crimresearch said:
I'm not getting this...Lambert said that Thurlow was in the water rescuing people and couldn't hear any enemy fire...
"Thurlow was far too distracted with rescue efforts to even realize he was under fire. He was concentrating on trying to save lives."
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040827/ap_on_el_pr/swiftboat_witness_4
Exactly how does that make Thurlow a joke?
From the above links (emphasis mine).
The Navy Times:
"Thurlow’s medal recommendation, for example, says he helped the PCF-3 crew “under constant enemy small arms fire.†That recommendation is signed by George Elliott, another member of the anti-Kerry group.
It lists as the only witness for the incident Robert Eugene Lambert, an enlisted man who was not on Kerry’s boat who also won the Bronze Star that day."
The Nation:
"Three Navy men won Bronze Stars for their actions that day: Kerry, Thurlow, and radarman first class Robert Eugene Lambert, a petty officer in the boat captained by Thurlow. The citation for Lambert's Bronze Star--previously undisclosed but obtained today under the Freedom of Information Act from the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis--repeats the description of the incident included in the citation for Thurlow's Bronze Star: "all units came under small arms and automatic weapons fire from the river banks."
Lambert's citation also notes that Lambert--who assumed command of PCF-51 after Thurlow went to assist another Swift boat damaged by a mine--"directed accurate suppressing fire at the enemy." The citation praises Lambert's "coolness, professionalism and courage under fire."
In an affidavit Thurlow signed last month, he said "no return fire occurred....I never heard a shot." He said to the Post, "I am here to state that we weren't under fire." But the individual citations for Thurlow, Kerry and Lambert each refer to enemy fire.
And the Lambert citation also suggests there was a need for his boat to engage in "suppressing fire."
Asked about the discrepancy between his own account and his citation, Thurlow, who was the senior skipper in the flotilla involved in this engagement, said that Kerry was often able to present his own (presumably self-serving) descriptions of events to superiors. But neither Thurlow nor the Swift Boat group has substantiated this claim.
And did Kerry rig not only his own award recommendation but those of Thurlow and Lambert? In the award recommendation for Thurlow's Bronze Star, Lambert--not Kerry--is listed as the eyewitness. (And Del Sandusky, a crew mate of Kerry, was the eyewitness listed in the award recommendation for Kerry. According to the National Personnel Records Center, Lambert's file no longer contains the award recommendation for his Bronze Star.)"
The Washington Post:
"Even if Kerry did write the March 13 after-action report, it seems unlikely that he would have been the source of the information about "enemy bullets" flying around Thurlow.
The official witness to those events, according to Thurlow's medal recommendation form, was his own leading petty officer, Robert Lambert, who himself won a Bronze Star for "courage under fire" in going to Thurlow's rescue after he fell into the river. Lambert, who lives in California, declined to comment. "
From your link:
Lambert, however, supports the Navy account that says all five swiftboats in the task force "came under small arms and automatic weapon fire from the river banks" when the mine detonated.
"I thought we were under fire, I believed we were under fire," Lambert said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.
"Thurlow was far too distracted with rescue efforts to even realize he was under fire. He was concentrating on trying to save lives."
....
A career military man, Lambert is no fan of Kerry's either. He doesn't like Kerry's post-Vietnam anti-war activity and doesn't plan to vote for him.
"I don't like the man himself," Lambert said, "but I think what happened happened, and he was there."
Thurlow has said that there was no enemy fire that day.
But the official record says otherwise.
Thurlow has said that that the boats received no bullet holes from that day.
But Navy reports from the time contradict this.
Thurlow has said that the only reason his own bronze star recommendation mentions enemy fire is because it was based on John Kerry's after action report.
But Thurlows bronze star citation was based in part on an eyewitness report from a man in Thurlows own boat as mentioned above, who also describes enemy fire.
Your quote from the article mentions Lamberts recollection that Thurlow was too busy saving lives to notice enemy fire. ....?
What does this have to do with Thurlow's unqualified assertion that there was
NO enemy fire that day?
Did Thurlow say that he was unsure? that he was too distracted? that he had doubts? No.
Thurlow has called Kerry a liar, but has presented no evidence to back up his claims. In fact, all available evidence contradicts his claims.
That's why he's a joke.
