Asshat Award

Siji · Post by **Siji** » August 19, 2004, 4:39 pm

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB9ATWE2YD.html

Military Documents Cast Doubt on Kerry Critic's Version of Combat, Published Report Says

WASHINGTON (AP) - Military records appear to contradict claims by a vocal critic of Sen. John Kerry that the Democratic presidential candidate lied about coming under gunfire during a mission in Vietnam, according to The Washington Post.

The newly obtained records of Larry Thurlow show that he, like Kerry, won a Bronze Star for the same engagement and that Thurlow's citation said he came under "constant small arms fire," the newspaper reported Thursday.

Thurlow, also like Kerry, commanded a Navy Swift boat during the war. Thurlow swore in an affidavit last month that Kerry was "not under fire" when he rescued Lt. James Rassmann from the Bay Hap River.

Thurlow's records, obtained by the Post under the Freedom of Information Act, include references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at all five boats in the flotilla that day. In his Bronze Star citation, Thurlow is praised for helping a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."

Thurlow is a leading member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a public advocacy group of Vietnam veterans who have aired a television advertisement attacking Kerry's war record.

Kerry has described how his boat came under fire from the river banks after a mine explosion disabled another U.S. Swift boat. Kerry and members of his crew say the firing continued as Kerry leaned over to fish out Rassman, who was blown overboard in another explosion.

Thurlow described Kerry's Bronze Star citation as "totally fabricated," saying "I never heard a shot."

Thurlow, a registered Republican [gee, you think?], said he is angry with Kerry for his antiwar activities after his return to the United States, especially his claim that U.S. troops committed war crimes with the knowledge of their officers up the chain of command.

Thurlow told the Post that he got the award for helping to rescue the boat that was mined.

"This casts doubt on anybody's awards," he said. "It is sickening and disgusting."

He said he believed his award would be fraudulent if it was based on coming under enemy fire.

"We weren't under fire," he insisted.

Thurlow said he lost his Bronze Star citation more than 20 years ago. He said he would not authorize release of his military records because he feared the Kerry campaign would discredit him. [I guess what's ok for him to do to others, isn't ok for other to do to him..]

Members of Kerry's crew have said Kerry is telling the truth. Rassman said he has vivid memories of enemies firing at him from both banks.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 19, 2004, 4:44 pm

This doesn't matter anymore. I don't think anyone is going to base their vote on whether Kerry shot and killed someone in the back or not.

Our best presidents were not in the military.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » August 19, 2004, 4:50 pm

you mean like Washington or Kennedy?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 19, 2004, 4:52 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:you mean like Washington or Kennedy?

ewww, well Washington had class if not teeth. Kennedy gets kudos for supporting our mission to the moon.

More good non military than military presidents though!

Thess · Post by **Thess** » August 19, 2004, 4:56 pm

This video I found to be very interesting in regards to John O'Neill and Kerry's long standing feud.

http://www.c-span.org/Search/basic.asp? ... ext=cavett

Siji · Post by **Siji** » August 19, 2004, 4:59 pm

Winnow wrote:This doesn't matter anymore. I don't think anyone is going to base their vote on whether Kerry shot and killed someone in the back or not.

Learn to read plz. The article has nothing to do with how anyone was shot by Kerry.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 19, 2004, 5:06 pm

Winnow wrote:This doesn't matter anymore. I don't think anyone is going to base their vote on whether Kerry shot and killed someone in the back or not.

Our best presidents were not in the military.

I dont think by ANYONES standards, that Bush will go down as one of our "best presidents"

In 20 years, he will be considered to be in the top 5 worst presidents, if not the worst president in american history.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 19, 2004, 5:24 pm

Winnow wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:you mean like Washington or Kennedy?
ewww, well Washington had class if not teeth. Kennedy gets kudos for supporting our mission to the moon.

More good non military than military presidents though!

totally wrong here. of 43 presidents only 12 had no military service.

Clinton, Herbvert Hoover, Coolidge, Harding, Wilson, Taft, Fillmore, van Buren, John Quincy Adams, and John Adams.

while some of those are great presidents your point is of course totally false.

FDR was Secretary of the Navy, and I'm not sure if that is technically a military position or not, probably not. But he was also in a wheelchair.

