| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Eris" |
| Date: |
25 May 2005 06:26:14 PM |
| Object: |
O.T. Kerry's military records |
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
.
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 10:02:28 AM |
|
|
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Raven" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 03:31:57 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message news:<1117119748.63e566de23b5f81687200aface330749@teranews>...
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
You mean when he was discharged from enlisted service in 1967 to accept
a commission? That stated clearly, "Character of Discharge: Honorable"
-- which shouldn't be surprising, since otherwise he wouldn't have
been *given* a commission. Google "Record_of_Discharge.pdf".
Or do you mean when he stopped being an active-duty reserve officer?
That didn't involve a "discharge". He was transferred to inactive status:
the *ready* reserve in 1970, and then the *standby* reserves in 1972.
Google "Release_From_Active_Duty.pdf", "Transfer_To_Standby_Reserve.pdf"
He was finally discharged from the *standby* reserves in 1978, also an
honorable discharge. Google "Honorable_Discharge_From_Reserve.pdf".
These records have been open for over a year. You still haven't read them?
Reading <http://swiftvets.eriposte.com> should resolve any other issues.
By contrast, records show Bush was absent from duty for at least a year:
"Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report."
From his annual review, copy at <http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc9.gif>.
TexANG thought he was at Dannelly (Alabama), but he never reported there.
"Soldiers are considered deserters when they remain AWOL for more than 30
days." <http://www.army.mil/soldiers/oct2003/pdfs/awol.pdf>
Or see page 10 of "What We Know About AWOL and Desertion",
<http://www-ari.army.mil/pdf/s51.pdf> :
"What is a Deserter? ... Currently, any soldier who has taken an unauthorized
leave from his/her training or duty station is considered AWOL. On the 31st
day of AWOL, this status is officially changed to Dropped From Rolls (DFR),
or desertion. This can be called the 'administrative' definition of the term."
But I guess it's different if your daddy's a favorite of the President.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 05:27:51 PM |
|
|
(Raven) wrote in
news:7d8764ba.0505301231.7a796981@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<1117119748.63e566de23b5f81687200aface330749@teranews>...
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
You mean when he was discharged from enlisted service in 1967 to
accept a commission? That stated clearly, "Character of Discharge:
Honorable" -- which shouldn't be surprising, since otherwise he
wouldn't have been *given* a commission. Google
"Record_of_Discharge.pdf".
Or do you mean when he stopped being an active-duty reserve officer?
That didn't involve a "discharge". He was transferred to inactive
status: the *ready* reserve in 1970, and then the *standby* reserves
in 1972. Google "Release_From_Active_Duty.pdf",
"Transfer_To_Standby_Reserve.pdf"
He was finally discharged from the *standby* reserves in 1978, also an
honorable discharge. Google "Honorable_Discharge_From_Reserve.pdf".
These records have been open for over a year. You still haven't read
them?
Kerry is *still* holding off releasing *all* his records.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/05
/24/the_caveat_emperor/
The caveat emperor
By Joan Vennochi, Globe Columnist | May 24, 2005
AT THIS POINT it comes as no surprise. John Kerry is releasing all his
military records -- but then again, he isn't.
ADVERTISEMENT
During an interview yesterday with Globe editorial writers and
columnists, the former Democratic presidential nominee was asked if had
signed Form SF 180, authorizing the Department of Defense to grant
access to all his military records.
''I have signed it," Kerry said. Then, he added that his staff was
''still going through it" and ''very, very shortly, you will have a
chance to see it."
The devil is usually in the details. With Kerry, it's also in the dodges
and digressions. After the interview, Kerry's communications director,
David Wade, was asked to clarify when Kerry signed SF 180 and when
public access would be granted. Kerry drifted over to join the
conversation, immediately raising the confusion level. He did not answer
the question of when he signed the form or when the entire record will
be made public.
Several e-mails later, Wade conveyed the following information: On
Friday, May 20, Kerry obtained a copy of Form 180 and signed it. ''The
next step is to send it to the Navy, which will happen in the next few
days. The Navy will then send out the records," e-mailed Wade. Kerry
first said he would sign Form 180 when pressed by Tim Russert during a
Jan. 30 appearance on ''Meet the Press."
