Friday, October 22, 2004

John F. Kerry: Hawk, Dove, or Vulture

a basic Outline for an analysis of John F Kerry
by greybeard

"If you wind up being less than what you're pretending to be, there is a major confrontation with value and self-esteem and your sense of how others view you."

John Kerry/ boston globe

"I can't believe I ever even married an American."

Terressa Hienz Kerry:
Our First Lady?

In search of truth?

Kerry himself has challanged, "Bring It On!"

So why is one labeled "anti-kerry" simply because they investigate Senator kerrys record?

The People interested in the truth of something are to be labeled 'anti' and therefore, convienitly, subject them to silence?

The following reading will try to show facts as presented by John Kerry Himself - either from his own site where he presents his record, and from things John F kerry has said himself to congressional hearings, senate hearings, magazines, books, news reporters Television and interviews; and even from an eulogy of a friend, and shipmate, of his, in which Senator Kerry lied to the United States Congress.

Sources will be liberaly (no pun intended) added for any who question the validity of claims, and who said what, and when.

The Links provided tell most of the story of John F Kerry.

Statements from other people, in links, will be used basicaly to tie in the story or stories told by John Kerry himself, and their own comments.

My own comments should be easy enough to identify.

I began by reading statements by John Kerry; I read excerpts from his books; I found some testimonies; Suddenly I was thinking, wait a minute,
things don't add up here. He has in his own words far to many descrepancies. It was then that i layed out an outline of descrepancies and my conclusions...

THEN i turned to google, with keywords from my own evaluations, to see if my conclusions were backed up by any fact.

Some People, generaly of a political nature, are saying that John F Kerry's military record should not be questioned, nor examined, and that he served honorably, and his service should be untouchable.
Others, of another political persusion, say that anything he said or did after he came back is fair game.

Somewhere between these political parties lies the American people who want to know, and should have the right to know about the characters of their leaders, and opinions should never be censored no matter who is paying for it, because in the long run it will be the American freedom of speech that will pay the highest price, losing the opportunity to KNOW, a choice to debate, and the right to challange, and enact a privledged privacy to those who would set themselves above those with a,now,lesser privacy, making information an unequal right to know.
Silencing 527's would allow our government and its leaders to remove our right to know.

News is nothing but spectacular sensenational BAD news everyday, and if people don't want to watch it they turn it off. So to if people don't like candidates fighting like roosters they will turn it off. i doubt most people do. We have become enured to spectecals,speculation, and sensationalism.

In the long run though no matter the colossium effect, we have the right to know the character of the candidates as well as the issues.

Today i examine Senator John Kerrys appearance, statements, and character.

It seems to be forgotten, or ignored, that what Kerry said when he came Back from viet-nam had to do with other peoples service and military performance, and alegations of what he was told they, other veterans, did in the war, which he had no qualms about questioning and commenting on.

The fact that what he did, stepping backward into vietnam, and bringing forth his opinion of what people were doing there, is condemned and wrong, now twists us into a web of silence or appear, ourselves, to look like john kerry did himself, by making comments about that service.

And yet John Kerry seems to have no problems with trying to make President Bush's service sound less than honorable because Bush served in the Air national Guard Reserves, while kerry went off to viet-nam, "because it was the right thing to do."

Or That Cheney recieved 5 deferments (for which i have not investigated, so unverified) and those deferments should be held as contemptable and not the kind of man qualified to send our sons and daughters off to war. A war we have already been in for 3 years.

It's a curious situation, seemingly spun to avoid further alienations, and open old wounds, when each side finds that, the vietnam error, or era, from which ever side you are on, that one can not question a part of history because it is so touchy a subject.

But John Kerry is running on his history and provides his history on his own website, so lets take a look at a small portion of his history.

May 26, 2004: kerrys website:

Kerry Campaign Chair Jeanne Shaheen today responded to Terry Holt’s appearance on MSNBC’s Hardball yesterday:

“What Terry Holt said last night was an intentional effort to diminish John Kerry’s military service. Not only was it wrong, it shows a fundamental disrespect for the service and sacrifice veterans of military combat duty have given our country. Mr. Holt crossed the line last night, and he should apologize immediately.”

Kerry himself who questioned others characters and told stories of others alledged atrocities, (heresay at the time) does not want his own stories of service to be told. Or rather he only wants any stories told in his words.

But over the years Kerry himself has told his stories in many different ways. He now wants to be personified as a war hero in the war that he condemned. Mr. Kerry should make up his mind.

"We threw away the symbols of what our country gave us," Mr. Kerry says on screen. "And I'm proud of it."

When Kerry came back from vietnam, it was he himself who questioned others who served honorably, who told others what they were doing was dishonorable, that they were war criminals and monsters.

John Kerry diminished others service with his tales, disrespected the servicemen in their capacity of service while in vietnam, and provided propaganda for the, then, enemy of the United States.

So with that record in mind why should not his own vietnam record be examined just as he did to others internationaly while using it as his political platform 35 years ago to place himself into office.

At that time Kerry would then proceed in the 1971 Senate Hearings to say that the war was a terrible mistake, that communism was not a threat, and that servicemen were rape, pillaging, murdering innocent civilians, and razing 'villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan'"on a day to day basis", and that even he himself was a war criminal.

In describing himself as a war criminal, who had not personaly seen atrocities committed by others, he has never completely explained himself.
Did he slink off out of view of his swift boat crew to have committed them?

By saying that he himself participated in, and committed war crimes, he was in effect saying that his crew was also involved in them, or that he committed them alone. Something i think his crew have failed to realize.

Kerry has admitted he burnt down villages. One such incident is recorded.

The village burning incident was recounted in the book by George Bates, an officer in Coastal Division 11 who participated in numerous operations with Kerry.

Bates says he still is "haunted" by a particular patrol with Kerry on the Song Bo De River.

"With Kerry in the lead, the boats approached a small hamlet with three or four grass huts. Pigs and chickens were milling around peacefully. As the boats drew closer, the villagers fled. There were no political symbols or flags in evidence in the tiny village. It was obvious to Bates that existing policies, decency, and good sense required the boats to simply move on.

"Instead, Kerry beached his boat directly in the small settlement. Upon his command, the numerous small animals were slaughtered by heavy-caliber machine guns. Acting more like a pirate than a naval officer, Kerry disembarked and ran around with a Zippo lighter, burning up the entire hamlet."

Kerry would later say, on The Dick Cavatte show:

I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground. And all of these, I find out later on, these acts are contrary to the Hague and Geneva Conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the applications of the Nuremberg principles, is in fact guilty.


Now, when we talk about something like war crimes, we're not throwing this term out lightly. The Hague Convention, the Geneva Conventions, history has laid down certain laws of warfare. Hague Convention, I believe, Article Four, states that you are not allowed to bombard uninhabited villages or villages that are not occupied by defendants. We have done that constantly in Vietnam.

[what i find, analyzing this, to be even more revealing of Kerrys character is this BS that he, this trained officer, says he didn't know till LATER On that he was contreveening laws of warfare and violating Geneva conventions-- especialy when he would state in later books how he PROTESTED all these type of procedures, while serving...]

Nuancing...its a word i never paid much attention to til lately.

War protesting for Kerry was convient at the time for the country was divided against the war and wanted Out. He used the numbers at that time to build a platform for election and used the war as his weapon and the United States Servicemen as his ammunition to achieve notority. Kerry needed a constiuency and he found them in a divided country.
The side of the split he choose goes to character.

In fact he used BOTH sides of the viet-nam equation when he used the people still back in the war, and those back from the war, to further his own ambitions.

What is it Kerrys Campaign is now saying if anyone questions kerrys service?

Not only was it wrong, it shows a fundamental disrespect for the service and sacrifice veterans of military combat duty have given our country.

Yes; that's what i thought they are saying.

Thirty five years later he would flip flop and now use the same war, and the same servicemen, as his symbol of heroism, and would defy anyone who would question his own record as being without honor and integrity...yet at the same time he continues to question his opponents record and service

This after having said in a speech on the Senate floor Feb. 27, 1992: (in reference and in defense of Bill Clinton being critized for having not served in Vietnam):

Lead, Don't Divide

"I am saddened that Vietnam has yet again been inserted into the campaign."

BY JOHN F. KERRY (excerpt)

...What is missing is a recognition that there exists today a generation that has come into its own with powerful lessons learned, with a voice that has been grounded in experiences both of those who went to Vietnam and those who did not.

What is missing and what cries out to be said is that neither one group nor the other from that difficult period of time has cornered the market on virtue or rectitude or love of country.

What saddens me most is that Democrats, above all those who shared the agonies of that generation, should now be refighting the many conflicts of Vietnam in order to win the current political conflict of a presidential primary.
...We do not need to divide America over who served and how.

Mr. Kerry, seems to have a double standard for every issue.

As anyone who has turned on a TV or radio, or picked up a newspaper, can tell you, Mr. Kerry has focused on the Presidents military record, and has tried in every way to paint the image as dishonorable.

Mr. Kerry, Senator Kerry, has a pattern that can not be ignored.

Kerry disrespected and dishonored all military when he accussed them of war crimes that he said he 'didn't personaly see', and gave the enemy 'hope' that should they hang on long enough that America would soon fold and withdraw. In fact he demanded it publicly and went so far as to meet with -communist delegations and has his photo hanging in a museum which until the 1990's was named the “American War Crimes Museum.” .

In time of war and still a commissioned military reserve Officer, Mekong John some would later say, joined the Likes of Hanoi Jane and commmunists sypathizers. This is not to say that there were not legitimate protesters, not running for office, who believed 'enough was enough' and the war should somehow be ended, who in no way were linked to the enemy at the time- the communists.

But Kerry, In secret meetings, flew to paris to meet with the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Governments negotiator Madam Nguyen Thi Binh; both communists delegations.

When young Mr. Kerry flew to Paris,in May of 1970, to meet with the communists his message to them must have been 'seared into their minds' -"hope is on the way!!

It is unclear weather this meeting is a violation of the law, but should be further investigated.Some say it is treason.

(1.Logan Act

note Check into: the Uniform Code of Miliatry Justice

April 23, 1971 Kerry before Senate Foriegn Relations Committe:

"How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

1971? - I'd of sworn i just heard Kerry on TV saying 1,000 men have died in Iraq because of President Bushs mistake - miscalculation - verify ears and get back to this one. Theres definately a pattern here to keep an open eye out for...

[Kerry: One does not send men to kill or be killed for a mistake. The Times - I've got it wrote down - but whered i get it from - not from the times]

Kerry, who along with Senator Tom Harkin would fly off to Nicaragua to Meet with communist Sandinistas, in an effort to defeat military aid to the Contras who were fighting the communist regime, were upon their return to the United States attacked by Secretary of State George Shultz as "self-appointed emissaries to the Communist regime..."

Kerry, on Nov. 2, 1971 would say: "Our democracy is a farce; it is not the best in the world."

March 15 2004:

Kerry said at a fund-raiser last week in Florida that he’s heard from some world leaders who quietly back his candidacy and hope he defeats President George Bush...

When asked to name them, Kerry refused saying:"I'm not going to betray a private conversation with anybody,"

Kerry:"I have heard from foreign leaders elsewhere in the world who don't appreciate the Bush administration and would love to see a change in the leadership of the United States."

Has he heard from them or are these leaders hearing from Kerry?

an email sent to Iranian Mullahs?

Taking campaign to the enemy?
Feb 9, 2004
Iran's Mehr News Agency reports it has received an e-mail from the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry pitching the candidate as one who will "repair the damage done" to international relations by President Bush.

From Feb.9th campaign email/ March 15th response, thereabouts, kerry says he has heard from world leaders who Back his candidacy... perhaps Kerry meant he was hearing back from those foriegn solicited email endorsements. He, of course, by March 19th has realized yet another blunder with his campaign, and it's message, and sends out the troops once again:

"This election will be decided by the American people, and the American people alone," Kerry adviser Rand Beers said in a statement Thursday. "It is simply not appropriate for any foreign leader to endorse a candidate in America's presidential election. John Kerry does not seek, and will not accept, any such endorsements."

well gosh John why would you send out emails belittling our government to foriegn governments or news agencies, while advocating government change?

Maybe someone should check Senators Kerry's frequent flier miles; has he secretly flown off anywhere lately??

Wouldn't one love to see his phone bill for the last few years...what other emails have gone out, and to whom?

anti-jewish Mahathir Mohamad endores Kerry

Spains anti- american Socialist Zapatero endorses Kerry

Hezbolah: Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah: "We may not be able to drive the Americans out of Iraq," says Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader in Lebanon. "But we can drive Bush out of the White House by heating things up in Iraq." anyone can logicaly see, the chaos in Iraq is a deliberate manipulation of the November elections.

[other islamic views to be added here]

[other endorsements to follow; Korea: etc]

One only has to look back into History to Kerrys idealist abandonment of vietnam and Contras, turned over to the hands of communist rule, to see why the facist fundamnetal-islamist put their tokens, hopes and aspirations on Kerry. [Kerry testified that Vietnam was a pointless war and that we could pull out without harming the local people.

Kerry's voting record is easier to understand also once one delves into his politics.

Swiftboat Myth or truth?
More kerry self-inflicted wounds than he can count?

One really has to begin to ask oneself: Who IS John Kerry?

Kerry who months before he was scheduled to be discharged, would ask to be let out early because "my conscience was bothering me, that I had to speak out against the war.''

[had Kerry waited there wouldn't have been many months left to campaign, but]

Kerry would once again try to obscure at least one real issue is here. Actions unbecoming an Officer...

from Kerrys website:

“January 1, 1970: Kerry promoted to (full) Lieutenant.

January 3, 1970: Kerry requests discharge.

March 1, 1970: Kerry’s date of separation from Active Duty.

April 29, 1970: Kerry listed as Registrant who has completed service.”

Kerrys website obfiscates the facts of his discharge. IF in Jan 1970 he applied for a discharge it was a discharge from ACTIVE DUTY. Kerrys separation from active duty put him in inactive status only
A registrant who has completed service only means that he has served actively and can not be called back up.

But he was not honorably discharged as he indicated in 1970.

When LT. Kerry demonstrated against the war he was still in the military in inactive status.

He wanted to speak out about what he had seen and what he knew, he said, but felt he could not do so in uniform.

{isn't he wearing a military shirt and RIBBONS in his 1970 speeches and or protests??}

His own words and consciense lend credence to the fact that he knew what he was doing, and that he shouldn't do it as a Naval Officer. And yet when he did these things, that he wanted to be free-of-conscience to do, he still was an officer of the United States Naval Reserves.-

LT. John Kerry,also, would not like one to realize that he was still in the Naval Reserves when he flew to Paris to meet with the communists.
He would like one to believe he was discharged before all these unbecoming events occurred, but he was not actualy discharged until FEB. 1978

Yet many records are not on his website, though he insists all of his records are...

Further investigation of this, and why, is needed

It is clear when investigating John Kerry's record that he continualy backtracks and changes his stories, embellishes, contrives, and obscures the actual truth by both lies and omissions.

Kerry trashed the symbols of honor when he threw away his medals ...and now conviently says he didn't throw away his medals now that these medals are political symbols of honor once again to him.

Or are they?

After stating publicly that he had thrown away his own medals so many years years ago on Television - some 6-7-8-9 - i can't remember...kerry said

He then later would say, that he threw away some other fellows medals and not his own.

