Boy, there are some passionate people on here.

Ill give you 4:

"Ad features vets who claim Kerry "lied" to get Vietnam medals. But other witnesses disagree -- and so do Navy records."
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

"Anti-Kerry Ad Misses Context, Distorts Facts"
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=209

"More Bush Distortions of Kerry Defense Record"
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=177

"Kerry’s Attack Video Misleads on Veterans, Jobs"
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=149

And I'll make a counter argument:

Prove to me that GW didn't go AWOL.

AWOL is a specific charge ending in dishonorable discharge...I doubt highly his father the WWII veteran was coaching junior on how to go AWOL...Doesn't pass the smell test.

Now, why doesn't Kerry release his records? (as Bush has)

Why is it okay to talk about Bush not being AWOL for 4 years, but it is off limits to scrutinize Kerry?

Easy! Just use your same approach. Govt documents say so! Did he ever get charged as awol? NO! Did he ever get convicted as AWOL? NO. In the immortal words of Sargent Preston of the Yukon, "this case is closed King."

i think you'll believe Kerry is a phony no matter what the facts may be

Lol,

You give me editorials as "proof". That's a good one. Try in your own words next time. As a hint, facts are helpful. The "official" navy records are based on Kerry's accounts, so I would hope they agree:)

Dang, I thought it was going to be more pix like this:

http://www.ulrp2.com/photos/risque/graphics/akerry.jpg

And your source for this silly comment is what?

And you provide what? A Republican insider-funded emotional attack by veterans who were not on Kerry's boat and who have changed their stories several times? Most of these guys are just pissed that Kerry pointed out what a stupid and wasteful war it was.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5751284/

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0820041kerry1.html

Since you guys never seem to be able to click on links, here's the salient part of the above link (again) written by George Elliott.


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1093460218.jpg

Tech you are just wrong. None of them have changed their stories on what happened over there not one, not once. You are reffereing to Elliot saying he shouldn't have signed the letter that is all. When you fail to find an instance of them changing their recolection of what happened I'll assume you agree:)

As far as Elliot's "gleaming" review of Kerry. I listened to Elliot in an interview. He said EVERYONE got those and they were all simliar, saying any less was considered bad for moral and was generally just not done. He said if you look at a variety of those which he wrote, Kerry's would be in the bottom half of how posative they got.

So, I'll sit back and wait for the "changed stories".

Sure they have Len.. there's a clip from one of the guys in the SBVFT ad.. in '98 he says Kerry acted with amazing courage.. called Kerry a hero..

If in some vague way you want to call that changing his story on what happened in Vietnam, I guess you got me. I am speaking to actual events, you know reality, facts, that of non-opinion.

Thurlow has changed his story. Now he says he wasn't under fire as it says on his citation; that he didn't 'read his citation' and has since lost his citation and refuses to release his records...

Thurlow was the senior officer in the action and would normally have had the responsibility for the write-up for all three of the medals earned that day (including one for him).

Elliott signed the commendation, and he can say anything he wants about it now, but there's his signature, under a specific description of actions meriting an award. No senior officer worth his salt signs citations without reading and approving them.

He gave at least one interview saying his SBVfT involvement was a 'terrible mistake' before he clammed up.

O'Neill is slimier still "I was on Kerry's boat" turns into: I was on the boat John Kerry had previously commanded. In other words, he was not on Kerry's boat.

No question these guys are pissed about Kerry's anti-Vietnam war stance, but they can't change what happened; they can't excuse what they said, and they can't foist it all off on some 'vast Kerry conspiracy' to get awards.

Some quotes from guys actually on Kerry's boat:

------------------------
"In 1969, I was Sen. Kerry's gun mate atop of the Swift boat in Vietnam. And I just wanted to let everyone know that, contrary to all the rumors that you might hear from the other side, Sen. Kerry's blood is red, not blue. I know, I've seen it.

"If it weren't for Sen. John Kerry, on the 28th of February 1969, the day he won the Silver Star . . . you and I would not be having this conversation. My name would be on a long, black wall in Washington, D.C. I saw this man save my life."3

— Fred Short

"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.

I had to sit on my hands [after a firefight], I was shaking so hard . . . He went to every man on that boat and put his arm around them and asked them how they're doing. I've never had an officer do that before or since. That's the mettle of the man, John Kerry."3

— David Alston

"What I saw back then [in Vietnam] was a guy with genuine caring and leadership ability who was aggressive when he had to be. What I see now is a guy who's not afraid to tackle tough issues. And he knows what the consequences are of putting people's kids in harm's way."2

— James Wasser

So calling a guy a hero and courageous - then calling him a liar and a coward - isn't changing your story? oi

Tech, your twisting what Elliot said. He said he shouldn't have signed the letter saying Kerry didn't deserve the Purlple heart. That's it. Not that he regretting being involved in the SBVfT movement. He said since he was not there during the event he cannot claim whether Kerry deserved it or not. He's was being gasp...honest.

Liberals don't want/can't handle the truth. They'd rather have Flipper or anyone else other than W because thier hatred for W blinds rational thought.

Rational thought creates hatred for Bush.

Not hardly, I'm not wild about Bush, but he's a darn sight better choice the 57 Flip Flopper who voted for it before voting against it, who can't understand why Vietnam vets might have a bone to pick with him.

No kidding. Talk about out of touch.

Kerry is living in his own private Idaho. . .757 . . whatever.

That's not the way I read Elliott's comments. Signing something and then saying later you wish you hadn't seems like changing your story.

... but let's just say that's what he meant and set Elliott aside for the moment.

What do you have to say about Thurlow & O'Neill?