Sunday, September 05, 2004

Associated Press Investigates Bush's National Guard File Missing Records



So the GOP attack mongrels believe it's okay to challenge the actual government records of Kerry's military service (service he volunteered for while a senior at Yale) but it's not okay to question the missing National Guard records concerning Bush being AWOL. His dad got him in ahead of thousands of other Texans on a waiting list into the Texas National Guard's elite rich-boy "Champagne Squad" while Congressman Bush was voting to send Texans and other Americans to war.

http://www.gregpalast.com/images/TrailerClips.mov

Excerpt of Ben Barnes on getting Bush into the National Guard - UNEDITED VIDEO:

http://69.59.167.160/

http://cgi.elpasotimes.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&topic=43&forum=Election_talk

Kerry and Bush's timeline concerning service and sacrifice for the nation:

http://www.independent-media.tv/itemprint.cfm?fmedia_id=7073&fcategory_desc=The%20Zero%20and%20The%20Hero


If thousands of Americans weren't dying or being wounded and maimed at the time in Vietnam (or winning medals for bravery like John Kerry) investigating Bush's skipping out on the Guard might not mean much. The Associated Press is looking into the details:

Bush's National Guard File Missing Records

By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Documents that should have been written to explain gaps in President Bush's Texas Air National Guard service are missing from the military records released about his service in 1972 and 1973, according to regulations and outside experts.

For example, Air National Guard regulations at the time required commanders to write an investigative report for the Air Force when Bush missed his annual medical exam in 1972. The regulations also required commanders to confirm in writing that Bush received counseling after missing five months of drills.

No such records have been made public and the government told The Associated Press in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that it has released all records it can find.

Outside experts suggest that National Guard commanders may not have produced documentation required by their own regulations.

"One of the downfalls back then in the National Guard was that not everyone wanted to be chief of staff of the Air Force. They just wanted to fly or maintain airplanes. So the record keeping could have been better," said retired Maj. Gen. Paul A. Weaver Jr., a former head of the Air National Guard. He said the documents may not have been kept in the first place.

Challenging the government's declaration that no more documents exist, the AP identified five categories of records that should have been generated after Bush skipped his pilot's physical and missed five months of training.

"Each of these actions by any member of the National Guard should have generated the creation of many documents that have yet to be produced," AP lawyer David Schulz wrote the Justice Department Aug. 26.

White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said there were no other documents to explain discrepancies in Bush's files.

Military service during the Vietnam War has become an issue in the presidential election as both candidates debate the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Democrat John Kerry commanded a Navy Swift boat in Vietnam and won five medals, including a Silver Star. But his heroism has been challenged in ads by some veterans who support Bush.

The president served stateside in the Air National Guard during Vietnam. Democrats have accused him of shirking his Guard service and getting favored treatment as the son of a prominent Washington figure.

The AP talked to experts unaffiliated with either campaign who have reviewed Bush's files for missing documents. They said it was not unusual for guard commanders to ignore deficiencies by junior officers such as Bush. But they said missing a physical exam, which caused him to be grounded, was not common.

"It's sort of like a code of honor that you didn't go DNF (duty not including flying)," said retired Air Force Col. Leonard Walls, who flew 181 combat missions over Vietnam. "There was a lot of pride in keeping combat-ready status."

Bush has said he fulfilled all his obligations. He was in the Texas Air National Guard from 1968 to 1973 and was trained to fly F-102 fighters.

"I'm proud of my service," Bush told a rally last weekend in Lima, Ohio.

Records of Bush's service have significant gaps, starting in 1972. Bush has said he left Texas that year to work on the unsuccessful Senate campaign in Alabama of family friend Winton Blount.

The five kinds of missing files are:


_A report from the Texas Air National Guard to Bush's local draft board certifying that Bush remained in good standing. The government has released copies of those DD Form 44 documents for Bush for 1971 and earlier years but not for 1972 or 1973. Records from Bush's draft board in Houston do not show his draft status changed after he joined the guard in 1968. The AP obtained the draft board records Aug. 27 under the Freedom of Information Act.

_Records of a required investigation into why Bush lost flight status. When Bush skipped his 1972 physical, regulations required his Texas commanders to "direct an investigation as to why the individual failed to accomplish the medical examination," according to the Air Force manual at the time. An investigative report was supposed to be forwarded "with the command recommendation" to Air Force officials "for final determination."

Bush's spokesmen have said he skipped the exam because he knew he would be doing desk duty in Alabama. But Bush was required to take the physical by the end of July 1972, more than a month before he won final approval to train in Alabama.

_A written acknowledgment from Bush that he had received the orders grounding him. His Texas commanders were ordered to have Bush sign such a document; but none has been released.

_Reports of formal counseling sessions Bush was required to have after missing more than three training sessions. Bush missed at least five months' worth of National Guard training in 1972. No documents have surfaced indicating Bush was counseled or had written authorization to skip that training or make it up later. Commanders did have broad discretion to allow guardsmen to make up for missed training sessions, said Weaver and Lawrence Korb, Pentagon (news - web sites) personnel chief during the Reagan administration from 1981 to 1985.

"If you missed it, you could make it up," said Korb, who now works for the Center for American Progress, which supports Kerry.

_A signed statement from Bush acknowledging he could be called to active duty if he did not promptly transfer to another guard unit after leaving Texas. The statement was required as part of a Vietnam-era crackdown on no-show guardsmen. Bush was approved in September 1972 to train with the Alabama unit, more than four months after he left Texas.

Bush was approved approval to train in September, October and November 1972 with the Alabama Air National Guard's 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group. The only record tying Bush to that unit is a dental exam at the group's Montgomery base in January 1973. No records have been released giving Bush permission to train with the 187th after November 1972.

Walls, the Air Force combat veteran, was assigned to the 187th in 1972 and 1973 to train its pilots to fly the F-4 Phantom. Walls and more than a dozen other members of the 187th say they never saw Bush. One member of the unit, retired Lt. Col. John Calhoun, has said he remembers Bush showing up for training with the 187th.

Pay records show Bush was credited for training in January, April and May 1973; other files indicate that service was outside Texas.

A May 1973 yearly evaluation from Bush's Texas unit gives the future president no ratings and stated Bush had not been seen at the Texas base since April 1972. In a directive from June 29, 1973, an Air Force personnel official pressed Bush's unit for information about his Alabama service.

"This officer should have been reassigned in May 1972," wrote Master Sgt. Daniel P. Harkness, "since he no longer is training in his AFSC (Air Force Service Category, or job title) or with his unit of assignment."

Then-Maj. Rufus G. Martin replied Nov. 12, 1973: "Not rated for the period 1 May 72 through 30 Apr 73. Report for this period not available for administrative reasons."

By then, Texas Air National Guard officials had approved Bush's request to leave the guard to attend Harvard Business School; his last days of duty were in July 1973.

Friday, September 03, 2004

Feel the Hate

September 3, 2004
NY TIMES OP-ED COLUMNIST
By PAUL KRUGMAN

"I don't know where George Soros gets his money," one man said. "I don't know where - if it comes from overseas or from drug groups or where it comes from." George Soros, another declared, "wants to spend $75 million defeating George W. Bush because Soros wants to legalize heroin." After all, a third said, Mr. Soros "is a self-admitted atheist; he was a Jew who figured out a way to survive the Holocaust."

They aren't LaRouchies - they're Republicans.

The suggestion that Mr. Soros, who has spent billions promoting democracy around the world, is in the pay of drug cartels came from Dennis Hastert, the speaker of the House, whom the Constitution puts two heartbeats from the presidency. After standing by his remarks for several days, Mr. Hastert finally claimed that he was talking about how Mr. Soros spends his money, not where he gets it.

The claim that Mr. Soros's political spending is driven by his desire to legalize heroin came from Newt Gingrich. And the bit about the Holocaust came from Tony Blankley, editorial page editor of The Washington Times, which has become the administration's de facto house organ.

For many months we've been warned by tut-tutting commentators about the evils of irrational "Bush hatred." Pundits eagerly scanned the Democratic convention for the disease; some invented examples when they failed to find it. Then they waited eagerly for outrageous behavior by demonstrators in New York, only to be disappointed again.

There was plenty of hatred in Manhattan, but it was inside, not outside, Madison Square Garden.

Barack Obama, who gave the Democratic keynote address, delivered a message of uplift and hope. Zell Miller, who gave the Republican keynote, declared that political opposition is treason: "Now, at the same time young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrats' manic obsession to bring down our commander in chief." And the crowd roared its approval.

Why are the Republicans so angry? One reason is that they have nothing positive to run on (during the first three days, Mr. Bush was mentioned far less often than John Kerry).

The promised economic boom hasn't materialized, Iraq is a bloody quagmire, and Osama bin Laden has gone from "dead or alive" to he-who-must-not-be-named.

Another reason, I'm sure, is a guilty conscience. At some level the people at that convention know that their designated hero is a man who never in his life took a risk or made a sacrifice for his country, and that they are impugning the patriotism of men who have.

That's why Band-Aids with Purple Hearts on them, mocking Mr. Kerry's war wounds and medals, have been such a hit with conventioneers, and why senior politicians are attracted to wild conspiracy theories about Mr. Soros.

It's also why Mr. Hastert, who knows how little the Bush administration has done to protect New York and help it rebuild, has accused the city of an "unseemly scramble" for cash after 9/11. Nothing makes you hate people as much as knowing in your heart that you are in the wrong and they are in the right.

But the vitriol also reflects the fact that many of the people at that convention, for all their flag-waving, hate America. They want a controlled, monolithic society; they fear and loathe our nation's freedom, diversity and complexity.

The convention opened with an invocation by Sheri Dew, a Mormon publisher and activist. Early rumors were that the invocation would be given by Jerry Falwell, who suggested just after 9/11 that the attack was God's punishment for the activities of the A.C.L.U. and People for the American Way, among others. But Ms. Dew is no more moderate: earlier this year she likened opposition to gay marriage to opposition to Hitler.

The party made sure to put social moderates like Rudy Giuliani in front of the cameras. But in private events, the story was different. For example, Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas told Republicans that we are in a "culture war" and urged a reduction in the separation of church and state.

Mr. Bush, it's now clear, intends to run a campaign based on fear. And for me, at least, it's working: thinking about what these people will do if they solidify their grip on power makes me very, very afraid.

Consistently Inconsistent THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION

September 3, 2004

"I am running for president with a clear and positive plan to build a safer world and a more hopeful America," President Bush said Thursday night. His well-written speech would have been more convincing if he had not actually been president for the last four years.

