Religions > Atheism > Smearboat Liars Caught In Own Lies, According to Navy Records
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Yang, AthD h.c" |
| Date: |
18 Aug 2004 10:46:07 PM |
| Object: |
Smearboat Liars Caught In Own Lies, According to Navy Records |
Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most
vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate
of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own
version of events.
In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who
commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly
disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came
under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March
13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.
But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released
yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act,
contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons
fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won
his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for
providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets
flying about him."
....
I never heard a shot," Thurlow said in his affidavit, which was
released by Swift Boats Veterans for Truth. The group claims the
backing of more than 250 Vietnam veterans, including a majority of
Kerry's fellow boat commanders.
A document recommending Thurlow for the Bronze Star noted that all his
actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire which LTJG
THURLOW completely ignored in providing immediate assistance" to the
disabled boat and its crew. The citation states that all other units
in the flotilla also came under fire.
....
Thurlow and other anti-Kerry veterans have repeatedly alleged that
Kerry was the author of an after-action report that described how his
boat came under enemy fire. Kerry campaign researchers dispute that
assertion, and there is no convincing documentary evidence to settle
the argument. As the senior skipper in the flotilla, Thurlow might
have been expected to write the after-action report for March 13, but
he said that Kerry routinely "duked the system" to present his version
of events.
For much of the episode, Kerry was not in a position to know firsthand
what was happening on Thurlow's boat, as Kerry's boat had sped down
the river after the mine exploded under another boat. He later
returned to provide assistance to the stricken boat.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -951 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
31 Aug 2004 02:29:14 PM |
|
|
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc9r5.13k0mdo3mo777N%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc942.1g4sp4e198nzalN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Eric da Red <bergamot@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:ch08ra$vlk$1@drizzle.com...
In article <Q3NYc.3035$8d1.1436@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Eric da Red <bergamot@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:ch0616$758$1@drizzle.com...
[..]
It's no small achievement to alienate most of the world,
especially after all the good feelings towards the US abroad
after 9/11/01.
imo, doing the right thing (tm) is more important.
Me too.
A "pre-emptive" invasion against a nation that posed no threat is
not the right thing.
Ever.
iyo. at least we can define the difference of opinion
Here's the definition of this difference of opinion: You're an
imperialist, and Eric isn't.
rubbish.
Not in the least.
i believe in being pro-active.
That's not what you said above. You implied that a 'pre-emptive'
invasion against a nation that posed no threat can sometimes be the
right thing. Or do you share Eric's opinion on the matter?
first of all, i said i disagreed with the notion of "no threat"
Nope. You said you disagreed with the notion that a pre-emptive invasion
against a nation that posed no threat is not ever the right thing to do.
It's quoted right up there.
second of all, based on the totality of the circumstances it can be, and
was justified.
....except that it can't, and wasn't.
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 04:54:41 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:34:40 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
but we don't know that. because no other president has had a 9/11
and spare me pearl harbor, because that's different in a # of ways.
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
.
|
|
|
| User: "vinpo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 05:19:12 PM |
|
|
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:if87j01ebfr1uov3dg04g15sl636afnc5k@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:34:40 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
but we don't know that. because no other president has had a 9/11
and spare me pearl harbor, because that's different in a # of ways.
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
germany attacked us at pearl harbor?
fascinating.
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
31 Aug 2004 04:37:01 AM |
|
|
In article <AJNYc.3111$8d1.1349@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:if87j01ebfr1uov3dg04g15sl636afnc5k@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:34:40 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
but we don't know that. because no other president has had a 9/11
and spare me pearl harbor, because that's different in a # of ways.
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
germany attacked us at pearl harbor?
fascinating.
Germany declared war on the US AFTER we declared war on Japan after Pearl
Harbor.
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
Is yours from Daffy Duck?
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thean" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
31 Aug 2004 09:44:31 AM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:ch1urh$f72$8@puck.cc.emory.edu...
In article <AJNYc.3111$8d1.1349@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:if87j01ebfr1uov3dg04g15sl636afnc5k@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:34:40 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
but we don't know that. because no other president has had a 9/11
and spare me pearl harbor, because that's different in a # of ways.
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
germany attacked us at pearl harbor?
fascinating.
