Political Pornography
Swift Vets For Truth, Unfit For Credibility

August 13 2004
Counterbias.com
Dennis Jones

Mike Barnicle of the Boston Herald calls it "political pornography." John McCain says, "I deplore this kind of politics. I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable." 

Both are referring to the new book Unfit for Command by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the commercial the group is currently running around the country. Scummeister Matt Drudge has plastered the accusations all over his web site and now the major media have picked up on the story. A story it may be, but it is also the lowest gutter form of political assassination.

This wouldn't be the first time that a Bush opponent has had his war record in Vietnam questioned in a sleazy way. John McCain ran against George W. Bush for the Republican nomination in 2000. After he soundly whipped Bush in New Hampshire the attack dogs came out of the woodwork to discredit him during the South Carolina primary. The stakes are high and George W. Bush is losing his bid for re-election. When all else fails, Karl Rove likes to slime his opposition. He will deny that the White House has anything to do with this. You believe what you want to believe and I'll stick with my hunch.

"It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me," McCain said in an interview with The Associated Press. Asked if the White House knew about the ad or helped find financing for it, McCain said, "I hope not, but I don't know. But I think the Bush campaign should specifically condemn the ad." They have not.

I served in the U.S. Air Force from 1967-71; fortunately for me, none of that service was in Vietnam. I am in awe of the men and women who have served in combat, and I find it very difficult to criticize them. The attempts of some to besmirch the character of John Kerry for political purposes absolutely infuriate me.

Swift Boat Veterans For Truth, who wrote Unfit For Command, are certainly entitled to their opinions and they have every right to air those opinions. I have no reason to believe that any of them did anything but serve honorably as did Senator Kerry. If they dislike the Senator nobody should deny them the right to protest his candidacy. They say that they are not affiliated with anybody and are not endorsing President Bush's re-election. Maybe - and maybe not.

Unfit For Command was co-authored by John O'Neill and Dr. Jerome Corsi. Mr. O'Neill was a veteran who did not serve a day with John Kerry. He did assume command of Kerry's swift boat after Mr. Kerry had left Vietnam. He has absolutely no firsthand knowledge about any of Kerry's service. However, he does have a long history of trashing John Kerry. In 1971 he served Richard Nixon and Charles Colson in distorting what Senator Kerry had to say about the war. He has carried his grudge for 35 years and now it has become public again in his attempt to trash Senator Kerry's war record.

Dr. Corsi also lacks any first hand knowledge of John Kerry's war record. According to O'Neill he was merely the main editor of the book. Maybe - probably not! The book jacket states that "In this stunning new book, John O'Neill and his coauthor Dr. Jerome Corsi (an expert on the anti-Vietnam War movement) have interviewed dozens of veterans who served with Kerry and have meticulously documented a shameful record of betrayal and deception on the part of John Kerry." That doesn't sound like just an editor to me.

I can understand why O'Neill now wants to back away from Corsi because Dr. Corsi has had a very colorful way with the language. He has, among other things, said that "ragheads" are "boy buggers"; referred to "John F*ing Kerry"; called Senator Hillary Clinton a "Fat Hog"; referred to her daughter as "Chubby Chelsie" Clinton; referred to Janet Reno as "Janet Rhino"; called Katie Couric "Little Katie Communist";  and  suggested Kerry was "practicing Judaism". At one time Corsi expressed the wish that a small plane that had crashed into a building in Los Angeles had instead crashed into the set of NBC'S The West Wing, thereby killing actor Martin Sheen. Corsi is supposed to be a devout Catholic who has said that the Pope is senile. Very colorful indeed.

Swift Boat Vets are said to have raised about $500,000 to air their commercials. A look at where that money came from shows a very strong hint of partisanship. In their initial disclosure report on donations we see that of the $158,750 the group initially received, $100,000 came from Robert R.  Perry, a wealthy Houston home builder.  During the 2002 elections Mr. Perry gave more than $3 million to Texas Republicans. On the national level he has given $359,825 to Republicans since 1999. That includes $6,000 to George W. Bush and $27,325 to Tom DeLay and his political action committee. Not exactly unbiased independents. We'll eagerly be looking forward to their next financial disclosure.

Swift Boat Vet Van O'Dell claims that "John Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star."  Mr. O'Dell was not on Mr. Kerry's boat. Jim Rassmun - the man Kerry rescued to win the Bronze Star - was on his boat, until he was blown overboard by an exploding mine. He completely backs up Kerry's account and he was the individual who nominated Kerry for the award. Del Sandusky, who was also on John Kerry's boat, corroborates Rassmun's account.

In Unfit For Command, the Vets say that "Kerry earned his Silver Star by killing a lone, fleeing, teenage Viet Cong in a loincloth." None of those accusers was actually on John Kerry's boat. Fred Short, Mike Medeiros and Tommy Belodeau - who were on that boat - all corroborate the official account. George Elliott, the Vet who was Kerry's commanding officer, submitted Kerry for this decoration. He has since said that he doesn't believe that Kerry deserved the medal. He also says that, "I have chosen to believe the other men. I absolutely do not know first hand." After the release of the commercial he told the Boston Globe that he had "made a terrible mistake." Still later he recanted on his recantation. I doubt if he knows what to believe but he certainly doesn't know anything because he wasn't there.

Louis Letson, another Vet, further claims that Kerry's first Purple Heart was for a self-inflicted wound. Mr. Letson was not on John Kerry's boat and he was not shown on the sick call list as the doctor who treated John Kerry. Letson also says that "the crewman with Kerry told me there was no hostile fire, and that Kerry had inadvertently wounded himself with an M-79 grenade." The crewmen who were on the boat with John Kerry deny that they ever talked to Letson. Basically the Vets are pissed off because Kerry wasn't wounded badly enough. But there is no denying that he went into harm's way - voluntarily.

The only Swift Boat Vet who was actually on Kerry's boat and does not fully support Kerry is Steve Gardner. He was not on the boat during any of the episodes which resulted in any of John Kerry's medals. He says, "I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from him in a gun tub, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy..." None of the other men who served on John Kerry's boat attest to that. On the contrary, all of them stand unreservedly behind Kerry and steadfastly attest to his courage under fire.

What the Swift Boat Vets are really vexed about is a statement that John Kerry, as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against The War, made before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971.

"I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group of 1,000; we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.... They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this
country."

Certainly strong language. I was not there so I cannot vouch for any of that, but I have studied war for 40 years and I can assure you that those things most probably did occur. All of the reporting from Vietnam during the war indicates that it was a particularly vicious war - and war frequently causes men to do things that they wouldn't normally do. Considering the conditions in which they found themselves, I think that the GI's in Vietnam acquitted themselves very well. I know that John Kerry believed that as well. He was merely trying to point out that what he viewed as a cruel and unjust war was resulting in actions which our country never intended - no matter how understandable they might have been. He was not being self-righteous. He included himself in the group of men who had been put in that position. Trashing his war record because he protested the war is mean, vicious and unacceptable.

In the end there are some facts which are positively beyond dispute. In the finest traditions of our country, John Kerry volunteered for service in the U.S. Navy while many did not. In the finest traditions of our country he volunteered for service in combat in Vietnam while many did not. In the finest traditions of our country he served bravely and heroically under fire while many did not. Men who disagree with what he said about that war after his service have chosen to slime his reputation by lying about his war record. I hope that they keep it up. The morons who buy this garbage already think that Bush is the greatest president in American history and will believe anything. I'm betting that any truly undecided voters will take it for what it is - a smear tactic that shouldn't belong in our politics.