As of May 17, 220 of the 229 Swift boat veterans
contacted by the group have agreed to sign an open
letter to Senator John F. Kerry that challenges his
fitness to serve as America's Commander-in-Chief.

Signers of the letter include the entire chain of command
above Lt. John Kerry in Vietnam: Lt. Commander Grant
Hibbard, Lt. Commander George Elliott, Captain Charles
Plumly, Captain Adrian Lonsdale USCG, and Rear
Admiral Roy Hoffman.

Hear what they have to say about John Kerry.

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/st...40515063551324

Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing,
manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive, but the
most common phrase that you'd hear is 'requires constant
supervision.'"
-- Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)

"In my specific, personal experience in both coastal and
river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw
or heard anything remotely resembling the atrocities
described by Senator Kerry. If I had, it would have been
my obligation to report them in writing to a higher authority,
and I would certainly have done that. If Senator Kerry
actually witnessed or participated in these atrocities or, as
he described them, 'war crimes,' he was obligated to report
them. That he did not until later when it suited his political
purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst kind.
That he would malign my service and that of his fellow
sailors with no regard for the truth makes him totally
unqualified to serve as Commander-in-Chief."
-- Jeffrey Wainscott

"While in Cam Rahn Bay, he trained on several 24-hour
indoctrination missions, and one special skimmer operation
with my most senior and trusted Lieutenant. The briefing
from some members of that crew the morning after revealed
that they had not received any enemy fire, and yet Lt.(jg)
Kerry informed me of a wound -- he showed me a scratch
on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared
to be from one of our own M-79s. It was later reported to
me that Lt.(jg) Kerry had fired an M-79, and it had
exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recall being
advised of any medical treatment, and probably said
something like 'Forget it.' He later received a Purple Heart
for that scratch, and I have no information as to how or w
hom.

Lt.(jg) Kerry was allowed to return to the good old USA
after 4 months and a few days in-country, and then he
proceeded to betray his former shipmates, calling them
criminals who were committing atrocities. Today we are
here to tell you that just the opposite is true. Our rules of
engagement were quite strict, and the officers and men of
Swift often did not even return fire when they were under
fire if there was a possibility that innocent people--fishermen,
in a lot of cases -- might be hurt or injured. The rules and
the good intentions of the men increased the possibility that
we might take friendly casualties."
-- Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)

"Lt. Kerry returned home from the war to make some
outrageous statements and allegations... numerous criminal
acts in violation of the law of war were cited by Kerry,
disparaging those who had fought with honor in that conflict.
Had war crimes been committed by US forces in Vietnam?
Yes, but such acts were few and far between. Yet Lt. Kerry
gave numerous speeches and testimony before Congress
inappropriately leading his audiences to believe that what
was only an anomaly in the conduct of America's fighting
men was an epidemic. Furthermore, he suggested that they
were being encouraged to violated the law of war by those
within the chain of command.

Very specific orders, on file at the Vietnam archives at Texas
Tech University, were issued by my father [Admiral Elmo
Zumwalt] and others in his chain of command instructing
subordinates to act responsibly in preserving the life and
property of Vietnamese civilians."
-- Lt. Col. James Zumwalt, USMC (retired)

"I served with these guys. I went on missions with them,
and these men served honorably. Up and down the chain
of command there was no acquiescence to atrocities. It
was not condoned, it did not happen, and it was not
reported to me verbally or in writing by any of these men
including Lt.(jg) Kerry.

In 1971, '72, for almost 18 months, he stood before the
television audiences and claimed that the 500,000 men
and women in Vietnam, and in combat, were all villains
-- there were no heroes. In 2004, one hero from the
Vietnam War has appeared, running for President of
the United States and Commander-in-Chief. It just galls
one to think about it."
-- Captain George Elliott, USN (retired)

"During the Vietnam War I was Task Force Commander
at An Thoi, and my tour of duty was 13 months, from the
end of Tet to the beginning of the Vietnamization of the
Navy units.

