Sunday, September 14, 2008


P W Conservative refused to post my factual blog comment and accused me of hate speech. So if someone states the fact that John McCain wrecked FIVE planes (the first one while he was in training school the second and third ones were also during peace time and one was deemed to be due to his "hot dogging" and created an international incident)...all of this before McCain ever flew in wartime conditions....this is hate speech?

You have to wonder what are the Republicans thinking? They are displaying a double standard. It was perfectly fine to go to extreme links, to "swiftboat" John Kerry's military record, it was acceptable to accuse Max Cleland of not defending America, and it was appropriate to suggest that Iraq vet Tammy Duckworth was connected to Al Jazeera. However, it is hate speech to present facts and question John McCains military record?

John McCain is a Republican politician who promoted his military experience as a reason to vote for him. Therefore it is appropriate to examine McCain's military record. This is made difficult by the fact that John McCain refuses to release his military records. Another double standard....John Kerry released all of his military records when he ran for president. John McCain refuses to release his military records...What is is McCain's military record that he doesn't want the American people to know?

Wow....I guess some Republicans will continue to insist that we march in lock step and never question the fact that John McCain has not released all of his military records as John Kerry did when he ran for the presidency. We should be "silenced" whenever possible and allow the Republican double standard to prevail.



So you be the's the blog post I commented on.
How to save the Government almost $5,000,000.
A president's pension currently is $191,300 per year, until he is 80 years old. Sen. McCain would receive ZERO pension as he would reach 80 at the end of two terms as president. Sen. Obama would be retired for 26 years after two terms and would receive $4,973,800 in pension. Therefore it would certainly make economic c sense to elect McCain in November. How's that for non partisan thinking???

Here's the comment I sent (that was NOT posted..the truth must hurt):
You obviously don't realize that taxpayers paid for FIVE planes that
McCain wrecked in his military while he was in school "training" to be a pilot (how did he graduate? oh yeah his grandfather was a very famous admiral and his daddy was a big time admiral when McCain got accepted into Annapolis and served in the military.
The second and third crashes involved McCain "hotdogging" and wrecking his plane b/c he was flying too low...also caused an international incident b/c of the power lines he took down....and he crashed flying his Navy plane home from an Army Navy game.

The fourth crash was on that aircraft carrier where McCain was hotdogging and then a missile from the plane behind him hit his plane. Allegedly this was not McCain's "fault" it had a variety of factors but McCain was the only person on that aircraft carrier who was whisked away by helicopter....allegedly b/c the crew was very unhappy with McCain.

They still allowed McCain to fly....any other pilot would have been put behind a desk long ago...heck any other pilot would have failed the pilot school....but then there granddaddy and daddy weren't admirals. And the Fifth crash that one was when McCain was actually in a wartime condition and he was shot down. Allegedly McCain admits that he did "push it" so he may have put himself in greater danger than the situation warranted.

And then there's the 100 percent military disability that he has taken for many years while serving in the Senate. McCain does not meet the written military criteria to draw that 100 percent disability....and at the same time McCain votes against bills that really supports our troops.

Me First McCain...what a guy....and he has sure cost the taxpayers a fortune.

P W Conservative did not post my comment and gave this reason for not posting it:
Your comment was deleted because this blog has a strict no-tolerance policy for those who attack our Soldiers and Veterans.
In the future please refrain from hate speech.
Thank You.
September 13, 2008 11:03 PM

I DISAGREE WITH YOUR POST...McCAIN HAS COST US TAXPAYERS LOTS OF MONEY. I also disagree with your censorship of my was NOT hate speech.


Cargosquid said...

Mosquito, what hotdogging was he doing in the carrier incident? Your description of his actions as "hot dogging" makes me suspect the rest of your story. McCain's aircraft was not even started. It was still in place. It wasn't moving. I've seen the video of the USS Forrestal fire. Every sailor in the US Navy watches that film. McCain's plane is involved in the missile strike caused by another plane's malfunction. That was the beginning of the fire.

Please provide sources and details of why the planes crashed, if you actually have that info. If he caused a plane to crash through pilot error, I'd like to see that report. Standard fighter training takes place at low levels. If he hit powerlines, it could be by accident. What "international incident" was caused? With what country?

Cargosquid said...

BTW, did you change the look of the blog? Looks good.

PWConservative said...

ANY negative comments about Veterans will be deleted, Including those about Kerry and Cleland.

Myreen said...

I guess military men have been elevated to the status of saints, beyond criticism, beyond reproach, which means they can get away with anything before their fawning admirers. Consequently, it takes a Veteran such as myself to question McCain's record, which I find, to put it mildly, exaggerated.

Ultimately, everyone who puts an individual on a pedestal secretly wants to see if that person's feet are made of mud anyway. They usually are. So let's see if McCain has mud on his.

Yes, there are some serious, serious questions being asked about McCain, and we will just deal with one tonight, the accusation that he was wet-starting his engine just before the horrific fire took place. Ex-naval officer, ex-NSA officer Wayne Madsen has had this to say in two articles, the oldest one first. Now these are not definitive proofs that McCain started the Forrestal fire, but they certainly raise some BIG questions:

1) November 20, 2007 -- More details emerge on McCain carrier incident

WMR has learned additional details regarding the deadly fire aboard the Navy aircraft carrier, the USS Forrestal, on July 19, 1967 in the Gulf of Tonkin. The additional details point to then-Lieut. Commander John McCain playing more of a role in triggering the fire and explosions than previously reported.

On January 16, 2006, WMR reported that according to a U.S. Navy sailor who was aboard the Forrestal on the fateful day of the fire, "McCain and the Forrestal's skipper, Capt. John K. Beling, were warned about the danger of using M-65 1000-lb. bombs manufactured in 1935, which were deemed too dangerous to use during World War II and, later, on B-52 bombers. The fire from the Zuni misfire resulted in the heavy 1000 pounders being knocked loose from the pylons of McCain's A-4, which were only designed to hold 500-pound bombs." WMR further reported, "The unstable bombs had a 60-second cook-off threshold in a fire situation and this warning was known to both Beling and McCain prior to the disaster."

WMR also cited the potential that McCain's Navy records were used against him by the neocons in control of the Pentagon, "The neo-cons, who have had five years to examine every file within the Department of Defense, have likely accessed documents that could prove embarrassing to McCain, who was on board the USS Forrestal on July 29, 1967, and whose A-4 Skyhawk was struck by an air-to-ground Zuni missile that had misfired from an F-4 Phantom."

WMR has been informed that crewmen aboard the Forrestal have provided additional information about the Forrestal incident. It is believed by many crewmen and those who have investigated the case that McCain deliberately "wet-started" his A-4E to shake up the guy in the plane behind his A-4. "Wet-starts", done either deliberately or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft.

In McCain's case, the "wet-start" apparently "cooked off" and launched the Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that touched off the explosions and massive fire. The F-4 pilot was reportedly killed in the conflagration.

"Wet starting" was apparently a common practice among young "hot-dog" pilots. McCain was quickly transferred to the USS Oriskany (the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred). After the disaster, McCain was shot down over North Vietnam on October 26, 1967.

As WMR previously reported, at the time of the Forrestal disaster, McCain's father, Admiral John McCain, Jr., was Commander-in-Chief of US Naval Forces Europe (CINCUSNAVEUR) and was busy covering up the details of the deadly and pre-meditated June 8, 1967, Israeli attack on the NSA spy ship, the USS Liberty. The fact that both McCains were involved in two incidents just weeks apart that resulted in a total death count of 168 on the Forrestal and the Liberty, with an additional injury count of 234 on both ships (with a number of them later dying from their wounds) with an accompanying classified paper trail inside the Pentagon, may be all that was needed to hold a Sword of Damocles over the head of the "family honor"-oriented McCain by the neocons.

WMR has also been informed by knowledgeable sources, including an ex-Navy A-4 pilot, the "wet-start game" was a common occurrence. However, it is between "very unlikely" and "impossible" for the Forrestal "wet start" to have been accidental. "Wet starts" were later rendered impossible by automated engine controls.


Mac said...

Whoops, we had a guffaw here. First, I didn't know my wife had logged in and by accident her name came up as the author of the above comment. It was I, Mac, who wrote that. Also the comment got cut in half, so here is the second Wayne Madsen Report about McCain and the Forrestal:

September 2, 2008 - Its not only his running mate that is re-inventing history
publication date: Sep 1, 2008
Previous | Next

September 2, 2008 - Its not only his running mate that is re-inventing history

It is not only John McCain's running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who is busy re-inventing her history as a reformer and political maverick. After news that Palin supported pork barrel projects like the infamous Ted Stevens' "bridge to nowhere," McCain's campaign is spinning its own yarn about McCain's involvement in the July 29, 1967 deadly fire aboard the USS Forrestal in the Gulf of Tonkin, off Vietnam.

In a 2008 GOP Convention insert in the Washington Post on August 31, reporter Michael Leahy wrote that the fire on board the Forrestal resulted in McCain suffering from "shrapnel buried in his chest and thighs." The article also states that McCain was transferred to Jacksonville, Florida to recover from his wounds and that rather than remain in Florida to recover from his wounds, he volunteered for service on the USS Oriskany, where he arrived on September 30, 1967. On October 26, 1967, McCain's plane was downed over North Vietnam and he became a prisoner of war for five and a half years.