Germany declared war on the US AFTER we declared war on Japan after Pearl
Harbor.
but they didn't ATTACK us.
that was your point, that FDR "went after the nation that actually attacked
us".
he went after Japan AND germany.
duh
whit
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
Is yours from Daffy Duck?
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Westley" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
31 Aug 2004 12:31:05 PM |
|
|
"Thean" <thea@home.net> writes:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:ch1urh$f72$8@puck.cc.emory.edu...
In article <AJNYc.3111$8d1.1349@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:if87j01ebfr1uov3dg04g15sl636afnc5k@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:34:40 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
but we don't know that. because no other president has had a 9/11
and spare me pearl harbor, because that's different in a # of ways.
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
germany attacked us at pearl harbor?
fascinating.
Germany declared war on the US AFTER we declared war on Japan after Pearl
Harbor.
but they didn't ATTACK us.
Before Pearl Harbor:
The USS Greer didn't have two torpedos shot at it by a German U-boat
on September 4, 1941?
The USS Kearney wasn't hit by a German torpedo, resulting in the
death of eleven American sailors on October 17, 1941?
(prompting a rather famous address by Roosevelt: "We have wished to
avoid shooting. But the shooting has started. And history has recorded
who fired the first shot. In the long run, however, all that will matter
is who fired the last shot.")
The USS Reuben James wasn't sunk by a German U-boat
with the loss of 115 of the crew on October 31, 1941?
(and Woody Guthrie didn't write a song about it?)
fascinating.
that was your point, that FDR "went after the nation that actually attacked
us".
he went after Japan AND germany.
They both attacked us, and as pointed out to you before, the US
declared war only on Japan - then Germany (and Italy) declared
war on the US, and the US declared war on them.
BTW, we won. You've shown so much ignorance, I thought I
should add that bit.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
01 Sep 2004 06:18:06 AM |
|
|
In article <2pjha5FlnkmcU1@uni-berlin.de>, "Thean" <thea@home.net> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
fascinating.
Germany declared war on the US AFTER we declared war on Japan after Pearl
Harbor.
but they didn't ATTACK us.
that was your point, that FDR "went after the nation that actually attacked
us".
he went after Japan AND germany.
Germany only after they declared war on us (which is an attack).
duh
whit
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
Is yours from Daffy Duck?
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thean" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
01 Sep 2004 11:28:04 AM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:ch4p4v$n3u$12@puck.cc.emory.edu...
In article <2pjha5FlnkmcU1@uni-berlin.de>, "Thean" <thea@home.net> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
fascinating.
Germany declared war on the US AFTER we declared war on Japan after
Pearl
Harbor.
but they didn't ATTACK us.
that was your point, that FDR "went after the nation that actually
attacked
us".
he went after Japan AND germany.
Germany only after they declared war on us (which is an attack).
really?
so, then you would have supported us invading afghanistan etc. to go after
al qaeda prior to 9/11 (since they declared war on us already?)
nice situational logic
whit
duh
whit
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
Is yours from Daffy Duck?
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
01 Sep 2004 12:03:08 PM |
|
|
In article <2pmbooFlt6b7U1@uni-berlin.de>, "Thean" <thea@home.net> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:ch4p4v$n3u$12@puck.cc.emory.edu...
In article <2pjha5FlnkmcU1@uni-berlin.de>, "Thean" <thea@home.net> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
fascinating.
Germany declared war on the US AFTER we declared war on Japan after
Pearl
Harbor.
but they didn't ATTACK us.
that was your point, that FDR "went after the nation that actually
attacked
us".
he went after Japan AND germany.
Germany only after they declared war on us (which is an attack).
really?
so, then you would have supported us invading afghanistan etc. to go after
al qaeda prior to 9/11 (since they declared war on us already?)
AFAIK, only countries can declare war. If, say, the KKK "declared war" on
Mexico, would Mexico be justified in invading the US?
nice situational logic
whit
duh
whit
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
Is yours from Daffy Duck?
whit
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
01 Sep 2004 01:52:45 PM |
|
|
Thean <thea@home.net> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:ch4p4v$n3u$12@puck.cc.emory.edu...
