News Are Novak and Lipscomb involved in political scandal?

[GENIERE]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-nws-novak27.html

http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-lips27.html

 

[JohnDubYa]

Uh-oh! I am starting to get the idea that the Swift Boat Veterans are mounting a counter-attack.

Kerry has some explaining to do over the next two months. There are simply too many people who discount his record.

I was astonished by Kerry's version" [in his book Tour of Duty] of what happened Dec. 2, Schachte said Thursday. When asked to support the Kerry critics in the swift boat controversy, Schachte said, "I didn't want to get involved." But he said he gradually began to change his mind when he saw his own involvement and credibility challenged, starting with Davis on CNN's "Crossfire" on Aug. 12.

... Schachte said he never has been contacted by or talked to anybody in the Bush-Cheney campaign or any Republican organization. He said he has been a political independent who votes for candidates of both parties.

 

[amp]

No John just a few. There are more that support Kerry's side at least so far. And the record still supports Kerry.

 

[kat]

No John just a few. There are more that support Kerry's side at least so far. And the record still supports Kerry.

I'm beginning to question your mathematical ability... Over 250 Swift Boat Vets and still counting...Most of Kerry's chain of command...17 out of 23 officers who served with Kerry...you have swift boat vets who have had experience..day to day experience with Kerry more then 60 of these Vet's have been awarded purple hearts, who have given eyewitness accounts and even who have been in the same boat as Kerry (which is you're sides claim to relevancy not theirs, as they are aware of how Swift Boats operated). I think your side is being a little dishonest in making this claim.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Including one Rear Admiral who was not even part of the Swift Boat campaign.

 

[amp]

NY Times 8/27/04 Op-Ed - Hienman (I misspelled the name I think).
as for being on the same boat as Kerry, Kat that can be said without them going on missions with him. All the men who were on his boat as far as I know, who went on missions with him refute swift boat vets.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Well, Bush is now playing his little band of angry men for all its worth. The truth of this that these people feel that they were betrayed by Kerry. His outspoken stance against the war, followed by his testimony in front of Congress made enemies for life. One of these guys was even the attack dog used on Kerry by Nixon for crying out loud! Then as now, the attack was bogus and un-American. That happens to men like Kerry who stand up for what's right; you make enemies. Bitterness drives this worn out clan of Swift betrayers; bitterness for the perceived betrayal by Kerry. That, and Texas Republican oil money.

Today Bush announced that he believes that Kerry did not lie and he should be proud of his record. So we see the typical Bush style tactic. First, perpetuate the lie, then pretend to be the nice guy rising above the frey. This will backfire on Bush. He has seen his short term gain, and he thinks he got away with it, but people don't like sneaky liars, which is rightly how this will reflect on the Bush and his campaign before November.

One of your oh so loyal Swift Boat vets is in hot water in Portland after admitting that he really didn't know what Kerry did in Vietnam. In fact he only repeated what he was told by others. So now we can easily see a proof of the truth of this situation. The swift boat vets are lying. By their actions they dishonor themselves, the political process, and our country.

Also, I believe Njorl already proved that none of these men actually served with Kerry. The men who really do know Kerry stand behind him as a genuine war hero.

One final comment. We have a new political group in Portland today: The Oregon Republicans for Kerry. This group includes many prominent Republicans from the NW.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Oh yes, here is why I'm now sure about Kerry's claims in all of this. There was none dirtier than Nixon. Nixon tried and failed to take Kerry down when he spoke out and testified to Congress. Nixon tried his best while at this height of power. If something was there, Nixon would have found it.

The truth: Kerry is a war hero.

Bush's people tried to disgrace a genuine hero in order to win the weasel his hole.

 

[JohnDubYa]

That's all fine, Ivan, but you never addressed the Admiral's comments that were linked. Is he lying, too?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

He wasn't there. He is just another angry man with a 30 year old chip on his shoulder. You need to understand how this kind of stuff festers with time. People sometimes grow old and bitter.

 

[JohnDubYa]

The Rear Admiral wasn't there?

Now you are claiming a Rear Admiral is old and bitter (without even knowing him). And you say the Bush team stoops low.