When pressed, in later years, he would change his story again and say, he threw away his ribbons instead of his medals.

For me it's not even the issue of weather he threw his medals vs his ribbons away. One isn't different than the other anyway.

The main issue, i make with the examples, is that John Kerry has no credibility when his years of on the record medly of contradictions are really nothing more then lies and more lies to cover the lies.

It should also be understood here that its true that what occurred 35 years ago in someones life shouldn't reflect so much in what a man has become 35 years later.

I am surely not the same person i was 35 years ago myself.

The issue for me is; is the man 35 years later, and during that timeperiod, still fabricating issues; and can he be trusted?

There also seems to be a shameful preference for partisanship over truth taking place in the media. Taking many of the keywords highlited in LINKS in this very writting, one can use the same keywords in google-news and come up with ZERO returns.

It is kerry himself who has made the entire issue of who he is, his honor, his integrity, his honesty, based on his flip-flopped heroism, and war record.

So why can't one examine the record then without being threatened with censorship, and lawsuits?

Senator John Edwards has said: "If you want to know what kind of man John Kerry is, just ask the people he served with."

Continualy his campaign managers and other spokespeople would try to make people believe that swiftees who say they served with Kerry, and making statements about Kerrys service, had no right to do so, and no Knowledge to do so, because:

Those men weren't on Kerrys boat...

They didn't "serve "with"" Kerry...

It's all smoking mirrors. Of course many of them served with Kerry.
All one has to do is read the action reports to see which boats served right alongside Kerrys boat. If thats not enough, read the books Kerry has had written about himself.

"Senator John Kerry has made his 4-month combat tour in Vietnam the centerpiece of his bid for the Presidency. His campaign jets a handful of veterans around the country, and trots them out at public appearances to sing his praises. John Kerry wants us to believe that these men represent all those he calls his "band of brothers."

But most combat veterans who served with John Kerry in Vietnam see him in a very different light

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has been formed to counter the false "war crimes" charges John Kerry repeatedly made against Vietnam veterans who served in our units and elsewhere, and to accurately portray Kerry's brief tour in Vietnam as a junior grade Lieutenant. We speak from personal experience -- our group includes men who served beside Kerry in combat as well as his commanders. Though we come from different backgrounds and hold varying political opinions, we agree on one thing: John Kerry misrepresented his record and ours in Vietnam and therefore exhibits serious flaws in character and lacks the potential to lead.

We regret the need to do this. Most Swift boat veterans would like nothing better than to support one of our own for America's highest office, regardless of whether he was running as a Democrat or a Republican. However, Kerry's phony war crimes charges, his exaggerated claims about his own service in Vietnam, and his deliberate misrepresentation of the nature and effectiveness of Swift boat operations compels us to step forward.

For more than thirty years, most Vietnam veterans kept silent as we were maligned as misfits, addicts, and baby killers. Now that a key creator of that poisonous image is seeking the Presidency we have resolved to end our silence.

When Kerry came back from the war he was a self proclaimed war criminal...

Yet, when Kerry was in the war, he was a hero.

When others were in the war, they were villians and not heroes, per Kerry.

[excerpts from "Stolen Valor" depict some of the debunked frauds who were Kerrys witnesses who lied in Detroit about has mailed me and given OK to use some quotes]

kerry who stated that he had "never witnessed" any attrocities (other than his admitted own) and who never served with any of those he would later come back and condemn and accuse of attrocities, backed up by 150 mens testimonies that Kerry organized, most of which were later found to be inaccurrate and down-right frauds, would now have us believe that men 15 yards away didn't serve with him, didn't know him, because they weren't on his boat, and therefore have no crediability.

The hypocrasy just numbs ones mind.

Kerry always has to have it "both ways".

Well, lets ask one of the men who was actualy ON kerrys boat then what he has to say:

...Del Sandusky who told CNN NewsNight on May 31, 2004 that "John, shot and bleeding, laid down and pulled up Rassmann by his belt."

Kerry, as you will discover, was never shot in Vietnam. Nary a scratch from a bullet.


It gets even more so.

Kerry takes so much pride now in displaying his military record on his site, and has even gone so far as to post all of his citations for medals and in later years would somehow get Admirals, and a Secretary of State to rewrite additional citations for the very same action.

...As WorldNetDaily reported , two researchers contend Kerry's Silver Star has an unauthorized "V" for valor which "makes it facially false and at variance with official government records."

That's because Silver Stars are given for gallantry and never are accompanied with a combat "V," which would be redundant. But Kerry's DD 214, or "Report of Transfer and Separation," displayed on his website, shows the "V."

In a correction to Kerrys dd214, at his website [in which he somehow was awarded a Silver Star "WITH A COMBAT V"] (an award never issued, ever, with a Silver Star) after being called on it, Kerry removed the "combat V" in a revised dd215, BUT while he was at it, he somehow added 4 bronze stars - in which the NAVY says he is only entitled to 2 Bronze Stars and is questioning his record on kerrys website.


Amid questions about one of John Kerry's combat "V" decorations, unearthed remarks by the senator eight years ago reveal he judged an admiral's allegedly false awards [combat "V"] as a serious offense that disqualified him from leadership.

After the suicide of Adm. Mike Boorda in 1996, National Review columnist Kate O'Beirne notes Kerry gave his response to two Boston papers.

..."In a sense, there's nothing that says more about your career than when you fought, where you fought and how you fought," Kerry told the Boston Herald.

"If you wind up being less than what you're pretending to be, there is a major confrontation with value and self-esteem and your sense of how others view you."

We can probably say then, that John Kerry knew at least 8 years ago that he himself shouldn't have a Silver Star with a combat "V" displayed at his site.

lets try to keep focused on the ball ...

John Kerry threw away his medals, John Kerry didn't throw away his medals but threw away someone elses, John Kerry didn't throw away his medals but did toss his ribbons, John Kerry is now running on his medals...

Stranger still, for it was john Kerrys idea while in the VVAW (vietnam Vets against the war) for 'his band of brothers' to go to the capitol fence and disperse their medals with so much contempt.
These are the same 'band of brothers' who at one meeting, that Kerry was reportedly at, disscussed the assasination of 6 senators.

Not to leave this spin on this statement as it appears, it is also reported that it was Kerry who oppossed such radical methods.

And yet looking below the surface of this type of leadership one would have to ask oneself why Senator Kerry never reported the assasination plot to the authorities. Some might wonder if he voted 'for it', "before he voted against it", but Kerry, despite the reported FBI survielance putting him at the meeting, has denied being there that day, and says later that he submitted an official letter of resignation on Nov. 10, 1971.

Some say Kerry was present that day and was the one who squashed the assasination discussion, and refused violent methods, others say he wasn't there. Later some who had said he was there, said now, they may have confused that meeting with another previous meeting.

My question would be then, i guess, how many meetings were there that John Kerry stood up and put the kabosh on this assasination discussion? Surely he could have been at a previous meeting, and not the infamous one, but then one needs to ask themselves, who was it that day, that people recall being Senator Kerry, who saved 6 Senators from being massacred by Scott Camils plan?

Of course this too is academic since the FBI files do place Kerry at the meeting where assasination was discussed.

Scott Camil:

“My plan was that, on the last day we would go into the [congressional] offices we would schedule the most hardcore hawks for last ­ and we would shoot them all,” Mr. Camil told the Oral History interviewer. “I was serious.”

Kerry seems to gather all those around him who may contest his' inflictions'...or dispute his band-aides

It is reported that Scott Camil who was the ringleader in the assasination plot was contacted by the Kerry campaign to help out in Florida. Mr. Camil plans to except the offer to become active in the Kerry Campaign.

Kerry, with so much conviction, who would lead and orchestrate others into the medals without meaning battle, would have his 'band of brothers' believing he had thrown his own medals away that day, while urging them all to trash their own and make a statement to the Country and to the World.

Apparently from what we can now determine, after he has changed his story, one of so very many stories, is that Kerry could not even be honest with those he was leading into that medal battle. Duped.

Either he threw them away, and later had to buy some new ones, or he did not throw them away and betrayed his cause and his own network of protesters.That's the kind of leader they had that day?

There is not a question of weather John Kerry or any other person served his country in a terrible war.

This analysis has to do with:








It has a great deal to do with deciet and/or/ truth

These, and many reasons, are why it is important to get to the bottom of John Kerry and his medals.

Medals that he now uses to establish himself as a man, not as a protester of a war seeking office, but as a man seeking office using his medals as a statement of who he is.

Mr. kerry once again is flip-flopping.
Now he desperatly would like to be counted amoung those heros,again, that he came back and condemned. Convient.

And while he was there he certainly must be included in those heroic people who woke up each day to unknown sacrafice, and lurking dread. Those who may never have seen a day of actual battle but cruised and supplied and maintained and healed and protected and served are equal heros, without which the oiled machined would break down and cause so much death and chaos.

The sad thing is that anyone who found themselves waking up each day to another terrible day of battle, fractured nerves, and backbone of steel, are people who were belittled, condemned and spit on when they returned home. A majority of the people doing the 'spitting' were from goups spawned by Kerrys spital...This spawn was a condemnation of all veterans.

Matt Drudge reported that Kerry telephoned Robert "Friar Tuck" Brant Cdr., USN (RET), one of the anti-Kerry Swift Boat veterans.

Kerry asked, "Why are all these Swift Boat guys opposed to me?"

Brant replied, "You should know what you said when you came back, the impact it had on the young sailors and how it was disrespectful of our guys that were killed over there."

Kerry said, "I wasn't talking about the Swifties, I was talking about the rest of the veterans."

Thank goodness, for the he said, she said, hearsey scoffers, that John Kerry is his own best source of what he says and thinks...

And so, Kerry must have been talking about the swifties all along according to his statements on the 1971 Dick Cavette Show:

...MR. KERRY: Thank you. Yes, we did participate in war crimes in Coastal Division 11 because as I said earlier, we took part in free fire zones, harassment, interdiction fire, and search-and-destroy missions.

Everytime I see a Democratic spokesperson on TV bluster and deny that Kerry EVER stated that he committed war crimes, and in their denial say that Kerry instead said that "others" committed war crimes, but NOT Senator Kerry, I wonder about their own honesty, integrity, leadership and judgement.

For Kerrys spokespeople please let me underline it again:

kerry said:I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground.

"[T]he fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, told me [W. Scott Thompson former Assistant Secretary of Defense]
-- 30 years ago when he was still CNO -- that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam, just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass, by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets.

'We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control,' the admiral said.

Hawk? Dove? or Vulture?

John Kerry would like to leave his contribution to those anti-war-veteran images behind him with excuses.

So I wonder if John Kerry is a different man 35 years later when he says, recently, he "was talking about the rest of the Veterans"....

John Kerry is described as an opportunist.

John Kerry accussed of betraying so many people.

Campaign Chair Jeanne Shaheen should understand that Kerry had crossed the line, and has never apologized for trashing other peoples service in the viet-nam war, calling them 'monsters' and war criminals, "men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence", while now proclaiming that his own service was honorable in, this, the biggest nothing in history.

Not to forget for a moment, i would think, that after condemning the people who served over there,and demanding that the troops be brought home, because communisum was not a threat, he would now condenm the people who were not over there at all...

as unfit to deal and trade in violence, i guess.(?)

Back then his barbs were for people who were serving their government, the military all the way up the chain, and the men in government who were lieing to everyone, and now he would throw sound bytes at those who didn't serve.

Does John mean ALL who didn't serve? Or just those in the government?

Kerry said: "I will not have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have..."

Forget for a second that it seems ok in kerrys mind to have questioned the committment of "those who DID serve"...since he did so.

Why then would it not be OK for those who did serve to question Kerrys commitment to dishonor their record of honor while serving?

It is reported (get source again) that Kerry is outraged when his patriotism is questioned...while he demands apologies

Mr. Kerry didn't seem to have any problems with questioning the patriotism of those serving in Vietnam when he came back.

perhaps it has taken Mr. Kerry 35 years to finaly understand.

Can it get any more 'complicated'?

Kerrys message to the troops is the same he had for the troops in viet-nam as he and the democratic Party have divided the post 911 strength and unity of America & Americans using the "misery index"...

Kerry has said: "It's the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time"

...Kerry says he's agona get us some new allies - to, ah, join us in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time...I donknow, maybe it sounds different in French.

And his telegraphed message to the enemy is he would have major troop reductions in iraq within 6 months

i sat stunned as I heard Kerry say the insurgents and radicals killing our troops every day, this must mean to them to hang on, for... "hope is on the way"...

Probably realizing what he had done, or still trying to stay on the side of people who know we just can't pull out now, he then changed his position once again, to a withdrawal within 4 years.

Joe Lockhart, a senior Kerry adviser said... in reference to speech of Prime minister Allawi of iraq:

The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips.

...who are kerrys speech writers?...[The VVAW??]

certainly its the message the terrorist/insurgents/ would like to hear coming out of America to support their murderous cause.

He insults the coalition partners that we DO have, who are also losing lives over there, by referencing them as "the coerced and the bribed"; insults the Head of State of Iraq, minimalizing his status as a spokesperson for Iraqi freedom and free elections; attacks our government officials as incompetents and puppetmasters.

I continue to have several questions in my mind everytime I hear John Kerry say that we can't win the war "without our allies"...

Who are these additional mysterious allies that Senator Kerry would have us believe are going to join us, if only President Bush is removed from office?

How in the world does he plann to "coerce and bribe" France Germany and Russia to support us in Iraq?

Because just as the swift boaters have said that they would not stop trying to reveal the real John Kerry even if President Bush asked them to - so to France has made it quiet clear that there is no way that they will change their position on Iraq and send a single troop there.

Mr. Kerry we do have allies helping us win the war. At least the ones who weren't involved in the oil for food blood money which motivated them to want Saddam to remain in power. To minimalize the allies who are helping the USA with their own blood sweat and tears in Iraq, in favor of those profiteering hold-outs, is dispicable and disgraceful.

..."90% of our blood and our dollars are going into Iraq"...Mr. Kerry continues to state.

Perhaps in Kerrys mind this fight for freedom, democrasy, security, and humam rights, and is not equaly distributed.

Senator Kerry - just what is the percentage you are willing to invest to insure stability and freedom? Less than 100%?
If no one else in the world stepped up to help us, we still need to give 100% to protect our freedom, security, and values.

If Kerry states he can not win the war without these "allies", and these allies have made it clear that they won't support the war in Iraq, hasn't Kerrys mindset already revealed that he, himself, believes that he can't win the war?

If Kerry can not win the war without these "allies" has he made plans already to pull out?

Does Senator kerry feel once again that we can "pull out without harming the local people/s" like he did in vietnam.?

Thirty years later there still is a huge mistake in the make-up of John F Kerry and his ideas.

where does fact and fiction begin, and what is JFKerrys record??

Is he fleeing down a river of facts?

Kerrys Yale Years and statements he made:

(fill in sources and his anti-war speeches and his ideas of changing of the government)

note here, comments and testimonies (quotes) of POW's who suffered further n additional cruel treatment while held POW's because of John Kerry's announcements that US military were 'war criminals'. Kerrys statements that were played for POWs to hear.

(Statements also found that many times Hanoi was ready to surrender but Held ON with the HOPE that the war could be won in the streets of America.