In article <2pjha5FlnkmcU1@uni-berlin.de>, "Thean" <thea@home.net>
wrote:
[..]
that was your point, that FDR "went after the nation that actually
attacked us".
he went after Japan AND germany.
Germany only after they declared war on us (which is an attack).
really?
so, then you would have supported us invading afghanistan etc. to go after
al qaeda prior to 9/11 (since they declared war on us already?)
nice situational logic
If we'd done that (and to be sure, it was on the table, even during the
Clinton administration), you'd have been into it. You'd have given
'props' to Clinton for his security hardline stance. But what's missing
from your argument is that Al Qaeda isn't a nation that declared war on
us, it's a global network that declared war on us.
But since we're talking about WWII, there are a lot of US ships at the
bottom of the Atlantic which were sunk by Germany before they declared
war on us (or we declared war on them). We were aiding the European
countries with supply ships which Germany didn't like one bit so many of
those ships ended up at the bottom of the ocean. Later, we were attacked
by Japan, and Germany was their ally, and we had already been attacked
by Germany, and Germany declared war on us, so we had a two-theater war.
It isn't like the US just decided, on a whim, to invade Germany, which
is what happened with Iraq. That sort of invasion is what *Germany* did
to its neighbors, and that's why all of Europe was fighting them in the
first place. And when the war was over, the League of Nations
transformed into the United Nations with the purpose of preventing
nations from acting like Germany did.
Which is why George W. Bush doesn't like the United Nations.
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric da Red" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
31 Aug 2004 12:12:16 PM |
|
|
In article <AJNYc.3111$8d1.1349@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:if87j01ebfr1uov3dg04g15sl636afnc5k@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:34:40 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
but we don't know that. because no other president has had a 9/11
and spare me pearl harbor, because that's different in a # of ways.
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
germany attacked us at pearl harbor?
Germany declared war on the US.
The US government thought it would be a good idea to respond.
Before that, Japan attacked the US.
The US thought it would be a good idea to repond there, too.
HTH.
--
Quote Of The Week: "We are here to affirm that when Americans stand up
and speak their minds and say America can do better, that is not a
challenge to patriotism; it is the heart and soul of patriotism."
-- John Kerry
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 07:19:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:19:12 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:if87j01ebfr1uov3dg04g15sl636afnc5k@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:34:40 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
but we don't know that. because no other president has had a 9/11
and spare me pearl harbor, because that's different in a # of ways.
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
germany attacked us at pearl harbor?
No, Japan did. Don't be a bloody idiot.
Germany then proceeded to declare war on us. They were allied with
Japan. Or is this news to you?
fascinating.
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
Amusing, but ignoring historical reality. The Germans didn't bomb
Pearl Harbor, as Bluto suggested, but they did declare war on us
before we responded in kind.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gary DeWaay" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 06:56:40 PM |
|
|
vinpo's wisdom:
Yes, for one thing FDR went after the nation that actually attacked
us.
germany attacked us at pearl harbor?
fascinating.
you must get your history from John Blutarsky
We didn't attack Japan?
--
FDR: "Nothing to fear but fear itself"
Shrub: "Nothing will get me reelected except fear itself"
(Ok, I made that one up)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 04:54:09 PM |
|
|
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
It's no small achievement to alienate most of the world, especially
after all the good feelings towards the US abroad after 9/11/01.
imo, doing the right thing (tm) is more important.
Then it's too bad he did the Wrong Thing(tm), isn't it?
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "vinpo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 05:15:23 PM |
|
|
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc6e9.u0og3azvs88qN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
It's no small achievement to alienate most of the world, especially
after all the good feelings towards the US abroad after 9/11/01.
imo, doing the right thing (tm) is more important.
Then it's too bad he did the Wrong Thing(tm), isn't it?
iyo, not imo
whit
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 05:48:13 PM |
|
|
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc6e9.u0og3azvs88qN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
It's no small achievement to alienate most of the world, especially
after all the good feelings towards the US abroad after 9/11/01.
imo, doing the right thing (tm) is more important.
Then it's too bad he did the Wrong Thing(tm), isn't it?
iyo, not imo
When you talk about 'the right thing (tm)' you don't need to mention
that it's 'iyo.' But when *I* talk about 'the Wrong Thing(tm),' it's
time for you to add that it's all opinion.
