Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Ok, I shot myself

  1. Aug 24, 2004 #1

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Kerry's campaign now says it is possible first Purple Heart was awarded for unintentional self-inflicted wound.

    Kerry received Purple Heart for wounds suffered on 12/2/68. In Kerry's own journal written 9 days later, he writes he and his crew, quote, 'hadn't been shot at yet'.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 24, 2004 #2

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Funny, and I'd like to believe it, but do you have a link?
     
  4. Aug 24, 2004 #3

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    The “facts?” are from the Swift Boat guys and have been circulated often for several months now. Whether true or not is the question. That Kerry’s campaign is supposedly admitting to it would be the big story. Sorry, I can’t give you a trustworthy source for that at this time. I think by this evening we’ll know.

    Er.. Your boss is looking over your shoulder.
     
  5. Aug 24, 2004 #4

    Gza

    User Avatar

    So why create a post based on untrustworthy sources?

    Is your name Michelle Malkin by any chance?

    Chris Matthews of Hardball had an interview with her where she made a complete fool of herself by pushing this claim without any support whatsoever. Matthews subsequently came down on her for her outlandish claim.


    Read the transcript for yourself:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5765243/
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2004
  6. Aug 24, 2004 #5

    kat

    User Avatar

    That's the most disgusting bit of wasted time I've ever spent, it's even worse then trying to wade through a limbaugh transcript. gaw, it's faulty as well. They attribute statements to the wrong person at least once as far as I can tell. That alone puts the whole transcript in question.

    At any rate, the show you linked to occurred before the statement this thread is referring to.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2004
  7. Aug 24, 2004 #6

    kat

    User Avatar

    You know, this just keeps getting more interesting all the time. I've been following John kerry since the early 90's and he has always contradicted himself and played on the publics misperceptions. He could get away with that in Mass. where approval of Kennedy practically insures your being put in office but on a national level..it's going to continue to show him in a bad light. It's really only just begun, his own words will hang him and I'm betting on the Clintonites helping him while appearing to be outraged at the audacity of the swift boat vets, his mates from the USS Gridley, POW's and the families of MIA's. Kerry made his bed way back in the 70's, what a surprise that he may now end up having to sleep in it.
     
  8. Aug 25, 2004 #7

    Gza

    User Avatar

    My apologies Kat. I tried to find a better source, but there is so little information to support/refute the claim that the transcript was the only thing I had (I hate Chris Matthews as much as I hate O'Reilly, so you better believe I was digging for scraps :blush: ) .
     
  9. Aug 25, 2004 #8
    Ok, so, when has anyone in the Kerry campaign said that he shot himself?
     
  10. Aug 25, 2004 #9

    kat

    User Avatar

    Unintentional self-inflicted does not mean "shot himself" in this case.
     
  11. Aug 25, 2004 #10

    kat

    User Avatar

  12. Aug 25, 2004 #11

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    What I don't understand is why this surprises him? What idiot made this the centerpiece of his campaign?

    With Iraq and a mediocre recovery, defeating Bush really should be a simple matter of stating what he'll do better. Why on earth is he focusing his campaign on the most divisive aspect of his past instead of what he plans to do now?
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2004
  13. Aug 25, 2004 #12

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    He didn't. The SBV attacks tried to make it the centerpiece. Now that the lies of the veterans have been exposed, it will sink back into oblivion again. Note that even Bush has criticised the group - now that the Bush campaign has wrung every advantage from it!
     
  14. Aug 25, 2004 #13

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Did you watch any of the DNC? The slogan may as well have been 'Kerry, war hero, for President.'
     
  15. Aug 25, 2004 #14

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    HERE is an interesting story with more on what I'm talking about:
    You do? This article is only 6 days old. I might have expected something like this two months ago (this is the reason why he made it the centerpiece of his campaign), but last week? Does he still not see? Anyway, the story says:
    And that's the way I see it as well: they made this an issue because of the usual perception that Dems are weak on defense and didn't anticipate the backlash (because, quite frankly, Dems don't understand defense).

