O'Rielly disappoints again

For whatever, I find Faux News either hilarious or stupid, own and use projectile weapons etc. and am Democrat (have Republican friends -in spite of...) and atheist (have Xtian and Jewish friends, Muslim acquaintances [limited time to become friends so far - in spite of). None of my friends believe the CTers. I am guessing even 20% would be way high on the believers.
 
I find it interesting that when a woowoo appears on US tv news it is normally on fox and while fox certainly does lead in the ratings for cable news over there it's numbers come nowhere near those for the big networks.

In fact, it's ratings come nowhere near those for spongebob squarepants.....

The CTers and Fox are made for each other simply because fox gives the woowoos a platform and the woowoos give fox a target.
 
Last edited:
Brainster said:
I spent more time looking into the SVBfT claims than all but about a dozen people on the planet, and I could not find a place where they lied.
Click to expand...

This guy claims to have spent more time than perhaps anyone else and comes to a very different conclusion: http://homepage.mac.com/chinesemac/kerry_medals/truth.html

ETA: Relevant to the OP, when O'Reilly had the Switboaters on, he apparentlly hadn't done any homework, either.
 
Last edited:
Lurker said:
If you examine EVERY medal/heart incident and get all the eyewitness testimony you can, you will find that in EVERY case teh majority of eyewitnesses support Kerry's version of events. Every single record from the time also supports Kerry. The SBVfT had to "allege" every single item.

Even the XMas in Cambodia your friend O'Neill had to lie about. He quotes from Kerry's book yet convenicently took out the portion right before where Kerry discusses a long trip to get back to base.
Click to expand...

Please, just give up the hope of rowing John Kerry back to his Christmas in Cambodia; even Brinkley gave up on that effort.

Kerry repeatedly said in the past that he was ordered illegally into Cambodia during Christmas 1968. His detractors claim he never entered that country at all. In "Tour of Duty," Brinkley does not place Kerry in Cambodia but, quoting from Kerry's journal, notes that Kerry's Swift boat was "patrolling near the Cambodian line." Later in the book, Brinkley writes that Kerry and his fellow Swift boat operators "went on dropping Navy SEALS off along the Cambodian border."

"I'm under the impression that they were near the Cambodian border," said Brinkley, in the interview. So Kerry's statement about being in Cambodia at Christmas "is obviously wrong," he said. "It's a mongrel phrase he should never have uttered. I stick to my story."
Click to expand...

Of course, there was an easy way for Kerry to bolster his story about going to Cambodia: come up with a single crewmember who recalled the trip. But not one of those nine or so Swiftees who stood on the stage with Kerry at the DNC would back up his tale. Brinkley claimed to have evidence of a later trip, which he never produced, probably because Kerry crewmember (and supporter) Mike Medeiros had a log of every mission he was involved in.

On the Rassmann issue, Tour of Duty, clearly relying on Kerry, claimed that Rassmann was on another boat when a mine exploded, sending him into the water. And indeed, that was the way the story appeared prior to the release of Unfit for Command. For example:

On March 13, 1969, Rassman was a 21-year-old lieutenant in Army Special Forces when he was blown overboard from a boat next to Kerry’s on the Bay Hap River.
Click to expand...

But when Unfit for Command came out, it claimed that Rassmann had been on Kerry's boat. And lo and behold, suddenly that was the way Rassmann recollected it too:

While returning from a SEA LORDS operation along the Bay Hap River, a mine detonated under another swift boat. Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river, and a second explosion followed moments later. The second blast blew me off John's swift boat, PCF-94, throwing me into the river.
Click to expand...

Of course, the Swiftees claimed that Rassmann had fallen off the boat when John Kerry sped up and made a sharp turn, tossing the Green Beret overboard, not because of a mine explosion under Kerry's boat. You can make the argument that memories can differ on the specifics, that Kerry had just forgotten that Rassmann was on his boat, and who knows whether he had fallen off from an explosion or from the sudden acceleration of the boat, right?