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "vinpo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 05:49:52 PM |
|
|
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc8z6.nwku791pu9q03N%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc6e9.u0og3azvs88qN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
It's no small achievement to alienate most of the world,
especially
after all the good feelings towards the US abroad after 9/11/01.
imo, doing the right thing (tm) is more important.
Then it's too bad he did the Wrong Thing(tm), isn't it?
iyo, not imo
When you talk about 'the right thing (tm)' you don't need to mention
that it's 'iyo.' But when *I* talk about 'the Wrong Thing(tm),' it's
time for you to add that it's all opinion.
because it's a counter argument
if you claim X. and i claim "not X" AND it's a matter of opinion., i qualify
thusly
whit
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 04:30:57 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:31:44 GMT, "vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc1ex.q8r0on5usqgeN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjb6lj.cozkao1mwhynoN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
Al <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
[..]
3) The two wars prosecuted by Bush have been the fastest, most
successful, with the least amount of casualties in the history of
the
world. How is that bad?
They're still on-going. They're not over. They'll keep going past the
forseeable future. From the Bush administration forward, there will
*always* be a war the US is fighting in the mid-east.
we have always been at war with the mid-east.
:)
Then Bush hasn't accomplished anything, has he?
-
it's a literary reference, paul. that's why i included the smiley.
bush has accomplished plenty
Yes, that's the problem, isn't it...?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 04:15:10 PM |
|
|
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc1ex.q8r0on5usqgeN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjb6lj.cozkao1mwhynoN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
Al <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
[..]
3) The two wars prosecuted by Bush have been the fastest, most
successful, with the least amount of casualties in the history of
the world. How is that bad?
They're still on-going. They're not over. They'll keep going past
the forseeable future. From the Bush administration forward, there
will *always* be a war the US is fighting in the mid-east.
we have always been at war with the mid-east.
:)
Then Bush hasn't accomplished anything, has he?
it's a literary reference, paul. that's why i included the smiley.
Yup.
bush has accomplished plenty
Yes, and this is why he must go.
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "vinpo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 04:18:31 PM |
|
|
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc49z.vuh8gd1r155iqN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc1ex.q8r0on5usqgeN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjb6lj.cozkao1mwhynoN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
Al <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
[..]
3) The two wars prosecuted by Bush have been the fastest, most
successful, with the least amount of casualties in the history
of
the world. How is that bad?
They're still on-going. They're not over. They'll keep going past
the forseeable future. From the Bush administration forward, there
will *always* be a war the US is fighting in the mid-east.
we have always been at war with the mid-east.
:)
Then Bush hasn't accomplished anything, has he?
it's a literary reference, paul. that's why i included the smiley.
Yup.
bush has accomplished plenty
Yes, and this is why he must go.
so has nader made it on to WA's ballot, paul?
after all, nader voters gave bush the 2000 election.
something you STILL can't admit.
whit
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 04:54:09 PM |
|
|
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc49z.vuh8gd1r155iqN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc1ex.q8r0on5usqgeN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjb6lj.cozkao1mwhynoN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
Al <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
[..]
3) The two wars prosecuted by Bush have been the fastest,
most successful, with the least amount of casualties in the
history of the world. How is that bad?
They're still on-going. They're not over. They'll keep going
past the forseeable future. From the Bush administration
forward, there will *always* be a war the US is fighting in the
mid-east.
we have always been at war with the mid-east.
:)
Then Bush hasn't accomplished anything, has he?
it's a literary reference, paul. that's why i included the smiley.
Yup.
bush has accomplished plenty
Yes, and this is why he must go.
so has nader made it on to WA's ballot, paul?
after all, nader voters gave bush the 2000 election.
something you STILL can't admit.
Do you, like, get out of bed on Monday mornings and decide to try and
slag Paul? First you say literary references within my posts make me
look stupid, and in this thread, I was playing along with your little
*literary reference* about eastasia and out of nowhere you're trying to
pick a fight about Nader.
Do you really not have anything of substance to talk about?
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "vinpo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 05:15:09 PM |
|
|
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc68o.7xkedt1pivc9zN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc49z.vuh8gd1r155iqN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc1ex.q8r0on5usqgeN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjb6lj.cozkao1mwhynoN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
Al <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
[..]
