Pickens throws the gaunlet down

[Stoneburner]

Another interesting article

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/n...ticles/roane040908.htm

We're supposed to believe he wanted to go to vietnam but was refused? We're supposed to believe the same people who apparently lied about whether he fulfilled his NG requirements?

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Icepick

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: kage69
Smells like a stunt, but regardless I think Kerry should do it with the caveat that he shouldn't let his critics take possession of his memoirs and keepsakes. We've already seen what political opponents and critics will stoop to in order to malign his service.

Speaking of cash induced historical validation, did anyone ever collect that prize money offered for validation that Bush ever set foot on the Alabama base he was transfered to from the TANG? Or has everyone accepted the notion that our chickenhawk in chief went AWOL and they just don't care?

I guess it would just be refreshing to see, just once, Bush fans hold him to the same standard they do Kerry.

But they don't hold Bush remotely to the same standard. The Swiftboaters malign Kerry's medals - which Kerry had no control over the awarding of. In other words, the Swiftboaters are saying that Kerry's superiors overstated his heroism, as if that's a slam against Kerry. No one disputes that Kerry was regularly in harms way during the Viet Nam war.

But the issue with Bush is whether he even bothered to show up for his totally risk-free stateside service.

How can anyone remotely compare the records of the two?

I will say this much. You can bash the Republicans in the current administration all you want but, they DO have some genius political tacticians. I mean they took a decorated military veteran with time served overseas in a combat zone and convinced voters that he was a traitor.

All this while glossing over the fact that the Republican candidate went out of his way to avoid combat and was given a choice position in the Air National guard stateside. To add insult to injury he showed up to work drunk at times and even failed to report on several occasions while the superiors looked the other way. They actually convinced some that he was the real hero. :roll:

Quoted for truth!

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
We're supposed to believe he wanted to go to vietnam but was refused? We're supposed to believe the same people who apparently lied about whether he fulfilled his NG requirements?

If you have proof and evidence to support your ludicrous claims, put them up. Otherwise, you're just another Dan Rather, perhaps with even less credibility. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
We're supposed to believe he wanted to go to vietnam but was refused? We're supposed to believe the same people who apparently lied about whether he fulfilled his NG requirements?

If you have proof and evidence to support your ludicrous claims, put them up. Otherwise, you're just another Dan Rather, perhaps with even less credibility. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

Which is still more than what you have.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
We're supposed to believe he wanted to go to vietnam but was refused? We're supposed to believe the same people who apparently lied about whether he fulfilled his NG requirements?

If you have proof and evidence to support your ludicrous claims, put them up. Otherwise, you're just another Dan Rather, perhaps with even less credibility. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

I'm supposed to prove your evidence is wrong or you are supposed to prove your evidence is correct? Intelligence is the threshold issue before we get to credibility.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
We're supposed to believe he wanted to go to vietnam but was refused? We're supposed to believe the same people who apparently lied about whether he fulfilled his NG requirements?

If you have proof and evidence to support your ludicrous claims, put them up. Otherwise, you're just another Dan Rather, perhaps with even less credibility. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

Dan Rather has plenty of credibility, though, more than any of the right-wing media figures.

Even his most famous controversy for decades, the bizarre street encounter with 'What's the frequency, Kenneth?' was eventualy vindicatd as having happened just as he said.

The worst the right could say was that he'd been too mean to their candidates on a couple of occasions, such as when Nixon's attempt to be snide backfired.

The mistakes Rather made in the National Guard story are minor. Journalists are always subject to being misled by an orchestrated effort - show me one who has no mistakes.

No, the credibitility of Pabster is the real problem here. Of course, by his distorted approach, Rather is the problem, as are any who are accurate.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Dan Rather has plenty of credibility, though, more than any of the right-wing media figures.

Oh, yeah. He's right up there on the Credibility Hot List with the likes of Nixon. :laugh:

The mistakes Rather made in the National Guard story are minor. Journalists are always subject to being misled by an orchestrated effort - show me one who has no mistakes.

ROFL. You call presenting forged documents as fact a "minor" mistake?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
Dan Rather has plenty of credibility, though, more than any of the right-wing media figures.

Oh, yeah. He's right up there on the Credibility Hot List with the likes of Nixon. :laugh:

You can call names, but that's not proving anything but how little you can prove.

The mistakes Rather made in the National Guard story are minor. Journalists are always subject to being misled by an orchestrated effort - show me one who has no mistakes.

ROFL. You call presenting forged documents as fact a "minor" mistake?

I call doing a story filled with solid evidence, with one part of that evidence being documents that had a lot things supporting their accuracy, such that even the multi-million dollar investigation headed by a republican concluded that it was unable to say for sure whether the documents were fake, and when the secretary familiar with the views of the man who was the purported author of the documents says they are entirely accurate in reflecting his views, that yes, that's a relatively minor error.

