This issue seems to have come up in several discussions, so I wanted to ask.
Any links to comprehensive, fair analyses would be greatly appreciated. thanks.
2007-09-13 03:47:08 · 22 answers · asked by American citizen and taxpayer 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Kerry never definitively refuted any of the allegations and refused to have his naval records opened which would provide details of his wounds, their extent and the conditions under which they were received.
Despite this circumstantial evidence, it speaks volumes that Lt. Kerry received 3 purple hearts within the span of a single month and doesn't have a single scar to show for his wounds. None of these wounds required any recuperation or kept him from his duties. I'm not saying he didn't get scraped up, but three purple hearts and not a single significant wound? The purple heart is a significant award only lower than the Bronze Star award.
I've tried to explain to civilians how such a significant award could be awarded for such trivial circumstances and have always been at a loss. John Kerry has demeaned and diminished the significance of the Purple Heart for all of those who were rightly awarded the honor. His actions trivialized the significance of this high honor.
2007-09-13 04:03:16 · answer #1 · answered by The emperor has no clothes 7 · 6⤊ 5⤋
To suggest that the Swift Vets and their multitude of revelations/allegations against Kerry (many irrefutably true) were ever "discredited" is simply a heinous falsification of truth in itself.
When you see "discredited" applied to the Swift Vet campaign, consider the source of that allegation. As was even stated by FactCheck.org, a rather liberal organization, the relative veracity of the Swift Vet allegations vs. John Kerry was, at best, inconclusive...
"At this point, 35 years later and half a world away, we see no way to resolve which of these versions of reality is closer to the truth."
2015-09-03 03:05:35 · answer #2 · answered by whateez 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I in no way would desire to appreciate that. i presumed it grew to become right into a draw between that and Ws national shield deal. besides he greater ideal be careful as bill suggested Hillery grew to become into one, no kidding I caught the tip of it and he grew to become into speaking at a stand witha microphone, bill grew to become into, he would possibly no longer have been leaning on it. as nicely he and W are the two cranium and Bones adult adult males if that truly ability something aout the hot worldwide Order i think of i will start up scoping all that out, reason why would he even convey it up if there no longer something there. fact is one bullet, it truly is all it takes. Take care. OH i presumed he did it for Kerry, no longer against him.
2016-11-10 08:00:30 · answer #3 · answered by durrett 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's kind of a mute point since Kerry will never have the opportunity to run for president again.
But IMO it is very accurate.
Of course when I provide you links many people will not look at the facts but only where the links came from.
Just a few. I took this very serious when Kerry was running and did lots of research.
http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html
http://www.newswithviews.com/Craig/roberts1.htm
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/19/171426.shtml
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41200
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/19/171426.shtml
http://members.aol.com/viperash50/kerry/kerry.html
2007-09-13 03:59:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
Not very.
Going with the Swiftboaters best arguments, there was probably the first of the 3 Purple Hearts that Kerry received which may not had been awarded or pursued by other personnel of the era. His brionze and silver stars were fully earned, as reported to by those closely serving with Kerry. Swiftboater's are despicable scum with their pack of lies in this area.
It is clear Kerry did not want to be in Viet Nam and was scheming to get out the war zone, thus the Purple Heart angle. Nonetheless, Kerry did his job and was ACTUALLY THERE. And he was ACTUALLY injured in combat which is beyond dispute by even the Swiftboaters.
Swiftboaters were a bunch of Stooge henchmen for Bush, getting compensation and fame serving the ends of a wartime deserter.
2007-09-13 04:00:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 8⤋
Although the Swift boat Veteran's claim to be Kerry's shipmates, only one of them Steven Gardner actually served with Kerry. and he tells a great story of how John Kerry Saved his life and received the Silver star.
What pains me is that this attack was started by a Man (Bush) who was protected by family influence from serving in Vietnam, and was even UA during a time of war and failed to report to his assigned duty station. And yet people continually attack the record of a man who volunteered to go to vietnam and fight. SO no, those stories have been debunked, but the Karl Rove Spin machine that financed the Swift boat veterans rolls on.
2007-09-13 04:00:20 · answer #6 · answered by Myles D 6 · 6⤊ 8⤋
None of them actually served under Kerry and those that did have said the attacks against him are untrue. It's interesting that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth no longer call themselves that. It's also quite sad some continue to believe their lies and denigrate a man who served his country.
2007-09-13 03:59:23 · answer #7 · answered by OPad 4 · 9⤊ 7⤋
There wasn't a single bit of truth in their accusations. Their assertions were at odds with official records, and few of them actuallly served with Kerry in the first place. Several news organizations double checked what they claimed, and found all of it to be untrue. Kerry, unlike your idols, is a true war hero who shed blood and risked his life for his country. This kind of bs perpetrated by conservatives against someone is the kind of behavior that shows how fascist and antidemocratic you people are. These people were bought and paid for by republicans in order to lie and cause harmful influence on a federal election. They are liars who sold out their country for $, and they are TRAITORS. They are absolute scum who deserve to have their *sses kicked.
2007-09-13 04:01:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 7⤋
Its nothing more than a smear campaign funded by 'right wing' donors/supporters, denouced even by John Mccain.
Their accusations are contradicted by Kerry's own crew and navy's records.
2007-09-13 04:32:04 · answer #9 · answered by BrushPicks 5 · 3⤊ 7⤋
Completely inaccurate slander.
Read the Snopes report below. The Swift Boaters were cowardly partisan scum who didn't even serve with Kerry.
The article includes many many quotes documenting Kerry's heroism from guys who ACTUALLY SERVED AND FOUGHT WITH HIM.
2007-09-13 03:56:42 · answer #10 · answered by celticexpress 4 · 9⤊ 8⤋