Kerry silver medal chronology...

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2003
Kerry silver medal chronology...
31
Sat, 08-21-2004 - 6:24am
The following from http://michnews.com/artman/publish/article_4808.shtml

By Grant K. Holcomb

Aug 21, 2004

I do not doubt the sincerity of James Rassman.



However, my own experience and review of such part of the record as is available for review convinces me that Mr. Rassman is right about then Lieutenant John Kerry pulling him out of the water but wrong about Kerry heroically saving his life.

I was an Operations Officer for 2d Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment during the first Gulf War.



I was on active duty U.S. Marine Corps Officer for over a decade.

I have watched how men behave under fire.

I cross referenced multiple statements from Senator Kerry, Mr. Rassman, and several other officers and sailors who participated in the "Sea Lords" tactical operation.

I use a military "findings of fact" format presented in chronological order.

Kerry and Rassman contradict themselves several times. However, multiple versions match on several points with other first hand accounts so I weighed those findings as being the most accurate.

The closer the date of the statements to the Democratic National Convention (DNC), the more embellished and divergent Kerry's and Rassman's statements became as compared to older first hand observations.

The Kerry Presidential campaign news release dated January 17, 2004, appended to this article, represents the most divergent, carefully crafted, and falsified account of the incident I was able to find.


Here are my findings:

1.) On March 13, 1969, five U.S. Navy "Swift" boats participated in operation Sea Lords in Bay Hap River and Dong Cung Canal. Sea Lords was a "sweeping" operation conducted in conjunction with U.S. Army ground forces. At the end of the operation (approximately 5 hours), the Swift boats extracted the ground troops and began exiting the river.

2.) LTJG John Kerry USN was the Officer-in-Charge of Swift boat PCF-94.

3.) 1st LT James Rassman USA was on Kerry's boat.

4.) Rassman was a Green Beret and was not trained in U.S. Navy Swift boat operations.

5.) Rassman was a passenger on Kerry's boat and did not serve with Kerry as a crewman.

6.) Rassman did not command or have "his own" Swift boat.

7.) Swift boats do not operate independently and the commanders and crews of the other Swift boats in Kerry's Swift boat squadron had direct and daily first hand observation of his conduct and actions.

8.) Shortly after the Swift boats started their exit of the river, Swift boat PCF-3 was hit by a command detonated mine. The entire crew was wounded and two crew members were thrown into the water. Rassman was not in this boat. Only one mine explosion was observed.

9.) Kerry's Swift boat was on the opposite side of the waterway from where Swift boat PCF-3 was damaged by the mine.

10.) Kerry had his driver speed away from the incident site hitting something in the river. This collision resulted in an injury to Kerry's right arm. At that time, supposedly responding to a bow gun being jammed, Rassman was heading to the bow and was subsequently knocked out of Kerry's boat.

11.) Three of the Swift boats remained at the scene with the damaged Swift boat PCF-3. Kerry's Swift boat accelerated away leaving Rassman in the water.

12.) Rassman spent a significant amount of his time in the water intentionally submerged, holding his breath in an attempt to evade what he thought was enemy fire.

13.) After the mine explosion, the Swift boats provided suppression fire against both shorelines in anticipation of an ambush. It is a sound and proven tactical decision to go on the offense against an ambush. Turning and running only exposes your back to the enemy presenting them with a much better target. Running from an ambush without firing also allows the enemy to easily establish accurate weapons fire. Kerry and his driver knew this.

14.) The commanders of four of the Swift boats state that they were not receiving enemy fire after the mine explosion.

15.) The weapons fire heard by Rassman was from the twin 50 caliber weapons being fired by the Swift boats, not enemy fire. Rassman assumed that such a significant amount of weapons fire coming from the Swift boats must be in response to enemy fire. The lack of any bullet holes in any of the five Swift boats following the incident presents reliable forensic evidence that there was no enemy weapons fire. Also, none of the personnel involved in the incident received any bullet wounds during the incident. In a waterway less than a football field wide, if the enemy on both sides of the river were in covered positions with clear fields of fire, Rassman and many others would be dead.

16.) Kerry returned to the scene and picked up Rassman at the same time another Swift boat approached Rassman for an attempted pick up. Rassman stated in an interview with Los Angeles Times on 3/13/04 that Kerry pulled him into the boat using his good arm.

17.) Rassman wrote the recommendation that resulted in Kerry receiving a medal.

18.) Rassman, as an assistant administrative officer with the responsibility for writing awards and decorations for his Green Beret unit, recommended that Kerry receive a Silver Star. Rassman believed then, as he does now, that he was actually under enemy fire. The officers in charge of the other Swift boats have presented affidavits to the contrary. Why Rassman was on Kerry's boat and why were they together on an earlier occasion when Kerry threw a hand grenade into a rice bin are unclear.

19.) An official statement from an officer is rarely questioned. The U.S. Navy chain of command at the time of the incident acted in good faith on Rassman's recommendation for a medal. However, the U.S. Navy issued Kerry a Bronze Star instead of a Silver Star.

20.) An act of heroism is defined as going "above and beyond the call of duty". It was Kerry's duty to pick up Rassman when he fell out of Kerry's boat, not an act of heroism. Kerry could have been charged for dereliction of duty if he had not done so. If the U.S. Navy higher chain of command knew that there was no enemy weapons fire, the medal would not have been awarded.

21.) Rassman is mistaken about Kerry "saving his life". Swift boat PCF-51 picked up the other men in the water from Swift boat PCF-3 and could have also picked up Rassman as well.

22.) If Kerry's medical records are ever produced, they should show that Kerry was not wounded by enemy fire during this incident.

If this incident is scrutinized, Kerry's "band of brothers" will collapse and, in turn, so will the artificial foundation of Kerry's presidential campaign.

As a child I asked my WWII Marine Corps veteran father about the scars on his body. It was not until I became a Marine that I realized they were bullet wounds. I found a box of his medals and had to use an Encyclopedia to find out what a Purple Heart, Silver Star, and Bronze Star were.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Sat, 08-21-2004 - 12:15pm
Kerry didn't actually save his life because someone else might have done it if Kerry hadn't beat them to it!!!

OMG this is a perversion of the truth. Using that logic you could say Bush didn't actually join the guard because someone else was just about to take that slot.


< 21.) Rassman is mistaken about Kerry "saving his life". Swift boat PCF-51 picked up the other men in the water from Swift boat PCF-3 and could have also picked up Rassman as well. ><

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Sat, 08-21-2004 - 12:25pm
I agree with you here.

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2003
Sat, 08-21-2004 - 2:40pm
Well not really, there is always the following... (which seems worthy of debate, no?)...

WND Kerry self-contradicts purple heart info...

WorldNet Daily is reporting consistancy problems with Kerry v. Kerry regarding the history of his first purple heart check out »www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp..

Kerry's war journal

contradicts medal claim?

At least 9 days after Purple Heart,

wrote he had not 'been shot at yet'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: August 17, 2004

8:00 p.m. Eastern

By Art Moore

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

A previously unnoticed passage in John Kerry's approved war biography, citing his own journals, appears to contradict the senator's claim he won his first Purple Heart as a result of an injury sustained under enemy fire.

John Kerry receving medal for Vietnam service.

Kerry, who served as commander of a Navy swift boat, has insisted he was wounded by enemy fire Dec. 2, 1968, when he and two other men took a smaller vessel, a Boston Whaler, on a patrol north of his base at Cam Ranh Bay.

But Douglas Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," for which Kerry supplied his journals and letters, indicates that as Kerry set out on a subsequent mission, he had not yet been under enemy fire.

While the date of the four-day excursion on PCF-44 is not specified, Brinkley notes it commenced when Kerry "had just turned 25, on Dec. 11, 1968," which was nine days after the incident in which he claimed he had been wounded by enemy fire.

Brinkley recounts the outset of that mid-December journey, which included a crew of radarman James Wasser, engineman William Zaladonis, gunner's mate Stephen Gardner and boatswain's mates Drew Whitlow and Stephen Hatch:

"They pulled away from the pier at Cat Lo with spirits high, feeling satisfied with the way things were going for them. They had no lust for battle, but they also were were not afraid. Kerry wrote in his notebook, 'A cocky feeling of invincibility accompanied us up the Long Tau shipping channel because we hadn't been shot at yet, and Americans at war who haven't been shot at are allowed to be cocky.'"

The diary entry apparently confirms assertions made by Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth, a group of more than 250 vets opposing his presidential candidacy who served in the Naval operation that patrolled the rivers and canals of the Mekong Delta area controlled by North Vietnam

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Sat, 08-21-2004 - 4:10pm
AHH!!

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Sat, 08-21-2004 - 11:47pm
It appears people are beginning to come out of the woodwork to support Kerry's claims. These are people who didn't want to relive the horror of an unpopular war. A war they made huge sacrifices for because other administrations "made a mistake".

Instead of Dissecting the heroic actions of Senator Kerry during the VN war, why weren't people spending their time asking what Bush had planned for the future? He's already screwed up the present, isn't someone concerned that he can't do any better with tomorrow?

I hope the Bush campaign people choke on their own slime and people see this entire disgusting smear for what it really is.

Examing Kerry's war record in excruciating detail may seem "interesting" to some, to others this preoccupation with attempting to destroy a man because he fought in Vietnam

is what's really interesting. What's with that?

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Sun, 08-22-2004 - 3:01am
Kerry also picked up support from Wayne D. Langhofer, who told The Washington Post he was manning a machine gun in a boat behind Kerry's and saw firing from both banks of a river as Kerry dived in to rescue Special Forces soldier James Rassmann, the basis for Kerry's Bronze Star.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-15-2004
Sun, 08-22-2004 - 8:57am
Great logic! Let all the murderers out of prison. Because, gee, "if I hadn't beat that guy about the head and killed him, somebody else would have!" I really need to know, are you a real person who really believes what you write here, or just a paid operative? That's a sincere question, not an attack. More people are starting to come out and support Kerry's service and record. The Smear Vets actually contradict themselves. How can Kerry be a medal-seeking cowboy and a coward at the same time? Why would somebody flee the scene if there was no danger (no gun fire) to flee from? The teensiest bit of critical thinking exposes their lies. Which led to my question, what motivates you to repeat this stuff? This is the 3rd time that the Bushies have done this, they started in on Tom Harkin which would be #4. How can you be proud to support a candidate who lies about people's war service when the candidate admits he dodged the war? And since Bush didn't want to go serve, he must have thought the war was wrong, which is what the Swiftboat Vets are angry at Kerry about in the first place. I just don't see how any regular American could be part of this.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Sun, 08-22-2004 - 1:34pm
great post.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Sun, 08-22-2004 - 7:05pm

In all the various accounts, including his own, Rassmann spent most of the time on the bottom of the river attempting not to get shredded by the boats propellers, so he's hardly a good witness

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Sun, 08-22-2004 - 7:15pm

Uh, pardon me, but what about all that

Renee ~~~

Pages