he tax dollar funded photo op of Bush landing on an aircraft carrier all dressed up in a flightsuit to announce Mission Accomplished was a desperate attempt to give the illusion that Bush actually did serve his country in the military and to bolster his image as a self-described "war president."
This country is now paying a heavy price for Bush's lack of military experience, and his taunting invitation of "bring it on," that has resulted in a never ending stream of challengers traveling to Iraq to teach our loudmouth President a lesson.
When evaluating Bush's performance as the Commander-in-Chief leading the Iraq war, it might be helpful to take another look at his years of service in military, or lack thereof.
The story of the draft-dodger in the White House who keeps sending more troops off to die in Iraq began in 1968 while the Viet Nam war raging and his student deferment ended, meaning it would only be a matter of time before he would be drafted.
However, his father jumped in to save him from that certain fate by lining up a slot in the Texas Air National Guard to make sure that sonny boy remained far away from Nam.
Of course for his part, Bush, the honest guy that Americans have come to know, has always denied that he received any help. "There was no special treatment," he said when running for governor in 1993. "They were looking for pilots and I was honored to serve."
"I can just tell you," he mumbled to reporters during campaign 2000, "from my perspective, I never asked for, I don't believe I received special treatment."
To put the whole special treatment debate in perspective, it should be noted that at the time Bush was accepted in the Texas Air National Guard, there was a waiting list of roughly 500 men and it usually took about a year and a half to get to the top of the list.
When asked about the waiting list issue, Bush spokesman at the time, David Beckwith, claimed that Bush was more qualified. "A lot of people weren't qualified" he said, "so special commissions were offered to those willing to undergo the extra training required."
However, Charles Shoemake, chief of personnel at the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980, publicly denied that there was a shortage of pilots or qualified applicants. "We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified," he said.
Any claim that Bush was more qualified than 500 other men is laughable being he only scored 25% on the Pilot Aptitude Test, which happens to be the lowest score permitted for a wannabe pilot at the time.
The truth was finally revealed in 1999, when Ben Barnes, former Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, said that he helped Bush get in the Guard at the request of Bush family friend, Sid Adger, according to an account of the events in a statement released after Barnes testified in a deposition for a federal lawsuit in September 1999.
Barnes also testified that he had met with a top Bush adviser to discuss the matter of rebutting rumors that Bush got special treatment, and to prove that the meeting took place, Barnes produced a note from Bush himself thanking him for his help in rebutting rumors that Bush's father had helped find a slot for his son in the Guard.
And true to form, with full knowledge that he wrote the note, on September 9, 2000, that pathological liar Bush still claimed, "No Bush ever asked Sid Adger to help."
Bush also claims that he got no special treatment when he received a direct appointment to Second Lt right out of basic training without having to go through officer candidate school which cleared the way for a slot in pilot training school. "Our information is there was absolutely no special deal," said Bush spokesman Beckwith.
However, in the September 1999 deposition Barnes testified that after receiving a request from Adger, he called Gen James Rose and recommended Bush for a pilot position.
When Bush joined the Guard his stated goal was "making flying a lifetime pursuit," and he signed a document that stated: "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation."
Based on that statement alone, Bush should have been shipped to Viet Nam in 1972 when he was permitted to move to Alabama to work on a political campaign and was ordered to attend drills at Dannelly Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama from May 1972 to November 1972, and went AWOL.
There is no record that Bush ever showed up. During the 2000 campaign, Bush claimed he attended drills at Dannelly and said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time."
"I made up some missed weekends," he said, "I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes.".
"I fulfilled my obligations," he stated.
His spokesman Dan Bartlett also vouched for the tall tale. "He specifically recalls pulling duty in Alabama," Bartlett said, "he did his drills."
Although there is no record of Bush being at Dannelly, there is plenty of evidence to prove that he was supposed to be. For instance, military records show a September 15, 1972, order stating: "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on "7-8 October, and 4-5 November."
In later interviews, Turnipseed and his administrative officer, Kenneth Lottsaid, said Bush never showed up. "Had he reported in I would have had some recall, and I do not," Turnipsee said. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there, If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered," he stated.
When questioned by reporters about Tunispeed's interview, the truthful and honest coward now sitting in the White House, brushed him off by saying: "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
By far the most colorful comments about Bush being AWOL were quotes in the February 13, 2004 Memphis Flyer, from interviews with 2 former guardsmen, Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop, who were members of the Alabama unit when Bush claimed he was there.
These men did attend drills in the summer of 1972 and both said they were certain Bush was not there. "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas," Mintz said. "And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence."
"I was a young bachelor then," he recalled, "I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
Mintz said the squadron only had 25 or 30 pilots and told the Flyer, "There's no doubt I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever."
He said, at the time he assumed that Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. Previously a Republican, Mintz also discussed his reaction to outright dissembling by Bush. "You don't do that as an officer," he said, "you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen."
"This guy's got a lot of nerve," Mintz said.
Mintz told the Flyer that no members of the Alabama unit remembered Bush being there. "I talked to one of my buddies the other day" he said, "and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
That buddy was Paul Bishop, who at the time of the interview was a pilot for a charter airline that was flying war supplies into Iraq. He was also a veteran of the first Gulf War and voted for Bush in 2000. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," Bishop said.
He told the Flyer that he did not pay much attention to Bush's claims in the 2000 campaign, but he had since the Iraq war started. "It bothered me," he said, "that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time."
"He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject," he stated, "I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country."
This interview with the Flyer is 3 years old and back then Bishop was already saying that he disapproved of the way Bush was handling the war and believed the problem was due to Bush's lack of combat experience. "I think a commander-in-chief who sends his men off to war ought to be a veteran who has seen the sting of battle," he said.
"In Iraq we have a bunch of great soldiers," he stated, "but they are not policemen. ... right now it's costing us an American life a day. ... We've got an over-extended Guard and reserve."
It would be interesting to hear what Mr Bishop has to say about Bush these days.
In light of his obviously low IQ, it could honestly be said that Bush simply can not remember the name of every guardsman in Alabama, but according to a spokesman for the Alabama Guard, there were 600 to 700 members in that unit and Bush can not remember one name, and amazingly, not one Alabama guardsman has come forward to proudly announce that he served his country right along side the current President of the US.
In any event, first hand sitings would be impossible to find because Bush's own military records prove he was AWOL in Alabama and Texas. In the fall of 1972 after the election Bush reportedly did return to Texas but not to Ellington Air Force Base.
On May 2, 1973, his Superior Officers at Ellington, Jerry Killian and William Harris, stated they were unable to complete Bush's "yearly" evaluation because: "Lt Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of this report."
Which means a year after he trotted off to Alabama, and 7 months after he returned to Texas, Bush's commanding officers in Texas still thought he was in Alabama. The report said Bush "cleared this base on 15 May 1972, and has been performing equivalent training in a non-flying status with the 187 TAC RECON GP, Dannelly Ang Base, Alabama."
Americans should tell members of Congress to consider the military service record of the man deciding the fate of our young men and women in Iraq before granting his next request for funding to keep them there until hell freezes over apparently.
Bush Verses Kerry - Questions About Military Service Revisited
August 10, 2004
Evelyn Pringle
That's it. I've had it. Questions about Bush's military service in the Air National Guard would in all likelihood be history by now if not for the constant Republican attacks on Kerry's patriotism and war record, along with a steady stream of accusations that he is weak on defense and national security.
Due to their own stupidity, the spotlight will now be on the military records of our deserter-in-chief and Top VP Chickenhawk for the duration of the campaign. I hereby intend to remind voters that while Kerry was in Vietnam putting his life on the line, Bush was a drunken AWOL deserter roaming around somewhere in between Alabama and Texas, every time I get the chance.
Lets start at the beginning of Bush's military career. There is no doubt that he received special treatment to get in the Texas Air National Guard. When he was accepted, there were over 100,000 guys on waiting lists all over the country, and there were 500 on the Texas list alone.
Bush denies receiving any help, "I can just tell you, from my perspective, I never asked for, I don't believe I received special treatment," he told reporters. When running for governor in 1993, he said "There was no special treatment. They were looking for pilots, and I was honored to serve."
Bush spokesman, David Beckwith, inferred he was accepted because he was more qualified than other guys: "A lot of people weren't qualified," he said, "so special commissions were offered to those willing to undergo the extra training required."
What a joke. Did they really think people would buy a story that Bush was more qualified than others, when he only scored 25% on the Pilot Aptitude Test (the lowest score allowed for would-be pilots)?
In any event, Charles Shoemake, chief of personnel in the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980, denies there was a shortage or that Bush was better qualified. "We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified," he said. Tom Hail, historian for the Texas Guard, also said that records do not show a pilot shortage at the time.
Bush only joined the Guard because his student deferment was set to run out. In January 1968 he met with Colonel Walter Staudt, then commander of the Texas Guard. Shortly thereafter, he was accepted ahead of everyone else on the list.
Ben Barnes, former Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, also helped Bush get in at the request of a Bush family friend, Sid Adger. Barnes said he was contacted by Adger and asked to help Bush get in, and so he called Gen. James Rose and did it. Barnes' account of events is contained in a statement released after he testified under oath in a deposition in a federal lawsuit in September, 1999.
Barnes also testified that he had since met with a top Bush adviser to discuss how to rebut allegations that Bush got special treatment. Barnes proved that the meeting took place, by producing a note from Bush himself, thanking him for his help in rebutting rumors that Bush's father helped his son find a Guard slot.
The Bush gang also claims he got no help when he received a direct appointment. "Our information is there was absolutely no special deal," said Beckwith.
The truth is, both Barnes and Staudt recommended him for a direct appointment, which allowed him to become a second lieutenant right out of basic training, without having to go through officer candidate school, and which guaranteed Bush a spot in the pilot training program.
Military records released so far contain no explanation for Bush's strange behavior during his final 18 months in the Guard, when he failed to show up for a physical, was suspended from flying, and went for five months without attending a single drill.
Questions about these issues gained momentum a while back when Michael Moore called Bush a deserter, and DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe pointed out that Bush went AWOL after taxpayers invested a quarter of a million dollars training him to be a fighter pilot.
When Bush joined the Guard he said he had a goal of "making flying a lifetime pursuit." He also signed a document stating he understood the penalty of not measuring up to Guard standards: "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation," it said.
Yet, even under the threat of being ordered to active duty, Bush seemingly had no fear when he allowed himself to be suspended. The 1972 suspension order stated:
Verbal orders of the Comdr on 1 Aug 72 suspending 1STLT George W. Bush.from flying status are confirmed.Reason for Suspension: Failure to accomplish annual medical examination. Off will comply with para 2-10, AFM 35-13.
AFM 35-13 specifies that "When a Rated Officer Fails To Accomplish a Medical Examination Prescribed by AFM .(1) The local commander ... will direct an investigation ... (2) will forward the report along with the command recommendation to USAFMPC/DPMAJD, Randolph AFB TX 78148 for final determination."
Bush claims he released all his military records. If that's true, where are the results of the official investigation and the follow-up report listed in the order above?
Over time at least three different stories have emerged from the Bush camp as to why he was suspended. At one point he said he did not take the physical because he was in Alabama and his personal physician was in Houston. But the Boston Globe quickly put that notion to rest when it reported that "flight physicals can be administered only by certified Air Force flight surgeons, and some were assigned at the time to Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, where Bush was living."
On another date his people told the London Times that he didn't have to take an exam, "As he was not flying, there was no reason for him to take the flight physical exam."
Then Bush spokesman Dan Bartlett told reporters that Bush was aware that he would be suspended, but that he had no choice because his paperwork hadn't caught up with him in Alabama. "It was just a question of following the bureaucratic procedure of the time," Bartlett said. "He knew the suspension would have to take place."
So which is it? That (a) his family physician wasn't in Alabama, or (b) he didn't have to take the exam because he wasn't flying, or (c) that the suspension was caused by a bureaucratic mix-up of paperwork?
Bush himself gave yet another bogus reason. He claimed the plane he trained on was no longer in use. This was a blatant lie. Bush's Texas unit continued to fly the F-102 until 1974. One of his Texas commanders, Retired Major Bobby Hodges, is quoted as saying: "If he had come back to Houston, I would have kept him flying the 102 until he got out, but I don't remember him coming back at all."
Two retired Guard generals told the Boston Globe that it was almost unheard of for a military pilot to miss a flight physical and not be investigated. "There is no excuse for that. Aviators just don't miss their flight physicals," said Major General Paul Weaver, who retired as director of the Air National Guard in 2002.
Brigadier General David McGinnis said that "Failure to take your flight physical is like a failure to show up for duty. It is an obligation you can't blow off," and that regulations would have required an investigation of the matter.
McGinnis surmised that Bush's superiors may have viewed him as a liability, and decided "to get him off the books, make his father happy, and hope no one would notice." But he said there still should have been a report. "If it didn't happen, that shows how far they were willing to stretch the rules to accommodate" then Lt Bush.
The documents released contain no record of any such inquiry. Its perfectly clear that the rules were stretched to accommodate Bush from the minute he decided to join the Guard in order to dodge the draft.
Any suggestion that Bush could simply decide to quit flying, with two years remaining on his commitment, after a quarter of a million dollars was invested in his training, is absurd. Bush signed a pledge to fly for at least five years after he completed his training to ensure that the tax dollars would be well-spent. He grossly violated that pledge.
Bush has never satisfactorily explained why he failed to show up for duty at the Dannelly Base in Alabama or what he was up to while he was AWOL for five months.
During the 2000 campaign, when asked about Dannelly, Bush said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time ... I made up some missed weekends ... I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations."
Dan Bartlett, his spokesman at the time, said, "He specifically recalls pulling duty in Alabama, he did his drills."
The official records don't support their versions of events.
In fact, the records show that on September 15, 1972, Bush received a direct order to report for duty at Dannelly. The order said: "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on 7-8 October, and 4-5 November. Bush apparently ignored the order because he never showed up.
Dannelly Unit commander, Retired General William Turnipseed, and his administrative officer, Kenneth Lott, both say Bush was not there. ''Had he reported in, I would have had some recall, and I do not,'' Turnipseed said. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered."
But Bush, being the pathological liar that he is, goes right on saying he served in Alabama. When asked about General Turnipseed's statements, he said, "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
If is memory is so good, then why can't he remember a single name out of the 700 guard members he served with at Dannelly? And why hasn't a single guy come forward to say he served with Bush?
The records prove that Bush's superiors in Texas thought he was in Alabama. Officers Jerry Killian and William Harris said so in his yearly evaluation: "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report," and a "civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama."
He wasn't in Texas and he wasn't in Alabama. So where was he?
In 1998, Bush hired Col. Albert Lloyd to review his Guard records. Since then, Lloyd himself has said the record should include evidence of his service in Alabama. "If he did, his drill attendance should have been certified and sent to Ellington, and there would have been a record," he said. No such attendance record exists.
Bush now claims he can prove he attended one drill on Nov. 29, 1972. However, the document used to support this claim is highly suspect. It is undated, unsigned, and doesn't even have Bush's name on it. It was "discovered" by Lloyd in 1998 and somehow got added to the official record. There are also two versions of it. The one discovered by Lloyd has handwritten notations on it, while the one obtained from Bush's records does not. It's hardly conclusive proof of Bush's whereabouts on one day in the year in question.
On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence to prove Bush wasn't at Dannelly. Most interesting are interviews with two actual members of the Alabama unit. According to a February 13, 2004 article in the Memphis Flyer, Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop attended regular drills in 1972 and they are both absolutely certain that Bush was not there.
Mintz told the reporter, "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas. And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence. I was a young bachelor then. I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
When he didn't show, Mintz thought Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. His assumption was wrong. In campaign 2000, Bush was referring to Mintz's unit, and so far he's sticking to the same story in 2004.
Mintz talked about his "negative reaction" to Bush's dishonesty. "You don't do that as an officer, you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen. This guy's got a lot of nerve," he said.
Mintz says there were only 25 or 30 pilots at the unit, "There's no doubt. I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever," he said. "And if he did any flying at all, on whatever kind of craft, that would have involved a great number of supportive personnel. It takes a lot of people to get a plane into the air. But nobody I can think of remembers him," said Mintz.
Mintz said he "talked to one of my buddies the other day and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
Mintz's buddy is Paul Bishop. He voted for Bush in 2000, but is now upset about Bush saying he served in Alabama. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," said Bishop.
Bishop said he didn't pay much attention to Bush's lies during campaign 2000, but he does now since the war in Iraq started. "It bothered me that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time. He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject. I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country," he said.
How will Bush's dishonesty play out in election 2004? Not too well if the opinions of Mintz and Bishop are any indication. Both were asked who they planned to vote for. Will Bishop vote for Bush? "Naw, this goes to an integrity issue," he says. And, who will Mintz be voting for? "Not for any Texas politicians," he says.
The latest stunt in the campaign to smear Kerry's war record comes from a group of guys who call themselves, "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. " They recently held a public news conference at which they attacked Kerry's status as a war hero, questioned the legitimacy of his combat wounds, and claimed his antiwar activities ought to disqualify him from becoming President. The founder and co-chairman of the group is John O'Neill.
Bush's campaign chairman, Marc Racicot, says: "Neither the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign nor the RNC have coordinated or participated in the planning of this news conference." O'Neill also denied any affiliation with the Bush camp.
Yeah right, there's no connection whatsoever. O'Neill organized the group with the help of Merrie Spaeth, who in 2000 just happened to be a spokeswoman for a group that spent $2 million on ads attacking John McCain's record when he ran against Bush.
In addition to being a generous contributor to both of Bush's presidential campaigns, Merrie is listed on the White House web site as one of the "prominent public and private sector leaders who are alumni of the White House Fellows Program from Texas." Texas investor Sam Wylie is a director of the group. He also has contributed the maximum amount permitted to the RNC and the Bush's campaign.
Golly gee, I don't know why in the world anyone would link this group to the Bush campaign.
The group attacked Kerry's war record in Vietnam and O'Neill claimed he was awarded a purple heart for a self-inflicted wound that was "trivial" and "insignificant." "I have very serious questions based on talking to people who were involved in those incidents," O'Neill said. "It was fraudulently reported and used as the basis for leaving Vietnam early," he said.
During the news conference, the group read a document written by a doctor, Louis Letson (also a member of the group) who said he treated a wound for Kerry in 1968. Letson said that "Some of his (Kerry's) crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore," and, "The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks. That seemed to fit the injury which I treated."
Oh sure, now I get it. In the dead of night, Kerry knew how to fire a mortar round toward the shore in a way that would make it ricochet off a rock and send a fragment of shrapnel back to the boat to land in Kerry's arm. And even though this brilliant feat took place in the dark, Kerry figured out a way to make sure that the shrapnel would hit him just right without hurting him too seriously. Wow! I wonder if Kerry's real name is "Houdini."
One member of the group, Steve Gardner, served under Kerry. He claims Kerry was indecisive in combat. "If a man like that can't handle that six-man boat, how can you expect him to be our commander in chief?" asked Gardner.
Since Kerry won five medals for bravery I'm not too concerned about Gardner's opinion of whether Kerry can handle a boat. The real question that needs to be answered is how did a draft-dodging coward, who went AWOL for five months in a time of war, and who couldn't sober up long enough to take a physical once a year, end up commander-in-chief?
David Wade, served with Kerry in Vietnam. He describes the statements by the group as "a false, lying smear campaign against a decorated combat veteran," and added, "This is the ugly face of the Bush attack machine questioning John Kerry's patriotism."
Kerry's favorable evaluations are out there for anyone who wants to read them. They contradict the allegations made by the group. One commander wrote: "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed." The citation for his Bronze Star praises his "calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire."
His heroic actions were described in the Silver Star citation, "With utter disregard for his own safety and the enemy rockets," the citation says, "again ordered a charge on the enemy, beached his boat only 10 feet from the Viet Cong rocket position and personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the of the enemy. ... The extraordinary daring and personal courage of Lt. Kerry attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire were responsible for the highly successful mission."
The Republican band of chickenhawks have a lot of nerve attacking Kerry's service to his country. Wade Sanders gave his opinion of their attacks at a follow-up news conference, "I think it's going to sicken and repulse the vast majority of the American people," and the criticism would "backfire on this president and this vice president."
Wade is right. This latest stunt guarantees that Bush's records, and Cheney's five deferments, will be front line issues for the rest of the campaign. They could have told the group to knock it off, but chose not to. So now its open season on the military service records from here on in.
The Vets demanded that Kerry release more records. I find this demand laughable being the Pentagon says it is under strict orders not to discuss anything about Bush's records, and FOIA Officers say they are under orders from the Pentagon to ignore all requests. And on top of all that, Officials from the National Guard Bureau, now headed by a Bush appointee from Texas, said they are under orders to not answer any questions.
The bureau's historian, Charles Gross, said 'If it has to do with George W. Bush, the Texas Air National Guard or the Vietnam War, I can't talk with you." FOIA officer, Rose Bird, said she stopped accepting requests in February and directs them to the Pentagon. But the Pentagon records coordinator, James Hogan, said senior Defense Department officials have directed the Bureau to not respond to questions about Bush's records.
You know, I am really worried about the number of agencies involved in guarding Bush's records. I wonder if we have enough employees left over to guard Fort Knox.
Come November, the voters will decide which candidate they trust to lead the country in a time of war. A war hero who was awarded five medals for bravery, or an AWOL deserter who failed to show up for duty for over five months, in a time of war.
Evelyn Pringle
That's it. I've had it. Questions about Bush's military service in the Air National Guard would in all likelihood be history by now if not for the constant Republican attacks on Kerry's patriotism and war record, along with a steady stream of accusations that he is weak on defense and national security.
Due to their own stupidity, the spotlight will now be on the military records of our deserter-in-chief and Top VP Chickenhawk for the duration of the campaign. I hereby intend to remind voters that while Kerry was in Vietnam putting his life on the line, Bush was a drunken AWOL deserter roaming around somewhere in between Alabama and Texas, every time I get the chance.
Lets start at the beginning of Bush's military career. There is no doubt that he received special treatment to get in the Texas Air National Guard. When he was accepted, there were over 100,000 guys on waiting lists all over the country, and there were 500 on the Texas list alone.
Bush denies receiving any help, "I can just tell you, from my perspective, I never asked for, I don't believe I received special treatment," he told reporters. When running for governor in 1993, he said "There was no special treatment. They were looking for pilots, and I was honored to serve."
Bush spokesman, David Beckwith, inferred he was accepted because he was more qualified than other guys: "A lot of people weren't qualified," he said, "so special commissions were offered to those willing to undergo the extra training required."
What a joke. Did they really think people would buy a story that Bush was more qualified than others, when he only scored 25% on the Pilot Aptitude Test (the lowest score allowed for would-be pilots)?
In any event, Charles Shoemake, chief of personnel in the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980, denies there was a shortage or that Bush was better qualified. "We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified," he said. Tom Hail, historian for the Texas Guard, also said that records do not show a pilot shortage at the time.
Bush only joined the Guard because his student deferment was set to run out. In January 1968 he met with Colonel Walter Staudt, then commander of the Texas Guard. Shortly thereafter, he was accepted ahead of everyone else on the list.
Ben Barnes, former Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, also helped Bush get in at the request of a Bush family friend, Sid Adger. Barnes said he was contacted by Adger and asked to help Bush get in, and so he called Gen. James Rose and did it. Barnes' account of events is contained in a statement released after he testified under oath in a deposition in a federal lawsuit in September, 1999.
Barnes also testified that he had since met with a top Bush adviser to discuss how to rebut allegations that Bush got special treatment. Barnes proved that the meeting took place, by producing a note from Bush himself, thanking him for his help in rebutting rumors that Bush's father helped his son find a Guard slot.
The Bush gang also claims he got no help when he received a direct appointment. "Our information is there was absolutely no special deal," said Beckwith.
The truth is, both Barnes and Staudt recommended him for a direct appointment, which allowed him to become a second lieutenant right out of basic training, without having to go through officer candidate school, and which guaranteed Bush a spot in the pilot training program.
Military records released so far contain no explanation for Bush's strange behavior during his final 18 months in the Guard, when he failed to show up for a physical, was suspended from flying, and went for five months without attending a single drill.
Questions about these issues gained momentum a while back when Michael Moore called Bush a deserter, and DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe pointed out that Bush went AWOL after taxpayers invested a quarter of a million dollars training him to be a fighter pilot.
When Bush joined the Guard he said he had a goal of "making flying a lifetime pursuit." He also signed a document stating he understood the penalty of not measuring up to Guard standards: "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation," it said.
Yet, even under the threat of being ordered to active duty, Bush seemingly had no fear when he allowed himself to be suspended. The 1972 suspension order stated:
Verbal orders of the Comdr on 1 Aug 72 suspending 1STLT George W. Bush.from flying status are confirmed.Reason for Suspension: Failure to accomplish annual medical examination. Off will comply with para 2-10, AFM 35-13.
AFM 35-13 specifies that "When a Rated Officer Fails To Accomplish a Medical Examination Prescribed by AFM .(1) The local commander ... will direct an investigation ... (2) will forward the report along with the command recommendation to USAFMPC/DPMAJD, Randolph AFB TX 78148 for final determination."
Bush claims he released all his military records. If that's true, where are the results of the official investigation and the follow-up report listed in the order above?
Over time at least three different stories have emerged from the Bush camp as to why he was suspended. At one point he said he did not take the physical because he was in Alabama and his personal physician was in Houston. But the Boston Globe quickly put that notion to rest when it reported that "flight physicals can be administered only by certified Air Force flight surgeons, and some were assigned at the time to Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, where Bush was living."
On another date his people told the London Times that he didn't have to take an exam, "As he was not flying, there was no reason for him to take the flight physical exam."
Then Bush spokesman Dan Bartlett told reporters that Bush was aware that he would be suspended, but that he had no choice because his paperwork hadn't caught up with him in Alabama. "It was just a question of following the bureaucratic procedure of the time," Bartlett said. "He knew the suspension would have to take place."
So which is it? That (a) his family physician wasn't in Alabama, or (b) he didn't have to take the exam because he wasn't flying, or (c) that the suspension was caused by a bureaucratic mix-up of paperwork?
Bush himself gave yet another bogus reason. He claimed the plane he trained on was no longer in use. This was a blatant lie. Bush's Texas unit continued to fly the F-102 until 1974. One of his Texas commanders, Retired Major Bobby Hodges, is quoted as saying: "If he had come back to Houston, I would have kept him flying the 102 until he got out, but I don't remember him coming back at all."
Two retired Guard generals told the Boston Globe that it was almost unheard of for a military pilot to miss a flight physical and not be investigated. "There is no excuse for that. Aviators just don't miss their flight physicals," said Major General Paul Weaver, who retired as director of the Air National Guard in 2002.
Brigadier General David McGinnis said that "Failure to take your flight physical is like a failure to show up for duty. It is an obligation you can't blow off," and that regulations would have required an investigation of the matter.
McGinnis surmised that Bush's superiors may have viewed him as a liability, and decided "to get him off the books, make his father happy, and hope no one would notice." But he said there still should have been a report. "If it didn't happen, that shows how far they were willing to stretch the rules to accommodate" then Lt Bush.
The documents released contain no record of any such inquiry. Its perfectly clear that the rules were stretched to accommodate Bush from the minute he decided to join the Guard in order to dodge the draft.
Any suggestion that Bush could simply decide to quit flying, with two years remaining on his commitment, after a quarter of a million dollars was invested in his training, is absurd. Bush signed a pledge to fly for at least five years after he completed his training to ensure that the tax dollars would be well-spent. He grossly violated that pledge.
Bush has never satisfactorily explained why he failed to show up for duty at the Dannelly Base in Alabama or what he was up to while he was AWOL for five months.
During the 2000 campaign, when asked about Dannelly, Bush said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time ... I made up some missed weekends ... I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations."
Dan Bartlett, his spokesman at the time, said, "He specifically recalls pulling duty in Alabama, he did his drills."
The official records don't support their versions of events.
In fact, the records show that on September 15, 1972, Bush received a direct order to report for duty at Dannelly. The order said: "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on 7-8 October, and 4-5 November. Bush apparently ignored the order because he never showed up.
Dannelly Unit commander, Retired General William Turnipseed, and his administrative officer, Kenneth Lott, both say Bush was not there. ''Had he reported in, I would have had some recall, and I do not,'' Turnipseed said. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered."
But Bush, being the pathological liar that he is, goes right on saying he served in Alabama. When asked about General Turnipseed's statements, he said, "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
If is memory is so good, then why can't he remember a single name out of the 700 guard members he served with at Dannelly? And why hasn't a single guy come forward to say he served with Bush?
The records prove that Bush's superiors in Texas thought he was in Alabama. Officers Jerry Killian and William Harris said so in his yearly evaluation: "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report," and a "civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama."
He wasn't in Texas and he wasn't in Alabama. So where was he?
In 1998, Bush hired Col. Albert Lloyd to review his Guard records. Since then, Lloyd himself has said the record should include evidence of his service in Alabama. "If he did, his drill attendance should have been certified and sent to Ellington, and there would have been a record," he said. No such attendance record exists.
Bush now claims he can prove he attended one drill on Nov. 29, 1972. However, the document used to support this claim is highly suspect. It is undated, unsigned, and doesn't even have Bush's name on it. It was "discovered" by Lloyd in 1998 and somehow got added to the official record. There are also two versions of it. The one discovered by Lloyd has handwritten notations on it, while the one obtained from Bush's records does not. It's hardly conclusive proof of Bush's whereabouts on one day in the year in question.
On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence to prove Bush wasn't at Dannelly. Most interesting are interviews with two actual members of the Alabama unit. According to a February 13, 2004 article in the Memphis Flyer, Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop attended regular drills in 1972 and they are both absolutely certain that Bush was not there.
Mintz told the reporter, "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas. And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence. I was a young bachelor then. I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
When he didn't show, Mintz thought Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. His assumption was wrong. In campaign 2000, Bush was referring to Mintz's unit, and so far he's sticking to the same story in 2004.
Mintz talked about his "negative reaction" to Bush's dishonesty. "You don't do that as an officer, you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen. This guy's got a lot of nerve," he said.
Mintz says there were only 25 or 30 pilots at the unit, "There's no doubt. I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever," he said. "And if he did any flying at all, on whatever kind of craft, that would have involved a great number of supportive personnel. It takes a lot of people to get a plane into the air. But nobody I can think of remembers him," said Mintz.
Mintz said he "talked to one of my buddies the other day and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
Mintz's buddy is Paul Bishop. He voted for Bush in 2000, but is now upset about Bush saying he served in Alabama. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," said Bishop.
Bishop said he didn't pay much attention to Bush's lies during campaign 2000, but he does now since the war in Iraq started. "It bothered me that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time. He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject. I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country," he said.
How will Bush's dishonesty play out in election 2004? Not too well if the opinions of Mintz and Bishop are any indication. Both were asked who they planned to vote for. Will Bishop vote for Bush? "Naw, this goes to an integrity issue," he says. And, who will Mintz be voting for? "Not for any Texas politicians," he says.
The latest stunt in the campaign to smear Kerry's war record comes from a group of guys who call themselves, "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. " They recently held a public news conference at which they attacked Kerry's status as a war hero, questioned the legitimacy of his combat wounds, and claimed his antiwar activities ought to disqualify him from becoming President. The founder and co-chairman of the group is John O'Neill.
Bush's campaign chairman, Marc Racicot, says: "Neither the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign nor the RNC have coordinated or participated in the planning of this news conference." O'Neill also denied any affiliation with the Bush camp.
Yeah right, there's no connection whatsoever. O'Neill organized the group with the help of Merrie Spaeth, who in 2000 just happened to be a spokeswoman for a group that spent $2 million on ads attacking John McCain's record when he ran against Bush.
In addition to being a generous contributor to both of Bush's presidential campaigns, Merrie is listed on the White House web site as one of the "prominent public and private sector leaders who are alumni of the White House Fellows Program from Texas." Texas investor Sam Wylie is a director of the group. He also has contributed the maximum amount permitted to the RNC and the Bush's campaign.
Golly gee, I don't know why in the world anyone would link this group to the Bush campaign.
The group attacked Kerry's war record in Vietnam and O'Neill claimed he was awarded a purple heart for a self-inflicted wound that was "trivial" and "insignificant." "I have very serious questions based on talking to people who were involved in those incidents," O'Neill said. "It was fraudulently reported and used as the basis for leaving Vietnam early," he said.
During the news conference, the group read a document written by a doctor, Louis Letson (also a member of the group) who said he treated a wound for Kerry in 1968. Letson said that "Some of his (Kerry's) crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore," and, "The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks. That seemed to fit the injury which I treated."
Oh sure, now I get it. In the dead of night, Kerry knew how to fire a mortar round toward the shore in a way that would make it ricochet off a rock and send a fragment of shrapnel back to the boat to land in Kerry's arm. And even though this brilliant feat took place in the dark, Kerry figured out a way to make sure that the shrapnel would hit him just right without hurting him too seriously. Wow! I wonder if Kerry's real name is "Houdini."
One member of the group, Steve Gardner, served under Kerry. He claims Kerry was indecisive in combat. "If a man like that can't handle that six-man boat, how can you expect him to be our commander in chief?" asked Gardner.
Since Kerry won five medals for bravery I'm not too concerned about Gardner's opinion of whether Kerry can handle a boat. The real question that needs to be answered is how did a draft-dodging coward, who went AWOL for five months in a time of war, and who couldn't sober up long enough to take a physical once a year, end up commander-in-chief?
David Wade, served with Kerry in Vietnam. He describes the statements by the group as "a false, lying smear campaign against a decorated combat veteran," and added, "This is the ugly face of the Bush attack machine questioning John Kerry's patriotism."
Kerry's favorable evaluations are out there for anyone who wants to read them. They contradict the allegations made by the group. One commander wrote: "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed." The citation for his Bronze Star praises his "calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire."
His heroic actions were described in the Silver Star citation, "With utter disregard for his own safety and the enemy rockets," the citation says, "again ordered a charge on the enemy, beached his boat only 10 feet from the Viet Cong rocket position and personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the of the enemy. ... The extraordinary daring and personal courage of Lt. Kerry attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire were responsible for the highly successful mission."
The Republican band of chickenhawks have a lot of nerve attacking Kerry's service to his country. Wade Sanders gave his opinion of their attacks at a follow-up news conference, "I think it's going to sicken and repulse the vast majority of the American people," and the criticism would "backfire on this president and this vice president."
Wade is right. This latest stunt guarantees that Bush's records, and Cheney's five deferments, will be front line issues for the rest of the campaign. They could have told the group to knock it off, but chose not to. So now its open season on the military service records from here on in.
The Vets demanded that Kerry release more records. I find this demand laughable being the Pentagon says it is under strict orders not to discuss anything about Bush's records, and FOIA Officers say they are under orders from the Pentagon to ignore all requests. And on top of all that, Officials from the National Guard Bureau, now headed by a Bush appointee from Texas, said they are under orders to not answer any questions.
The bureau's historian, Charles Gross, said 'If it has to do with George W. Bush, the Texas Air National Guard or the Vietnam War, I can't talk with you." FOIA officer, Rose Bird, said she stopped accepting requests in February and directs them to the Pentagon. But the Pentagon records coordinator, James Hogan, said senior Defense Department officials have directed the Bureau to not respond to questions about Bush's records.
You know, I am really worried about the number of agencies involved in guarding Bush's records. I wonder if we have enough employees left over to guard Fort Knox.
Come November, the voters will decide which candidate they trust to lead the country in a time of war. A war hero who was awarded five medals for bravery, or an AWOL deserter who failed to show up for duty for over five months, in a time of war.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)