Nope. It turned out that in 1998, Kerry had remembered the incident largely as the SBVfT had. In a eulogy for PCF-94 crewmember Tom Belodeau, which Kerry read into the Congressional Record (PDF file) he talked about the incident:

There was the time we were carrying special forces up a river and a mine exploded under our boat sending it 2 feet into the air. We were receiving incoming rocket and small arms fire and Tommy was returning fire with his M–60 machine gun when it literally broke apart in his hands.

He was left holding the pieces unable to fire back while one of the Green Berets walked along the edge of the boat to get Tommy another M–60. As he was doing so, the boat made a high speed turn to starboard and the Green Beret kept going -- straight into the river.
Click to expand...

Note: I don't disagree that the SBVfT made some mistakes and were wrong on a couple of issues. But when it comes down to who was lying, I can prove John Kerry lied about incidents that were supposedly seared--seared in his memory.
 
"O'Reilly dispopoints again."

In order to be disappointed, I would need to hold him in some esteem in the first place.
 
Brainster said:
Note: I don't disagree that the SBVfT made some mistakes and were wrong on a couple of issues. But when it comes down to who was lying, I can prove John Kerry lied about incidents that were supposedly seared--seared in his memory.
Click to expand...

It is compeletely immaterial which boat Rassman was on. Memories are hard to pin down the exact details. What IS important about that event is whether gunfire was ocurring. Everything you quoted said it was. The SWVfT say it was not. More eyewitnesses to the event in question say there was gunfire, many not even on Kerry's boat. All documents of the time indicate there was enemy fire. There were even 3 bullet holes in the boats (although Thurlow said there were none until shown a report that there were three and then his story changed and he said the three holes had been there before although he says this but provides no evidence).

Who cares which boat Rassman was on? That is hardly integral to whether Kerry earned his Bronze Star that day, is it?

Don't you feel a bit odd that if you deny Kerry all his purple hearts, bronze star and silver star that you are siding with the MINORITY of eyewitnesses for each event? Does that not give you any pause whatsoever before you slime a veterans's war record?

If you want to continue this conversation, we should start a new thread elsewhere do as not to derail.

Lurker
 
Lurker said:
It is compeletely immaterial which boat Rassman was on. Memories are hard to pin down the exact details. What IS important about that event is whether gunfire was ocurring. Everything you quoted said it was. The SWVfT say it was not. More eyewitnesses to the event in question say there was gunfire, many not even on Kerry's boat. All documents of the time indicate there was enemy fire. There were even 3 bullet holes in the boats (although Thurlow said there were none until shown a report that there were three and then his story changed and he said the three holes had been there before although he says this but provides no evidence).

Who cares which boat Rassman was on? That is hardly integral to whether Kerry earned his Bronze Star that day, is it?

Don't you feel a bit odd that if you deny Kerry all his purple hearts, bronze star and silver star that you are siding with the MINORITY of eyewitnesses for each event? Does that not give you any pause whatsoever before you slime a veterans's war record?

If you want to continue this conversation, we should start a new thread elsewhere do as not to derail.

Lurker
Click to expand...
I don't want to simplify this to much but the T in SWVfT stands for Troof. Or said another way the SWVfT are to the Kerry incidents as the Scholars for 9/11 Truth are to 9/11. But yes, another thread would be appropriate.
 
I don't know where Barret got the poll about some eighty-percent of the American people believing 9/11 was an inside job from.

And of course, Barret mentioned the BBC story again.
 
ConspiRaider said:
Hi Brain -
This despicable group of vets - and I'm a vet myself so I can call them that - was born of an idea by Rove and funded - mostly - by Bob Perry, a Republican real estate baron in Texas. He gave tons of money to Our Current Leader, and also to the honest and forthright Tom Delay. And many many other Republicans. Funnelled millions to Repubs.
Click to expand...

