PDA

View Full Version : New Kerry Film - The Truth About Kerry's Viet Nam!



Fair_Play
09-27-2004, 06:50 PM
The film <font color="red"> ** </font color> is discussed below. First the following quote:

[ QUOTE ]
Constructing a complete picture of <font color="red"> Kerry's </font color>service is difficult due to gaps in the Naval records provided by the <font color="red"> Kerry </font color>campaign. These gaps include missing and incomplete fitness reports, missing medical records and missing records related to his medal awards. <hr /></blockquote>

Just appearing on Hannity and Colmes was Mr. George Butler, a friend of <font color="red"> Kerry </font color>for over thirty years. During that time he has taken countless photographs of <font color="red"> Kerry</font color>, and has just released a film that purports to tell the <font color="blue"> "truth"</font color> about <font color="red"> Kerry's</font color> Viet Nam Service.

I am biased. Mr. Butler is obviously biased as well. As for <font color="red"> Kerry </font color> himself? By having a film, done by a friend, tell the <font color="blue"> "truth" </font color>about his Viet Nam service. Obviously he just could not find the time to sign Standard Form 180.. he is just so busy deciding which side of his mouth he is going to use next, and is not about to release his records for they obviously contain the <font color="red"> actual truth(s) that he simply cannot afford to have anyone know. </font color>

/ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif hahahahaha <font color="blue"> hahahaha hahahaha!</font color>

Fair Play


<font color="red"> ** </font color> <font color="blue"> Propaganda, pure and simple - a simple Orwellian retake on history: If you are going to tell a lie, make it a big lie! </font color> What are the odds that this docudrama contains footage from <font color="red"> Kerry's </font color> re-staged "home movies"?? For the good Senator (sic) the cost of shooting this film is a paltry sum, and the benefits far outweigh the obvious downside to simply telling the truth by signing SF 180 (SF 180 is a form used for release of information - and not to sign one is a grave sign that the information would not stand up to scrutiny, on cannot but surmise this, albeit with virtual certainty! "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel!" Samuel Johnson, April 7, 1775

Qtec
09-28-2004, 03:17 AM
Could you post a link to GW,s medical records. I cant seem to find them.
Thanks
Q

highsea
09-28-2004, 03:55 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Could you post a link to GW,s medical records. I cant seem to find them.
Thanks
Q <hr /></blockquote> <font color="red"> They're </font color> <font color="green">on </font color> <font color="blue"> a </font color> <font color="orange"> need </font color> <font color="yellow"> to </font color> <font color="black"> know </font color> <font color="purple"> basis. </font color> <font color="pink"> Ask <font color="brown"> </font color> Dan <font color="#666666"> Rather </font color> </font color>.

highsea
09-28-2004, 04:12 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fair_Play:</font><hr><font color="red">Propaganda, pure and simple - a simple Orwellian retake on history: If you are going to tell a lie, make it a big lie! </font color> <hr /></blockquote>I hope it has lots of phony bullets hitting the water all around him, like the film they used in the DNC convention. Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!

I'm John Kerry, reporting for duty!

"I'm ordering you to get the men in the boat, Mr. Christian!"

"Go to hell, Captain Bligh!"

Hahahahaha. Isn't revisionist history wonderful?

Qtec
09-28-2004, 06:07 AM
What? You mean they havent been released?
If they were unclassified, surely I could find them on the web.Or not?

Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

hondo
09-28-2004, 07:16 AM
At least he went to VietNam. I'm so tired of this crap.

eg8r
09-28-2004, 07:20 AM
[ QUOTE ]
At least he went to VietNam. I'm so tired of this crap. <hr /></blockquote> When did this begin to matter to a liberal?

eg8r

Fair_Play
09-28-2004, 07:30 AM
Hello Q,
[ QUOTE ]
What? You mean they havent been released?
If they were unclassified, surely I could find them on the web.Or not? <hr /></blockquote>
Q, The vast majority of Kerry's military records have not been released, not by a long shot, that is why you cannot find them on the web.

Now, no one who was not actually been there has any idea what John Kerry's VN records say, as he has not given permission for any of them to be released by the government. The ones that we do know about are ones that were selectively culled from his file by Kerry himself.

Military records on an individual are covered by the Privacy Act, and while an individual has his own records, the governament also has their records.

This is why the term "Standard Form 180" comes up, this form is used for the release of records. John Kerry has never given permission for any of his records to be released by the government. The records that Kerry has released, again, are only the ones that he has decided to release. Of course, these mostly show him in a favorable light.