Now when I went there right after Tet, I was restricted in
my movements. I couldn't go much of anyplace because
the Vietcong controlled most of the area. When I left, I
could go anywhere I wanted, just about. Commerce was
booming, the buses were running, trucks were going, the
waterways were filled with sampans with goods going to
market, but yet in Kerry's biography he says that our
operations were a complete failure. He also mentions a
formal conference with me, to try to get more air cover
and so on. That conference never happened..."
-- Captain Adrian Lonsdale, USCG (retired)

worth considering--

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/

bart,
at this point i've got to believe kerry is a throw away candidate to get the
dems together for 2008
nothing else makes sense.

gf.

"Bart Senior" wrote in message
. ..
As of May 17, 220 of the 229 Swift boat veterans
contacted by the group have agreed to sign an open
letter to Senator John F. Kerry that challenges his
fitness to serve as America's Commander-in-Chief.

Signers of the letter include the entire chain of command
above Lt. John Kerry in Vietnam: Lt. Commander Grant
Hibbard, Lt. Commander George Elliott, Captain Charles
Plumly, Captain Adrian Lonsdale USCG, and Rear
Admiral Roy Hoffman.

Hear what they have to say about John Kerry.


http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/st...00405150635513
24

Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing,
manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive, but the
most common phrase that you'd hear is 'requires constant
supervision.'"
-- Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)

"In my specific, personal experience in both coastal and
river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw
or heard anything remotely resembling the atrocities
described by Senator Kerry. If I had, it would have been
my obligation to report them in writing to a higher authority,
and I would certainly have done that. If Senator Kerry
actually witnessed or participated in these atrocities or, as
he described them, 'war crimes,' he was obligated to report
them. That he did not until later when it suited his political
purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst kind.
That he would malign my service and that of his fellow
sailors with no regard for the truth makes him totally
unqualified to serve as Commander-in-Chief."
-- Jeffrey Wainscott

"While in Cam Rahn Bay, he trained on several 24-hour
indoctrination missions, and one special skimmer operation
with my most senior and trusted Lieutenant. The briefing
from some members of that crew the morning after revealed
that they had not received any enemy fire, and yet Lt.(jg)
Kerry informed me of a wound -- he showed me a scratch
on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared
to be from one of our own M-79s. It was later reported to
me that Lt.(jg) Kerry had fired an M-79, and it had
exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recall being
advised of any medical treatment, and probably said
something like 'Forget it.' He later received a Purple Heart
for that scratch, and I have no information as to how or w
hom.

Lt.(jg) Kerry was allowed to return to the good old USA
after 4 months and a few days in-country, and then he
proceeded to betray his former shipmates, calling them
criminals who were committing atrocities. Today we are
here to tell you that just the opposite is true. Our rules of
engagement were quite strict, and the officers and men of
Swift often did not even return fire when they were under
fire if there was a possibility that innocent people--fishermen,
in a lot of cases -- might be hurt or injured. The rules and
the good intentions of the men increased the possibility that
we might take friendly casualties."
-- Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)

"Lt. Kerry returned home from the war to make some
outrageous statements and allegations... numerous criminal
acts in violation of the law of war were cited by Kerry,
disparaging those who had fought with honor in that conflict.
Had war crimes been committed by US forces in Vietnam?
Yes, but such acts were few and far between. Yet Lt. Kerry
gave numerous speeches and testimony before Congress
inappropriately leading his audiences to believe that what
was only an anomaly in the conduct of America's fighting
men was an epidemic. Furthermore, he suggested that they
were being encouraged to violated the law of war by those
within the chain of command.

Very specific orders, on file at the Vietnam archives at Texas
Tech University, were issued by my father [Admiral Elmo
Zumwalt] and others in his chain of command instructing
subordinates to act responsibly in preserving the life and
property of Vietnamese civilians."
-- Lt. Col. James Zumwalt, USMC (retired)

"I served with these guys. I went on missions with them,
and these men served honorably. Up and down the chain
of command there was no acquiescence to atrocities. It
was not condoned, it did not happen, and it was not
reported to me verbally or in writing by any of these men
including Lt.(jg) Kerry.

In 1971, '72, for almost 18 months, he stood before the
television audiences and claimed that the 500,000 men
and women in Vietnam, and in combat, were all villains
-- there were no heroes. In 2004, one hero from the
Vietnam War has appeared, running for President of
the United States and Commander-in-Chief. It just galls
one to think about it."
-- Captain George Elliott, USN (retired)

"During the Vietnam War I was Task Force Commander
at An Thoi, and my tour of duty was 13 months, from the
end of Tet to the beginning of the Vietnamization of the
Navy units.

Now when I went there right after Tet, I was restricted in
my movements. I couldn't go much of anyplace because
the Vietcong controlled most of the area. When I left, I
could go anywhere I wanted, just about. Commerce was
booming, the buses were running, trucks were going, the
waterways were filled with sampans with goods going to
market, but yet in Kerry's biography he says that our
operations were a complete failure. He also mentions a
formal conference with me, to try to get more air cover
and so on. That conference never happened..."
-- Captain Adrian Lonsdale, USCG (retired)

worth considering--

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/

With the exception of the bible thumpin part I thought you were describing
Democrats, then I read the dates, put it in context and realized that back
then there were Christians in the Democrat party. Just change thumpin to
hatin', and you'll easily see it was the Democrats beingdescribed. There
famous for running military ops and then running . .. .that certainly
qualifes as wacko.



Slave owning, KKK'n, oilfield trashin, military wackos, fire and
Brimstone bible thumpin, pea brained, ****** bashing, witch
burning..people looking to hop on a gravy chain by starting
wars....That's truly how you see republicans?

Sheeeze you have some issues to deal with....This is 2004 not 1960

Did Kerry pay you to write that extreme propaganda? Our did you steal
it from M. Moore?

Joe

slamming a war hero, not very patriotic.You guys call into question each
medal presented to our heros with each accusation, that they ALL may be
unearned, again not very patriotic. Bush lied about Alabama and MWD's, and
people died.IMHO.
"Bart Senior" wrote in message
. ..
As of May 17, 220 of the 229 Swift boat veterans
contacted by the group have agreed to sign an open
letter to Senator John F. Kerry that challenges his
fitness to serve as America's Commander-in-Chief.

Signers of the letter include the entire chain of command
above Lt. John Kerry in Vietnam: Lt. Commander Grant
Hibbard, Lt. Commander George Elliott, Captain Charles
Plumly, Captain Adrian Lonsdale USCG, and Rear
Admiral Roy Hoffman.

Hear what they have to say about John Kerry.


http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/st...00405150635513
24

Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing,
manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive, but the
most common phrase that you'd hear is 'requires constant
supervision.'"
-- Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)

"In my specific, personal experience in both coastal and
river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw
or heard anything remotely resembling the atrocities
described by Senator Kerry. If I had, it would have been
my obligation to report them in writing to a higher authority,
and I would certainly have done that. If Senator Kerry
actually witnessed or participated in these atrocities or, as
he described them, 'war crimes,' he was obligated to report
them. That he did not until later when it suited his political
purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst kind.
That he would malign my service and that of his fellow
sailors with no regard for the truth makes him totally
unqualified to serve as Commander-in-Chief."
-- Jeffrey Wainscott

"While in Cam Rahn Bay, he trained on several 24-hour
indoctrination missions, and one special skimmer operation
with my most senior and trusted Lieutenant. The briefing
from some members of that crew the morning after revealed
that they had not received any enemy fire, and yet Lt.(jg)
Kerry informed me of a wound -- he showed me a scratch
on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared
to be from one of our own M-79s. It was later reported to
me that Lt.(jg) Kerry had fired an M-79, and it had
exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recall being
advised of any medical treatment, and probably said
something like 'Forget it.' He later received a Purple Heart
for that scratch, and I have no information as to how or w
hom.

Lt.(jg) Kerry was allowed to return to the good old USA
after 4 months and a few days in-country, and then he
proceeded to betray his former shipmates, calling them
criminals who were committing atrocities. Today we are
here to tell you that just the opposite is true. Our rules of
engagement were quite strict, and the officers and men of
Swift often did not even return fire when they were under
fire if there was a possibility that innocent people--fishermen,
in a lot of cases -- might be hurt or injured. The rules and
the good intentions of the men increased the possibility that
we might take friendly casualties."
-- Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)

"Lt. Kerry returned home from the war to make some
outrageous statements and allegations... numerous criminal
acts in violation of the law of war were cited by Kerry,
disparaging those who had fought with honor in that conflict.
Had war crimes been committed by US forces in Vietnam?
Yes, but such acts were few and far between. Yet Lt. Kerry
gave numerous speeches and testimony before Congress
inappropriately leading his audiences to believe that what
was only an anomaly in the conduct of America's fighting
men was an epidemic. Furthermore, he suggested that they
were being encouraged to violated the law of war by those
within the chain of command.

Very specific orders, on file at the Vietnam archives at Texas
Tech University, were issued by my father [Admiral Elmo
Zumwalt] and others in his chain of command instructing
subordinates to act responsibly in preserving the life and
property of Vietnamese civilians."
-- Lt. Col. James Zumwalt, USMC (retired)

"I served with these guys. I went on missions with them,
and these men served honorably. Up and down the chain
of command there was no acquiescence to atrocities. It
was not condoned, it did not happen, and it was not
reported to me verbally or in writing by any of these men
including Lt.(jg) Kerry.

In 1971, '72, for almost 18 months, he stood before the
television audiences and claimed that the 500,000 men
and women in Vietnam, and in combat, were all villains
-- there were no heroes. In 2004, one hero from the
Vietnam War has appeared, running for President of
the United States and Commander-in-Chief. It just galls
one to think about it."
-- Captain George Elliott, USN (retired)

"During the Vietnam War I was Task Force Commander
at An Thoi, and my tour of duty was 13 months, from the
end of Tet to the beginning of the Vietnamization of the
Navy units.

Now when I went there right after Tet, I was restricted in
my movements. I couldn't go much of anyplace because
the Vietcong controlled most of the area. When I left, I
could go anywhere I wanted, just about. Commerce was
booming, the buses were running, trucks were going, the
waterways were filled with sampans with goods going to
market, but yet in Kerry's biography he says that our
operations were a complete failure. He also mentions a
formal conference with me, to try to get more air cover
and so on. That conference never happened..."
-- Captain Adrian Lonsdale, USCG (retired)

worth considering--

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/

Bart Senior wrote:
As of May 17, 220 of the 229 Swift boat veterans
contacted by the group have agreed to sign an open
letter to Senator John F. Kerry that challenges his
fitness to serve as America's Commander-in-Chief.

I guess this is a good example of how "conservatives" always tell the
whole truth and nothing but the truth, Bart.

This is nothing but a trumped-up advertising campaign, of no more
substance or merit that a Pepsi commercial.

DSK

DSK wrote in message ...
Bart Senior wrote:
As of May 17, 220 of the 229 Swift boat veterans
contacted by the group have agreed to sign an open
letter to Senator John F. Kerry that challenges his
fitness to serve as America's Commander-in-Chief.

I guess this is a good example of how "conservatives" always tell the
whole truth and nothing but the truth, Bart.

This is nothing but a trumped-up advertising campaign, of no more
substance or merit that a Pepsi commercial.

DSK

So what your saying Doug is all the officers Kerry served under are
liars?
That they just made up everything.

Seems quite a few people that were in Vietnam with Kerry see things a
whole lot differently than Kerry did. Kerry has a history of twisting
the truth, and the officers and men that sent the open letter to Kerry
do not.

So.... whos word should we trust?

Joe

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:46:11 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 07:02:01 -0400, DSK said:

This is nothing but a trumped-up advertising campaign, of no more
substance or merit that a Pepsi commercial.

Hmm. Supported by only a small minority of 220 out of 229?

That may be, but many of those 220 never even met Kerry in Vietnam. Of
the dozen or so that actually served under Kerry's command, only one does
not support him.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...9270022.htm?1c

DSK said:
This is nothing but a trumped-up advertising campaign, of no more
substance or merit that a Pepsi commercial.


