I saw the same interview. I wonder whethre the anti-Kerry guys are still so pissed at his anti-war stuff that they are making up stuff. I don't no what other explanation there would be. The former Green Beret that introduced Max Cleland at the Dem Convention seems highly credible when he talks about Kerry pulling him from the water while under enemy fire. Have these anti-Kerry guys called that guy a liar?

It is a shame that it comes to this, but if they want to compare Vietnam service records then, in the words of our CinC, "Bring 'em on."

Is there a way that they can all be telling the truth?

I think so.

I mean, in a traffic accident or crime eyewitnesses often honestly report conflicting observations. So can these guys.

B

as timely as today's headlines

"I knew it was wrong"



John Kerry's former commanding officer now retracts a statement he signed onto at the prodding of the anti-Kerry Swift Boat Veterans that said Kerry didn't deserve the Silver Star. It was a "terrible mistake," and he felt "time pressure" from those involved in the book, the officer says. The Drudge Report, at least partly responsible for the hype around the anti-Kerry ad and book -- and which yesterday bore this blaring headline: "VETS CHARGE: KERRY KILLED FLEEING TEEN; LIED FOR MEDAL..." is linking to the Boston Globe piece with the understated headline "One Veteran retracts criticism of Kerry..."

Yes, one veteran, who happened to be Kerry's commanding officer. Since none of the other veterans who appear in the anti-Kerry ad actually served with Kerry, this retraction delivers a mighty blow to their claims. As the Globe points out: "All of Kerry's crewmates who participated and are still living said in interviews last year that the action was necessary and appropriate, and it was Elliott who recommended Kerry for the Silver Star."

From the Globe: "A key figure in the anti-Kerry campaign, Kerry's former commanding officer, backed off one of the key contentions. Lieutenant Commander George Elliott said in an interview that he had made a ''terrible mistake' in signing an affidavit that suggests Kerry did not deserve the Silver Star -- one of the main allegations in the book. The affidavit was given to The Boston Globe by the anti-Kerry group to justify assertions in their ad and book."

"Elliott is quoted as saying that Kerry ''lied about what occurred in Vietnam . . . for example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back.'"

"The statement refers to an episode in which Kerry killed a Viet Cong soldier who had been carrying a rocket launcher, part of a chain of events that formed the basis of his Silver Star. Over time, some Kerry critics have questioned whether the soldier posed a danger to Kerry's crew. Crew members have said Kerry's actions saved their lives."

"Yesterday, reached at his home, Elliott said he regretted signing the affidavit and said he still thinks Kerry deserved the Silver Star. 'I still don't think he shot the guy in the back,' Elliott said. 'It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here.'"

"Elliott said he was no under personal or political pressure to sign the statement, but he did feel ''time pressure' from those involved in the book. ''That's no excuse,' Elliott said. 'I knew it was wrong . . . In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake.'"

"The affidavit also contradicted earlier statements by Elliott, who came to Boston during Kerry's 1996 Senate campaign to defend Kerry on similar charges, saying that Kerry acted properly and deserved the Silver Star. The book, 'Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry,' is to be published next week. Yesterday it reached number one on the bestseller list on Amazon.com, based on advance orders, in part because of publicity about it on the Drudge Report."

Salon 8-6

Koop, I think you inadvertently left off the part where he stood by the remainder of the Swift Boat comments except for the Silver Star portion. Isn't that right?

B

I googled this:


Anti-Kerry Vietnam Veterans Hold Strong


The following statement from Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is in response to an article appearing in the morning edition of the Boston Globe (“Veteran Retracts Criticism of Kerry”) which implies that one Vietnam Veteran wishes to retract an affidavit he signed regarding John Kerry’s actions during and after Kerry’s time in Vietnam. The signed affidavit can be seen below.
"Captain George Elliott describes an article appearing in today’s edition of the Boston Globe by Mike Kranish as extremely inaccurate and highly misstating his actual views. He reaffirms his statement in the current advertisement paid for by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Captain Elliott reaffirms his affidavit [see below] in support of that advertisement, and he reaffirms his request that the ad be played.

“Additional documentation will follow. “The article by Mr. Kranish is particularly surprising given page 102 of Mr. Kranish’s own book quoting John Kerry as acknowledging that he killed a single, wounded, fleeing Viet Cong soldier whom he was afraid would turn around.

“Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has more than 250 supporters who are revealing first hand, eyewitness accounts of numerous incidents concerning John Kerry’s military service record. The organization will continue to discuss much of what John Kerry has reported as fact concerning his four-month tour of duty in Vietnam.”

The anti-Kerry guy on CNN said that at least one eye witness to the incident where Kerry pulled the Green Beret from the water said the water was like a "mill pond", meaning very still. According that that account, there were no bullets. Meanwhile the pro-Kerry guy said he was on Kerry's boat and there were plenty of enemy bullets flying. It's hard to reconcile those statements with each other.

Allowing those who earn wealth to keep it is not a "redistribution".

__________________
I'm sick of .sig files

No Botnst, that's the whole article, to what are you refering?

What is left out though is the supposidly non partisan Mr. O'Neill and his connections to the Texas Republicans.

Mr. O'Neil after being tapped by Nixon's hatchet man Charles Colsen to discredit Kerry in '71, went on to clerk for Rehnquist and later to become partner in a firm that does oil and gas litigation in TX. Papa Bush considered him for a Federal judgeship.

Other members of that firm include noted right wing nut Tex Lazar, who ran for LT Gov of Texas with Bush.

Also notable is partner Margret Wilson, a Bush appointee to commerce dept and his former lawyer when he was Gov.

Their press person Merrie Speath worked under Reagan and was and advisor to Ken Starr during the impeachment.

But hey they are just a non partisan group looking for truth right?

Of course it is a redistribution, unless you believe that we should have no taxes at all.

and while we're on the subject, who is one of the sponsers of Swift boat veterens for truth, none other than Sam Wyly.

Who is Sam Wyly? Well if your not familiar with his work he was "Republicans for Clean Air" another 527 group that produced untruthful attack ad's with Ms. Speath that went after McCain on his enviromental record. Proven false but the damage was done. He is also a big contributer to Bush.

Why?

Glad you asked. When GWB was TX governer one of his notable accomplisments was to privatise the investments of the University of Texas Endowment fund.

And who got to handle that 90 million dollar fund and the fees associated with managing it?

Sam Wyly.

do i have mr. wyly to thank for the 300% increase in texas college tuition?

Koop,
Since you raise the finanacing issue....
Why is the financial backing if the anti Kerry side suspect, yet it amounts to about 1% of the backing provided by anti Bush, George Soros?
Soros is responsible for giving between $15 million and $20 million.
I thought we had to get the money out of campaigns. Or is that only anti- democrat money that must be regulated?

I'm talking about those fine non partisan folks at Swift Boat vets for blah blah blah

That's the whole point of my rant, that they are not "non partisan" but are founded and funded by the same ol right wing political hacks.

Unlike Wyly, who hides behind such deceptive names as SBVfor Truth and "Republicans for Clean Air" Everyone knows Soros and which side of the fence he's on.

Oh I see. The guys are mind-controlled robots of some TX fatcat. They sure couldn't have come-up with this story on their own, right?

B

Better still: My fatcat is bigger than your fatcat.