Factcheck.org revision on Kerry medals......

[onecitizen]

http://wwwfactcheck.org/miscreports.aspx?docid=240


You might wanna check this out.

on edit: Bad link. Corrected link:

http://www.factcheck.org/MiscReports.aspx?docID=240

[madmax]

1. Link not working n/t

[WLKjr]

2. broke for me too

please fix

n/t

[shraby]

5. Here y'are

The dot was left out between www and factcheck

<http://www.factcheck.org/miscreports.aspx?docid=240>

[AlCzervik]

3. here is the update

Clarification: Kerry's Silver Star citations
08.14.2004

eMail to a friend Printer Friendly Version


 

In an Aug. 9 update we stated that Kerry's citation for the Silver Star made no mention of killing a Viet Cong. In fact, there are three citations, and one of the three does indeed mention the killing.This merely strengthens our conclusion that George Elliott's second affidavit is misleading.  All three citations make clear that Kerry was not  awarded the Silver Star for the reasons Elliott implied. We have amended our article on the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad to reflect this.

Elliott, who was Kerry's commanding officer at the time, now says he believes Kerry shot a Viet Cong in the back, adding:  "Had I known the facts, I would not have recommended Kerry for the Silver Star for simply pursuing and dispatching a single, wounded, fleeing Viet Cong." But the one citation that mentions the killing states that the Viet Cong "fled" and that Kerry "pursued," showing Elliott knew the score when he recommended Kerry for the award 35 years ago. Elliott's affidavit also fails  to note that the Viet Cong's rocket launcher was loaded, posing a lethal threat to Kerry and his men.

Furthermore, all three versions of the citation make clear that the basis for the award was not "simply" for the killing alone, but for repeatedly attacking enemy ambushers.
http://www.factcheck.org/MiscReports.aspx?docID=240

[onecitizen]

6. Thanx CRSer.......

Don't know what's wrong there. Works for me from email but not from this board. Sorry everyone.

What's interesting to me about this is that this clarification is not with their original misleading article. It is over in the right hand side about middle way down. They really want you to see it don't they?

[Piperay]

4. Couldn't get it either. nt

:shrug:

[City Lights]

7. Too bad their revision didn't change their conclusion.

Despite the revision they still conclude there is no way to determine who is telling the truth. :eyes:

[mountainvue]

8. Annenberg Political Fact Check?

As in Walter Annenberg, tricky Dick Nixon's appointee as Ambassador to Great Britain and one of the Ronnie Reagan kitchen cabinet?
No thanks.