View Full Version : Military records counter a Kerry critic


FlaMudslinger
08-19-2004, 09:01 AM
By Michael Dobbs

Updated: 11:12 p.m. ET Aug. 18, 2004WASHINGTON - Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own version of events.


In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."


As one of five Swift boat skippers who led the raid up the Bay Hap River, Thurlow was a direct participant in the disputed events. He is also a leading member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a public advocacy group of Vietnam veterans dismayed by Kerry's subsequent antiwar activities, which has aired a controversial television advertisement attacking his war record.

In interviews and written reminiscences, Kerry has described how his 50-foot patrol boat came under fire from the banks of the Bay Hap after a mine explosion disabled another U.S. patrol boat. According to Kerry and members of his crew, the firing continued as an injured Kerry leaned over the bow of his ship to rescue a Special Forces officer who was blown overboard in a second explosion.

'Constant enemy small arms fire'
Last month, Thurlow swore in an affidavit that Kerry was "not under fire" when he fished Lt. James Rassmann out of the water. He described Kerry's Bronze Star citation, which says that all units involved came under "small arms and automatic weapons fire," as "totally fabricated."

"I never heard a shot," Thurlow said in his affidavit, which was released by Swift Boats Veterans for Truth. The group claims the backing of more than 250 Vietnam veterans, including a majority of Kerry's fellow boat commanders.

A document recommending Thurlow for the Bronze Star noted that all his actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire which LTJG THURLOW completely ignored in providing immediate assistance" to the disabled boat and its crew. The citation states that all other units in the flotilla also came under fire.

"It's like a Hollywood presentation here, which wasn't the case," Thurlow said last night after being read the full text of his Bronze Star citation. "My personal feeling was always that I got the award for coming to the rescue of the boat that was mined. This casts doubt on anybody's awards. It is sickening and disgusting."

Thurlow said he would consider his award "fraudulent" if coming under enemy fire was the basis for it. "I am here to state that we weren't under fire," he said. He speculated that Kerry could have been the source of at least some of the language used in the citation.

In a telephone interview Tuesday evening after he attended a Swift Boat Veterans strategy session in an Arlington hotel, Thurlow said he lost his Bronze Star citation more than 20 years ago. He said he was unwilling to authorize release of his military records because he feared attempts by the Kerry campaign to discredit him and other anti-Kerry veterans.

The Post filed an independent request for the documents with the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, which is the central repository for veterans' records. The documents were faxed to The Post by officials at the records center yesterday.

Thurlow and other anti-Kerry veterans have repeatedly alleged that Kerry was the author of an after-action report that described how his boat came under enemy fire. Kerry campaign researchers dispute that assertion, and there is no convincing documentary evidence to settle the argument. As the senior skipper in the flotilla, Thurlow might have been expected to write the after-action report for March 13, but he said that Kerry routinely "duked the system" to present his version of events.

For much of the episode, Kerry was not in a position to know firsthand what was happening on Thurlow's boat, as Kerry's boat had sped down the river after the mine exploded under another boat. He later returned to provide assistance to the stricken boat.

Thurlow, an oil industry worker and former teacher in Kansas, said he was angry with Kerry for his antiwar activities on his return to the United States and particularly Kerry's claim before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that U.S. troops in Vietnam had committed war crimes "with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

Anti-Kerry TV ad
" 'Upset' is too mild a word," said Thurlow, a registered Republican, of his reaction to Kerry then. "He did it strictly for his own personal political gain, and it directly affected every single one of us as we were trying to put our lives together."

Two other Swift boat skippers who were direct participants in the March 13, 1969, mine explosion on the Bay Hap, Jack Chenoweth and Richard Pees, have said they do not remember coming under "enemy fire." A fourth commander, Don Droz, who was one of Kerry's closest friends in Vietnam, was killed in action a month later.

The incident featured prominently in an anti-Kerry television ad produced by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth earlier this month. "John Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star," says Van Odell, a gunner on PCF-23, one of the boats that came to the rescue of the stricken boat. "I know. I was there."

The Bronze Star controversy is also a major focus of an anti-Kerry book by John E. O'Neill, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," which will hit No. 2 on The Post's bestseller list this weekend. The book accuses Kerry of "fleeing the scene" and lying repeatedly about his role.

Members of Kerry's crew have come to his defense, as has Rassmann, the Special Forces officer whom he fished from the river. Rassmann says he has vivid memories of being fired at from both banks after he fell into the river and as Kerry came to his rescue. The two had an emotional reunion on the eve of the Iowa Democratic caucuses in January, an event that some political analysts believe helped swing votes to Kerry at a crucial time.