One quote i heard on TV was (paraphrased) America had lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.

Because Hanoi would hang ON, more and more soldiers names would be added to the wall.

Such is the legacy of Kerry standing on the shoulders of soldiers.

investigate this more fully:

Kerry, ...launched a highly publicized diversionary investigation of the POW/MIA families and activists, who were demanding an honest accounting.

Kerry labeled them "professional malcontents, conspiracy mongers, con artists, and dime-store Rambos" who were only involved in the POW/MIA issue for money.

Kerry stopped the Vietnam Human Rights Act (HR2833) from coming to a vote in the Senate claiming human rights would deteriorate as a result.

His actions sent a clear signal to Hanoi that Congress cares little about the human rights for which so many Americans fought and died.

investigate further...

...In December of 1992, not long after Kerry was quoted in the world press stating "President Bush() should reward Vietnam within a month for its increased cooperation in accounting for American MIAs," Vietnam announced it had granted Boston, Massachusetts based Colliers International, a contract worth billions. Colliers International became exclusive real estate agent representing Vietnam.

WHO is Colliers??
investigate further...

well that was easy- Kerrys cousin:

Long after he changed sides in congressional hearings, Mr. Kerry lobbied for renewed trade relations with Hanoi. At the same time, his cousin C. Stewart Forbes, chief executive for Colliers International, assisted in brokering a $905 million deal to develop a deep-sea port at Vung Tau, Vietnam — an odd coincidence.


John F. Kerry, as the national leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War said, "The political power structure within the United States can and must change if the nation is to avoid violent efforts to seize power." He further stated that "If it (the government) doesn't change we are asking for trouble. If it (the change in U.S. government) is not done, those who are talking about seizing it will have every right to go after it."

kerrys return from the war...

I'm an internationalist. I'd like to see our troops dispersed
through the world only at the directive of the United Nations. ...1970

Kerrys iraq debate:

"The Global Test"...And you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

Kerrys war deferments:

Kerry requests and/or recieves, in his later revelations, 4 deferments: of a sort deferal- some 4 years -studying political science.

2.trys to get a deferment to go to Paris to study. Deferment Is denied. Is told to enlist or be a draftie he could NOT pick and choose were he wanted to go...

"I volunteered for service because it was the right thing to do," Kerry would say.

Again, very disingenuous. Kerry volunteered because his deferment options were up.

He would try to avoid the war by requesting to sit in the cafes of Paris. With the Paris request shot down Kerry knew he would be drafted. The choice between being drafted and volunteering gave him the choice of being sent to the front lines as a draftie ,or volunteering for Officers Training.

(more here)-

3.Enlists in Reserves (inactive)
John Kerry did NOT enlist because he "felt it was the right thing to do"; He signed on with the Naval RESERVES, inactive status, thinking he might not get called up...

Lets not be drug into the trap that there is somehow something Less honorable being in the Reserve vs being in The Navy while being insulting to the Reservist...the Point here is that Kerry would in biographies state he was in the Navy - - a deliberate attempt on his part obscuring that he was in the Reserves - this while insinuating that his opponent's enlistment in the Reserves is somehow less honorable than his own.

4.swift boat training;

Kerrys inactive status was changed, from inactive to active, and he served according to the crew on the gridley as a good officer, offshore of vietnam servicing aircraft carriers; he was described as one who often stared at the boats off in the distance in rememberance of his friend John F Kennedy and his Pt-109 escapades. John Kerry requested and signed up for swift boat duty knowing full well that it was a "safe duty" that would keep him out of the war that he, in his own words said, that he wanted to avoid...(but would give him his own boat and perhaps an illussion of PT 109...) but by the time he had been trained and reported for swift boat duty he suddenly found that swift boats were now going to be used in a 'combat way'...Kerry was Not happy about this.
(i think i read somewhere he said, "I didn't sign up for this!" i will have to track this one down again]

So much so was his bad attitude that he lasted only one week in one station before the Officers there got rid of him and his belly-aching.

[include here portions of Unfit for Command of chapter three - if/when permission is given]

So in a sense one can readily recognize that Kerry applied for, and recieved, his own 4-5 deferments to keep him at a distance from the war, that he accusses one of his oppents of.

He belittles George Bush for staying at Home and having enlisted in the Guard RESERVES - and insinuates President Bush did so to avoid combat, yet Kerry himself enlisted in the Naval RESERVES- and admits he did so to avoid combat.

Kerry would accuse Cheney of avoiding Vietnam by seeking 5 deferments.

From what i can determine on the net is Cheney recieved 1 deferment for each year of college, or 4, and one for married with a child, for a total of the five deferments Kerry refers to.

If this is indeed Kerrys basis for this disingenuous total, we could then add 4 more derferments to Kerrys own total for his own 4 years in college.

Kerry's anti-military sentiments were well known when he was a student at Yale. After graduating, Kerry petitioned his draft board for a student deferment so he could study in--where else?--Paris. His deferment denied, Kerry then calculated that he could avoid Vietnam by joining the Naval Reserves, where he'd likely be able to serve stateside even if his unit was activated. Kerry's service record indicates that on 18 February 1966 he enlisted in the USNR under ''inactive'' status. This puts the lie to any assertion that Kerry ''volunteered'' for dangerous swift boat duty while George W. Bush somehow slunk off to fly fighter-jets.

As fate would have it, Kerry's reserve unit was activated, while the president's ANG unit remained stateside--yet both circumstances were far beyond the control of these two junior officers. As for Kerry's choice of Swift Boats, he told the Boston Globe last year, ''I didn't really want to get involved in the war. When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling....and that’s what I thought I was going to be doing.”''

(Kerry told Brinkley that a big reason he'd volunteered for Swift Boat duty in Vietnam—which is often cited as an example of his heroism—was so he could spend the summer with [Julia] Thorne [kerrys first hieress wife] before training started. When asked if she'd ever heard that story before, their daughter Vanessa Kerry grew quiet and said, "No, but it wouldn't surprise me.")

As fate would by then have it, and Kerry had gone thru the training period and "reported for swift boat duty", Zumwall had decided to change the activities of swift boats duties and now send them into the dangerous rivers and channels for which it is reported Kerry was extremely unhappy about.

Kerrys first Purple heart seems to have come from an enemy action, in his words, on his own website, which took place on Dec. 2, 1968.

"December 2, 1968 - Kerry experiences first intense combat, receives first combat related injury."

When Kerry showed up with a tiny piece of shrapnel sticking out of his arm he was administered bactine, a bandaide, and told to go away... no wait, i'm sorry, that was later when he insisted upon recieving a purple heart, and was told he didn't qualify for a purple heart because there never was an enemy action nor enemy gunfire, and that kerry himself had accidentaly wounded himself while firing an M-79 grenade launcher..."
Kerry missed no duty from what is later described as "a scratch". and was told to "forget It" when asking for the Purple heart.

Kerry's wound was so minor that in sick bay, Navy Dr. Louis Letson asked him, "Why are you here?" and used tweezers to take out a 1- or 2-centimeter metal fragment that barely stuck into his skin.

Shortly after being wounded, Mr. Kerry was transferred to Cat Lo on the Mekong Delta having been given his first swift boat.
The non-enemy gunfire is confirmed by Kerry himself in his own war journal, 9 days later,in which he writes...In his biography of Mr. Kerry, "Tour of Duty," Douglas Brinkley reports on page 189 that soon after Mr. Kerry turned 25 on Dec. 11, 1968, he headed out on his first mission: "[The crew] had no lust for battle, but they also were not afraid. Kerry wrote in his notebook, ´A cocky feeling of invincibility accompanied us up the Long Tau shipping channel because we hadn´t been shot at yet, and Americans at war who haven´t been shot at are allowed to be cocky´. "

One of the criteria for awarding a Purple Heart is that the person in question was involved in action against the enemy. A wound resulting from friendly fire still qualifies for a Purple Heart as long as it was incurred while engaged with the enemy.

In addition, one of Kerry's commanding officers, retired Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard, said he strongly questioned whether Kerry the senator deserved his first Purple Heart. Elaborating on an account reported in The Boston Globe last month, Hibbard said he was briefed after the Dec. 2, 1968, event for which Kerry received a Purple Heart.

''The briefing from some members of that crew the morning after revealed that they had not received enemy fire," Hibbard said. ''And yet Lieutenant [junior grade] 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 Lieutenant 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 Purple Heart for that scratch, and I don't know how," Hibbard said.

How ever it is that Senator Kerry recieved this Purple Heart has not been answered as wherever the medical and action reports are, describing the enemy action and injury, and the person who eventualy awarded kerry this first Purple Heart is not produced on his website.

This while other action and med reports are on the site. And while Kerry insists all records are on the site.

At first the kerry campaign tried to say that Navy Dr. Louis Letson never treated Kerrys wound because someone else signed the report ... so there is a report...
Dr. Louis Letson responded that he was the only physician serving in that particular region of Vietnam and it was his 'assistant', a medic, that signed it.

Kerry would continue to threaten legal action and obscure the truth of this incident until his own dairy/journal revealed that he admitted not being under any enemy fire until at least after Dec 11, 1968...

Unable to dispute Kerrys own recorded words the Kerry campaign has after that backed off and that it was indeed possible that John Kerry’s first Purple Heart commendation was the result of an, unintentional, self-inflicted wound.

Here's a fact; no matter who signed it, Kerry certainly knows who removed the piece of metal and treated him with bactine and a band-aide.

here's another; Kerry knew he hadn't been injured by enemy fire.

and another- Kerry being turned down for the Purple Heart would later submitt to someone else - not identified as yet- for this first Purple Heart, going behind the backs of those who had denied it to him because it was a self inflicted accident.

Having been turned down for the request and given the reason why - self infliction- he somehow ends up with this medal anyway...

One can only imagine what the action, casualty, and recommendation, report actualy says in them since Senator Kerry has not produced it.

Certainly the reports had to have written by kerry, himself.

Purple Heart no.1 debunked.

Most Swiftees who were with Kerry at Cam Ranh Bay never knew until Kerry decided to run for president that he had somehow successfully maneuvered his way to this undeserved Purple Heart. But in Kerry’s own unit, Coastal Division 14, his attempt to gain the award through fraud marked him as someone who could never be trusted. When Kerry was dispatched to go to An Thoi with Lieutenant Tedd Peck (now Captain, USNR, retired), Peck told him, “Kerry, follow me no closer than a thousand yards. If you get any closer, I’ll teach you what a real Purple Heart is.”

Here we begin a irrefutable trail of Mr. Kerrys own words and actions.

For a man who brought a video camera, a tape recorder, and a journal along with him you would think he could keep his stories straight.

Kerrys Silver star:

(The regulations pertaining to Personal Award Recommendations also reccomend that combat awards be supported by at least two witnesses.)


Feb. 28, 1969, was a day that started out badly...

recalls Fred Short: I see out of a spider hole a Vietcong stand up dressed in a loin cloth, holding a B-40 rocket."

Short recalled: "The guy was getting ready to stand up with a rocket on his shoulder, coming up. And Mr. Kerry took him out …

"If this guy would have got up, and he had a clear shot at us, we would have been history," Thorson said.

...Kerry recalled. "And Tommy clipped him, and he started going [down.] I thought it was over."

William B. Rood:
Chicago Tribune


John O'Neill, author of a highly critical account of Kerry's Vietnam service, describes the man Kerry chased as a "teenager" in a "loincloth." I have no idea how old the gunner Kerry chased that day was, but both Leeds and I recall that he was a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore...

Kerry, followed by one member of his crew, jumped ashore and chased a VC behind a hooch—a thatched hut—...

With our troops involved in the sweep of the first ambush site, Richard Lamberson, a member of my crew, and I also went ashore to search the area. I was checking out the inside of the hooch when I heard gunfire nearby.

Not long after that, Kerry returned, reporting that he had killed the man he chased behind the hooch. He also had picked up a loaded B-40 rocket launcher, which we took back to our base in An Thoi after the operation.

No one is questioning Mr. Roods accounts of this days events- but his accounts do go to show how everyone seems to have a different version of the days events.

Former crewmember, Michael Medeiros, who was chasing after Sen. Kerry and the fleeing soldier, said he did not see Sen. Kerry kill him but had no doubt that the senator did so. "The only one that was there was Senator Kerry," he said.

The Boston Globe reported:

Kerry said that his fatal shooting of the Vietnamese soldier, who was carrying a loaded rocket launcher, occurred in full view of Belodeau and crewmember Michael Medeiros.

"I was never out of sight of Tom Belodeau or Mike Medeiros," Kerry said. "I went straight out from the boat to the path so I had a line of fire. I never went behind the hootch, and this is the first time in 30 years that anybody has suggested otherwise."

...and yet Senator John Kerrys citation for that day suggests otherwise:

. . . an enemy soldier sprang up from his position not ten feet from Patrol Craft Fast 94 and fled. Without hesitation Lieutenant (junior grade) ..."KERRY leaped ashore, pursued the man behind a hootch and killed him, capturing a B-40 rocket launcher with a round in the chamber. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY then led an assault party and conducted a sweep of the area while the Patrol Craft Fast continued to provide fire support. After the enemy had been completely routed, all personnel returned to the Patrol Craft Fast to withdraw from the area.”

...behind the hootch- not behind the hootch? witnessed? not witnessed??

...and i haven't even covered the "shot in the back episode..."

...So Kerry shot and killed the guerrilla. "I don't have a second's question about that, nor does anybody who was with me," he said. "He was running away with a live B-40, and, I thought, poised to turn around and fire it."

Is it any wonder that any reporter would be confused by all these possibilities??
Or is the word probabilities?

...and WHY did Senator Kerry go after and recieve- not ONE- but THREE different written versions of this same Silver Star citation over the coming years?

Three Siver Star citations issued for the same event.

There is no question that men fighting that day were brave and their clear recollections may be lost thru these long years.

But one only has to read John Kerrys own versions of what happened in his books, interviews, statements, war record to see that Kerry hasn't forgotten at all. He simply told too many different versions taking the crediability away from his statements.

Unlike Kerry, when he returned from the war, I don't question kerrys service - i question Kerrys honesty, when he describes his service.

Senator Kerrys second Purple Heart, less advertised, seems to be in question also...(refind hildreth source)

Kerry's Third Purple Heart and Bronze Star with Valor:

as witnessed by Rassman a friend and supporter of JFkerry:

As they were heading back to the boat, Kerry and Rassmann decided to blow up a five-ton rice bin to deny food to the Viet Cong. In an interview last week,[washington post] Rassmann recalled that they climbed on top of the huge pile and dug a hole in the rice. On the count of three, they tossed their grenades into the hole and ran.
Evidently, Kerry did not run fast enough. “He got some frags and pieces of rice in his rear end,” Rassmann said with a laugh. “It was more embarrassing than painful.” At the time, the incident did not seem significant, and Kerry did not mention it to anyone when he got back on the boat. An unsigned “personnel casualty report,” however, erroneously implies that Kerry suffered “shrapnel wounds in his left buttocks” later in the day, after the mine explosion incident, when he also received “contusions to his right forearm.”

Anti-Kerry veterans have accused Kerry of conflating the two injuries to strengthen his case for a Bronze Star and Purple Heart. Kerry's Bronze Star citation, however, refers only to his arm injury.

JFKerry may have a citation somewhere that refers to 'only his arm injury', written and submitted apparently by Rassman, but on his own site he lists the official military spotreport that includes the injury to his buttocks along with his arm injury...{see spotreport link below}

now, one has to ask oneself- did jfk write his own spotreport that day, or did he report the buttocks injury to someone else who wrote it? in either case young JfK included,and reported, the fragged ass as an injury suffered under enemy fire- refering to the explosion of the boat next to his own lets look into the leaky boat

see page 8 of 9 of kerrys spotreport from his own website; injury 'hostile fire':

LTJG John F. Kerry, USN 713525/1100 Injury, Hostile Fire 13 Mar 69, 1530H, Song Bay Hap, WQ 010780. While serving as officer in charge aboard PCF-94 engaged in operations in the above river. LTJG Kerry suffered shrapnel wounds in his left buttocks and contusions on his right forearm when a mine detonated close aboard PCF-94.

Treated by medical officer aboard USCGC Spencer (WHEC-36) and returned to duty with Coastal Divison Eleven.

page 3 of 9 states:


yes; quite erroneously 'reported' that day by someone, or to someone...LTJG Kerry suffered shrapnel wounds in his left buttocks and contusions on his right forearm when a mine detonated close aboard PCF-94.

So either Mr. Kerry wrote up the report saying that he suffered the injury due to the explosion, or someone else who he reported the injury Too wrote it up. Either way the inclusion is a fabrication of what really happened.

Senator Kerry who would come back from vietnam and accuse the military chain of command of 'knowing' what was going on, could hardly fault them for not knowing what was going on if an Officer they trusted was submitting fraudulent reports of what was going could they?

in fact in Kerrys 1971 Senate Testimony Kerry would admit That records were routinely distorted.

Sen. Stuart Symington: Mr. Kerry from your experience in Vietnam do you think it is possible for the President or Congress to get accurate and undistorted information through official military channels? . . .

John Kerry: . . .I had direct experience with that, Senator, I had direct experience with that and I can recall often sending in the spot reports which we made after each mission, and including the GDA, gunfire damage assessments, in which we would say, maybe 15 sampans sunk or whatever it was. And I often read about my own missions in the Stars and Stripes and the very mission we had been on had been doubled in figures and tripled in figures. . . .

I also think men in the military, sir, as do men in many other things, have a tendency to report what they want to report and see what they want to see. And this is a very serious thing because I know on several visits--Secretary [Mel] Laird came to Vietnam once and they staged an entire invasion for him. . . .

I think that the intelligence which finally reaches the White House does have a serious problem with it in that I think you know full well, I know certainly from my experience, I served as aide to an admiral in my last days in the Navy before I was discharged, and I have seen exactly what the response is up the echelon, the chain of command, and how things get distorted and people say to the man above him what is needed to be said, to keep everybody happy, and so I don't--I think the entire thing is distorted.

Senator kerry admits several things here:

He did indeed write spot reports...often

He seems to be diverting responsibility when he says "WE" would say...inflating no. of sampans sunk, or whatever...

Either they all got around and discussed how inflatable these reports were going to be or Kerry would know nothing about what was in the reports, written by others and their contents as to embellishments, unless he had written them himself.

I doubt Kerrys expliots were written up and submitted to Stars And Stripes by his crew or other swift boats; it would be interesting to know just how Kerrys missions were described to Stars and Stripes...who the author was...and what the figures were reported. And weather they were edited.

Its possibile 'we' have yet another version of Kerrys 'missions' out there.
(look into getting copies)

I also think men in the military, sir, as do men in many other things, have a tendency to report what they want to report and see what they want to see.

I think this type of statement begins to explain Kerrys mindset as each of his written military reports begin to unravel.

I think that the intelligence which finally reaches the White House does have a serious problem with it...I have seen exactly what the response is up the echelon, the chain of command, and how things get distorted and people say to the man above him what is needed to be said, to keep everybody happy, and so I don't--I think the entire thing is distorted.

Senator Kerry would explain 35 years ago why President Bush recieved bad information from various countries; our own CIA; and inteligence reports - perhaps if Senator Kerry hadn't had such a high percentage of absence on the Inteligence Committee he would have known better what was going on as to the information being distorted, and investigated this inteligence, before the "serious problem" reached the white house...

Instead, after having supported the same Intelligence, Kerry calls the President of the United States a liar.

So once again, if Kerry was writing reports that were inflated, grossly incorrect, fraudulently fabricated, spectacularly embellished, and simarily simulated for the video camera,...(was that over the top?) well then the 'intelligence' up the chain of command had a very weak link on March 13, 1969 - in John Kerry, who would later say -- I think the entire thing is distorted...while writing images of Ghenghis Khan into history.

The men there that day say it is Kerry who wrote up the days events; It's Kerry who had his own typewritter...(find source again)Its kerry who volunteered 'often' to write up the reports (refind source)

Thurlow (PCF-51), Chenowith (PCF-23), and Peez (PCF-3), three of the other four commanders present, say that they did not write up the report that day, and the fourth- Droz (PCF-43), was killed a month later.

page 3 of 9 from kerrys website spotreport of action that day:

...PCF 23 joined at Cai Nuoc. PCFs with MSF embarked departed Cai Nuoc at 1445H proceeding down Bay Hap. At VQ 995770 mine detonated under PCF 3 lifting boat about 2-3 ft out of water. Very heavy black smoke observed at same time boats rcvd heavy A/W and S/A from both banks. Fire continued for about 5000 meters. Two other mine explosions observed. All boats and MSF returned fire and attempted assist PCF 3. PCF 94 picked up MSF advisor who went overboard. 94 towed PCF 3 as bucket brigade controlled flooding. PCF 43 took all WIA to USCGC Spencer for treatment. PCF 94 and 51 assisted PCF 3 . LCVP with damage control party was immediately dispatched from Washtenaw County. Boat damage separate message. Spotter aircraft in area spotted and RF/PF Cau Nuoc fired 4.2" Mortar after boats cleared. One secondary explosion vicinity WQ 010782

notice that the report states that...All boats and MSF returned fire and attempted assist PCF 3...there is no mention that all the boats fled but kerrys...
Nor that all boats stayed- except Kerrys.
And if all boats stayed, then who ran the 5000 meters?

(refind source where kerry states he turned his boat back after only a couple hundred yards)

note: it is curious - that all persons alive today say that they did not write up these reports - and that with their hands full and attention drawn to the banks where they say they unleashed heavy fire UNTIL they realized no one was shooting back,(see there own interviews, reports, avadavits of that day) that any of them would note how far upriver Kerrys boat had run (5000 meters) a comment that only kerry himself has used over the years about how far on the river he had gone before he realized (for some reason) he needed to turn around and go get the man that in some cases he says was on his boat, and went overboard when the boat swerved, (meaning i guess that he saw him go overboard before he continued 5000 meters upriver, or in another case where he says that rassman was on another boat behind him (explaining why he didn't know a man was overboard in his haste to leave him there) and after the firing had stopped, he turned his boat around and went back...) in either case, or any case, the case can be made that kerry wrote the report himself because all other boats stayed where they were alongside the damaged PCF 3 boat - therefore these boats, or their commanders, would not have written a report indicating that they,themselves, took fire for 5000 meters --- as this report indicates ---if you see what i mean

notice also, how many times PCF 94 [kerrys boat] which is the only boat not actually on the scene at all, is mentioned in the reports...

Following this line of reasoning alone, one can also then make the case that it was kerry who falsified the buttocks injury in the reports,and wrote the reports himself, knowing full well he had recieved that injury earlier in the day while blowing up a rice bin with rassmann...further the other commanders say that there were no OTHER explosions that day and so would not have written that there were...

a convient explanation for the buttocks wound was was an additional mine explosion and was added to the report with the illussion of enemy fire ?

- only one man would have needed to cover his ass that day- and apparently didn't.
Rassman says kerry did not report the rice bin injury when they returned to the boat...

One can only imagine Kerry carrying shrapnel & rice in his butt until the apropriate time that he can report or include the injury as enemy inflicted, rather than another self-inflicted wound.

The records show the injury was included, so one can only imagine that to be the case.

In any case, weather there was a second or third mine explosion, kerry himself knew he was not hit by it, nor by the primary explosion.

And those there would have known he wasn't injured by the primary also,as most report there was only the one.

So he either reported the explosion shrapnel injured him, to someone else, who may have written the report, or he wrote the report himself, inappropriately.

Knowing his boat was to far away from PCF3 to sustain injury, and very likely that others knew of his rice bin injury and would not include it in a report as 'enemy inflicted', it seems highly probable that Senator Kerry wrote the report himself.

i think the 5000 meters also exposes who wrote the reports that day...since his was the only boat which had left the area and traveled away from the downed PCF3...

since kerry refuses to authorize a Standard Form 180 we may never know for sure...

after 14 days of research i am beginning to think that kerry simply doesn't make sure other people are going to back up his stories before he tells them...

To be fair,it is reported that all boats were traveling at full speed when the explosion could get quite far upriver before realizing the rest of the boats are far behind if one is intent on getting out of the area and not realizing that all the gunfire still occurring far behind is not the enemy but all the other swift boats firing on the shoreline...and thus turn around and go back.

But, 5000 meters, or, 3 miles?

Kerry, in a purported journal entry cited in Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," maintains that he wanted to get his troops ashore "on the outskirts of the ambush."

note: So, how many men did Kerry let ashore? Or was there some reason that Kerry didn't need to let them ashore at all?

kerry had already been repremanded for leaving his post (his boat) in his Silver Star incident when commanding officer, George Elliott, raised an issue with Kerry: the fine line between whether the action merited a medal or a court-martial.

"When [Kerry] came back from the well-publicized action where he beached his boat in middle of ambush and chased a VC around a hootch and ended his life, when [Kerry] came back and I heard his debrief, I said, 'John, I don't know whether you should be court-martialed or given a medal, court-martialed for leaving your ship, your post,'" Elliott recalled in an interview.

"But I ended up writing it up for a Silver Star, which is well deserved, and I have no regrets or second thoughts at all about that," Elliott said. A Silver Star, which the Navy said is its fifth-highest medal, commends distinctive gallantry in action.

Asked why he had raised the issue of a court-martial, Elliott said he did so "half tongue-in-cheek, because there was never any question I wanted him to realize I didn't want him to leave his boat unattended. That was in context of big-ship Navy — my background. A C.O. [commanding officer] never leaves his ship in battle or anything else. yet, despite this repremand and reminder to never put his boat and crew in danger, and leave his post,kerrys excuse for running away downriver is that he wants to get his men ashore...again to be fair- he says "troops" and not specificaly his own swift boat "men"...

3 miles is quite a ways away to go to get your troops ashore, struggle for an hour back thru foliage, stalking silently, and surprize the enemy while your comrades are taking fire out in the river...especially when you just drove thru 3 miles of intense gun battle, from the enemy-saturated banks of the river that they'd have to fight was there any fire?

the other commanders state that they fired on the shore for about 45 seconds before realizing that they were not taking any fire from the shore

There may even indeed have been someone/s on shore to detonate the mine and who may have even fired off a few shots before retreating...there is still the statement about Tommys gun falling apart to consider--- but the boat damage reports have only 3 bullet holes in one boat; that boat was thurlows who states that those bullet holes came from a previous combat action...also not one person was shot that day.

Even discounting or questioning that - certainly there could not have been much fire from shore with no other than 3 bullet holes in the five boats present.

Well, 4 boats present, because Kerrys boat had left the area, leaving the other swift boats behind.

( find again source where kerry says all boats took off and he himself turned his boat back into the ambush to get rassmann)

kerrys boat, At 32 knots, would have traveled aprox. 2442 ft...almost half a mile... in 45 seconds of reported gunfire from other swift boats.

(45 seconds=100 [1000?] rounds from an M-60 according to Lee, a swifty on the river that day - an interesting quote from Lee later)

this means that kerry, who has now traveled the officialy reported 5000 meters (the only boat that day that did) has traveled another 3 minutes after the gunfire has stopped behind him... note: to have been traveling slower would mean that he continued, leaving his 'brothers
behind, and one who he witnessed go into the water, in the water, for an even longer period, before returning...

4 - 5 minutes is not a lifetime after all, until, or unless you are in the water believing that you are going to die - and if youre underwater hearing bullets flying youre certainly not witnessing much going on above and able to identify who is actually firing.

It is probably unlikely that there was a third mine explosion as Rassmann, who says he spent a great deal of this time period underwater, would probably have suffured concussion or ear drum dammage...

But if we examine kerrys own story/s over the years we can see that kerrys own reported stories of this single incident are manyfold:

1a.rassmann was on kerrys boat - the boat swerved and rassmann walked striaght off the boat


Kerrys website PRESSRelease
indicates rassmann was not on Kerrys boat; Kerry was HIT IN THE ARM; while a mine blew rassmanns boat out of the water;With enemy fire coming from both sides of the river and swift boats evacuating from the area, Kerry’s crew chose to turn their boat toward the ambush to save Rassmann.

On Page 106 of the book "John F. Kerry, The Official Biography by the Boston Globe Reporters Who Know Him Best," Rassman is on a boat behind Kerry's.

3a. eulogy Kerry Gave for Tommy Belodeau,:

(See Congressional Record: January 28, 1998 (Senate) Page S186-S187).

Mr. KERRY : Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the text of the eulogy I gave for my friend, Thomas M. Belodeau, on November 10, 1997.

There was the time we were carrying special forces up a river and a mine exploded under our boat sending it 2 feet into the air.

We were receiving incoming rocket and small arms fire and Tommy was returning fire with his M-60 machine gun when it literally broke apart in his hands. He was left holding the pieces unable to fire back while one of the Green Berets walked along the edge of the boat to get Tommy another M-60. As he was doing so, the boat made a high speed turn to starboard and the Green Beret kept going — straight into the river. The entire time while the boat went back to get the Green Beret, Tommy was without a machine gun or a weapon of any kind, but all the time he was hurling the greatest single string of Lowell-Chelmsford curses ever heard at the Viet Cong. He literally had swear words with tracers on them!

One can find this statement in the archives of 1998 congressional record.

kerry wants 'truth' entered into the congressional record, 1997... and in this one it's Kerrys Boat that was blown up......and...while one of the Green Berets [rassmann] walked along the edge of the boat to get Tommy another M-60... the boat made a high speed turn to starboard and the Green Beret kept going — straight into the river..

... a highspeed turn - not an explosion...Kerrys boat blown up - not PCF3

One really has to wonder (after all these different stories if it was the high speed TURN which threw Kerry into the bulkhead "smashing his right arm"

[Brinkely Tour of Duty: "The concussion threw me violently against the bulkhead on the door and I smashed my arm," Kerry says on page 314."]

Also, isn't it against a LAW to LIE to Congress??

4. rassman was blown off kerrys boat by a second mine explosion
(get sources)

5.there are other kerry interviewed versions also...the chocolate chip cookie...while assisting PCF 3 and laying down fire and backing boat up to go get rassman...etc

It reminds one of 3 citations for the same event - possibly 4, i haven't seen his home movies.

And who knows what was written in Stars and Stripes, that Kerry says reported his exploits. The guy loves to read about himself...loves to write about himself too.

How many dang stories does kerry have and what does this type of personality and behavior tell us about a man who asks to be in charge of the day to day operation of our nation? When he talks to us and other nations, what are we to believe?

now if one examines these various Rassmann stories one will understand why kerry may have had to change the story putting rassman on another boat other than his own...

