Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

[Urbane Guerrilla]

When were the Swift Boaters refuted? Has anyone awarded John Kerry even one Purple Heart, let alone three? Notice that this has not come up in any reputable source I've ever heard of, and unlike some, I'm not the sort to put my fingers in my ears. John Kerry has run true to his form for the past thirty years -- he plumped for the Sandinistas much more than for his own country's interest, or humanity's. That's a matter of public record, and you can look up how he voted: he was consistently one of those voting against our acting in any way in Nicaragua. There was far too much of that kind of Marxist-symp activity going on in Congress at the time. I hardly need mention any party-line breakdown.

An exerpt from John O'Neill, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, in June 2005:

We called for Kerry to execute a form which would permit anyone to examine his full and unexpulgated [sic] military records at the Navy Department and the National Personnel Records Center. Instead he executed a form permitting his hometown paper to obtain the records currently at the Navy Department. The Navy Department previously indicated its records did not include various materials. This is hardly what we called for. If he did execute a complete release of all records we could then answer questions such as (1)Did he ever receive orders to Cambodia or file any report of such a mission (whether at Christmas or otherwise); (2) What was his discharge status between 1970 and 1978 (when he received a discharge) and was it affected by his meetings in 1970 and 1971 with the North Vietnamese? (3)why did he receive much later citations for medals purportedly signed by Secretary Lehman who said he did not know of them; (4) Are there Hostile Fire and Personnel Injured by Hostile Fire Reports for Kerry's Dec. 1968 Purple Heart (when the officer in charge of the boat Admiral Schacte, the treating Surgeon Louis Letson, and Kerry's Division Commander deny there was hostile fire causing a scratch) awarded three months later under unknown circumstances.

1) True enough; but what I had in mind was matters of politics and history.
2) And proof is where? Who says this? The kind of people who're trying to get her silenced? Should they be taken seriously?
3) Such a remark is so strained as not to enter into consideration much: there was a good deal of carrying on like somebody in the White House had committed a felony -- until the matter was looked at more closely, and was found a creature of anti-Republican spin.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

When were the Swift Boaters refuted?

I pointed you to the links at least twice.

1) True enough; but what I had in mind was matters of politics and history.
2) And proof is where? Who says this? The kind of people who're trying to get her silenced? Should they be taken seriously?

I made a link.

3) Such a remark is so strained as not to enter into consideration much:

So when she lies, you just discount it as not politics or history, or you pretend the refuter isn't credible, or you say it's below consideration.

I think my point is made. Thank you.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

I pointed you to the links at least twice.

And here's another.