Grover Cleveland was drafted but paid $150 to get out of the civil war, which was legal.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » August 19, 2004, 5:46 pm

I hope people voting for Kerry are doing so for the right reasons, and not because people proved that he got shot at =p Nothing like coming under fire against your will to demonstrate those leadership qualities!

Of course the people insisting that he DIDN'T get shot at QUITE as much as he may want you to believe are no better =p

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » August 19, 2004, 6:45 pm

Xzion wrote:In 20 years, he will be considered to be in the top 5 worst presidents, if not the worst president in american history.

Hehe, that dont need to take 20 years, i already consider him in the top 5 category

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 19, 2004, 7:02 pm

Voronwë wrote: totally wrong here. of 43 presidents only 12 had no military service.

Clinton, Herbvert Hoover, Coolidge, Harding, Wilson, Taft, Fillmore, van Buren, John Quincy Adams, and John Adams.

while some of those are great presidents your point is of course totally false.

Grover Cleveland was drafted but paid $150 to get out of the civil war, which was legal.

I mean people who actually did something in the military not just titles.

Washington and Eisenhower are the notable presidents that took major parts in conflics while not president.

My point stands! If you're counting people that paid 150.00 to get out of the civil war, you need to narrow down that list!

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 19, 2004, 7:13 pm

I mean people who actually did something in the military not just titles.

Stop changing your definition! Flip-flopper! Waffler!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 19, 2004, 7:19 pm

Kelshara wrote:
I mean people who actually did something in the military not just titles.
Stop changing your definition! Flip-flopper! Waffler!

That was my Kerry impersonation! Add Bush to the list then. If paying 150.00 to get out of the Civil War qualifies, then Clinton can probably make the list as well somehow!

No waffle here! I wasn't expecting such a broad definition of military service.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 19, 2004, 7:21 pm

Kennedy server in WW2. Are you stupid?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 19, 2004, 7:27 pm

kyoukan wrote:Kennedy server in WW2. Are you stupid?

No skippy, I mentioned Kennedy as an exception. See above.

Are you calling Kennedy one of our best presidents? Blinded by Camelot are we?

Mplor · Post by **Mplor** » August 20, 2004, 1:37 am

Um, Harry Truman was a decorated WWI veteran and is often considered among the best US presidents.

Winnow, recant!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 20, 2004, 1:56 am

Mplor wrote:Um, Harry Truman was a decorated WWI veteran and is often considered among the best US presidents.

Winnow, recant!

I mean presidents who served in the military and killed at least 50 men with their bare hands.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » August 20, 2004, 2:03 am

Wasn't Kerry also a senator or something for 20 years? Not that it matters...I mean three months of combat in Vietnam more than makes up for anything he did in the proceeding 35 or so years.

I'd like to hear Kerry make up more stories like the one about his top secret stealth mission to Cambodia on Christmas Eve where he dropped off navy seals deep inside enemy territory while single handedly destroying every commy in site. Rambo 4 anyone?

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » August 20, 2004, 7:48 am

Brotha wrote:Wasn't Kerry also a senator or something for 20 years? Not that it matters...I mean three months of combat in Vietnam more than makes up for anything he did in the proceeding 35 or so years.

I'd like to hear Kerry make up more stories like the one about his top secret stealth mission to Cambodia on Christmas Eve where he dropped off navy seals deep inside enemy territory while single handedly destroying every commy in site. Rambo 4 anyone?

Man how soon you hypocrites forget your "Support the troops" retoric. I always considered you a dumb blind patriot. Now I see you are dumb and a patriot when convenient.

Kerry volunteered where he could have probably avoided going at all. Served in a nice safe position on a navy ship and volunteered for a more dangerous position on a boat. Regardless of his decorations and actions while there Kerry risked his life every day, that is the bottom line. He put his life at risk to support your retarded government while Bush and Cheney were pussies in comparison.

Keep going tho. Making fun of decorated US veterans seems to be the fad these days.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » August 20, 2004, 9:03 am

Most of the "hypocrites" support Kerry's actions in vietnam....but I know that it pisses me off that he would trash medals that he may or may not have even earned. It just disrespects the people that died over there that didn't even want to be there. Vietnam sucked....no one would dispute it and I am sure a good 80% of the people sent there had no desire to fight in that shithole anyway. You can speak out about something without trashing symbols of people that showed bravery and loyalty and got jack and shit in return.

