Kerry's Heroism? [Archive] - Firehouse Forums

StoveBolt

08-10-2004, 11:29 PM

Hmm i was always leary about hero's that like to talk about their heroism, being on a fire dept we all knew some heros and they would rather talk about whats for dinner.. is Kerry having trouble with his heroism stories??

In March 1986, Kerry said, during a speech on the Senate floor, that, "I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by the Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared — seared — in me...."

Boston Herald in 1979, "I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas. The absurdity of almost being killed by our own allies in a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real."

More recently, in a profile of Kerry that appeared in the Washington Post in June 2003, Kerry revealed that he kept an old camouflage hat from the war in a secret pocket in his briefcase. "My good luck hat," Kerry told the paper. "Given to me by a CIA guy as we went in for a special mission in Cambodia."

But in excerpts from the upcoming new book "Unfit for Command" first obtained by the Drudge Report, Swift Boat veteran John O'Neill writes:
"Despite the dramatic memories of his Christmas in Cambodia, Kerry’s statements are complete lies. Kerry was never in Cambodia during Christmas 1968, or at all during the Vietnam War ... he was more than fifty miles away from Cambodia."

The charge that Kerry lied about being in Cambodia could be particularly damaging, since at least three of Kerry's "band of brothers" crewmates back up the Swiftvet critics.

Reports O'Neill:
"At least three of the five crewmen on Kerry's boat, Bill Zaldonis, Steven Hatch, and Steve Gardner, deny that they or their boat were ever in Cambodia."

Steve Gardner, who served on board PCF-44 under Kerry's command in December 1968, as well as part of January 1969, says that at the time, in the area in which Kerry and his crew were operating, it was not possible to take a swift boat to Cambodia.

"It was physically, totally, categorically, across-the-board impossible to get into the canal that went to Cambodia with a swift boat," says Gardner. "There were concrete pilings that were put in the water...plus, the Navy kept patrol boats there to make sure nobody went in. When I was on the 44 boat, it was a physical impossibility to take a swift boat into Cambodian waters."

DaSharkie

08-11-2004, 08:56 AM

I am not a Kerry supporter by a LONG shot, but I am getting really ticked off byt two things that keep coming out:

1) Where were these people taht are going after his war record over the past 20 plus years of his political life? It is the same with Clinton (again I was never a big fan of the guy) but where were all of these people and critics of him over the span of his previous 20 plus year political life. I am not saying that they are lying, I just hate it when all of the little dtractors come out after years and years. It weakens their complaints and arguments.

2) I have to wonder about why his war record is touted so much and the same about his medals and awards. He has done little if anything to minimize it. I have never and I mean NEVER seen anyone's purple hearts, Bornze Star, or Silver Star touted so much. The recipients (I refuse to call them "winners" - it is not a competition - are the most humble, quiet, and down to Earth folks you could ever want to meet. They do nothing but minimize what they did in combat and credit those that served with and under them with accomplishing what they did. I have to wonder why Kerry is allowing the DNC, and his own campaign for that matter, to run and use this so much. It weakens the amount of respect I have for the man as a warrrior by touting his wartime accomplishments.

I have a book called "Above and Beyond" about aviation Medal of Honor recipients and they all credit their wingmen and squadron mates for their ability to do what was necessary and think that they are undeserving of the medal and its laurels. They were just a warrior in the right place at the right, time so to speak.

When you look at the difference in comparing Bob Dole's acts in World War II (for which he has lost almost total use of his Right arm) and how Kerry has been and is touting his war record it is like night and day. Two decorated veterans, both injured, one is quiet about his service and the actions that cost him severely physically and emotionally, one is boasting upon the fact that he served and was injured three times, admittedly without losing a single day (not even collectively) of combat time. Look at former President George H. W. Bush: Youngest Naval aviator to serve, shot down over the ocean, served his nation, it is not, nor do I recal it being touted by him - though I do recall mention of it as him having served in the armed forces where Bill clinton and Michael Dukakis (a.k.a. "Tanker") never served.

That is about as much touting of any military service I tolerate by either party, he served his country. I shall extends my thanks and respect to you for having done so. From one warrior to another.

oldman21220

08-11-2004, 09:28 AM

As relates to Kerry, he was the one that wanted to run as a war hero. Once he does that, then his record and untruths about it becomes a matter of importance. Unless they are a MUTT themselves, I doubt that anyone here would want a MUTT as fire chief. It's really the same deal.

jasper45

08-11-2004, 01:08 PM

The reason that John Kerry's service in Vietnam is being questioned is his own fault. John Kerry chose to make his service in Vietnam a platform on which his ability to be commander-in-chief was based. Anytime that you establish any platform, or policy as a President, or a Presidential candidate it will be picked apart and disected. And rightly so for that matter.
More of the problem here is that the left does not like having their own tactics used against them. I'm sure we have all heard of moveon.org, they have been active participants for the left on other issues. Swiftboat vets for truth has their own agenda, for what they are saying is truth. They have a right to their say, and these men were there, defending their free speach rights while the majority of Americans spit on them. Perhaps including John Kerry himself. On another note though, since when has having served in the military been a requirement of the President? If that were the case, the Democrat's hero Bill Clinton would surely have never been President. Especially considering he ran against George H.W. Bush, a WWII airman who was shot down, and Bob Dole also a veteran who left a good part of his arm in the same war. Their military service was down played, in order to have Clinton gain the presidency. Now they want a requirement of war hero service?
The men criticizing Kerry's record are all Vietnam veterans, deserving of a legetimate look at what they have to say. They earned it. Besides, Kerry could put an end to all questions about his record by making public his service record. If what he has said is truth, what is there to hide? Open up the records and let us see what truly happened. Again, the only reason that this has become an issue is because Kerry decided to run on his service record. Anyone who watched the DNC can plainly see that. He wants to run on it, fine, that is his perogitive. If hes has nothing to hide, he should open the records up and erase all doubts surrounding his service. Perhaps then all we will do is openly thank him for his service, and rightly so. Provided there has been no misrepresentation done.

FireLt1951

08-12-2004, 10:27 AM

The real HERO's of Viet Nam are on the wall!

As for the story above, I'll give you a little background on the Mekong River, where it crossed into Viet nam.
After a 5 month stint with the 25th Infantry, I served with Advisory Team 64 in Chou Doc Province, district of Tan Chou which was right on the boarder with Combodia and on the Mekong River. The only Navy boats I saw or delt with were PBR's and some Gunboats. I never in all my time there (11 months) ever saw a swift boat. So Hanoi John can't be telling the truth here. It would have to be a fabrication. I am only stating what I know and saw. So take it as you will.

The Swift Boat Vets have every right to question Kerry's assertions as related to his service in their unit. They served honorably and much longer that Hanoi John. I'll choose to believe them before I'll believe hanoi John.

I saw an ad the other day that showed Kerry on the river bank with his combat gear and M-16. In my 16 months in Viet Nam I never, ever saw anyone taking 8mm films while in any type of action. In my honest opinion this had to have been a staged film. He knew exactly what he was doing and that was preparing himself to become a politician.

In the end game, I could never consider voting for Kerry because of his Winter Soldier testimony (lies). If he actually did and/or saw what he stated, he would be a war criminal and should have been prosecuted for those war crimes. He should also have been charged with dereliction of duty.

StoveBolt

08-12-2004, 12:06 PM

Originally posted by DaSharkie
but where were all of these people and critics of him over the span of his previous 20 plus year political life.

O'Neill has been on his butt since the late 60s even appeared against him then on the dick cavett show..said he warned the dmc about him and they wouldn't listen, he also said that him winning the democratic nomination was just more than he could take, in fact he said it made some of the swiftie's physically sick..

correction.. make that the DNC

DaSharkie

08-12-2004, 01:58 PM

FireLt1951 - Thank you for your service. From a "Jarhead" to an Army "Dog."

Stovebolt - I thank you for the correction and point, but I do have to wonder where all of these people were as a collective voice? I understand that his assention to the national spotlight has made it a greater issue, but I really need to know for myself. I am not, nor have I stated, that these gentlemen do not have the right to protest his record, I just don't necessarily liek the delay in doing so. It does not change my opinion of the guy (I may not like a lot Bush's policies - but I tolerate him a heck of a lot better than I tolerate Kerry).

FireLt1951

08-12-2004, 04:08 PM

I have recently been talking to a few of the swift vets online. They made it known that they were not concerned about Hanoi John because the vast majority don't live in Massachusetts (really don't know if ANY do). Once he stepped up to become a national candidate, they felt compelled to voice their opinions and I wholeheartly agree. Hanoi John is not running for Senator but for President, therefore the game has changed. Kerry has on many occasions lately brought up his service, so he has no one to blame but himself. I have never cared for Kerry, just as I don't care for Kennedy but I don't live in Massachusetts and have no control over their choice. Now as a national candidate, things have changed. I have never forgiven Hanoi John for the accusations made against Viet Nam veterans. Hanoi John, with Hanoi Jane and others made my life miserable after my return because of their lies and their aiding the enemy. It was one thing to protest the war but making inaccurate accusations that affected so many combat veterans was inexcusable. Now all of a sudden he's using his service for purely political reasons (the man has no shame), I'm not going to buy the rhetoric and his un-truths. This doesn't even cover his socialist leanings. If he gets elected, I'll live with it the best I can but he'll never have my respect as a citizen or veteran.

Sharkie,

I prefer GRUNT:)
How do you feel about Hanoi John's depiction of the flag raising on Iwo Jima. To me it's a total insult to all the Marine's that fought and died on that sacred soil and Hanoi John choose to make lite of it?

allineedisu

08-12-2004, 04:56 PM

I remember several years ago on the TV show JAG, that a guy was running for a seat in congress. He was going around telling every one that he was a seal. He even bought a pin that seals wear and was wearing it. Some body spotted this phoney and exposed him. This guy turned out to be a writer in the rear with the gear.

Actually, this was a true story that JAG had on its program.

