On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:15:23 +0000, Gould 0738 wrote:

I believe your talking about Dr. Louis Letson. If he treated Kerry, one
would think his name would appear on Kerry's sick call sheet. It
doesn't.



Isn't this the guy who says "I know Kerry is lying about earning a Purple
Heart because I treated him for the wound?"


Yup, that's him. Part of Kerry's website is devoted to "fact checking."
Unfortunately, to much of this is "he said, she said." I guess that's
what happens when you dig up thirty year old garbage.

http://www.johnkerry.com/rapidrespon...504_truth.html

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:15:23 +0000, Gould 0738 wrote:

I believe your talking about Dr. Louis Letson. If he treated Kerry, one
would think his name would appear on Kerry's sick call sheet. It
doesn't.



Isn't this the guy who says "I know Kerry is lying about earning a Purple
Heart because I treated him for the wound?"


Yup, that's him. Part of Kerry's website is devoted to "fact checking."
Unfortunately, to much of this is "he said, she said." I guess that's
what happens when you dig up thirty year old garbage.



And isn't that the real shame of it?

73 words out of a 10,000 word acceptance speech about his 240 months in the
Senate but almost half of them on the 4 months he bravely served in Vietnam
some 30+ years ago.

And according some here in this very forum those 4 months 30 years ago are
more telling as to his ability to be POTUS than his recent 240 months in the
US Senate. Sadly, I am sure there are plenty of other non thinking
partisans who feel the same and cannot see what is important and what is
not.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...
"basskisser" wrote in message

.....evidence of your wild allegations, other than what the
swift boat vets are being paid to say?


Um, to which group of swift boat vets are you referring?

Glad to see you've resurrected the "wild allegations."

If you are that damned stupid, stay out of the conversation. It's
getting awfully tiring to have to explain every single sentence of
every single post to you. For an explanation, please see the topic of
the post, which is "Swift Boat Liars". THOSE would be the one's that I
am talking about, seeing how that is the topic of this post.

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 14:13:32 -0400, jim-- wrote:



And isn't that the real shame of it?

73 words out of a 10,000 word acceptance speech about his 240 months in
the Senate but almost half of them on the 4 months he bravely served in
Vietnam some 30+ years ago.

And according some here in this very forum those 4 months 30 years ago
are more telling as to his ability to be POTUS than his recent 240
months in the US Senate. Sadly, I am sure there are plenty of other non
thinking partisans who feel the same and cannot see what is important
and what is not.

There is still three months until the election. Surely between now and
then, there will be a national debate on real issues, but then, maybe not.
I have stated before, that I believe *both* candidates did what there
country asked of them. It would be nice to move on to a more issue
oriented campaign, but it this climate, that may be asking too much.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
The guys on Kerry's boat most likely
got stuck there because they couldn't transfer off due to nobody
wanting to
transfer onto Kerry's boat.



And 35 years later they still feel "trapped" by Kerry? If the stories
being
spread by the shadow organization are true, why do Kerry's crew still
feel
compelled to call it "bull****".

From John Herring:

Or they all received questionable awards?


Shame, shame, shame on you. :-(





Really support our troops. Join "Soldiers for The Truth".
http://www.sftt.org/


Maybe they are worried about being tried for "War Crimes"

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:23:05 -0400, "jim--" wrote:

I find it amazing that 10 guys who served on Kerry's boat speak the truth
but every one of the 250 who served along side his boat are liars and are
politically motivated.

Strange, eh Chuck?

Don't let Chuck get to you, he's just "Harry West Coast" and more a
troll than anything else.

Your skull is even thicker than I thought.

You're fighting Dennis for the 2004 American Cranial Density Award.

jps

They gave up years of their lives and, in
some cases, limbs, their health, their futures, and their lives, in a
trumped-up, bull**** war that had nothing to do with American security
and, in fact, did little more than prop up a series of right-wing
dictators in south Vietnam.

And would you like to tell us which right wing president drug us into
that mess to support the right wing dictators???

