Just who in the Kerry campaign are we talking about? And how about a direct quote of the complaint? Does Kerry personally support the complaint? Perhaps with this information, an intellegent response could be formulated.
Rip -- I've never tried to get you banned. Your propensity to cut and paste huge blocks of drivel from least credible of neocon fringe sites make you such an easy target, and the few words of your own you bother to post just sink your credibility further.
It is getting a bit boring and repetitive, though. :roll:
Rip -- Most of my replies to you and other neocons and others usually contain direct links to credible references that address whatever point your think you are making. See my previous post to heartsurgeon in this thread as an example.
Have you ever read any of them? I reject your statement as patently untrue. Your credibility on these forums is shot, but you have only your own words to blame for that. :frown:
It has nothing to do with "wanting." Bush is already a failure.
If you honestly believe winning elections is all that counts, you don't understand anything about the United States of America, and your opinion simply counts for nothing.
:thumbsdown:
:thumbsdown:Harvey, I didn't say that you've tried to get me banned, but others here have.
Do you know who wrote Thrurlow's commendation? That would be interesting to know, wouldn't it? Did you know that 7 of the Swiftboat Vets offered to meet with the Post reporter but were refused?
Kerry should open all of his military records so we can sort this out. Do you not agree?
Do you know who wrote Thrurlow's commendation? That would be interesting to know, wouldn't it? Did you know that 7 of the Swiftboat Vets offered to meet with the Post reporter but were refused?
Kerry should open all of his military records so we can sort this out. Do you not agree?
So this is where all you "died" in the wool right wingers are hiding out at. I wondered why you weren't in the "debate" thread any more. Found a new way to attack an honorable man.
Can you seriously tell me that Bush wouldn't want to ban something that was proven lies? You can't can you. Then this thread is just more of your innuendo and supporting of lies. In other words, business as usual for the right wingers.
I almost feel sorry for you pathetic people.
Can you seriously tell me that Bush wouldn't want to ban something that was proven lies? You can't can you. Then this thread is just more of your innuendo and supporting of lies. In other words, business as usual for the right wingers.
I almost feel sorry for you pathetic people.
Do you know?
I wish I had time to find the links to all the news shows I watched, last night (including some from Fox), but I really have to jam pretty soon. What I did catch:
1. As of last night, no one was able to identify who wrote the "Action Report" for the day.
2. Thurlow's denial notwithstanding, he was the ranking officer of those on the five boats that included Kerry's, so he should/would/could have had some input about the contents of the Action Report.
3. Several other senior naval and intelligence officers stated that Action Reports are typically derived from the reports of as many people as can be found in order to get as complete an idea of what happened as possible. This may have included info from Kerry, his boatmates, other swift boat commanders and their crews.
4. Kerry would not have been given his medals based on reports HE authored. Medal recommendations come from others, including shipmates, like the ones who swear he saved their lives.
5. Thurlow's inference that Kerry had "a plan" to get an early out, or to promote his own future political objectives, by intentionally getting wounded three times is ludicrous. It's pretty hard to get a VC enemy to cooperate in a plan to wound you just a little bit.
When you're in harm's way, survival is as much a matter of luck as anything else. Any one wound occurring in pursuing such "plan" could just as easily result in one way trip home in a box.
I already replied to heartsurgeon's post, above, suggesting the same thing:
The difference is, Harvey, Bush isn't running for president based on his military experience, even if he has records that haven't been released.
Stick to surgery and leave the politics to someone who knows what their talking about. Whether you are willing to admit it or not SBVFTT is in the process of blowing up in Bush's face. I laugh that now you think he should let the issue die.
If you want to release some records, I'd like to see all of Bush's IRS records. All the way back to the S&L days.
Ok, first of all, this is not a BOOK BAN (what's with the caps?). It is a private group (Kerry's not elected yet) ASKING another private group to stop printing alleged lies about them. Now, since it is fairly clear (to me at least) that the Swift Boat veterns are, at the very least, bending the truth, I don't think that's unreasonable. Legality aside, I would think a company would want to avoid representing lies as facts.
It doesn't matter what Bush has or has not done, please tell me what is wrong with the above?
It doesn't matter what Bush has or has not done, please tell me what is wrong with the above?
That's a difference without a distinction. I think it's at least as relevant that the records found, so far, show NO notation that Bush was paid for the time he claims he was on duty and flying. This strongly suggest the chickenhawk who pretends to be a Commander In Chief ducked out of his own paltry military obligation and, if he did, has publically lied to the American people about it. :frown:
If Kerry should make his military records public, then if Bush has any hard evidence he was on duty and flying when he says he was, he should make that public, as well. I haven't heard anything from Kerry saying he would oppose such disclosure. What's more imporatant is that all the official Navy records that have become public all support Kerry's version of the events. So do the statements from those who really served with him, not just in the same war or on another boat upstream. Nothing the NOT SO SWIFT boat liars have said is backed by anything other than Republican money. :roll:
Give it time to let the word get out to the mainstream public and we shall see what the polls say then. Better yet, let's have a debate between them!! Bring it on mofo's, bring it on!!
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
Pft. Allegedly got busted with a hooker bud. The case will be dropped Monday as NOTHING had occured yet. Detroit police are notorious for jumping the gun on Johns simply so they can impound their cars which provides $900-$1000 a peice to the city in fees whether they were actually going to recieve the "services" or not. Happens all the time here.
Next...
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
And Kerry was never running on his military experience until you Repubicans 'informed' us all he was. You (R) brought it up, he has been deflecting the sh!t you (R) have been slinging at him ever since.
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
If you read my post you will see that I said he was not running on any sort of military ticket or platform. The Repugs started in with the smearing and when that happens, of course the strawman you have built has to respond in suit. Of course NOW he is talking about Vietnam because you all made it so. I don't think for one second he would have had his crew at the DNC had his service not already been attacked for several months leading up to it. But that is purely speculation. It would be like Bush touting his TANG service at the RNC. No need for it.
I do find it very telling that now the Repugs can sit back like you are doing and say that HE is the one going on and on about his Vietnam/Medals/Military Service when in fact it is YOU (R) that brought keep bringing into the forefront. How very, very convenient.
I do find it very telling that now the Repugs can sit back like you are doing and say that HE is the one going on and on about his Vietnam/Medals/Military Service when in fact it is YOU (R) that brought keep bringing into the forefront. How very, very convenient.
Kerry's has made his 4 months in Vietnam the centerpiece of his campaign. If he didn't wanted his military record to be scrutinized, he shouldn't have based his electability on it.
So Kerry will "wage this war with the lessons he learned in war" because an independent group of people challenged his medals?
Here is something that might interest you. Watch the "A good american" ad, looks like Kerry was bringing up his vietnam experience during the primaries. SBVFT was formed in April, can't blame it on them, can you?
He also spent much of his primary time bashing John Edwards.
Here is something that might interest you. Watch the "A good american" ad, looks like Kerry was bringing up his vietnam experience during the primaries. SBVFT was formed in April, can't blame it on them, can you?
He also spent much of his primary time bashing John Edwards.
Basically, the demand from the Kerry camp is a prelude to a lawsuit, wherein the publisher can be held liable, too, if they continue to publish stuff they know isn't true. The Kerry legal team needs to formally offer the ultimatum before proceeding...
Slander is verbal, Libel is in print or electronic media- same thing, different delivery method...
The publisher can either put up or shut up now... I'm sure it wouldn't be the first time that a publisher refused to print such scurrilous and defamatory lies...
Slander is verbal, Libel is in print or electronic media- same thing, different delivery method...
The publisher can either put up or shut up now... I'm sure it wouldn't be the first time that a publisher refused to print such scurrilous and defamatory lies...
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
Originally posted by: Harvey
Rip -- I've never tried to get you banned. Your propensity to cut and paste huge blocks of drivel from least credible of neocon fringe sites make you such an easy target, and the few words of your own you bother to post just sink your credibility further.
It is getting a bit boring and repetitive, though. :roll:
I wonder if he was talking about me?
I've never "tried" to get Rip banned, in the sense of contacting mods or the like, but I do think he should be, for his own good and the good of this board, and I have said that in the past. Rip's posts are pretty much wholly worthless - the ones that aren't copy-and-pasted from WorldNetDaily or similarly laughable sources are Rip's own "facts," which are often completely fabricated. As far as I'm concerned he is a pollutant here, and contributes nothing but distraction. On the bright side, he is so lacking in credibility that he has effectively become an advocate for the Democratic party.
Rip, this is a private forum. Free speech doesn't count here. The owners/admins/moderators can (and often do) censor whatever or whomever they see fit.
By that logic half the members of this forum have become advocates for the GOP. Or is being a pollutant a bad thing only if you are right-winged?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 397
Facebook
Twitter