The bottom line to this, is that any one can buy and wear combat medals, except the Medal of Honor. Having this medal by fraud, is a criminal offense and you shall go to jail, without passing go.

Take this as it is. If you beleive Kerry, then vote for him. It would be like voting for Jane Fonda and all the other phoneys that protray themselves as Americans, but really are a wolf in sheeps clothing, always giving aid to the ememy.

StoveBolt

08-12-2004, 05:56 PM

i heard the doctor speak, that treated him for one purple hearts (am radio sean hannity), he said it was a piece of medal the size of pencil lead about 1/2" long and half sticking out of his arm, one of the reasons the guy remembered him was, the enlisted guys with Kerry told him, not in front of Kerry , "thats the new JFK from Massachusetts he's going to be president someday" he also said the size of the wound don't have any bearing on wounded in action and that he didn't know kerry or anything about him, other than that one incident..
"can't wait to get the book"

DaSharkie

08-12-2004, 05:58 PM

Lt. - I'll call you a grunt. For any infantryman it seems to be a badge of honor to be called a "grunt," by anyone who was not especially.

As for the imitation flag raising of Iwo Jima.....

These men has nothing on those great Marines (and one Navy Corpsman by the way). Three of these men never made it off of Iwo alive, having died in comabt before FDR could get their orders cut to return home for war bond tours. These men were also VERY uncomfortable with the publicity and wanted to return to the Pacific to continue the fight. Ira Hayes ended up an alcoholic and died basically drinking himself to death as he was haunted by the demons of this battle. He is still highly respected by his native tribe though.

It is shameful and diminishes the accomplishments of the Marine Divisions that invaded that dispicable rock and died by the thousands.

As for the protestors, I have to ask where are they now? (Other than supporting Kerry I mean?) None of them have come out publicly saying anything about it. I know the DNC and Kerry would not want to have his war protestations brought up and made light of now - it seems to be all but forgotten.

The bottom line to this, is that any one can buy and wear combat medals, except the Medal of Honor. Having this medal by fraud, is a criminal offense and you shall go to jail, without passing go.

Wearing any medal to which you were not awarded is a FEDERAL CRIMINAL OFFENSE and the military and FBI take it QUITE seriously, as do many veterans groups.

For a good read about this, get ahold of Stolen Valor. It is a book written by a Vietnam vet who has case after case of guys who claimed to have been vetereans, been awarded medals, been awarded the MOH and proven to be false. An excellent book.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/096670360X/qid=1092343983/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/104-7236165-9867934?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

This is from an ongoing case in point back in Mass. This twit claims to have been a P.O.W. in Viet Nam and has been getting into hot water over it. The Herald ran an article in mid-July about him and another last week. The FBI has handed off the investigation for further review by the Justice Department.

These are the two articles and their links

FBI probes POW-annabe for fraud
By Tom Farmer
Thursday, July 15, 2004

A Groton man who claims he escaped from a Vietnamese prison camp and earned distinguished war medals is an apparent fraud whose case has been referred to the FBI based on a Herald probe of his fantastic accounts.

Donald S. Weikel, 56, allegedly used his fabricated heroics to obtain a POW license plate from the Registry of Motor Vehicles as well as citations from the state Legislature and the town of Groton, which held a ``Donald Weikel Day'' three years ago to honor the Charlestown native.

``We have no input whatsoever that he was a prisoner of war,'' said Larry Greer of the Department of Defense, which maintains the nation's official list of POWs.

Weikel also claims to have returned to combat after escaping from a POW camp and to have earned a Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts.

``It's safe to say he does not have those medals,'' said Herb Edwards at U.S. Marine headquarters in Washington.

Weikel did serve with the Marines in Vietnam in the spring and summer of 1966 but was not in combat from 1965 to 1969 as he claims in articles published last week in the Ayer Public Spirit and in a 2002 book by Groton Eagle Scouts.

Weikel's own Marine Corps discharge document, or DD-214, which he allowed the Herald to photograph yesterday, clearly states his entire length of service was one year, eight months and two days with nine months and four days of ``foreign or sea service,'' which designates time spent in combat or on deployment.

Confronted about his alleged lies, Weikel was steadfast that he was a POW for four months from September 1965 to January 1966 and earned the medals on the document he showed the Herald. ``You want to see the bullet holes on me?'' he challenged, displaying scars on his bare torso. ``Here's my record. It's all right here.''

Retired Marine Master Sgt. Richard Pittman of California, a Medal of Honor recipient in Vietnam who examined the document photographed by the Herald, said it appears Weikel altered a copy of his DD-214 to reflect the awarding of the Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals and changed his discharge rank to sergeant from lance corporal.

Pittman and former Marine James Roy of Georgetown raised suspicions about Weikel after they read stories about him last week in the Ayer newspaper.

``I'm just amazed how the communities where these people reside are so willing to accept these statements without fact,'' Pittman said. Pittman said there are differences in the type where Weikel's disputed medals are noted as well as misspellings and other inaccuracies on the DD-214 that indicate it was altered.

FBI Special Agent Thomas Cottone confirmed yesterday Weikel's case has been referred to the FBI for investigation. Fraudulently wearing a military medal or altering service records is a federal offense punishable by up to a year in prison or fines.

The nonprofit POW Network has Weikel on its list of ``Phonies and Wannabes'' and obtained his military record through the Freedom of Information Act. It states the highest decoration he was awarded was the Combat Action Ribbon.

Registrar of Motor Vehicles Kimberly Hinden said when Weikel obtained the POW plate in 1998 he needed to show documentation to the Veterans Administration. ``The VA says it has no record of him or of him being a POW,'' she said yesterday.

Officials believe Weikel showed the VA a 1996 letter from the National Public Records Center in Washington to the office of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy [related, bio] (D-Mass.) that states Weikel ``was a POW/MIA.'' The NPRC letter, also obtained by the Herald, has different-sized type and appears to have been altered. A copy has been forwarded to Kennedy's staff to compare with the original.

Meet the Rambo of Groton

Among Donald S. Weikel's allegedly false claims are:

He was taken prisoner in a 1965 ambush and spent four months in a Vietnamese village in which he was held captive in a 20-foot pit covered with bamboo and tortured on a ``rack,'' had the skin of his testicles nailed to a chair and was shocked with electricity.

He saw prisoners' limbs tied to four water buffalos that moved in different directions and saw wild dogs eat the prisoners' torn-away limbs.

He escaped after killing several guards, leaving 150 other prisoners behind, and returned with U.S. forces to find only 60 survivors.

He served a second ``revenge tour'' in Vietnam in which he ``took out'' 165 enemy soldiers.

He was wounded three times, including shrapnel wounds to the head and gunshot wounds to his back and hip.

Source: Ayer Public Spirit

http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=38744
(more related articles available on this page).

Feds probe phony POW's claims of earning medals
By Tom Farmer
Friday, August 6, 2004

State officials yesterday confirmed a Boston Herald report that a former Marine from Groton was never a Vietnamese prisoner of war as they turned the matter over to the FBI in Boston for investigation.

Donald S. Weikel, 56, also claims he is a recipient of the Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts, which the Marine Corps has stated he was never awarded.

``He was not a POW,'' said Thomas G. Kelley, secretary of the Massachusetts Department of Veterans Services and a recipient of the Medal of Honor.

Weikel was confronted by the Herald last month about his claims he spent four months in a Vietnamese prison camp before escaping, and that he was wounded three times during two combat tours of duty.

Officials said Weikel did serve in Vietnam, but only during the spring and summer of 1966, not through 1969 as he claims.

He is also under investigation for allegedly changing his official service record - or DD-214 - to show he was awarded medals he never earned. Altering the document is a federal offense.

FBI Special Agent Thomas A. Cottone Jr., who works with the Congressional Medal of Honor Society investigating bogus medal recipients, said yesterday Weikel's case has been referred to an agent in Boston for investigation.

Sources said Weikel is receiving VA benefits for a 100-percent disability but not for wounds he claims he suffered in Vietnam.

pfd3501

08-12-2004, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by DaSharkie
I am not a Kerry supporter by a LONG shot, but I am getting really ticked off byt two things that keep coming out:

1) Where were these people taht are going after his war record over the past 20 plus years of his political life? It is the same with Clinton (again I was never a big fan of the guy) but where were all of these people and critics of him over the span of his previous 20 plus year political life. I am not saying that they are lying, I just hate it when all of the little dtractors come out after years and years. It weakens their complaints and arguments.

DaSharkie - I've heard some of these people in radio interviews - as long as Kerry was just a senator of reletively low prominence they were willing to let it slide. When he hobbled to the front of the 2004 lame dog pack then they decided to let their story be known.

I forget who it was, but in 1971 one of these people debated Kerry based on kerry's "WAR CRIMES" testimoney, had the debate on TV and basically handed Kerry his ass.

This may sound cynical, because for the most part I believe these swift boat vets against Kerry. But if you are going to put a tell all book out, will it sell better when its about a backwater senator, or will it sell more when it's about a presidential candidate?

I'm sure that they have the truth on their side, and facts triple checked and quadruple documented. One of these people is a trial lawyer, who knows all about libel and slander.

StoveBolt

08-12-2004, 09:44 PM

Former FBI Agent Warns Swift Boat Vets

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/garyaldrich/ga20040810.shtml

StoveBolt

08-14-2004, 10:58 PM

O'Neill's book says Kerry "would revisit ambush locations for re-enacting combat scenes where he would portray the hero, catching it all on film. Kerry would take movies of himself walking around in combat gear, sometimes dressed as an infantryman walking resolutely through the terrain. He even filmed mock interviews of himself narrating his exploits. A joke circulated among Swiftees was that Kerry left Vietnam early not because he received three Purple Hearts, but because he had recorded enough film of himself to take home for his planned political campaigns."