The larger error by far is your ignoring the bulk of the story with solid evidence, including the evidence that the *contents* of the memos was accurate.

Of course, I can go look back at your many threads critizing actual misdeeds by right-wing reporters - say, Jeff Gannon - to see you are fair. Oh, wait, you haven't.

You're just parroting the right-wing blather on Rather.

 

[Stoneburner]

Pabster, the U.S. govt used forged documents as part of their claim against Iraq.

What an unbelievably stupid thing to say.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
So you assumed I was saying you thought the article was false even though I asked you to read it? Are you honestly this stupid?

IF I say, "read the article and tell me where you think it's wrong" how does that presuppose you've read it unless you already have a particular viewpoint about something you haven't read.... Oh I understand now

reading is fundamental. And please dont' claim that "false" "incorrect," and "wrong" are not interchangeable. Not only is that untrue, it'll be a new low for your weaseling ways.

Again, I asked you to read something because it was clear you hadn't read it, and then I asked you to tell me where it was false. How you take that to mean I was claiming you thought it was false without reading is typically idiotic of you .

Lastly, you still have to tell me where I made an assertion requiring affirmative evidence in this thread. Either address this in your next post OR admit you were wrong. You brought up burdens of proof, now it's time to show you know what' you're talking about. Maybe if you understood when the burden is placed on whom, this thread wouldn't be filled with me trying to educate you.

You must be on drugs. That's the only possible explanation for your complete and total idiocy in this thread and in this forum in general.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
The swiftboat thing has already been investigated pretty thoroughly. Nightline did an interesting piece where they went to Vietnam and talked to the Vietnamese that were there that day, and they pretty much blew the Swift Boat guys out of the water. Their stories conflict with official record, they conflict with each other, and a good number of them weren't even present at the actual event. It's fairly safe to say that they're full of shit.

This isn't to say that military medals don't get embellished on the paperwork or anything, hell when I look at the awards I got I hardly recognize myself sometimes. All in all though there's just too many sources from too many different places that coroborate Kerry's version of events to sincerely doubt his version is pretty close to the truth.

I'm sure the "Vietnamese that were there" have their own agendas as well.

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Sadly, if everything the swiftboaters said about Kerry were true, he would still have vastly outshone Bush as a President. It might be the difference, say, between a bum and a worthless piece of slime.

Yay! Only took 2 posts to start bashing Bush!

That's the only way liberals can get back at more logical people. They bash most illogically, the most illogical person who was least involved with the conversations. Liberals: illogical.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Pabster, the U.S. govt used forged documents as part of their claim against Iraq.

What an unbelievably stupid thing to say.

Please show me these "forged" documents.

 

[Stoneburner]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery

Have a pleasant evening.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

You must be on drugs. That's the only possible explanation for your complete and total idiocy in this thread and in this forum in general.

What's your excuse? Genetics and old age? There's something so amusing about somebody who's painfully stupid but doesn't realize it. There's also something amusing about you reading the previous statement and instantly wanting to remark how it's applicable to myself.

TastesLikeChicken, invoking the "i'm rubber you're glue" defense since 1934.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery

Have a pleasant evening.

You're such a hack :laugh:

First of all, you might want to note the 2 warnings at the top of that Wiki entry. It is full of crud.

Secondly, you are saying that we relied on knowingly false documents as our reasoning to go in to Iraq, and forged documents alone. All of which is inaccurate, misleading, and the usual bullshit from you.

Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery

Have a pleasant evening.

You're such a hack :laugh:

First of all, you might want to note the 2 warnings at the top of that Wiki entry. It is full of crud.

Secondly, you are saying that we relied on knowingly false documents as our reasoning to go in to Iraq, and forged documents alone. All of which is inaccurate, misleading, and the usual bullshit from you.

Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

So Pabs denies the Niger yellowcake letter was a forgery.

How about the aluminum tubes, Pabs?

The mobile biological weapons labs?

So the person who exposed the BS about Niger uranium is a liar and his wife is a whore.

You are losing it, Pabs.

You need a break. Go get your 'holiday swerve' on. . . .

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery

Have a pleasant evening.

You're such a hack :laugh:

First of all, you might want to note the 2 warnings at the top of that Wiki entry. It is full of crud.

Secondly, you are saying that we relied on knowingly false documents as our reasoning to go in to Iraq, and forged documents alone. All of which is inaccurate, misleading, and the usual bullshit from you.

Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

Fine, go read the 1 percent doctrine by ron suskind you clown. IF you weren't such a bull milking idiot you'd know about the niger forgeries.

And, my retarded friend, are you claiming dan rather KNOWINGLY used forged documents ?

So there we have it. YOu attack dan rather for using forged documents, but you defend bush for it. You are functionally brain dead, pabster.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

Wilson is a liar and Plame is a whore because they exposed this Administration of being decietful...hmm interesting concept. I guess George Washington was a liar and Audy Murphy was a coward according to your logic.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

Both halves of your statement are bullshit. Unless you can prove Valerie Plame is a whore, that part of your bullshit is libel, as well.