Dave wrote:
Hmm. Supported by only a small minority of 220 out of 229?

In other words, 220 out of 229 Vietnam vets who *might* have some
possible tracable connection to Kerry decided that they would become
paid shills for Bush. It seems likely to me that many of these names
quoted are totally fictional anyway.


I notice that there are *no* veterans who served with GWB Jr coming
forward to say whether he was even there, much less how fit for command
he is. Oops, sorry, that's "changing the subject" isn't it?

It comes down to what you want to believe. You and Bart (and many
others) hate & despise Kerry... you want to believe anything bad about
him. IMHO that's not a good foundation for voting one way or the other,
and even less of a justification for making numerous & vehement public
statements.

DSK

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:20:31 -0400, DSK wrote:

DSK said:
This is nothing but a trumped-up advertising campaign, of no more
substance or merit that a Pepsi commercial.


Dave wrote:
Hmm. Supported by only a small minority of 220 out of 229?

In other words, 220 out of 229 Vietnam vets who *might* have some
possible tracable connection to Kerry decided that they would become
paid shills for Bush. It seems likely to me that many of these names
quoted are totally fictional anyway.


I notice that there are *no* veterans who served with GWB Jr coming
forward to say whether he was even there, much less how fit for command
he is. Oops, sorry, that's "changing the subject" isn't it?

It comes down to what you want to believe. You and Bart (and many
others) hate & despise Kerry... you want to believe anything bad about
him. IMHO that's not a good foundation for voting one way or the other,
and even less of a justification for making numerous & vehement public
statements.

DSK

It makes you wonder what the standard is. These same "Republicans"
were smearing John McCain in the last election. It seems they go to
great efforts to find the least qualified candidate and then spend all
their efforts trying to tear down those obviously more qualified.
There is no room for a moderate in the Republican Party, although they
will certain hide behind one of the few they still have left.

It certainly makes you wonder what the *real* agenda is. I suspect if
you dig a little deeper it is all about the relatively quiet issues of
abortion and Gawd and sex education and all the other right wing
cultural crap that they know they can't win with. They float these
"gay marriage" balloons to keep the barking seals of the right wing
happy and energized, but otherwise spouting all this other nonsense
just makes them look silly to the rest of us.

felton wrote:
It certainly makes you wonder what the *real* agenda is.

It doesn't make me wonder at all. I grew up with these people, or at
least their very close cultural & intellectual & spiritual & civic kin.
They are the KKKers and the John Birchers and the Bible-thumping whackos
who want to burn witches & keep slaves, and they are closely allied with
a number of large business interests (specifically oil & military
contracting) who see a gravy train.

Don't kid yourself, there is a strong possibility that President Bush
will get reelected. I don't remember if you're old enough to remember
the 1972 election... Nixon got reelected by a landslide, in the midst of
the most obvious corruption & Constitutional violations in history.
Jesse Helms, one of the last of the pea-brained old-time
fire-and-brimstone ******-bashing politicians, got elected in that same
race.

There are a lot of people out there who really really want this type of
"leadership." They are all going to get out & vote.

At the same time, Republicans have had four years to get their paws into
the election machinery and corrupt the process. This time, look for
large numbers of military absentee ballots to get "lost" and even larger
numbers of suspicious purges of the voter rolls.

... They float these
"gay marriage" balloons to keep the barking seals of the right wing
happy and energized

And that was a bit of rather cunical posturing. There is no chance at
all of getting a Constitutional amendment on that issue. They
deliberately chose the method of legally supressing gay marriage with
the lowest odds of success, and trumpet it to all the witch-burners.

... but otherwise spouting all this other nonsense
just makes them look silly to the rest of us.

Boths sides look pretty silly to me; but given a choice between plunging
the country into debt for the sake of Halliburton profits, ignoring
terrorism, weakening the military, shredding the Constitution,
alienating once-staunch allies, and turning the country into a de facto
militarist plutocracy... well let's just say I don't see that as a
"choice." And that's ignoring domestic issues such as health care,
education, & the environment.

DSK