3) The two wars prosecuted by Bush have been the fastest,
most successful, with the least amount of casualties in the
history of the world. How is that bad?
They're still on-going. They're not over. They'll keep going
past the forseeable future. From the Bush administration
forward, there will *always* be a war the US is fighting in
the
mid-east.
we have always been at war with the mid-east.
:)
Then Bush hasn't accomplished anything, has he?
it's a literary reference, paul. that's why i included the smiley.
Yup.
bush has accomplished plenty
Yes, and this is why he must go.
so has nader made it on to WA's ballot, paul?
after all, nader voters gave bush the 2000 election.
something you STILL can't admit.
Do you, like, get out of bed on Monday mornings and decide to try and
slag Paul?
are you referring to yourself in the third person?
First you say literary references within my posts make me
look stupid, and in this thread, I was playing along with your little
*literary reference* about eastasia and out of nowhere you're trying to
pick a fight about Nader.
Do you really not have anything of substance to talk about?
i'm messing with you, paul
i find it intellectually dishonest of you that you can't admit that nader
voters (not nader, technically speaking) resulted in our current (wonderful)
president. apparently you can cast your critical eye outwards, but not
inwards.
whit
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 05:48:12 PM |
|
|
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc68o.7xkedt1pivc9zN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
[..]
Do you really not have anything of substance to talk about?
i'm messing with you, paul
You're trying to mess with me.
i find it intellectually dishonest of you that you can't admit that nader
voters (not nader, technically speaking) resulted in our current
(wonderful) president.
However, what you have said above about Nader voters is untrue. Thus, if
I were to 'admit' it, I would be comitting a falsehood. You demand
intellectual honesty of me, but the example of honesty you give is one
that's untrue.
apparently you can cast your critical eye outwards, but not inwards.
You have *no idea.*
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "vinpo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 05:52:40 PM |
|
|
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc8uy.1m23uzb1iiel1dN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc68o.7xkedt1pivc9zN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
[..]
Do you really not have anything of substance to talk about?
i'm messing with you, paul
You're trying to mess with me.
i find it intellectually dishonest of you that you can't admit that
nader
voters (not nader, technically speaking) resulted in our current
(wonderful) president.
However, what you have said above about Nader voters is untrue.
if you honestly believe (and we've gone over this) that ABSENT nader, bush
still would have won, i say rubbish
whit
Thus, if
I were to 'admit' it, I would be comitting a falsehood. You demand
intellectual honesty of me, but the example of honesty you give is one
that's untrue.
apparently you can cast your critical eye outwards, but not inwards.
You have *no idea.*
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "AWOL W. Chickenhawk" |
|
| Title: Bush's 42% Pre-9/11 vacation Rate (was...Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings) |
30 Aug 2004 09:38:09 PM |
|
|
Bush spent more time jacking off on his Texas ranch than he did in the
White House that fateful summer of 2001. In an article printed on
8/7/01 The Washington Post calculated his vacation rate up until labor
Day of that year at 42%.
Maybe if Champaign Georgie wants to talk about attendance so badly we
should bring up how his pathetic work habits left America wide open
for the worst terrorist attacks in U.S. history.
"vinpo" <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<YcOYc.3155$8d1.3051@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc8uy.1m23uzb1iiel1dN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc68o.7xkedt1pivc9zN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
[..]
Do you really not have anything of substance to talk about?
i'm messing with you, paul
You're trying to mess with me.
i find it intellectually dishonest of you that you can't admit that
nader
voters (not nader, technically speaking) resulted in our current
(wonderful) president.
However, what you have said above about Nader voters is untrue.
if you honestly believe (and we've gone over this) that ABSENT nader, bush
still would have won, i say rubbish
whit
Thus, if
I were to 'admit' it, I would be comitting a falsehood. You demand
intellectual honesty of me, but the example of honesty you give is one
that's untrue.
apparently you can cast your critical eye outwards, but not inwards.
You have *no idea.*
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 06:04:06 PM |
|
|
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc8uy.1m23uzb1iiel1dN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
[..]
i find it intellectually dishonest of you that you can't admit that
nader voters (not nader, technically speaking) resulted in our current
(wonderful) president.
However, what you have said above about Nader voters is untrue.
if you honestly believe (and we've gone over this) that ABSENT nader, bush
still would have won, i say rubbish
That's a stupid way of putting it, whit. It wasn't Nader's job to elect
Bush.
If 600 more Democrats had voted in Florida, things would have been
different. 600 Democrats didn't vote, though, and here we are.
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 07:44:38 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:04:06 -0700, usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum)
wrote:
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc8uy.1m23uzb1iiel1dN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
[..]
i find it intellectually dishonest of you that you can't admit that
nader voters (not nader, technically speaking) resulted in our current
(wonderful) president.
However, what you have said above about Nader voters is untrue.
if you honestly believe (and we've gone over this) that ABSENT nader, bush
still would have won, i say rubbish
That's a stupid way of putting it, whit. It wasn't Nader's job to elect
Bush.
He did a pretty good job of it, though.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "vinpo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 06:25:23 PM |
|
|
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc9hv.ijmiynmg2sleN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
Paul Mitchum <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gjc8uy.1m23uzb1iiel1dN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
vinpo <vinpo@earthlink.net> wrote:
[..]
i find it intellectually dishonest of you that you can't admit that
nader voters (not nader, technically speaking) resulted in our
current
(wonderful) president.
However, what you have said above about Nader voters is untrue.
if you honestly believe (and we've gone over this) that ABSENT nader,
bush
still would have won, i say rubbish
That's a stupid way of putting it, whit. It wasn't Nader's job to elect
Bush.
no.
but if nader voters had voted for their OTHER choice (bush or gore), gore
would have won
If 600 more Democrats had voted in Florida, things would have been
different. 600 Democrats didn't vote, though, and here we are.
and if moronic dems hadn't designed and then failed to properly read the
butterfly ballot, gore would also be president
so what?
the point is a matter of CONSCIOUS choices. nader voters made a CONSCIOUS
choice to vote nader, knowing the potential result
they are as much to blame as anybody. moreso than most
and you can't stomach that.
whit
--
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go
to war." - GWB, Houston Chronicle, January 2002
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 11:36:03 AM |
|
|
usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote in message news:<1gjb6lj.cozkao1mwhynoN%usenet@mile23.c0m>...
Al <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote in message
news:<1gj8bcf.7vq9v1nwjytyN%usenet@mile23.c0m>...
Al <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
[..]
So you aren't interested at all in presenting an opinion why someone
other than Bush is a better canidate? Maybe then you can just tell me
how Bush fucked up the country for you?
Well, just a few posts ago, I said this:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1gj30g9.11xsmzvxwmnc6N%25usenet%40
mile23.c0m&output=gplain>
Too bad you're unable to follow a conversation.
My experience so far has been when the points you bring up are directly
addressed -1) Diplomatic Ties, 2) Bad Economy, 3) Bad War - their
complaints fall flat.
1) How have diplomatic ties been hurt?
You're kidding, right?
Our non-allies in the war are France, Germany and Russia. These are
countries we have never been able to depend upon. So no, I'm not
kidding. Could you tell me how we've hurt our non-allies by going to
war in Afghanistan and Iraq? We didn't force them to participate. I
can see where *we* wouldn't help France next time they want to impose
their will on Cote d'Ivoire.
2) How is the economy messed up when it is comparable to the one Clinton
had in 1996 when he was re-elected?
Are you fucking blind? Bush got elected, tried to stimulate the economy,
failed.
In between "Bush got elected" (thanks for conceding that) and "tried
to stimulate the economy" we had possibly the worse disaster in
American history. Do you remember what that was?
We took an enormous hit economically. The Dow went down 2000 points.
Did we fall into a depression? No, we swiftly recovered due to putting
lots of money back into the economy.
Then there's that whole
hand-out-$300-but-make-everyone-pay-$1600-back-over-time thing.
If you own a home, you would understand how putting yourself in debt
is great for your (personal) economy. It's better to get the economy
humming, get people back to work so they can pay taxes in this case
the $1600 (whatever) as quickly as possible. If we to slow the economy
further we may never get ahead.
3) The two wars prosecuted by Bush have been the fastest, most
successful, with the least amount of casualties in the history of the
world. How is that bad?