If kerry saw rassman go overboard, in any of the other versions, and then continued up the river at full speed, or slower, for another 3 miles,5000 meters as reported, then kerry in his haste to get out of the area, he, kerry, did indeed leave a man behind...

Is it any wonder that it is reported that when his staff surprized Kerry with the presence of Rassmann several months ago that Kerry appeared to be very uncomfortable and ill at ease...perhaps he was just holding his breath.
(refind source)

thus it is important to know which boat rassman was actualy on for a proper analysis...and set this mystery to bed...rassmann says he was on Kerrys boat (insert source here)

but rassmann also says he was the only one in the water that day...

“The fire was strong enough to knock out Tommy Belodeau’s machine gun…I was in the middle of the firefight,” Rassmann has said of the false claims that there was no fire that day and that other boats rescued people from the water. “There was one person in the water that day and that was me, anyone who is telling you otherwise is giving you a lie.

Well one only has to read the reports to know that 3 others were in the water that day...despite Rassmann telling us otherwise.

In Kerry's own account, many years,and versions,later, he said he was a few hundred yards away when he saw the splashes around Rassmann, and rushed to rescue him from the sniper fire.

if this is so, then who was it that day that took enemy fire for 5000 meters in the official report?? it certainly wasn't the other boats who are ALL reportedly helping boat PCF3 in the official report.
...and the Kerry campaign had to acknowledge, after the "no Man Left Behind" lie, that Kerrys boat did leave the scene while the other boats remained.

was firing going on for 5 minutes? 10 minutes?
thats alot of ammo...
flying down the river under miles and miles of enemy fire, from what must have been at least platoons and bridgades of enemy fire stretching this length of river from both banks, guns ablazing like the 'guns of navarone', and as the other boats fled John kerry turned his boat around to recuse a man overboard...

Is it any wonder that people want to set the record straight and believe that John kerry is certainly not 'fit for command'.

point of fact would be that the bronze star citation notes that kerry returned UPriver after discovering he had a man overboard...forgetting for a moment that he later states he saw rassmann walk straight off the boat when it swerved, or in another version that rassmann was blown off the boat, or another on Kerrys website where he says Rassmann was on another boat, lets remember that rassmann is back where all the other boats are assiting PCF3-->

Kerry after traveling 5000 meters under someones' reported heavy fire, that he now has to turn around and go back against the current another 5000 meters; or another 4-5 minutes of travel time...this puts kerry aprox 10 minutes out of the action...seems unlikely to have been gone that long...
and rassmann has indicated he was in water only a few minutes. (get source)

its not unlikely that upon returning, finaly, that kerry did at some point, say several hundred yards away, indeed spot rassman in the water...

However when one looks at the time factor, it again becomes extrememly unlikely that when Kerry pulled Rassmann from the water that he was STILL under enemy fire...

note:refind the kerry story that he was alongside, assisting PCF3 when (someone) shouted 'man overboard' - and kerry reversing engines, while alongside Pcf3, went to get rassmann]

Now during this time period, that PCF 94 is downriver, the other boats have drawn together, 3 other men have been pulled from the water, others have assisted and gone aboard PCF3 to render aide to the injured men aboard, thurlow has fallen overboard, and reportdly Chenowith has recused the others in the water - and yet when all spotreports are examined we find that it is PCF 94's [john kerrys] daring that day that is highlighted; and the recusing of rassmann mentioned and not the others who were in the water and rescued.


Did Chenowith recieve a Purple Heart that day for resucing men in the water?
Not that i've been able to uncover as yet.

no one else recieved, that day, a medal for pulling men out of the river that i could find as yet...not to be mistaken for some medals recieved that day for other reasons...If someone else had written the report would not that someone have recommended a medal to the others for their valor under fire while pulling men out of the water?

why not?

I heard a report on Hannity-FOX by the author of "Stolen Valor" (refind authors name) That RASSMANN recieved a Purple Heart that day...3 were reported awarded that day...(uncomfirmed - )

When one reads everything that has gone on that day, it is never mentioned anywhere, that i have yet found, that Rassmann was injured...If he indeed recieved a Purple Heart what were his injuries and who wrote the report?

Who was the third man?

guide for Reading spot reports.

CTE command structure:

CTE 194 = Zumwalt

CTE 194.5 = Hoffman

CTE 194.5.4 = Lonsdale

CTE = Elliott

CTE = Kerry

need to find out...

Was Kerry always /1 ; or only when he was in Tactical command?

Where is 28 FEB 69 SPOT REPOT 281130Z

Thurlow's Bronze Star, which was awarded for the same action that earned Kerry his medal... the citation... that he came under "constant enemy small arms fire," a description seized on by Kerry backers to discredit all the Swiftvets' claims.

Not so fast.

The problem here with the quick dismissal of claims is that if Kerry wrote the reports that day, (as he seems to have done in all his other awarded medals- minus rassmans) then the one Kerry would have written for Thurlow, of course, would have the same language in it that was in Kerrys own citation.

The apparent discrepancies in the casualty and after-action reports, taken together, raise the question of whether Kerry's fellow veterans are lying now, or Kerry lied in order to get the third Purple Heart.

The Washington Post, in an August 19 article, reported Thurlow's citation as evidence of a conflict in his story, but Thurlow maintains that there was no fire, and that his award citation is factually incorrect.

"In terms of receiving hostile fire, it's false," Thurlow told HUMAN EVENTS of his own Bronze Star citation.

Elliott told HUMAN EVENTS that he wrote the part about hostile fire in Thurlow's citation based on the same after-action report. "I got the information from the after-action report," he said.

For Immediate Release

Statement By Swift Boat Veterans for Truth Member Larry Thurlow

I am convinced that the language used in my citation for a Bronze Star was language taken directly from John Kerry's report which falsely described the action on the Bay Hap River as action that saw small arms fire and automatic weapons fire from both banks of the river.

To this day, I can say without a doubt in my mind, along with other accounts from my shipmates -- there was no hostile enemy fire directed at my boat or at any of the five boats operating on the river that day.

I submitted no paperwork for a medal nor did I file an after action report describing the incident. To my knowledge, John Kerry was the only officer who filed a report describing his version of the incidents that occurred on the river that day.

It was not until I had left the Navy -- approximately three months after I left the service -- that I was notified that I was to receive a citation for my actions on that day.

I believed then as I believe now that I received my Bronze Star for my efforts to rescue the injured crewmen from swift boat number three and to conduct damage control to prevent that boat from sinking. My boat and several other swift boats went to the aid of our fellow swift boat sailors whose craft was adrift and taking on water. We provided immediate rescue and damage control to prevent boat three from sinking and to offer immediate protection and comfort to the injured crew.

After the mine exploded, leaving swift boat three dead in the water, John Kerry's boat, which was on the opposite side of the river, fled the scene. US Army Special Forces officer Jim Rassmann, who was on Kerry's boat at the time, fell off the boat and into the water. Kerry's boat returned several minutes later -- under no hail of enemy gunfire -- to retrieve Rassmann from the river only seconds before another boat was going to pick him up.

Kerry campaign spokespersons have conflicting accounts of this incident -- the latest one being that Kerry's boat did leave but only briefly and returned under withering enemy fire to rescue Mr. Rassmann. However, none of the other boats on the river that day reported enemy fire nor was anyone wounded by small arms action. The only damage on that day was done to boat three -- a result of the underwater mine. None of the other swift boats received damage from enemy gunfire.

And in a new development, Kerry campaign officials are now finally acknowledging that while Kerry's boat left the scene, none of the other boats on the river ever left the damaged swift boat. This is a direct contradiction to previous accounts made by Jim Rassmann in the Oregonian newspaper and a direct contradiction to the "No Man Left Behind" theme during the Democratic National Convention.

These ever changing accounts of the Bay Hap River incident by Kerry campaign officials leave me asking one question. If no one ever left the scene of the Bay Hap River incident, how could anyone be left behind?

Thurlow in no way has been discredited. The person who wrote the action-report gets the credit for the language including,... "took place under constant enemy small arms fire" in the report...pre-citations.

So who wrote the after action report; and who put Thurlow in for the Bronze Star??

Answer these questions and you have the truth.

Here's a few more questions i have.

How long did this rescue of PCF3 take?

I believe i read somewhere it took over an hour...if this is so why did the after action reports not included in them any enemy fire bullet holes in the boats,other than 3 holes recieved the day before in Thurlows boat, as they sat like sitting ducks Rescuing Pcf3?

Did the other reported injured men blown off the boat that day, taken to the Spencer, recieve Purple Hearts?
did I already ask that question?


how did kerrys arm contusion (a bruise) in medical report, become a bleeding wound in his bronze star citation?

(see kerrys own site: in which the citation for the medal(which to be fair does not mention the buttocks wounding) states: ..."Lt. Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain, with disregard for his personal safety, he pulled the man aboard. Lt. Kerry's calmness, professionalism, and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the US Naval Service."

was there fire or was there not fire?

was the arm bruised, or was it bleeding?

who wrote the reports?

what do the actual reports, that kerry will not release, say on them and who signed them?

On Kerrys website he also has a write-up stating:

...another mine detonated wounding Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry in the right arm.

how does a 'contusion' in medical report go from bruised to bleeding?

...Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain and with disregard for his safety, he pulled the man aboard.

I don't mean the reports that kerry has listed that he wants us to see; i mean all of the reports.

What really happened the day kerry exposed himself on the bow with his 'bleeding arm' and shrapnel wounds...?

On kerrys website he has a medical page in which his treating doctor has provided this information on Kerrys medical.

To Whom It May Concern:

Re: John Kerry's Military Medical File

...13 March 1969, 1900 hours, United States Coast Guard Cutter Spencer. “John Kerry, LTJG, USNR- In firefight approx 3 hours ago, pt was a) thrown against bulkhead sustaining injury (contusion) to R forearm. b) sustained small piece of shrapnel in L upper buttock.”

IN FIREFIGHT - sustained shrapnel in butt

Thrown against Bulkhead - no mention of an explosion.

Contusion- on right forearm - yet Kerrys site states on another page that he was WOUNDED - by a second mine explosion-

I realize this is becoming redundant by now, to go over and over these facts presented by Kerry himself and how the facts go to character, integrity, honesty and, and, and, nuance.
I have several different words for it.

But Kerry would never have recieved a Purple Heart for a bruised forearm; he would have recieved it for the bogus shrapnel in his butt.

Kerry who would describe himself to Boston Globe as "walking Wounded"...A shrapnel wound in his left arm gave Kerry pain for years.

At this point in my research i really want to write, "Boo Who", but am more inclined to go find out how to spell finagler instead.
finagler...a deceiver who uses crafty misleading methods.

In the medical report above (at Kerrys site) one can readily see that this arm that gave him soooo much pain for years was the left arm, 'thorn' scratch, treated with bactine and a band aide.

These descriptions by Kerry over the years are more than just embellished war stories. Kerry has made sure over the years, through journals and letters and Books and staged-homemovies,interviews, and his own website, that he became a deliberate Paper hero, a calculated Public figure, and an exaggerated false warrior.

Walking wounded my ass...hummm, maybe there's a Title for Johns' next Book.

One lie begets another lie until the truth can no longer be untangled from the web of lies...butt in kerrys case i think the web holds many of his fabrications if one only takes the time to investigate.

To continue the charade:

Kerry in his BioBook Tour of Duty:""I got a piece of small grenade in my ass from one of the rice bin explosions" Kerry said...

Now i could leave that spin on Kerrys statement because we have already read Rassmanns statement that he and kerry were together and Kerry got the grenade in the butt while he and Rassmann were running away from the explosion from grenades that the both of them had set off...

I could, leave that spin, since thats the truth, but i won't.

Instead lets take a full context of the way Kerry transforms and portrays his rice bun injury.

Tour of Duty/Brinkely

The Nung blew up some huge bins of rice they had found, as it was assumed, as always, that these were the local stockpiles earmarked to feed the hungry VC moving through the Delta smuggling weapons. “I got a piece of small grenade in my ass from one of the rice-bin explosions and then we started to move back to the boats, firing to our rear as we went.”

Kerry would imply, in the Tour Bio-Book, this rice butt injury as due to the NUNG, and friendly fire...
Which would probably be covered as an exceptable injury for a Purple Heart, if it were ever seriously challanged.
(of course then he'd have to explain his 'sustained shrapnel IN FIREFIGHT' citation...)

We Know thru Rassmann that even this Kerry NUNG implication is just another

But hey it makes a much more heroic version than - bleeeeeeeeding, surrounded and outnumbered by pieces of rice in the air, Kerry, firing curses with tracers on them, struggled galantly back to the boats holding his rear as he went...

Is this guy amazing or what??

35 years later i call all this revisinism "willfull deception" in my view.

And the man continues to get away with it.

All these questions arising from fake or embellished documents reminds one of the CBS fiasco going on...

[yesterday, Sept 19, 2004, there was a report that the kerry campaign was given "some documents" long before the CBS report --- but what kind of documents Kerry recieved hasn't been clarified yet- but Fox news just stated that the Kerry campaign had been telling news reporters for weeks to watch CBS---but thats another story.]

If there were but ONE story, in so many different areas of John Kerrys Life, there would never be a question or an antenna raised...But John Kerry has provided all the various versions himself at one time or another, mostly in Public record.

He also has now inpuned others who try to fill the holes in his boat. Rassmann himself has now been put on record with several different versions of that day. And as Democrats scramble to deny all these stories are true, they ignore that the evidence is all in Kerrys own words and the legacy he is giving them, as they protest and ignore the death rattle, is that kerry has made the democratic spokespeople look like liars while denying these truths, and as people without judgement values when they ignore these truths.

and yet on Mr. Kerrys website he writes in his combat_reports page, Kerry, who had received shrapnel wounds and hurt his right arm, directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire while he pulled the Army advisor back into his boat. PCF 94 then returned to aid PCF 3 and towed the boat down the river to safety. Kerry received the Bronze Star for this action.

PCF 94 then returned to aid PCF 3 and towed the boat down the river to safety.

Again a conflageration of terms- for John Kerry was not even on the swiftboat when PCF3 was towed down the river to safety...he was by that time aboard the USCGC Spencer-->PCF 43 took all WIA (wounded in action) to USCGC Spencer for treatment.

At one point when asked to release his records in full
he claims he cannot release further information due to a contract with the author of the Kerry Book... "Tour of Duty"
(isn't a tour of duty 12 months and not 4??)
The Kerry campaign has refused to release Kerry's personal Vietnam archive", including his journals and letters, saying that the senator is contractually bound to grant Brinkley exclusive access to the material. But Brinkley said this week the papers are the property of the senator and in his full control.

"I don't mind if John Kerry shows anybody anything," he said. "If he wants to let anybody in, that's his business. Go bug John Kerry, and leave me alone." The exclusivity agreement, he said, simply requires "that anybody quoting any of the material needs to cite my book."

kerry has done this type of 'cover' up before.

In the 70's, Kerry running for congress...

The candidate had trouble balancing himself between Kerry the patriot and Kerry the minion of Hanoi's agitprop apparatus. He tried to distance himself from his brand-new book, The New Soldier. According to a major newspaper in the district, the Lowell Sun, the book cover "carried a picture of three or four bearded youths of the hippie type carrying the American flag in a photo resembling remarkably the immortal photo by Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal of U.S. Marines raising the flag on Iwo Jima after its capture from the Japanese during World War II. The big difference between the two pictures, however, is that the photo on John Kerry's book shows the flag being carried upside down in a gesture of contempt."

