Who are you voting/rooting for in this years election
- Thread starter Brino
- Start date
- Status
Starman said:
Listen to me, since george w bush's election i haven't seen so much mudslinging.Michael Moore made it worse by attacking gwb at higher level.Who started to diss bush since the first page and post links which are misleadings?Answer me.So if you start to criticize bush for his actions , don't think that i will say nothing because i will criticize clinton or kerry in the same way you criticize bush.
georges since your so adament about Kerry cheating and lying for his medals and since you apparently are not willing to read the website I posted then I'll just show you a little of what's on that site.
SBV CLAIM ON LEGITIMACY OF KERRY'S FIRST PURPLE HEART:
...The following morning, John Kerry arrived at the office of Coastal Division 14 Commander Grant Hibbard to apply for a Purple Heart. Having already been informed by Schachte that Kerry's injury was self-inflicted rather than the result of hostile fire, Commander Hibbard told him to "forget it." Hibbard recently said of Kerry's minor scratch, "I’ve seen worse injuries from a rose thorn." Nevertheless, John Kerry managed to obtain his coveted Purple Heart for this incident nearly three months later after being transferred to Coastal Division 11.
FACT
(i) Kerry could NOT have gotten his Purple Heart without his Commander's recommendation. Indeed, regulations do not allow combatants to nominate themselves Purple Hearts or award it to themselves.
(ii) The severity of the injury is irrelevant to the award of a Purple Heart. The injury had to be sustained due to an outside force or in action against an enemy or hostile foreign force - or even from friendly fire. So SBV's claims are outrageous and without merit.
REFERENCES
Thomas Lang, CamPaign Desk:
Lt. Mike Kafka, a spokesman with the Navy Office of Information (CHINFO) in Washington D.C., told us three pertinent facts:
1 -- No soldier determines if he is eligible for a Purple Heart; only his commander can determine that specific U.S. Navy criteria have been met for the award. Hibbard told the Globe that while he was skeptical at the time as to whether Kerry came under enemy fire and whether he was even wounded, at the time he dropped the matter and told Kerry "do whatever you want." But that's not enough for any soldier to be awarded a Purple Heart; that requires the recommendation of a commander; and Hibbard was the commander. It is unclear as to whether another commander stepped in or Hibbard finally signed on to the Purple Heart.
2 -- The severity of the injury, which the Chicago Tribune dwells upon, apparently does not bear on whether a soldier qualifies for a Purple Heart. Paragraph 4 of the "Purple Heart Criteria for U.S. Navy" states that "a wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under one or more of the conditions listed in paragraph 2 [in 1968, those were: in action against the enemy, or as a result of action by "any hostile foreign force"]. A physical lesion is not required; however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer..." Kerry's wound was treated by a medical officer, who removed the shrapnel and applied an antiseptic.
3 -- Whether the injury is related to enemy fire, which the Times chose to emphasize, is germane to the question at hand. Enemy fire is essential for any soldier to receive a Purple Heart. A training accident doesn't qualify. Paragraph 3 of "Purple Heart Criteria for U.S. Navy" defines "enemy-related injuries" as those incurred when a solider is "struck by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other projectile created by enemy action."
Thomas Lang, Campaign Desk:
Alas, today, the Washington Times' fatally-wounded coverage of Kerry's newly-released service records makes yesterday's various media bloopers look like journalism at its finest.
...
Hurt quotes one Mel Howell, a retired Navy officer who flew helicopters in Vietnam, but who apparently never served with Kerry, as saying, "Most of us came away with all kinds of scratches like the ones Kerry got but never accepted Purple Hearts for them."
As Lt. Mike Kafka, a U.S. Navy spokesman, told us yesterday, in line with official U.S. Navy documentation, wounded combatants neither nominate nor award themselves Purple Hearts. The Purple Heart is awarded only after a commander determines that a soldier or sailor has incurred a wound inflicted by the enemy and forwards a recommendation to his superiors.
...
One veteran, Ray Waller, is identified as "a combat medic in the Marines" who "was responsible for determining whether injuries warranted Purple Hearts."
...
However, as noted above, Navy medics neither award Purple Hearts nor recommend others for a Purple Heart. Commanders do that based on, as US Navy guidelines put it, confirmation of medical treatment by "the doctor that provides medical care."
The expansive Waller goes on to tell Hurt that he had "never heard of" a shrapnel injury so minor that it did not require a tetanus shot and time off which had led to a Purple Heart. As Lt. Kafka notes, however, the written "Purple Heart Criteria for the U.S. Navy" does not list either a tetanus shot or time off due to injury as a requirement for receiving a Purple Heart.
