 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jeremy Eaton
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 08 May 2004
Posts: 90
|
 Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 3:00 pm Post subject: Re: Are you "non-partisans" investigating Bush's d |
 |
|
| Quote: |
The New York Times already investigated that. And concluded that G.W. Bush completed his commitment in a manner not different from many others in any significant way. No story. |
No.... actual story. You'd better cite the specific issue of the New York Times that you so blithely reference.
Here's my source:
Texan journalist James Moore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stumpy
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 08 May 2004
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am going to simply be a spectator to this dispute. I don't think it will soon end.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeremy Eaton wrote: | | Cheers Sparky, your counter-point about censorship still stands I believe. |
You would.
Actually, it's "Navy Cubed," but that is a minor point and not one that you'd want me to comment on, anyways.
| Quote: | | you are going after a minor point I was making anyways... One I'm not particularilly interested in discussing. |
Ah, not so familiar with bulletin boards, then?
See, you post whatever you choose.
I respond to whatever I choose.
Other people respond to whatever they choose.
| Quote: | | If you care to address my other points, rather than changing the topic. Or didn't you "get" that? |
What other points? You quoted an eloquent part of his perjurious speech before Congress.
I've read it before. I probably know it better than you do. I also know the rest of what he had to say that day. Do you?
In the section you quoted, he asked, (or actually, Bobby Kennedy's speechwriter asked) "How do you ask the last man to die in Viet Nam?"
Well, thanks in part to his actions years later as Chair of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, the last men to die in Viet Nam were probably still in enemy hands long after the VC claimed that they had returned all of our prisoners of war.
Letting him become President and CinC of the world's greatest military will stab them in the back all over again.
This, we MUST not allow.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeremy Eaton
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 08 May 2004
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
(N)3
Nope. Don't know what he had to say the during rest of the day. Enlighten me. I've heard the speech, and thought it was incredible. Eloquent, heartfelt, and powerful.
I take it you have some problem with it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 5:38 pm Post subject: Re: Are you "non-partisans" investigating Bush's d |
|
|
| Jeremy Eaton wrote: | | Quote: |
The New York Times already investigated that. And concluded that G.W. Bush completed his commitment in a manner not different from many others in any significant way. No story. |
No.... actual story. You'd better cite the specific issue of the New York Times that you so blithely reference.
Here's my source:
Texan journalist James Moore |
Do a search. Isn't that hard to find. I dropped my registration to the Times, so you'll have to settle for that. The information is correct.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JasonBinPNW
Ensign
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 58
Location: Vancouver (not BC), Washington (Not DC)
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Navy_Navy_Navy wrote: | | Well, thanks in part to his actions years later as Chair of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, the last men to die in Viet Nam were probably still in enemy hands long after the VC claimed that they had returned all of our prisoners of war. . |
Mmm, that's my next issue with these DU Borg/Forum Trolls. Why would such a "great" guy who cares so much for his "Band of Brothers" go so far out of his way to suppress evidence regarding our POW-MIA's in Vietnam?
Even if it was inconclusive evidence or conjecture, it deserved to be heard.
Could it have been that resotring relations with Vietnam was more important to him than full accountability of his "Band of Brothers"? And why oh why would that be?
_________________
Semper Fi!
Jason
Proud member of "The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Greenhate wrote:
| Quote: | | The New York Times already investigated that. And concluded that G.W. Bush completed his commitment in a manner not different from many others in any significant way. No story. |
It's good to see Bush supporters acknowledging the respectability and professionalism of the New York Times.
I do disagree, however, with his interpretation of what the Times wrote. For instance,
The New York Times, Feb 16, 2004 pA17 col 04 (19 col in)
Lieutenant Bush, Cavities and All. (National Desk)(Biography) Elisabeth Bumiller.