The Bronze Star recommendations for both Kerry and Thurlow were signed by Lt. Cmdr. George M. Elliott, who received reports on the incident from his base in the Gulf of Thailand. Elliott is a supporter of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and has questioned Kerry's actions in Vietnam. But he has refused repeated requests for an interview after issuing conflicting statements to the Boston Globe about whether Kerry deserved a Silver Star. He was unreachable last night.

Money has poured into Swift Boat Veterans for Truth since the group launched its television advertisement attacking Kerry earlier this month. According to O'Neill, the group has received more than $450,000 over the past two weeks, mainly in small contributions. The Dallas Morning News reported yesterday that the organization has also received two $100,000 checks from Houston home builder Bob Perry, who backed George W. Bush's campaigns for Texas governor and for president.

Bush campaign officials have said they have no connection to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which is not permitted to coordinate its activities with a presidential campaign under federal election law.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

jackhart
08-19-2004, 11:39 AM
well now, looks like the guy calling "liar" is possibly a liar himself. he "speculates" that kerry "could have been" the source of some of the quotes regarding arms fire? but his medal was awarded on that basis? and, he "refuses" to release the details of his own military records?? wtf is he hiding?

SSgtTEX
08-19-2004, 12:06 PM
the only thing i have to comment is how is the fawking freedom of info act allow newspapers to get soldiers military records. Hell there are parts of my records that im not allowed to see. WTF?

PaulT
08-19-2004, 12:32 PM
there are parts of my records that im not allowed to see. WTF?

Must be those that fall into the 'don't ask, don't tell' catagory :goodfinge

WhoaDammit
08-19-2004, 12:51 PM
the only thing i have to comment is how is the fawking freedom of info act allow newspapers to get soldiers military records. Hell there are parts of my records that im not allowed to see. WTF?


money talks bud.

~Critter

jackhart
08-19-2004, 01:17 PM
Must be those that fall into the 'don't ask, don't tell' catagory :goodfinge
:histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica

95 BXL
08-19-2004, 01:18 PM
well now, looks like the guy calling "liar" is possibly a liar himself. he "speculates" that kerry "could have been" the source of some of the quotes regarding arms fire? but his medal was awarded on that basis? and, he "refuses" to release the details of his own military records?? wtf is he hiding?

See, jack... this is just a touch more of your hypocrisy. There are dozens of records that Kerry refuses to release, not the least of which concern his Purple Hearts, his promises to do so notwithstanding, and not a peep out of you over those.

Typical of the Kerry supporter.

That said, the man in question lied about nothing. You read this article and actually were gullible enough to buy into his nonsense.

If only you had ever set foot in uniform.

jackhart
08-19-2004, 01:31 PM
wrong again jerkoff.

please search and you will see where i have criticized kerry for not disclosing. in fact, just today i posted about his private senate intelligence voting records and how he is wrong for not disclosing his attendance records. missed that one didja?? and why don't you say ANYTHING about this clown's failure to disclose? talk about one-sided, you are the true hypocrite.

you are a joke, as i have been saying all along. i also love how you read the article and dismiss it without anything more than "the man lied about nothing" as if there wasn't a shred of evidence to the contrary. hell, the man who was saved himself has refuted this idiot's testimony. and you missed the fact i said he was "possibly" lying, showing that i am open to both sides of the issue, something you are incapable of doing.

but that is typical of the fanatic supporter. no grey, just black and white. what a joke you are.

95 BXL
08-19-2004, 03:02 PM
Now jackoff, no need to get all pissy.

I have repeatedly asked you to post links to your threads in this regard. You have repeatedly failed to do so.

Your concern over his well known failure to attend committee meetings is excused by you under the guise of "campaigning," as if his responsibilities to the people who elected him are somehow suspended because he has the presidential bug up his ass.

Have I posted anything to back up my perspective that the article was a lie?

Nope. Don't need to. First, the proof which I'm aware of will be out there soon enough, and second, it wouldn't matter to a dimbulb such as yourself if Kerry got around to MORE admissions about lying over his military record. He's already admitted he lied about that Christmas-in-Cambodia thing, and that didn't make any difference to a left wing nutjob such as yourself.

Yeah... I know you covered your ass by using the word "possibly," a typical leftist smear tactic where you give yourself deniability by whining, "I said 'possibly,' so get off my back."

