PDA

View Full Version : Swift Boat Veterans = Lame


Pages : [1] 2

peeon
08-11-04, 01:14 AM
The Guy Who Was Actually There Speaks Out for Kerry

Shame on the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush

By JIM RASSMANN
Wall Street Journal
August 10, 2004

I came to know Lt. John Kerry during the spring of 1969. He and his swift boat crew assisted in inserting our Special Forces team and our Chinese Nung soldiers into operational sites in the Cau Mau Peninsula of South Vietnam. I worked with him on many operations and saw firsthand his leadership, courage and decision-making ability under fire.

On March 13, 1969, John Kerry's courage and leadership saved my life.

While returning from a SEA LORDS operation along the Bay Hap River, a mine detonated under another swift boat. Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river, and a second explosion followed moments later. The second blast blew me off John's swift boat, PCF-94, throwing me into the river. Fearing that the other boats would run me over, I swam to the bottom of the river and stayed there as long as I could hold my breath.

When I surfaced, all the swift boats had left, and I was alone taking fire from both banks. To avoid the incoming fire, I repeatedly swam under water as long as I could hold my breath, attempting to make it to the north bank of the river. I thought I would die right there. The odds were against me avoiding the incoming fire and, even if I made it out of the river, I thought I'd be captured and executed. Kerry must have seen me in the water and directed his driver, Del Sandusky, to turn the boat around. Kerry's boat ran up to me in the water, bow on, and I was able to climb up a cargo net to the lip of the deck. But, because I was nearly upside down, I couldn't make it over the edge of the deck. This left me hanging out in the open, a perfect target. 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.

For his actions that day, I recommended John for the Silver Star, our country's third highest award for bravery under fire. I learned only this past January that the Navy awarded John the Bronze Star with Combat V for his valor. The citation for this award, signed by the Commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Vietnam, Vice Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, read, "Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry's calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service." To this day I am grateful to John Kerry for saving my life. And to this day I still believe that he deserved the Silver Star for his courage.

It has been many years since I served in Vietnam. I returned home, got married, and spent many years as a deputy sheriff for Los Angeles County. I retired in 1989 as a lieutenant. It has been a long time since I left Vietnam, but I think often of the men who did not come home with us.

I am neither a politician nor an organizer. I am a retired police officer with a passion for orchids. Until January of this year, the only public presentations I made were about my orchid hobby. But in this presidential election, I had to speak out; I had to tell the American people about John Kerry, about his wisdom and courage, about his vision and leadership. I would trust John Kerry with my life, and I would entrust John Kerry with the well-being of our country.

Nobody asked me to join John's campaign. Why would they? I am a Republican, and for more than 30 years I have largely voted for Republicans. I volunteered for his campaign because I have seen John Kerry in the worst of conditions. I know his character. I've witnessed his bravery and leadership under fire. And I truly know he will be a great commander in chief.

Now, 35 years after the fact, some Republican-financed Swift Boat Veterans for Bush are suddenly lying about John Kerry's service in Vietnam; they are calling him a traitor because he spoke out against the Nixon administration's failed policies in Vietnam. Some of these Republican-sponsored veterans are the same ones who spoke out against John at the behest of the Nixon administration in 1971. But 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.

As John McCain noted, the television ad aired by these veterans is "dishonest and dishonorable." Sen. McCain called on President Bush to condemn the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush ad. Regrettably, the president has ignored Sen. McCain's advice.

Does this strategy of attacking combat Vietnam veterans sound familiar? In 2000, a similar Republican smear campaign was launched against Sen. McCain. In fact, the very same communications group, Spaeth Communications, that placed ads against John McCain in 2000 is involved in these vicious attacks against John Kerry. Texas Republican donors with close ties to George W. Bush and Karl Rove crafted this "dishonest and dishonorable" ad. Their new charges are false; their stories are fabricated, made up by people who did not serve with Kerry in Vietnam. They insult and defame all of us who served in Vietnam.

But when the noise and fog of their distortions and lies have cleared, a man who volunteered to serve his country, a man who showed up for duty when his country called, a man to whom the United States Navy awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts, will stand tall and proud. Ultimately, the American people will judge these Swift Boat Veterans for Bush and their accusations. Americans are tired of smear campaigns against those who volunteered to wear the uniform. Swift Boat Veterans for Bush should hang their heads in shame.

Mr. Rassmann, a retired lieutenant with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, served with the U.S. Army 5th Special Forces Group in Vietnam 1968-69.

retsam
08-11-04, 02:10 AM
ok if he served so proudly then why doesnt he release all of his military records......

vampireuk
08-11-04, 02:12 AM
"Yes yes, we in America respect our troops and what they have done in the past to keep our country free, unless they speak out against a democrat!"

*booo!* *hiss!*

Peeon do you realise go check the swift boat veterans site. They point to a image they use of Kerry with other officers, when only one of them thinks he is fit for command, yes shame on them indeed for wanting people to know their version of what happened. Only in America could these evil men get to say what they want :eek:

Sazar
08-11-04, 02:13 AM
now that is a good question and one I wanna know bout too :)

however the fact he served and served honorably is a fact :cool:

its in the manifests and discharge records... :cool:

netviper13
08-11-04, 10:23 AM
Why are the people on the right attempting to discredit Kerry's war record? Oh yeah, because he's the only candidate running for President who has one. Whoops.

peeon
08-11-04, 10:30 AM
It makes me wonder why all the sudden they speak out now...

vampireuk
08-11-04, 10:48 AM
Perhaps because Kerry used them in one of his political adverts....

Maybe they objected to been used as political propaganda when they see him unfit to command a country. If Kerry didn't make his war record such a huge deal then he would not be suffering the backlash.

Sazar
08-11-04, 01:21 PM
bush is using his war record as well as 9/11 images for his political campaign... thats supposedly fair game for him according to conservatives :cool:

it becomes anti-american to question bush's bull...

but when kerry plays up his war record... oh noes... thats evil... :D

vampireuk
08-11-04, 01:33 PM
No feel free to question, we won't kick up a big fuss and scream ;)

If a person brings something to the table to support their political campaign it is open for scrutiny.

saturnotaku
08-11-04, 01:35 PM
bush is using his war record as well as 9/11 images for his political campaign...

Again, this probably wouldn't be an issue if Kerry wouldn't have been beating his chest in the first place.

Or perhaps the American people are starting to tune out the left's crying about Bush's "war record." Oh perchance to dream... :wonder:

Cobra_nVidia
08-11-04, 01:37 PM
Apparently, though, with the Republicans the scrutiny can be as baseless as needed. :lame:

When somebody who served with Kerry says something negative instead of positive, let us know.

vampireuk
08-11-04, 01:41 PM
Apparently, though, with the Republicans the scrutiny can be as baseless as needed. :lame:

When somebody who served with Kerry says something negative instead of positive, let us know.

Well done you missed the whole point :clap:

Sazar
08-11-04, 01:45 PM
Again, this probably wouldn't be an issue if Kerry wouldn't have been beating his chest in the first place.

Or perhaps the American people are starting to tune out the left's crying about Bush's "war record." Oh perchance to dream... :wonder:

how can you possibly say kerry has been doing this first? :confused:

bush has been using his war record and the security trump card from day 1 sat... he was using it even before kerry was a viable democratic candidate let alone the nominee for the party...

what is it with conservatives? it seems they selectively choose to forget all kindsa things wrt bush while pulling up dirt on kerry...

hey I think kerry is as big a douche-bag as the next guy but its a bit unfair sometimes to slander him with stuff while bush gets a free-pass on the SAME points :cool:

jnd3
08-11-04, 01:55 PM
how can you possibly say kerry has been doing this first? :confused"

bush has been using his war record and the security trump card from day 1 sat... he was using it even before kerry was a viable democratic candidate let alone the nominee for the party...

what is it with conservatives? it seems they selectively choose to forget all kindsa things wrt bush while pulling up dirt on kerry...

hey I think kerry is as big a douche-bag as the next guy but its a bit unfair sometimes to slander him with stuff while bush gets a free-pass on the SAME points :cool:

Dude, Kerry's entire platform has been a single item: "John Kerry Served In Vietnam." That has been the entirety of his campaign, and the pre-campaign campaign. The Kerry camp is not asking us to judge him on his legislative record, they are asking us to judge him based on his four months as a swift boat commander. If that's all we have, is it not fair to find out all we can about his service during those four months?

UDawg
08-11-04, 02:15 PM
bush is using his war record as well as 9/11 images for his political campaign... thats supposedly fair game for him according to conservatives :cool:

it becomes anti-american to question bush's bull...

but when kerry plays up his war record... oh noes... thats evil... :D

well since you guys wont address the issues raised by the swift boat vets I will.

Bush's record as a war president is in the open and can be debated whether you agree with the actions taken or not. Kerry on the other hand will not release his war record in Vietnam. The DOD has his records but by law cannot release the records with out Kerry's consent. I think this is appropriate. Now in the same issue Linda trip also worked for the DOD under Clinton and her DOD records were LEAKED by the Clinton administration. This was done in order to distroy her. I am sure even the less thoughtfull liberal can see a problem here.

Now back to Rassmann. O'Niel is not disputing the fact that Kerry turned around and pulled Rassmann out of the water. What O'Niel and the other vets are disputing is the medal he got for it and what actualy happened.

Kerry said his boat was the only one that turned around. This cannot be because the others that were there said (including O'Niel) that the 3 boat hit the mine and was disabled and that three from that boat were blown into the water and the other two boats surrounded the 3 boat. Kerry's boat was the only one that left. When Kerry notices Rassmann was gone he turned around and got him out of the water, yet Kerry gets a medal for this, while no one else got a medal or evene reported pulling the other three out of the water. Why? Because there wasn't any fire coming from the shore and it was not as dangerious a situation. Kerry said there was fire from the shore and the others that were there besides Rassmann said there wan't any fire from the shore. This is only one issue. Rassus and O'Neil were in a debate about this and O'Nel blew Rassmann away.

Now one last note. O'Niel is a Democrat. You will not that NO ONE from the Democrats and up to Kerry will not debate the O'Neil and the other 200 vet's side of the story. The DNC and Kerry are going after them personaly. They are going after credit information on these vets and other such things. what does this have to do with the issue? If they are trying to prove the are lying and are only doing this because they need the money then it should be easy for the DNC and Kerry to refute the claims. Instead they are only trying to say they have bad credit and need the money. This is such a childish and desperate act.

Oh and BTW you guys seem to think it is ok for Rassmann to be on Kerry's campaign staff but O'Niel and the other vets who put forth their own money with the help of donation is just a arm of the GOP. There have been lies spread on this board that this is the GOP putting this out there. Like I said O'Niel is a Democrat. So nice try but why don't you debate the issue. I noticed NO ONE! on the liberal side posted in my thread on this topic. I posted a wealth of information on this. Instead you guys get a new thread with one story from Rassmann.

One final not Sazar. Kerry has mad his four months in Vietnam 30 years ago the center part of his campaign. He brought Vietnam vets on stage with him. Kerry wants to use this four months but does not want to have it questioned. Bush is using a CURRENT issue that is the war on terror as a part in his campaign. This is a major issue right now so it is appropriat. Kerry is bringing up a dead and burred issue and running on it. You are avoiding the issue by making a senseless comparison. BTW Kerry has been doing this for 30 years.

Sazar
08-11-04, 02:39 PM
udawg... i think kerry should disclose his records.. I have said that here and I have said that elsewhere... I think he should disclose ALL his records and not just the ones that have been released thus far...

concerning platforms... kerry's record in vietnam is central to him running against bush wrt the "war on terror"

bush does not have anything else to run on other than to say "look... I have a good record on the war on terror..."

what else is he running on? the economy? global issues? diplomacy? give me a break...

bush's central theme since post 9/11 for re-election has become terrorism and his leadership... people questioning that are branded unpatriotic and their insinuations dismissed...

my point is IF you give bush a free pass wrt the war on terror and his proclaimed leadership of the nation then why is it such a big deal if kerry wishes to make his few months in vietnam count for more than they probably are worth...

UDawg
08-11-04, 02:55 PM
You don't get it saz. Kerry is not running on anything but his vietnam war record. Your point is silly to be honest. The war on terror is the single biggest issue. Bush can show what he has done and we can debate it. Kerry has been on both sides of hte issue and has not said what he would do about it but rather run to the un and do it "smarter" what the heck does that mean? It means nothing because Kerry is a empty suit.

Kerry is running on his vietnam record and a false record at that because he has nothing else. Bush can say this is what I have done. My point is if Kerry wants to us the vietnam war as his back ground then do be surprised if he get slammed on it. Just as the left is trying to slam bush on their pov on the war on terror.

Again no one is willing to tackle the swiftboat vets.

Sazar
08-11-04, 03:19 PM
I have been to their site and I have read their comments... I don't find anything pertinent that tells me that kerry himself in his swift-boat was a bad leader...

those men have expressed their opinion that they don't want kerry to be their commander-in-chief and their views should be applauded for what they are... and frankly if they feel they are being mis-represented than kerry is obliged to remove their mug-shots from his campaign ads...

I don't care so much that kerry gets slammed on his vietnam claims as I do the fact that bush gets a free ride on the same issues...

kerry may well be an empty suit BUT as I have repeatedly said... bush has shown me absolutely nothing that shows he is worthy of re-election... in light of that I would rather take an empty suit over an empty puppet and his puppet-masters...

Cobra_nVidia
08-11-04, 03:32 PM
Well done you missed the whole point :clap:
Either you do not have a point, or have not made it. You cannot simply accuse someone in politics of something without evidence. A bunch of Vietnam veterans saying they served with Kerry, when they DID NOT, is absolute stupidity.

