Nice to see no one here defending the "swiftboating"-BS anymore. But if I may add, also in late 2004, it did not take much brains to figure out that this was a smear campaign of rather classical style.

__________________
Im Grabe schlummert ein neues Morgenrot.

Oh, it's quite relevant here, since this is a thread where you are on about how Kerry was supposedly mistreated by the SwiftBoat group.

So, was Kerry a "pampered loser" as you claim all our other armed forces members are?

Matt

to wit;

Unfortunately, key aspects of my offer of $1 million have not been accurately reported," Mr. Pickens wrote in a letter to the crewmen. "My offer, reiterated in a letter to Senator Kerry not long after the challenge was made, was to pay $1 million for information that would prove any of the ads – which I helped fund – inaccurate. In reviewing your material, none of the information you provide speaks specifically to the issues contained in the ads."


from your link.


Anyway, I'd say let the public decide, Pickens and the crewman should publish the material provided. Pickens says the info. they provided does not shed light on the swift boat issue addressed. Okay.
If he’s a poltroon, and is back sliding it will be evident.
I seem to remember that part of the issue/agreement was kerrys films, he took while on duty and his service record(?).

As to the reporter going down the river, I hope it wasn’t that river in Cambodia kerry never went down bringing back his cia gifted hat. I also seem to remember not to long ago, a high level prison guard making comments on McCain and how that proved nothing, he was a collaborator etc. So, you’ll forgive me if I don’t find testimony after 35 years from a single foot soldier, that yields one hit on google ( and not much their other than the down the river authors testimony) as presumptive proof of much.

Ad to that, as I have stated before, I always took the book by O’neill with a grain of salt, what I and many folks who followed this found egregious and truly offensive was Kerrys own testimony and lies, back tracks etc. that had zero to do with the “swift boaters”.

Add to that I must say also, goober, your concern as to getting involved in clearing a sailor, defense of such etc. is inconsistent with your views on the military and a little rich.

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

How is a lying rightie smear specialist, welching on a bet, "Breaking News?" It's the sum total of these scumbags existence.

This has been used by El Rushbo, and in these forums as "No one took Pickens up on his offer to pay a million to anyone who could prove anything the swifties said was wrong"

I have been unable to find the exact wording that he used, apparently he claims he was referring to TV ads that he personally funded. But since many Swift Boat TV ads contained lies, I assume he will claim that his funding only went to certain ads. But it's the condition that Kerry turn over all his tapes, films and diaries, that give me the feeling this is a guy who was feeling pretty good and talking big, and now realizes that he went too far, and is trying to welch.

Which amounts to an admission by a big financial backer of the Swifties, that most of what they said was lies.
Which you didn't have to be too bright to figure out.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Still can't answer this, eh Goober?



How sad.

Still off topic, Matt, maybe you should dig out the context of that quote, and respond to it in the proper thread.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Perfectly on topic - the thread is about an aspect of the swift boat vets and Kerry.

It speaks volumes that you can't summon up the courage to answer the question, though, and I'm quite happy to showcase your evasions here.

Matt

Actually you are taking something out of context that is totally off topic.
But then again, that's what you do..........

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Nothing out of context about it, Goober. You called the people serving in our Army "pampered losers".

That's your whole post. So let's dispense with your nonsensical claim that it was "taken out of context".



Matt

Matt Larson Disease...................

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

There's an intelligent response.

You said what you said, Goober. Your dishonest attempts to distance yourself from your self-defining comments about our troops have all failed.

So, any chance you'll answer the question?

Matt

would love to see the explaination for this, so kerry was a worthy warrior but current warriors are pieces of shit???? was kerry worthy cause he protested? or cause he drinks your koolaide...would love to see an answer on this one

It's off topic, because it was in a thread about Osama bin laden.
For all the trillions we have spent on the military over the years, Osama bin Laden is fat and happy, and will probably die of old age.

This is what the most expensive, most well paid military in the history of the world has accomplished, next to zero, although they will come up with meaningless crap about schools and water systems to try to justify the complete failure of the mission.
hence "losers", because if you don't win , you lose.
"Pampered", because no army in history has been better fed, better housed, better trained, better equipped or better paid.

Sure, I understand that they have accomplished things, but it's like saying your team got more first downs, more sacks, more completed passes even though they lost the game.

Military history shows that the military(that is almost every military in history, not any specific one) continues to prepare for the last war, and that they continue to employ methods from the last war, long after those methods have become ineffective.

Our current military would blow away anything from WWII, and if they were transported back in time to 1941, they probably would be in Berlin and Tokyo three weeks later, but that's not the enemy we face today, and those methods air, armor, artillery and infantry are as effective as armored knights on horseback against today's threats.

This thread is about someone who leveled false accusations against one man in particular, offered a million dollars to anyone who could prove those allegations wrong, and is backing out of the offer now that he's being swamped with the evidence that those allegations were false.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

And it's perfectly on topic to discuss the accusation you leveled at the same man - that he is or was a "pampered loser".

It's sad you lack the capacity to answer the question, given your allegedly strong convictions about the poor quality of our military and all who serve in it.

Sad, but not unexpected.