And as for a description of a "fanatic supporter," you must have got that from your mirror.

Even now, while the silly son of a bitch is finally responding, he's blaming Bush instead of addressing the issues. And in that regard, it's no wonder you support this clown so much... since you're just like him.

jackhart
08-19-2004, 03:08 PM
ahh, the old, "I know you are but what am I" argument.

Help, help, 95bxl gave me cooties!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

95 BXL
08-19-2004, 03:12 PM
Typical of your more substantive responses, jackoff.... thanks for playing. NEXT!

PaulT
08-19-2004, 03:12 PM
wrong again jerkoff.
Now jackoff, no need to get all pissy.

NOW NOW GIRLS!!! :goodfinge

#1 - Please keep it civil in these threads and quit acting like like a bunch of three year olds fighting over their teachers affection in pre-school

or

#2 - dont post, its that simple

your all adults, at least act like one, carry on

SSgtTEX
08-19-2004, 03:19 PM
thank you paul. 95 if you are so incapable too not be able to tell that Dave is not a kerry supporter then maybe you just should stay out of the political. Dave, a good friend of mine, doesnt need to "prove" he has said bad things about Kerry. Fawk man that is what a mans word is for on here. You, my friend, are the true jackoff. Even karma and myself can forgive and forget and share a cold one if we met. Now go play with yourself in the corner.

95 BXL
08-19-2004, 07:39 PM
thank you paul. 95 if you are so incapable too not be able to tell that Dave is not a kerry supporter then maybe you just should stay out of the political. Dave, a good friend of mine, doesnt need to "prove" he has said bad things about Kerry. Fawk man that is what a mans word is for on here. You, my friend, are the true jackoff. Even karma and myself can forgive and forget and share a cold one if we met. Now go play with yourself in the corner.

Sorry, ATEX... I had one daddy, and he ain't you.

That you know this guy, unfortunately, means nothing to me. I know him as well... I know him from his words... I know him from his hypocrisy... I know him from his flat out lies and I know him from his failure to back up his positions...

Politics is my business. While you may believe his claims, his words and constant support of Kerry, when contrasted to his constant bashing of Bush, clearly would lead any reasonable individual to a different conclusion than the one you've reached.

Now, if you want to get into this, just say so. If you don't, then STFU and let us deal with it.

WhoaDammit
08-19-2004, 08:30 PM
Sorry, ATEX... I had one daddy, and he ain't you.

That you know this guy, unfortunately, means nothing to me. I know him as well... I know him from his words... I know him from his hypocrisy... I know him from his flat out lies and I know him from his failure to back up his positions...

Politics is my business. While you may believe his claims, his words and constant support of Kerry, when contrasted to his constant bashing of Bush, clearly would lead any reasonable individual to a different conclusion than the one you've reached.

Now, if you want to get into this, just say so. If you don't, then STFU and let us deal with it.


1) You cannot know a man from his typed words. Meeting face to face is the only way to know a person. plain and simple. you have no idea if Dave is just egging you on to make a fool out of you (although you seem quite capable on your own)

2) DO NOT confuse Jakhart and Beerman. BAD thing to do. Not only will they tear ya a new one on that, I might help.

3) if ya don't have something nice to say about someone, don't call them names. just call them by their sn.

4) quit being dense. plain and simple. Diehards die first. I'll support Bush, and probably vote for him, but you are starting to sound like you need professional help.

5) And if politics is your business, I ain't buying anything from you.

~Critter

95 BXL
08-19-2004, 10:19 PM
1) You cannot know a man from his typed words. Meeting face to face is the only way to know a person. plain and simple. you have no idea if Dave is just egging you on to make a fool out of you (although you seem quite capable on your own)

Actually, throughout history, we have come to know people by what they write. That YOU haven't yet seemed to master that ability is, well, your problem.

I could care less what his motivation is. His words and perspective speak eloquently for him. And, of course, while you claim I lack the ability to "know" him from his words, that hasn't seemed to stop YOU from knowing ME from MY words... or why else would you have added these entirely unnecessary comments about being a fool?

I never claimed to know this guy individually. But his positions and perspectives are quite clear. Basic reading comprehension would allow anyone to figure those positions out.

The issue here is that he claims a certain perspective, no doubt as a credibility-building device, then writes like he's on Michal Moore's staff.

I have no problem expressing my positions and I've never claimed to be anything other than what I am. But media has been bombarded with people making the same claim as jackhart, while busting Bush's chops and givingt Kerry a free pass. I know it when I see it, and I see it here.

