| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| WashPost nitpiks Kerry Critic; Ignores Kerry's Lies |
| 2004-08-19 |
| EFL Records Counter a Critic of Kerry Fellow Skipper's Citation Refers To Enemy Fire By Michael Dobbs Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, August 19, 2004; Page A01 Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most vocal critics [the Post isn't interested in obtaining Kerry's records apparently], who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict [as later explained in the article, the military records may have been influenced by Kerry's puff up of this incident - the citation in question is written by a person who had access both to the account of the Kerry critic as well as the account of Kerry but the citation was not written by an eyewitness - ] his own version of events... Of note here is that the WashPost headers misleadingly spin the story to Kerry's advantage and bury information in the narrative that might point to the fact that Kerry's dishonest after action account may be the problem. In the short run this is good for Kerry - both for fundraising and for his poll numbers. In the long run... well, I guess we'll find out. |
| Posted by:mhw |
| #8 Here's the explaination: Thurlow said Commander George Elliott wrote up the citation for his Bronze Star and Kerry's on March 23, largely based on Kerry's after-action report. Thurlow's citation included a witness from another boat, but only Kerry's report refers to enemy fire, he said. It was the custom to file only one after-action report for an incident, Thurlow noted. "So the one and only report, which George accepted at face value, was this cock-and-bull story about coming 5,000 meters under intense fire to get Rassman," he said. Thurlow said he was unaware of his medal until two to three months after returning home to Kansas April 22, 1969. Which is why he didn't question the citation, he was out and just filed it away. He said the first time he saw Kerry's after-action report was this year in Washington, D.C. "When I looked at that, it actually made me chuckle," Thurlow said. "What a story." |
| Posted by: Steve 2004-08-19 2:53:38 PM |
| #7 The "mainstream" media is becoming unglued. I already hear the laughing on talk radio (Ingraham, Rush, Hannity, etc.) about the fact that editorial pages are covering this even though it hasn't been covered in the regular "news" pages. How odd is that? |
| Posted by: BigEd 2004-08-19 12:06:47 PM |
| #6 Mitch, Yes I meant mines in water. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-08-19 11:41:46 AM |
| #5 "As I recall, the VC didn't use mines very extensively for one thing." I hope you mean naval mines, because some preposterous percentage of US injuries in Vietnam were from landmines. As for the whole Thurlow thing, I don't understand why he's supposed to be embarrassed. He says that the citation is overblown, and that he wasn't as brave as his records indicate. How is this discrediting? If you believe the records, he's being self-effacing and humble. If you believe him, the account that made it into the records was inflated and overblown without his knowledge. Either way, the whole article only reinforces my previous impression of metal inflation and exaggeration in that war, driven by gloryhounds like Kerry. |
| Posted by: Mitch H. 2004-08-19 11:35:40 AM |
| #4 the military records may have been influenced by Kerry’s puff up of this incident - the citation in question is written by a person who had access both to the account of the Kerry critic as well as the account of Kerry but the citation was not written by an eyewitness It looks like Kerry wrote the after action report. When that reached their HQ, staff officer read it, decided the action deserved medals, kicked it over to whoever was tasked with writing citations that day, they just pulled a few details off the after action report (Kerry's), and used it to write both awards. I've read several awards given for the same event and it's just a (insert name here) type of award. |
| Posted by: Steve 2004-08-19 11:29:35 AM |
| #3 For much of the episode, Kerry was not in a position to know firsthand what was happening on Thurlow's boat, as Kerry's boat had sped down the river after the mine exploded under another boat. He later returned to provide assistance to the stricken boat. The incident in question was many years ago. There may have been some minimal fire from the shore or from the ships to the shore and Thurlow may have interpreted the minimal fire as 'quiet' and Kerry may have interpreted the minimal fire as 'under fire'. However the quote above raises lots of questions. As I recall, the VC didn't use mines very extensively for one thing. For another, if a mine went off, why would you accelerate your boat? Anyway, the big story is the way the Post is being Kerry's bitch. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-08-19 11:05:00 AM |
| #2 Look how the WaPo goes into details about Thurlow's not opening up his records (He isn't running for president) while completely ignoring Kerry's refusal (and Kerry *is* running for pres). Sounds like some of that stuff from a Brown Book (giving military, personal and medical details on the swiftvets) mentioned in an earlier Rantburg posting... For much of the episode, Kerry was not in a position to know firsthand what was happening on Thurlow's boat, as Kerry's boat had sped down the river after the mine exploded under another boat. He later returned to provide assistance to the stricken boat. Translation: Kerry fled with his tail between his legs (yelp! yelp! yelp! yelp!...) until it was safe for him to come back as the 'Hero'.... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-08-19 10:28:59 AM |
| #1 Verbal volleyball while Kerry hides. |
| Posted by: crazyhorse 2004-08-19 9:50:55 AM |