This past week tested the proposition that it may be possible to know too much about President Bush. The White House, determined to refute Democratic charges that Mr. Bush was AWOL from the National Guard, so frantically disgorged hundreds of pages of documents from Mr. Bush's military files that reporters who normally complain about presidential secrecy found themselves drowning in a monsoon of Bush World minutiae.
The documents did little to solve the argument between the president and his critics about where, when and how often Lieutenant Bush turned up for Guard duty in 1972 and 1973. But they did reveal that while in Alabama, Mr. Bush had at least nine cavities and that he has gained 19 pounds since 1971.
There were other details even more arcane, like the fact that the president worked as a salesman of sporting goods at Sears, Roebuck in Houston the summer of 1966, after his sophomore year at Yale.
----snip----
Friday night brought a final tidal wave of paper, much of it highly repetitive and already released in previous years, that once again offered no new proof that Mr. Bush had turned up for duty in Alabama. But the mountain did add up to a molehill of additional trivia, some of it known and much of it forgotten, about the 43rd president of the United States.
--- end article -----
Personally, I think the Bush campaign was hoping that a deluge of records would permit them to say "we submitted over 300 pages!" and that nobody would notice that the pertinent ones were missing.
Regarding claims that Kerry was hiding something about his war service and the strange accusation that he balked on a promise three days earlier. Note that Hibbard was left speechless.
The New York Times
April 22, 2004 pA22 col 04 (20 col in)
After days of being pressed by Republicans, Senator John Kerry on Wednesday released his military records, which showed uniformly positive evaluations from his commanders in Vietnam.
After balking Monday on a promise to release his full Navy record, Mr. Kerry posted more than 140 pages of documents on his campaign Web site, www.johnkerry.com, in a move that largely silenced critics on a part of his life that has been central to his presidential hopes.
The records depict many instances of bravery in the face of enemy fire and describe a young officer who is smart, articulate and decisive. For example, George M. Elliot, his commander in early 1969, wrote, ''In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed.''
Mr. Elliot added, ''His bearing and appearance are above reproach.''
Even a commander who, 36 years after the fact, questioned a Purple Heart awarded to Mr. Kerry in 1968, recorded no reservations at the time. The officer, Grant W. Hibbard, a lieutenant commander during Mr. Kerry's five-month tour in Vietnam, told The Boston Globe last week that the wound for which Mr. Kerry won his first Purple Heart was no more than a small scratch.
But there was nothing negative about Mr. Kerry in an evaluation that Mr. Hibbard wrote two weeks after that incident.
For the most part, Mr. Hibbard wrote, Mr. Kerry was under his command for too short a time to evaluate him fully. Of 16 categories for rating, including professional knowledge, moral courage and loyalty, Mr. Hibbard checked ''not observed'' in 12. Mr. Hibbard gave Mr. Kerry the highest rating of ''one of the top few'' in three categories -- initiative, cooperation and personal behavior. He gave Mr. Kerry the second-best rating, ''above the majority,'' in military bearing. Reached Wednesday at his retirement home in Florida, Mr. Hibbard said he had no comment.
----- snip -----
I'm pleased that Bush supporters accept the validity of America's finest newspaper! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
95 bxl
Seaman
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | So that is what those links mean? Kerry was openly agreeing to go to Vietnam, even though he personally didn't want to, when his country needed him to...
...and Bush was making it clear he wasn't going to go even if needed?
Man, ejs, you've really thrown a wrench in the works here! I can't believe anyone truly patriotic who loves America would support someone who did his damnest to avoid a war he wanted others to die for!
(btw, I admire Kerry's candor and modesty in that quote) |
Sparky... you clearly don't understand the military, meaning like most of the Pro-Kerry types here, you're probably never served... and you know so little about this issue.
The fact is that the box checked in that form says:
I DO...... DO NOT VOLUNTEER FOR OVERSEAS.
When you leftists come here with your limited "knowledge" of the military, and spew your BS as if you know what you're talking about, all you do is re-enforce the perception that Kerry is scum, and those rallying around him are equally scum.