 

[kat]

NY Times 8/27/04 Op-Ed - Hienman (I misspelled the name I think).
as for being on the same boat as Kerry, Kat that can be said without them going on missions with him.

erm, it was a training mission...kerry was not the officer in charge..Schacte's call sign was Batman. Kerry's was Robin...They were in THE boat together...it was a Boston Whaler..smaller then the swift boats...no enemy fire according to the Officer in charge..who is now a Rear Admiral... Kerry injured himself..accidently...you know..self inlficted..asked to be awarded...was turned down...applied again for an award..this time circumnavigating the OIC..ew Kerry's a sneaky dirty rat..

All the men who were on his boat as far as I know, who went on missions with him refute swift boat vets.

Then we just got to come to the conclusion that you just don't know what you're talking about.. Steve Gardner does not refute the Swift Vets and he was Kerry's gunner mate on the PC-44.
As for Kerry's "Band of Brothers" it consists of:
Jim Rassmann - US Army, Green Beret, served one documentable day with Kerry, not a crewmate

The Reverend David Alston - may have been a crewmate for one week - not yet verified

Skip Barker- OinC of PCF 31 - was not a crewmate

Steve Hatch- PCF 44 crewmate (would have no knowledge of the medals)

Jim McDevitt - US Marine, met Kerry in 1972 while recuperating in the hospital - not a crewmate

Mike Medeiros - PCF 94 crewmate

Pat Runyon - spent one night on the "Boston Whaler" with Kerry, not a crewmate

Wade Sanders - OinC of PCF 98, not a crewmate ( did not witness any of Kerry's medal incidents)

Del Sandusky- PCF 94 crewmate

Fred Short- PCF 94 crewmate

Gene Thorson- PCF 94 crewmate

Jim Wasser - PCF 44 crewmate (would have no knowledge of the medals)

Drew Whitlow- PCF 44 crewmate (would have no knowledge of the medals)

Bill Zaladonis - PCF 44 crewmate (would have no knowledge of the medals)

So, of the 14 men that Kerry claimed were Swift boat crewmates, only eight were. Two commanded other swifts. One may have served with him for a week. Another served with him for about 3 hours. One spent a day with him. And one didn't meet him until 1972.

 

[GENIERE]

The entire US Navy Is old, embittered...


"But according to a U.S. Navy spokesman, "Kerry's record is incorrect. The Navy has never issued a 'combat V' to anyone for a Silver Star."

 

[Dissident Dan]

11 of the 12 men who served with Kerry on his swift boat are on his side. But, of course, that won't matter to any of you because you really don't care about his service. You just want to see him go down because you don't like his politics.

 

[JohnDubYa]

You just want to see him go down because you don't like his politics.

Sounds like those that criticized Bush over the AWOL incident.

So Dan, do you think the Admiral is lying? You should have some opinion of his statements.

 

[Hurkyl]

11 of the 12 men who served with Kerry on his swift boat are on his side.

Look at it from my POV, who knows little about the incident.

Kat has just given a specific list of people, apparently those claimed to have served on the boat with Kerry, and explained that several of them could not have done so.

Then I see this response.


Now, I won't just take Kat's word for it, but your quote was disingenious at best, and tends to support the hypothesis that the counterargument is nonexistant.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The Rear Admiral wasn't there?

Now you are claiming a Rear Admiral is old and bitter (without even knowing him). And you say the Bush team stoops low.

I know he wasn't on the river with Kerry when Kerry was under fire.

When Bush now says he believes Kerry's story, and Kerry should be proud of his war record, isn't he calling this guy a liar? Maybe you had better check with GWB to find out why he no longer believes the Swift Boat Veterans.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Now, I won't just take Kat's word for it, but your quote was disingenious at best, and tends to support the hypothesis that the counterargument is nonexistant.

Yes we see a heck of a lot of alleged facts with nothing to back them up.

Edit: Pretty soon the right will be aguing that Bush's tour of duty was just as dangerous as Kerry's.

How disgraceful that Bush allowed or financed this effort. Kerry was in Vietnam! That fact alone demands that his life was in extreme jeapordy...or does someone have a link that proves this wrong as well. Kerry chose to serve - to really serve his country - and Bush didn't. Sure, let's spend more time trying to dishonor this hero Republicans. This only proves how desparately we need Kerry, an honorable man, to win.