FactCheck.org:
...even a "friendly fire" injury can qualify for a purple heart "as long as the 'friendly' projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment," according to the website of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
SBV CLAIM ON KERRY'S TRUTHFULNESS REGARDING HIS FIRST PURPLE HEART:
[Louis Letson]: I know John Kerry is lying about his first purple heart, because I treated him for that injury.
[via FactCheck.org]: Letson says Kerry's wound was self-inflicted and does not merit a purple heart...Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time...says that he “turned down the Purple Heart request,” and recalled Kerry's injury as a "tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn."
FACT
Letson was NOT the doctor who signed Kerry's sick call sheet and was not a Kerry crewmate
REFERENCES
FactCheck.org:
...even a "friendly fire" injury can qualify for a purple heart "as long as the 'friendly' projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment," according to the website of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
...
medical records provided by the Kerry campaign to FactCheck.org do not list Letson as the “person administering treatment” for Kerry’s injury on December 3, 1968 . The medical officer who signed this sick call report is J.C. Carreon, who is listed as treating Kerry for shrapnel to the left arm.
In his affidavit, Letson says Kerry's wound was self-inflicted and does not merit a purple heart. But that's based on hearsay, and disputed hearsay at that. Letson says “the crewman with Kerry told me there was no hostile fire, and that Kerry had inadvertently wounded himself with an M-79 grenade.” But the Kerry campaign says the two crewmen with Kerry that day deny ever talking to Letson.
Also appearing in the ad is Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time. Hibbard’s affidavit says that he “turned down the Purple Heart request,” and recalled Kerry's injury as a "tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn."
That doesn't quite square with Letson's affidavit, which describes shrapnel "lodged in Kerry's arm" (though "barely.")
Hibbard also told the Boston Globe in an interview in April 2004 that he eventually acquiesced about granting Kerry the purple heart.
Hibbard: I do remember some questions on it. . .I finally said, OK if that's what happened. . . do whatever you want
Kerry got the first purple heart after Hibbard left to return to the US.
Information cited at John Kerry.com:
Letson Offers NO PROOF He Treated Kerry.
Despite Letson's claims to have treated Kerry, he is not listed on any document as having treated Kerry after the 12/2/68 firefight. Offering only an account of dates and places-which is readily available in Kerry's biography and media accounts-Lester has produced nothing to verify his treatment of Kerry.
Letson Didn't Record His Memories of Vietnam Until Kerry's Emergence in 2003.
"Letson says that last year, as the Democratic campaign began to heat up, he told friends that he remembered treating one of the candidates many years ago. In response to their questions, Letson says, he wrote down his recollections of the time." [National Review Online, 5/4/04]
There's more but I wont post it all seeing as you have the link to go see for yourself.
Now I know you'll still say that Kerry is a liar and cheated for his medals but now everyone will know your wrong.
Brino
SBV CLAIM ON LEGITIMACY OF KERRY'S FIRST PURPLE HEART:
...The following morning, John Kerry arrived at the office of Coastal Division 14 Commander Grant Hibbard to apply for a Purple Heart. Having already been informed by Schachte that Kerry's injury was self-inflicted rather than the result of hostile fire, Commander Hibbard told him to "forget it." Hibbard recently said of Kerry's minor scratch, "I’ve seen worse injuries from a rose thorn." Nevertheless, John Kerry managed to obtain his coveted Purple Heart for this incident nearly three months later after being transferred to Coastal Division 11.
FACT
(i) Kerry could NOT have gotten his Purple Heart without his Commander's recommendation. Indeed, regulations do not allow combatants to nominate themselves Purple Hearts or award it to themselves.
(ii) The severity of the injury is irrelevant to the award of a Purple Heart. The injury had to be sustained due to an outside force or in action against an enemy or hostile foreign force - or even from friendly fire. So SBV's claims are outrageous and without merit.
REFERENCES
Thomas Lang, CamPaign Desk:
Lt. Mike Kafka, a spokesman with the Navy Office of Information (CHINFO) in Washington D.C., told us three pertinent facts:
1 -- No soldier determines if he is eligible for a Purple Heart; only his commander can determine that specific U.S. Navy criteria have been met for the award. Hibbard told the Globe that while he was skeptical at the time as to whether Kerry came under enemy fire and whether he was even wounded, at the time he dropped the matter and told Kerry "do whatever you want." But that's not enough for any soldier to be awarded a Purple Heart; that requires the recommendation of a commander; and Hibbard was the commander. It is unclear as to whether another commander stepped in or Hibbard finally signed on to the Purple Heart.