Son Goku
08-11-04, 06:12 PM
Couple of things:

1. This individual has the right to say as he will wrt Kerry...and if he believes Kerry saved his life, I can well see a reason why he would want to come forward, and perhaps even join the campaign. Any question of motive hinges on whether it's just some "anti-Bush plot" put forth by the Kerry campaign, or whether this person's life was saved; and hence feels obliged to come forth and speak in light of this.

2. The other people (if they are speaking their peace) have the right to do so also...

3. Quite frankly I wouldn't mind seeing Kerry's full record released. (Wasn't Bush's military record released? I seem to remember it was.) Fair would be fair, and then the American people could have both to compare, and make up their own minds for themself.

4. This isn't the first time one's involvement in Vietnaum was brought up...and I'm refering to McCain. Those comments certainly did look to have the ear marks of Karl Rove on it, but I doubt it could be proven one way or the other. At the time I heard those comments, I thought it was rather distasteful...though yes that's the prior election, not this one.

5. Udawg, you do have a point here

Kerry has been on both sides of hte issue and has not said what he would do about it but rather run to the un and do it "smarter" what the heck does that mean?

This campaign (pretty much all around) has been less about the issues and has been downright dirty. We don't know where he stands with this or what he would do... Personally, I would like to see more of an issue oriented campaign, but have resigned myself to the fact that probably won't happen by November.

6.

what else is he running on? the economy? global issues? diplomacy? give me a break...

Certainly not his business experience :D And if I were him, given his record in failed business ventures, I probably wouldn't want to bring it up either ;)

kerry may well be an empty suit BUT as I have repeatedly said... bush has shown me absolutely nothing that shows he is worthy of re-election... in light of that I would rather take an empty suit over an empty puppet and his puppet-masters...

And this is essentially where I'm left at too. I would probably vote for a corpse, before I'd vote Bush back into office. Sorry if that isn't exactly to everyone's liking, but I'm quite frankly concerned for another 4 years of Bush.

UDawg
08-11-04, 07:36 PM
Either you do not have a point, or have not made it. You cannot simply accuse someone in politics of something without evidence. A bunch of Vietnam veterans saying they served with Kerry, when they DID NOT, is absolute stupidity.

when are you guys going to stop this lie? They DID server with him. They were in the same unit the same baracks and saw each other at least 3 times a week. They went on many patrols to gether and only talked about patrols they went on with him. THEY SERVED WITH HIM. To say otherwise is just a lie and I am tire of this weak lie. Many of the vets were on his boat. The gunner on his boat signed the statement and said what he saw of Kerry. If you are going to say that because they were not on his boat that they did not serve with thim then you are frikking nuts and a liar.

Ninja Prime
08-11-04, 07:58 PM
Why are the people on the right attempting to discredit Kerry's war record? Oh yeah, because he's the only candidate running for President who has one. Whoops.

Better to not have one at all than to have a horrible one of commiting war crimes, shooting up innocents boats, and claiming three purple hearts for self-inflicted wounds and then running away after only four months, only to insult your fellow soldiers and undermine their ability to fight while providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

vampireuk
08-12-04, 02:11 AM
It seems you have to have stood within 3 inches of him to have actually served with him :rolleyes:

saturnotaku
08-12-04, 06:34 AM
I think people are getting caught in the semantics of serving with Kerry versus serving under him. But it doesn't matter - regardless of how they served in relation to Kerry, the point is that they were there.

PsychoSy
08-12-04, 07:56 AM
Here's the deal -- you've got the swift-boat vets with this ad telling their side of story and you've got the vets that Kerry has on the stage with him telling their side, too. The public has to decide which group of vets is telling the truth. The sad thing in all of this is that this election (and the past 4 years in general) has put one hell of a divide between the people and as a result of that, their bias or political preference is gonna be a factor on which "group of vets" they're gonna believe -- no matter what.

Independents/moderates voters are the real victims here -- they're confused, don't really know which way to turn. These people are beset by manipulation and propaganda on all sides and personally my heart goes out to them because when I read this thread ... the lyrics of a very familiar rock song float accross my mind and they clearly describe their dilema this election year.

I'm so amused by the things I read
I need the truth, but the truth is I don't know who to believe
The left says 'Yes' and the right says 'No'
I'm in between and the more I learn, well the less that I know ...

I'm no prophet or mind reader of course but I think the moderate voters are (if not allready) going to get sick and tired of the back and forth between these two groups of war vets. I sense they're getting really apathetic about it all and they're gonna stay predominately undecided and unphased up until the Kerry Vs. Bush debates.