As to the few records that Kerry has selectively released that evaluate his performance of duty? to a civilian they look just hunky dory - but to a military officer, or a personnel specialist familiar with naval officer ratings&gt; A big time slam alarm against Johnny... not good in the least.

Again, I have not got a clue about what the 'missing' (not released) records contain. However, it is to me and to my comrades in arms it smells particularly putrid, not because it is Kerry, but simply because there can be no reason to hide fitness reports, medical records and records related to Kerry's medal awards, especially as it does seem that Kerry was more than likely the author of a great deal of paper than was not corroborated.

Could very well be that Kerry has chosen not to release these records because of modesty... IMHO we shall never know.

All the best to you and to yours,

Fair Play

<font color="blue"> While t is good to trust, It is better not to! </font color>

The military culture and military procedures can be somewhat 'arcane' to civilians, but are not that difficult to find out about.

SpiderMan
09-28-2004, 07:54 AM
Perhaps voters of Vietnamese descent would not take kindly to "atrocities" and/or civilian killings committed by Kerry?

SpiderMan

Fair_Play
09-28-2004, 08:12 AM
Hello SpiderMan!

Ouch!! [ QUOTE ]
Perhaps voters of Vietnamese descent would not take kindly to "atrocities" and/or civilian killings committed by Kerry? <hr /></blockquote>

Sheesh, I thought I was partisan! Wowie!!

My take: don't believe Kerry was ever within a ten miles (or more) of an atrocity, unless it occurred in the memory 'seared into my brain' in Cambodia... hahaha /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

This guy just frosts my gonads, a regular self-serving three dollar bill (IMHO) - there is a very good reason that in a brawl "his" swifties would not even get to the starting gate again the vast number of swifties who are angrier than me...

There are just far too many 'oddities' involved in his military career and in his self-aggrandizing statements "John Kerry, reporting for duty" to be anywhere near honorable reality...

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue"> I reserve the right to keep my real feelings under cover! </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

All the Best,

Fair Play

Wally_in_Cincy
09-28-2004, 09:56 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote hondo:</font><hr> At least he went to VietNam. I'm so tired of this crap. <hr /></blockquote>

Kerry's the one who based his entire Presidential campaign on his time in Viet Nam. Did he expect no one to scrutinize it? Is he that myopic?

hondo
09-28-2004, 10:50 AM
No, I don't believe he ever dreamed what the
Republicans would put him through.

SpiderMan
09-28-2004, 11:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fair_Play:</font><hr> Hello SpiderMan!

Ouch!! &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Perhaps voters of Vietnamese descent would not take kindly to "atrocities" and/or civilian killings committed by Kerry? <hr /></blockquote>

Sheesh, I thought I was partisan! Wowie!!

My take: don't believe Kerry was ever within a ten miles (or more) of an atrocity, unless it occurred in the memory 'seared into my brain' in Cambodia... hahaha /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

This guy just frosts my gonads, a regular self-serving three dollar bill (IMHO) - there is a very good reason that in a brawl "his" swifties would not even get to the starting gate again the vast number of swifties who are angrier than me...

There are just far too many 'oddities' involved in his military career and in his self-aggrandizing statements "John Kerry, reporting for duty" to be anywhere near honorable reality...

&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<font color="blue"> I reserve the right to keep my real feelings under cover! </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

All the Best,

Fair Play <hr /></blockquote>

I do seem to recall a past quotation where Kerry alluded to commiting "atrocities". Supposedly this was said during his protest days. If true, and I don't know that it is true, then he may be hiding his participation from potential voters.

SpiderMan

Ross
09-28-2004, 11:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote hondo:</font><hr> At least he went to VietNam. I'm so tired of this crap. <hr /></blockquote>

Kerry's the one who based his entire Presidential campaign on his time in Viet Nam. <hr /></blockquote>

Wally, this is an oft repeated but untrue exaggeration that has been quite successfully spread by the conservative PR machine. It is true that he has pointed out that he served in war and Bush did not, but that is a valid issue when you are electing a commander in chief. But he has not made it the "basis of his entire Presidential campaign." Every campaign speech Kerry has made he has talked about creating jobs, about health care, about protecting the environment, about tax policy, about Iraq, about education and so on. Those issues are what he is focusing on and what we as voters should be paying attention to.

