 |
| |
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote:
There is nothing more pathetic than someone too stubborn, proud, or simply deluded enough not to notice when they have made a total ass of themselves. |
I know. That's why I'm contemptuous of you.
Now, I think I'll go back to my policy of ignoring you to focus on people whose opinions are actually worth listening to. |
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh, poor baby got his ass handed to him, and he goes off crying, without a worhtwhile response
The sad part is, all the things you said in that "wise" reponse of yours had been said before, and addressed before.
The sad thing is, Ned has made a more worthile contribution here than you, since:
1. he isn;t half as obnixious, rude and spiteful
2. he has moments of clarity, hiwle your assumed net persona (or perahps sadly your real personality) does not allow you to be anything other than a smartass. Sometimes earnestness is worth something.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote:
If you can provide a substantive counterarguement, fine. |
You first. Making up reasons why the mainstream media can't investigate Kerry's record when amateurs all over the internet are busy doing a pretty damn good job of it is hardly a "substantive counterargument". I'm not going to waste my time responding to claims that are obviously false on their face. The mainstream media is clearly not doing its job with regards to the SwiftVet's accusations. The fact that you can't see this speaks volumes about the usefullness of your opinions. |
God, you trully are deluded- I mean, honestly.
To your first claim- I believe all your references to bloggers and such are based solely on his Cambodia statements- well, maybe you have some sort of mental problem that does not allow you to understand basic sentences, BUT I DONT GIVE A DAMN NOR AM I ARGUING ABOUT THOSE CAMBODIA STATEMENTS.
And what bloggers have found are serious inconsistencies between mission logs and his statements. Were the hell do you think these logs came from? FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN MILITARY RECORDS! Is that too hard for you to grasp???? These very same records are being used to asses the validity of the far more serious charges made, that Kerry lied about the circumstances under which he recieved his medals (the point of the first add, which does not even mention anything about Cambodia, something that has become "a story" post the beginning of this smear campaign)
So, the press, using the very same type of public domain records bloggers and anyone else, incluidng you, have access to, have found that the allegations made in the TV ad are simply not supported by the evidence of military records.
To summerize your entire case:
Bloggers have been able to show that Kerry's Cambodia statement, which IIUC were made in the Senate in 1986, do not match the mission logs the public can get their hands on, and thus this claim made by him is very likely not true.
You then extrapolate to the entire set of Swiftboat claims, including those on the TV ad and try to make the leap that IF the Cambodia claim was false, then all Kerry;s claims atre false.
Of course, that assumption does not pass any basic logical hurdles, but you throw it out there anyway, cause God knows logic is not for you....
The media set out to investigate the claims MADE IN THE TV AD CURRENTLY RUNNING (CAMBODIA IS NOT MENTIONED ANYWHERE IN THAT AD) and that is what the NYT piece does, and it more than adequately shows massive holes in the claims of this org., meaning that Kerry hardly has to porve anything, since the swift boat vets have failed to show even the most basic burden of credability for thier claims in that ad.
Lord, I fear this reply might be too long and logical for you. Let me simplyfy it:
PZZNWED!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote:
To summerize your entire case:
Bloggers have been able to show that Kerry's Cambodia statement, which IIUC were made in the Senate in 1986, do not match the mission logs the public can get their hands on, and thus this claim made by him is very likely not true. |
That's incorrect. The bloggers didn't use mission logs to prove that Kerry was lying, since they can't get their hands on the logs. They used the testimony of other vets and Kerry's own diary, two sources I suggested the mainstream media might use (and sources you claimed were worthless or not available for use). |
1. If your claims about the Cambodia claim being proven correct are based simply on testimony that can;t be corraborated in another way, then your definition of proof is pretty sad.
