Battle Over Kerry’s Record Continues

Re “Voters Need a Heads Up, Not a Look Back, From Bush, Kerry,” Aug. 23: Ronald Brownstein notes that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have a more “defensible” ad when they take on Sen. John Kerry’s testimony before the Senate in 1971. More defensible, possibly; just as misleading, absolutely.

Whereas Brownstein clearly states that Kerry’s testimony was a compilation of the words from antiwar veterans who claim they committed atrocities during the war in Vietnam, the Swift boat group truncates the quote so it sounds as though the litany of atrocities and accusations comes directly from Kerry’s own Vietnam experiences. This deception needs to be remembered when watching this latest desperate attempt by the right to steer us from the important issues that affect us now and in the future.

Debra L. Haskell

Henderson, Nev.

*

The bile reached the back of my throat and I filled with more and more rage as I read each word of William B. Rood’s Aug. 22 article on his Vietnam combat experience [with Kerry].

Some Republicans who were not there and some who didn’t see any combat at all are questioning Kerry’s service and integrity? Where is the Christian God’s Old Testament retribution when we need it? May President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, et al be voted back to the privileged country club ranches from whence they emerged, and may we find men of honor and integrity to run this country.

William Diaz-Brown

Lomita

*

The Swift boat veterans’ ads exposing Kerry’s lies are being supported by veterans like myself willing to contribute the $10, $20 or $100 it takes to expose the senator’s duplicity. This isn’t about his running for the presidency, but rather his using his status as Vietnam War hero versus the hideous charges he leveled on his fellow veterans upon his return from Vietnam. This is not about politics; it’s about honor.

In 1971, Kerry made blanket charges that his fellow veterans had committed heinous war crimes against the Vietnamese people. As a consequence, the returning troops were labeled “baby killers.” These charges, of course, were not true. Now the senator seeks to use his war record for his own aggrandizement. Well, he can’t do it without opening old wounds. As I stated, this is not about politics -- it’s about honor, our honor.

Allyn Anderson

Van Nuys

*

Picking through Rood’s article, I found a couple of points to comment on: Rood was not on Kerry’s boat but instead he was in the “hooch” searching for enemy personnel when Kerry made his move.

Kerry’s supporters dismiss the Swift boat veterans’ statements because they were not on Kerry’s boat. So Rood is no more credible than John O’Neill using that objection. Petty Officer Jerry Leeds has stated that he would return his medal if it was determined that he didn’t earn it. Former Sen. Bob Dole stated Sunday that Kerry should release his records and make an apology to all men who served in Vietnam. Kerry needs to call off his attack dogs and level with the voters.

Paul D. Westman

Arcadia

*

Re “Kerry Ad Lays Blame on Bush,” Aug. 23: Dole gets it wrong. He takes issue with the fact that Kerry was eligible for an early rotation out of Vietnam on the basis of having received three Purple Hearts for what Dole describes as “superficial wounds.”

Dole certainly knows about combat wounds. But if he wants to take issue with Kerry’s record, he should address his complaint to the entire award system during the war in Vietnam, rather than adding to the chorus of mudslingers attempting to minimize the significance of Kerry’s combat service as compared with Bush’s short stateside stint and Cheney’s manipulation of the deferment system.

The fact is, the Purple Heart is awarded for wounds received in combat. There is no stipulation about the severity of the wound. Dole’s beef should be with the military departments, not with Kerry. Unless, that is, Dole is simply jumping on the partisan bandwagon.

Russell Burgos

Thousand Oaks