It's so weird to see JREFers fall into conspiracy theory mode. The leader of the Swift Boat vets had been after Kerry for years, long before anybody had heard of Karl Rove. These guys had been dogging Kerry because they felt his Vietnam testimony in the Senate was a betrayal, done to advance his own political ambitions. Lots of Kerry's accusations were made up from thin air, and I suspect they just felt like they were returning the favor.

Two wrongs certainly don't make a right, but don't let yourself fall into the trap of assigning all of the worlds' injustices to the hidden hand of the dark shadow secret government. The Swift Boaters were very useful to the Republicans but that does not mean they were created by them (just as the WTC attacks being useful to the Neocon agenda doesn't mean they pulled them off).


Rove never served in the military, but he - in his sociopathic manner - knew he could score points by attacking Kerry for his military service. That's all this was. Political hatchet-jobbing, which is Karl's fix in life. It's really too bad that all of his sociopathic efforts were dashed to pieces on November 7th. Fortunately, enough Americans actually said: Enough.
Click to expand...

Listen to yourself. Come on. Don't demonize the people who disagree with you. Be a critical thinker in all situations, try to strip the emotion out of it. You don't think Kerry ran negative ads? Did you forget the forged documents about Bush's war record? The Kitty Kelly book? All that silliness? It flows equally from both sides.

If negative advertising and back-room deals and underhanded tricks make Rove a "sociopath" then every politician who has ever successfully run for office is a sociopath.

Come to think of it...
 
David Wong said:
It's so weird to see JREFers fall into conspiracy theory mode. The leader of the Swift Boat vets had been after Kerry for years, long before anybody had heard of Karl Rove. These guys had been dogging Kerry because they felt his Vietnam testimony in the Senate was a betrayal, done to advance his own political ambitions. Lots of Kerry's accusations were made up from thin air, and I suspect they just felt like they were returning the favor.

Two wrongs certainly don't make a right, but don't let yourself fall into the trap of assigning all of the worlds' injustices to the hidden hand of the dark shadow secret government. The Swift Boaters were very useful to the Republicans but that does not mean they were created by them (just as the WTC attacks being useful to the Neocon agenda doesn't mean they pulled them off).

Listen to yourself. Come on. Don't demonize the people who disagree with you. Be a critical thinker in all situations, try to strip the emotion out of it. You don't think Kerry ran negative ads? Did you forget the forged documents about Bush's war record? The Kitty Kelly book? All that silliness? It flows equally from both sides.

If negative advertising and back-room deals and underhanded tricks make Rove a "sociopath" then every politician who has ever successfully run for office is a sociopath.

Come to think of it...
Click to expand...
David -

Who said anything about a "dark shadow secret government"? Certainly wasn't me.

Cut the patronizing, condescending tone. This is heading political and in that situation - you can forget all about removing emotion from such a discussion. Emotion always plays prominently in politics - always. Very little in the way of critical thinking from either of us can be expected.

So I'm just going to back away because obviously you are Republican and I am Democrat and we'll not budge an inch. Further discussion in this type of forum is pointless, concerning politics.
 
The Republicans were willing to slander a Viet Nam War hero to keep The Worst President Ever™ in power. No wonder the voters slapped them down.
 
David Wong said:
<SNIP> Did you forget the forged documents about Bush's war record? <SNIP)
Click to expand...

Bush had a war record? I wasn't aware that he did. And I think I recall that it was fairly well established that he seldom showed up for work in the Air National Guard, though it seems a lot of his paperwork went "missing".

And while it may be that Rove was not responsible for the SBVfT'ers, he certainly made sure they got their message out.

EDIT: Sorry, off of the thread OP...back to it..
 
Last edited:
Seriously guys, there's an entire sub forum where you can go all woo over your silly American politics. Please take your discussion there.

-Gumboot
 
12233458d231fd957f.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom