billvon 3,120 #51 September 21, 2004 >Have any proof of this? Some more stuff! Larry Thurlow is another vocal member of the SBVFT. From American History Magazine, April 2004: ---------------------------------- Thurlow was struggling to get PCF-3's wounded gunner out of his hole and onto the deck when the damaged Swift ran aground hard on a shoal on the right side of the river, sending Thurlow somersaulting into the water. At the same moment, the five Swifts came under fire from the right side again, and Kerry remembered thinking that was it -- they were going to get completely cut off and annihilated in a crossfire. . . Kerry and the other wounded men received medical attention aboard a Coast Guard cutter, which was the closest ship capable of treating them. Along with a third Purple Heart for the injury to his right arm, Kerry was also awarded a Bronze Star for his bravery, as was Larry Thurlow. --------------------------------- That was before he was paid to change his story. Larry in a TV ad after he was paid: "When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry." During an August interview on Inside Politics, Larry Thurlow claimed that during Kerry's rescue of Rassman, there was no enemy fire at all, and hence Kerry didn't deserve a purple heart or a bronze star. Note that this is the SAME incident that Thurlow got a bronze star for, which he claims he deserves. So which is it, Larry? Perhaps another ten grand would help him make up his mind. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #52 September 21, 2004 >Still don't see proof that they were paid by any party. No problem! From AP: ---------------------------------------- HOUSTON - The chief financial backer of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and its television ad challenging Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry’s military record is a wealthy Texas homebuilder known for his deep pockets and aversion to the limelight. Bob J. Perry, 71, provided at least $100,000 to help start the veterans group at the urging of his friend John O’Neill, a Houston attorney who co-wrote “Unfit for Command,” a book which attacks Kerry’s military record. . . . . He’s given more than $5.2 million to Texas candidates and committees since 2000, according to Texans for Public Justice, a nonpartisan group that tracks campaign contributions, yet Texas’ top GOP donor is rarely seen at fancy fund-raisers or hobnobbing with the political elite. -------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #53 September 21, 2004 And your point is? It all looks pretty on paper but you keep running and babbling in circles. Do you have any proof or not? Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #54 September 21, 2004 >It all looks pretty on paper . . . Paper is often what proof comes on. Remember, there is more to reality than TV. >Do you have any proof or not? Just gave you a bunch. I have no illusions that you will pay the least bit of attention to any of it, of course, since it does not support your position. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #55 September 21, 2004 Has nothing to do with my position. Has everything to do with proof. You have shown none. What you have shown a lot of is conspiracy theories and liberal spin. I'll quit asking you for concrete proof and just go with my original instincts. Thanks. Maybe in the next debate you can back up your position. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #56 September 21, 2004 >You have shown none. I showed you how a SBVFT member changed his position on Kerry after the SBVFT was paid $100,000 by the biggest GOP contributor in Texas. I realize that you cannot accept that that happened; that does not change the fact that it did. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #57 September 21, 2004 horse, water, water.......____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #58 September 21, 2004 Quote>You have shown none. I showed you how a SBVFT member changed his position on Kerry after the SBVFT was paid $100,000 by the biggest GOP contributor in Texas. I realize that you cannot accept that that happened; that does not change the fact that it did. No, you're saying that the VET was paid... so PROVE ITMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #59 September 21, 2004 Quote She ended up cutting me off, dropping my call, and saying something about how my gun is a penis substitute. - Man, that is so funny... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #60 September 21, 2004 QuoteNo, you're saying that the VET was paid... so PROVE IT Glad someone has some logic and common sense around here. Was beginning to think I was the only one who understood the concept of proof. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #61 September 21, 2004 QuoteIn my experience the left is much less civil than the right. This seems to bear that out... http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/09/hate/index.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #62 September 21, 2004 Quote>You have shown none. I showed you how a SBVFT member changed his position on Kerry after the SBVFT was paid $100,000 by the biggest GOP contributor in Texas. I realize that you cannot accept that that happened; that does not change the fact that it did. Next you're going to tell me that 2+2=4 just because my calculator says so. Everyone knows that basic addition is just conspiracy theory. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #63 September 21, 2004 >No, you're saying that the VET was paid... so PROVE IT The SBVFT is made up of vets, including the two I described who changed their stories. The SBVFT was paid. Therefore the vets I described were paid. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #64 September 21, 2004 QuoteHow'd you figure that out? Did you finally invent a tool to read someone's mind? Doubt he did, just what kind of a jerk puts a political sign in the hands of a three-year-old and subjects her as a utensil at the rally of an opposing group? Edit to add: I do think that the guys who did this should be flogged. I recall something about freedom of speech in our .... what's the law paper thing .... oh yeah, Constitution."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #65 September 21, 2004 Quote>No, you're saying that the VET was paid... so PROVE IT The SBVFT is made up of vets, including the two I described who changed their stories. The SBVFT was paid. Therefore the vets I described were paid. Nope.... that's not proof of anything... if you're going to say that the vets are getting paid, I want cancelled checks or the equivalent that says so.... Something else that crosses my mind... why is it ok (for the liberals) for Kerry to be on every side of an issue, but a conservative changes their mind and it must be because they're getting paid?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #66 September 21, 2004 Quotewhy is it ok (for the liberals) for Kerry to be on every side of an issue, but a conservative changes their mind and it must be because they're getting paid? There's a huge difference between changing your stance or reevaluating tactics of an ongoing situation and conpletely reversing the opinion you express about someone from 30 years ago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #67 September 21, 2004 >if you're going to say that the vets are getting paid, I want >cancelled checks or the equivalent that says so.... No one (other than a few people here) disputes the fact that the #1 Texas GOP contributor funded the SBVFT. I won't bother getting you any additional proof, since if I did, you would claim they were forgeries, or they were just paper and therefore meaningless. If you like, go to Google and type: Swift Boat "Bob Perry" And read any of the 6900 odd news stories about his funding of that group. Then you can argue with Google about how they are all forgeries or whatever. >why is it ok (for the liberals) for Kerry to be on every side of an issue, >but a conservative changes their mind and it must be because they're > getting paid? There is a difference between being paid to change a story you have held for years, and voting against a bill that you disagree with but later voting _for_ a bill because it has been changed to your satisfaction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #68 September 21, 2004 Quote Swift Boat "Bob Perry" I know who Bob Perry is, I live in Texas when I'm not working in Kosovo... Quote There is a difference between being paid to change a story you have held for years, and voting against a bill that you disagree with but later voting _for_ a bill because it has been changed to your satisfaction. I'm not EVEN going to try to search Google for examples of Kerry's changes of point from week to week, much less from month to month....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #69 September 22, 2004 Quote Wait a minute, aren't you the person who just pointed out the oxymoron of "free speech...zones? Now you're saying this guy shouldn't have brought his daughter into a "confrontational location"? Yes, that was me, but no sorry, these statements are not in conflict. Just because free speech should be allowed doesn't mean that some jerks out there aren't going to make it tough on people, and little girls. I mean, why do banks put money in a vault? After all, it's illegal to steal it, so it should be perfectly safe sitting on the sidewalk, right? (I just thought the phrase 'free speech zone' sounded funny, that's all) Quotewho knows, he coulda told the girl to cry nice for the cameras if someone yells at her and takes the sign... So, you throw out a "he coulda" and now what, we operate on the assumption that your conjecture is the fact? Glad you read the part where I said "he coulda", because that usually means that what I'm about to say next I'm not presenting as fact. Bottom line, the dad was perfectly and legally justified in bringing his daughter there to that confrontational location and holding that sign when he was too chicken-shit to do so. *And* for all practical purposes this was a pretty stoopid plan. He used his daughter as a human shield. Again, this is my "conjecture" and not fact. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