You don't believe character is important?
That it's a prime requisite for POTUS?
How about aspects of character, like honesty, intelligence, integrity, and so
forth? Are they "BS" as well?

So when you look at Kerrys admission that he committed the atrocities
to which he referred (cutting off heads, ears, rape, burning villages
etc.) you feel that shows a strength of character???

Tom wrote:

You don't believe character is important?
That it's a prime requisite for POTUS?
How about aspects of character, like honesty, intelligence, integrity, and so
forth? Are they "BS" as well?

So when you look at Kerrys admission that he committed the atrocities
to which he referred (cutting off heads, ears, rape, burning villages
etc.) you feel that shows a strength of character???


Hey...it's the military.


--
"There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in
Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me -
you can't get fooled again." -George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept.
17, 2002

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
I find it amazing that 10 guys who served on Kerry's boat speak the truth
but every one of the 250 who served along side his boat are liars and are
politically motivated.

Most of the charges this group brings against Kerry involve his actions on
just
a few missions. There are 6 guys on a boat.
Do the math, Jim. Do you believe they sent 40 boats at a time to maneuever
at
high speeds in very restricted waters?

Chuck, I know you are not as stupid as you appear to be on this topic.

At least two boats were on every mission. In case one breaks down then they
have the other one to tow it back or leave the broken boat and bring back
the broken boats crew.

This is how Kerry's peers were able to judge his actions and capabilities
and most have said that they didn't have faith and confidence in Kerry's
abilities.

Even *if* they did, why would anybody be inclined to pay particular
attention
to the
actions of one particular skipper who, at that time, was not a public
figure?

Your life depended upon his, Kerry's, dedication to the mission and your
safe return.

I'm astonished at the one doctor who said he treated Kerry for one of his
wounds, but now believes that the wound was (depending on the day he tells
the
story, it seems to change depending on the audience) either self inflicted
or
not serious enough to warrant a purple heart.

We can clear all of this up if the medical records are released so that we
can actually find out the extent and source of the wounds.

Do they just hand out a purple heart to everybody who says, "I'd like one
of
those, I think it will look good on my uniform and get me laid back home,"
or
does somebody check the medical records to evaluate whether a serviceman
was
wounded?

It depends upon how much the the potential awardee whines, stomps his feet
and holds his breath to get his way.

If anybody checks the records at all, was the doctor who treated Kerry
lying
then, or is he lying now?

Again, if Kerry would release his military medical records we could clear
this up.

If nobody checks the records and they do hand out purple hearts like so
many
Cracker Jacks prizes to anybody who cares to ask for one......then what is
the
basis for the angst and outrage that Kerry "wasn't wounded badly enough"
to
qualify?

Oh, hang on......here's something factual about Purple Heart awards. It
looks
like
there is no requirement that the injury be of
any certain severity. Only that it required medical treatment and that it
was
caused by the enemy.

From:

http://www.purpleheart.org/Awd_of_PH.htm


b. While clearly an individual decoration, the Purple Heart differs from
all
other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended" for the
decoration; rather he or she is entitled to it upon meeting specific
criteria.


(1) A Purple Heart is authorized for the first wound suffered under
conditions
indicated above, but for each subsequent award an Oak Leaf Cluster will be
awarded to be worn on the medal or ribbon. Not more than one award will be
made
for more than one wound or injury received at the same instant or from the
same
missile, force, explosion, or agent.

(2) A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an
outside
force or agent sustained under one or more of the conditions listed above
A
physical lesion is not required, however, the wound for which the award is
made
must have required treatment by a medical officer and records of medical
treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a
matter of official record.

(3) When contemplating an award of this decoration, the key issue that
commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy
caused
the injury. The fact that the proposed recipient was participating in
direct or
indirect combat operations is a necessary prerequisite, but is not sole
justification for award.


Face it, Kerry wouldn't have been wounded "badly enough" to satisfy the
modern
Republican tribe unless he came home in a box.

Kerry found a loop hole, getting three purple hearts, to get out early.