There are posters here that have said that Kerry's Dem convention speech was all about his Vietnam war heorics. In truth, he spent no more than a few sentences on his service. Probably less than 5% of his speech, tops. If you remember otherwise feel free to read the text of his convention address:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0729.html

The main reason we keep hearing so much about Kerry's Vietnam days is because of the incessant mudslinging by the so called swiftboat vets who "served with John Kerry" but actually didn't. It has been a very succesful diversion tactic by the Republican supporters. Congrats to them for their strategy, if not their integrity.

eg8r
09-28-2004, 01:39 PM
[ QUOTE ]
It is true that he has pointed out that he served in war and Bush did not, <font color="red"> but that is a valid issue when you are electing a commander in chief. </font color> <hr /></blockquote> Isn't this the most liberally hypocritic statement ever. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
The main reason we keep hearing so much about Kerry's Vietnam days is because of the incessant mudslinging by the so called swiftboat vets who "served with John Kerry" but actually didn't. <hr /></blockquote> Keep telling the lies over and over again and sooner or later the public will believe it, looks like you are doing your best.

http://www.boortz.com/images/washington.jpg

[ QUOTE ]
It has been a very succesful diversion tactic by the Republican supporters. Congrats to them for their strategy, if not their integrity.
<hr /></blockquote> Above, you stated that his military career is a valid issue, but in this quote, when the Reps address this hypocritically "valid" issue, you call it a diversion tactic. What are the Reps diverting from if they are addressing a "valid" issue?

eg8r

eg8r
09-28-2004, 01:43 PM
[ QUOTE ]
No, I don't believe he ever dreamed what the
Republicans would put him through. <hr /></blockquote> You just can't believe that the man is liable for what he says? The Reps have decided to make him back it up. Kerry has chosen not to back any of his claims and instead acts like a victim. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif It is quite easy to clear up the issue and prove the SBV are lying, RELEASE THE INFO. LOL, it is funny, the liberal media demanded Bush to release all his medical documents yet they don't require the same from Kerry. Why do you give him a free ride?

eg8r

highsea
09-28-2004, 04:13 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> It is true that he has pointed out that he served in war and Bush did not, but that is a valid issue when you are electing a commander in chief. But he has not made it the "basis of his entire Presidential campaign." <hr /></blockquote>Come on Ross, do you really believe this? Look at Kerry's own words in 1992.[ QUOTE ]
Mr. President, I also rise today--and I want to say that I rise reluctantly, but I rise feeling driven by personal reasons of necessity--to express my very deep disappointment over yesterday's turn of events in the Democratic primary in Georgia.

I am saddened by the fact that Vietnam has yet again been inserted into the campaign, and that it has been inserted in what I feel to be the worst possible way. By that I mean that yesterday, during this presidential campaign, and even throughout recent times, Vietnam has been discussed and written about without an adequate statement of its full meaning.

We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have personally always believed that many served in many different ways. Someone who was deeply against the war in 1969 or 1970 may well have served their country with equal passion and patriotism by opposing the war as by fighting in it. Are we now, 20 years or 30 years later, to forget the difficulties of that time, of families that were literally torn apart, of brothers who ceased to talk to brothers, of fathers who disowned their sons, of people who felt compelled to leave the country and forget their own future and turn against the will of their own aspirations?

But while those who served are owed special recognition, that recognition should not come at the expense of others; nor does it require that others be victimized or criticized or said to have settled for a lesser standard. To divide our party or our country over this issue today, in 1992, simply does not do justice to what all of us went through during that tragic and turbulent time.<hr /></blockquote> Full Speech (http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004646)

Apparently, Kerry no longer feels this way about Vietnam. Just one more in a long string of flip-flops.

Kerry has made a huge deal of his Vietnam service, campaigning with the few swifties who actually support him, posting his war medals on his website, etc. At the same time, the Dems propaganda machine has turned out in force attacking Bush's guard service.

Kerry devoted 70 words out of over 5,000 in his acceptance speech to his Senate record. Now it's great that he found time to talk about the traditional liberal causes, but nobody believes that he was not campaigning on his Vietnam experience.

On the contrary, it is Bush that has stayed in the present with his speeches. All he has said about Kerry is that he served honorably.

Contrast that against the DNC's "Fortunate Son" ad campaign. McAuliffe's repeated "come clean" speeches, Harkin and Pelosi ranting on and on about Bush's guard days, etc. LOl, they've made Vietnam the central issue in Kerry's campaign! Now that it has blown up in their faces with the Rather meltdown, they are finally giving up on it and focusing on Iraq. Too little, too late, imo.

What a joke of a campaign.

highsea
09-28-2004, 04:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> What? You mean they havent been released?
If they were unclassified, surely I could find them on the web.Or not?

Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif <hr /></blockquote>Q, unlike Kerry, Bush isn't campaigning on his Vietnam service, so he hasn't bothered to put them on his website.

If you want to see his records, you can order them from the National Archives and Records Administration under the FOIA. I'm not sure if the FOIA applies to you, since you are not a US citizen, but you can give it a try. Bush has already signed SF180, so you will not need to include that when you place your order.

Here is the web page (http://www.archives.gov/research_room/obtain_copies/veterans_service_records.html).

Qtec
09-30-2004, 02:24 AM
This is long, but interesting.


Assembling Full War Records a Challenge

By Michael Dobbs
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A07


Although both President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry have repeatedly said they have made public their complete military service records, neither presidential candidate has yet permitted independent access to original files held in a high-security vault.

The lack of outside verification of the military personnel records of the candidates has made it more difficult for journalists and historians to evaluate their Vietnam War-era service, which has been the subject of lively election-year debate. In Bush's case, Texas Air National Guard officials have also delayed or prevented public access to 30-year-old unit records that could shed light on whether he received favorable treatment from the Guard because of his father's political connections, as his Democratic opponents have alleged.

More than seven months after the White House announced that Bush's records had been "fully released," files continue to trickle out almost weekly from the Pentagon and elsewhere. Some of the newly released records contradict earlier claims by the Bush camp, such as his assertion in a 1999 campaign autobiography that he gave up flying "because the F-102 jet I had trained in was being replaced by a different fighter."

In the past few weeks, both candidates have been forced to deal with questions about what they were doing in the Vietnam War even as they honed their debating points about Iraq and the war on terrorism.

Assembling a full Vietnam War-era record for the two men is complicated by the fact that the files are scattered around more than a dozen repositories. In addition to master personnel files on each candidate, which are at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, researchers have been looking for the records of the units in which they served. Typically, unclassified unit records are available to the public under much less restrictive conditions than individual files.

Both Bush and Kerry have made public hundreds of documents about their military service and posted them on the Internet. At the same time, they have retained control over their personnel records, making it impossible for outsiders to tell whether anything is being held back.

Chad Clanton, a Kerry campaign spokesman, replied to a request for independent verification of Kerry's master personnel file by saying it was unnecessary "since we've already placed John Kerry's entire military file on our Web site." White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said yesterday that the White House was "working with the Defense Department to accommodate [The Washington Post's] request to independently verify the completeness of the president's personnel records."

An analysis of records released by the White House and the Kerry campaign shows internal discrepancies that raise doubts about whether the full files have been released. Bush aides have made public two versions of the president's master personnel file, one in 2000 and one this February. Each version contains at least half a dozen pages missing from the other, suggesting that neither is complete.

In Kerry's case, it is difficult to tell which documents on his Web site come from his master personnel file. At least one document first posted on the Web site in August -- a recommendation for a Bronze Star -- appears to have come from his personnel file, contradicting earlier assertions by his campaign that everything in the file had already been made public.

Although the St. Louis repository is under the control of the National Archives, officials at the Archives say that the records belong to the military unit that generated them. In practice, they can be released to outsiders only with the permission of the veteran concerned. Such access is usually granted through the signing of a release known as Standard Form 180, a step that neither candidate has so far taken.

Scott Levins, assistant director for military records at the St. Louis repository, said the National Archives made copies of the candidates' master personnel files before temporarily releasing the originals to other government agencies for inspection and copying. He said these authenticated copies are now locked in a vault and can be inspected only with the permission of the originating agency.

Questions about Bush's military records have centered on how he gained a coveted pilot's slot in the Texas Air National Guard in 1968 and why he gave up flying in 1972, more than two years before his six-year term ended. Kerry critics, meanwhile, have focused on how he won the three Purple Hearts that permitted him to return home early from Vietnam.

In part because Kerry served with the Navy rather than the National Guard, his unit records are much more accessible than those of Bush. The Navy maintains a historical center at the Washington Navy Yard where researchers can freely inspect the records of Kerry's Swift boat outfit, Coastal Division 11. The records include after-action reports and unit histories, which have made possible a detailed reconstruction of Kerry's day-to-day activities.