There is a HUGE difference between NOT volunteering to go overseas, and
| Quote: |
...and Bush was making it clear he wasn't going to go even if needed?
|
You have NO evidence, outside your warped perception, that Bush would not have gone overseas had he been ordered to do so.
But that didn't stop you from making the quantum leap of non-logic you leftists are so famous for.
With every word people like you spew, Kerry gets further and further behind... and you people confirm that your true candidate should have been Gen. Clark, whose military record compared to Kerry's is like comparing a Ferrari to a Yugo.
Do you think you people talking this BS are doing Kerry any favors? I have no problem judging Kerry by the people he attracts, his politics notwithstanding. And the lying scum that have coagulated around this board in his support speaks volumes.
Hate Bush? I don't give a damn if you do. But get your facts straight first... won't you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JasonBinPNW
Ensign
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 58
Location: Vancouver (not BC), Washington (Not DC)
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 95 bxl wrote: | | Hate Bush? I don't give a damn if you do. But get your facts straight first... won't you? |
Since when do the Dems need to have "Facts" when conjecture, hyperbole, and demegogery have worked so well for them?
_________________
Semper Fi!
Jason
Proud member of "The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | Greenhate wrote:
| Quote: | | The New York Times already investigated that. And concluded that G.W. Bush completed his commitment in a manner not different from many others in any significant way. No story. |
It's good to see Bush supporters acknowledging the respectability and professionalism of the New York Times.
I do disagree, however, with his interpretation of what the Times wrote. For instance,
The New York Times, Feb 16, 2004 pA17 col 04 (19 col in)
Lieutenant Bush, Cavities and All. (National Desk)(Biography) Elisabeth Bumiller.
This past week tested the proposition that it may be possible to know too much about President Bush. The White House, determined to refute Democratic charges that Mr. Bush was AWOL from the National Guard, so frantically disgorged hundreds of pages of documents from Mr. Bush's military files that reporters who normally complain about presidential secrecy found themselves drowning in a monsoon of Bush World minutiae.
The documents did little to solve the argument between the president and his critics about where, when and how often Lieutenant Bush turned up for Guard duty in 1972 and 1973. But they did reveal that while in Alabama, Mr. Bush had at least nine cavities and that he has gained 19 pounds since 1971.
There were other details even more arcane, like the fact that the president worked as a salesman of sporting goods at Sears, Roebuck in Houston the summer of 1966, after his sophomore year at Yale.
----snip----
Friday night brought a final tidal wave of paper, much of it highly repetitive and already released in previous years, that once again offered no new proof that Mr. Bush had turned up for duty in Alabama. But the mountain did add up to a molehill of additional trivia, some of it known and much of it forgotten, about the 43rd president of the United States.
--- end article -----
Personally, I think the Bush campaign was hoping that a deluge of records would permit them to say "we submitted over 300 pages!" and that nobody would notice that the pertinent ones were missing.
Regarding claims that Kerry was hiding something about his war service and the strange accusation that he balked on a promise three days earlier. Note that Hibbard was left speechless.
The New York Times
April 22, 2004 pA22 col 04 (20 col in)
After days of being pressed by Republicans, Senator John Kerry on Wednesday released his military records, which showed uniformly positive evaluations from his commanders in Vietnam.
After balking Monday on a promise to release his full Navy record, Mr. Kerry posted more than 140 pages of documents on his campaign Web site, www.johnkerry.com, in a move that largely silenced critics on a part of his life that has been central to his presidential hopes.
The records depict many instances of bravery in the face of enemy fire and describe a young officer who is smart, articulate and decisive. For example, George M. Elliot, his commander in early 1969, wrote, ''In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed.''
Mr. Elliot added, ''His bearing and appearance are above reproach.''
Even a commander who, 36 years after the fact, questioned a Purple Heart awarded to Mr. Kerry in 1968, recorded no reservations at the time. The officer, Grant W. Hibbard, a lieutenant commander during Mr. Kerry's five-month tour in Vietnam, told The Boston Globe last week that the wound for which Mr. Kerry won his first Purple Heart was no more than a small scratch.