Six months after Kerry's loss to George W. Bush, it feels somewhat
gratuitous to point out how hard it can be to get a clear, straight
answer from Kerry on this and other matters. But as long as the
Massachusetts senator is thinking about another presidential run, the
candor gap remains on the table, because he puts it there.
On one hand, he seems to have concluded that Democrats have a
''branding" problem, much like a company selling razor blades. The
Democratic Party, said Kerry, needs ''a new brand. That's the
challenge." For 25 years, he said, Democrats did not fight negative
branding by their opponents. As a result, he said, Democrats are now
labelled as ''tax, spend, weak, things like that."
Later, Kerry said, ''Let me be crystal clear. We do not have to
reformulate or redefine the Democratic Party. I'm tired of hearing that
the Democratic Party doesn't stand for anything." The party, he said,
stands for healthcare for every single American; public education that
works and gets the necessary resources, with strict accountability;
foreign policy that demonstrates both strength and respect for
multinationalism; a tax structure that is fair; protecting the
environment, and energy independence.
However, Republicans successfully directed the 2004 contest to other
issues, including the war on terror, gay marriage, and abortion. Kerry
now stands as close to Bush as he can on those issues.
On Iraq, Kerry basically endorsed the outcome of the Bush Doctrine,
saying: ''I do think we're making a kind of progress, slowly but
surely."
Asked about gay marriage, he explained that he and George Bush hold the
same position -- for civil unions. And he noted that he is supporting
Pennsylvania Democrat Bob Casey Jr. -- ''what they call a prolife
candidate" -- against incumbent Republican Senator Rick Santorum.
Kerry said that people don't want to ''go back to coat hangers and back
alleys," or put ''moms in jail and doctors." Then he pointed out the
alternatives that Democrats, following in the footsteps of New York
Senator Hillary Clinton, now take pains to embrace -- adoption,
prevention, and abstinence.
The twists and turns of the past campaign still elicit bursts of
passionate analysis. He continues to attribute Bush's success to a
combination of voter indifference to the truth and the Republicans'
ability to leverage the ''fear factor."
Asked about the impact of religion, he said that he reread the New
Testament since the election to make sure ''I didn't miss anything" and
recalled that on the campaign trail ''I gave a very strong speech about
values and how you measure these things." He believes he lost the
''soccer moms" and ''security moms" to the Osama bin Laden videotape,
released the Friday before Election Day.
The campaign waged against him by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
arouses Kerry's greatest passion. ''What they said was untrue," he said.
He considered, but decided against, filing suit against the group, which
alleged that he did not deserve his Vietnam military honors.
Kerry insists ''The truth in its entirety will come out . . . the truth
will come out."
Signing Form 180 is the first step. Releasing his entire military record
to the public is the second.
It doesn't get any plainer than that.
Reading <http://swiftvets.eriposte.com> should resolve any other
issues.
Reading his complete military record is what matters.
By contrast, records show Bush was absent from duty for at least a
year: "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period
of report." From his annual review, copy at
<http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc9.gif>. TexANG thought he was at
Dannelly (Alabama), but he never reported there.
That's a demonstrable lie.
http://nationalreview.com/owens/owens200402090833.asp
"Soldiers are considered deserters when they remain AWOL for more than
30 days." <http://www.army.mil/soldiers/oct2003/pdfs/awol.pdf>
Or see page 10 of "What We Know About AWOL and Desertion",
<http://www-ari.army.mil/pdf/s51.pdf> :
"What is a Deserter? ... Currently, any soldier who has taken an
unauthorized leave from his/her training or duty station is considered
AWOL. On the 31st day of AWOL, this status is officially changed to
Dropped From Rolls (DFR), or desertion. This can be called the
'administrative' definition of the term."
But I guess it's different if your daddy's a favorite of the
President.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 12:02:51 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given doesn't
mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 12:59:13 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
27 May 2005 02:27:05 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred? By the way, we were talking about Kerry,
weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a sudden?
Fucking looney.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
27 May 2005 04:17:55 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from
his superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's hypocrisy.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's actual
documented records. That's why.
Fucking looney.
Fucking hypocrite.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
29 May 2005 02:32:16 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from
his superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what you
are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which is only
good sense, not hypocracy.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's actual
documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't take
that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They were shown to
be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes to help Bush during
the primaries. Instead I listened to the testimony of legitimate
service personnel who had actual knowledge of events. As for Bush,
they never found any, did they?
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 09:31:33 AM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117395136.704323.326040@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records
being released. He seemed to have general positive
evaluations from his superiors, What are these folks waiting
to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for
one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's
hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what you
are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which is only
good sense, not hypocracy.
The actual documented records are all available. The Republicans weren't
lying.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's
actual documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't take
that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They were shown
to be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes to help Bush
during the primaries.
One or two of them, not the whole group.
Instead I listened to the testimony of
legitimate service personnel who had actual knowledge of events. As
for Bush, they never found any, did they?
Yes, in fact they did find them, but the MSM media conveniently didn't
publish their stories.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eris" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 09:39:06 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 14:31:33 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117395136.704323.326040@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records
being released. He seemed to have general positive
evaluations from his superiors, What are these folks waiting
to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for
one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's
hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what you
are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which is only
good sense, not hypocracy.
The actual documented records are all available. The Republicans weren't
lying.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's
actual documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't take
that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They were shown
to be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes to help Bush
during the primaries.
One or two of them, not the whole group.
Instead I listened to the testimony of
legitimate service personnel who had actual knowledge of events. As
for Bush, they never found any, did they?
Yes, in fact they did find them, but the MSM media conveniently didn't
publish their stories.
And neither did Fox, The Washington Times, The National Enquirer?
No one in this NG provided sites for them?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 11:03:27 AM |
|
|
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:u99m915g0pi2j0f0qfvs9jd5lljuq7kf96@4ax.com:
On Mon, 30 May 2005 14:31:33 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117395136.704323.326040@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records
being released. He seemed to have general positive
evaluations from his superiors, What are these folks
waiting
to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for
one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers
given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about
Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's
hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what
you
are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which is
only
good sense, not hypocracy.
The actual documented records are all available. The Republicans
weren't
lying.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a
sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his
service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's
actual documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't take
that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They were shown
to be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes to help Bush
during the primaries.
One or two of them, not the whole group.
Instead I listened to the testimony of
legitimate service personnel who had actual knowledge of events. As
for Bush, they never found any, did they?
Yes, in fact they did find them, but the MSM media conveniently didn't
publish their stories.
And neither did Fox, The Washington Times, The National Enquirer?
Wouldn't you dismiss them if they had?
No one in this NG provided sites for them?
http://nationalreview.com/owens/owens200402090833.asp
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eris" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 12:35:23 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 16:03:27 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:u99m915g0pi2j0f0qfvs9jd5lljuq7kf96@4ax.com:
On Mon, 30 May 2005 14:31:33 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117395136.704323.326040@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records
being released. He seemed to have general positive
evaluations from his superiors, What are these folks
waiting
to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for
one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers
given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about
Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's
hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what
you
are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which is
only
good sense, not hypocracy.
The actual documented records are all available. The Republicans
weren't
lying.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a
sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his
service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's
actual documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't take
that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They were shown
to be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes to help Bush
during the primaries.
One or two of them, not the whole group.
Instead I listened to the testimony of
legitimate service personnel who had actual knowledge of events. As
for Bush, they never found any, did they?
Yes, in fact they did find them, but the MSM media conveniently didn't
publish their stories.
And neither did Fox, The Washington Times, The National Enquirer?
Wouldn't you dismiss them if they had?
Of course but what does that have to do with them no publishing, there
are 20 or 30 million people who would have accepted it as gospel.