2. Much more importantly- were the **** did bloggers get a hold of John Kerry's private diary? And if they have their hands on it, why arent the national review and the washington times, both of which have more than enough resources, right on it? Unless you plan to accuse them of a pro-Kerry bias?
quote:
No wonder your making an ass out of yourself; you don't understand my arguments because you don't have even a basic understanding of the facts, as usual. I don't need to waste my time being berated by you, only to find out that you don't have the first damn clue what you were talking about. Now, run along and educate yourself. I'm trying to discuss this issue with intelligent posters. |
You so cute when you get PZZNWED
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:34
|
|
Since you think so highly of blogs:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ar...4_08/004505.php
quote:
KERRY IN CAMBODIA....Instapundit links today to a piece in the Telegraph that quotes John Kerry biographer Douglas Brinkley about the "Christmas in Cambodia" kerfuffle:
"On Christmas Eve he was near Cambodia; he was around 50 miles from the Cambodian border. There's no indictment of Kerry to be made, but he was mistaken about Christmas in Cambodia," said Douglas Brinkley, who has unique access to the candidate's wartime journals.
....He said: "Kerry went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. He had a run dropping off US Navy Seals, Green Berets and CIA guys." The missions were not armed attacks on Cambodia, said Mr Brinkley, who did not include the clandestine missions in his wartime biography of Mr Kerry, Tour of Duty.
"He was a ferry master, a drop-off guy, but it was dangerous as hell. Kerry carries a hat he was given by one CIA operative. In a part of his journals which I didn't use he writes about discussions with CIA guys he was dropping off."
So let me get this straight. Kerry did go to Cambodia — even though that was supposedly impossible, he did take CIA guys in — even though that was supposedly absurd, and he did get a hat from one of them — even though that was supposedly a sign of mental instability. The extent of Kerry's malfeasance is that instead of doing it in December, he actually did it in January and February.
Considering that he's mentioned this story only twice, most recently 18 years ago, and it turns out that his only crime is to have tarted it up with a bit of holiday pathos, I think I'll pass on following it any further down the Swift Vets rabbit hole. But thanks to everyone who displayed their deep unseriousness about this election by participating in this smear. It will be remembered. |
So, this "diary access" you speak of is the access his own biographer had. If you note, the biographer is mentioned repeatedly in the NYTimes piece.
Yes, I wonder whic great lies....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
GePap, who was president Dec. 25, 1968? Johnson. Kerry's Cambodia story has Nixon ordering him into Cambodia. He even says "president Nixon."
?
Now, GePap, what do you think about this? |
I think it is as relevant, as I said, as Reagan claiming when speaking about his Contra policy, that he had been to Nicaragua, which of course was utterly false.
In essence, a total non-issue.
More important are the claims made in the TV ad run by this org, and those ads are under serious and legitimate scrutiny, and their claims pretty weak.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Drake Tungsten
|
 |
Knee deep in alien womyn...
Oct 2001
time: 14:34
|
|
quote:
One, why don;t you READ WHAT THE BIOGRAPHER STATES? since he is the primary source for this story? |
The biographer isn't the primary source. Jesus, go read about what happened and then come back. As it stands now, I could get a better debate from my neighborhood kids. Their spelling would be better, as well.
quote:
Anyone who votes on something that insignificant is a fool. |
You don't seem to understand why the Cambodia story is significant. I'm not surprised.
By itself, it's not that important, although a presidential candidate lying for decades about an event that he claims was a turning point in his life does have some importance. It's very important, however, because of what it shows us about other things. As the first of the SwiftVets accusations to be proven, it demonstrates that they have some credibility, at least enough to warrant some sort of attention be given to their claims. The lack of fair coverage given to these claims by the mainstream media, even after the Cambodia story had been proven, demonstrates just how biased the media is in its coverage of this election. The behavior of the NYT, WaPo, LA Times and others in regards to this story have been nothing less than shameful. That's the really story here, one that came about because the Cambodia accusations proved true and the media still refused to cover them.
Last edited by Drake Tungsten on 21-08-2004 at 12:15
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-08-2004 10:50
|