RRocket
Well-Known LVC Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
- Messages
- 431
- Reaction score
- 0
Bud, Miller..what's the difference? It's just another thing Americans know little about...making a good beer.... :givemebee
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 2nd Ad
- Thread starter MonsterMark
- Start date
Now im cleaning coke off MY keyboard
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
I know you can't vote but I was really counting on your support for Nader, thus denying Kerry the vote, enabling Bush to win, again!RRocket said:
RRocket
Well-Known LVC Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
- Messages
- 431
- Reaction score
- 0
Bryan,
If Hillary ran in the future...would she get in? The Clintonistas would be on Cloud 9 for sure.... It seems the Clintons can do no wrong...could anyone stop that juggernaut? Would'nt you just die if she got in with Bill as VP??? LOL
If Hillary ran in the future...would she get in? The Clintonistas would be on Cloud 9 for sure.... It seems the Clintons can do no wrong...could anyone stop that juggernaut? Would'nt you just die if she got in with Bill as VP??? LOL
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Man, with the taxes you guys pay on suds, I'm surprised you can afford to drink anything. I will tell you that Labatts Blue almost killed me. Had a severe reaction one time with my throat closing and my uvula growing to a length of 3 inches, gagging me. I guess that is why I am such a sensitive lover now. I only had 3 down my throat so I can just imagine what it would be like with 8! So much for Labatts. What else you got besides Molson?RRocket said:
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Not a snowballs chance in hell. Talk about polarizing the country. That would be unreal, but fun with Billy boy back in the game. Spot me 60 Republicans in the Senate and 250 in the House and I'll go for Hillary and Bill in 2008. Deal?RRocket said:
what a MESS that would be, but think of all the time billy would have to play with interns!
RRocket
Well-Known LVC Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
- Messages
- 431
- Reaction score
- 0
Creemore Springs is dynamite....Sleemans Honey Brown is yummy too...
http://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/rate_results/455/1654/
I do like a couple micros from the US...kinda hard to get though. Sam Adams isn't too shabby either for a mass brew, though most Americans don't seem to like it.....Had a Michigan micro by Kalamazoo brewery I enjoyed...
I may be making it up to WI in a few weeks. Perhaps we should sample some American beer and titty bars? I can also oblige you, and give you 98 Mark a good whipping with my Lex...
http://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/rate_results/455/1654/
I do like a couple micros from the US...kinda hard to get though. Sam Adams isn't too shabby either for a mass brew, though most Americans don't seem to like it.....Had a Michigan micro by Kalamazoo brewery I enjoyed...
I may be making it up to WI in a few weeks. Perhaps we should sample some American beer and titty bars? I can also oblige you, and give you 98 Mark a good whipping with my Lex...
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
That was a nice little break there. Back to the story. Here is a piece from the WaPo (Washington Times) editorial page.
"As for volunteering for Vietnam, what Mr. Kerry actually volunteered for was patrol duty and only patrol duty, a safe assignment.As he wrote in his contribution to "A War Remembered": "They [swiftboats] were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing. Although I wanted to see for myself what was going on, I didn't really want to get involved in the war."
That makes sense, considering he already was opposed to the Vietnam War. And once he found himself assigned to potentially dangerous duty, he complained and moaned so much, demanding transfers back to safer duty, that he was assigned and re-assigned to three different coastal divisions his first month in-country. As Silver Star recipient William Franke says in the book: "Kerry protested being transferred to An Thoi, arguing that he had volunteered only for coastal patrol ? not the more hazardous duty of missions within the inland waterways ? his objections were so strong that he was transferred out within a week."
Mr. Kerry's notion that he could pick and choose his duty assignments — that he could somehow just be there as an observer without encountering mortal peril — fit nicely with the self-centered, cinematic view of himself and the war. He clearly saw himself as the producer, director and star of his own war movie: "John Kerry, War Hero." He even had footage taken of the hero, using his crew as extras, swiftboats as props, the jungle as background."
The Greeks had a word for it: alazon. Also the title of a play by Aristophanes, it denoted a character who tells us more than the truth, much more. He is a man who deceives and is self-deceiving. In his play, Gen. Lamachus embodies this flaw. Besides being boastful, he is vain and conceited. He desires women, wealth and reputation. He prides himself in his possessions as symbols of his expertise.
This trait, this character evolved into the Roman Miles Glorious, as portrayed by Plautus. The "braggart soldier" was self-absorbed and humorless, blinded by his own ego, with a necessary sycophant nearby to reinforce his alpine opinion of himself.
At the end of "Miles Gloriosus," the title character, his true nature revealed, says:"Fool, fool that I am! Now see what an ass they've made of me."
John Kerry, a naval miles gloriosus, has had his true nature revealed by Swiftvets For Truth. Yet he continues to play out his movie role for groups such as the VFW.
John B. Dwyer is an author, military historian and Vietnam veteran.
"As for volunteering for Vietnam, what Mr. Kerry actually volunteered for was patrol duty and only patrol duty, a safe assignment.As he wrote in his contribution to "A War Remembered": "They [swiftboats] were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing. Although I wanted to see for myself what was going on, I didn't really want to get involved in the war."
That makes sense, considering he already was opposed to the Vietnam War. And once he found himself assigned to potentially dangerous duty, he complained and moaned so much, demanding transfers back to safer duty, that he was assigned and re-assigned to three different coastal divisions his first month in-country. As Silver Star recipient William Franke says in the book: "Kerry protested being transferred to An Thoi, arguing that he had volunteered only for coastal patrol ? not the more hazardous duty of missions within the inland waterways ? his objections were so strong that he was transferred out within a week."
Mr. Kerry's notion that he could pick and choose his duty assignments — that he could somehow just be there as an observer without encountering mortal peril — fit nicely with the self-centered, cinematic view of himself and the war. He clearly saw himself as the producer, director and star of his own war movie: "John Kerry, War Hero." He even had footage taken of the hero, using his crew as extras, swiftboats as props, the jungle as background."
The Greeks had a word for it: alazon. Also the title of a play by Aristophanes, it denoted a character who tells us more than the truth, much more. He is a man who deceives and is self-deceiving. In his play, Gen. Lamachus embodies this flaw. Besides being boastful, he is vain and conceited. He desires women, wealth and reputation. He prides himself in his possessions as symbols of his expertise.
This trait, this character evolved into the Roman Miles Glorious, as portrayed by Plautus. The "braggart soldier" was self-absorbed and humorless, blinded by his own ego, with a necessary sycophant nearby to reinforce his alpine opinion of himself.
At the end of "Miles Gloriosus," the title character, his true nature revealed, says:"Fool, fool that I am! Now see what an ass they've made of me."
John Kerry, a naval miles gloriosus, has had his true nature revealed by Swiftvets For Truth. Yet he continues to play out his movie role for groups such as the VFW.
John B. Dwyer is an author, military historian and Vietnam veteran.
Last edited by a moderator:
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Give me a call when you firm up your plans. We'll have to run up to the Dells to see some really hot babes. Darn, now I have to get to work on the car, to get her ready to defend our honor. Sounds like a plan. Just give me a heads up in advance.RRocket said:
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Another interesting tidbit for all to digest.The Bronze Star debate has come down to "who wrote the After Action Report"
Let me add a little circumstantial evidence to the Bronze Star case. The Spot report for 13 Mar 69 uses the phrase "5000 metres". Agreed?
1. American educated naval officers don't use the term metre, especially with a French spelling.
2. The Navy uses the term yard (3 feet). There are 2000 yards (approx) in a nautical mile which is actually 6086 feet. So an American educated naval officer would have written 5000 yards. (2.5 nautical miles)
3. As Kerry was educated in French and Swiss schools in his formative years, who would you conclude wrote the Spot Report resulting in the awards and citations?
4. All 3 other OinC's still living say Kerry wrote the Spot Report. Hmmmm?
Think about it.....What are you going to believe? The Spot report or the 3 surviving officers on scene?
Tom the RiverRat.
Let me add a little circumstantial evidence to the Bronze Star case. The Spot report for 13 Mar 69 uses the phrase "5000 metres". Agreed?
1. American educated naval officers don't use the term metre, especially with a French spelling.
2. The Navy uses the term yard (3 feet). There are 2000 yards (approx) in a nautical mile which is actually 6086 feet. So an American educated naval officer would have written 5000 yards. (2.5 nautical miles)
3. As Kerry was educated in French and Swiss schools in his formative years, who would you conclude wrote the Spot Report resulting in the awards and citations?
4. All 3 other OinC's still living say Kerry wrote the Spot Report. Hmmmm?
Think about it.....What are you going to believe? The Spot report or the 3 surviving officers on scene?
Tom the RiverRat.
honestly, based on what little you have told me, im more likely to believe the spot report. Ill tell you why.
-This was 35 years ago, what anyone remembers now is somewhat foggy at best;
-Why did it take these guys 35 years to say something? Why didnt they contridict then? If its such a big dishonorable thing, why didnt they stop it when you could actually have fresh stories in everyone's mind?
-These guys didnt say something on their own, they did it in a calculated manner to give Bush an edge, and are funded by Bush supporters;
-These guys are making money off their story, which is a motive to lie;
-What was standard practice as far as who writes these reports? Is it SOP for Kerry to have written the report?
What you have told me here is that both parties have a motive to lie or distort the truth. So, either Kerry made up a story 35 years ago that nobody disputed then and he has stuck with - or it was the truth, which would explain why the story is the same as the report 35 years ago, and also explains why these guys wouldnt have said anything then.
-This was 35 years ago, what anyone remembers now is somewhat foggy at best;
-Why did it take these guys 35 years to say something? Why didnt they contridict then? If its such a big dishonorable thing, why didnt they stop it when you could actually have fresh stories in everyone's mind?
-These guys didnt say something on their own, they did it in a calculated manner to give Bush an edge, and are funded by Bush supporters;
-These guys are making money off their story, which is a motive to lie;
-What was standard practice as far as who writes these reports? Is it SOP for Kerry to have written the report?
What you have told me here is that both parties have a motive to lie or distort the truth. So, either Kerry made up a story 35 years ago that nobody disputed then and he has stuck with - or it was the truth, which would explain why the story is the same as the report 35 years ago, and also explains why these guys wouldnt have said anything then.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Hopefully this will help.Joeychgo said:
1. If most of Kerry's fellow Swift veterans don't support him, then who were all those guys with him at the Democratic Convention? They made it appear that Kerry has the complete support of his "Band of Brothers" from Vietnam.
John Kerry has been able to convince about 13 men who served on Swift boats in the Mekong Delta to support him, 7 or 8 of whom were at various times crew members on his own 6-man boat. Those are the men the Kerry campaign so prominently featured at the Democratic Convention. The photograph we have posted at SwiftVets.com shows Kerry with 19 of his fellow Swift boat OICs (Officers In Charge) in Coastal Division 11. Four OICs were not present for the photograph. Only one of his 23 fellow OICs from Coastal Division 11 supports John Kerry.
Overall, more than 250 Swift boat veterans are on the record questioning Kerry's fitness to serve as Commander-in-Chief. That list includes his entire chain of command -- every single officer Kerry served under in Vietnam. The Kerry game plan is to ignore all this and pretend that the 13 veterans his campaign jets around the country and puts up in 5-star hotels really represent the truth about his short, controversial combat tour.
The Swift boats fought in groups, so the other OICs who fought alongside Kerry know him well and can accurately describe what he did and did not do. In many cases Kerry's fellow OICs had a better perspective than his own crew members, since the latter had no way to determine whether he was following orders and how well he worked with his peers.
3. Why do you want Senator John Kerry to release his entire military records?
We want Senator Kerry to tell the truth about his conduct in Vietnam to the American public. We were there. We know that there are many critical facts that Americans need to know -– facts that have not been disclosed. Releasing the complete set of Kerry's service records will provide some insight into that conduct.
4. Aren’t you nothing more than Republican loyalists who happen to be veterans?
No. Among us are Democrats, Republicans and Independents. We are acting solely as Vietnam veterans who served in Swift Boats.
5. Vietnam was a long time ago. Why does it matter today?
Senator John Kerry himself made his Vietnam service a centerpiece for his campaign for the Presidency, so questions about his service are germane. Senator Kerry’s biographer described Kerry’s total Vietnam experience as a “three-decade-long tour of duty,” so questions about his entire “tour of duty” are germane. And in his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry stated that his fellow Vietnam veterans were guilty of widespread atrocities, so questions about the veracity of those charges are germane.
9. Hasn’t Senator Kerry already released his records?
No, Senator Kerry has disclosed only a selected portion of his records. Specifically, Senator Kerry has not disclosed the records leading to the award of the three purple hearts, the Silver Star and the Bronze Star. There are also missing performance evaluations (called “Fitness Reports”) for certain periods of his service as a Navy officer. We call upon Senator Kerry to authorize the complete release of his military records by filing a simple two-page Form 180.
10. Why are you not demanding that President Bush release his records?
It is our understanding that President Bush has released his records. If there are additional facts about his conduct in the military that should be disclosed, then we hope and trust that servicemen who had served with him will come forward as we have.
13. What exactly has Kerry lied about?
Senator Kerry misrepresented his own actions and those of his fellow officers and men. We believe that some of that misrepresentation resulted in him receiving medals to which he was not entitled. While many people might think that is immaterial, it is a matter of great importance to military personnel and veterans. As our chairman, Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman, U.S. Navy (Ret.), has said, “This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust -- all absolute tenets of command.”
It is a matter of public record that John Kerry lied before Congress when he falsely portrayed his fellow service personnel in Vietnam as rapists and baby killers. John Kerry claimed that American troops were guilty of “crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command,” and that we “personally raped” and otherwise brutalized innocent civilians. Kerry specifically accused Swift boat personnel of “showing the flag and firing at sampans and villages along the banks” and “butchering a lot of innocent people.” None of that is true.
We believe Senator Kerry’s irresponsible accusations damaged the U.S. war effort. Whether his testimony was designed to advance a political or personal agenda, we do believe that testimony endangered our prisoners of war, dishonored those injured and killed in action and did irreparable harm to the reputation of servicemen who served honorably in Vietnam only to return home to unwarranted ridicule and abuse.
Drawing on the credibility of a tour of duty in Vietnam, however abbreviated, John Kerry shaped a false, slanderous image of U.S. military personnel as violent, vicious and brutal. U.S. military personnel, Senator Kerry told the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, are collectively “a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence.” That is untrue. As with military men and women today, U.S. military personnel in Vietnam went out of their way to safeguard innocent life, often taking casualties themselves rather than putting civilians at risk.
Having lied to the world about his former comrades, it is our view that Senator Kerry is unfit to command our sons and daughters as Commander-in-Chief.
14. Are you claiming that there were no atrocities committed in Vietnam whatsoever?
No. We base our position on statements made by Vietnam veterans -– many of whom served in the same Swift Boat units as the Senator and many who served at the same time. Our position is based on the testimony of eyewitnesses who were in a position to have seen or been informed about war crimes. None of these veterans witnessed or were informed of any of the crimes Senator Kerry has accused them of committing. Military personnel who witness crimes and atrocities have an absolute duty to report them to their superiors. Senator Kerry did not report a single instance of criminal behavior. If he had indeed witnessed the atrocities about which he testified to Congress, he should have reported them.
15. How common was it for a person to receive medals at the rate and number that Senator Kerry did?
Winning three Purple Hearts, the Bronze Star and the Silver Star in four months is rare. We have received letters from countless veterans outlining serious injuries -- far more serious than any Kerry sustained –- who said they did not seek a Purple Heart, because they did not feel it was warranted by the minor nature of their wound. In any case, the Senator’s full disclosure of his military records will shed light on the truth.
16. How can you demand that Senator Kerry release his records when you refuse to release your own?
We are not candidates to be Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Services. We are acting on principle -– namely the principle that the public has the right to know the details of Senator Kerry’s service. We believe that as a candidate for Commander-in-Chief, Senator Kerry has an obligation to disclose those records.
17. Are you working or involved in any way with the Bush/Cheney campaign or any other Republican organization?
Absolutely not. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is a non-partisan organization. As part of our mission, we believe it is incumbent on ALL presidential candidates to be totally honest and forthcoming regarding personal background and policy information that would help the voting public make an informed decision when choosing the next president of the United States.
The organization was created, organized and funded by swift boat veterans who joined together to defend a common cause. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth accepts donations from individuals and groups as a 527 organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Joey, as I understand it, all proceeds from the sale of the book are going to the Veterans of Foreign Wars. I'll confirm the recipient.
RRocket said:
Don't flatter yourself. Simply because someone yells vehemently doesn't make them right. You're the one that's setting the tone. So you can run interference for Kerry if you want by taking us all off subject with your Pearl Harbor questions and your "Bush is so stupid and evil" accusations and other subjects that we've already hashed out. It just proves even more how you'll blindly follow "anyone but Bush." I just want the truth about Kerry's service, or for Kerry to drop his "hero" routine. If the records are as he says, even with a few minor discrepancies, then you win and I'll admit it on this point.
I don't know if the psychological reaction to the Japanese would have been different if the breaking off of diplomatic relations by Japan had occurred before the attack like they had planned, but it's something to consider. But that's not the only one in history. Wars are full of attacks that occurred before an enemy was planning on attacking. You can't characterize them all as bad simply because you didn't like this one. It's not like it happened without warning, either. Saddam and the whole world knew what was coming. We didn't drive them to it, they drove the U.S. to it.
Punisher
Active LVC Member
MonsterMark said:
Im assuming you got this info from there site or something. This is something that strikes me as odd. I guess they dont want to release there records because it would probly support his side more then it would support theres. Otherwise they would do it. Plain and simple.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Yes, I got it from the Swift Vets site. What is really sad is that it has "only' been viewed 645 times. Pretty sad that people don;t want to know where these guys are coming from.Punisher said:
Larry Thurlow just signed his 180. So now what is Kerry's position?
Please understand that these guys are not running for the most powerful position on the planet. Kerry is, and I would think thta just this once, people would be willing to hold him to a higher standard on this.
Last edited by a moderator:
Punisher said:
You may have a point, but there are other things to consider that shouldn't be ignored. Namely privacy issues. Running for public office, especially the presidency, requires a greater level of disclosure IMO. Just show us the records, Mr. Kerry, everything else is inconsequential.
Punisher
Active LVC Member
MonsterMark said:
Good for Larry Thurlow, but IMO if they want to question Kerry and try and force him to sign the release of his records they should do the same thing. I personally feel that they would release there records if they felt it would support there cause. After all, if they all release there records, we are goin to get the best possible understanding of what happened? We will have the reports of everyone to compare. But because those reports will probly help Kerry they will just continue to attack him and say they dont need to release theirs.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
From BusinessWeek. A good read on why Kerry's past matters in THIS election
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5797120/
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5797120/
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
These guys aren't running for Commander In Chief. So it is irrelevant. So let's see Kerry's records and if that clears things up, great. You don't understand that it is the officers that write the after-action reports, not the grunts.Punisher said:
Punisher
Active LVC Member
MonsterMark said:
Its easy to pick apart a single account of something. If you have everyones account you would get the best idea of what really happened. Surely Kerry didnt write everyones reports. If they are after the truth like they claim they would release there records too so everyone could have the best possible idea of what really happened. If say just Kerry were to release his, he would be subject to them attacking his accounts if say he wrote the report, yet if they released there records his report would probly be supported by others, so he wouldnt be so vulnerable to attack. Taking the stand that only Kerry should release his records is silly, and its not goaled at just finding the truth, because that would be best found if all released there records.
MonsterMark said:
Hell -- this thread has been viewed 589 times!
People vote with their wallet - and their wallet isnt 35 years old.
Ok, knowing that I personally dont care much about 35 years ago, how about we talk about real issues? Why should I vote for Bush? What is he gonna do for me and us now?MonsterMark said:
Punisher said:
I don't have a problem with all their records being made public. Let's open it all up. But you should apply your logic to Kerry as well: Kerry's hiding something. But I know you won't, so what's the point?
Bush calls for halt to Swift Boat vets' ads
‘I think they’re bad for the system,' president says
And I say so too.
‘I think they’re bad for the system,' president says
And I say so too.