 

[kat]

Can you cut the hyperbole..it's really making me want to puke.

 

[JohnDubYa]

When Bush now says he believes Kerry's story, and Kerry should be proud of his war record, isn't he calling this guy a liar? Maybe you had better check with GWB to find out why he no longer believes the Swift Boat Veterans.

Perhaps he was just being polite.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Ivan, you never answered my question: Do you think the Rear Admiral is lying?

 

[GENIERE]

Fom Chicargo Sun-TimeS:

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman has no idea where a Silver Star citation displayed on Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's campaign Web site came from, he said Friday. The citation appears over Lehman's signature.


"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," he said.

 

[kat]

yadda yadda

11 of the 12 men who served with Kerry on his swift boat are on his side. But, of course, that won't matter to any of you because you really don't care about his service. You just want to see him go down because you don't like his politics.

I don't know if this is in response to my post listing who is who but, you really need to get a new talking points memo from the DNC. Yours is outdated.

And no, I don't like his politics...which includes, for the past 30 years, smearing the memories of War hero's who did FULL tours in vietnam. Give me a break. I'd like to see some discussion of his Senate record, but we know he doesn't want that because being to the left of the left isn't going to win him the presidency.

 

[Gza]

And no, I don't like his politics...which includes, for the past 30 years, smearing the memories of War hero's

Since when is protesting an unjust war "smearing the memories of War heroes"?

 

[kat]

Did I say protesting? Did I say protesting?..when did I say anything about protesting? :zzz: :surprise:

 

[Dissident Dan]

Look at it from my POV, who knows little about the incident.

Kat has just given a specific list of people, apparently those claimed to have served on the boat with Kerry, and explained that several of them could not have done so.

I couldn't find a good source online that said "11 of 12" specifically, but I've heard it on the major news networks. Check out http://factcheck.org/ and do a search on "swift boat veterans".

 

[Dissident Dan]

And no, I don't like his politics...which includes, for the past 30 years, smearing the memories of War hero's who did FULL tours in vietnam. Give me a break. I'd like to see some discussion of his Senate record, but we know he doesn't want that because being to the left of the left isn't going to win him the presidency.

So, if people in our military do bad things, we should just keep that knowledge to ourselves?

 

[JohnDubYa]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-lips28.html

Could John Kerry have forged the signature? (I don't know how awards are given, so I don't know if such a forgery is possible.)

Okay, so let me get this straight:

Former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman is a bitter old man, bought off by Republicans, who "was not there." Have I got it down yet?

 

[Dissident Dan]

It appears so.

 

[kat]

So, if people in our military do bad things, we should just keep that knowledge to ourselves?

Does the term "smearing" suggest honesty to you?

 

[Gza]

Does the term "smearing" suggest honesty to you?

Okay kat. Since I couldn't seem to get it right in my earlier post either; what do you mean by "smearing"?

 

[BobG]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-lips28.html

Could John Kerry have forged the signature? (I don't know how awards are given, so I don't know if such a forgery is possible.)

Okay, so let me get this straight:

Former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman is a bitter old man, bought off by Republicans, who "was not there." Have I got it down yet?

No, he couldn't have forged the signature on the original citation, nor could he fake the signatures required to process the decoration (obviously, a copy of a citation posted on a website could be completely fake).

Shachte's (sp?) story about Kerry's first Purple Heart lacks credibility. If he was there (which is in dispute), the unanswered question about his story is "What were they shooting at when Kerry fired the grenade too close to the boat?"

Shachte says that he, himself, was shooting into the woods. Was he shooting to defend his boat or was he just initiating a couple of rookies and he was the only person in on the joke (the other person purportedly on the boat sure thought they were shooting at something and he dispute's Schachte's claim of being on the boat, at all).

It's a dead end story and, like just about all the others, it was never really meant to be more than a dead end story. It's the bait to get people's attention so they can shift the focus to their real issue - Kerry's anti-war activities.

The problem with this is that their main point winds up being the excuse for their own lies rather than the issue they wanted.

