|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 0/368 Day: 0/11 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: New Book: Kerry ‘Unfit for Command’ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
SBV's say they would not have brought this up if Kerry was not running for President Oh, how dare he.
The Naval record is what those in power wanted it to say. We don't know who wrote the military records, but those reports would have been written by people who were there, possibly by some of the men who later became Swift Boaters. Moreover, why would the "power" want to help Kerry? He was just a leiutenant. It stretches credulity to suggest that all his happened just so it could be a peripheral issue in a campaign 30 years later.
However, the fact that these Republican and Democratic SBVs are going to extra effort to make their point. Of course they are. They're being well-paid to do so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
You are forming your own opinion of what a leader should do in that situation. Other leaders disagree with your interpretation. Who disagrees that drastic situations require immediate assessment? What purpose did the Seven Minute Wait serve? Whose lives did it save? Remember that, at the time, not all the planes had crashed. A hasty order might have diverted a plane and saved lives. Whose lives did it save to finish a kiddie book?
Bush needed more information, just as any commander on a battlefield would need before making an unplanned decision. So did he go get it? Make some phone calls? What information was he looking for in "My Pet Goat"?
What is clear is that his leadership on fighting terrorism is what a lot of us are looking for. If you're looking to be less safe, and have our military assests leveraged in irrelevant occupations making us less able to defend yourselves, well, I guess. Me, I'm looking for someone to protect us against terrorists. Bush hasn't been doing that.
The fact is, there is nothing the President could have done at that time more than what he did. We'll never know, I guess, because he didn't even fucking try. I don't understand how you can consider that "leadership." That's paralysis. It's a sign of cowardice; you know, like when he skipped out of his National Guard duty.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Voting is a very minor decision compared to actually making things happen. Oh? Like, uncovering Reagan' illegal aid to the Nicaraguan Contras? Like, discovering the connection between Noriega's drug trafficking and the Bank of Credit & Commerce International? Like searching for American POW's in Vietnam with John McCain, an action that led to peaceful relations between that country and ours? I'd say that there's plenty Kerry makes happen.
Since you brought it up, voting is not one of Kerry strengths. It seems he was absent quite often. Like, 40 percent often, which is how often Bush has been on vacation?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: What? I have no idea what you are trying to say here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThingsChange Member (Idle past 5956 days) Posts: 315 From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony) Joined: |
But what I and others would like to see released, are the government records concerning the formulation of energy policy
Just like a liberal... shift the argument to avoid the issue. The energy policy records (I thought this was discussed in length before on this forum) like other private consultations in the past between administrations, is not frequently revealed for public consumption. It's a no-win situation for Cheney for liberal critics, since if those who know about energy were consulted, the conspiracy theorists would shout about helping friends, and if those companies were not consulted, then the critics would shout that the experts were not consulted. The consultation is a distraction. What makes a difference are the decisions! That's what really counts. You liberals are so into the "intent" business, that you infer things assuming the worst, because of your prejudices.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Really? You are looking for a reduction in our civil rights, including the right to not be held without representation, indefinitely, without trial? Are you looking for leadership which stops looking for the person who ordered the WTC bombings, named Osama bin Ladin, and in fact has stated that he doesn't care where he is? Are you looking for leadership that lies in order to garner support for a war that has absolutely no connection to Al Qaida or Osama bin Laden?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThingsChange Member (Idle past 5956 days) Posts: 315 From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony) Joined: |
crashfrog writes: We don't know who wrote the military records, but those reports would have been written by people who were there, possibly by some of the men who later became Swift Boaters.\ The Navy is challenging the authenticity of Sen. John Kerry's Vietnam War medals. It seems Judicial Watch has asked Kerry to remove some of his questionable claims from his Web site, pending a formal investigation by the Navy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1270 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
He said Bush Sr. would have done things different. Then you replied to him accusing him in you reply and argument that he said Sr. would have done things the same way Bush jr. did. He simply didn't say that.
-porcelain
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThingsChange Member (Idle past 5956 days) Posts: 315 From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony) Joined: |
leadership that lies in order to garner support
You liberals are lying about this claim that Bush lied.Bush did not lie. He told the truth as he was informed. Lying would be knowing the truth but saying otherwise. Also, you don't know that he has stopped looking for Osama. People thought the same thing about Saddam. I don't for a minute think he has stopped looking. I do believe he is downplaying Osama to flush him out of the caves, however. This is another instance of reading what you interpret his intent to be, and as a liberal, you find the worst intent to latch onto.
...no connection to Al Qaida or Osama bin Laden? Obviously, you are ignoring the facts that repeatedly reject this old mantra from the left. This "deny the facts on old arguments" is a just like Creationists. How ironic for EvC Forum. If you want those facts, go replay McCain, Guiliani, O'Reilly and go look things up on the Web and news. I don't have to the time.