In 2000, George W. Bush ran for president promising a "humble" foreign policy and warning against ambitions to remake other countries, let alone the world.

On domestic concerns, Bush '04 does sound a lot like Bush '00. The contrast is with what Bush actually did, or didn't do, in the years between. He also sounded a lot like a Democrat. "I am running with a compassionate conservative philosophy," he said, using a term we heard a lot four years ago and not much since, until this week. "Government should help people improve their lives," Bush said, promising to "transform" health insurance, pension plans and worker training, among other things.

Consistency is an undervalued virtue in our political culture: consistency between what you said before and what you say now, between what you say and what you do, between what you say and the truth, even what you say from one sentence to the next. The praise and prizes these days go to skilled self-reinvention for the needs of the moment, also known as spin.

Democrats do it, but Republicans do it better. One night GOP speakers are attack dogs, the next night they're kinder and gentler. Their platform feeds raw meat to the hard right, while their moderates take the stage and fan out to TV interviews, reassuring swing voters that they don't really mean it. Was Franklin D. Roosevelt a Republican? You might think so, given how often his name was invoked. Well, whatever.

The convention's lowest moment may have been New York Gov. George E. Pataki's suggestion that the Clinton administration is to blame for 9/11 because it ignored the evidence and ducked the fight against terrorism. We don't recall Pataki or Bush warning of this danger, if it was so obvious.

Sen. Zell Miller's vile keynote address will be cherished forever by connoisseurs of live-for-the-moment rhetoric. It was, of course, full of technically true lies (John Kerry, as senator, voted to kill various weapons systems — the same ones that Dick Cheney, as secretary of Defense, also tried to kill, and so on). But the speech reached its transcendent moment when this Democratic senator stood before thousands of Republicans baying for the defeat of a Vietnam War veteran by a man who chose to defend Texas instead, after weeks in which attacks by Republicans on Kerry's Vietnam service dominated the news. Miller praised "the American soldier." He condemned those who would allow national security to become an issue in "partisan politics." And Madison Square Garden cheered because he was referring to the Democrats! We guess you had to be there.

Thursday, September 02, 2004

George W. Bush: Words Speak Louder than Actions

Click above and go watch the video of George W. Bush...in his own words. (Once on the website click on the "George W. Bush: Words Speak Louder than Actions")

Bush Leaves Out Complex Facts in Speech



By CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - President Bush's boast of a 30-member-strong coalition in Iraq masked the reality that the United States is bearing the overwhelming share of costs, in lives and troop commitments. And in claiming to have routed most al-Qaida leaders, he did not mention that the big one got away.

Bush's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on Thursday night brought the nation a collection of facts that told only part of the story, hardly unusual for this most political of occasions.

He took some license in telling Americans that Democratic opponent John Kerry "is running on a platform of increasing taxes."

Kerry would, in fact, raise taxes on the richest 2 percent of Americans as part of a plan to keep the Bush tax cuts for everyone else and even cut some of them more. That's not exactly a tax-increase platform.

And on education, Bush voiced an inherent contradiction, dating back to his 2000 campaign, in stating his stout support for local control of education, yet promising to toughen federal standards that override local decision-making.

"We are insisting on accountability, empowering parents and teachers, and making sure that local people are in charge of their schools," he said, on one hand. Yet, "we will require a rigorous exam before graduation."

On Iraq, Bush derided Kerry for devaluing the alliance that drove out Saddam Hussein and is trying to rebuild the country. "Our allies also know the historic importance of our work," Bush said. "About 40 nations stand beside us in Afghanistan, and some 30 in Iraq."

But the United States has more than five times the number of troops in Iraq than all the other countries put together. And, with 976 killed, Americans have suffered nearly eight times more deaths than the other allies combined.

Bush aggressively defended progress in Afghanistan, too. "Today, the government of a free Afghanistan is fighting terror, Pakistan is capturing terrorist leaders ... and more than three-quarters of al-Qaida's key members and associates have been detained or killed. We have led, many have joined, and America and the world are safer."

Nowhere did Bush mention Osama bin Laden, nor did he account for the replacement of killed and captured al al-Qaida leaders by others.

Bush's address wasn't the only one this week that glossed over some realities.

Vice President Dick Cheney, trying to make Kerry look wobbly on defense, implied in his speech that Kerry would wait until the United States is hit by a foe before hitting back. "He declared at the Democratic convention that he will forcefully defend America after we have been attacked," Cheney said.

New York Gov. George Pataki echoed Cheney's line of criticism Thursday night.

Kerry said in his convention speech, "Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response." But he also spoke of pre-emptive action in that address, saying a threat that is "real and imminent" is also a justification for war.

In his keynote address, Sen. Zell Miller attacked Kerry for Senate votes against the Navy F-14D Tomcat fighter and the B-2 bomber — the heart of his case that the Democrat has stood against essential weapons systems.

He ignored the fact that Cheney, as defense secretary, canceled the F-14 and submitted a budget scaling back production of the B-2.

Miller also said Kerry has made it clear he "would use military force only if approved by the U.N.," a stretch of Kerry's position. Kerry told his convention "I will never hesitate to use force when it is required" and "I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security."

Despite Claims, Bush Wavers on Decisiveness


Bush sat seven minutes reading a children's book after being told of an attack on the U.S. then flew all over the U.S. looking shook up at each stop.

By Janet Hook and Edwin Chen Times LA TIMES Staff Writers

NEW YORK — By the time President Bush mounts the podium tonight to accept his party's renomination, few viewers will have missed the Republican National Convention's central message: He is a strong, decisive leader who, unlike Democratic opponent John F. Kerry, steers a steady course through shifting tides of public opinion.

"Some call it stubbornness; I call it principled leadership," former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said this week. "President Bush has the courage of his convictions."

But a review of Bush's first-term record paints a more complex portrait: While he has been bold and unflinching on some issues — especially Iraq and tax policy — on a host of other fronts he has been uncertain, on the sidelines or inconsistent.

While he has advocated overhauling Social Security — a goal that may be impossible to achieve without presidential leadership — he has been vague about exactly how he wants to do it. Although for months the administration expressed doubt about the need for creating a Department of Homeland Security, he now counts it as among his signal accomplishments.

He fought a bill revising the campaign finance system, but signed it rather than using his veto power.

Indeed, he has not yet vetoed any measure — even big spending bills loathed by his conservative supporters. If he keeps up that track record, Bush would be the first president never to wield a veto since James Garfield, who was shot to death after less than a year in office.

"He is much more uneven as a leader than we're hearing this week," said Paul C. Light, a professor in the School of Public Service at New York University. "There are some issues that appear to trigger a determined reaction and others where he doesn't know where he stands or will go with the flow."

By focusing so heavily on the president's decisiveness, the Bush campaign is making his leadership style key to the case for his reelection. That focus dovetails with the GOP attack on Kerry, a senator from Massachusetts, for changing positions on matters such as the war in Iraq, the No Child Left Behind Act education bill and trade policy.

"All I'm asking you to do is tell your friends and neighbors: Be careful of somebody whose position shifts in the wind," Bush said this week at a rally in West Virginia.

Kerry supporters have tried to challenge Bush's claim to being a decisive leader by pointing out inconsistencies — such as his recent statement that, contrary to his earlier assertions, the war on terrorism could not be won. (Bush on Tuesday declared the war winnable, saying of his earlier comment: "I probably needed to be a little more articulate.")

Kerry backers also argue that, however decisive Bush may be, he is leading in the wrong direction.

"Sticking with the wrong policy is not the way to govern," said Phil Singer, a Kerry campaign spokesman. "This isn't decisiveness. This is a failed policy."

Bush campaign officials say that some of Bush's shifting stances have been minor adjustments to account for new conditions and information. "The president has adapted his positions to the circumstances," one senior campaign official said.

Still, Bush's 2002 decision to impose steel tariffs strongly contrasted with the tough language he used during the 2000 presidential campaign to denounce such trade protectionism.

"I will work to end tariffs and break down barriers everywhere entirely, so that the whole world trades in freedom," he said in 1999. But in office, and faced with the economies of politically crucial states battered by foreign steel production, Bush slapped tariffs on imports.

He cast the decision as a response to unfair trading practices by foreign nations, which had caused layoffs and bankruptcies at U.S. steel companies.

"When there are unfair trade practices, this president will act," said White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan. But many free-market conservatives saw it as an act of political opportunism to gain favor with voters in swing states.

Bush lifted the tariffs last December, saying they had "achieved their purpose" of giving the U.S. steel industry time to restructure.

In some instances, Bush has quickly staked out a position and then retreated in the face of strong public sentiment. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, senior administration officials spoke out against creating a separate Cabinet-level department to coordinate domestic security.

"There does not need to be a Cabinet-level office of homeland security," Ari Fleischer (news - web sites), then-White House press secretary, said a month after the Sept. 11 attacks. Seven months after that comment, Tom Ridge, then serving as the president's homeland security advisor, said he would "probably recommend" that Bush veto a bill creating a new department.

But after congressional momentum behind the bill became almost unstoppable, Bush announced in a nationally televised address that he would support creation of a Department of Homeland Security. Ridge ultimately was named to head it.

Bush aides insist that was not a reversal. White House spokesman Dan Bartlett said the White House never opposed the department's creation. Rather, he said, Bush kept his views to himself and a few top aides in order to minimize bureaucratic opposition to such a massive consolidation of federal agencies — a plan that some of the president's Cabinet secretaries might have resisted.

Bush has continued to push for tax cuts, even as the federal budget deficit has burgeoned and some Republicans have grown wary of another tax reduction initiative. And he has been stalwart in pursuing his policies toward Iraq, even as polls have shown public support for the effort has dwindled.

Still, he has revised and retreated from past statements about the U.S. mission in Iraq and the rationale for war. For instance, he has backed away from once-definitive claims about Iraq's stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.

In several domestic policy areas, some of Bush's conservative supporters say, he has not been as decisive as he has been abroad. They were rankled when he did not veto the campaign finance measure. They were disappointed he did not fight an expensive agriculture bill that substantially increased subsidies for farmers.

In last year's debate over a bill that provided prescription drug coverage under Medicare, many conservatives said Bush gave too much ground in the expansion of the program and got too little in return by way of market-oriented reforms.

"Some of us have been frustrated with that," said Rep. Mike Pence (news, bio, voting record) (R-Ind.). "But the president has had such an intensely divided Congress, he doesn't have the votes to be decisive on Capitol Hill."