But there was nothing negative about Mr. Kerry in an evaluation that Mr. Hibbard wrote two weeks after that incident.
For the most part, Mr. Hibbard wrote, Mr. Kerry was under his command for too short a time to evaluate him fully. Of 16 categories for rating, including professional knowledge, moral courage and loyalty, Mr. Hibbard checked ''not observed'' in 12. Mr. Hibbard gave Mr. Kerry the highest rating of ''one of the top few'' in three categories -- initiative, cooperation and personal behavior. He gave Mr. Kerry the second-best rating, ''above the majority,'' in military bearing. Reached Wednesday at his retirement home in Florida, Mr. Hibbard said he had no comment.
----- snip -----
I'm pleased that Bush supporters accept the validity of America's finest newspaper! |
I just don't accept the validity of Efficiency reports. I've written them and received them. They are eyewash. What they say? Means very little unless you understand the language they are written in. As a Naval Officer stated during the Carter Administration, "90% of the Navy is in the top 10% according to their ERs".
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JC_Christian
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 08 May 2004
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stumpy wrote:
| Quote: | | I am going to simply be a spectator to this dispute. I don't think it will soon end. |
And Our Leader was right when he said that in 1967. What's your point?
_________________
Heterosexually yours,
Gen. JC Christian, patriot
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | "90% of the Navy is in the top 10% according to their ERs" |
You know it, I know it, and so do most commissioned officers of the era.
Was it also true of the enlisted service reports?
This is a great line, and the unwilling media needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to it's veracity.
Almost as good as the "I recommend him for promotion ahead of his peers". I can't speak for the Navy, but for the Army, promotion through O3 was AUTOMATIC after the requisite ONE YEAR of service, unless, of course, you were in Leavenworth (and even THEN I'm not sure it wasn't).
On edit: oh yeah, and add a </sarcasm> after that last parenthetical for our humor-challenged leftist friends. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I am SUCH an idiot! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eecee
Ensign
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 52
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:58 pm Post subject: Re: Kerry Beats Bush as Far as Service |
|
|
| ejs wrote: |
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-05-05-kerry-vietnam_x.htm
In more than 9,000 pages from the early 1970s, the FBI is seen tracking the protests, manifestos and myriad activities of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and concluding that the group took a more extreme turn in the years after Kerry, now the Democratic presidential candidate, quit it.
FBI files on the organization were released Wednesday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by The Associated Press and other news organizations.
Kerry is accused in the file of little more than charisma.
An FBI summary of the anti-war protests he helped organize in April 1971 says Kerry, a decorated war hero, "overshadowed" many of the organization's other leaders and was "a more popular and eloquent figure" than the rest.
"Kerry was glib, cool, and displayed just what the moderate elements wanted to reflect," the summary says. |
This does not surprise me. If there was any dirt to be dug up on Kerry either with respect to his military records or his antiwar activities, the Nixon administration would surely have done so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | From 95 BXL:
| Quote: | | Sparky... you clearly don't understand the military, meaning like most of the Pro-Kerry types here, you're probably never served... and you know so little about this issue. |
While Kerry was dealing with the jungles, the shrapnel, death, questionable treatment of civilians, etc. the following conservatives were chasing skirts at home: |
While Kerry was typing away on his typewriter at every opportunity, having himself filmed on 8mm movies, wondering how in the world he was going to get out of this duty that wasn't supposed to "have anything to do with the war".... (His own words, there, spark)
This site isn't about any of those people you mentioned.
John Kerry has said twice in televised interviews that he would release his full service record, and he hasn't.
Wonder if it's the fact that people who know how to read what's in those papers might see what he doesn't want anyone to see.
He posted another boats' action reports as his own, for Pete's sake? Just how unethical do you have to BE before the libs shut this one down and try for a better candidate?
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
