bodypilot90 0 #1 May 7, 2004 With the left so up in arms about the "bad treatment" of prisoners, how can you vote for someone who has done much worse. http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/audio/kerry2.mp3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #2 May 7, 2004 Aw....C'mon......you're not referring to Kerry blowing the shit out of sampans with .50's and 20 mils in free fire zones that might have had a "few" non-hostiles on them......then stating he was a war criminal for doing it and....and.....accusing fellow sailors of doing it .....and then denying that he ever did it......such a nit picker!!!I'm sure he would have treated them well had he taken them alive in the first placeMarc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #3 May 7, 2004 So are you saying the "right" has no problem with "bat treatment" of prisoners? Seems to me everyone except the really perverse are up in arms about it, including the President. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #4 May 7, 2004 Quotethen denying that he ever did it Asking for the 767th time for anyone to post a reference to prove this claim. I hear you guys saying it a lot, but never heard it or read it anywhere, and have asked for a link repeatedly. If he did make that denial, I'd like to know. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #5 May 7, 2004 > how can you vote for someone who has done much worse. Getting a good friday vet-bashing in? I can't wait to see what you think of the US soldier who did this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #6 May 7, 2004 QuoteGetting a good friday vet-bashing in? I can't wait to see what you think of the US soldier who did this. That's a bit different from what Kerry did isn't it? Once again I ask you, how can you vote for Kerry who admited to war crimes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #7 May 7, 2004 QuoteSo are you saying the "right" has no problem with "bat treatment" of prisoners? Seems to me everyone except the really perverse are up in arms about it, including the President. "bat treatment" LOL almost as bad as "paul pots" no I'm asking how left who is so "concerned" with human rights can vote for Kerry. on what happened in the pictures I'll wait till the findings of the reports. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #8 May 8, 2004 >Once again I ask you, how can you vote for Kerry who admited to war crimes. Same way you can vote for someone who presided over war crimes I suppose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b1jercat 0 #9 May 8, 2004 Yet another Lame attempt to bash Kerry from some one who supports a Lame president. blues jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #10 May 8, 2004 QuoteAsking for the 767th time for anyone to post a reference to prove this claim. I hear you guys saying it a lot, but never heard it or read it anywhere, and have asked for a link repeatedly. If he did make that denial, I'd like to know. see this link o Kerry spinning on Meet the Press -- May 6, 2001 / April 18, 1971 (1:52, 4.7MB) from this page http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Documents Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #11 May 9, 2004 Sorry to digress, but Bill brought it up... QuoteI can't wait to see what you think of the US soldier who did this. I think the soldiers responsible for firing that missile feel really bad, they're also probably just as horrified that Iraq would put military installations deliberately in civilian areas. Terrorists and other chicken-shit armies use tactics like this for the express purpose of getting pictures of injured civilians. It helps their cause, doesn't it? The militant muslims get even madder, and people like you start throwing it around as a case against the war. Why do so many people let themselves be manipulated by tactics like this? Just in case you missed it... from the article: Quote"Our house was just a poor shack. Why did they want to bomb us?" He did not know the area where he lived was surrounded by military installations. I bet a lot of the pictures we see al-jazeera and other militant arab leaders using to get their followers riled up are more the fault of their own (militants') actions than the coalition's.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #12 May 10, 2004 >I think the soldiers responsible for firing that missile feel really bad, I think you're right. No one goes into combat hoping to kill kids, but the ultimate rule of the military is that soldiers follow orders, and if you are ordered to do something you do it. Many people (including Kerry and, I am sure, the pilot who fired that missile) feel horrible afterwards, and have a lot of guilt to deal with. It's part of war. Innocent people die. >they're also probably just as horrified that Iraq would put military > installations deliberately in civilian areas. ??? Why do you say that? I live right next to MCAS Miramar, maybe 1/4 mile from the runway (it gets really loud during the day sometimes.) Is anyone horrified that the US is using me as a civilian shield? People often live near military bases because people work there and hence there is a need for housing and commerce nearby. >Why do so many people let themselves be manipulated by tactics like this? For the same reason I was manipulated I suppose. A great house at a pretty good price. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #13 May 10, 2004 QuoteFor the same reason I was manipulated I suppose. A great house at a pretty good price. And a ton of disclosures making sure you understood you were within a certain parameter of a military base, with live ordnance, and allowance of time for you to investigate that fact and re-decide if you really wanted to take that risk - if indeed you felt it was a risk - or back out of the contract should you choose to do so. Somehow, I doubt SH's people disclosed that kinda stuff to his citizenry... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #14 May 10, 2004 >And a ton of disclosures making sure you understood you were within > a certain parameter of a military base, with live ordnance, and > allowance of time for you to investigate that fact and re-decide if > you really wanted to take that risk - if indeed you felt it was a risk - >or back out of the contract should you choose to do so. Actually, no. There were a bunch of seismic disclosures, disclosures about mold and fungus, an agreement to abide by the CC+R's, and one about airplane noise - but the airplane noise one listed several airports within SD that might cause the noise, including MCAS. Of course, anyone who asked a neighbor whether they were close to a base (or even spent a few hours in that neighborhood) would figure it out pretty quickly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #15 May 10, 2004 QuoteActually, no. There were a bunch of seismic disclosures, disclosures about mold and fungus, an agreement to abide by the CC+R's, and one about airplane noise - but the airplane noise one listed several airports within SD that might cause the noise, including MCAS. Bill, actually, YES. It is *state law* that you receive something which states whether you are/are not within 1/4 a mile from an active/inactive military base. It should've come with the property id...once I'm at the office, I'll get you the exact wording from the disclosure company I use. There are disclosures about the red legged frog, the existence of radon, flood plains, fire risk, and so forth, and in that package should've been the military issue (at least with the company I use for the disclosures...) I can't recall the exact lawsuit which brought it about, but there was a child who was killed because of unexploded ordnance in his backyard, which decided to explode one day while he was playing (IIRC). The family litigated everyone, rightfully so, since that's a material fact which wasn't disclosed. Because of that, state law became such that you must disclose that fact. Further, in the physical inspection contingency, you have what's called the neighborhood investigation. You can check out the whole neighborhood, from registered sex offenders ("Megan's Law", aka Database Disclosure) to future use of neighborhood (permits, and whatnot). Sounds like either you didn't read the paperwork carefully (unlikely) or that your realtor wasn't up to speed (more often than not, that's the case). Pity, that....But actually, yes, it is state law that it is disclosed. And again, I doubt that SH disclosed it to the folks moving in. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #16 May 10, 2004 Quote>Why do so many people let themselves be manipulated by tactics like this? For the same reason I was manipulated I suppose. A great house at a pretty good price. That's not what I meant. I mean why do people let the propaganda like this article that you posted get them all fired up? This is EXACTLY what the people posting stuff like this want. Seems like they'd be willing to send an army of little kids into a firefight just so they could get some pictures of dead kids to fire up the rest of the nutcases. They'd blame us for that too. It's silly to get manipulated like this, and so many are letting it happen. THINK. And as for your house being near Miramar, you knew it was there and you lived there anyway. If you thought it was going to get bombed, you'd probably leave, right? Why didn't these people do that? Well, either they were too proud, or they were told by their clerics or leaders that everything was okay and they should stay. I doubt Miramar is counting on your house being there to deter a military attack. The bad guys in Iraq win either way if people buy into their BS.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #17 May 10, 2004 >Sounds like either you didn't read the paperwork carefully (unlikely) > or that your realtor wasn't up to speed (more often than not, that's > the case). Not suprising, since our realtor was a relatively new New York transplant. She seemed to annoy everyone but me since I'm used to New Yorkers. >And again, I doubt that SH disclosed it to the folks moving in. And again, no one warned me I could be used as a "civilian shield." I think it would be silly to claim that people were intentionally placed around the Miramar base to be shields; they just liked the location. Similarly, I have a strong feeling that the people who lived near military bases in Iraq just wanted to live there, or were born there, or found a cheap house there etc. I think it is unreasonable to expect any country to make a "buffer zone" around military bases to make it more convenient for them to be bombed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,117 #18 May 10, 2004 When I first moved to my suburb there was a Nike base (just shows how long ago this was) about a mile away. Homes were built right up to the wire. Guess what would have been taken out right away if the USSR attacked. I don't recall any whining about the use of human shields. The site is now a park.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #19 May 10, 2004 Ok you want proof......one of numerous sources....newsmax had a lengthy article on 2/21 about it...www.newsmax.com/archives...that should be a good start!Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #20 May 10, 2004 QuoteWhen I first moved to my suburb there was a Nike base QuoteGuess what would have been taken out right away if the USSR attacked. Sneaker plants (excuse me for you mid-westerners...tennis shoe plants) were strategic targets during the cold war? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,560 #21 May 10, 2004 QuoteSneaker plants Nike Missiles Yah, I saw the tongue-in-cheek. But I'll bet more than a couple of folks thought that was a typo originally. Bet it wasn't. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mirage63 0 #22 May 11, 2004 >Why do so many people let themselves be manipulated by tactics like this? "For the same reason I was manipulated I suppose. A great house at a pretty good price." Bill simple easy question here. If you knew that there was a GOOD chance that the airbase was going to have the shit bomb out of it would you stay in your "great house at a pretty good price" with your children. I feel for the child, I hate the decision making process that left him there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