He also may record his first veto — and shore up his credentials as a fiscal conservative — if Congress passes a pending highway bill that the administration has criticized as too pricey.

On some issues, Bush's leadership has involved putting proposals on the table but, in the view of many, not exercising the muscle needed to push tough issues through Congress.

Early this year, he proposed a revision of immigration law that would have expanded the ranks of legal immigrant workers — a move popular with Latino voters Bush is courting in this year's campaign, but controversial among GOP conservatives. To the disappointment of his allies on the issue, the White House has done little to move the initiative through Congress.

When the Senate this summer debated a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, conservative backers were pleased that Bush was on their side. But the proposal fell far short of passage, and some conservatives complained that he did too little to push it.

Analysts say Bush's uncompromising stance on some issues and his more flexible approach on others is in keeping with a long-standing feature of his leadership style: his tendency to latch on to a handful of goals and pour his political capital into them. But that also has meant that some matters go unattended, such as the passage of a major corporate tax bill.

Inaction on the bill — to replace an export tax credit that has been ruled illegal — threatens to cost the U.S. $4 billion in trade sanctions imposed by the European Union.

"The president has a group of things he considers critically important that he pays a great deal of attention to," said David Hoppe, a former senior Senate Republican leadership aide. "They are not really worried about other issues, and let them go on the back burner."

Los Angeles Times

Saturday, August 28, 2004

Dole Video: "Shame" on Bush Attacks Was Right

For Shame
A leaked video reveals what Bob Dole really thinks about Bush's tactics.
By Chris Suellentrop
Posted Friday, Aug. 27, 2004, at 4:26 PM PT
FROM SLATE.COM

To Play the clip go to: http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2105781&

For pretty much the duration of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth controversy, the Kerry campaign has been trying to demonstrate that the smear campaign being conducted against the Democratic presidential nominee is all the more loathsome because it is part of a pattern of behavior by George W. Bush: the use of front groups to damage his campaign opponents by putting false statements into the political bloodstream. Particularly salient, Democrats believe, is the 2000 campaign conducted against John McCain during the South Carolina primary.

Democrats now have an unlikely ally in their quest to prove that Bush has a history of these kinds of dirty tricks: Bob Dole. No one has done more to lend establishment respectability to the falsehoods being peddled against Kerry than Dole. The former Senate majority leader and 1996 presidential nominee of the Republican Party made several demonstrably false statements about John Kerry's war record this past Sunday on CNN's Late Edition before saying that "not every one of these people can be Republican liars. There's got to be some truth to the charges."

But Dole also made another statement that day, one that hasn't been aired until now. Of McCain's charge to President Bush during a 2000 debate—"You should be ashamed"—Dole told Wolf Blitzer, "He was right." Dole made the remark off-air, while CNN broadcast the Kerry ad called "Old Tricks," the one featuring McCain's 2000 debate remarks. The campaign stopped airing it recently at McCain's request.

Although the remark was made off-air, it wasn't made off-camera. A CNN employee who asked not to be named made a digital file of the raw camera feed from the Late Edition studio. The footage does not include the graphics or other video, such as the McCain ad, that was shown during the live broadcast. "Once the control room punches the ad, it automatically kills the mics in the studio," the CNN employee told me. "He knows he can speak to Wolf and no one will hear him." Slate has posted the video, so you can see Dole's remark for yourself. (Click the image to view the clip.)

Question for Bob Dole: If President Bush should be ashamed of his behavior four years ago, why aren't you ashamed now?

Chris Suellentrop is Slate's deputy Washington bureau chief. You can e-mail him at suellentrop@slate.com.

W's Pampered Life As A Military Deserter


With the Bob Barnes video on the net with his admission of regrets helping Bush get into the National Guard ahead of thousands of others on the list, here's more on the story...



At the time Bush applied to the National Guard, there were 100,000 other young men in line before him, stalled on a crowded waiting list hoping their number would be called before they were sucked up by the draft and dropped onto the killing fields of the Mekong Delta. In Texas alone, there were 500 applicants frantically vying for only four open slots for fighter pilot-training in the Air National Guard.

At first blush, Bush didn't seem to have much of a shot at landing one of those choice positions. First, he flunked his medical test. Then he flunked his dental exam. And finally, as Ian Williams reveals in Deserter, his merciless indictment of Bush's disappearing act in the National Guard, he scores a rock-bottom 25 percent on his pilot aptitude examination. That's one out of four correct answers, a ratio that is not even a credible mark in cluster-bombing class. To put this achievement in perspective, the average score of applicants taking the pilot aptitude test was 77 percent, a whopping fifty-two percentage points higher than the proud product of the Yale ancestral admissions program. More than 95 percent of the testers scored higher than Bush, the Ivy Leaguer.

Aptitude for piloting a fighter jet notwithstanding, on May 27, 1968, just nervy twelve days before the expiration of his student deferment, Bush the Younger was accepted into the Texas Air National Guard. On his application form under the heading "Background Qualifications," Bush declares in a refreshing spurt of honesty "None."

Today the pipsqueak commander-in-chief has exploited the Guard and Army Reserve as a form of covert conscription to beef up troop numbers in Iraq and Afghanistan. But in those days National Guard squadrons were generally not being sent off to the frontlines in Vietnam. But just to be sure, Bush checked the box on his enlistment form saying he was unwilling to do time overseas. That box was a comfy failsafe that is no longer available to young people seduced into signing up as weekend warriors in Bush's National Guard.

Flush with excitement at his triumphal entry into the Air National Guard, Bush averred to one-and-all that he had caught the flight bug. He duly submitted to the Guard brass a "Statement of Intent," pledging that he had "applied for pilot training with the goal of making flying a lifetime pursuit and I believe that I can best accomplish this to my own satisfaction as a member of the Air National Guard as long as possible."

This seems like boilerplate stuff. But it is a crucial document in at least one respect. Getting the dunderheaded Bush air-ready was going to take a lot of training and the Guard wanted to get a guarantee that it would get a minimal return on its investment-if not a special line-item in the appropriations bill, at least commitment from Bush that he would stick around as a pilot for the duration of his commitment, if not beyond. Ian Williams estimates that the Guard spent more than a million dollars training Bush how to fly. Bush was warned that any prolonged absence from the Guard would result in him being ordered to "active duty" for a period of two years.

What the commanders of the Guard may not have known at the time was that in Bush's mind it was either the Guard or Canada. In 1994, the gunshy Bush, who tortured animals as teen-ager, fessed up to the Houston Chronicle that being sent to Vietnam was simply not an option for him: "I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada. So I choose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanesI don't want to play like I was somebody out there marching when I wasn't. It was either Canada or the service. Somebody said the Guard was looking for pilots. All I know is, there weren't that many people trying to be pilots."

As we now know, there were more than 500 people looking to be pilots in Texas alone, nearly all of them more qualified for the slots than Bush.

So how did this miraculous induction come about? Bush has long denied he got any favored treatment, which would seem unmanly. But there's now little doubt that the draft evader benefited from at least three pairs of helping hands: Sid Adger, a Texas oilman and Bush family crony, Ben Barnes, then Speaker of the House in Texas, and Gen. James Rose, former commander of the Texas Air National Guard.

The truth began to trickle out in 1999, when Barnes, then a top lobbyist and political fixer in Austin, became a witness in a lawsuit by Laurence Littwin. Littwin was suing the State of Texas for firing him as lottery directory, which he claimed was politically motivated. The Littwin lawsuit is a complex and confusing affair that provides a glimpse at the baseline of corruption pullulating through the Texas political system.

In sum, Littwin claimed that he was forced to hire a company called GTech to run the Texas lottery in order to suppress the real story of how Bush won entry into the Guard-namely that Ben Barnes had pulled strings with Gen. Rose. In the 1990s, Barnes worked a lobbyist for GTech. Indeed, GTech had paid Barnes $23 million for his expert services.

In his deposition, Barnes denied blackmailing Littwin into giving GTech the lucrative contract. But he confessed, with the haughty sense of accomplishment that only an apex politico can impart, that he had indeed opened the backdoor for Bush into the Air National Guard. Barnes said that he responded to a distress beacon from Bush intimate Sid Adger, a now dead Texas oil tycoon, and prevailed on Gen. Rose to adopt the young Bush as a member of the Guard's flying elite, which then included the war aversive sons of Gov. John Connelly and Sen. Lloyd Bentsen. It helped that Barnes's chief of staff, Nick Kralj, also served as a top aide-de-camp to the general. Mission accomplished.

But the handouts didn't stop there. Bush didn't want to remain a lowly private or corporal in those drab uniforms. He saw himself as officer material. Yet, he had no desire to subject himself to the mental and physical rigors of Officer Candidate School. In his mind, he was a birthright officer. And so it came to be. After a mere six weeks of training, Bush was promoted to the rank 2nd Lieutenant. He didn't even have his pilot's license.

In the wake of this astounding achievement, Bush felt it was time for a breather. He abandoned his training with the Guard for two months, hightailing it to the beaches and bars of Florida, where he claimed to have occasionally lent the services of his agile political mind to the senatorial campaign of rightwing, neo-segregationist congressman Ed Gurney, a favorite of Richard Nixon. Gurney won, but his victory was short lived. Gurney was later indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of political corruption, bribery and perjury. He walked away a free man courtesy of a hung jury.

* * *

After the election, Bush headed for Moody Air Base in Georgia to complete his pilot training with the 3559th Student Squadron. Around Thanksgiving, Bush was once again whisked away from the monotony of life as a fighter-pilot-in-training, this time courtesy of Richard Nixon. The president sent a plane to Moody Air Base to pick up the young Bush so that the newly brevetted lieutenant could escort Nixon's fabulously neurotic (and what progeny of Nixon's wouldn't at least be neurotic?) daughter Tricia out on a date. Sparks didn't fly. The young officer made clumsy advances, which Tricia deftly deflected. She later described Bush as "testy."

And so the days and weeks of Bush's service to the country, as commander-in-chief likes to put it, during the war in Vietnam rolled on. His instructors at the Moody Air Base assigned Bush the task of learning how to fly the F-102, an obsolete fighter soon destined for the scrap heap.

Finally, on June 23, 1971 Bush graduated from combat flight training school. Now he was ready to defend the airspace of Texas from hostile incursions from Mexico, Belize or the Virgin Islands.

Except that George the Younger apparently had formed other plans. Without informing the Guard commanders who had saved him going to Vietnam, Bush quietly applied for admission to study law at the University of Texas. For one of the few times in his life, Bush didn't get immediate gratification.