"On February 28, 1969, now in charge of PCF 94, Kerry came under fire from an enemy location on the shore. The crew's gunner returned fire, hitting and wounding the lone gunman. Kerry directed the boat to charge the enemy position. Beaching his boat, Kerry jumped off, chased the wounded insurgent behind a thatched hutch, and killed him. Kerry and his crew returned within days, armed with a Super 8 video camera he had purchased at the post exchange at Cam Ranh Bay, and reenacted the skirmish on film."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39683

DaSharkie

08-15-2004, 02:29 PM

Kerry would take movies of himself walking around in combat gear, sometimes dressed as an infantryman walking resolutely through the terrain. He even filmed mock interviews of himself narrating his exploits.

If this is true, it is absolutely vile and putrid let alone dishonorable. And he accused others of revelling in the death of the enemy. :rolleyes:

StoveBolt

08-16-2004, 06:59 PM

Are we going to have to revise our history books?

Seeing it was thought nixon didn't send any military into cambodia until april of 1971, I guess no one knew including Kerry's entire chain of command what he was up to in Vietnam..

Douglas Brinkley, who has unique access to the candidate's wartime journals.

"Kerry went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. He had a run dropping off US Navy Seals, Green Berets and CIA guys." The missions were not armed attacks on Cambodia, said Mr Brinkley, who did not include the clandestine missions in his wartime biography of Mr Kerry, Tour of Duty.
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/ma...08/13/wus13.xml

Smoke20286

08-16-2004, 08:04 PM

Republican-funded Group Attacks Kerry's War Record (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231)

Although the word "Republican" does not appear in the ad, the group's financing is highly partisan. The source of the Swift Boat group's money wasn't known when it first surfaced, but a report filed July 15 with the Internal Revenue Services now shows its initial funding came mainly from a Houston home builder, Bob R. Perry, who has also given millions to the Republican party and Republican candidates, mostly in Texas, including President Bush and Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay, whose district is near Houston

In an Aug. 10 opinion piece in the conservative Wall Street Journal , Rassmann (a Republican himself) wrote that the ad was "launched by people without decency" who are "lying" and "should hang their heads in shame."

Fact Check is a reputable non partisan website, that exposes the lies and untruths that are delivered up daily basis in politics, both Republican and Democrat

DaSharkie

08-16-2004, 08:56 PM

Regardless of who funded the advertisement, it is the right of these guys to say what they feel and think, especially at this level. There are people on the other side that do the same thing, as it is their right. If you have someone espousing their record as a warrior and people do not feel that this is true, they have an obligation to say so. Truth, not rhetoric is necessary to make a decision as to who is the best person to be elected as the leader of the United States of America. In order to make that decision, one needs to hear all sides of a discussion and debate.

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-17-2004, 09:51 AM

Random thoughts:

1. I know S/A Cottone personally. He is one of the finest and most committed men you will ever meet.

2. Doesn't every FD have the guy who does nothing, then rubs dirt and ash on his face and stands around trying to get their picture on TV or in the paper? Reminds me of Kerry.

3. With all due respect, there were alot more heroes in Viet Nam than the deceased heroes on the wall.

ThNozzleman

08-17-2004, 10:10 AM

2. Doesn't every FD have the guy who does nothing, then rubs dirt and ash on his face and stands around trying to get their picture on TV or in the paper? Reminds me of Kerry.
Yeah? Well, at least HE showed up for the fire. :rolleyes:

pfd3501

08-17-2004, 10:35 AM

In listening to some of the swift boats veterans testimony, Kerry turned tail and ran initially during one of his "rescues". That's how he lost someone overboard that he had to save. The rest of the boats in the crew stayed at a boat that had been rpg's.

After trashing George Sr and Bob Doles WWII heroics, those on the left side of the fence are being extremely hypocritical by elevating Kerry's dubious service. 200 Swift boat vets, including all the officers who served along Kerry, can't be wrong.

All of this is smoke screen anyway. As someone who missed 75% of his Senate Intelligence Committee meetings, including ALL of the meetings in the year after 9/11/2001 he needs to deflect attention from his dismal record in the Senate. When you are rated to the left of even Teddy (I lost my heart in chappaquidic) Kennedy, you can't run on your record.

TillerMan25

08-17-2004, 10:49 AM

Yeah? Well, at least HE showed up for the fire.

Keep Drinking the Kool-Aid, Patsy. Your Boy is going down in flames in November. That's if he doesn't pull out prior to the Election due to this Scandal.

The Man is a LIAR.
The Man is a FRAUD.
The Man is a FLIP FLOPPER.

"I actually did vote for the 87 Billion Dollars, before I voted against it!" - John "F--king" Kerry, 2003.

"No War For Ketchup!"

TillerMan25

08-17-2004, 10:59 AM

TillerMan25

08-17-2004, 11:00 AM

TillerMan25

08-17-2004, 11:01 AM

TillerMan25

08-17-2004, 11:03 AM

jasper45

08-17-2004, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by ThNozzleman

Yeah? Well, at least HE showed up for the fire. :rolleyes: Is that a shot at Clinton? Just curious because I don't remember him (Clinton) serving in anything period.

ThNozzleman

08-17-2004, 03:00 PM

Is that a shot at Clinton? Just curious because I don't remember him (Clinton) serving in anything period.
Last time I checked, Clinton is not running for President. There are two lead candidates for the position of President; one's a veteran, and the other is a draft-dodger. I'm pretty sure you know which is which. Or, maybe you don't; I don't care. :eek:

jasper45

08-17-2004, 03:11 PM

Your right, Clinton is not running for President. He already was, and his lack of military service was not brought forth as an issue. At least thats what the left insisted on when Clinton was President. Military service was also down played in the campaigns of 2 obvious veterans in H.W. Bush, and also in Bob Dole. By the way, there was no doubt on whether Bob Dole earned his purple heart. Why change now? Its obvious by now that neither candidate is a "draft dodger", that is unless you consider enlisting in the national guard to be draft dodging. If that is the case, I have several relatives who would love to meet you. You need some consistancy in your viewpoints, military service is only important when it suits you? You can't have 2 sets of standards in your thinking, unless you don't wish to be taken seriously.

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-17-2004, 03:27 PM

You see, Jasper, this is a typical liberal tactic. They know that George W. is not a draft dodger. They know that he served and served honorably. But they have nothing else so they attack the TYPE of service he served. The flaw in this logic is that they have to dump on and alienate hundreds of thousands of past and present people who served their country admirably in the national Guard. It will surely backfire.

Hey Noz, if it was so all fired important for Pres. Bush's military records to be released, including his pay stubs and dental records, why shouldn't Kerry be held to the same srandard? Why should the Us peopple have access to every page of his records? After all, it was Kerry hmislef who has proclaimed himself a war hero.

PREDICTION: He will not answer this question, but attack the President.

oldman21220

08-17-2004, 03:38 PM

All you Kerry fans ask him to release his evaluations, form 280 if I remember correctly.

TillerMan25

08-17-2004, 03:38 PM

I am very sick of the Left always regarding Reserve or National Guard duty as less than honorable. It is a slap in the face to those who serve in those units. I don't see any differences in the Caskets of the National Guardsmen or the Regular Army Soldiers when they come back to Dover.

one's a veteran, and the other is a draft-dodger.

Anyone who wore the uniform of the United States Military and was discharged honorably from duty is a Veteran. It doesn't matter if it was National Guard, Reserve or whatever. Putting yourself in for a Purple Heart for a Self-inflicted wound is not what I would call honorable....Check out the Swift Vets. I would think the 200 guys calling Kerry a Liar is a HELL of alot more Credible than one man Claiming 200 liars. John Kerry is not a credible man.

How condescending of you Robert. If an armed conflict ever occured on this soil you would be begging one of these "Draft-Dodgers" to protect your YELLOW ASS!

I think you owe an apology to some of our Military on here...especially those serving in Guard or Reserve Units. You are a disgraceful American Robert.

TillerMan25

08-17-2004, 03:46 PM

I know he won't do it, but I had to call him out on it.

SPFDRum

08-17-2004, 04:31 PM

If memory serves, and I'm sure our resident historian Dalmation can help me out, most of those involved in the Bataan death march where reservists and guard. Then spent most of the war in slave labor camps enduring every possble torture imaginable by the Japanese.
So Robert, because these Americans where "just in the gaurd or reserves" are they also draft dodgers?

jasper45

08-17-2004, 04:52 PM

Tillerman, GeorgewendtCFI .... I highly doubt you will get any kind of an apology from the likes of Thnozzleman. I was able to witness what the green party really is about. I really beleive they are as anti-American as you can get. They would rather support the like of Saddam Hussein, or Yasser Arafat. How do I know this ? I was witness to their national convention in which they nominated Cobb to run on their ticket. They held a peace rally outdoors, in which they cheered for US failure in Iraq, and would rather carry palestinian flags than the flag of our nation. I guess the signs stating "victory to the iraqi resistance" was what infuriated me the most. I would guess that the likes of Thnozzleman can't stand any kind of servicemen.

ThNozzleman

08-17-2004, 05:22 PM

You are all making baseless, ignorant assumptions, as usual. How I feel about one person (the President) does not in ANY way reflect how I feel about any other person, military or otherwise. I won't even address the rest of the stupid comments made on this thread by people already on my ignore list.
I would guess that the likes of Thnozzleman can't stand any kind of servicemen.
You would, of course, guess wrong. Surely, you aren't that stupid. The rest of your post is baseless assumptions about me, and just as stupid. And, I assure you, to lump me in with any of the people you mentioned while in my presence would be very stupid, too.
So Robert, because these Americans where "just in the gaurd or reserves" are they also draft dodgers?
Of course not, and I've never stated as such. However, for posters on this thread to blast Kerry and his combat service in Vietnam as some kind of political trick and a joke while, at the same time, treating GWB's rather questionable military service like he was the finest soldier to ever live is very humorous to me. I don't owe an apology to anyone in the service. You guys are WAY out of line, here.
Hey Noz, if it was so all fired important for Pres. Bush's military records to be released, including his pay stubs and dental records, why shouldn't Kerry be held to the same srandard? Why should the Us peopple have access to every page of his records? After all, it was Kerry hmislef who has proclaimed himself a war hero.
Don't care, don't care, don't care. I'm voting Bush out of office because he started a stupid, needless war that's killed thousands. I don't give a crap what either candidate did 35 years ago. I don't remember Kerry ever calling himself a "war hero". However, I DO know that Kerry went to Vietnam, while your man, Bush, stayed home in Texas. That's pretty much indisputable, I reckon.
PREDICTION: He will not answer this question, but attack the President.
Guess you were wrong. My, George...how your hands must tremble when you are typing angrily.
Second prediction: You won't get it.
You're DAMN right about that one.
By the way, George...I thought you "retired" from the forums? :rolleyes:

Bones42

08-17-2004, 05:32 PM

people already on my ignore list. and if their on your ignore list, you shouldn't be reading their comments. :D

Noz, just curious...are you voting for Kerry or just against Bush?

And, if for Kerry, why?

And in case you care, which you may not, I will be voting for Bush.

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-17-2004, 05:34 PM

By the way, George...I thought you "retired" from the forums?

I missed you too much;)

ThNozzleman

08-17-2004, 05:42 PM

I missed you too much
I knew there was a reason my average post rate was down so much! :p

DrParasite

08-17-2004, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by ThNozzleman
By the way, George...I thought you "retired" from the forums? :rolleyes:
yeah, well, it was peaceful while it lasted. oh well, a man can still dream :rolleyes:

you know, some people get really heated about politics. it's a shame we can't get that heated of a discusson over something as important like keeping our firefighters alive, improving our staffing/budget/use of resources, or way to topple the evil looming threat of union rule!! Just kidding about that last one, but the other two are pretty important topics

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-17-2004, 05:45 PM

Anyway...

"Reporting for Duty!"

"When I was in Viet Name (ad nauseum"

He interjected Viet Nam and his war record into this race, not me or anyone else. If that is his main campaign point, then that campaign point deserves to be scrutinized.

I heard an interesting point on the radio this AM; Kerry spent 4 whole months in Viet Nam as an enlisted man. Bush has spent 3 years as the Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful Army on earth. That actually means Bush has gobs more military experience than Kerry ever will. And despite what the liberal biased media wants you to believe, it has been a very, very succesful 3 years.

BTW, the lies about Viet Nam and Cambodia will be the straw that breaks the camel's back and turns the majority of the electorate against Kerry. It may actually require that he drop out of the race. Remember when Joe Biden simply plagarized part of a speech?

jasper45

08-17-2004, 05:45 PM

Dalmatian90

08-17-2004, 05:54 PM

If memory serves, and I'm sure our resident historian Dalmation can help me out, most of those involved in the Bataan death march where reservists and guard.

Jeesh, I go to give a quick glance at a thread I wasn't paying attention to otherwise...

A bit of quick research finds at least two large U.S. National Guard units where involved -- the 200th & 515th Coastal Artillery Regiments, New Mexico National Guard.

Now what New Mexico was doing with coastal artillery, I don't know. But their NG units had a lot of hispanics who could speak Spanish, a handy skill to have if one is assigned to the former Spanish colony of the Phillipines.

One reference put the 200th at 1,800 men, so guesstimate 3,600 between those two units alone.

70,000 U.S. & Philipine troops were involved with the death march, 10,000 died during it. I also believe (recalling college 12+ years ago...) a lot of the Phillipine military forces were called "National Guard" -- but I think NG in that context were more full-time forces than NG in U.S. usage.

Matt

ThNozzleman

08-17-2004, 06:03 PM

and if their on your ignore list, you shouldn't be reading their comments.
Well, dammit; quit quoting them!
Noz, just curious...are you voting for Kerry or just against Bush?
Against Bush. He started a needless war, based on misleading statements to the nation. And I don't buy the "bad intelligence" line. The most powerful man in the world, and he was the last to know? Please.
And, if for Kerry, why?
Because he didn't start a war that's needlessly killed thousands. Plus, he is more aligned with my view of what America should be; a nation for all, not just white Christians. And, quite frankly, I think George W. is about three sandwiches short of a picnic, myself.
And in case you care, which you may not, I will be voting for Bush.
It matters not to me; that is your right to exercise how you see fit. My only reason for responding on this forum was to address the thread after thread after thread started, attacking Kerry. Nobody has done as such against Bush, even though they could. It merely struck me as ironic that forum members can belittle Kerry's military record, when their candidate of choice obviously is seriously lacking in that same area, himself. The ol' "throwing rocks in a glass house" thing, you understand.

ThNozzleman

08-17-2004, 06:25 PM

My stance was, and still is this : Kerry needs to release his military records. If President Bush's records need to be examined, publicly, so do Senator Kerry's. I believe that the only people whom are openly questioning Kerry's record of military service are the swift boat vets for truth, and by the way, John Kerry has touted himself as a war hero. To make the statement that he isn't means you did not watch any of the DNC, or paid any attention to his campaign. Kerry has been waving his Vietnam service everywhere. Kerry chose to put his military record as a reason to vote him in, it then beckons some investigation. Certainly you can't disregard what the swift boat vets have to say, they were there also.
So he served and he mentions it; funny, I don't hear anyone complaining when Republican candidates do the same thing. It's politics; of course he's going to say the same things, over and over. Politicians usually do repeat things, because they address different crowds constantly. At least Kerry is more flexible as to who can attend his speeches, whereas the Bush crowds are handpicked. And I'm pretty sure that Kerry isn't touting his military service in Vietnam as the ONLY reason to vote him into the presidency.
I did not say President Bush was "the finest" soldier, as you put it. I merely took exception to your implication of him being a draft dodger because of his service in the guard. Like I said before, and I still feel the same way after rereading your original post, if that is truly how you feel about guardsmen, I have several family members who will take personal exception to your view. They certainly were not draft dodgers; is there something wrong with controlling how you serve your country? Certainly it is better than running to Canada? Or even Great Britain?
It's quite clear to me why Bush joined the NG instead of serving his country overseas like thousands of other people who had no choice in the matter. And, dammit, I'll say it one more time...do NOT lump my feelings of the actions of one person (Bush) with the way I feel about any other person. It has nothing to do with Canada or Great Britain, or anyone else who avoided the draft by going there. My wife is a recently retired Army Reserve soldier. A great number of my friends are soldiers in Reserve units, including several guys from my department that have been called up to serve. A large majority of my family is military, as well. It ALL has nothing to do with how I feel about GWB and how he got into the guard during the Vietnam years. I have read up on his military record, and I don't care for what I see. They can release Kerry's and Bush's records, or not, for all I care. It is obvious that the conservative/Republican/right-wing members of this forum are doing the only thing they can to address GWB's lackluster military career, and that's to attack Kerry's service in combat.
Whether or not Kerry lied about anything in his service in Vietnam is besides the point to me. Already his campaign has had to change some inaccurate statements he has made, who knows what more is really out there. Kerry's voting record in the senate, among other things is what has turned me off about him. You are also very critical about Bush's service record, Kerry does have some aspects that could be criticized as well. I will save that for the swift boat vets for truth. Should his service record be open game for this campaign? You bet, he made it that way. He was the one who touted it all along. Should it be a deciding factor in whether or not you vote for him? Your conscience has to be your guide there, but certainly many of the swift boat vets for truth think it is enough of a reason for him to not be President.
I'm sure I could make plenty of inaccurate statements about what I did thirty years ago, too. The rest of your statement pretty much addresses why I even responded to this post. Neither candidate is perfect; both are long-time politicians, who see it fit to move in the direction they think they need to go to save their political bacon. I'm sure there are a lot of pissed off people who hate the both of them. All I do know, concerning the subject of this post, is this:
Kerry = Vietnam combat veteran
Bush = stayed home
If the roles were reversed, I guarantee you that many opinions about each man's service would drastically change. Think about it. This, of course, is why we continue to see the steady reference to Clinton, and his lack of service/draft-dodging ass. If you can't beat the man, drag in a straw man and beat him up, I guess. Right? I mean, help me out, here.

StoveBolt

08-17-2004, 07:05 PM

The following is a speech by U.S. Navy Captain Dan Ouimette.

America WAKE UP!

That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 and maybe it was, but I think it should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then.

It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this sovereign US embassy set the stage for the events to follow for the next
23 years.

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Viet Nam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism. America's military had been decimated and downsized / right sized since the end of the Viet Nam war. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.

Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil continued.

In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut. When it explodes, it kills 63 people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more. Then just six short months later a large truck heavily laden down with over
2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut. 241 US servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more. Two months later in December
1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait, and America continues her slumber. The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gates of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept.

Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid. Then in August a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed and the Snooze Alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US soil is continually attacked. Fifty-nine days later a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed. The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 259. America wants to treat these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war...the Wake Up alarm is louder and louder.

The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again.

Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women. A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500.

The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively. They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. These attacks were planned with precision, they kill 224. America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.

The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.

And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America. How wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.

In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every high official in government over what they knew and what they didn't know. But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can see exactly what they knew. You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979. The President is right on when he says we are engaged in a war. I think we have been in a war for the past 23 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough.

America has to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. America has changed forever. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford to hit the Snooze Button again and roll over and go back to sleep. We have to make the terrorists know that in the words of Admiral Yamamoto after the attack on Pearl Harbor "that all they have done is to awaken a sleeping giant."