By contrast, National Guard officials say their Vietnam War-era records are sparse and poorly maintained. Because Bush's unit, the 147th Fighter Interceptor Group, was not an active-duty unit, record-keeping was even more informal than in Guard units that served in Vietnam. Until recently, "nobody was interested" in its history, said Travis Evans, a Texas National Guard freedom-of-information officer who has been deluged by requests to access Bush records.

Even so, the Bush administration has made it difficult for researchers to gain access to unclassified Guard files. For months, all requests relating to Bush's military service were referred to one public affairs officer at the Pentagon, Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke. The Freedom of Information Act officer assigned to the Bush records case, James Hogan, declines to talk directly to reporters.

This week, in response to complaints about lack of access, the Pentagon permitted a Post reporter to inspect records held by the Air National Guard history office in Crystal City. The Post has so far been unable to gain access to more detailed records preserved by the 147th in Houston or the Texas adjutant general's office, including a collection of "special orders" that could shed light on Bush's Guard service.

Most records at the Air National Guard history office are unclassified unit histories releasable to the public. But the Pentagon failed to release the 147th unit history until Sept. 17, more than six months after the Associated Press filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits for them and five years after reporters first began requesting them.

A Nov. 28, 1999, letter to the National Guard history office from a Texas National Guard historian, Tom Hail, noted that the 147th unit's histories were generating great interest "by the press scouring for dirt on Governor G.W. Bush." He said requests for copies of the documents were being handled through the Freedom of Information Act process. A Guard public relations officer, Col. Tom Schultz, said more research was required to establish what happened to the 1999 requests.

The unit histories undermine the initial contention of the Bush camp that he gave up flying because his services as an F-102 pilot were no longer needed. They show that the F-102 remained the workhorse of the 147th through mid-1972, when Bush moved from Texas to Alabama to take part in a political campaign, even as pilots were being trained on the more sophisticated F-101. Fifteen F-102 planes were in service in the 147th that year, compared with 18 planes in 1968, the year Bush joined the Guard.

The use of F-102s expanded in October 1972, when the group assumed a new "24-hour active alert mission" to safeguard the southern boundary of the United States against "surprise attack," according to the unit history. The new mission required that two F-102 fighter-interceptors be on five-minute alert at all times. The plane was not phased out until September 1974, 2 1/2 years after Bush stopped flying.

The unit histories also cast doubt on a 1999 statement by Bush that there were "five or six flying slots available" in the 147th when he first expressed an interest in applying, in January 1968. At that time, the unit was two pilots short of its assigned strength of 29 pilots. Two pilots were undergoing training to take over the positions, and one pilot was on the transfer list.




And this,

[ QUOTE ]
Bush said in a TV interview in February that he would make all his military records available. That month, the White House released more than 400 pages of Bush military records, including some duplicates, and said the documents were a complete catalog of his personnel files.

But some documents still have not been made public. The White House did not release Bush's medical records from his Guard files but allowed a group of reporters who cover the White House to review them for 20 minutes. They found nothing unusual. Kerry released some of his military records earlier this year. He has also declined to release his complete medical records but showed them to reporters as Bush did.

Since February, the White House has banned all Guard and military commanders outside the Pentagon from commenting on Bush's records or service. Requests for information must go to the Pentagon's Freedom of Information Act office.

The Pentagon last week responded to a 4-month-old request from USA TODAY for additional records from Bush's files by sending another copy of documents that were released by the White House in February. The documents do not address the unexplained year in Bush's Guard service or his decision to stop flying.

The Associated Press filed a lawsuit this summer requesting copies of Bush's military records stored in a Texas archive on microfilm. It sought information that might explain why Bush did not take his flight physical and whether he showed up for duty in Alabama in the fall of 1972, AP spokesman John Stokes said.
<hr /></blockquote>

Its obvious niether candidate has released all their records.

Q

highsea
09-30-2004, 02:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Its obvious niether candidate has released all their records.
Q
<hr /></blockquote>Does it matter?

Qtec
09-30-2004, 02:51 AM
Not to me.Its the lies and hypocracy that gets me.
I,m more interested what they plan to do in the next 4 years, not what they did/said 35 years ago.
The fact is, nobody knows what GW might do if he gets another 4 years. Not even GW /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Q

highsea
09-30-2004, 05:15 AM
You got 3 guesses Q, and the first two don't count.