The flying fratboy's application to the University of Texas law school was ungraciously declined, despite the pleas of his father, who had just lost a fierce senatorial campaign against Lloyd Bentsen. Whatever its faults, apparently the University of Texas isn't prone to handing out legacy admissions to New Haven-born whelps of the political elite. Even in Texas, you have to draw the line somewhere.

Sulking at this unfamiliar rebuke, Bush slunk off to Ellington Air Base near Houston to join the 111th Fighter Squadron. By most accounts, his drinking, already problematic, began to intensify. By other accounts, it was during this time in Ellington that Bush began to refamiliarize himself with his narcotic of choice at Yale...cocaine. In his college days, Bush not only snorted, he dealt. Among the haut monde at Yale, he was known as one of the top purveyors of primo Colombian powder in New Haven, dispensing the crystal snow from ounce bags.

Now we come to the crucial lost years of 1971 and 1973. Shortly after Bush arrived at Ellington, his political ambitions begin to percolate to the surface. He tells the Houston Post that he is considering a run for the Texas state senate. His testing of the waters doesn't excite much interest and nothing comes of it.

So he continues flying, mainly on weekends, over the course of the next year. And he continues getting inebriated. On a trip back to Washington, DC at Christmastime, Bush treats his younger brother to a night cruising the bars of Georgetown. In the early hours of the morning, a shit-faced Bush crashes his car into a row of garbage cans in front of the family house. Roused from his slumbers by the racket outside, his father confronts him in the driveway about driving around drunk. Bush the Younger threatens to pummel his father with his fists, but Marvin, also drunk, intervenes and Bush is sent packing back to Texas.

In April of 1972, two important events coincide. The Air Force mandates drug testing for all pilots during medical exams and Bush takes what will turn out to be his last flight as a pilot for the Air National Guard.

Less than a month later, Bush flees his Texas Guard base for Alabama, where he signs up to work on the congressional campaign of Winton "Red" Blount, a friend of Bush's father and Nixon's postmaster general. He didn't inform his superiors at Ellington that he had left Texas until two weeks later, when he requested a transfer to the 9921st Air Reserve Squadron, a postal unit with no fighter jets. Initially, the transfer is granted.

No one recalls seeing Bush report for duty and there is no documentary record supporting his service there, which, in any event, was to consist primarily of reading flight manuals--an uninviting assignment for the quasi-literate airman. On July 6, Bush is scheduled to take his required flight physical, which will for the first time include a drug test. He fails to show up. Failure to take a flight physical is grounds for immediate suspension of his pilot's license.

These days Bush claims that he simply blew off the physical because the Guard was phasing out the F-102 and he didn't expect to be piloting any more flights. This excuse is circumspect for two reasons. First, although the F-102 was on its way out, the jet had not yet been mothballed and Bush still had the opportunity to learn to fly the new generation of fighter jets. Indeed, there was a fleet of them just down the highway at Dannelly Air Base in Alabama. Moreover, the flight physical was a mandatory requirement of service. This was not a matter of getting a permission slip to play intramural polo at Yale. For most Guardsmen, failure to abide by such orders resulted severe consequences, like being compelled to spend two-years in active duty, perhaps in Vietnam.

On July 31, Bush's transfer to the Montgomery postal unit was overturned by the DC office, which deemed him "ineligible for reassignment to the Air Reserve Squadron. He is ordered to return to Ellington. But Bush doesn't pay any attention. Instead, he retreated to Miami with his father for the 1972 Republican National Convention, the last hurrah of Nixon.

Two weeks later Bush returns to Alabama, where he files a new transfer request, this time to the 187th TAC Recon Group in Mobile. The transfer is approved on September 5, 1972. The following day the Air Force officially revokes his flight privileges for "failure to accomplish annual medical examination."

Bush wasn't alone in losing his wings. The other pilot suspended alongside Bush was none other than his close friend, James M. Bath. Yes, that James Bath, who would in just a few short years become the financial factotum for the Bin Laden family in Texas. In the 1980s, it was Bath, backed by the Bin Laden fortune, who bailed Bush out of the financial ruin he had made of Arbusto Drilling and Harken Energy. Old friends down there are not forgotten.

The de-winged pilot was ordered to report for duty to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, commander of the 187th Recon Group. The Colonel says he never meet Bush and there is no record that junior ever showed up at the base. "Had he reported in, I would have had some recall, and I do not," said Col. Turnipseed. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there. If we had had a first lieutenant from Texas, I would have remembered."

On September 29, Bush was sent a letter commanding him to appear before the Flying Evaluation Board to explain why he had refused to take the medical exam. Bush never responded. At this point, Bush was not only AWOL, but in breach of two direct orders.

Meanwhile, back in Montgomery, Bush had apparently gone AWOL from the Blount campaign as well. He spent his nights carousing in the bars of Montgomery. He would arrive hung-over at the campaign office in the afternoon, prop his cowboy-booted feet on the desk and recount his night of debauchery. The women workers at the campaign headquarters called Bush the "Texas soufflé." Full of himself and stuffed with hot air, the blue-haired ladies for Blount snickered.

Blount lost the election, but remained tight with the Bush clan. His company, Blount International, continues to benefit from it close association with the Bushes and their wars. In 1991, Blount International got a multimillion-dollar contract to reconstruct bombed out Kuwait City. Later, it won one of the largest private contracts ever awarded by the Saudi Royal family. Now, Blount's firm is working as a subcontractor for Halliburton in Iraq.

In the fall of 1972, things began to look grim for the fatuous flyboy from New Haven. The National Guard was on his tail, demanding an explanation for why he had jilted them after they had saved him from Vietnam and had invested a million dollars in teaching him how to fly fighters.

Thanks to the investigations of the intrepid Larry Flynt, we now know that it was in this window of months that Bush apparently got a Houston woman pregnant and gallantly paid for her to have an abortion. It was also in this period that Bush, according to his biographer J.H. Hatfield, was arrested for possession of cocaine. Instead of landing in prison, the judge presiding over the case bent to the pleadings of Bush's father, then US ambassador to the UN, and ordered the young derelict to perform six month's worth of community service at PULL, a center for black youths in urban Houston.

Williams' book Deserter lends circumstantial credence to Hatfield's account and raises even new questions. According to Bush's autobiography (ghostwritten by his political au pair, Karen Hughes), A Charge to Keep, he met former Houston Oiler tight end John White in December of 1972. White, Bush claims, asked him to come work full-time at his Houston youth center, called Project-PULL. Bush, who until this charmed moment had never exhibited the slightest charitable instinct, agreed. He started work at PULL in January of 1973.

Now keep in mind that Bush supposedly already had a job, working for the National Guard. Yet over the next six months there's not one confirmed Bush sighting by his Guard commanders. In the ornithology of the Air National Guard, Bush is the rarest and stealthiest of birds, passing through Guard air space like a ghostly passenger pigeon. Indeed, when his superiors tried to fill out an annual evaluation of Bush's service they are unable to complete the form, writing on May 2, 1973: "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of the report."

A month later, National Guard HQ in Washington sent Texas Guard commanders an official query about Bush. The DC brass instructed the Texas crew to prepare a Form 77a on Bush "so this officer can be rated in the position he held." The Texas Guard, then run by Bush family cronies who now saw themselves implicated in the transgressions of the absconder fratboy, balks at the order. Indeed, they delay filing a response until November 12, 1973, by which time Bush has been honorably discharged from the Guard. Even then the response from the Texas HQ is coy, though ripe with nefarious possibilities: "Not rated for the period 1 May 1972 through 30 April 73. Report for this period unavailable for administrative reasons."

So it seemed that the bureaucratic vise beginning to squeeze young George. Then mysteriously Bush is recorded as having performed 36 days of duty between May and July of 1973. Bush doesn't recall precisely what he did. There are no pay records to confirm his service. No one in the Guard witnessed him on the base. Indeed, Bush couldn't have done the Guard service because by his own admission he was working full-time for John White at PULL-if he'd gone AWOL from that job he might have very well landed in jail. It now seems likely that the entry of those 36 days of service was post-dated by someone in the Texas office not only to protect Bush, but also to shield his retinue of enablers in the high command of the Texas Air National Guard.

In September Bush completed his tour of duty at PULL, applied to grad school, and despite being AWOL from the National Guard from May of 1972 through October of 1973, is granted an honorable discharge.

That fall Bush evacuated to Cambridge, making a soft landing at Harvard Business School, another reliable safehouse for the brattish scions of the ruling class. Fellow students at Harvard remember Bush prancing into lecture halls wearing his uniform. Even then, he had a taste for military cross-dressing, though no one in the Massachusetts National Guard ever recalls the tyro-in-a-jumpsuit showing up for duty at the base--although he did drop by once to have his choppers cleaned gratis by the Guard's dentist.

Whenever Bush plays dress-up, as he does at nearly every photo-op on a military site from the USS Lincoln to torture seminar rooms at Ft. Bragg, he comes off as the missing member of the Village People, which mayy explains his enduring appeal to the latent types manning the controls of the Christian right these days.

In the mid-1990s, as Bush began to plot his run for the White House, the governor and his handlers (Dan Bartlett, Karen Hughes and Karl Rove) realized that Bush's missing years in the Guard might prove problematic. After all, during the 1992 presidential campaign, Bush's father assaulted Clinton for his deft manipulation of Col. Eugene Holmes, the commander of Arkansas's ROTC, to sidestep the draft.

Bush's dilemma was trickier and more unseemly than Clinton's. In order to escape service in Vietnam, he had exploited his family's political connections to secure a choice spot in the Texas Air National Guard, despite failing his pilot aptitude test. Though a blatant act of patronage, Bush was promoted to officer status before he earned his pilot's license and without going to officer training school. He refused to take his mandatory flight physical and also refused to show up for a mandatory evaluation. He went AWOL for a year and a half and then requested and received an early discharge. All this after promising to "serve as long as possible" and to devote himself to a lifetime of high flying...flying planes, that is.

In the offices of the Texas Air Guard there were records documenting Bush's dubious career and exposing the holes in his extravagent version of his military service to the country. The most potentially damning of those documents (Bush's pay records) are now missing. Where did they go?