On November 20, 2007, WMR reported on McCain's Forrestal experience and the account differs greatly from the Post article: "WMR has been informed that crewmen aboard the Forrestal have provided additional information about the Forrestal incident. It is believed by many crewmen and those who have investigated the case that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E to shake up the guy in the plane behind his A-4. 'Wet-starts', done either deliberately or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft. In McCain's case, the 'wet-start' apparently 'cooked off' and launched the Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that touched off the explosions and massive fire. The F-4 pilot was reportedly killed in the conflagration. 'Wet starting' was apparently a common practice among young 'hot-dog' pilots. McCain was quickly transferred to the USS Oriskany (the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred)."

New York Times reporter R. W. Apple. Jr. reported on July 31, 1967, that Captain John K. Beling, the Forrestal's commanding officer, stated: "for some unknown reason, a plane parked near the carrier's island, midway up the 1,045 foot flight deck, experienced an "extreme wet start." This malfunction, comparable to what happens when a cigarette lighter is ignited after having been filled to full, occurs about once a week on attack carriers, but almost never so severely as it did yesterday."

Apple continued in his report on the wet start: "A thick tongue of flame lashed backward from the parked jet, igniting a missile on one of the dozen or so planes parked near the fantail, their engines turning over in readiness for a strike launching scheduled for 11 a.m.

The rocket 'shot across the deck,' Captain Beling said, 'and by a quirk of fate [emphasis added] smashed into a fuel tank under a plane on the port side.'" [The plane, a Skyhawk, the missile hit was McCain's, quite a quirk of fate since it was he who committed the wet start].

Apple concluded that McCain, "leapt from his aircraft, rolled through the flames and spirited to safety moments before bombs began exploding wildly." The Post's Leahy reported: "the fire ignited a bomb beneath the plane [McCain's plane] [and] "McCain had shrapnel buried in his chest and thighs." However, Apple, who was on the Forrestal as the flames were still being extinguished and who spoke to eyewitnesses, said McCain "spirited to safety." No mention was made of McCain being wounded and having to seek convalescence in Florida.

The fire on he Forrestal was the worst disaster on a U.S. carrier since World War II. McCain's father, Admiral John McCain, Jr., was Commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe. The three-officer panel named to investigate the Forrestal disaster was conveniently packed with three naval aviator officers, all lower in rank than Senator McCain's father: Rear Admiral Forsyth Massey, Fleet Air Commander at Quonset Point, Rhode Island; Captain Albert Earnest, Commanding Officer of Naval Air Station Oceania, Virginia; and Captain Martin Stack, Commanding Officer of Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida.

These three officers, not only all junior to McCain's Admiral father but all serving in the same Atlantic theater, concluded that an "electrical surge" caused the Zuni to fire from the wing of the F-4 Phantom striking McCain's A-4 Skyhawk. No mention was made of the "wet start" cited by Captain Beling to the New York Times' reporter R.W. "Johnny" Apple because to mention "wet start" would have implicated Lieut. Commander John McCain, known far and wide as "Johnny Wet Start" for his several "flame thrower" antics on the flight deck.

And there is one more lie that ended up in the Navy's official record of the Forrestal disaster, one that let McCain off the hook and one that is used by his supporters to dispel any notion that McCain's plane and the west start caused the conflagration.

It is said by McCain defenders that his A-4E Skyhawk (No. 416 in the red circle on the right side in the above diagram) was parked with its tail pointed seaward, therefore the "extreme wet start" cited by Captain Beling either did not happen or did not originate from McCain's plane. But what did Beling tell Apple? He stated "for some unknown reason, a plane parked near the carrier's island, midway up the 1,045 foot flight deck, experienced an 'extreme wet start.'"

Forrestal fire caused by "extreme wet start"

As seen in the diagram above, McCain's A-4 is shown no where close to the Forrestal's "island" [lower left] and certainly not near mid-flight deck. And herein lies the dilemma for McCain. Either McCain and his supporters, most of whom never saw, let alone were aboard the Forrestal in July 1967, are lying. Or Captain Beling, the Commanding Officer of the Forrestal, was lying to a top reporter for the New York Times. Of course, the answer is reasonably simple: Beling, who would be held ultimately responsible for what occurred on his ship, had no reason to lie, while McCain, the career-conscious son and grandson of two Navy admirals, had every reason to lie. And the Navy establishment has perpetuated the lie about the Forrestal ever since that fateful day in August 1967 that took 134 lives and injured 161 other crewmen, one of whom confronted McCain at a campaign appearance in 2000 in South Carolina. McCain's reaction to the mere mention of "wet start," according to the Forrestal fire survivor, was that the presidential candidate turned completely ashen.