Thank you very much.

jasper45

08-17-2004, 08:55 PM

The only reason I mentioned Clinton, is because if you remember back the roles were sort of reversed. Going back to 1996 with Bob Dole, and 1992 with H.W. Bush, the left wing did all that they could to de-emphasize Clinton's lack of military service. I remember quite clearly how it was constantly tossed out how no military service is required to be commander in chief. I don't disagree with that. I feel that a President needs to be a decision maker, who surrounds himself, or herself with a quality staff etc...
The attitude you take with President Bush, and his military record still stuns me. I have relatives who joined the guard to avoid the draft. It seems to me as though you would hold the same attitude with them. Also, in case you have not noticed these attacks on Kerry's service are coming from swift boat vets for truth. A number of them have said they are not pro Bush, simply anti Kerry. Sounds like the reverse of some others. They are treated no differant under campaign law, specefically Mccain-Feingold as special interest groups independant of parties or candidates. Moveon.org is probably the most noted left wing group. That is where the questions about his service have originated, from those who also were there with Kerry. If they choose to attack his service, they have every right. They were there, I was not. Nor were you. Like I said before, Kerry's service in Vietnam is not a deciding factor in my decision making, nor is President Bush's "draft dodging", to use your words.
I do ask you though, is it wrong to read what the "swift boat vets for truth" has to say, and then use that information for debate? I guess I don't see a differance from using information from anywhere else to form an ideology. Maybe some people will use that information to make a decision, I won't say that they are wrong for doing so. I am sure some will use President Bush's "draft dodging", again your words, to make their decision also.
Just on a side note, during the 1991 Gulf war I was exploring ways to serve in the military were a draft to be instituted. I merely wished to have some control over the way I would potentially serve. I guess I see no problem with this logic. I guess others do. The implications you make on President Bush's service imply you must have known him fairly well to be able to understand his motivation for joining the guard. There is no straw man here, just looking for some consistancy. The bar was set at a specefic height already, by a previous administration. It was proven by this previous history that military service is not a job requirement for a President. Why would Kerry need to use it as a tone setter for his campaign? Why would he not release his records of service then, to remove this debate as an issue. Certainly he would erase all doubt, and completely undermine the swift boat vets statements if his (Kerry's) statements are truthfull.

StoveBolt

08-17-2004, 10:09 PM

I like moveon.org's ad to tell bush to have the Swift Boat's Against Kerry ad's pulled because its not fair..

They start it off with a pilot walking up to a jet fighter and then they say "some say his father got him into the National Guard" then they show some paper work being stamped "Failure to Appear".. boy it just gets better.. SB

VinnieB

08-18-2004, 01:28 AM

Welll...after reading throught his whole thread I have come to the conclusion that some have no FRIGGIN' idea about what the military is all about. I served in the USMC from 95-02...(mostly the Clinton years :( )..I was sent to places such as Bosnia, Kosovo, Turkey, Operation Desert Fox, and then Afganistan. The later of which happened a few months after the WTC attack were I was an NYC-EMT working on that day and one of the first one's to the job. I have seen this fellow..."nozzleman's" posts...get a clue junior!...How many "need less wars" did Clinton wage?...I can tell you of atleast 2 that I was in....BOTH were EUROPEAN problems...but we all know the Europeans couldn't break up a pillow fight between the Olson Twins. Come to think of it...ALL WARS ARE NEED LESS....ask a vet!....If we had bee vigilant for all those years...I bet this crap would not have happened. And what about WMDs...who gives a sh*t!....The whole regime was a WMD!...they were the most unstable country in the region. We gave them a "Street Education"...meaning if someone punches you in the face and you don't react...you deserve another punch....and if you do react...you had better kick the asses of his biggest friend too!...And as for the POS Kerry....He and his party are the WORST for defense....don't believe me...then check thier voting records on the US Government Website!.....They tout him as a "war hero" because the DEMS have NO credibility on Defense!....Its a fact!...Look at the current state of the military compaired to 92-00....in the last 2 years since I got out Bush has made leaps and bounds on defense...they have received 2 new type of body armour...the US Army Strykers have been levied to numerous brigades, the F-22 has entered final test phase...The 2005 (hr288) denfense budget was pasted which incresed immenent danger pay from $150 to $225..something Clinton said NO to...hey thanks Bubba!...Go "F" yourself!..(I can finally say that!)....pay raises with continue to be 3.5%, Humvees are being up armoured, new weapons for the USMC!...money is flooding R&D....this is good times for us!....Oh! and guess what....Kerry/Edwards were ABSENT for the vote!....oh yeah ...they are good for defense!...because thier candidate spent 16 weeks in Vietnam on a river boat.....they should be endorcing Bob Dole...an man who knows what a war is (the same man they torn apart in 96...they even attack his credibility...anyone remember..I DO!)...The dems even said in 92 that Bush Sr "abandonned" his 2 other crew members in an effort to save his own hide...well he has stated that his tail gunner's brains were all over him and he could not get to his Radio/torpedo man....before he ditched..HOW DARE THE DEMS THEY SAY THAT!....these are not Democrats running...They are Socialist!...Even John McCain was attacked about his credibility and mental state...do you rember what he did?....he released his military records and it all went away!....If Kerry were to do the same...then I bet this would disapper...

My Blood pressure is up enough...so I will close my ranting....Kerry at one time "may" have been a "hero".....BUT the moment he went on national TV and declared his commanders and commrades "war criminals" he LOST ALL CREDIBILITY as a WARRIOR!....and this proves he is not the man for the job. Fu*k him.....

I am going to go throw up now....all this talk of "super warrior" Kerry has made me sick...I am then going to smash myself in the head with a baseball bat so I will not have nightmares tonight....just remember...Kerry violated the most sacred rule of warriors....he betrayed his brother in arms......

PS....does Edward's mother know he is playing Senator?

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-18-2004, 08:20 AM

I am currently reading "Unfit for Command". The main difference between this book and "F-911" is that these guys were there. The book is based on the personal experiences of the men who ate slept and served with Kerry. I don't think that the book will tell you that Kerry never saw combat. He did. But the book destroys his credibility on the veracity of his accounts and illustrates how he embellished his escapades.

Also, if you believe that this is the first election that Kerry has used the "war hero" card, you are wrong. The book points out numerous elections where he mocked his opponents military record and pounded his chest over his "hero" status. He brought it on, he deserves to be scrutinized.

You guys need to read this book. It is an eye-opener.

but we all know the Europeans couldn't break up a pillow fight between the Olson Twins.

I'm seeing a movie plot here.

Vinnie, thanks for your service.

Bones42

08-18-2004, 10:53 AM

ThNoz, thanks for your reply.

a pillow fight between the Olson Twins I'm with George on this one. :D

Tiller, does any of this have anything to do with the topic at hand? Thought not. :mad:

TillerMan25

08-18-2004, 10:59 AM

Yeah, it shows what Americans have to deal with on the Side of Mr. Kerry (dare I call him a Senator, he has been absent in the Senate for the last two years.)

A Vote for Kerry is a vote for condoning loons like the ones pictured above.

pfd3501

08-18-2004, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by ThNozzleman
However, for posters on this thread to blast Kerry and his combat service in Vietnam as some kind of political trick and a joke while, at the same time, treating GWB's rather questionable military service like he was the finest soldier to ever live is very humorous to me. I don't owe an apology to anyone in the service. You guys are WAY out of line, here.

I haven't seen anyone tout GWBs service as heroic. Questionable? He, unlike Kerry has answered questions, presented records, documentation, etc. That's why the media left isn't harping on it anymore. It hasn't stuck.

Kerry put in for his medals, no one else thought what he did was deserving of merit. The physician that treated him for the minor flesh wound resulted in his first purple heart denied any commendation for Kerry's actions or wounds. Kerry had to go doctor shopping to find someone to fill out the paperwork for the medals.

Kerry touts his military experience so he can "mainstream" himself. Rated the number one liberal in congress (when he bothers to show up) he now has to try to appeal to the other side of the fence. He has voted against weapons systems, bombers, funding for intelligence agencies.

During Kerry's acceptance speech at the Socialist National Convention Kerry boasted to the effect that as president he would not send troops into combat without proper body armor, yet he voted against the appropriations bill for body armor. Anyone else smell a rat here?

What Kerry did in vietnam is relevant because he has made it his touchstone throught his slimy political career. To deny it is hypocritical.

BTW, while defineately not calling GWB a hero, his air guard service was dangerous. Talk to anyone who flew a F104, and you will learn that it took skill and nards to just get one off the ground and back down, safely. And GW did volunteer for Vietnam duty as a pilot, but was kept back.

TillerMan25

08-18-2004, 03:35 PM

Oh, now I am being censored? People can turn any thread into a Career/Vollie, Leather/Plastic, Fog/Straight argument and you censor me? what Kind of BS is this?

TillerMan25

08-18-2004, 04:04 PM

Seen recently outside Firehouse.com's College Park Headquarters.

VinnieB

08-18-2004, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI
I'm seeing a movie plot here.

Vinnie, thanks for your service.

Hey thanks....:) ....I just hope I can be the leading man in the movie!;) :D

pfd3501

08-18-2004, 04:13 PM

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten time since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18,1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." > - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

SO NOW EVERY ONE OF THESE SAME DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED--THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK US TO WAR UNNECESSARILY! WHO'S REALLY LYING?

Send this to everybody you know..The media and networks won't do it. Why do you suppose that is?

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-18-2004, 04:34 PM

Kerry for President!

ThNozzleman

08-18-2004, 04:41 PM

http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp
Make your own decision, I guess.

ThNozzleman

08-18-2004, 04:43 PM

ThNoz, thanks for your reply.
No problem at all, man.

EFD840

08-18-2004, 04:45 PM

Talk to anyone who flew a F104, and you will learn that it took skill and nards to just get one off the ground and back down, safely.

Well, yes the 104 was a fickle fighter but that ain't GWB's bird. He flew F-102 Delta Daggers. The 102 was used in Vietnam as an interceptor and for a while as a B-52 escort but it was designed as a bomber interceptor and was very overmatched by the MiG-17s and MiG-21s used by the north. Several were lost to ground fire and one to a MiG in air combat (They never scored a victory against an enemy fighter). Why the lesson in aviation history? When Bush entered the Texas ANG in '68 the 102 was still deployed in Vietnam so a combat tour was a real possibility. They were withdrawn from the theater in late '69 to early '70 but there's no way he could have known the air force's schedule.