    Kerry and his campaign are right that the fact that he served 'Nam and Bush didn't is a pro for Kerry and a con for Bush. What they should have also seen is that his actions after the war weigh just as heavily. Whether his actions in combat are inflated or not, the reason they are being questioned is his actions after the war.

    Regarding my statement about his service being the centerpiece of his campaign, here it is with the initial effect and the effect after the backlash:
    From Kerry's own website, roughly half of his biography is about his service in Vietnam. That part is about twice as long as the section on his service in public office.
     
  16. Aug 25, 2004 #15

    kat

    User Avatar

    http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040825-125217-7993r.htm
     
  17. Aug 25, 2004 #16

    amp

    User Avatar

    Kat...
    http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2004/08/what_the_other_.html http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2004/08/the_elliott_ret.html http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/08/06/veteran_retracts_criticism_of_kerry/

    From here:
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-08-kerry-vets_x.htm
     
  18. Aug 25, 2004 #17

    kat

    User Avatar

    So where in your post are you addressing Kerry's own statements and those of his campaign in regards to "self-inflicted wounds"?

    and was there something specific you wanted to point out in the Beldarblog, I mean other then the glowing appraisal of "o'neills honesty and integrity?
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2004
  19. Aug 25, 2004 #18
    kat, you really seem to swallow with eagerness anything that is anti-kerry. A little critical thinking goes a long way. The fact that you trust the sbvft is evidence of this.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2004
  20. Aug 25, 2004 #19

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Apparently the Kerry Campaign source “ admitting to self inflicted wound” has been shut up, at least for a while. There are two books cited below (Art Moore), the first was written by Kerry loyalists.

    What Kerry has not refuted and cannot refute:
    - He was not in Cambodia endangered by enemy or friendly fire
    - He either lied in his journal or accepted the first Purple Heart without merit
    - He never lost a day due to injury nor was he hospitalized
    - The doctor who treated his first “injury” used a band aid
    - When asked several months ago to provide documents relevant to his injuries, he saturated his website with 200+ plus pages of irrelevant material. None of the material included medical info, a defense lawyer’s ploy.

    By Art Moore
    © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com But Douglas Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," for which Kerry supplied his journals and letters, indicates that as Kerry set out on a subsequent mission, he had not yet been under enemy fire.
    While the date of the four-day excursion on PCF-44 [Patrol Craft Fast] is not specified, Brinkley notes it commenced when Kerry "had just turned 25, on Dec. 11, 1968," which was nine days after the incident in which he claimed he had been wounded by enemy fire.
    A previously unnoticed passage in John Kerry's approved war biography, citing his own journals, appears to contradict the senator's claim he won his first Purple Heart as a result of an injury sustained under enemy fire.
    Kerry, who served as commander of a Navy swift boat, has insisted he was wounded by enemy fire Dec. 2, 1968, when he and two other men took a smaller vessel, a Boston Whaler, on a patrol north of his base at Cam Ranh Bay.
    In the swift-boat group's newly published book, "Unfit for Command," authors John O'Neill, who took over command of Kerry's boat, and Jerome Corsi assert the wound for which Kerry received his medal actually was caused by him firing an M-79 grenade launcher too close, "causing a tiny piece of shrapnel (one to two centimeters) to barely stick in his arm."
     
  21. Aug 25, 2004 #20

    kat

    User Avatar

    Well...I think when you start argueing against the person instead of the content it's a good sign that you don't have a strong argument. The greatest evidence that I've seen has always been Kerry's own contradicting statements enjoined by the contradicting statements of those he's brought forth to argue for him..it doesn't take much critical thinking to see that there is a problem.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Ok, I shot myself
  1. Kadhafi is OK? (Replies: 18)

  2. Pay me to educate myself (Replies: 14)

Loading...