2 -- The severity of the injury, which the Chicago Tribune dwells upon, apparently does not bear on whether a soldier qualifies for a Purple Heart. Paragraph 4 of the "Purple Heart Criteria for U.S. Navy" states that "a wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under one or more of the conditions listed in paragraph 2 [in 1968, those were: in action against the enemy, or as a result of action by "any hostile foreign force"]. A physical lesion is not required; however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer..." Kerry's wound was treated by a medical officer, who removed the shrapnel and applied an antiseptic.
3 -- Whether the injury is related to enemy fire, which the Times chose to emphasize, is germane to the question at hand. Enemy fire is essential for any soldier to receive a Purple Heart. A training accident doesn't qualify. Paragraph 3 of "Purple Heart Criteria for U.S. Navy" defines "enemy-related injuries" as those incurred when a solider is "struck by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other projectile created by enemy action."
Thomas Lang, Campaign Desk:
Alas, today, the Washington Times' fatally-wounded coverage of Kerry's newly-released service records makes yesterday's various media bloopers look like journalism at its finest.
...
Hurt quotes one Mel Howell, a retired Navy officer who flew helicopters in Vietnam, but who apparently never served with Kerry, as saying, "Most of us came away with all kinds of scratches like the ones Kerry got but never accepted Purple Hearts for them."
As Lt. Mike Kafka, a U.S. Navy spokesman, told us yesterday, in line with official U.S. Navy documentation, wounded combatants neither nominate nor award themselves Purple Hearts. The Purple Heart is awarded only after a commander determines that a soldier or sailor has incurred a wound inflicted by the enemy and forwards a recommendation to his superiors.
...
One veteran, Ray Waller, is identified as "a combat medic in the Marines" who "was responsible for determining whether injuries warranted Purple Hearts."
...
However, as noted above, Navy medics neither award Purple Hearts nor recommend others for a Purple Heart. Commanders do that based on, as US Navy guidelines put it, confirmation of medical treatment by "the doctor that provides medical care."
The expansive Waller goes on to tell Hurt that he had "never heard of" a shrapnel injury so minor that it did not require a tetanus shot and time off which had led to a Purple Heart. As Lt. Kafka notes, however, the written "Purple Heart Criteria for the U.S. Navy" does not list either a tetanus shot or time off due to injury as a requirement for receiving a Purple Heart.
FactCheck.org:
...even a "friendly fire" injury can qualify for a purple heart "as long as the 'friendly' projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment," according to the website of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
SBV CLAIM ON KERRY'S TRUTHFULNESS REGARDING HIS FIRST PURPLE HEART:
[Louis Letson]: I know John Kerry is lying about his first purple heart, because I treated him for that injury.
[via FactCheck.org]: Letson says Kerry's wound was self-inflicted and does not merit a purple heart...Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time...says that he “turned down the Purple Heart request,” and recalled Kerry's injury as a "tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn."
FACT
Letson was NOT the doctor who signed Kerry's sick call sheet and was not a Kerry crewmate
REFERENCES
FactCheck.org:
...even a "friendly fire" injury can qualify for a purple heart "as long as the 'friendly' projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment," according to the website of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
...
medical records provided by the Kerry campaign to FactCheck.org do not list Letson as the “person administering treatment” for Kerry’s injury on December 3, 1968 . The medical officer who signed this sick call report is J.C. Carreon, who is listed as treating Kerry for shrapnel to the left arm.
In his affidavit, Letson says Kerry's wound was self-inflicted and does not merit a purple heart. But that's based on hearsay, and disputed hearsay at that. Letson says “the crewman with Kerry told me there was no hostile fire, and that Kerry had inadvertently wounded himself with an M-79 grenade.” But the Kerry campaign says the two crewmen with Kerry that day deny ever talking to Letson.
Also appearing in the ad is Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time. Hibbard’s affidavit says that he “turned down the Purple Heart request,” and recalled Kerry's injury as a "tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn."
That doesn't quite square with Letson's affidavit, which describes shrapnel "lodged in Kerry's arm" (though "barely.")
Hibbard also told the Boston Globe in an interview in April 2004 that he eventually acquiesced about granting Kerry the purple heart.
Hibbard: I do remember some questions on it. . .I finally said, OK if that's what happened. . . do whatever you want
Kerry got the first purple heart after Hibbard left to return to the US.
Information cited at John Kerry.com:
Letson Offers NO PROOF He Treated Kerry.