I can't even begin to tell you how pissed I would have been to see people spitting at returning soldiers. Guys get drafted and have no choice but to go and try to stay alive for a year under the worst possible conditions....to return to retards that treat them like they willingly went to murder innocent people. For some reason I have a feeling that a lot of people on this board would have been those protesters.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » August 20, 2004, 10:51 am

Kerry could end most of this debate if he merely released his military records for public review.

Kerry himself has made his military career open prey since HE is trying to use it to win the presidency.

There are enough questions about the veracity of Kerry's claims to deserve full disclosure.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 20, 2004, 11:12 am

heh yeah guess he can since his records weren't "accidentally" destroyed.

Post by **Sylvus** » August 20, 2004, 11:36 am

Kerry could have used his medals as roach clips while getting high and banging North Vietnamese prostitutes and it'd still be more honorable than using his father's connections to get into one of the safest military positions at the time and then go AWOL from it.

Sure, no one wants to see him trash the medals that he earned while serving our country, but I think by volunteering to be in the thick of things and then living up to his commitment he earned the right to do whatever he wants with them.

Would I have trashed the medals? Probably not. But then again, my ass wouldn't have even volunteered for anything, I'd have been headed north across the border or holding George W's legs while he did a keg stand.

Does military service have any bearing on one's ability to be president? Not necessarily. But if that is the ruler by which you want to measure a candidate, use it on both of them. I think you'll find that the person who didn't even actually serve will come up short, even if the other did some things afterwards that you don't agree with.

Someone who has seen combat and then denounced it might be less likely to send others to a similar situation without good reason.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » August 20, 2004, 12:06 pm

Kelshara wrote:heh yeah guess he can since his records weren't "accidentally" destroyed.

Bush's records were found and released. Do a google search if you don't believe me.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » August 20, 2004, 12:47 pm

Siji wrote:The newly obtained records of Larry Thurlow show that he, like Kerry, won a Bronze Star for the same engagement and that Thurlow's citation said he came under "constant small arms fire," the newspaper reported Thursday.

Thurlow, also like Kerry, commanded a Navy Swift boat during the war. Thurlow swore in an affidavit last month that Kerry was "not under fire" when he rescued Lt. James Rassmann from the Bay Hap River.

Thurlow's records, obtained by the Post under the Freedom of Information Act, include references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at all five boats in the flotilla that day. In his Bronze Star citation, Thurlow is praised for helping a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."

Thurlow is a leading member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a public advocacy group of Vietnam veterans who have aired a television advertisement attacking Kerry's war record.

I heard yesterday that Thurlow's recommendation was written up by <drumroll> John F. Kerry.

That would make it an amazing coincidence <insert sarcasm here> that Thurlow's and Kerry's write-ups would essentially paint the same picture.

By the way... do you suppose the gunners on these swift boats were firing into the the jungle around them "just in case"? So that the people in the water would be aware of gunfire but not know that it was friendly and focused outward?

I don't really care what happened in this specific incident. I DO care the national press is giving Kerry a pass on this. Keep in mind and context that the national press aired nearly 100 news stories that Bush "might" have been AWOL during part of his guard service. Talk about your liberal news bias...

Fredonia Coldheart · Post by **Fredonia Coldheart** » August 20, 2004, 12:57 pm

Winnow wrote:
Voronwë wrote: totally wrong here. of 43 presidents only 12 had no military service.

Clinton, Herbvert Hoover, Coolidge, Harding, Wilson, Taft, Fillmore, van Buren, John Quincy Adams, and John Adams.

while some of those are great presidents your point is of course totally false.

Grover Cleveland was drafted but paid $150 to get out of the civil war, which was legal.
I mean people who actually did something in the military not just titles.

Washington and Eisenhower are the notable presidents that took major parts in conflics while not president.

My point stands! If you're counting people that paid 150.00 to get out of the civil war, you need to narrow down that list!

What about Teddy! How can you dismiss the Rough Riders and the charge up San Juan hill!

Grant - not a major military person - I think not!

Nixon was in the Pacific during WWII as a Navy lieutenant commander.

Ford also was a Navy lieutenant commander during WWII.

Zachary Taylor spent 25 years fighting Indians and led many victorious battles in the Mexican War.

Where were you during American History classes? These are just the ones I came up with off the top of my head - I know I'm missing more there.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » August 20, 2004, 1:11 pm

I wish we could clone Theodore Roosevelt to be our next president. Nation building, jingoistic capitalism, "Speak softly but carry a big stick," and all that.

Teddy. I'd take his reanimated head in a jar before either of the bufoons running today.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » August 20, 2004, 2:34 pm

Forthe wrote:Kerry volunteered where he could have probably avoided going at all. Served in a nice safe position on a navy ship and volunteered for a more dangerous position on a boat.

I hate to break it to you but Kerry didn't "volunteer for a more dangerous position" (although I shouldn't even be talking about this because it means I'm questioning his patriotism OMG!!).

Kerry volunteered for the swift boats, but at the time they weren't much more dangerous than his "safe position" on a navy ship.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... p?ID=13378

Kerry was assigned to the swift boats after working offshore on larger ships. When he transferred to the swift boats, they were used to ferry personnel and material from shore- to offshore-vessels. Only after he had transferred to the unit was the swift boat mission changed to combat.

Post by **Sylvus** » August 20, 2004, 2:57 pm

Yeah, that article also says

Swift boat crews were vulnerable to ambush from the banks of the rivers.

What's your point? Are you arguing that leaving a large Navy ship for a smaller boat that transfers goods from on-shore to off- was a lateral move in terms of safety until they moved into more of a combat role? I'm not well-schooled in the ins and outs of combat in Vietnam, did they have a pretty big Navy that put our large Navy ships in a lot of danger?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 20, 2004, 3:14 pm

Brotha wrote:
Forthe wrote:Kerry volunteered where he could have probably avoided going at all. Served in a nice safe position on a navy ship and volunteered for a more dangerous position on a boat.
I hate to break it to you but Kerry didn't "volunteer for a more dangerous position" (although I shouldn't even be talking about this because it means I'm questioning his patriotism OMG!!).

Kerry volunteered for the swift boats, but at the time they weren't much more dangerous than his "safe position" on a navy ship.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... p?ID=13378

Kerry was assigned to the swift boats after working offshore on larger ships. When he transferred to the swift boats, they were used to ferry personnel and material from shore- to offshore-vessels. Only after he had transferred to the unit was the swift boat mission changed to combat.

Don't be dissing our greatest american hero! That papercut you just got was worse than one of the purple heart wounds he inflicted on himself and begged for the medal to get himself out of the war.

He got three purple hearts. That's fan-fucking-tabulous but keep that shit out of your political weasilings.

These medals only matter to those that weren't there in terms of political significance. My dad, for example, received plenty of medals, doesn't talk about them, and could give a rats ass if a president has medals or no medals. The president surrounds himself with people that are specialists. Bush has plenty of war veterens to give him advice.

I find it funny you liberals are so hyped up on the military history of presidents. Clinton? What a fucking joke he was but all the sudden military sevice matters! No wonder you wishy washy people like Kerry. I have much more respect for a veteran who served and doesn't use his "heroic 3 month tour" for political gain. It's still a great diversionary tactic as it wastes endless amount of time for something that won't effect the election.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 20, 2004, 3:30 pm

Winnow is getting repetitive and boring. New contents please!

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » August 20, 2004, 3:44 pm

Sorry, this is a long read. Take a look how Chris Matthews treated Larry Thurlow on Hardball last night. He also had Michelle Malkin on the same show... take a look at her response.

I'm reminded of the old adage, "where there's smoke there's fire". You have to love how the liberal media is doing everything in their power to defend Kerry.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5765243/

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000418.htm

What I take away from all this is that the Democrat Party waterboys in the media are in full desperation mode. I have now witnessed firsthand and up close (Matthews' spittle nearly hit me in the face) how the pressure from alternative media sources--the blogosphere, conservative Internet forums, talk radio, Regnery Publishing, FOX News, etc. --is driving these people absolutely batty.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 20, 2004, 3:51 pm

Fox News alternative media? Well it is alternative to the truth I guess..

Siji · Post by **Siji** » August 20, 2004, 4:01 pm

Winnow wrote:Don't be dissing our greatest american hero! That papercut you just got was worse than one of the purple heart wounds he inflicted on himself and begged for the medal to get himself out of the war.

As opposed to having his daddy just get him out before he got in there in the first place eh?

Winnow wrote:The president surrounds himself with people that are specialists. Bush has plenty of war veterens to give him advice.

Military types know they get money and promotions and budgets during times of war. What do you think they're going to push for - war or peace? A clueless fucking lemming like Bush is perfect for them because he has absolutely no personal experience with which to compare against what the military boys are telling him. They say jump he says "OK!" Someone that's actually been in war, and has an IQ higher than the shit I flushed down the toilet earlier might actually consider alternative methods of negotiating other than the ways which best serve the military.

Winnow wrote:but all the sudden military sevice matters!

You can thank you daddy Bush for that. He's the one that brought the military to the minds of everyone in the world. Before Iraq, John Kerry's military service wouldn't have meant as much at all. However, now when people compare it to the guy who's currently running us full speed to hell, it appears to be a bigger deal than it would have been before.

Winnow wrote:I have much more respect for a veteran

Too bad your bitch ass Bush isn't one.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » August 20, 2004, 4:04 pm

Kelshara wrote:Fox News alternative media? Well it is alternative to the truth I guess..

Show me any Fox News story that you can demonstrate is not truthful.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » August 20, 2004, 4:20 pm

Sylvus wrote:Yeah, that article also says

Swift boat crews were vulnerable to ambush from the banks of the rivers.
What's your point? Are you arguing that leaving a large Navy ship for a smaller boat that transfers goods from on-shore to off- was a lateral move in terms of safety until they moved into more of a combat role? I'm not well-schooled in the ins and outs of combat in Vietnam, did they have a pretty big Navy that put our large Navy ships in a lot of danger?

That quote was obviously after they moved into a combat role. I have no idea why Kerry volunteered for swiftboats, but it's really doubtful that "wanting to get in on the action" was one of his reasons for volunteering to be in a unit that very infrequently saw combat.

But if you want to argue semantics, yes it was more dangerous. It also would have been "more dangerous" on just about any base in Vietnam than a navy ship.

Maybe this will help (and this is a very pro-Kerry article):

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/pack ... 03_p.shtml

"I didn't have any real feel for what the heck was going on [in the war]," Kerry has recalled. His ship returned to its Long Beach, Calif., port on June 6, 1968, the day that Robert F. Kennedy died from a gunshot wound he received on the previous night at a Los Angeles hotel. The antiwar protests were growing. But within five months Kerry was heading back to Vietnam, seeking to fulfill his officer commitment despite his growing misgivings about the war.

Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat" skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.

"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "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."

But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed -- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous. Under the newly launched Operation SEALORD, swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy. Cruising inlets and coves and canals, swift boats were especially vulnerable targets.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » August 20, 2004, 4:28 pm

But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed -- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous.

And instead of going AWOL, or having daddy get him a transfer.. he stuck to it and did his duty.

I don't give a rats ass how he got there. He did, and he didn't run away from it. He didn't lie about volunteering for the boats. If he somewhere said that he volunteered because he knew they were dangerous, I'd be unhappy about him lying about it. Thus far I haven't seen that as being the case. Feel free to provide evidence as such.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » August 20, 2004, 5:00 pm

Siji wrote:
But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed -- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous.
And instead of going AWOL, or having daddy get him a transfer.. he stuck to it and did his duty.

I don't give a rats ass how he got there. He did, and he didn't run away from it. He didn't lie about volunteering for the boats. If he somewhere said that he volunteered because he knew they were dangerous, I'd be unhappy about him lying about it. Thus far I haven't seen that as being the case. Feel free to provide evidence as such.

I never said he lied about that, but after seeing other embellishments he's made I certainly wouldn't be surprised.

Here's how he typically spins it to give people the wrong impression, like the one Forthe had (from Kerry's website):

http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/bio.html

On his second tour, he volunteered to serve on a Swift Boat in the river deltas, one of the most dangerous assignments of the war.

I'm not sure how accurate this next claim is but:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... wstop.html

The Harvard Crimson newspaper followed a youthful Mr Kerry in Boston as he campaigned for Congress for the first time in 1970. In the course of a lengthy article, "John Kerry: A Navy Dove Runs for Congress", published on February 18, the paper reported: "When he approached his draft board for permission to study for a year in Paris, the draft board refused and Kerry decided to enlist in the Navy."

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » August 20, 2004, 6:32 pm

Forthe wrote:Kerry volunteered where he could have probably avoided going at all. Served in a nice safe position on a navy ship and volunteered for a more dangerous position on a boat.

That was all I said about it Brotha you fucking idiot.

VeeshanVault

Asshat Award

Asshat Award

Re: Asshat Award