You as much a liar and a pathetic a loser as your TRAITOR IN CHIEF and his criminal cabal. :roll:

And getting back to the topic and speaking of losers and liars, Pickens is no better. First, he makes an unconditional offer to pay $1 million to anyone who could disprove even a single charge of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Then, when Kerry takes him up on it, Pickens backs out of the bet and demands more from Kerry than being able to "disprove even a single charge."

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery

Have a pleasant evening.

You're such a hack :laugh:

First of all, you might want to note the 2 warnings at the top of that Wiki entry. It is full of crud.

Secondly, you are saying that we relied on knowingly false documents as our reasoning to go in to Iraq, and forged documents alone. All of which is inaccurate, misleading, and the usual bullshit from you.

Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

I keep asking you this but I don't get an answer. Can you at least appreciate the irony of you calling people trolls? I just don't believe there is any way you don't know at least in the back of your mind that most of your postings are just that.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery

Have a pleasant evening.

You're such a hack :laugh:

First of all, you might want to note the 2 warnings at the top of that Wiki entry. It is full of crud.

Secondly, you are saying that we relied on knowingly false documents as our reasoning to go in to Iraq, and forged documents alone. All of which is inaccurate, misleading, and the usual bullshit from you.

Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

Stoner doesn't care. He'll throw cold water on everyone elses sources but feels it's perfectly OK to use some schlocked up partisan hackery for his own source and insist it's the final truth. Somehow he doesn't believe the same burden of proof and accuracy he that he demands from others applies to himself. It's hilarious to see and it's typical of his trolling idiocy in here.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Wilson is a liar and Plame is a whore because they exposed this Administration of being decietful...hmm interesting concept. I guess George Washington was a liar and Audy Murphy was a coward according to your logic.

Flame is a whore because while she cried about being "outed" she was happily gracing the cover of Vanity Fair. She's also a liar. Wilson is a proven liar. They both ought to be indicted, but instead they got Libby in their desperation to get someone--anyone-- from this Admin.

Originally posted by: Harvey
Both halves of your statement are bullshit. Unless you can prove Valerie Plame is a whore, that part of your bullshit is libel, as well.

Oh please, Harvey. Flame's one of the biggest attention whores in DC. She's also a liar, as I noted earlier.

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I keep asking you this but I don't get an answer. Can you at least appreciate the irony of you calling people trolls? I just don't believe there is any way you don't know at least in the back of your mind that most of your postings are just that.

Perhaps if you weren't so busy trolling around yourself...

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery

Have a pleasant evening.

You're such a hack :laugh:

First of all, you might want to note the 2 warnings at the top of that Wiki entry. It is full of crud.

Secondly, you are saying that we relied on knowingly false documents as our reasoning to go in to Iraq, and forged documents alone. All of which is inaccurate, misleading, and the usual bullshit from you.

Wilson is a liar, Plame is a whore, and you're nothing but a little troll who pops up from time to time.

Stoner doesn't care. He'll throw cold water on everyone elses sources but feels it's perfectly OK to use some schlocked up partisan hackery for his own source and insist it's the final truth. Somehow he doesn't believe the same burden of proof and accuracy he that he demands from others applies to himself. It's hilarious to see and it's typical of his trolling idiocy in here.

What's wrong with my source? I'll never understand this childish fascination you have with creating equivalence everywhere. Just because I point out your sources are biased or incorrect does not mean you should try to do the same UNLESS the same circumstances exist. As for this particular claim, it's fairly well known enough that you and pabster should have heard of it. In fact, why don't you confirm it with him SINCE YOU SAY YOU READ HUBRIS. Yes, Hubris discusses the forged niger documents

Another blatant lie from Chicken.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/...q.documents/index.html


This good enough for your standards pabster? Now will you attack the U.S. govt like you do dan rather?

The only thing consistent about you is your stupidity.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Wilson is a liar and Plame is a whore because they exposed this Administration of being decietful...hmm interesting concept. I guess George Washington was a liar and Audy Murphy was a coward according to your logic.

Flame is a whore because while she cried about being "outed" she was happily gracing the cover of Vanity Fair. She's also a liar. Wilson is a proven liar. They both ought to be indicted, but instead they got Libby in their desperation to get someone--anyone-- from this Admin.

Wow :shocked::roll:

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Oh please, Harvey. Flame's one of the biggest attention whores in DC. She's also a liar, as I noted earlier.

First, you called her a whore with no qualifications. Now, you're weaseling away from that and slinking down to "attention whore." You have yet to prove either is true, and you have yet to prove that Joseph Wilson lied.

The only liars in this thread are pathetic Bushwhacko sycophant hacks like YOU. :roll: