Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own version of events.

So quoth the WaPo, in a front-page story (Registration-free link here) about the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" ad. Oops.

In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him.". . .

Last month, Thurlow swore in an affidavit that Kerry was "not under fire" when he fished Lt. James Rassmann out of the water. He described Kerry's Bronze Star citation, which says that all units involved came under "small arms and automatic weapons fire," as "totally fabricated." . .

A document recommending Thurlow for the Bronze Star noted that all his actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire which LTJG THURLOW completely ignored in providing immediate assistance" to the disabled boat and its crew. The citation states that all other units in the flotilla also came under fire.

(my emphasis added.)

Evidently he really did "completely ignore" the "constant enemy small arms fire":

"It's like a Hollywood presentation here, which wasn't the case," Thurlow said last night after being read the full text of his Bronze Star citation. "My personal feeling was always that I got the award for coming to the rescue of the boat that was mined. This casts doubt on anybody's awards. It is sickening and disgusting."

Well, he got that last part right.

Thurlow said he would consider his award "fraudulent" if coming under enemy fire was the basis for it. "I am here to state that we weren't under fire," he said. He speculated that Kerry could have been the source of at least some of the language used in the citation.

Oh, so it's Kerry's fault now! Evil John Kerry snuck into naval records and said laudatory things about me! Shame on him!

In a telephone interview Tuesday evening after he attended a Swift Boat Veterans strategy session in an Arlington hotel, Thurlow said he lost his Bronze Star citation more than 20 years ago. He said he was unwilling to authorize release of his military records because he feared attempts by the Kerry campaign to discredit him and other anti-Kerry veterans.

No, I think he's discrediting his story just fine all by himself.

And don't forget, of course, the other lies in that smear ad:

Two who appear in the ad say Kerry didn't deserve his first purple heart. Louis Letson, a medical officer and Lieutenant Commander, says in the ad that he knows Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because “I treated him for that.” However, medical records provided by the Kerry campaign to FactCheck.org do not list Letson as the “person administering treatment” for Kerry’s injury on December 3, 1968 . The medical officer who signed this sick call report is J.C. Carreon, who is listed as treating Kerry for shrapnel to the left arm.

Not to mention, but the official criteria for the award of a Purple Heart state that:

the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a matter of official record.

So, if Dr. Letson is saying that he treated John Kerry for a wound, but that wound didn't qualify for a Purple Heart, isn't that a direct self-contradiction? Because a wound that requires medical treatment qualifies for a Purple Heart. Go figure.

Bill Clinton said it best, during an appearance on the Daily Show a while back. He said something along the lines of "Democrats do well when people think."

Bingo. That's what critical thinking is about -- examining assumptions rationally, using evidence. It's about examining competing ideas and letting them stand or fall on their merits. It's about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary proof. It's about letting your feelings enter into the decision-making process, but not letting them rule it. That's how you make your decisions -- particularly decisions on such crucial topics as who's going to sit in the most powerful seat in the world for the next four years. Not who has the slickest ad. Not who scares the shit out of you with terror alerts and bogeymen around every corner, while offering buy-American platitudes and duct tape as your only concrete options. Not who gives you a warm, fuzzy, hey-I'd-have-a-beer-with-him feeling.

And, I would submit, it's about waging war on deliberate untruths, the kind that seem to be spewed constantly from the direction of the White House and its minions in the Bush/Cheney campaign and elsewhere.

Josh Marshall:

Unfortunately, lies like this, once uttered, are impossible to counter in their entirety, just as mud thrown against a wall makes a terrible mess even though it doesn't stick. The only way to counter such misdeeds is to shine a light on those cynical and deceitful enough to seek to gain from them. That would be the president and his supporters. But on this front most of the media are content to act as indifferent bystanders to the offense.

Bring the light.

Comments

[bmarkey]

Nicely done, sir. Were I wearing a hat, I would certainly tip it; as it is, I wave my cereal spoon in your direction.