No one in this NG provided sites for them?
http://nationalreview.com/owens/owens200402090833.asp
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 02:14:41 PM |
|
|
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:5ljm919opn7l9limnabp5udk9psfpoeagp@4ax.com:
On Mon, 30 May 2005 16:03:27 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:u99m915g0pi2j0f0qfvs9jd5lljuq7kf96@4ax.com:
On Mon, 30 May 2005 14:31:33 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117395136.704323.326040@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military
records being released. He seemed to have general
positive evaluations from his superiors, What are these
folks
waiting
to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy,
for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers
given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about
Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's
hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what
you are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which
is only good sense, not hypocracy.
The actual documented records are all available. The Republicans
weren't lying.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a
sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his
service even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't
take Bush's actual documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't
take that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They
were shown to be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes
to help Bush during the primaries.
One or two of them, not the whole group.
Instead I listened to the testimony of
legitimate service personnel who had actual knowledge of events.
As for Bush, they never found any, did they?
Yes, in fact they did find them, but the MSM media conveniently
didn't publish their stories.
And neither did Fox, The Washington Times, The National Enquirer?
Wouldn't you dismiss them if they had?
Of course but what does that have to do with them no publishing, there
are 20 or 30 million people who would have accepted it as gospel.
Those people already didn't believe the Democrats' lies about Bush's
service record.
No one in this NG provided sites for them?
http://nationalreview.com/owens/owens200402090833.asp
No comment? Not even a blanket dismissal?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
29 May 2005 08:05:09 PM |
|
|
jwk wrote:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from
his superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what you
are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which is only
good sense, not hypocracy.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's actual
documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't take
that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They were shown to
be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes to help Bush during
the primaries. Instead I listened to the testimony of legitimate
service personnel who had actual knowledge of events.
Thank you. It's good to know some people could see through the
smokescreen known as Unfit for Command, and Swift Boat Veterans for
"truth".
Doug
As for Bush,
they never found any, did they?
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "G-Ride" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 07:52:05 PM |
|
|
<dreese@erols.com> wrote in message
news:1117415109.018116.301120@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
jwk wrote:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117222025.048468.22550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records
being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from
his superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for
one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
Where was the hypocricy Fred?
You accused me of the very thing that you do yourself. That's
hypocrisy.
There might be some hypocracy if that were true Fred, however what you
are accusing me of is not believing the Republican lies, which is only
good sense, not hypocracy.
By the way, we were talking about
Kerry, weren't we? How did Bush become the topic all of a sudden?
Because you're perfectly willing to take Kerry's word for his service
even when he's been shown to be a liar, but you won't take Bush's
actual
documented records. That's why.
Absolutely false. I only accept documentation, and legitimate
testimony. I didn't take Kerry's word for anything. I didn't take
that of the so-called "swift boat veterans" either. They were shown to
be the same group that accused McCain of war crimes to help Bush during
the primaries. Instead I listened to the testimony of legitimate
service personnel who had actual knowledge of events.
Thank you. It's good to know some people could see through the
smokescreen known as Unfit for Command, and Swift Boat Veterans for
"truth".
It wasn't too hard to see the swifties for the lying hacks that they were -
if one was paying attention.
--
Aloha, G-Ride
"Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga."
- Dalai Llama
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 01:15:12 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
So, Freddy, which Vietnamese city did George W. Bush fly over? Cam-Ranh
Bay? Lao Cai? Da Nang? Can Tho? Vinh? Nha Trang?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 02:49:20 PM |
|
|
DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in
news:Qmole.2877$Ri3.1943@trnddc09:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
So, Freddy, which Vietnamese city did George W. Bush fly over?
Cam-Ranh Bay? Lao Cai? Da Nang? Can Tho? Vinh? Nha Trang?
Sure, change the subject and run away.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 03:50:00 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in
news:Qmole.2877$Ri3.1943@trnddc09:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1117126971.669653.301910@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in
news:m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
The exact nature of his original discharge from the Navy, for one.
Just because you Republican folk won't accept the answers given
doesn't mean that other answers exist that you *will accept.
Fucking hypocrite. Yes, I mean *YOU*.
Even when you *have* seen the answers that *do* exist about Bush's
service record you *still* think he was AWOL.
So, Freddy, which Vietnamese city did George W. Bush fly over?