On June 14, 1969, a "localized fire" broke out on the Forrestal wile undergoing repairs at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard. It was never determined whether any critical evidence, including documents, from the 1967 fire was destroyed, although Captain James Nance, the Forrestal's commander, said operational readiness was not affected. Another fire struck the Forrestal in Portsmouth, Virginia in July 1972. Again, no information was released on any evidence from the 1967 fire being destroyed, but in December Seaman Jeffrey Allison was convicted of setting the July blaze in the Admiral's quarters, a multi-million dollar fire that destroyed computer equipment in combat information center. The Forrestal was decommissioned in 1993.

John McCain has been using his experience as a naval officer as a reason why he should be elected President of the United States. He often uses his "experience and judgment" as his selling points. However, McCain's antics on board the Forrestal with "extreme wet starts" not only made him unworthy then to wear the uniform and wings of a U.S. Navy officer but make him unworthy now to be Commander-in-Chief and President of the United States.

Mosquito said...


Thanks for the compliment about the look of my blog. somehow the other template got messed up so I simply switched templates.

As far as the McCain "hot dogging" on the Forrestal Mac detailed the "wet start" that hot dogging pilots did...and yes McCain was guilty of a wet start right before the missile launched from the plane that McCain "wet started." It is alleged that the wet start did not cause the missile to fire...It is very interesting that after the Forrestal incident the Navy made sure that "wet starts" were extinguished and this type of "hot dogging" was no longer be tolerated however, The allegations persist that the crew felt McCain was at fault and that is supposedly why McCain was quickly put on a helicopter and taken from the ship...

McCain was in flight school he had his first plane wreck while practicing carrier landings. Why in the world did McCain graduate from flight school...he was allegedly "barely passing" before he wrecked his first plane.

His second plane wreck appears to be totally John McCain's fault. Apparently he was "hot dogging" again, flying too low and created an international incident when he ran into power transmission lines and crashed his plane. Why was he allowed to continue flying? IMO this second accident should have ended McCain's flying career. Actually, it is alleged that some Annapolis classmates think McCain would not have graduated Annapolis except for the fact that his Father was an admiral. (Btw, McCain himself admits that he was never a great pilot).

The third wreck was a "flame out" when McCain was returning from an army navy game. The Forrestal was plane wreck number four....but McCain was not flying at the time....but allegedly "hot dogging" on the deck and this may or may not be connected to the chain of events that followed. We won't ever know without the records (which McCain refuses to release to the general public).

McCain was on his 23rd mission (allegedly McCain flew a total of 20 hours over enemy territory) and that is the extent of his "combat" fighting experience. Apparently John McCain received 28 medals for his 20 hours of combat experience.

John McCain then spent 5 1/2 years at the Hanoi Hilton enduring torture for the first 1 1/2 to 2 years.

Cargosquid my sources are the book Nightingale's Song (great book about the Vietnam War era told by "weaving together" the lives of Annapolis graduates--John Poindexter, Jim Webb, Ollie North, John McCain and Robert McFarlane.) The rest I got from was interesting discovering the history that McCain had with families concerned about the MIA issue in Vietnam. There's even a group of Vietnam Vets who are organized against John McCain.

Unfortunately, McCain refuses to release his military records....since John Kerry released his military records when he was running for president I find McCain's lack of transparency disturbing. He also continues to refuse to release his medical records. This leads me to conclude that he must be hiding something.

P W Conservative--I fail to see how any of this is hate speech, why don't you do as I requested and explain how the comment I wrote is a hate speech? If you make an accusation you should be able to back it up.

Mosquito said...

I'm sorry Cargosquid I forgot to include some of the info you requested on the second plane crash the "international incident" that you requested. It occurred in the Spanish part of the Iberian Peninsula.

If you google this stuff you will get lots of info on all of this....

But we will never really know what happened b/c McCain refuses to okay the release of these records to the public....

PWConservative said...

I view negative comments about veterans as hateful and unAmerican and therefore I designate it hate speech.

Mosquito said...

It is appropriate and legitimate to question ALL the candidates who aspire to run for the Presidency.

The military IF it is to function effectively questions their soldiers and sailors. Their personnel are held to a high standard of accountability...or at least they used to before Bush/Cheney. (for example the military is now recruiting folks with felony records which used to be a disqualifier).

So it is necessary IF our country is going to get back to a condition where it can function efficiently and be able to compete in the world to have competent leaders.

PW I bet you would fit in well with McCain's political PR team...they also have an unusual set of standards for viewing the world and explaining topics like sexism, ageism, economic fundamentals, etc...

But questioning is NOT my definition of Hate Speech. Since I have actively worked for years to stop Hate Speech in my environment and my community I have a good understanding of what it is. So I seriously disagree with your perspective.

So Buzz...Buzz....

Lisa Edward said...

This is definitely one of the best articles I have read in this website! Thanks Mate
Mosquito Net in Chennai