Top: Convair F-102 Delta Dagger
Bottom: Lockheed F-104 Starfighter

ThNozzleman

08-18-2004, 04:58 PM

My Blood pressure is up enough...so I will close my ranting....Kerry at one time "may" have been a "hero".....BUT the moment he went on national TV and declared his commanders and commrades "war criminals" he LOST ALL CREDIBILITY as a WARRIOR!....and this proves he is not the man for the job. Fu*k him.....
And what if he's telling the truth? Are we to believe that no horrors were committed by US troops in Vietnam? What about My Lai?
http://www.rotten.com/library/history/war-crimes/my-lai-massacre/

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

http://www.lexisnexis.com/academic/2upa/Imhw/VietnamPeersInquiryMyLai.asp

oldman21220

08-18-2004, 05:13 PM

If what Kerry has said is true, he should turn himself in to the International Court in The Hague, Netherlands to stand trial for crimes against humanity.

FireLt1951

08-18-2004, 06:06 PM

Were there crimes committed in Viet Nam? The answer would be yes. By maybe .5% of the military people there. I don't think there was ever a war in history where a certain number of individual's hadn't committed unacceptable atrocities. One of the problems with your argument about Mai Lai is the fact that Hanoi John should have also been on trial for war crimes. Read the Winter Soldier Investigation. Did Hanoi John lie? I would have to say that he did in fact lie. He stated that it was common for the military to commit war crimes on a daily basis. In my opinion and experience, it’s pure fabrication. He also admitted to committing war crimes himself and then backed away from the statement almost immediately. He also accused the V.F.W. of being warmongers. From my experience, combat veterans are the least likely to be warmongers. They know the horror's of war and would prefer not to have to fight. But they also understand that to appease an enemy in any form is far more dangerous and costly. This is just the tip of the iceberg on Kerry. His Senate record is dismal at best in relation to veterans, military and intelligence.

I will always consider Hanoi John to be a turncoat to those of us that fought with dignity and honor. Hanoi John disparaged that dignity and honor and now he desire's to be called a combat veteran in the truest sense. A real combat veteran DOESN'T turn on his brother's. We bled together and to turn on them in any form is despicable.

I find it quite amusing that after 20 years in the Senate, Hanoi John has come up with all these new ideas for our country. Where has he been for the last 20 years? I haven't been able to find any significant legislation brought forth by Hanoi John in his entire Senate career. I, unlike Hanoi John do not believe that the federal government should take care of you from cradle to grave and has all the answers. I truly believe Hanoi John is a pure socialist at heart and will never be any other color.

I haven't totally agreed with everything the President has done but given the choice. It can't be Hanoi John that get's my vote. The war on terror is exactly that, A WAR. We have continually been attacked for the last 25+ years by these terrorist’s and their money backer's. If this country shows any weakness to these A@@hol&'s you will be seen as exactly that! WEAK AND UNWILLING to pay the price for your beliefs. I don't think they would allow me to re-enlist but given the chance. I'd do it in a second and take my experience with me to keep my fellow military personnel as safe as can be expected in a combat situation. To say you back the military but you don't back the war is a mistake. The worst thing that can happen to a person in combat is to be told that what they are doing and accomplishing is wrong. By stating that you don't back the war is stating that you really don't back the troops. Regardless of my opinion of the war, I will back it and let the military personnel know that their sacrifice is not wasted and I'm 100% behind them and their mission.

ThNozzleman

08-18-2004, 07:08 PM

The worst thing that can happen to a person in combat is to be told that what they are doing and accomplishing is wrong. By stating that you don't back the war is stating that you really don't back the troops.
I couldn't disagree more. Not favoring a war has nothing to do with whether or not you care for the people involved in it, soldiers or otherwise. The attitude that not supporting the war is not supporting the troops is a poor one, especially considering the history of our nation. I can think of no better support of our troops than to get them the hell out there, myself. People cannot continue to blindly follow the government with stars in their eyes. This is what gave us Vietnam, a stupid war that claimed thousands, needlessly. If one feels it's a stupid, needless war, one should say so; to do otherwise would make one a liar. The soldiers are adults; they can make up their own minds as to whether they think we should be in Iraq, or not. Saying that not supporting the war is not supporting the troops is tired right-wing propaganda. It was not true then, and it is not true now.

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-18-2004, 07:39 PM

FireLt1951

08-18-2004, 07:44 PM

First off, I'm far from being a right winger. If I'm anything, I'm quite moderate politically. I base my opinions on my experience's not propaganda. We are at war now and as a combat veteran, I will not tell these brave military personnel that what they are doing is wrong. I will not do to them what was done to me. You have your ideals and opinions and I have mine and to each their own. You ask not to be labled and yet you choose to label me as a right wing propaganist, not! The simple truth is I could never bring myself to even consider Kerry (socialist) for the Presidency under any and all circumstances.

VinnieB

08-19-2004, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by ThNozzleman

I couldn't disagree more. Not favoring a war has nothing to do with whether or not you care for the people involved in it, soldiers or otherwise. The attitude that not supporting the war is not supporting the troops is a poor one, especially considering the history of our nation. I can think of no better support of our troops than to get them the hell out there, myself. People cannot continue to blindly follow the government with stars in their eyes. This is what gave us Vietnam, a stupid war that claimed thousands, needlessly. If one feels it's a stupid, needless war, one should say so; to do otherwise would make one a liar. The soldiers are adults; they can make up their own minds as to whether they think we should be in Iraq, or not. Saying that not supporting the war is not supporting the troops is tired right-wing propaganda. It was not true then, and it is not true now.

Is your helmet on too tight? What makes you think you have a better outlook on Iraq than the men and women overthere? They are the ones doing the job...lets ask them? Unlike Kosovo and Bosnia, the military personnel deployed are NOT asking to come home....Re-enlistments are on track and morale is good. They do want to be home, (anyone whoever's been in war knows what I mean) BUT they also know they need to get a job done. They are all bound by a sense of duty. Oh and as far as war crimes in Vietnam...wow!...big suprise!...I would agree with the .5% number posted by FireLT....Let me ask you this....since we are comparing war crimes....Talk to a refugee from Hue City, Saigon, anyone of the thousands of villiages were the NVA and VC slaughtered millions of people....OH! and as far as the "politics" about Vietnam...unlike this war...there was NO commitment by the US Government to "win" that war. I believe this is in Macnammara's book. Something to the effect of.."We had no intentions of winning the war in Vietnam".....This is alot different than today's war.....Oh! and as far as people the "support our troops" but not the war...or thier efforts in the war....just my little experiance...When I can home from Afganistan...I was still in my desert cammies...walking up to my apartment in town....I was approched by 3 persons whostopped me and said "how could you do those terrible things to those poor innocent people", "why did you have to kill those women and childern"..blah blah blah...I just looked at them and smiled...It took every amount of disipline in my body...not to choke these pigs out...It just goes to show...these people are out of touch with reality.

StoveBolt

08-19-2004, 10:50 AM

Analysis of John Kerry's Fitness Reports

http://www.swiftvets.com/staticpage...hp?page=Fitreps

John Kerry's First Purple Heart

http://www.swiftvets.com/staticpage...hp?page=Purple1

xploded

08-19-2004, 11:23 AM

Why can't these libs see that when fighting an enemy such as we are that showing any crack in the unity shows weakness. These savages see the whiners questioning every move that is made and have to be just laughing their asses off. These folks are in no hurry and will just sit back and wait for our own mistakes and weaknesses to show so they can take advantage of them. The only way to defeat them is to just show resolve and kick their ass. The old tired argument that the strongest patriotism is to question the actions of the government is all well and good in the right setting. This is not it. These fanatics do not care if you disagree with the policies, they will kill your ass just the same. It seems that with Hollywood and all the libs today that being cool and fashionable means to cut down the President and all that believe in what we are doing has to be done. I guess I will never be popular with that crowd because I say the terrorist started this fight with the first bombing of the trade center and it took quite a few other attacks and a new president to finally come to the conclusion that something had to be done. So now just do it.

jasper45

08-19-2004, 01:19 PM

FireLt1951 brought up some good points in his response. These are much the same words I have heard spoken from Vietnam Veterans I work with. I do believe that it is very difficult to "support" the troops but not the war, or the other good one is "I support the troops, but Bush is on his own". Does anybody out there really believe that he (President Bush) is using the military in this war for his own gain? I personally feel that he is greatly troubled by the deaths, and wounding everyday of our servicemen and women. I have a difficult time believing that Clinton used the military action in Kosovo to deter the whole Lewinsky scandal. Maybe I am naive, but I certainly don't think that, and I am certainly no fan of our former President.
Regarding dissent, I think it has a purpose and a duty here in our free society. Look at Iraq, what was the first thing those citizens did with their new found freedom? They protested. Something they could not ever do before in most of their lifetimes. Dissent is a fine line though. I do believe that with modern media, and the internet that our dissent is used as a tool for our enemy, and I do believe that it gives our enemy motivation to stay the course. I also believe that in a round about way it has and will continue to cost our military casualties. We are at war now, we have been since September 11, 2001. I know, I know Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. But al-qaeda was and is in Iraq, and Iraq was an open sponsor of terror at the state level. There is no doubt about that. It is important to remember here that Kerry also voted to remove Iraq from the business of terror. My biggest fear is that people will do to our newest vets what was done to our Vietnam vets, FireLt1951 has many stories of life here post service, and how he and many others were treated. Like the war or not, your right to spit on these veterans was paid for with alot of blood. That bill is still being paid for today, as we sit here in the comfort of our homes arguing, wondering if we will have a cold beer to go with our steak tonight.
Dissent is a priviledge we need to take very seriously. When we voice our dissent, maybe we should look at the whole picture. Lt1951 can speak from a point of authority here, our words and actions do get to the troops. I have heard that from many others, and I heard how it affected them mentally and emotionally, added on top to the stresses already faced by warfare. I am not telling anyone to not voice their opinion, I am only saying that maybe we need to think about how it may affect those who are keeping us free, with their very lives. The time to openly debate the rightousness of this war stopped when hostilities started. We need to support our Commander in Chief now, his decisions regarding the war on terror and our troops preserving freedom. At this point, if you don't agree with how the war on terror is being carried out, voice your opinion in the voting booth. Remember though, John Kerry did support this same "needless" war.

VinnieB

08-19-2004, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI
Kerry for President!

