Somebody on Kerry's Staff Goofed

[AUloggerhead 2,356]

My, my .... this could be really embarassing: Link

Discrepancies noted in Kerry's record

Ex-skipper says website wrong

By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff  |  April 23, 2004

WASHINGTON -- Vietnam combat records posted on John F. Kerry's campaign website for the month of January 1969 as evidence of his service aboard swift boat No. 94 describe action that occurred before Kerry was skipper of that craft, according to the officer who said he commanded the boat at the time.

On the site, the Massachusetts senator is described as the skipper of Navy boat No. 94 during several actions in late January 1969.

However, Edward Peck, who was the skipper of the 94 before Kerry took over, said combat reports posted by the campaign for January 1969 involve action when he was the skipper, not Kerry. Peck, who was seriously wounded in fighting that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, said he believes Kerry campaign aides made a mistake in claiming Kerry as skipper of the 94 at that time.

Military records  Combat reports  Command history (From johnkerry.com) 

On the Kerry website, the report of the combat on that day on the 94 boat is posted as occurring during Kerry's time as skipper of the boat. Peck said Kerry replaced him after the Jan. 29, 1969, event.

"Those are definitely mine," Peck said, referring to the combat reports that the Kerry campaign posted as representing Kerry's action. "There is no doubt about it."

A Kerry campaign spokesman, Michael Meehan, said in an e-mail that the campaign had obtained the combat reports for the 94 from the Navy. He did not directly address the question of why the campaign describes Kerry being skipper of the 94 at a time when Peck says he commanded the boat.

The reports at issue are in a 20-page batch representing Kerry's combat in January 1969. The reports include references to some dramatic action, including an ambush of Patrol Craft Fast, or PCF, 94. In addition to posting the information online, the campaign sent out an e-mail yesterday afternoon repeating the claim that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 boat throughout January and describing action the campaign said Kerry experienced while commanding the craft.

For example, in a summary of action that occurred Jan. 26, 1969, the campaign says Kerry served on boat No. 94 alongside another boat, No. 66. "PCFs 94 and 66 escorted troops up the Ong Doc River early in the morning when they were ambushed by gun and rocket fire from approximately 40 men on both sides of the river," the campaign summary says. "Two B-40 rounds hit close to Kerry's boat, while PCF 66 received 2 B-40 rocket hits. Three men on PCF66 were wounded. A junk containing South Vietnamese troops was also sunk, killing 11 South Vietnamese troops. Intelligence reports after the mission indicated that the Viet Cong troops may have planned the ambush in advance."

Peck said he was the skipper of the 94 at this time and that Kerry was not on the craft. While combat reports show several boats traveling with the 94, the campaign website says only that Kerry was the skipper of the 94 and does not try to place him on the other boats.

In another report, the campaign summarizes action that took place on Jan. 29, 1969, this way: "While Kerry's boat and another [PCF72] were probing a canal along the river, Kerry's boat came under heavy fire and was hit by a B-40 rocket in the cabin area. One member of Kerry's crew -- Forward Gunner David Alston -- suffered shrapnel wounds in his head. His injuries were not considered serious and he was sent to the 29th Evac Hospital at Binh Thuy."

Peck said he was the skipper on this day as well. Peck was also injured in the ambush and was hospitalized.

As a result, Kerry then took over the crew, Peck said. The Navy combat report posted by the Kerry campaign states that Peck and Alston were injured in the same event. There is no mention of Kerry in that report.

Kerry's commanding officer, George Elliott, said in a telephone interview that he vividly recalls Peck's injury and hospitalization and Kerry's replacement of Peck. "I think somebody made a mistake who doesn't know" the timing of Kerry's service, Elliott said. Kerry was skipper of boat No. 44 in December and January before taking over command of the 94, he said.

Michael Kranish can be reached by e-mail at kranish@globe.com.

Oh! what a tangled web we weave

when we practice to deceive.

[Tigermike 3,425]

But, but, but, but, BUSH LIED! Bush was in the National Guard! BUSH KNEW!

[MDM4AU 337]

But, but, but, but, BUSH LIED! Bush was in the National Guard! BUSH KNEW!

And he really didn't serve. He had strings pulled...and, and, and, he didn't show up in Alabama, and, and, and,...He Knew!!!!

[DKW 86 7,726]

ABB and "We hate Bush!"

[CarolinaTiger 0]

i'm sure this was just a simple clerical error...not meant to deceive...kerry's record is solid enough without having to scarf someone else's. :roll:

i think it's hilarious. the thing so many libs got worked up over...bush's military service...is now coming full circle. no wonder kerry was saying vietnam service shouldn't be a part of the campaign....he didn't want his scratch revealed.

[MDM4AU 337]

Actually, I am sure it was just a virus similar to the one that put the profanity on his website and even linked to the speeches/articles in which he actually spoke it! :roll:

[keoson7 28]

um, um uh well, um tiger, uh ummm, Al , well um, ahem, tiger um, uh AL your response um uhh well. um. Faked military heroics. um, uh uh well um what um uh say TigerAl.hmmmm.

[Tiger Al 0]

um, um uh well, um tiger, uh ummm, Al , well um, ahem, tiger um, uh AL your response um uhh well. um. Faked military heroics. um, uh uh well um what um uh say TigerAl.hmmmm.

I say 'tis much ado about nothing.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

um, um uh well, um tiger, uh ummm, Al , well um, ahem, tiger um, uh AL  your response um uhh well. um. Faked military heroics. um, uh  uh well um what um uh say TigerAl.hmmmm.

I say 'tis much ado about nothing.

what a coincidence!

[TitanTiger 20,708]

I say 'tis much ado about nothing.

I agree, TigerAl. Just like the hullabaloo over George W. Bush's National Guard service, this is a non-issue.

Of course, if you still insist that the GWB issue is a big deal, then by that standard, so is this.

[Tigermike 3,425]

Of course, if you still insist that the GWB issue is a big deal, then by that standard, so is this.

They are only big issues when used against President Bush. Legally elected George W. Bush, that is.

[Tiger Al 0]

I say 'tis much ado about nothing.

I agree, TigerAl. Just like the hullabaloo over George W. Bush's National Guard service, this is a non-issue.

Of course, if you still insist that the GWB issue is a big deal, then by that standard, so is this.

I think it's no big deal because it's probably a case of one of his staffers mistakenly crediting command of the boat to Kerry and not the other guy. I don't think it was a conspiracy to intentionally mislead people.

However, if I were a Bush supporter I'd probably try to fly it early and often to take away from my guys failure to be forthright with his records, etc.

[channonc 466]

Hmm... I guess the only thing that comes to mind is...

"Kerry Hater!"

Edit: I am being sarcastic to prove a point. Whenever articles such as these are posted about Bush, I constantly see at least one post that says the left cries nothing but "hate bush" but when an article is posted about Kerry, it is gospel truth.

[CCTAU 3,369]

Hmm... I guess the only thing that comes to mind is...

"Kerry Hater!"

Edit: I am being sarcastic to prove a point. Whenever articles such as these are posted about Bush, I constantly see at least one post that says the left cries nothing but "hate bush" but when an article is posted about Kerry, it is gospel truth.

I don't think anyone tried to present it as "the gospel truth." It was mostly brought to light on this board to show that its the same as GWs service issue, but it will be treated the way GWs issue should have been treated because of the liberal bias.

[WarTim 3,463]

I say 'tis much ado about nothing.

Sure.....Unless, you are one of the proud and few that do not want a Presidential candidate to be a bald faced LIAR........

p.s. Although, with the "clinton's past"...I could see the problem........

[Tiger Al 0]

I say 'tis much ado about nothing.

Sure.....Unless, you are one of the proud and few that do not want a Presidential candidate to be a bald faced LIAR........

p.s. Although, with the "clinton's past"...I could see the problem........

I'll kill two birds with one stone: Liberal media bias and Bush is honest.

"The larger point is, and the fundamental question is: Did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is: Absolutely," Bush said.

"And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power, along with other nations, so as to make sure he was not a threat to the United States and our friends and allies in the region. I firmly believe the decisions we made will make America more secure and the world more peaceful."

LINK

Now, a media who was so liberally biased should've slammed him for this outright, bald-faced LIE. Didn't happen. It was so obviously dishonest that anyone remotely familiar with the run-up to the war knows that UNMOVIC was all in Iraq from 12/2002-3/2003.

[channonc 466]

Also, I remember Powell, Rumsfeld, and Bush all saying that we knew exactly where these weapons were and that the only way to retrieve them was militarily.

I agree that Sadaam had weapons at one time, but its pretty obvious that the Bush team lied when they said they knew exactly where those weapons were.

[Tiger Al 0]

Also, I remember Powell, Rumsfeld, and Bush all saying that we knew exactly where these weapons were and that the only way to retrieve them was militarily.

I agree that Sadaam had weapons at one time, but its pretty obvious that the Bush team lied when they said they knew exactly where those weapons were.

Yep...they were using the so-called "faulty intelligence" to direct UNMOVIC to various locations where they thought, according to the intel, the WMD's were. Remember Powell's little slide show at the UN? UNMOVIC searched those places and found nothing in the way of WMD. We knew all of this before the first tank crossed the border.