The second problem is choosing the wrong candidate to support with this type of add. Their ties to the Bush campaign are a little too close and this isn't the first time 'independent' Bush supporters have come out with 'low blow' ads against his opponent (in fact, the anti-McCain ads in the 2000 South Carolina primary were worse than the Swift Boat ads and are the main reason relations between Bush and McCain are still so strained, today).

 

[Dissident Dan]

Does the term "smearing" suggest honesty to you?

A smear campaign is what's being carried out by the sbvft. The types of events that Kerry described have been well-documented.

 

[kat]

A smear campaign is what's being carried out by the sbvft. The types of events that Kerry described have been well-documented.

Well, we're not talking about "types of events" we're talking about events that pertain to Swift Boat Vets along with statements and testimony given by Kerry. Attempting to set the record straight when misleading statements have been made about you, is not "Smearing".

 

[Dissident Dan]

Kerry related both things that he saw and things that he had been told of. Some specific events have been verified and some have not. Those that have been verified are on the same levels of atrocity as those that have not. The sheer number and quality of the events that have been verified provide ample reason to think that those that have not been verified are not far-fetched.

The simple truth is that American soldiers committed horrible, horrible crimes. People of all nationalities, ethnicities, religions, etc. have done horrible things. Americans are not miraculously above everyone else in some ivory tower of purity.

 

[kat]

Kerry related both things that he saw and things that he had been told of. Some specific events have been verified and some have not. Those that have been verified are on the same levels of atrocity as those that have not. The sheer number and quality of the events that have been verified provide ample reason to think that those that have not been verified are not far-fetched.

The simple truth is that American soldiers committed horrible, horrible crimes. People of all nationalities, ethnicities, religions, etc. have done horrible things. Americans are not miraculously above everyone else in some ivory tower of purity.

I think, Dan, that you're giving a hell of a lot of gloss to Kerry's actions in regards to the winter soldier testimony. Kerry, admittedly either witnessed and took part in war crimes, and as an officer failed to report these war crimes...as was HIS duty. Kerry, gave testimony as truth from men who were imposters. Men who were NEVER in Vietnam. Kerry gave testimony that every one in vietnam was involved in war crimes. This is an outright lie. My father was never involvded in war crimes. My father never witnessed anyone cutting off ears, or action reminscent of Ganghis Kahn. So, perhaps SOME soldiers committed war crimes, but NOT of the manner that Kerry's FALSE testimony FROM FALSE witnesses portrayed.
If Kerry's personal testimony as to what HE witnessed and was aware of is TRUE then he should be charged for war crimes. As an officer IT WAS his responsibility. If his personal testimony is a lie, then his integrity is such that I would have to question the integrity of anyone who would vote for him.
FURTHERMORE his testimony was directly responsible for the pull out of vietnam without insuring the safety of our allies or the return of our POW's. THOSE deaths are on HIS head and they make any deaths that you want to attribute to George W. Bush look absolutely inconsequental.
You'd be better off to offer his Senate record rather then try to defend his winter soldier testimony. But then that also on amplifies how he has continuesly failed to support the military, and in fact actively worked to undermine it.

 

[amp]

Kerry in his testimony was repeating and reinforcing what had already been spoken at another panel in I think Detriot.

 

[kat]

Kerry in his testimony was repeating and reinforcing what had already been spoken at another panel in I think Detriot.

Yes, Kerry's testimonies were based on a Vietnam Veterans Against War conference called the "Winter Soldier Investigation", that he helped organize which was held in Detroit. Kerry was a leader with the VVAW. The event was primarily funded by Jane Fonda and NONE of the Winter Soldier "witnesses" Kerry cited were willing to sign affadavits, and their "horrible" stories were not backed by names, dates or even the locations that would have allowed their claims to be investigated. Only a few were willing to cooperate with military investigators. When the claims were investigated it was found that several of the veterans said to have given statements at Winter Soldier were abosulute imposters and were actually using the name of real veterans.

The Senate testimony was a part of the VVAW's ongoing disinformation campaign.(the FBI files can be found online, very interesting BTW). The VVAW's (which I remind you Kerry was a leader of) Executive Secretary Al Hubbard claimed to have been an Air Force Captain wounded in Vietnam piloting a transport plane. But, in reality Hubbard had only been a staff sergeant who was not a even a pilot and who had never even been assigned to Vietnam.