Cam-Ranh Bay? Lao Cai? Da Nang? Can Tho? Vinh? Nha Trang?
Sure, change the subject and run away.
Sure, defend a chickenshit coward who defended our nation against the
Viet Cong in... Houston? Or was it Mobile?
But, then again, you have a knack for changing the subject and running
away. :-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Raven" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 01:58:50 PM |
|
|
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message news:<m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com>...
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
Did your post somehow hang around in the ether for over a year,
before it successfully got posted?
<http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/8485782.htm?1c>
Posted on Wed, Apr. 21, 2004
Kerry Highly Praised in Military Records
Nedra Pickler, Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Records of John Kerry's Vietnam War service released
Wednesday show a highly praised naval officer who volunteered for
a dangerous assignment and at one point was "unofficially credited
with 20 enemy killed in action."
[click link to read remainder of article.]
Also, from July 2004, via the Wayback Machine: <http://tinyurl.com/asko6>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Raven" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
30 May 2005 01:59:13 PM |
|
|
Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message news:<m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com>...
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
Did your post somehow hang around in the ether for over a year,
before it successfully got posted?
<http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/8485782.htm?1c>
Posted on Wed, Apr. 21, 2004
Kerry Highly Praised in Military Records
Nedra Pickler, Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Records of John Kerry's Vietnam War service released
Wednesday show a highly praised naval officer who volunteered for
a dangerous assignment and at one point was "unofficially credited
with 20 enemy killed in action."
[click link to read remainder of article.]
Also, from July 2004, via the Wayback Machine: <http://tinyurl.com/asko6>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
25 May 2005 06:34:31 PM |
|
|
In article <m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com> writes:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
Whoa! Where'd those five Avenger Torpedo Bombers come from?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
28 May 2005 10:29:19 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 May 2005 23:34:31 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
In article <m92a91ta9dga2n4qvnjqel8npvumcnp6sl@4ax.com> writes:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
Whoa! Where'd those five Avenger Torpedo Bombers come from?
Wright Field!
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 04:48:19 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:26:14 -0400, Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why, are some of
the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 04:50:42 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:26:14 -0400, Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why, are some of
the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
Sorry, but his military records have already been revealed... before the
election.
Thanks for playing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 09:18:52 AM |
|
|
DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in
news:SZgle.3$Vm4.1@trnddc01:
duke wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:26:14 -0400, Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com>
wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why,
are some of the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
Sorry, but his military records have already been revealed... before
the election.
Not.
Thanks for playing.
Sigh. You sure make it difficult to not call you a gullible fool.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Even if the grass is greener on the other side,
they still have to cut it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eris" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 07:13:40 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 May 2005 09:50:42 GMT, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com>
wrote:
duke wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:26:14 -0400, Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why, are some of
the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
Sorry, but his military records have already been revealed... before the
election.
Thanks for playing.
They really like to skirt the issue of the wide spread voter fraud
don't they?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 05:39:52 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 May 2005 09:50:42 GMT, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why, are some of
the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
Sorry, but his military records have already been revealed... before the
election.
Not according to the opening statement above. Thanks for playing.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 06:51:23 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2005 09:50:42 GMT, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why, are some of
the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
Sorry, but his military records have already been revealed... before the
election.
Not according to the opening statement above. Thanks for playing.
Irrelevant. His records have already been revealed.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wcb" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 09:29:59 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:26:14 -0400, Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why, are
some of the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
AWOL still won't come clean about his beiing AWOL.
--
When I shake my killfile, I can hear them buzzing!
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: O.T. Kerry's military records |
26 May 2005 05:41:33 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 May 2005 09:29:59 -0500, wcb <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
duke wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:26:14 -0400, Eris <vithant@nospamgmail.com> wrote:
Some folks are real excited about Kerry's military records being
released. He seemed to have general positive evaluations from his
superiors, What are these folks waiting to have revealed?
His refusal to do so prior to the election, and the questions why, are
some of the things that cost him the election.
I wonder what he has to hide?
AWOL still won't come clean about his beiing AWOL.
Oh, his not being awol has been fully revealed now. The military says so.
That's why he won the election while kerry kicked the bucket.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