The book was hard to come by at the time, according to the newspaper, but a rival in the Democratic primary found one in Greenwich Village and tried to publish the cover as an advertisement in the Sun. Kerry tried to cover it up. "Things began to get hot as the old pressure went on to prevent publication of the advertisement showing the cover of the book," the Sun's editors wrote on Oct. 18, 1972. "Permission from the publisher of the book, Macmillan Co. of New York, to reproduce the cover, granted by Macmillan in a telegram on the day publication of the ad was scheduled, was quickly withdrawn hours later by Macmillan with the explanation that the approval of the author, John Kerry, would be required before the cover could be reproduced in a political advertisement. So that killed the ad."

Kerry said it wasn't he who blocked publication. According to the Sun, "Subsequently, efforts were made to obtain Mr. Kerry's okay to reproduce the famous book cover, but Mr. Kerry now says he doesn't have the right to give this permission because the copyright on the book cover belongs to a coeditor of the book, one George Butler." The Sun couldn't locate Butler.

When the vietnam veterns against John Kerry posted this same book cover on their site, 30+ years later, they were threatened with legal action if it wasn't removed:

There is no picture here because lawyers representing John Kerry's interest threatened our Internet server with legal action unless the picture was removed. CLICK HERE to visit another server. Scroll down to see a picture of the book cover Kerry supporters are trying to hide.

This type of behavior shows that Kerry knows that what he did back then, and the way he did it, was wrong. It's an addmission.

Again just before an election Kerrry employs censorship to stifel peoples right to know, to protect himself from the image of himself that he doesn't want others to know.

It is reported that Kerry has filed a lawsuit to have the swiftboat vets book "Unfit for Command" stopped from Publication.

Kerry's campaign also is calling on Regnery Publishing to withdraw "Unfit for Command" from bookstores, describing it as a book with "proven falsehoods" meant "to smear the military service of an American veteran."

Come on John. The people have a right to know. Besides, have you not read your own books? Like "The New Soldier".

In JOHN KERRY's own words: "And so a New Soldier has returned to America, to a nation torn apart by the killing we were asked to do. But, unlike veterans of other wars and some of this one, the New Soldier does not accept the old myths. We will not quickly join those who march on Veteran's Day waving small flags, calling to memory those thousands who died for the "greater glory of the United States".

No wonder it is reported that Kerry bought up all the copies, and refused to authorize its being republished.(refind source)

As Mr. O'niel has said, "sue me". But then Kerry will have to open up all those records in court to prove or disprove each correction that Kerry claims is false.

It was Kerry – not the Swift Boat Veterans – who told The Washington Post: "I wish they had a delete button on LexisNexis."

In John Kerrys DNC (democractic national convention) theatrics of "no Man Left Behind" Kerry would have you believe that all other boats fled the area when PCF3 was disabled by a mine detonation and he,alone, returned to rescue Rassmann; He, and/or his campaign managers, has/have since had to change yet another of his stories/, and admit that all other boats had remained and it was only his own boat that fled the area...

And i guess i have a final question about all boats leaving the scene, even though kerry has yet again changed and corrected one of his tall tales - How could All boats have left the scene if PCF3 was disabled by a mine detonation? At least one remained behind doncha think? Its a moot issue since we now learn the truth from the horses mouth.

So too, so many different versions have arose in regard to Kerry's Silver Star...perhaps its because if kerry did shoot the 'loincloth boy' (not a loinclothed boy -) in the back (not in the back) behind the hootch (not behind a hootch) and got a Silver Star with a "combat V". (not with a "combat V".)

The bottom line might come down to who witnessed the actual occurrance - (didn't witness the actual occurrance...)
are there regulations on witnesses, or can they just hear a shot in the distanceeeeee??

Again, as to Kerrys Three Citations, for this Silver Star, for the above action...
In an August 27, 2004, interview for the Chicago Sun Times, Secretary {of Navy} Lehman stated: “It is a total mystery to me. I never saw it. I never signed it. I never approved it. And the additional language it contains was not written by me.”

There are far to many questions unanswered.

Kerrys spokespeople have backed off on Kerry first Purple Heart which he still retains, and admit perhaps it there are questions on that one - while ignoring the integrity it must have taken to lie to procure it, and the dishonesty involved in the way he recieved it.

John Kerry obviously has not answered the questions arising from this Bronze star and the Purple Heart, that came with it, due to someones report that day, and his suppossed enemy inflicted injuries... this THIRD purple Heart which now enabled him to be reassigned out of the war zone...some say, with his own 'brothers' encouragement, while others, on his boat, state they are grateful that Kerry somehow got them transfered out of swiftboat duty before he left for the states.
How grateful they must have been. I know I would have. Kerry sounds like a man with alot of pull somewhere, back then.

Kerry stated during the Dick Cavett debate with John O’Neill in 1971:

The fact of the matter remains that after I received my third wound and was told that I could return to the United States, I deliberated for about two weeks because there was a very difficult decision in whether or not you leave your friends because you have an opportunity to go.

But I finally made the decision to go back and did leave of my own volition because I felt that I could do more against the war back here.

...I deliberated for about two weeks... -
John, John, can you not tell the truth about anything?
Go to your website and read Thrice_Wounded_Reassignment.pdf.

John Kerry was "wounded" as we know on March 13 1969 - as the kerry pdf shows kerry had deliberated, submitted a request for reassignment Out Of VietNam, over the weekend, and that request to leave his buddies behind was on a desk for transfer approaval 4 days later on Monday, March 17, 1969.

That must have been some mind-wrestling-grueling..."decision in whether or not you leave your friends."

What all this really shows is John Kerry does not make good decissions, and that Knowing they are not exceptable choices, he invents rationale so he doesn't appear to be entirely self-serving.

In any rational deliberation the man comes up a fabricator of facts by his own accounts.

For a man who recieved 2 Purple Hearts, A Silver Star, and A Bronze Star all in a 3 week period, and as Senator Bob Dole would later say - "and never bled" -John Kerry would somehow go Off to Washington by April 11, 1969, nearly a month after his Purple Heart rice butt injury, without recieving any additional medals... Perhaps the Mission was accomplished by March 13, 1969. Perhaps there were enough medals and film in the can.

{not comfirmed the April 11, date- have read of this date but also read he left on march 17, 1969; 4 days after his 2 week agonizing-deliberation - I do not think the 17th date of departure is correct that i find reported on the net...

will have to find the exact date-
one quote in "Tour of Duty"/Brinkely says:

[Tour of Duty, pages 328, 329:
Kerry left the area, spent a few days, 5-6;...

“then flew back to see Julia in New York.”

When John Kerry finally landed at Kennedy Airport in New York he was greeted by an ecstatic Julia Thorne. “I went to pick him up,” she recalled...

Then, emerging from the crowd in his dress blues and his white hat, came John Kerry. He was bandaged, some of it was sticking out, and nobody was paying attention to him . . .”

Interesting to find out the date and how long these bandages sticking Out for a bruised arm were actualy on. A week? A month? Did he recieve First Aide in the plane?

I assume one couldn't see butt bandages.

The Herald described Kerry as among the veterans who said they would take offense at someone falsely wearing the "V" pin...

"Is it wrong? Yes, it is very wrong. Sufficient to question his leadership position? The answer is yes, which he clearly understood," Kerry told the Herald.

..."Is it wrong?

Yes, it is very wrong.

Sufficient to question his leadership position?

The answer is yes...(kerry answered)

“If you wind up being less than what you’re pretending to be, there is a major confrontation with value and self-esteem and your sense of how others view you.” J. F. Kerry, 1996

To cheat by getting a Purple Heart from a self-inflicted wound would be regarded as befitting the lowest levels of military conduct. To use such a faked award to leave a combat sector early would be lower yet. Finally, to make or use faked awards as the basis for running for president of the United States, while faulting one’s political opponents for not having similar military decorations, would represent unbelievable hypocrisy and the truly bottom rung of human conduct. Anyone engaging in such conduct would be unfit for even the lowest rank in the Navy, to say nothing of the commander in chief.

"i remember well..."

"I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies.... The absurdity of almost being killed by our own allies in a country in which president Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real."

Or how about this one where he lied to Congress once again:

Congressional Record 1986:

"Mr. President, I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared--seared--in me....”

Kerry was never in cambodia, Nixon wasn't even president in 1968, and niether were the Khmer Rouge until 1972...

Mr. Would-be President-1986...the pattern of lies continues. The pattern often follows an attack against our government officials and accussations of our government lieing to us. It is a clear pattern that Kerry uses as an Offense.

for a better look at where kerry was that night one only has to look at Kerrys sugar coated journal...

xmas in cambodia: from john kerrys war journal - seared in his mind forever...

It's cool now and the evening has closed around you to become full night. The night for once is comforting and you take a coke and some peanut butter and jelly and go up on the roof of the cabin whit your tape recorder and sit for a while, quietly, watching flares float silently through the sky and flashes announce disquieting intent somewhere in the distance. You call down to one of your men and ask him to draft a message to the Admiral in Command of all Naval Forces in Vietnam and also to the Commander of Market Time. IT says "Merry Christmas from the most inland Market Time unit." You hope that they'll court marshal you or something because that would make sense. But the night soothes everything and the people and things that are close to you dart through the mind and bring the only warmth and peace that there is. Visions of sugar plums really do dance through your head and you think of stockings and snow and roast chestnuts and fires with birch logs and all that is good and warm and real. It's Christmas Eve.

[who writes like that??]

When the descrepancies are brought up the Kerry Campaign goes on full alert:

Kerry has a new and improved Cambodian version now.

additional notes: go back and find sources for the following:


(John Hurley statements here- kerry forgot - kerry was in cambodia in Feb and not Christmas- he was on 94 and not Pcf44-[different crew of course])

Kerry went on 3-4 missions

(Brinkelys new rendition/statement/ ignoring what he wrote in Tour of Duty Taken from Kerrys notes letters and journals - changes cambodia now to Kerry in cambodia in Jan - feb...)

(Hurleys statement that other crew members would come forward to say they were in cambodia with kerry - crew members have already said they were not in cambodia on christmas- because those crew memebers are the crew from PCF 44 - and not Pcf94 which stand by kerry today - of course this pushes Kerrys statement of being in Cambodia into Feburary because he didn't take over PCF 94 until Jan 30, 1969.)

[still waiting to hear from the crew on this one]

...the national director of Veterans for Kerry, John Hurley, told Fox News this week Kerry simply got the date of the Cambodia trip wrong.

"I think the date is what's inaccurate, that it was just not Christmas Eve Day," he told the news channel.

Another defense claims Kerry was near the border at Christmastime but not actually in Cambodia.

Columnist Norman Tucker writes about the January adjustment of the story:

In an attempt at damage control of Kerry's "seared in me" memory, the revelation has just now been made that he had misspoken and that it is now "seared" in him that he was really in Cambodia not on Christmas of 1968 but in January 1969.

OK... christmas in lets examine that...

We know that Kerry took over PCF94 on Jan. 30, this gives him exactly 2 days of Jan with the 94 crew. Kerry was on PCF 44 the rest of January.

Gardner of pcf44 says they were never in cambodia (refind source)...this puts kerry on PCF94...

questions to be asked:

do patrol boats go on missions alone?

if not, what other swift boat went with Kerrys and verifies this mission...

Wasn't the entrance to cambodian waters blocked by patrol boats?( i think i read it was)

in the end though all the investigating sends one on wild goose chases in search of more fairy tales and inconsistancies, because it still remains a fact that Kerrys alledged mission in Cambodia was ...also LINKED with being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies....this according to Kerrys journal occurred Christmas eve 1969.

Mr. President

seared--seared--in me....

35 years later- the year 2004 - Kerry is still lieing to cover up other lies...this tells me the make up of who the man is Today, and the extent he would go to falsify the truth.
He simply invents stories for any given situation.

I remember well...

Martin Luther King:

"I remember well April 1968, I was serving in Vietnam, a place of violence," Kerry told the assembled, according to a report by Fox News Channel's Brit Hume. "When the news reports brought home to me and my crewmates the violence back home and the tragic news that one of the bullets flying that terrible spring took the life of Dr. King."

...Kerry didn't "report for duty" for another 6 months after Mr. King was shot.

...When Dick Gephardt criticized Kerry's position on affirmative action in November 2003, Kerry issued a press release stating that, "[I]n a 1992 speech, John Kerry had the courage to stand up for affirmative action and support President Clinton's 'mend it, don't end it' programs." Kerry repeated this interpretation of the 1992 speech during the January 29, 2004, Democratic debate in Greenville, S.C.

Kerry's latest defense of the 1992 speech , however, had a slight problem with chronology. As Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, noted, "Last night, at the debate, I was surprised when (Kerry) invoked the name of Bill Clinton in discussing the 'mend it, don't end it' approach to affirmative action. President Clinton was not yet in office when Senator Kerry made that 1992 speech." (Emphasis added.) Indeed, "mend it, don't end it" didn't originate until three years after the 1992 speech, during the buildup to Clinton's 1997 Race Initiative.

Why Senator Kerry mixes his dates seems to be entwined in name dropping according to whatever constituency he is addressing at the time that he remembers so well...

Speaking before the South Carolina Democratic[s]..., Kerry introduced his former boatmate David Alston:

He sat up in a turret above my head in the pilot house--firing twin fifty-calibers to suppress enemy fire from ambushes. We were extremely exposed--always shot at first.... On one occasion in an ambush his turret was riddled with almost one hundred bullets penetrating the aluminum skin. This gunman kept firing even though he was wounded--one bullet going through his helmet, grazing his head and another hitting his arm....

again kerry remembers well - this january 29 1969 incident in which Mr. Alston was wounded in action - an action i might add that was posted on John Kerrys website under spotreports_January1969.pdf:

The files were removed from Kerrys website: The files removed were on

I do not have a record of what was in that pdf file; but i am sure there are people who downloaded it, who can produce it. There are certainly many quotes and refernces to the exact wording on the net. Such as:

When Kerry's military records were first posted on the {kerrys] site, according to the Globe , "the campaign summarize[d] action that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, this way:

'While Kerry's boat and another (PCF-72) were probing a canal along the river, Kerry's boat came under heavy fire and was hit by a B-40 rocket in the cabin area. One member of Kerry's crew Forward Gunner David Alston suffered shrapnel wounds in his head....'"

The campaign website also listed two other incidents that took place prior to January 29 as having occurred under Kerry's leadership.

kerry has since removed this write up, and the janury1969 pdf file from his website-
cause guess what? John Kerry wasn't ever on the swift boat on jan. 29/or before/ 1969...John kerry never witnessed Mr. Alston being wounded...

LT. Ted Peck was commander of the swift boat that day that Alston was injured.

...LT. Ted Peck was wounded and Kerry took over the boat the day AFTER this Jan. 29 1969 incident.

One source has written:

We know Alston was wounded on this date because his casualty report was made available briefly by the Kerry Campaign before it was curiously removed. (Offical Navy Casualty Report for David Alston)

This is Yet another report removed from Kerrys website once people began to investigate and question...

When one investigates the dates, Kerry didn't even meet Alston because Alston by Jan 30, 1969 was in a hospital being treated.

Some report that Alston returned to Kerrys boat about a month later after having recoved from his head and arm wounds...

Other reports say that Alston never returned to the boat at all.

google images shows, on feb 28, a photo of the crew not including Mr. Alston... and another image in March 1969 including Mr. Alston, as described in the caption.

some still say that this caption, for March, is not correct because Mr. Alston doesn't show any signs of head injury - nor shaved head- which would probably be required for a serious head wond...

also looking at this photo one can see that Alston is not shown as a crew memeber in March...

the photos and timelines are not very clear -probably because there are so many versions of stories told its hard to unravel.

Yet most photos do show the Feb 28, 1969 crew as being:

Kerry and crew stand together in An Thoi, Vietnam, on February 28, 1969, after presentation of Kerry's Silver Star. He also received a Purple Heart for a minor wound. From left: Del Sandusky, John Kerry, Gene Thorson, Thomas Belodeau. Kneeling from left, Mike Medeiros, Fred Short.

why am i belaboring this point of who were crew and who were not?

It is because Alston has made many statements that he 'witnessed' Kerrys Silver Star combat heroism.

David M. Alston, spoke on ABC's Nightline on June 22 of being present for Kerry's Silver Star-winning actions on February 28:

"I know when John Kerry told [crew member Del Sandusky] to beach that damn boat, this was a brand-new ball game We wasn't running. We took it to Charlie."

Alston... wasn't on the boat that day...

...[Alstons] total time of service under Kerry was quite brief — perhaps as little as seven days. According to records of Kerry's service posted on his campaign's website, it appears the two men were in actual combat together on two of those days.

was this another "i remember well" incident of Jan 29 1969?
of course it was.

Note that Mr. Alston is from South Carolina and to whom Kerry was preparing to address -> The S>C> Democrats...

Kerry seems to say whatever it takes to impress which ever crowd he is performing before.

kerry knows well that he wasn't even on the boat for which he has taken credit for a battle other men suffered.

Alston knows dam well he wasn't on the boat to witness Kerrys Silver Star.

Kerrys actual crew also know that niether of these Alston Kerry stories are true.

Back to the third Purple Heart and Bronze Star with a "V":


"John, shot and bleeding, laid down and pulled up Rassmann by his belt."

(Former crew member Del Sandusky, CNN NewsNight, Aired May 31, 2004)


"I was there when Sen. Kerry got shot, and I've seen his blood on the deck of a swift boat."

(Former Crewmate Fred Short, Scripps Howard News Service, July 29, 2004)

and yet-->The Honorable Senator John F Kerry was never shot while serving in Vietnam.

"I saw blood on the back of his pants," Medeiros said.

oooh- kerrys self inflicted rice bin incident probably 'splains 'the blood on the deck' then; and the third Purple Heart.

But it doesn't explain why all these different versions are not being questioned nor explained.

Each time someone questions something at Kerrys website - it disappears/and or is removed.

Reminds one of Nader doesn't it?

Nader just keeps disappearing from State Ballots and peoples right to vote for him as the Democrats ask the courts to have him removed.

Meanwhile the Kerry campaign would keep presenting public people who state Loudly that the Republicans are suppressing the black vote ---?

while another spokesperson is telling at the same time, How it's OK to suppress Nader because he "is a spoiler".

AND--- thisss is good---and the Democrats fully expect that by blocking and suppressing a persons' vote for Nader that they, the Nader people, will deliver their vote instead to Kerry.

and apparently they will...

Boggels the mind.

But back to disappearing Kerry website files-

note how Vague and obscure Kerrys site reports the timeline which would cover this bogus janury1969 pdf file...

Late January, 1969 Kerry joined his 5 man crew on PCF-94...

Late January through
Early March, 1969...

Starting in late January 1969...

There are a few things very clear:

"Those are definitely mine," Peck said, referring to the combat reports that the Kerry campaign posted as representing Kerry's action. "There is no doubt about it."

A Kerry campaign spokesman, Michael Meehan, said in an e-mail that the campaign had obtained the combat reports for the 94 from the Navy. He did not directly address the question of why the campaign describes Kerry being skipper of the 94 at a time when Peck says he commanded the boat.

Michael Meehan has continuously had to repair Kerrys inconsistancies - such as Christmas in Cambodia- and in this instance, Meehan, would like us to except that the reports are the NAVYS fault; or that the report he recieved, actually stated that Kerry was on the boat??

Micheal Meehan ignores that Kerry himself placed himself on the boat that day when he introduced David Alston!

Kerry:He [Alston] sat up in a turret above my head in the pilot house--firing twin fifty-calibers to suppress enemy fire from ambushes. We were extremely exposed--always shot at first.... On one occasion in an ambush his turret was riddled with almost one hundred bullets penetrating the aluminum skin.
This gunman kept firing even though he was wounded--one bullet going through his helmet, grazing his head and another hitting his arm....

Kerry would probably now try to have us believe that he was only refering to 'an occassion' in Alstons Own Life, and not that Kerry was there to experience it...but kerrys site already stated it was Kerrys experience:

Kerry's boat and another (PCF-72) were probing a canal along the river, Kerry's boat came under heavy fire and was hit by a B-40 rocket in the cabin area. One member of Kerry's crew Forward Gunner David Alston suffered shrapnel wounds in his head....'"

The campaign website also listed two other incidents that took place prior to January 29 as having occurred under Kerry's leadership.

i rest my case...

With Senator Kerry nothing much is ever as it first appears to be.

Kerry seems to be a self serving revisionist.

One can not depend on Senator Kerry to be straight about anything. Nor can one depend on his spokespeople too be. Everytime there are descrepancies they find a way to 'sugar coat' it.

It seems unlikely that the official January spot report from the Navy, described Kerry, himself, as the skipper of the boat on January 29, 1969.

Is there any evidence that John Kerry actualy authored inaccurrate spotreports??

In my opinion yes.

One only has to look at the sampan incident in which Kerry did not list the child that was killed as being a child; He instead obscured this incident by describing the child killed as an enemy VC...and invented 4 other VC never even actualy seen...(re-find the source and story)

Will there be an investigation into all these questions of honesty and credibility?


Basicaly, The Navy responded that they would not be looking into all the questions arising from Senator Kerrys war record and his medals; nor his conduct upon returnng fom the war.

This at the same time that a judge is ordering by next week for all records of President Bush to be produced.

This same judge, or another, should order Senator Kerry to produce his FULL records.

On the Judicial Watch website:

The Navy Personnel Command FOIA Officer Dave German...wrote
“We have withheld thirty-one (31) pages of documents from the responsive military personnel service record as we were not provided a release authorization.”

Yet Senator Kerry would continue to have us believe that all records are on his site.

One has to wonder what would go on in the White House, and the overtime the Democrats will need to spend defending, or covering up, Kerrys fabrications.

It would surely seem that John Kerry wouldn't tell the truth even if it hit him in the butt.

©2004 Google - Searching 4,285,199,774 web pages


"requires constant supervision"

out of 2,220 returns John Kerry is No.1

It's not so surprising that Kerry would vote for a war. Kerry needed a war in order to later run on his self perserved, self inflated, warrior image.

Terressa hienz Kerry:

Our First Lady?

"I can't believe I ever even married an American."


"shove it"




the arrest of Kerrys brother for aledgedly phone wire tampering Kerrys Congressional Opponent so many years ago...

Kerrys Political voting record when he wasn't absent- 60%-80% absent?? (skiing in the 'family SUV'??)

look into reports:

6 years on the Senate Intelligence Committee where he missed 80% of its public hearings.

Romney administration calls for Kerry to resign

By Associated Press | June 15, 2004

BOSTON --The Romney administration called Tuesday for Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry to resign while he runs for president, saying he's had an abysmal attendance record since launching his campaign last year and is not adequately representing his constituents.

...Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, a Republican, said Kerry has missed 64 percent of last year's roll call votes and 87 percent this year, including a vote on banning Internet child pornography.

He also missed a vote on extending unemployment insurance benefits, which was defeated by one vote.

"Kerry insisted again Tuesday that he would not resign from the job that he has repeatedly refused to do." - Inside Cover Story (June 23, 2004), Kerry Flops in Rare Appearance at Work - Presidential hopeful has 89% absentee rate in the Senate according to Boston Globe, some constituents and politicians in Massachusetts are beginning to grumble about Senater Slacker. In May 2004, Senate Democrats failed to extend jobless benefits, and Kerry was AWOL for that vote.

a speech Kerry gave for the Concordian Literary Society that won the top prize. It was titled: ``Resolved: that the growth of spectator sports in the western world in the last half century is an indication of the decline of western civilization.''

"President Clinton was often known as the first black president," Kerry explained during the radio interview. "I wouldn't be upset if I could earn the right to be the second."

additional things to investigate, evaluate and incorporate, or dismiss below

I didn't know who Kerry was when i began research on him (11-12) days ago. i began with no preconcieved notions, other than the swift boats ads, and news broadcasts, for and against the accussations being made. i had seen and questioned in my own mind their validity. I wanted to find the truth. I wanted to write up JUST what John Kerry 'said', here, and there, over the years of John Kerrys Life- and Not what others said he said... Within days of research i found my objectivity blown out of the water with a capital "V". Validity. Kerrys.

additional things to investigate an evaluate:

Tides Foundation, which has been given hundreds of thousands of dollars by the Heinz Foundation... Tides Center

If an existing funder wants to pour money into a specific agenda for which no activist group exists, Tides will start one from scratch. At least 30 of the Tides Center’s current “projects” were created out of thin air in response to the needs of one foundation or another.

The Tides Center board of directors has been especially busy of late. In 2001 the first Tides “franchise” office (not counting Tides’ presence in Washington and New York) was opened in Pittsburgh. This new outpost, called the Tides Center of Western Pennsylvania, was erected largely at the urging of Pittsburgh native Teresa Heinz (the widow of Senator John Heinz, the ketchup heir). Heinz pulls more strings in the foundation world than almost any other old-money socialite; she’s presently married to U.S. Senator John Kerry (D-MA). The Tides Foundation has collaborated on funding projects with the Heinz Endowments (Teresa Heinz’s personal domain) for over 10 years.


... Among the most unbelievable “projects” of the Tides Center is something called the Institute for Global Communications ( IGC is a clearinghouse for Leftist propagandists of all stripes, including living-wage advocates, anti-war protesters, slave-reparations hucksters, and a wide variety of extreme environmentalists. In February 2002 Orange County Register columnist Steven Greenhut called it “a network of the loony left” that “has to be seen to be believed… One alert posted in an IGC member conference calls for financial support for the Earth Liberation Front… Another message warns readers against cooperating with the FBI.”

so how much has Hinez Kerry contibuted and for what projects??

...2001 is when Kerry opened his website - -

look into:

contributors to kerrys cause/s...

China-gate figure John Huang also donated money to Kerry. Huang later pled guilty to illegal fundraising for the DNC. Huang remains free despite the fact that he refused to answer whether he was an agent of the Chinese military over 2,000 times while under oath.

Jane Fonda known for her support of communists and TREASONous charges...

Fonda was the major financial support to one of the most damaging pro-Hanoi groups called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), which was led for a time by Robert Muller, a Vietnam veteran who had been shot in the spine. VVAW, at its peak membership, mustered about 7,000, some of whom had been indoctrinated in the "Coffee Houses." That organization was later led by Vietnam vet John Kerry, now a U.S. senator and former co-chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs.

Ramsey Clark Endorses John Kerry

Clark has been labeled a “traitor” for his habit of showing up in countries hostile to the U.S. A lawyer, he has represented accused terrorists and war criminals.

Clark served as LBJ’s Attorney General in the 1960s and then participated in the anti-Vietnam War movement in the early 1970s with Kerry, just back from the war, who accused his fellow soldiers of war crimes and genocide. Clark was a lawyer for Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and Kerry was a major leader of the group. A photograph at the time shows Clark on the same stage with Kerry.

Clark traveled to Hanoi, North Vietnam, from July 29 to August 12, 1972, under the sponsorship of the Stockholm-based International Commission for Inquiry, a Communist “peace” front. He was taken on a guided tour and denounced the U.S. bombing of North Vietnam. He also visited American POWs held by Hanoi, falsely declaring that they were in good health and their conditions “could not be better.” Such visits by American figures gave the communists the confidence to continue in the face of defeats on the battlefield.

More recently, Clark has been collaborating with the communist Workers World Party (WWP) in staging “anti-war” demonstrations against U.S. Iraq policy. Brian Becker, a member of the WWP secretariat, helped organize those protests and was the moderator of the Ramsey Clark press event on Haiti.

Zack Exley

The Ruckus Society’s “action camps” have also provided training to thousands of radical activists in the techniques of agitation, disruption and how to select targets. Those it has trained have come from many different leftwing groups, including RAN, Earth First! and ELF. “Nearly half of Ruckus’ roster of camp ‘trainers,’” according to research by the Center for Consumer Freedom, “proclaims membership in Earth First! as well.” Among the topics taught at these boot camps for radicals have been “street blockades,” “police confrontation strategies” and “using the media to your advantage.”

Activists who have undergone Ruckus training are to ordinary protestors as a Navy Seal commando is to an ordinary foot soldier. Ruckus graduates have been armed with a huge toolbox of ways to goad police into overreaction, exploit situations, and cause problems for those they target. Ruckus has become the military academy where dozens of leftwing groups send their elite shock troop protestors to learn the skills of waging guerrilla street warfare against capitalism.

One such leftwing activist is Zack Exley, who was trained by and has worked as a “workshop facilitator” for The Ruckus Society.

Since April 2004 Exley has been the Director of Online Communications and Online Organizing for the John Kerry-John Edwards 2004 presidential campaign organization.

these are simple NOTES at this time

UCMJ - Article 115 - Malingering
... (4) Intentional self-inflicted injury in a hostile fire pay zone or in
time of war. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay .

Kerry, by his own account, violated the UCMJ, the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy officer, and he further stands in violation of Article three, Section three of the U.S. Constitution.

Upon entering the Navy in 1966, John Kerry signed a six-year contract (plus a six-month extension during wartime) and an Officer Candidate contract for five years of active duty and active Naval Reserve. This indicates that Kerry was clearly a commissioned officer at the time of his 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris -- in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and Kerry's subsequent coddling of Communists while leading mass protests against our military in the year that followed, also place him in direct violation of our Constitution's Article three, Section three, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare. (As General Vo Nguyen Giap is his witness....)

Thus, we refer our readers to the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."

It is for this reason -- for his record of giving aid and comfort to the enemy while a member of the U.S. Armed Forces in violation of his oath -- that we insist John Kerry resign his seat in the U.S. Senate. He has dishonored his family, dishonored his state and dishonored our nation. He is not fit for public office at any level of government, much less, the highest office in the land. John Kerry should resign.

Jim Geraghty reporting -


The Chicago Sun-Times has reported a U.S. Navy spokesman said, "Kerry's record is incorrect. The Navy has never issued a 'combat V' to anyone for a Silver Star." Naval regulations do not allow for the use of a "combat V" for the Silver Star, the third-highest decoration the Navy awards. None of the other services has ever granted a Silver Star "combat V," either.

so just how is it that kerrys site reports that he has a "V" for valor posed with his Silver Star?

kerry says its just another misunderstanding and mistake...

there seems to be a slew of these going on here-

kerry has since removed the combatV link but here it is:
a simple dd214 of his own site will find it also:

or you can find it archived:shhhh!

kerry has made another correction/ (one of many) to this false combatV medal and added it to his site:

Kennedy speech writer (Adam Walinsky)

"I can still see him now, standing in the doorway of the pilothouse, firing his M-16, shouting orders through the smoke and chaos_. Even wounded, or confronting sights no man should ever have to see, he never lost his cool." (David Alston in a speech before the Democratic Convention)

Rev. David Alston says, "When the bullets started to hit the side of the ship, we found out that John Kerry [could] lead. (Kerry for President Campaign Ad that aired early February '04)

"I saw John Kerry's blood on the deck of that boat [PCF-94]." (The Providence Journal, August 1, 2004)

[notes: the only blood alston could have seen was the Feb 20th leg wound - the images for Feb 28, on google don't show Alston as part of the crew pictured for Feburary...

The March incident we already know was a contusion and not bleeding -

there is a pic of Alston shown with kerry for March.

look into further...


"I was there when Sen. Kerry got shot, and I've seen his blood on the deck of a swift boat." (Former Crewmate Fred Short, Scripps Howard News Service, July 29, 2004)

I have seen no medical report that indicates kerry ever suffered a gunshot wound....because Kerry never was shot in vietnam.


"John, shot and bleeding, laid down and pulled up Rassmann by his belt." (Former crewmember Del Sandusky, CNN NEWSNIGHT, Aired May 31, 2004)

excerpts from john kerrys own words direct from the dick cavett show transcripts - there is also a video that seems to be no longer available

transcript from dick cavett show:

[streaming video located here:


MR. CAVETT: Well, let's talk about that. Did you see war crimes committed and –

MR. KERRY: Well, I have often talked about this subject. I personally didn't see personal atrocities in the sense that I saw somebody cut a head off or something like that. However, I did take part in free fire zones and I did take part in harassment interdiction fire. I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground. And all of these, I find out later on, these acts are contrary to the Hague and Geneva Conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the applications of the Nuremberg principles, is in fact guilty.

[what i find, analyzing this, to be even more revealing of character is this BS that he, this trained officer, says he didn't know till LATER that he was contreveening laws of warfare and violating Geneva conventions-- ]


Now, when we talk about something like war crimes, we're not throwing this term out lightly. The Hague Convention, the Geneva Conventions, history has laid down certain laws of warfare. Hague Convention, I believe, Article Four, states that you are not allowed to bombard uninhabited villages or villages that are not occupied by defendants. We have done that constantly in Vietnam.

MR. O'NEILL: [Unintelligible] John. Can you tell me about any war crimes that occurred in that unit, Coastal Division 11? And a second question: Why didn't you attempt to get out of the unit or submit a request when you were there if you saw anything that shocked a normal man?

[..........jumping down to one of kerrys responses to this question:]

MR. KERRY: Thank you. Yes, we did participate in war crimes in Coastal Division 11 because as I said earlier, we took part in free fire zones, harassment, interdiction fire, and search-and-destroy missions.

"W" stands for Wrong

...hummmm "F" stand for FRAUD??

mekongJohn Kambodia john hanoi john

"The New Soldier," which features photos of the Democratic presidential front-runner demonstrating side-by-side with America basher Ramsey Clark.

"I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. "

i would like to point out here that if spotreports were falsified and actions actually taken were not accurately reported then the officers at all levels of command could hardly have been informed and aware...

"[Kerry] arrived in country with a strong anti-Vietnam War bias and a self-serving determination to build a foundation for his political future," Hoffmann said. "He was aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard to specific tactical assignments. He was a loose cannon.

"In an abbreviated tour of four months and 12 days," Hoffmann added, "and with his specious medals secure, Lt. j.g. (junior grade) Kerry bugged out of Vietnam and began his infamous betrayal of all United States forces in the Vietnam War."

"Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing, manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive," said retired Capt. Charley Plumly, "but the most common phrase you would hear [was] 'requires constant supervision.'"

Chenoweth, Thurlow and Odell have all signed affidavits attesting to their version of events.

first purple heart:

Dec. 2, 1968
Lt. William Schachte,+1968+%22+%22a+scratch%22&hl=en

Patrick Runyon and William Zaldonis

Grant Hibbard

Del Sandusky


Tom Wright (who would later object to operating with Kerry in Vietnam) and Steven Gardner (the gunner’s mate who sat behind and above Kerry for most of his Vietnam stay and came to regard him as incompetent and dishonest)

Moreover, many Swiftees have now come forth to question Kerry’s deception.
“I was there the entire time Kerry was and witnessed two of his war ‘wounds.’ I was also present during the action [in which] he received his Bronze Star. I know what a fraud he is. How can I help?” wrote Van Odell, a gunner from Kerry’s unit in An Thoi.2 Commander John Kipp, USN (retired), of Coastal Division 13 also volunteered, “If there is anything I can do to unmask this charlatan, please let me know. He brings disgrace to all who served.”

February 1969, he took shrapnel in his left leg, earning his second Purple Heart.

Seven months later, he requested early release from duty to run for Congress, and by January 1970 Kerry was released.

Another Kerry whopper?

''I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief," said retired Rear Admiral Roy Hoffmann, who helped organize the news conference and oversaw all of the swift boats in Vietnam at the time Kerry commanded one of those crafts. ''This is not a political issue; it is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust -- all absolute tenets of command."

Two of those officers, former lieutenant commander George Elliott and former Coast Guard captain Adrian Lonsdale, stood by Kerry's side when questions were raised during the 1996 Senate campaign about whether Kerry deserved the Silver Star.

Retired Lieutenant Colonel Jim Zumwalt -- the son of the late Navy Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, who also had appeared by the senator's side in 1996 -- also expressed his opposition to Kerry.

Eight years ago, Elliott, who wrote up Kerry for the Silver Star, rebutted suggestions that Kerry shot a retreating enemy in the back in that encounter, providing crucial support in the closing days of a hard-fought Senate race between Kerry and then-Governor William F. Weld. Yesterday, however, Elliott joined the other commanders in saying he opposed Kerry for president on the grounds that the senator was an antiwar leader who alleged atrocities were committed in Vietnam.

Elliott defended his current position, saying it was consistent to have supported the senator when he was wrongly accused in 1996.

''I find a couple of things ironic. I stood alongside John Kerry along with Admiral Zumwalt and Adrian Lonsdale in 1996 to defend him against the false accusation of -- Guess what? -- atrocities and war crimes," Elliott said. ''That wasn't true then; that's why I stood with him. The second irony is, in 1971 . . . he claimed that the 500,000 men in Vietnam in combat were all villains. There were no heroes. In 2004, one hero from the Vietnam War has appeared running for president."

''It galls one to think about it," Elliott said.

Kerry's commander, Grant Hibbard, is quoted as saying that Kerry came to see him the next day to seek a Purple Heart, but "I told Kerry to 'forget it.' "

Asked how Kerry got a Purple Heart, Hibbard replied, "It beats me."

Later that month, was ordered to more dangerous duty on inland waterways at a place called An Thoi but fellow Swift Boat veterans say he loudly bellyached until he got transferred out within a week, showing that he had "very little nerve for facing serious combat."

The book quotes fellow Swiftee William Franke as saying Kerry complained that he "had volunteered only for coastal patrol and not for the far more hazardous duty of missions within the inland waterway."

William Schachte, the officer commanding that mission, "berated Kerry for almost putting someone's eye out. There was no hostile fire of any kind," the book says.

Kerry wants to tell his stories and have them believed without question, and if questioned he threatens lawsuits and demands TV stations and Publishers not to publish or broadcast. Yet when these fairy tales are exposed as bogus versions of the truth, because the censorship he seeks to employ dos not work, he somehow continues to backtrack, cover his ass, change his stories, and have captured and retained the hearts and minds of the Democratic Party.
This Democratic Party who joins Kerrys league of dishonor by inventing new versions to cover kerrys other versions.
Repeatedly i have seen Democratic Spokesman after spokewomen deny on TV time after time that John Kerry ever said that he himself 'committed war crimes' well as other things he has stated, and done...I simply sit there and shake my head and think- what liars you all are... and that is the lagacy of John Kerry to the Democratic party that will have to struggle for years to clean the image they have left with so many people who watched them night after night ignore the facts before their very eyes.

The real problem is that if they would ignore and cover up with excuses and denials what anyone can recognize as kerrys B>S> and dishonesty, that one has to be very concerned what a Kerry administration would do to protect him, and their party, if he were in office making some new historical fairy tales.

The Unamerican American...see if there is a Book with that Title
just kidding :) I'll ask google.

We are told Rassmann put Kerry in for the Silver Star but Kerry recieved instead the Bronze Star with "V"...Rassmanns write-up doesn't include the buttocks injury...however it seems to have included a bleeding arm- did Rassmann write that? or is this another citation that was re-written years and years later...?

But hold on we now know that the citation was submitted by Rassmann and Rassmann KNEW kerry had not suffered a buttocks injury On The River...this explains why this One piece of evidence doesn't conform to other reports that do include the shrapnel wound...

the problem is which one of the THREE different versions of this that were rewritten in a 20 year period for some reason are the correct version?
We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have personally always believed that many served in many different ways.

On kerrys website his service-timeline states:

December 6, 1968 Kerry moved to Coastal Division 11 at An Thoi on Phu Quoc island

December 13, 1968 Kerry moved to Coastal Division 13, Cam Ranh Bay

Kerry who would spend a grand total of 7 days in Coastal Division 11 would later accusse those men of 'war crimes'?

It would be interesting to see reports for those 7 days.

And yet, Zumwalt’s Pentagon colleague W. Scott Thompson later recalled the Admiral complaining that “young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass, by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets. ‘We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control,’ the admiral said.

For some reason it brings to my mind a History, or Discovery, Channel show i saw in which Stalin's enemies would be airbrushed out of photos, the images gone forever, creating a new history.

This is the man who would come back and accusse others of war crimes and catapult his hypocrasy off the carcasses of

John Kerry diminishes every aspect of War&Honor
Apparently a lawsuit was filed in which a judge has ordered President Bush to produce all military records. Noted.

People have been asking Kerry to release all of his military records for 6 months+ to no avail. Kerrys team continues to report all records are 'on the site' ...If this is true then it certainly wouldn't reveal anything not reported on his site if the Form 180 was signed.

Senator Kerry Release the form 180.

Although I have struggled valiently the one word i keep writing, and erasing, is UnAmerican.

MTV interview:

...Yago: Your dad is a certified war hero. Does he ever tell you what it was like?

Kerry : He told me the story of what happened when he won the Silver Star, but he never told me he won the Silver Star for it. That wasn't part of the story. ... He told me the story of being attacked in this tiny canal and of having to basically ... he had no choice but turning his boat in to shore and going after the enemy point-blank. He said the enemy popped up with — I'm sorry, I don't know my weapons very well — you know, a bazooka or whatever it was on his shoulder and stared at him straight in the face. Dad said they had this sort of face-off, if you will. And he stopped. And I said, "Well, what happened?" And I was about 7, and he said, "Oh, the guy dropped it and ran away." ... It wasn't until two or three years ago that I actually learned that in the end he actually did kill someone. But that was a choice that he faced: to kill or be killed. And I think that that was what upset him and has hurt him the most about that war and now this war, too, is that that decision is so brutal and it's no-win. So he never told me why he won that medal, he just told me the story. And you know, he did tell me that he did have three Purple Hearts, 'cause I found them and was like, "What are these?" And he said, "Purple Hearts." "How did you get them?" He said, "I was shot." And you're sitting there, [thinking,] "What, he was shot?" He was shot three times...

It is wierd. Simply wierd...because Kerry's DD214 states on it:
transfer or discharge data:
Accept Commission Article C 10306(1) (B) Bupers Manual -214-

google tells me this for Article C 10306:

22 Ibid.; DA Msg 903276, 1 Apr 69, ODWAC Ref File, Discharge on Marriage, CMH. The Navy and Marine Corps continued a policy of allowing discharge on marriage if a joint household could not be established by the couple (Bur of Naval Personnel Manual, Article C-10306, 1959; Marine Corps Bull 1300, Oct 66). Under USAF Regulation 35-20, the WAF eliminated discharge on marriage.

I must confess other than this google return I could not find this number in the few Military/Bupers Manuals I checked; but I always have problems loading pdf files...

But even this return doesn't make sense.
continued a policy of allowing discharge on marriage if a joint household could not be established by the couple (Bur of Naval Personnel Manual, Article C-10306,

Kerry married a woman worth 300 million the first time- and they couldn't establish a household??

Kerry's site says on March 1, 1970: Kerry’s date of separation from Active Duty.
Kerry ... Married on May 23, 1970
But the dd214 states Martial Status: Single
Discharge: Honorable

some sources read or used:"I+got+a+piece+of+small+grenade+in+my+ass+from+one+of+the+rice+bin"&btnG=Google+Search"I+got+a+piece+of+small+grenade+in+my+ass+from+one+of+the+rice+bin"&hl=en"Evidently%2C+Kerry+did+not+run+fast+enough.+"&btnG=Google+Search"I+was+talking+about+all+the+rest+of+the+veterans.""&btnG=Search"kerry++said"+arm+bleeding&hl=en"kerry++said"+arm+bleeding&hl=en"kerry+said"+march+13+1969&hl=en"most+inland"+unit+"kerry+said"&hl=en"most+inland"+unit+"kerry+said"&btnG=Search"loin+cloth"++"kerry+said"&hl=en"&hl=en"berated+kerry"&hl=en"for+president"+"Kerry+experiences+first+intense+combat%3B+receives+first+combat+related+injury"&btnG=Search"silver+star"++"combat+V"&hl=en"silver+star"++"combat+V",8599,599034,00.html"i+didn%27t+mean+swifties"&hl=en"do+you+know+who+i+am%3F"&hl=en"kerry+said"++5+boats+fled&hl=en"+the+other+three+boats+fled+the+scene"&hl=en"no+man+left+behind"+kerry+transcript&hl=en"silver+star"+"regulation"+"one+witness"&hl=en"four+bronze+campaign+stars+for+his+service+in+Vietnam"&btnG=Google+Search"discharged"+kerry+&hl=en&start=1"i+remember+well"+kerry++-1968&hl=en,_Post-Service_Activities.html+"kerry+admitted"+assasinate+"senators"&hl=en"When+I+signed+up+for+the+swift+boats,"+kerry&hl=en"boats+fled+the+scene"&btnG=Search"kerry+said"+"a+monster+in+the+form+of+millions+of+men+who+have+been+taught+to+deal+and+to+trade+in+violence."+&btnG=Search"pull-out"&hl=en"tide+foundation"&hl=en"tour+of+duty"+helicopter+kerry&hl=en"tantamount+to+genocide"+kerry+&hl=en"There+were+no+heroes"&hl=en"There+were+no+heroes"&hl=en"kerry+said"++"There+were+no+heroes"+villains&hl=en"sat+up+in+a+turret+above+my+head+in+the+pilot+house+"&btnG=Google+Search,2933,132636,00.html,+1969&hl=en

a Wade Sanders update: 2011
American Thinker site:

Kerry spokesman stripped of Silver Star

No comments:

Post a Comment