John Kerry, right along with Jane Fonda and the VVAW worked closely with our enemies. he arranged and participated in multiple meetings with the North Vietnamese and Vietcong leaders. He supported their positions and he and his "brothers" of the VVAW also played a key role in defining the false, and damaging image of Vietnam veterans as psychologically disabled drug addicts and alcoholics so haunted by the crimes they had been forced to commit in a "racist" war that they weren't able to function in society. THIS was a the outright lie that so many Vet's had to battle upon their return. I would serious question the integrity of anyone who could vote for such a man, "anybody but Bush" or not.

Yes, there were war crimes in Vietnam BUT Kerry's testimony dirtied all of our vets EVEN those who served honorably.

 

[amp]

First you said "he helped organize" then you said "he wasthe leader of" which is it?

 

[kat]

First you said "he helped organize" then you said "he wasthe leader of" which is it?

I'm sorry, you'll have to direct quote me and show me where I said he was
"THE" leader of.
Don't distort my words.

 

[amp]

"Kerry was a leader with the VVAW." Sorry, leader normally means the 'one' in charge but as the quote shows you said 'A' leader meaning I guess he was one of multiple leaders of the org. What I hope is that you can direct me to some transcripts of the VVAW testimony in Detroit. "...their "horrible" stories were not backed by names, dates or even the locations that would have allowed their claims to be investigated." Pray tell how it could have been investigated 'then' as there is 'now' ample docmentation of horrible atrocities.

 

[russ_watters]

"Kerry was a leader with the VVAW."

Amp, your quote in the last post was:

...then you said "he wasthe leader of" which is it?

Do you see any difference between those two quotes? There is a word that changed from one to the other. A plain ordinary lie is bad enough: misquoting someone like that is worse - its a double-lie.

Regarding the Swift Boat flap, I'll reiterate what I've said before, but with one addition:

Kerry miscalculated. He should have realized when he made this the centerpiece of his campaign that it would piss some people off. I'm sure some of what they have said is true, some is false, just like some of what Kerry said is true and some is false. Time and fog of war don't help either. But that's all part of the miscalculation.

What Kerry did after the war may be part of the motivation behind the SBV, but to me (and, it would appear, to kat) its is at least as bad as an inflated medal. Kerry might have stepped on one land mine already, but he's standing on a bigger one that may yet go off.

 

[amp]

Russ, I'm sure you read my post and see I apologized to Kat for misquoting her "Sorry" then I went on to explain why I made the error.

 

[Dissident Dan]

Kerry gave testimony that every one in vietnam was involved in war crimes. This is an outright lie.

Show me a credible source for this claim.

But then that also on amplifies how he has continuesly failed to support the military, and in fact actively worked to undermine it.

Please, please read some independent Analysis. FactCheck.org is a good one: http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=147

Also, note how ridiculously huge our military budget is: http://www.cdi.org/issues/wme/spendersFY03.html

This is just not defensible to any rational person.

 

[russ_watters]

Please, please read some independent Analysis. FactCheck.org is a good one: http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=147

Dan, your source backs kat's claim:

In this 1984 campaign memo (which a Kerry spokesman confirms is genuine) the candidate called for cutting Ronald Reagan’s military budget by between $45 billion and $53 billion through (among other things) cancellation of the MX missile, B-1 bomber, anti-satellite weapons, and the “Star Wars” anti-missile program, along with several conventional weapons that have become mainstays of the present-day military, including the AH-64 Apache helicopter, the Aegis air-defense cruiser, and the F-14 and F-15 fighters. He also called for a 50% reduction in the Tomahawk cruise missile.

And during the same campaign, according to the Boston Globe, Kerry also advocated reductions in the M-1 Abrams tank, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and the F-16 jet.

Also, note how ridiculously huge our military budget is: http://www.cdi.org/issues/wme/spendersFY03.html

This is just not defensible to any rational person.

Well, that depends, Dan, on what you see as the role of our military and on how you slice the data: as a percentage of gdp, the numbers say something altogether different.