HA...LMFAO!!!!....NO!!!...Don' t Drink the Kool-Aid!...:eek: :D

VinnieB

08-19-2004, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by FireLt1951
First off, I'm far from being a right winger. If I'm anything, I'm quite moderate politically. I base my opinions on my experience's not propaganda. We are at war now and as a combat veteran, I will not tell these brave military personnel that what they are doing is wrong. I will not do to them what was done to me. You have your ideals and opinions and I have mine and to each their own. You ask not to be labled and yet you choose to label me as a right wing propaganist, not! The simple truth is I could never bring myself to even consider Kerry (socialist) for the Presidency under any and all circumstances.

Amen!...and...Welcome home Brother. Thanks for your service and sacrifice.

VinnieB

08-19-2004, 02:23 PM

[i] I have a difficult time believing that Clinton used the military action in Kosovo to deter the whole Lewinsky scandal. Maybe I am naive, but I certainly don't think that, and I am certainly no fan of our former President

I agree..We were there because of Europes Failure to keep tabs on the situation....And we did make a promise after the Balkan War to not let it happen again...the same promise we made in September of 1945. Actually...the UN (booooooo!!!)...was incharge of the Balkan War...lead by the French. Well...they failed to really do anything. Then Kosovo Came...and a call for NATO to handle the crisis..not the UN because of the previous failure. The biggest participants there were the UK, Germany and us. I for one believed we should not have even bothered with a European problem...BUT we did make a promise and we were expected to do something about it. Up until March 2003...the world always expected the US to intervene. And we always do...our current Naval Warfighting Doctrine is written for these types of actions. Well....I'll stop ranting...just a small history lesson.

ThNozzleman

08-21-2004, 12:37 AM

A little different take...
http://swiftvets.eriposte.com/

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-21-2004, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by ThNozzleman
A little different take...
http://swiftvets.eriposte.com/

OK, so let me get this straight...

SBV is an ultra right wing group that should be bsnned from political action because they are funded by people who support the President.

But moveon.org is OK?

Unfit for Command should be taken off the shelves and burned because the opposition believes the book is a lie and might hurt their candidate.

But Michael Moore's movie, Richard Clark's book, Bob Woodward's book, etc. were works of art, totally objective, totally accurate and did not hurt Pres. Bush?

Please, you're smarter than this.

DaSharkie

08-21-2004, 09:52 AM

George,

I have been thinking about this especially lately. It is OK for liberals (excue me they like to be called "Progressives" now) to spit hate filled statements agains Republicans, rip into the past of others, criticize everything someone has done, say "I have a plan....." and never offer up what that plan is or how it will b eaccomplished. But if you call them on it, you are hate filled, partisan, "angry white men", sexist, racist, homophobic, or whatever.

I have truly come to believe that liberals want diversity (in opinion, racial composeure, or whatever), so long as you believe the same thing that they do. Otherwise you get that sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, or whatever insult they wish to throw at you.

This is not an insult towards anyone here, just a take on your last post.

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-21-2004, 10:01 AM

jasper45

08-21-2004, 12:21 PM

I think what we are seeing here is the double standard that exists, and some politics being played at the national level. The purpose of swift boat vets for truth is no differant than moveon.org. They are both "527" or whatever number their type of group is designated under. President Bush can't even acknowledge they exist, much less tell them to go away. Same is true for Kerry with moveon.org. Swift vets deserve to be heard. Let your conscience be your guide on whether you choose to beleive them or not. As I said before, their information is not a deciding factor for my decision in November. Their information does deserve to be heard though, just as much as moveon.org. This game has been played by pro-liberal groups for years now, and it is plainly obvious the left doesn't like having the shoe on the other foot.

ThNozzleman

08-21-2004, 02:17 PM

SBV is an ultra right wing group that should be bsnned from political action because they are funded by people who support the President.
Never stated that; I just think they are being less than truthful, and more than shameless, when they attack Kerry's service record in Vietnam. The link I posted earlier plainly lays this out in straight-forward fashion. I'll let others figure out the legalities concerning whether or not they are in violation of regulations, or participating in slander/libel.
But moveon.org is OK?
Never stated that. Only glanced over their site, once. If you want to start a thread concerning moveon.org, feel free to do so. Otherwise, we can continue to debate the politically motivated SBV and their rather questionable statements towards John Kerry, a combat veteran who served with honor by all official accounts that I've seen.
Unfit for Command should be taken off the shelves and burned because the opposition believes the book is a lie and might hurt their candidate.
Calm down...nobody is burning books. If the things stated in the book are lies, then Kerry has every right to oppose them and attempt (through legal and ethical means) to persuade vendors/publishers/stores, what-have-you to not participate in sales activities. This is a common tactic, used by every facet of the political system. He also may have the right to press charges of libel and slander, as well.
But Michael Moore's movie, Richard Clark's book, Bob Woodward's book, etc. were works of art, totally objective, totally accurate and did not hurt Pres. Bush?
Haven't read the books, nor have I watched Moore's movie, so I don't know. All I know is that a politically motivated group of people are attacking the combat record of a decorated Navy officer (who volunteered to serve overseas), with contradictory and questionable statements and accusations that fly in the face of every official record of his combat service in Vietnam...all to promote the re-election of a man with a lackluster, shaky service record, who did not volunteer for combat or go to Vietnam.
Please, you're smarter than this.
Man! A compliment from George! :eek:

ThNozzleman

08-21-2004, 03:05 PM

I have truly come to believe that liberals want diversity (in opinion, racial composeure, or whatever), so long as you believe the same thing that they do. Otherwise you get that sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, or whatever insult they wish to throw at you.
These are universally-accepted terms used to describe the very real behavior exhibited by certain groups in our society towards individuals and groups who are somehow "different" than they are. People who fall into one of these catagories know who they are, and they should be ashamed.
I'm not allying myself with anyone in particular; there are a lot of loud-mouth people of questionable intelligence on both sides, many who do it for profit and power. I do not align myself with any particular system or political party; merely call it like I see it. If my views land on one side of the fence or the other, so be it.
As for name-calling and insults, however, I'm pretty sure the right-wingers on this forum are well ahead in that little race. A quick visit to several other threads on these same forums will prove that very quickly. To my knowledge, the same attitude and childish behavior has not been reciprocated by the "other side". Correct me, if I'm wrong. Believe me, I have been the recipient of some juicy hate email before...it's a really nice feeling. Such anger is sickening to me. :rolleyes:

EFD840

08-21-2004, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI

OK, so let me get this straight...

SBV is an ultra right wing group that should be bsnned from political action because they are funded by people who support the President.

But moveon.org is OK?

Unfit for Command should be taken off the shelves and burned because the opposition believes the book is a lie and might hurt their candidate.

But Michael Moore's movie, Richard Clark's book, Bob Woodward's book, etc. were works of art, totally objective, totally accurate and did not hurt Pres. Bush?

Please, you're smarter than this.

Fresh out of retirement, George hits one out of the park again!

It is uttterly amazing that Michael Moore's movie - which he openly admits is intended to get Bush voted out - is OK but a book written by MEN WHO WERE THERE WITH KERRY is deserving of a Federal Elections Commission complaint.

Talk about a crybaby. All other issues aside, the fact that Kerry goes running to mama the first time someone turns up a little heat should be more than enough proof that he isn't capable of running this country.

StoveBolt

08-21-2004, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by ThNozzleman
I just think they are being less than truthful, and more than shameless, when they attack Kerry's service record in Vietnam

these vets have something to say and i'm listening, and kerry is going to answer some of them or get some one other than Hurley, who only can say "THESE ARE JUST A BUNCH OF REPUBLICAN BACKED LIARS" and McCain, McCain, McCain, McCain and THE NAVY OFFICIAL RECORDS SAY and THE NAVY OFFICIAL RECORDS SAY (which kerry created) did you watch scarborough last night?.. they had steve gardner (average kind'a guy/kerry's boat) and Hurley.. he made hurley look like a jerk .. steve gardner was holding up a report of what kerry said after the san pan deal and told hurley to tell kerry to release all the reports (with a smile on his face). in fact every time hurley talked gardner had a smile on his face, hurley also said o'neill was a dirty tricks man for nixon.. after the interview scarborough had pat Buchanan on .. Buchanan lost his cool about what hurley was saying about o'neill and these vets, he said "i don't know how anyone could vote for this guy for president" and told scarborough he was doing the right thing, getting to the bottom of this.. there is "MUCH" more coming you will see ... SB

sorry for the edit..

DaSharkie

08-21-2004, 04:19 PM

Noz,

My post was not directed at you in any way. I am just sick of not getting both sides of the argument (from either party). The democratic party refused to allow a pre-life speaker at the convention. I do not support affirmative action, I get called racist (and others who share my view) by supporters of it (who tned to be liberal). I do not condone or like homosexuality (I think it is wrong for a variety of reasons) but I honor, respect, and call homosexuals friends, but because I think homosexuality is wrong I get called a homophobe (by those who tend to be liberal). I believe gun control is wrong and I am called a redneck, hatemonger (by those who tend to be liberal.)

To insult someone for simply holding and voicing an opinion different than yours is rediculous. I do not know you, I may not like your opinions or views on many issues, but that does not mean that I cannot have a quality conversation with you, or ever call you my friend. I have a friend back in Massachusetts who is a card carrying member of the socialist party, but I still get along with him.

As for hate mail, this is wrong. As is shooting a doctor who performs abortions, a person fighting for civil rights, or whatever. There are rediculous crackpots on both sides. And you are right, the insults have flown here, many times against you, and that is wrong. It cheapens the conversation, degrades any quality that your points may have, and makes them look like a child. If you cannot have a logically thought out, reasoned conversation without resorting to petty insults and name calling, then go away.

I will say that there were probably more insults thrown by the "right wingers" simply because there appears to be more conservative leaning posters here than those that hold many of the same beliefs that you do. This does not make it right, nor would I condone it. I have posted in the past for a civilized conversation but it falls on deaf ears so I ignore it, and usually most of the post that is made with it.

