John Kerry the war criminal: Unfit to command, part 2

[DanS]

Why would I do it publicly though.. that would only encourage the hippies.

Precisely. See Massachusetts.

[Pekka]

che, true.. But then again I didn't say whose country's conservative I was.. if I said I was conservative as in American style, I'd rank somewhere between Nazi and hooligan in here. Lot of commies in here They hate our country

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Straybow


Have you seen his medical records?[/q]


No, mb, I haven't seen his medical records, nor have you. Kerry has yet to release them.

And which one of us then, is making oracular statements without knowledge of these wounds- where are you getting your information from, direct telepathic feed from Sun Myung Moon?

[Pekka]

DanS, Well, I just think that's another thing like Ned mentioned integrity. I think that once you're a war hero, that fact will never change. You might become a bastard afterwards, sure, but you'd still be a war hero anyway. But if we'd say that's an issue of his integrity, I could agree with that, if the points were good and facts represented were also good, and since they might have already been represented, and good points made, I have no energy to read them through and in fact because I'm not a part of KErry campagn machine, I don't care so much for his integrity debate, he might fail in that or not, I just wanted to say that I think that once someone is a war hero, that it doesn't change.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Are you bragging about it claiming yourself a war hero?

Do you have any prrof yet he isn't? He has a silver star and a bronze star to show as evidence (which are not just handed out to anyone) while you have nothing but the unsubstantiated claims of political enemies. Wow.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap


Do you have any prrof yet he isn't? He has a silver star and a bronze star to show as evidence (which are not just handed out to anyone) while you have nothing but the unsubstantiated claims of political enemies. Wow.

GePap, the Swiftvets are not his "political" enemies.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap, the Swiftvets are not his "political" enemies.

They are now.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

GePap,

Does he more than proudly claim them?

Does he not make an issue of his heroism?

I answered Pekka's question that if he Pekka) was awarded medals fraudulently is it no harm no foul. I added the caveat, in the case of fraudulent medals handed out and THEN bragging about them that does in my mind cheapen the sacrifice of others.

I did not say necessarily that Kerry did so. I do think he bragged and lied/exaggerated (presumably for political gain) but did not come out so far as to say he did not show valor.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned


GePap, the Swiftvets are not his "political" enemies.

Of course they are. I mean, its self-evident they are.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Pekka
And that's exactly why I don't understand this debate. Because the fact reamins, he might be bragging, but he IS running for the president. And yet, he at least went to the country to fight. That's why I see republicans shouldn't try to attack Kerry's military record. They should find more lucrative targets, like attacking his economy plans.

Last time I looked, his platform could be summed up as "everything Bush did was wrong, vote for me". Maybe someone could provide a link if he's actually said anything about his plans.

[Ramo]

http://www.johnkerry.com/plan/

[Joseph]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Personally, I don't understand why anyone who is disgusted with Kerry's wartime record isn't similarly disgusted with Bush's wartime record. It smacks of hypocricy. The truth is, we have two self-serving, New England, Yale Skull n' Bones, bluebloods who have likely lied about their military service. To be deeply offended by one while calling the other honest and forthright is just wrong. Either be offended by both or by neither.

Che you forgot already, they are blood cousin also, this is a family affair.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


35 years later, with precision as to the dimensions of the fragment? Or maybe you treated some chicken**** radioman 2, then later heard later about Kerry and VVAW, then got together with your buddies and talked about that ******* who "betrayed" you all, then you remembered that chicken**** you treated, except now it's become Kerry. Psych studies have documented that sort of memory process for several decades now. It's how human memory works.

Oh, and since when do "training missions" qualify one for the PH? Oh yeah, I forget, Kerry is supposedly the only O2 in history to recommend himself for decorations and then endorse and approve those recommendations. Or his CO must have been so negligent as to not even know that Kerry was on a training mission. Or they were just being nice, because they knew this was a chicken**** officer they wanted to be rid off ASAP, so chicken**** that they assigned two boats to him, rather than put him in some administrative billet or simply transferring him.

So what you get is different stories, decades after the fact, about what they "think" caused the wound, combined with an extremely low probability event for the wound to be caused that way.

People can question Kerry all they want, this just doesn't amount to much of anything.



It depends on the magnitude of the events and the time. When did Kerry make his "seared into my memory" statement? When did the medic make his? Was the identity and nature of wounds of Kerry so significant in this medic's memory as the position of Kerry's boat in his?

Maybe they're both telling the truth, maybe they're both lying, maybe they both believe they're telling the truth but recall (edit - in)accurately. But the presumption and the claim here (by the SB vets and their supporters) is that they have a universal monopoly on the truth, and Kerry is lying pretty much across the board, and anyone who agrees with Kerry is either lying for political reasons or has been persuaded by Kerry to remember things his way.



Why doesn't he just switch the entire campaign to praising George W. Bush and answering any allegations the SB vets make? Why don't the SB vets come up with something more substantial than their collective memories and excuses for why others who were there dispute their versions?

MTG have you ever done something with someone that at time was no big deal. But later that someone becomes someone and you said, Hey I remember him because we did this together 10, 15, 20 years ago. Our mind does work that way sometimes.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Ned
The only way Kerry is going to get out of this is meet the charges head on. Simply saying this a smear orchestrated by Bush is not an answer that anyone but a Democrat will accept.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Ramo
http://www.johnkerry.com/plan/

Thanks for that.