...reduction in our civil rights... I think the negatives are grossly overblown (as usual) by liberals, since they are mainly "potential" and not reality. The risks are enormous in the coming years of a terrorist action that could dwarf the WTC tragedy. Since we are not invading Pakistan, Syria, Iran, etc. to hunt down terrorists (as if that would be effective... not), we are depending upon intelligence, especially here at home. So, you and Kerry like to disadvantage the Intelligence community when we need more. I would rather help reduce the chances of a major terrorist action than form a committee after another tragedy to investigate and conclude that our Intelligence organization was lacking. P.S. Hmmm. You seem potentially dangerous. Where do you live? Please be specific and give hours when you are home. As a liberal, you don't have a gun, do you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote:Sadly, this may be true.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
docpotato Member (Idle past 5077 days) Posts: 334 From: Portland, OR Joined: |
quote: You're not talking about those votes Kerry made to take away weapons systems that Cheney supported and, if I remember correctly, thought didn't cut enough are you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
The Navy is challenging the authenticity of Sen. John Kerry's Vietnam War medals. Please substantiate this claim.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThingsChange Member (Idle past 5956 days) Posts: 315 From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony) Joined: |
Substantiate Claim (of Navy investigation) I got the news from Newsmax, but it is misleading.I should have known... nothing can move so fast with government. Correction: The Navy is not (yet) investigating Kerry. The DoD with cooperation from Attorney General must investigate the allegation first to see if the charges have merit worth pursuing. Then, the Navy would actually investigate. more from Chicago Sun Times:
Page not found - Chicago Sun-Times
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Hans Blix never told Bush that there was any evidence that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. If the Administration isn't going to listen to the experts, they obvviously were only interested in listening to people who told them wron information because it was what they wanted to hear. http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1767468
The leaders of the United States and Britain failed to exercise "critical judgment" in going to war against Iraq a year ago despite the lack of hard evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, says Hans Blix, the former chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. "If you sentence someone to death or you sentence someone to war, you'd better have some evidence," Blix tells NPR's Bob Edwards. "And we didn't feel there was evidence..." Blix, whose new book is called Disarming Iraq, says he became doubtful about the existence of Iraqi WMD in January 2003. He says U.N. inspectors visited locations in Iraq that intelligence had indicated "as places where there would be weapons. And in none of these cases did we find any weapons." quote: They said that they knew where the WMD were, even though the inspectors has been to all of those sites and didn't find any WMD. They also repeatedly made connections between the terrorists who flew planes in into the WTC and Hussein, even though Iraq had nothing to do with the attack. They did such a good job telling this lie that at one point a majority of Americans believed that the suicide terrorists were Iraqui, not Saudi. Where do you think the public got that mistaken idea?
quote: Actually, he said so in a speech, and I saw him say it on tape. I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02 "I am truly not that concerned about him."- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts, 3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02) quote: I can't wait to see what you make of those quotes.
...no connection to Al Qaida or Osama bin Laden? quote: Um, are you paying attention to the findings of the 9/11 commission? MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos No ‘collaborative relationship’ seenIt said that reports of subsequent contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship, and added that two unidentified senior bin Laden associates "have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaida and Iraq." The report, the 15th released by the commission staff, concluded, We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaida cooperated on attacks against the United States.
...reduction in our civil rights... quote: Wrong. The Patriot act is already being abused by law enforcement, and US citizens are being held indefinately, without representation and without trial. That, my friend, is called the begining of repression and facism. http://abcnews.go.com/...20/conservatives_patriot030312.html
Some conservative groups are finding common ground with organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, expressing concerns about the effect that the USA Patriot Act and a possible follow-up law, the Domestic Security Enhancement Act, could have on civil liberties. Liberal critics have directed much of their worry at what they saw as an attack on immigrants' rights in the Patriot Act, the massive measure that was passed as the country was reeling from the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. More than 60 towns, cities and counties around the country have passed resolutions criticizing the act, some going so far as to instruct municipal employees including police not to assist federal agents in investigations that they believe violate the Constitution. Now, right-leaning groups such as the American Conservative Union, the Eagle Forum and Gun Owners of America say they are concerned that American citizens could also be victimized by what they say are unconstitutional law enforcement powers allowed by the Patriot and the potential enhancement act. The heart of the issue, according to conservatives, liberals and constitutional scholars, is the effect that USA Patriot has already had on issues of probable cause and due process, and that both of those concepts would be further eroded if the so-called Patriot II were adopted as it appears in the draft form. According to what is in the draft, if adopted it would allow the Justice Department to wiretap a person for 15 days without a warrant; federal agents could secretly arrest people and provide no information to their family, the media or their attorney until charges are brought, no matter how long that took; and it would allow the government to strip Americans of their citizenship for even unknowingly helping a group that is connected to an organization deemed to be terrrorist. It would also make it a crime for people subpoenaed in connection with an investigation being carried out under the Patriot Act to alert Congress to any possible abuses committed by federal agents. There is also no "sunset provision," which constitutional scholars say removes the element of congressional oversight and means lawmakers would have no way of compelling the Justice Department to prove that the powers provided in the act have not been abused. quote: Are they? Why do you think that? What is the evidence that would suggest this? And, anyway, I'd really like to know if you are comfortable with the government having the power to make people "disappear", to wiretap your home withpout a warrant, etc. Sound a lot like the KGB, doesn't it? Does the ends justify the means in the supposed "most free country in the world"? It doesn't to me. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-03-2004 07:09 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
This whole concept doesn't give you some misgivings, some concerns? That a "conservative legal watchdog group" (run by? funded by?) wants to launch a legal investigation by people under the administration against his opponent?
Do you ever get the opinion that the neocons will stoop to what ever tawdry measure is necessary no matter how immoral, innapropriat or unamerican it is? The hypocrisy of this is just boggling. This is worse that the Clinton witch-hunt. I am appalled and I fear for America if this goes ahead. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024