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-21-2004, 05:15 PM

Never stated that; I just think they are being less than truthful, and more than shameless, when they attack Kerry's service record in Vietnam. The link I posted earlier plainly lays this out in straight-forward fashion. I'll let others figure out the legalities concerning whether or not they are in violation of regulations, or participating in slander/libel.

And it wasn't shameless for the libs to attack Pres. Bush's record in his highly succesful war on terror? If it is slander/libel, Let Mr. Heinz file a lawsuit. Better yet, yet Mr. Heinz RELEASE HIS MIMLITARY RECORDS!

Never stated that. Only glanced over their site, once. If you want to start a thread concerning moveon.org, feel free to do so. Otherwise, we can continue to debate the politically motivated SBV and their rather questionable statements towards John Kerry, a combat veteran who served with honor by all official accounts that I've seen.

The best official accounts that exist are the accounts written by Kerry himself. But you haven;t seen them because he refuses to release them.

You don't see any parallel or similarity between SBV and moveon?

Calm down...nobody is burning books. If the things stated in the book are lies, then Kerry has every right to oppose them and attempt (through legal and ethical means) to persuade vendors/publishers/stores, what-have-you to not participate in sales activities. This is a common tactic, used by every facet of the political system. He also may have the right to press charges of libel and slander, as well.

The Kerry campaign is writing to booksellers and asking (telling) them to stop selling this book. That is one step shy of burning them. You are being intellectually dishonest if youtell me that you wouldn't be up on your horse screaming censorship if the Pres. camp had done the same thing. There have been baseless biased attacks on Pres. bush than any other elected official in history and he stood there and took it like a man. He didn't run around crazed and crying telling people to stop selling the books. He let his honorable record speak for itself and so far, these attacks have not affected him a bit. If they were true he would be down by 30 points. Kerry is so upset because they are ttrue and he is toast.

Haven't read the books, nor have I watched Moore's movie, so I don't know. All I know is that a politically motivated group of people are attacking the combat record of a decorated Navy officer (who volunteered to serve overseas), with contradictory and questionable statements and accusations that fly in the face of every official record of his combat service in Vietnam...all to promote the re-election of a man with a lackluster, shaky service record, who did not volunteer for combat or go to Vietnam.

All I know is that a politically motivated group of people are attacking the combat record of an honorable, succesful and moral Commander in Chief with with contradictory and questionable statements and accusations that fly in the face of every official record of his honorable and courageous service to this country. The scary thing here is that they are doing it with the duplicity of the press.

GeorgeWendtCFI

08-21-2004, 05:17 PM

To my knowledge, the same attitude and childish behavior has not been reciprocated by the "other side".

ROTFLMAO:rolleyes:

FireLt1951

08-21-2004, 06:48 PM

This is all Hanoi John has to do to clear all this up. I don't find this unreasonable.

http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3862

What the Kerry camp needs to do to effectively counter the Swift Vet charges:

1. Sign form 180 and release all of John Kerry's military records.

2. Provide damage report and wound reports from the No Man Left Behind incident that provides details about just how many bullet holes were shot into the 5 boats involved, and how many of the over 20 men involved suffered a gunshot wounds during this intense firefight. By effectively demonstrating that there was enemy fire during this incident, and that some of the sailors did indeed suffer gunshot wounds, Kerry's campaign can counter the claim there was no enemy fire.

3. Have statements from the other crewmembers of Kerry's boat to the effect that Steve Gardner is lying about the 'Sampan Incident' where he claims he shot a father and a little boy to death, and in which they took a mother and infant girl aboard. Have Kerry's other crewmembers state that the after-action report Gardner called attention to is completely accurate: 4 VC were killed and two VC were Captured in Action.

4. Provide statements from other crewmembers of Kerry's boat to the effect that they do remember being in Cambodia with John Kerry, either on Christmas Day or later on while dropping off Special Forces operatives.

5. Have other crewmembers of Kerry's boat sent out to appear in interviews to counter Gardner and other Swift Vets instead of professional political hacks. Gardner was there, he was an eyewitness and so are many of the Swift Vets to the events they are making claims about. Lanny Davis, James Carville, and John Hurley were not there. Neither was Tad Devine. You can only effectively counter eyewitnesses with other eyewitnesses.

6. Have Kerry address the specific charges being leveled about his medals. If the SwiftVets are claiming the first Purple Heart wound was a 'scratch' not worthy of the medal, have Kerry come out and talk about how bad the wound was, where it was located on his arm and show any scar that still remains. Let him show the scars on his leg where the shrapnel supposedly still resides.

It must be noted that thus far, even though the Swift Vet story is building steam every day, John Kerry and his campaign managers have refused to do any of the six things listed above.

1. Kerry adamantly REFUSES to sign Form 180. Whenever he or his spokespersons are asked they insist they have released ALL records, but they clearly have not. Paperwork for Kerry's first Purple Heart has manifestly NOT been released, among several other documents. If Kerry has in fact released all of his available military records, as he claims, then there is no reason NOT to sign a Form 180.

2. Kerry's camp keeps referring to the medal citations that he and Larry Thurlow received for the No Man Left Behind event, and the after action report which Kerry wrote, which describes enemy fire coming from the banks during this action. The medal citations are based on the after action report, and since no other officer involved in this event has ever said there was enemy fire, Kerry must have written it. The most effective way to counter the over 12 eyewitness accounts that claim there was no enemy fire would be to produce the damage reports to the 5 boats involved in this incident from gunfire. It would be to produce medical reports about gunshot wounds treated due to the alleged enemy fire. Kerry's camp has NOT produced any such documentation. The Swift Vet eyewitnesses claim the 4 other boats were stationary around PCF 3 for more than an hour doing repair and recovery operations, as well as treating the crewmen of that boat that were injured when the mine went off. That was plenty of time for these sailors and their boats to be hit by enemy small arms fire if indeed there were any. Instead, Kerry's campaign keeps insisting that since the medal citations and the after-action report written by Kerry mentions enemy fire, the matter is closed and no damage or medical reports need to be produced.

3. None of Kerry's other crewmembers have shown up on any of the networks as a counterpart to a Swift Vet for Truth spokesman during a debate. All the spokespeople for Kerry's camp have been professional poltical people, not Vietnam eyewitnesses to the specific events being discussed. Another Kerry boatcrew member would be the most effective challenger to Steve Gardner's account of the 'Sampan Incident'. Such a person could say "Steve, I was there, we did kill four VC and capture two just like the report says." Instead we get John Hurley sputtering that Gardner is making it all up. Kerry's camp has had two weeks to get their eyewitness out there, including Kerry himself. They have not done so.

4. Kerry has pretty much given up on the Christmas in Cambodia, but has also 'floated' the idea that he was there later on dropping off Special Forces. All Kerry has to do is produce crewmembers of his own boat who can look into a camera and say "I was in Cambodia with John Kerry". They have NOT done so.

5. Once again, the best counter to an eyewitness is another eyewitness. Kerry claims to have up to 13 eyewitnesses on his side versus over 60 for the Swift Vet's For Truth. The Swift Vet's eyewitnesses can be seen on TV and heard on the radio almost every day for the past two weeks. They have been on Hardball with Christ Matthews, Hannity and Colmes, The No Spin Zone, Rush Limbaugh, and more. Kerry's eyewitnesses have been.......................... ..nowhere. Unseen and unheard. Whenever John O'Neil, Larry Thurlow, Steve Gardner or another Swift Vet is going to appear, the Kerry Campaign has had opportunity after opportunity to put one of Kerry's boat crewmembers on the show as well. They have NOT done so. As a matter of fact, the one statement I can find where one of Kerry's Swift Vet backers discusses the Christmas in Cambodia controversy, Meideros says he doesn't remember ever being in Cambodia with John Kerry.

6. Kerry has refused to address the specific charges regarding the wounds that resulted in his first and third Purple Hearts. Not once has he said that the wound to his arm that resulted in his first Purple Heart was a 'substantial' or 'serious' wound. He has not stated how many stitches were required to close it or how much blood he lost due to it. Numerous eyewitnesses, including his commanding officer, state the wound was a mere scratch. He has not produced a SINGLE MEDICAL RECORD that discusses the nature of the wounds for which he got his first and his third Purple Heart, and I am not sure about the second one, I will have to check. All the eyewitnesses besides himself state these first and third Purple Heart wounds were so slight they had nothing but contempt for Kerry as they watched him try to wrangle medals out of them. After Kerry's attempt to get his first Purple Heart for the slight scratch on his arm, the one where his C.O. Grant Hibbard threw him out of his office, Kerry was assigned to take his boat to An Thoi with another swift boat commanded by Lieutenant Tedd Peck, who told him "Kerry, follow me no closer than a thousand yards. If you get any closer, I'll teach you what a real Purple Heart is."

Instead of doing these six things that would effectively counter the Swift Vet's For Truth ads and book, Kerry has:

1. Filed a complait with the FEC claiming that Swiftboat Vets for Truth is funded and coordinated as a part of the Bush-Cheney campaign and not a real 527 organization.
2. Claimed all the Swift Vets For Truth, over 200 of them, are all Republicans who are lying.
3. Put pressure on TV stations and bookstores not to air the ads and to not display the book.
4. Asked Regenry, publishers of Unfit For Command, to cease publishing the book.
5. Claimed that President Bush is using the Swiftboat Vets For Truth to attack his war record and challenged the President to 'Bring it on!'.

Every step that Kerry has made on this issue has been a mis-step. He has changed his story, not provided any eyewitness to counter the specific Swift Vet charges, and has instead attempted to censor the charges by having the ads and the book pulled instead of answering the charges. He then makes every effort to tie the Swift Vets to the Bush campaign, the strategy being if he can prove Bush is funding and directing SBVFT the organization is instantly and automatically discredited and no one need look seriously at the charges that are being leveled against him.

Thus far, Kerry's defense has been misdirection and avoidance and attempts at censorship.

Can he really keep this up for the next two and a half months?

I don't think so.