2) DO NOT confuse Jakhart and Beerman. BAD thing to do. Not only will they tear ya a new one on that, I might help.

Feel free to show where I've done that. As for the rest; time, date and place would be helpful.

3) if ya don't have something nice to say about someone, don't call them names. just call them by their sn.

And this is directed at.... me?

You mean, like "dense," or"fool" or "in need of professional help?" Yeah.... I got that.

Please. I rise to the occasion. At base, if jackhart or anyone else doesn't like what I have to write, they can always add me to their respective "ignore" lists, or simply stop reading my posts. I doubt that anyone here needs a netnanny.

4) quit being dense. plain and simple. Diehards die first. I'll support Bush, and probably vote for him, but you are starting to sound like you need professional help.

Well, I'll just have to suffer, then, won't I?

5) And if politics is your business, I ain't buying anything from you.

Not to worry. I'm quite selective, actually, and frankly, you can't afford me.



~Critter[/QUOTE]

marv
08-19-2004, 10:41 PM
Hey, temps gonna be 10 to 15 degrees below average. Cold front commin' down from Canada.

'Doc', the mechanic at Rogers Car Center who's been workin' on my '89 was supposed to finish the rear axel/diff re-build last Friday but he got "sick". Funny, he's on vacation this week. Hmmmmmmmm. Roger, capable himself, hasn't turned a tap on it. So I guess I'll get it back late next Monday or Tuesday. I need to tell Roger, "Helping tourists with 'emergencies' is nice, but it's the locals that provide the repeat business."

Lee, down at A-1 Auto across the highway is just as good and I've had pretty good service from him over the years. He takes care of the '79. When I get the '89 back from Roger, I might not go back to Roger.

Bo, the Siberian Husky, was abandoned by some of those tourists several years ago. He ran loose for a couple of years and managed to get both hips broken - probably tourist drivers. Anyway, my wife brought him home and for a couple of years now, we've been giving him bufferin with his food. But it looks like he's getting worse. Jeeze, he's only seven or so years old and we're not gonna put him down because WE feel bad about it.

Well, that's it from Shell Knob for tonight. Y'all have a good one and take care.

Y'hear that jack and 95!

WhoaDammit
08-19-2004, 11:48 PM
Actually, throughout history, we have come to know people by what they write. That YOU haven't yet seemed to master that ability is, well, your problem.

I could care less what his motivation is. His words and perspective speak eloquently for him. And, of course, while you claim I lack the ability to "know" him from his words, that hasn't seemed to stop YOU from knowing ME from MY words... or why else would you have added these entirely unnecessary comments about being a fool?

I never claimed to know this guy individually. But his positions and perspectives are quite clear. Basic reading comprehension would allow anyone to figure those positions out.

The issue here is that he claims a certain perspective, no doubt as a credibility-building device, then writes like he's on Michal Moore's staff.

I have no problem expressing my positions and I've never claimed to be anything other than what I am. But media has been bombarded with people making the same claim as jackhart, while busting Bush's chops and givingt Kerry a free pass. I know it when I see it, and I see it here.
1st off, I am not a professional nor an academic writer, and by no means a professional. I was taught, however, that such remarks as your opening statement are generally false by default. A persons personality is by no means represented in their work. A bit, a small peice perhaps, may be imbedded naturally in it, but the bulk of personality cannot express itself in political threads alone.

2nd, Have you ever heard of Debate competitions? Unlike political debates, the contestants may be against what they are arguing for. The winner is the one who presents the best argument. Regardless of his and your positions on the matter, I'd have to give this debate to jackhart for being far more civil about it.

And lastly, I have NOT followed the "media hype" and have no idea what kind of things are being said about the president. Or Kerry for that matter. My focuses are more pressing and immediate. What mud is flung between the two parties is none of my concern. What mud is slung on here is my concern. Because like it or not, these people care about the same thing you do. The Ford Bronco.


Feel free to show where I've done that. As for the rest; time, date and place would be helpful.
Um, rember Beerman is the Bush hater. He's made that clear. Jackhart is more of a rabble rouser, and you tend to raise the most rucous.



And this is directed at.... me?
No, to everyone here.

You mean, like "dense," or"fool" or "in need of professional help?" Yeah.... I got that. At least I can be civil, unlike the names I have seen you call Dave. None of those were necessary.

Please. I rise to the occasion. At base, if jackhart or anyone else doesn't like what I have to write, they can always add me to their respective "ignore" lists, or simply stop reading my posts. I doubt that anyone here needs a netnanny.
Again, we are doing this to watch YOUR reaction to it.



Well, I'll just have to suffer, then, won't I?
Well, I'd say Bush is the one suffering, if you are his representation. I have never heard of Kerry, and politically speaking, he's a nobody. I have seen Bush react to terrorism, but have sen nothing from Kerry. I have seen Bush make decisions, but not Kerry. I have seen action from one man, and not the other.... And I've seen a whole lot of useless wind from you.

Not to worry. I'm quite selective, actually, and frankly, you can't afford me.

I wouldn't buy your words if they were free.

And remeber, you can't be this much of a jerk in person.

~Critter

95 BXL
08-23-2004, 08:47 PM
1st off, I am not a professional nor an academic writer, and by no means a professional. I was taught, however, that such remarks as your opening statement are generally false by default. A persons personality is by no means represented in their work. A bit, a small peice perhaps, may be imbedded naturally in it, but the bulk of personality cannot express itself in political threads alone.

By all means, whoever or whichever school you were attending when you were told this…. Go on back and get a refund, won’t you?

I respectfully disagree, and allow me to use your own words to illustrate.

YOU have no problem calling me a jerk, saying:

“And remeber, you can't be this much of a jerk in person.”

How is it that, you can actually write something like: “A persons personality is by no means represented in their work,” on one hand, then conclude I’m a “jerk” on the other, merely because of my writings in “political threads alone?”

So, I guess the question is, how is that YOU can make such a determination about ME, but I, in turn, cannot make such a conclusion about jackhart?


2nd, Have you ever heard of Debate competitions? Unlike political debates, the contestants may be against what they are arguing for. The winner is the one who presents the best argument. Regardless of his and your positions on the matter, I'd have to give this debate to jackhart for being far more civil about it.

Well, I understand that Adolf Eichmann was quite civil. Would you give the racial debate to him because of his civility?

What about veracity? What about facts? Are you to give credibility to a civil liar over a less than civil individual being factual?

That’s up to you. Many political liars count on such a response among the more gullible. Whether you provide it or not is entirely up to you.


And lastly, I have NOT followed the "media hype" and have no idea what kind of things are being said about the president. Or Kerry for that matter. My focuses are more pressing and immediate. What mud is flung between the two parties is none of my concern. What mud is slung on here is my concern. Because like it or not, these people care about the same thing you do. The Ford Bronco.

Why is what anyone else says that not directed to you “your concern?” Is it just “my” peculiar brand of the art you object to?


Um, rember Beerman is the Bush hater. He's made that clear.

And I respect him for it. But then, he also makes no bones about it, nor does he falsely claim one thing while his actions clearly show something else.

If jackhart would just be honest and admit what he is… I admit it… Beerman admits it… but jackhart says one thing while doing something completely different. So, contrary to your assertion, I have never “confused” the two.


Jackhart is more of a rabble rouser, and you tend to raise the most rucous.

Perhaps… but one additional difference is that I don’t require surrogates to defend me. I can handle that myself.


At least I can be civil, unlike the names I have seen you call Dave. None of those were necessary.

Neither were his characterizations. And, as I’ve said in the past, I rise to the occasion.


Again, we are doing this to watch YOUR reaction to it.

Who is “we?” You got a mouse in your pocket? Oddly enough, I could care less. I stand by my observation…. I rise to the occasion and if I hadn’t received adequate provocation, then I wouldn’t have responded as such.

Nice of you to give him a pass, tho.


Well, I'd say Bush is the one suffering, if you are his representation.

“I was taught, however, that such remarks as your statement here are generally false by default.”

Imagine… all this based on a conclusion over what I wrote in a political thread?

I have never heard of Kerry, and politically speaking, he's a nobody.

Excuse me? I think he’s a scumbag, but not even I would go THAT far.


I have seen Bush react to terrorism, but have sen nothing from Kerry. I have seen Bush make decisions, but not Kerry. I have seen action from one man, and not the other.... And I've seen a whole lot of useless wind from you.

OK… let me try and lay it out in terms you can understand.

1. You ain’t my daddy, or my net-nanny.
2. I could give a rat’s ass (sorry I borrowed your line, jackhart) about your characterization.
3. You have all the political astuteness of a board fence.
4. You are my first entry into the ignore list, and I earnestly urge you to extend the same courtesy to me.