They're still on-going.
We established the necessary regime changes. That was our first goal
and it was done in an unprecedented fashion.
They're not over. They'll keep going past the
forseeable future.
We are still in Germany; we are still in Japan - 60 years later. I'm
happy for it. We don't have to worry about Germany and Japan attacking
anyone anymore.
From the Bush administration forward, there will
*always* be a war the US is fighting in the mid-east.
We (the US) have always been fighting Moslem countries. The difference
now from 1797 is that we have clear military superiority and modern
technology allows us to communicate directly or almost directly with
Mid-East Moslems. We can use these advantages now or we can force our
children to deal with them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings |
30 Aug 2004 11:55:00 AM |
|
|
In article <3965eb5d.0408300836.2eb2b0b8@posting.google.com>,
(Al) wrote:
usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote in message
news:<1gjb6lj.cozkao1mwhynoN%usenet@mile23.c0m>...
Al < > wrote:
usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote in message
news:<1gj8bcf.7vq9v1nwjytyN%usenet@mile23.c0m>...
Al < > wrote:
[..]
So you aren't interested at all in presenting an opinion why
someone
other than Bush is a better canidate? Maybe then you can just tell
me
how Bush fucked up the country for you?
Well, just a few posts ago, I said this:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1gj30g9.11xsmzvxwmnc6N%25usenet%40
mile23.c0m&output=gplain>
Too bad you're unable to follow a conversation.
My experience so far has been when the points you bring up are directly
addressed -1) Diplomatic Ties, 2) Bad Economy, 3) Bad War - their
complaints fall flat.
1) How have diplomatic ties been hurt?
You're kidding, right?
Our non-allies in the war are France, Germany and Russia.
And pretty much the rest of the world.
These are
countries we have never been able to depend upon.
Whereas the handful of Podunk countries we cajoled, threatened, and bribed
to join us are so dependable?
So no, I'm not
kidding. Could you tell me how we've hurt our non-allies by going to
war in Afghanistan and Iraq? We didn't force them to participate. I
can see where *we* wouldn't help France next time they want to impose
their will on Cote d'Ivoire.
2) How is the economy messed up when it is comparable to the one
Clinton
had in 1996 when he was re-elected?
Are you fucking blind? Bush got elected, tried to stimulate the economy,
failed.
In between "Bush got elected" (thanks for conceding that) and "tried
to stimulate the economy" we had possibly the worse disaster in
American history. Do you remember what that was?
Sure. So?
We took an enormous hit economically. The Dow went down 2000 points.
Did we fall into a depression? No, we swiftly recovered due to putting
lots of money back into the economy.
And tax cuts for the rich helped how? Bush was pushing them before 9/11.
Then they were the "cure" for an economy doing too well. After they were
the cure for an economy not doing well.
Then there's that whole
hand-out-$300-but-make-everyone-pay-$1600-back-over-time thing.
If you own a home, you would understand how putting yourself in debt
is great for your (personal) economy. It's better to get the economy
humming, get people back to work so they can pay taxes in this case
the $1600 (whatever) as quickly as possible. If we to slow the economy
further we may never get ahead.
Bush's tax cuts have done nothing but added to the debt.
3) The two wars prosecuted by Bush have been the fastest, most
successful, with the least amount of casualties in the history of the
world. How is that bad?
They're still on-going.
We established the necessary regime changes. That was our first goal
and it was done in an unprecedented fashion.
Yet when the Soviets tried to do the same thing in Afghanistan,
Czechoslovakia, etc., we criticized them.
They're not over. They'll keep going past the
forseeable future.
We are still in Germany; we are still in Japan - 60 years later. I'm
happy for it. We don't have to worry about Germany and Japan attacking
anyone anymore.
So that's the cause? Was Bush's alleged service in Alabama the cause of it
never being attacked?
From the Bush administration forward, there will
*always* be a war the US is fighting in the mid-east.
We (the US) have always been fighting Moslem countries.
Oh BS. Since when?
The difference
now from 1797 is that we have clear military superiority and modern
technology allows us to communicate directly or almost directly with
Mid-East Moslems. We can use these advantages now or we can force our
children to deal with them.
What Moslem country have we always been fighting?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