One intriguing explanation comes from Lt. Col. Bill Burkett, a top aide to Maj. Gen. Daniel James, III, then commander of the Texas Air National Guard. In 1997, Burkett claims he was just outside the open door of Maj. Gen. James's office when the general received a conference call from Joe Allbaugh, Bush's chief of staff, and Dan Bartlett, Bush's communications director. The conversation played out over James's speakerphone, where Burkett claims he overheard Bush's men order James to cleanse Bush's military files. Burkett said he recalled Allbaugh's saying: "We certainly don't want anything that is embarrassing in there."

A few days later, Burkett says that he saw Brig. Gen. John Scribner dispose of Bush's pay and performance records in a 15-gallon metal waste can inside the Texas Air National Guard Musuem. "The files had been gone through over the years," Scribner quipped to Burkett, pointing to the garbage can. "Not as much in here as I thought." Apparently, this was a mop-up operation to make sure that nothing had been missed in previous search-and-destroy raids on Bush's files.

Burkett went public with his recollections in the spring of 2004 during the mini-tempest in the corporate press over Bush's military record sparked by Michael Moore's assertion that the president was a "deserter." The president's praetorian guard went into action, smearing Burkett as a disgruntled malcontent with an ax to grind against Maj. Gen. James, who Bush had elevated to the head of the Air National Guard for the entire country. Although the Burkett story quickly faded, phone records and other documents back up the circumstances of his claims. And Burkett himself hasn't backed down despite the assaults on his character from Bush's political mercenaries. "If President Bush is going to be the first president in over one hundred years that puts himself in a uniform and uses taxpayer's money for a photo opportunity to land on a flight deck and say hooray," Burkett told reporters. "He's put it on the table and we deserve to know." But the press bus had long since pulled away, never to return to the scene of the crime.

Given this vaporous record of service during Vietnam, it takes a perverse kind of hubris for Bush to assail the military careers of a POW (John McCain), a bona fide killing machine (John Kerry) and a triple amputee (Max Cleland). It's the trademark of a pampered bully.

Friday, August 27, 2004

'you should be ashamed'



George Bush is up to his old tricks: shows GOP maverick John McCain telling Bush in 2000 'you should be ashamed' for standing by as a 'fringe veterans group' questioned his patriotism. (AP Photo/John Kerry for President 2004, HO)

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

Bush's Moral Cowardice



With the president descending to the most shameless sort of attack politics to save his presidency, there's an understandable desire on the part of Democrats to reopen every political vulnerability he has that has yet to be fully explored or dissected: his failure to show up for military service in the Texas Air National Guard, personal indiscretions from his 'lost years', insider deals from the various failed companies. All of it.

I have no argument with any of this. I think it makes perfect sense. To pick up on the military language that is now so ubiquitous, I think Democrats need to open up on all fronts.

But fighting fire with fire isn't a compelling message. Nor will getting into a tit-for-tat about what each of these guys was doing in 1969 or 1970 or 1971 win this race for the Democrats.

Look at the wrong direction/right direction poll numbers and you see pretty clearly that the country is looking to fire George W. Bush. The president's only hope is to get the debate on to issues like these, shift the dynamic of the race, and convince voters that, whatever their dissatisfactions with his administration, John Kerry isn't an acceptable alternative.

When this stuff comes down the pike, Kerry has to fight back mercilessly. And he can win those fights. But, fundamentally, every day of this campaign that isn't spent talking about the sluggish economy and the president's debacle in Iraq is a day wasted, a strategic failure for the Kerry campaign.

But Democrats don't have to choose between hard-hitting lines of attack on the president himself and focusing on the main issues that are facing the country today. The most damning attacks turn out to be the most compelling, the most relevant for what the country faces, and the most difficult for the president to combat.

I've said several times over recent days that it is an example of the president's moral cowardice that he has such a long record of having others savage his opponents -- for sins of which he is usually more guilty than they -- and then denying any responsibility for what's happening. It's like the moment captured in that recent Kerry campaign spot where John McCain tells Bush to stand by his attacks or apologize, and the now-president is painfully caught off guard, bereft of the protective phalanx of retainers.

He's not used to having to stand behind what he's done. And when McCain comes at him one on one he's jelly. His life has always been a matter of others doing his dirty work for him, others bailing him out. And in that moment it shows.

The current debate about these two men's military service has put the spotlight on physical courage. But that really is a side issue in this campaign, if we're talking substance. The real issue isn't physical bravery but moral cowardice.

President Bush is an examplar of that quality in spades. And it cuts directly to his failures as president. Forget about thirty years ago, just think about the last three years.

Before proceeding on to that, one other point about the two men's service. On the balance sheet of moral bravery, as opposed to physical bravery, the two men are about as far apart as you can be on Vietnam. On the one hand you have Kerry, who already had doubts about whether we should be fighting in Vietnam before he went, and put his life on the line anyway. On the other hand, you have George W. Bush who supported the war, which means he believed the goal was worth the cost in American lives. Only, not his life. He believed others should go; just not him. It's the story of his life.

That is almost the definition of moral cowardice.

We have a more immediate sense of what physical bravery and cowardice are. In fact, when we speak of bravery and cowardice, the physical variety is almost always what we're talking about. It's whether or not you can charge an enemy position while you're be fired at. It's whether you're immobilized by the fear of death.

Moral cowardice is more complex. A moral coward is someone who lacks the courage to tell the truth, to accept responsibility, to demand accountability, to do what's right when it's not the easy thing to do, to clean up his or her own messes. Perhaps we could say that moral bravery is having both the courage of your convictions as well as the courage of your misdeeds.

As I've been saying here for the last couple days, the issue isn't that Bush ducked service in Vietnam. It's that he tries to smear other people's meritorious service without taking responsibility for what he's doing. He gets other people to do his dirty work for him. Again, that image of McCain calling him on his shameless antics and his look of fear, his look of feeling trapped.

The key for the Kerry campaign to make is that the president's moral cowardice is why we're now bogged down in Iraq. It's a key reason why almost a thousand Americans have died there. President Bush has set the tone for this administration and his moral cowardice permeates it.

Consider only the most obvious examples.

The president didn't think he could convince the public of the merits of his reasons for going to war. So he lied to them. He greatly exaggerated what was thought to be the evidence of weapons of mass destruction and completely manufactured a connection between Iraq and al Qaida. He couldn't get the country behind him on the up-and-up. So he took the easy way out; he took a shortcut; he deceived them. And now the country is paying a terrible price for it.

He and his advisors knew that if they levelled with the public about the costs of war -- in dollars, years, soldiers -- he'd have a very hard time convincing them. So he didn't level with them. He took the easy way out.

The sort of forward planning that would have made a big difference in post-war Iraq was scuttled or attacked because it would make the job of selling the war harder. Those who sounded the alarm had their careers cut short.

Once we were in Iraq and it was clear that we had been wrong about the weapons of mass destruction -- a judgement that's been clear for more than a year -- he wouldn't admit it. And he still hasn't. A year and a half after we invaded Iraq and he still can't level with the American people about this. He still relies on his vice president to try to fool people into thinking Hussein was tied to al Qaida and the 9/11 attacks.

More importantly, once it became clear that the president's plans for post-war Iraq were producing poor results, he refused to shift policy or to reshuffle his team. He refused to demand accountability from his own team because of how it would have reflected on him. He's preferred to continue on with demonstrably failed policies because to do otherwise would be to admit he'd made a mistake and open himself to all the political fall-out that entails. And that's not something he's willing to do.

The stubborn refusal ever to change course, which the president tries to pass off as a sign of leadership or devotion to principle, is actually an example of his cowardice.

For the same reasons, he runs from soldiers' funerals like they were burying victims of the plague -- because it's the easy way out. If there's a problem, he denies it or finds someone else to take the fall for him.

Everyone has these tendencies in their measure. No one is perfect. But they define George W. Bush.

The same sort of moral cowardice that led him to support the Vietnam war but decide it wasn't for him, run companies into the ground and let others pay the bill, play gutter politics but run for the hills when someone asks him to say it to their face, those are the same qualities that led the president to lie the country into war, fail to prepare for the aftermath and then refuse to take responsibility for any of it when the bill started to come due.

That's the argument John Kerry needs to be making. And he needs to make it right now.

-- Josh Marshall

Kerry and the Swift Boat Ads - NY TIMES LETTERS

The New York Times
August 24, 2004
Kerry and the Swift Boat Ads

To the Editor:

Re "Kerry TV Ad Pins Veterans' Attack Firmly on Bush" (front page, Aug. 23):

President Bush is in a lose-lose situation. If he's not behind the attacks on John Kerry's service record in Vietnam, he is not only a commander in chief who took us to war on incorrect information without a plan for peace, but also someone who can't control his own people stateside.

If he is behind the attacks, he has no honor.

Mary T. Ficalora
Agoura Hills, Calif., Aug. 23, 2004



To the Editor:

As the father of a young Marine corporal who gave his life for his country in the Vietnam War, I am sickened by the Republicans' continued attacks on Senator John Kerry's war record.

It is a political ploy to divert attention from their candidate's own weakness by casting aspersions on their opponent's strength. Where was George W. Bush when the bullets were flying over the swamps of the Mekong River and the jungles near Cambodia?

Arthur W. Machen Jr.
Towson, Md., Aug. 23, 2004



To the Editor:

As a former Swift boat officer in Vietnam, and one who served with John Kerry in the rivers of the Mekong Delta, I am appalled at the comments about his military service made by some veterans and nonveterans associated with the Republican Party.

I was one of the Swift boat veterans not interviewed by John E. O'Neill for his book, "Unfit for Command," no doubt because I have positive recollections of Mr. Kerry. During our time in the service together, I found Mr. Kerry to be a brave and honorable man, never refusing an order, always willing to put himself in harm's way to engage the enemy.

By questioning Mr. Kerry's military service, these veterans - and the people backing them - are dishonoring only themselves.

Richard McCann
Chagrin Falls, Ohio, Aug. 21, 2004
The writer is a retired Navy commander.



To the Editor:

John Kerry fought in the war and then returned to try to convince our government to stop the endless and needless bloodshed.

That was an honorable thing to do. Those who criticize him for learning from his experience in the field and then using that experience to help the antiwar effort do a great disservice to those patriots who forced our government to end an unjust war.

Marc J. Osterweil
New Kingston, N.Y., Aug. 22, 2004



To the Editor:

An Aug. 21 news analysis suggests that John Kerry made a strategic error by not promptly rebutting the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's attacks. But might not he have made a principled decision to stick to the high road and to resist efforts to drag his campaign into the mud? More important is why many news outlets reported the Swift boat veterans' allegations as if they were true, or why tapes of veterans "speaking coolly and directly to the camera" found their way into TV news reports.

The real problem is not with Mr. Kerry's decision but with the fact that the press effectively provided free campaign advertising for his attackers. Perhaps hoping to appear balanced, the press has once again failed to investigate and report the facts.

Richard B. Miller
Bloomington, Ind., Aug. 21, 2004
The writer is the director of the Poynter Center for the Study of Ethics and American Institutions, Indiana University.

Saturday, August 21, 2004

Veteran Backs Kerry on Silver Star Account


Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, left, and William B. Rood, right, are shown in this undated photo at the Swift boat base at An Thoi shortly after the action for which Kerry was awarded the Silver Star and Rood was awarded the Bronze Star in early 1969 during his service in Vietnam. Both men are holding weapons captured in the mission. Rood, a night city editor with the Chicago Tribune, who served with Kerry during the Vietnam War as the commander of a Navy swift boat on the 1969 mission ischallenging the attacks on Kerry's account of the incident. (AP Photo/Chicago Tribune, Courtesy William B. Rood)

Sat Aug 21, 9:02 PM ET

CHICAGO - A Chicago Tribune editor who was on the Vietnam mission for which John Kerry received the Silver Star is backing up Kerry's account of the incident.

William Rood, 61, said he decided to break his silence about the Feb. 28, 1969, mission because reports by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are incorrect and darken the reputations of veterans who served with Kerry, according to a report in the Tribune's Sunday editions.

Rood, an editor on the Tribune's metropolitan desk, said the allegations that Kerry's accomplishments were overblown are untrue. Kerry came up with an attack strategy that was praised by their superiors, Rood said.

"The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us," Rood said in a 1,700-word first-person account published in the newspaper. "It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there."...

Click for rest of story on headline above.

Kerry Urges Bush to Demand Attacks Stop



By MARY DALRYMPLE, Associated Press Writer

EAST HAMPTON, N.Y. - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry on Saturday night urged President Bush to "stand up and stop" what he called personal attacks on him over his combat record in Vietnam.

At a fund-raiser attended by about 750 people, Kerry said the attacks by a group of Vietnam veterans and former Swift Boat commanders have intensified "because in the last months they have seen me climbing in America's understanding that I know how to fight a smarter and more effective war" against terrorists.

"That's why they're attacking my credibility. That's why they've personally gone after me. The president needs to stand up and stop that. The president needs to have the courage to talk about it."

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group funded in part by a top GOP donor in Texas, has been running ads featuring veterans who served in Vietnam at the same time as Kerry and question his wartime record.

The White House and the Bush campaign have denied any direct connection with the Swift Boat group. "The president has made it repeatedly clear that he wants to see an end to all" advertising from outside groups, said Brian Jones, a Bush campaign spokesman.

But on Saturday, a former POW, retired Col. Ken Cordier, resigned as a volunteer from the Bush campaign's veterans' steering committee after it was learned that he participated in an anti-Kerry ad sponsored by the Swift Boat group. The ad criticizes Kerry's congressional anti-war testimony in the 1970s alleging U.S. troops engaged in atrocities in Vietnam.

"Col. Cordier did not inform the campaign of his involvement in the advertisement," the Bush campaign said in a statement. "Because of his involvement (with the group) Col. Cordier will no longer participate as a volunteer for Bush-Cheney '04."

Earlier on Saturday, Kerry's campaign released a video comparing the controversy over Kerry's Vietnam service to attacks on John McCain during the 2000 Republican primaries.

The video, sent via e-mail to supporters, says, "George Bush is up to his old tricks" and shows then-Texas Gov. Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) at a debate in February 2000.

McCain, sitting next to Bush, says that when "fringe veterans groups" attacked him at a Bush campaign function, Bush stood by and didn't say a word. McCain says a group of senators wrote Bush a letter that said: "Apologize. You should be ashamed."

McCain, also a Vietnam veteran, says Bush "really went over the line."

"I don't know how you can understand this, George, but that really hurts," McCain says.

The Swift Boat group also was being challenged by a Chicago Tribune editor who was on the Feb. 28, 1969, mission for which Kerry received the Silver Star. William Rood, 61, said he decided to break his silence about the mission because recent reports of Kerry's actions in that battle are incorrect and darken the reputations of veterans who served with Kerry.

"The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us," Rood said in a 1,700-word first-person account published in Sunday's edition of the Tribune. "It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there."

Rood said the allegations that Kerry's accomplishments were overblown are untrue and that Kerry came up with an attack strategy that was praised by their superiors. According to the Tribune, Rood's recollection of what happened that day in South Vietnam was backed by military documents.

Rood wrote that Kerry recently contacted him and other crew members, requesting that they go public with their accounts of what happened.

"I can't pretend those calls (from Kerry) had no effect on me, but that is not why I am writing this," Rood said. "What matters most to me is that this is hurting crewmen who are not public figures and who deserved to be honored for what they did. My intent is to tell the story here and to never again talk publicly about it."

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.

Until now, the Post noted on its Web site, Kerry's version of acting under fire had come from crewmen on his own boat. It quoted Langhofer as saying he was approached by leaders of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth several months ago but declined to join them in speaking against Kerry.

In Roanoke, Va., on Saturday, Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards also called on Bush to end the Swift Boat Veterans ads.

"This is a moment of truth for George W. Bush," Edwards said at a Democratic rally. "We're going to see what kind of man he is and what kind of leader he is. ... We want to hear three words: Stop these ads."

Friday, August 20, 2004

More Republican Ties Behind Swift Boat Vets for Bush

Public records reveal that two of the people in the new "Swift Boat Veterans for Bush" television ad are Republican activists, as the fact sheet below shows. This is just more proof that Bush's Republican allies are the ones behind this disgraceful smear of John Kerry's military record. It's pretty clear what's going on here. It's no wonder the Bush campaign refuses to condemn this smear.

KENNETH CORDIER

PARTISAN: Another Texas Republican Donor

CORDIER, KENNETH
DALLAS,TX 75208
US AIR FORCE/RETIRED COLONEL
3/2/2001
$1,000
Republican Party of Dallas County

CORDIER, KENNETHW MR
DALLAS,TX 75225
SELF EMPLOYED
2/27/2002
$238
RNC/Repub National State Elections Cmte

CORDIER, KENT
DALLAS,TX 75206
RETIRED
6/30/2000
$1,000
Hutchison, Kay Bailey

2001-06-05
REPUBLICAN PARTY OF TEXAS
CORDIER, KEN 1 $100

[followthemoney.org]

PARTISAN: “Despised” LBJ
“The procession ended just before the 1968 presidential election when the United States stopped its bombing campaign. ‘I remember that was the worst day of my life’ because the POWs' treatment worsened and they felt forgotten by their government, Col. Cordier said. He "despised" Lyndon Johnson for his war policies.” [Dallas Morning News, 11/10/03]

PARTISAN: Bush Administration Ties
He is a member of a Bush administration advisory panel on veterans’ issues.
[“VA Announces Membership of POW Advisory Committee,” PR Newswire, 4/17/02; http://www1.va.gov/opa/pressrel/PressArtInternet.cfm?id=440 ]

PARTISAN: Open About His Conservative Political Views
“Col. Cordier (pronounced core-dee-AY) still wears his conservatism on his sleeve and doesn't hold back in his appraisals of more liberal approaches “[Dallas Morning News, 11/10/03]

JUDGEMENT: Defending Abu Ghraib Abuses?
”Inappropriate remarks: Last month, a lone bagpiper marched to the tune of "Amazing Grace" as silence fell over the distinguished guests, choir, color guard and the veterans and families who came to dedicate the Irving Veteran's Memorial Park honoring those who gave "the last full measure of devotion" to their nation. Unfortunately, one of the invested guests, retired Air Force Col. Ken Cordier, a decorated former Vietnam POW and experienced speaker, chose to politicize this solemn event. In an attempt at levity, he defended the pulling of ladies' panties over the faces of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. interrogators at Abu Ghraib as preferable to beheading. His inappropriate, Limbaughistic comments detracted from the reverence and purpose of this event. Richard A. Widener, Irving” [THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 6/13/04]

JUDGEMENT: Said Fellow POW Was “A Traitor”
Talking about POWs who were released early: “According to Cordier, Low ‘is a traitor to the other prisoners of war" for accepting premature release on July 18, 1968.’” [Air Force Times, 11/3/03]

INCONSISTENCY: Doesn’t Remember Kerry Being Invoked In Vietnam
“Cordier, now living in Texas, doesn't recall Kerry's name specifically being used in interrogations, propaganda broadcasts by Hanoi Hannah (Radio Vietnam) or during "attitude checks" -- political indoctrination sessions -- since Kerry was then not a household name. But he said he does remember the North Vietnamese using the so-called Winter Soldier investigations and photographs of war veterans, both real and imposters, throwing military medals over the White House fence.” [UPI, 8/3/04]

PARTISAN: Questioned Normalization Under Clinton And Wished Bush Would Win
“Said he questioned the president's motives and the appropriateness of the visit at this time. He predicts that the next administration, which he presumes will be headed by Texas Gov. George W. Bush, will engage more in "carrot and stick diplomacy" with the Vietnamese government, offering "generous rewards" for concessions” [Dallas Morning News, 11/19/00]

PAUL GALANTI

JUDGEMENT: Wanted To Ban Draft Dodgers From Public Colleges
“A House of Delegates committee yesterday killed a bill sponsored by Del. Warren E. Barry (R-Fairfax) that would have directed Virginia's state colleges not to admit any young man who failed to register for the draft. Barry appeared before the Education Committee along with a former Navy flier, Paul Galanti of Richmond, who had spent seven years as a North Vietnamese prisoner of war, but the panel nonetheless killed his idea for the second year in a row, this time by a vote of 12 to 8.” [Washington Post, 2/5/83]

JUDGEMENT: Called Conservative Christians “Sheep”
"They probably called their little followers. They vote on that one issue. They call them sheep. That's exactly what they are." -Paul Galanti, McCain's Virginia campaign co-chairman, on the backlash by Virginia's conservative Christian voters after McCain's attacks Monday on the Rev. Jerry Falwell and Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson. AP, 2/29/00

JUDGEMENT: Insulting Disabled Vets?
“Life has a way of throwing curve balls and John [Hager] got beaned by one when he acquired polio as an adult and lost the use of his legs. He would have been forgiven for tossing in the towel, drifting over to the VA hospital and spending the rest of his life feeling sorry for himself.” [Richmond Times Dispatch, 6/2/01]

JUDGEMENT: On Critics Of The Vietnam War: “Communist Sympathizers”
“It caused me to question anything I hear from Communists or their many sympathizers or copycats or dupes in America who tended then - and still tend - to distort the truth for their personal gain, or even (gasp) to lie if that will achieve the desired end.” [Richmond Times Dispatch, 6/17/01]

PARTISAN: Carter-Basher
“I had a great final three years in the Navy despite the devastation Carter's policies had wrought on the military. My last Navy year was under one of the finest-ever Commanders-in-Chief, who led the country out of Jimmy Carter's unlamented and self-caused "malaise."” [Richmond Times Dispatch, 6/17/01]

Here's The Connect-The-Dots Picture On Swift Boat Liars' Hate Of Kerry

Helen Thomas

A recent interview with The Progressive...

Why do Bush's press conferences sound so scripted?

Bush has a seating chart and he knows who he is going to call on. He picks the people. He's been told to not call on me because I am going to ask a very tough question, such as, Why are we there? Why are we killing people in their own country? How can we? On what basis? I mean, if you want to go after terrorists, good. But Iraq had nothing to do with it.

This President has not had many press conferences. Do you think the Bush
administration values the opportunity to talk with the press?

Hell, no. He's forced to. It's absolutely necessary because we are there in their face. But he doesn't hold enough news conferences. It's far short of anybody else. And when he appears with a head of state and they try to act like it's a news conference, it's not. He says, "I'll take two questions here and two questions on that side," and there's no follow-up. He gets mad if it is a two-part question. I mean, c'mon. The President of the United States should be able to answer any question, or at least dance around one. At some time, early and often, he should submit to questioning and be held accountable, because if you don't have that then you only have one side of the story. The Presidential news conference is the only forum in our society, the only institution, where a President can be questioned. If a leader is not questioned, he can rule by edict or executive order. He can be a king or a dictator. Who's to challenge him? We're there to pull his chain and to ask the questions that should be asked every day, for every move.

Thursday, August 19, 2004

Letters On Lying Swift Boat Liars

August 20, 2004

Medals, Service and Political Ads (4 Letters)


To the Editor:

Re "Politics as Usual" (editorial, Aug. 19):

The so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are open to criticism on more than one level.

By making accusations of fraud in the matter of John Kerry's medals for valor, particularly during the presidential campaign, not to mention so many decades after the Vietnam conflict, the former military officers making up this organization have opened their motivations to question.

This charge calls into question every medal for valor awarded in Vietnam, perhaps every medal awarded for valor from the Revolutionary War to the present.

By making such ill-timed and specious charges against Senator Kerry, these former Navy officers have sullied George W. Bush's presidency as well. Many will mistakenly believe that President Bush is somehow making this awful slur against Senator Kerry's character by proxy.

Mike Berry
Spring Branch, Tex., Aug. 19, 2004

To the Editor:

Not mentioned in your Aug. 19 editorial is the fact that John Kerry has denounced the MoveOn advertisement about President Bush's military record (news article, Aug. 18).

President Bush, as you did point out, has failed to do likewise with respect to the ad by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Brian Rice
Ann Arbor, Mich., Aug. 19, 2004

To the Editor:

It's both sad and infuriating that you equate the group MoveOn with the disreputable smear tactics of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

It's time that we stop pretending that both sides are "equally responsible" for the degraded state of our politics.

The Republicans have been engaging in personal destruction for years, which included an attempted coup of Bill Clinton's presidency. The reason groups like MoveOn exist at all is for defense against such tactics.

Rick Reil
New York, Aug. 19, 2004

To the Editor:

When all is said and done, John Kerry was in Vietnam and George W. Bush was not.

Irving Fishman
West Milford, N.J., Aug. 19, 2004

Swift Boat LIARS, Everyday A New Whopper



The New York Times
August 20, 2004
Friendly Fire: The Birth of an Anti-Kerry Ad
By KATE ZERNIKE and JIM RUTENBERG

After weeks of taking fire over veterans' accusations that he had lied about his Vietnam service record to win medals and build a political career, Senator John Kerry shot back yesterday, calling those statements categorically false and branding the people behind them tools of the Bush campaign.

His decision to take on the group directly was a measure of how the group that calls itself Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has catapulted itself to the forefront of the presidential campaign. It has advanced its cause in a book, in a television advertisement and on cable news and talk radio shows, all in an attempt to discredit Mr. Kerry's war record, a pillar of his campaign.

How the group came into existence is a story of how veterans with longstanding anger about Mr. Kerry's antiwar statements in the early 1970's allied themselves with Texas Republicans.

Mr. Kerry called them "a front for the Bush campaign" - a charge the campaign denied. [Article, Page A18.]

A series of interviews and a review of documents show a web of connections to the Bush family, high-profile Texas political figures and President Bush's chief political aide, Karl Rove.

Records show that the group received the bulk of its initial financing from two men with ties to the president and his family - one a longtime political associate of Mr. Rove's, the other a trustee of the foundation for Mr. Bush's father's presidential library. A Texas publicist who once helped prepare Mr. Bush's father for his debate when he was running for vice president provided them with strategic advice. And the group's television commercial was produced by the same team that made the devastating ad mocking Michael S. Dukakis in an oversized tank helmet when he and Mr. Bush's father faced off in the 1988 presidential election.

The strategy the veterans devised would ultimately paint John Kerry the war hero as John Kerry the "baby killer" and the fabricator of the events that resulted in his war medals. But on close examination, the accounts of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth' prove to be riddled with inconsistencies. In many cases, material offered as proof by these veterans is undercut by official Navy records and the men's own statements.

Several of those now declaring Mr. Kerry "unfit" had lavished praise on him, some as recently as last year.

In an unpublished interview in March 2003 with Mr. Kerry's authorized biographer, Douglas Brinkley, provided by Mr. Brinkley to The New York Times, Roy F. Hoffmann, a retired rear admiral and a leader of the group, allowed that he had disagreed with Mr. Kerry's antiwar positions but said, "I am not going to say anything negative about him." He added, "He's a good man."

In a profile of the candidate that ran in The Boston Globe in June 2003, Mr. Hoffmann approvingly recalled the actions that led to Mr. Kerry's Silver Star: "It took guts, and I admire that."

George Elliott, one of the Vietnam veterans in the group, flew from his home in Delaware to Boston in 1996 to stand up for Mr. Kerry during a tough re-election fight, declaring at a news conference that the action that won Mr. Kerry a Silver Star was "an act of courage." At that same event, Adrian L. Lonsdale, another Vietnam veteran now speaking out against Mr. Kerry, supported him with a statement about the "bravado and courage of the young officers that ran the Swift boats."

"Senator Kerry was no exception," Mr. Lonsdale told the reporters and cameras assembled at the Charlestown Navy Yard. "He was among the finest of those Swift boat drivers."

Those comments echoed the official record. In an evaluation of Mr. Kerry in 1969, Mr. Elliott, who was one of his commanders, ranked him as "not exceeded" in 11 categories, including moral courage, judgment and decisiveness, and "one of the top few" - the second-highest distinction - in the remaining five. In written comments, he called Mr. Kerry "unsurpassed," "beyond reproach" and "the acknowledged leader in his peer group."

The Admiral Calls

It all began last winter, as Mr. Kerry was wrapping up the Democratic nomination. Mr. Lonsdale received a call at his Massachusetts home from his old commander in Vietnam, Mr. Hoffmann, asking if he had seen the new biography of the man who would be president.

Mr. Hoffmann had commanded the Swift boats during the war from a base in Cam Ranh Bay and advocated a search-and-destroy campaign against the Vietcong - the kind of tactic Mr. Kerry criticized when he was a spokesman for Vietnam Veterans Against the War in 1971. Shortly after leaving the Navy in 1978, he was issued a letter of censure for exercising undue influence on cases in the military justice system.

Both Mr. Hoffmann and Mr. Lonsdale had publicly lauded Mr. Kerry in the past. But the book, Mr. Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," while it burnished Mr. Kerry's reputation, portrayed the two men as reckless leaders whose military approach had led to the deaths of countless sailors and innocent civilians. Several Swift boat veterans compared Mr. Hoffmann to the bloodthirsty colonel in the film "Apocalypse Now" - the one who loves the smell of Napalm in the morning.

The two men were determined to set the record, as they saw it, straight.

"It was the admiral who started it and got the rest of us into it," Mr. Lonsdale said.

Mr. Hoffmann's phone calls led them to Texas and to John E. O'Neill, who at one point commanded the same Swift boat in Vietnam, and whose mission against him dated to 1971, when he had been recruited by the Nixon administration to debate Mr. Kerry on "The Dick Cavett Show."

Mr. O'Neill, who pressed his charges against Mr. Kerry in numerous television appearances Thursday, had spent the 33 years since he debated Mr. Kerry building a successful law practice in Houston, intermingling with some of the state's most powerful Republicans and building an impressive client list. Among the companies he represented was Falcon Seaboard, the energy firm founded by the current lieutenant governor of Texas, David Dewhurst, a central player in the Texas redistricting plan that has positioned state Republicans to win more Congressional seats this fall.

Mr. O'Neill said during one of several interviews that he had come to know two of his biggest donors, Harlan Crow and Bob J. Perry, through longtime social and business contacts.

Mr. Perry, who has given $200,000 to the group, is the top donor to Republicans in the state, according to Texans for Public Justice, a nonpartisan group that tracks political donations. He donated $46,000 to President Bush's campaigns for governor in 1994 and 1998. In the 2002 election, the group said, he donated nearly $4 million to Texas candidates and political committees.

Mr. Rove, Mr. Bush's top political aide, recently said through a spokeswoman that he and Mr. Perry were longtime friends, though he said they had not spoken for at least a year. Mr. Rove and Mr. Perry have been associates since at least 1986, when they both worked on the gubernatorial campaign of Bill Clements.

Mr. O'Neill said he had known Mr. Perry for 30 years. "I've represented many of his friends,'' Mr. O'Neill said. Mr. Perry did not respond to requests for comment.

Mr. O'Neill said he had also known Mr. Crow for 30 years, through mutual friends. Mr. Crow, the seventh-largest donor to Republicans in the state according to the Texans for Public Justice, has donated nowhere near as much money as Mr. Perry to the Swift boat group. His family owns one of the largest diversified commercial real estate companies in the nation, the Trammell Crow Company, and has given money to Mr. Bush and his father throughout their careers. He is listed as a trustee of the George Bush Presidential Library Foundation.

One of his law partners, Margaret Wilson, became Mr. Bush's general counsel when he was governor of Texas and followed him to the White House as deputy counsel for the Department of Commerce, according to her biography on the law firm's Web site.

Another partner, Tex Lezar, ran on the Republican ticket with Mr. Bush in 1994, as lieutenant governor. They were two years apart at Yale, and Mr. Lezar worked for the attorney general's office in the Reagan administration. Mr. Lezar, who died last year, was married to Merrie Spaeth, a powerful public relations executive who has helped coordinate the efforts of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

In 2000, Ms. Spaeth was spokeswoman for a group that ran $2 million worth of ads attacking Senator John McCain's environmental record and lauding Mr. Bush's in crucial states during their fierce primary battle. The group, calling itself Republicans for Clean Air, was founded by a prominent Texas supporter of Mr. Bush, Sam Wyly.

Ms. Spaeth had been a communications official in the Reagan White House, where the president's aides had enough confidence in her to invite her to help prepare George Bush for his vice-presidential debate in 1984. She says she is also a close friend of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, a client of Mr. Rove's. Ms. Spaeth said in an interview that the one time she had ever spoken to Mr. Rove was when Ms. Hutchison was running for the Texas treasurer's office in 1990.

When asked if she had ever visited the White House during Mr. Bush's tenure, Ms. Spaeth initially said that she had been there only once, in 2002, when Kenneth Starr gave her a personal tour. But this week Ms. Spaeth acknowledged that she had spent an hour in the Old Executive Office Building, part of the White House complex, in the spring of 2003, giving Mr. Bush's chief economic adviser, Stephen Friedman, public speaking advice. Asked if it was possible that she had worked with other administration officials, Ms. Spaeth said, "The answer is 'no,' unless you refresh my memory.''

"Is the White House directing this?" Ms. Spaeth said of the organization. "Absolutely not.''

Another participant is the political advertising agency that made the group's television commercial: Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm, based in Alexandria, Va. The agency worked for Senator McCain in 2000 and for Mr. Bush's father in 1988, when it created the "tank" advertisement mocking Mr. Dukakis. A spokesman for the Swift boat veterans said the organization decided to hire the agency after a member saw one of its partners speaking on television.

About 10 veterans met in Ms. Spaeth's office in Dallas in April to share outrage and plot their campaign against Mr. Kerry, she and others said. Mr. Lonsdale, who did not attend, said the meeting had been planned as "an indoctrination session."

What might have been loose impressions about Mr. Kerry began to harden.

"That was an awakening experience," Ms. Spaeth said. "Not just for me, but for many of them who had not heard each other's stories."

The group decided to hire a private investigator to investigate Mr. Brinkley's account of the war - to find "some neutral way of actually questioning people involved in these incidents,'' Mr. O'Neill said.

But the investigator's questions did not seem neutral to some.

Patrick Runyon, who served on a mission with Mr. Kerry, said he initially thought the caller was from a pro-Kerry group, and happily gave a statement about the night Mr. Kerry won his first Purple Heart. The investigator said he would send it to him by e-mail for his signature. Mr. Runyon said the edited version was stripped of all references to enemy combat, making it look like just another night in the Mekong Delta.

"It made it sound like I didn't believe we got any returned fire," he said. "He made it sound like it was a normal operation. It was the scariest night of my life."

By May, the group had the money that Mr. O'Neill had collected as well as additional veterans rallied by Mr. O'Neill, Mr. Hoffmann and others. The expanded group gathered in Washington to record the veterans' stories for a television commercial.

Each veteran's statement was written down as an affidavit and sent to him to sign and have notarized. But the validity of those affidavits soon came into question.

Mr. Elliott, who recommended Mr. Kerry for the Silver Star, had signed one affidavit saying Mr. Kerry "was not forthright" in the statements that had led to the award. Two weeks ago, The Boston Globe quoted him as saying that he felt he should not have signed the affidavit. He then signed a second affidavit that reaffirmed his first, which the Swift Boat Veterans gave to reporters. Mr. Elliott has refused to speak publicly since then.

The Questions

The book outlining the veterans' charges, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against Kerry," has also come under fire. It is published by Regnery, a conservative company that has published numerous books critical of Democrats, and written by Mr. O'Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, who was identified on the book jacket as a Harvard Ph.D. and the author of many books and articles. But Mr. Corsi also acknowledged that he has been a contributor of anti-Catholic, anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic comments to a right-wing Web site. He said he regretted those comments.

The group's arguments have foundered on other contradictions. In the television commercial, Dr. Louis Letson looks into the camera and declares, "I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury." Dr. Letson does not dispute the wound - a piece of shrapnel above Mr. Kerry's left elbow - but he and others in the group argue that it was minor and self-inflicted.

Yet Dr. Letson's name does not appear on any of the medical records for Mr. Kerry. Under "person administering treatment" for the injury, the form is signed by a medic, J. C. Carreon, who died several years ago. Dr. Letson said it was common for medics to treat sailors with the kind of injury that Mr. Kerry had and to fill out paperwork when doctors did the treatment.

Asked in an interview if there was any way to confirm he had treated Mr. Kerry, Dr. Letson said, "I guess you'll have to take my word for it."

The group also offers the account of William L. Schachte Jr., a retired rear admiral who says in the book that he had been on the small skimmer on which Mr. Kerry was injured that night in December 1968. He contends that Mr. Kerry wounded himself while firing a grenade.

But the two other men who acknowledged that they had been with Mr. Kerry, Bill Zaladonis and Mr. Runyon, say they cannot recall a third crew member. "Me and Bill aren't the smartest, but we can count to three," Mr. Runyon said in an interview. And even Dr. Letson said he had not recalled Mr. Schachte until he had a conversation with another veteran earlier this year and received a subsequent phone call from Mr. Schachte himself.

Mr. Schachte did not return a telephone call, and a spokesman for the group said he would not comment.

The Silver Star was awarded after Mr. Kerry's boat came under heavy fire from shore during a mission in February 1969. According to Navy records, he turned the boat to charge the Vietcong position. An enemy solider sprang from the shore about 10 feet in front of the boat. Mr. Kerry leaped onto the shore, chased the soldier behind a small hut and killed him, seizing a B-40 rocket launcher with a round in the chamber.

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth describes the man Mr. Kerry killed as a solitary wounded teenager "in a loincloth," who may or may not have been armed. They say the charge to the beach was planned the night before and, citing a report from one crew member on a different boat, maintain that the sailors even schemed about who would win which medals.

The group says Mr. Kerry himself wrote the reports that led to the medal. But Mr. Elliott and Mr. Lonsdale, who handled reports going up the line for recognition, have previously said that a medal would be awarded only if there was corroboration from others and that they had thoroughly corroborated the accounts.

"Witness reports were reviewed; battle reports were reviewed," Mr. Lonsdale said at the 1996 news conference, adding, "It was a very complete and carefully orchestrated procedure." In his statements Mr. Elliott described the action that day as "intense" and "unusual."

According to a citation for Mr. Kerry's Bronze Star, a group of Swift boats was leaving the Bay Hap river when several mines detonated, disabling one boat and knocking a soldier named Jim Rassmann overboard. In a hail of enemy fire, Mr. Kerry turned the boat around to pull Mr. Rassmann from the water.

Mr. Rassmann, who says he is a Republican, reappeared during the Iowa caucuses this year to tell his story and support Mr. Kerry, and is widely credited with helping to revive Mr. Kerry's campaign.

But the group says that there was no enemy fire, and that while Mr. Kerry did rescue Mr. Rassmann, the action was what anyone would have expected of a sailor, and hardly heroic. Asked why Mr. Rassmann recalled that he was dodging enemy bullets, a member of the group, Jack Chenoweth, said, "He's lying."

"If that's what we have to say," Mr. Chenoweth added, "that's how it was."

Several veterans insist that Mr. Kerry wrote his own reports, pointing to the initials K. J. W. on one of the reports and saying they are Mr. Kerry's. "What's the W for, I cannot answer," said Larry Thurlow, who said his boat was 50 to 60 yards from Mr. Kerry's. Mr. Kerry's middle initial is F, and a Navy official said the initials refer to the person who had received the report at headquarters, not the author.

A damage report to Mr. Thurlow's boat shows that it received three bullet holes, suggesting enemy fire, and later intelligence reports indicate that one Vietcong was killed in action and five others wounded, reaffirming the presence of an enemy. Mr. Thurlow said the boat was hit the day before. He also received a Bronze Star for the day, a fact left out of "Unfit for Command."

Asked about the award, Mr. Thurlow said that he did not recall what the citation said but that he believed it had commended him for saving the lives of sailors on a boat hit by a mine. If it did mention enemy fire, he said, that was based on Mr. Kerry's false reports. The actual citation, Mr. Thurlow said, was with an ex-wife with whom he no longer has contact, and he declined to authorize the Navy to release a copy. But a copy obtained by The New York Times indicates "enemy small arms," "automatic weapons fire" and "enemy bullets flying about him." The citation was first reported by The Washington Post on Thursday.

Standing Their Ground

As serious questions about its claims have arisen, the group has remained steadfast and adaptable.

This week, as its leaders spoke with reporters, they have focused primarily on the one allegation in the book that Mr. Kerry's campaign has not been able to put to rest: that he was not in Cambodia at Christmas in 1968, as he declared in a statement to the Senate in 1986. Even Mr. Brinkley, who has emerged as a defender of Mr. Kerry, said in an interview that it was unlikely that Mr. Kerry's Swift boat ventured into Cambodia at Christmas, though he said he believed that Mr. Kerry was probably there shortly afterward.

The group said it would introduce a new advertisement against Mr. Kerry on Friday. What drives the veterans, they acknowledge, is less what Mr. Kerry did during his time in Vietnam than what he said after. Their affidavits and their television commercial focus mostly on those antiwar statements. Most members of the group object to his using the word "atrocities" to describe what happened in Vietnam when he returned and became an antiwar activist. And they are offended, they say, by the gall of his running for president as a hero of that war.

"I went to university and was called a baby killer and a murderer because of guys like Kerry and what he was saying," said Van Odell, who appears in the first advertisement, accusing Mr. Kerry of lying to get his Bronze Star. "Not once did I participate in the atrocities he said were happening."

As Mr. Lonsdale explained it: "We won the battle. Kerry went home and lost the war for us.

"He called us rapers and killers and that's not true," he continued. "If he expects our loyalty, we should expect loyalty from him."