Despite Letson's claims to have treated Kerry, he is not listed on any document as having treated Kerry after the 12/2/68 firefight. Offering only an account of dates and places-which is readily available in Kerry's biography and media accounts-Lester has produced nothing to verify his treatment of Kerry.
Letson Didn't Record His Memories of Vietnam Until Kerry's Emergence in 2003.
"Letson says that last year, as the Democratic campaign began to heat up, he told friends that he remembered treating one of the candidates many years ago. In response to their questions, Letson says, he wrote down his recollections of the time." [National Review Online, 5/4/04]
There's more but I wont post it all seeing as you have the link to go see for yourself.
Now I know you'll still say that Kerry is a liar and cheated for his medals but now everyone will know your wrong.
Brino
Just a little correction, straight from an encyclopedia...
Except for the Nobel Peace Prize, which Norway sponsors, Sweden oversees the awarding of the other Nobel prizes each year. These prizes are given to significant contributors in the areas of chemistry, literature, medicine, and physics. Sweden is the birthplace of Alfred Bernhard Nobel, the 19th-century inventor of dynamite and a wealthy businessman who endowed the Nobel prizes.
----------------------------------
That was from the encyclopedia. Here is some facts from a fact calender.
The Nobel Peace Prize award of 1994 was shared between Yasser Arafat (Palestine), Shimon Perez (Israel) and Yitzhak Rabin (Israel).
Starman said:
did you read my sentence"Who started to diss bush since the first page and post links which are misleadings?Answer me."
did i said it was you? so it was't necessary to feel yourself targetted.You didn't post in page 1 that is what i wanted to underline also.
brino, maybe you should start drinking coffee.................. Nice game...................I sure that it is endorsed by your other hero, Michael Moore.
It must be painful finding out the truth about your "war hero". I know how it feels, I get that pain in my ass whenever I read crap about GWB.
Anyway too nice of a day to write an essay on the defense of my views. I get to see both of the candidates today. Can't wait to hear Kerry say "reporting for duty":rofl2: What a joke, maybe BonJovi will play a tune.
Traffic will be a bitch.
Reporting for Duty.................Ranger :glugglug:
Nice game...................I sure that it is endorsed by your other hero, Michael Moore.It must be painful finding out the truth about your "war hero". I know how it feels, I get that pain in my ass whenever I read crap about GWB.
Anyway too nice of a day to write an essay on the defense of my views. I get to see both of the candidates today. Can't wait to hear Kerry say "reporting for duty":rofl2: What a joke, maybe BonJovi will play a tune.
Traffic will be a bitch.
Reporting for Duty.................Ranger :glugglug:
Ranger said:brino, maybe you should start drinking coffee..................
It must be painful finding out the truth about your "war hero". I know how it feels, I get that pain in my ass whenever I read crap about GWB.
Anyway too nice of a day to write an essay on the defense of my views. I get to see both of the candidates today. Can't wait to hear Kerry say "reporting for duty":rofl2: What a joke, maybe BonJovi will play a tune.
Traffic will be a bitch.
Reporting for Duty.................Ranger :glugglug:
Yeah the Truth hurts Ranger! That's why you must be in a lot of pain right now! Take some Aspirin for the pain maybe that'll help! I feel sorry for you!
Brino said:
is http://www.eriposte.com/media/liars_inc/swiftboat.htm
an offical website or a site that is maintained buy the democrats here is the whole question, the same question goes for the games. if the sources are neutral and not biased then i believe it.
but often links and newspapers are biased so how can i trust them.
georges said:
See this is proof that you didnt believe my link georges and you you wouldnt have believed whats in that game even if it was an article.
BTW Your wrong about Kerry's military career but I'm not going to argue with you anymore because your argument has no basis in fact. You cant argue with my link because it's factual and everyone knows you cant argue with facts!
georges said:
Then why did you say youd take articles seriously (biased or not) or was that just another lie!
BTW anybody would be hard pressed to find a news organization that isnt biased. Your links have been biased too! Oh and tell me how you know that sites run by demoscrats?
Brino said:
i would take some serious articles (non biased)because once they describe the situation and they don't have a pro x or pro y tendancy.So i am not lying and please stop saying what i didn't say and stop putting words into my mouth.
lot of links are biased but there are some that aren't and that stay objective. i am pretty sure that those sites are run by democrats because of the way they caricature or talk about gwb.
georges said:
The sources of that sites information is from the military and from a website called factcheck.org. Their not biased their facts straight from the horses mouth. Where as all your links and articles have been from right wing pro Bush propaganda machines. Prove me wrong and pull some other lie/right wing propaganda out of your bag of tricks!
- Status
