"Dave Kearton" wrote in
message ...

"D. Strang" wrote in message
news:bSx2c.10362$m4.4748@okepread03...
| "BUFDRVR" wrote
|
| It's hard for me to believe that you cannot conceptualize that not
everyone
| during times of combat operations sees action. I've got several good
friends
| who, through no fault of their own, have exactly *zero* combat hours.
|
| I used to fly with a navigator who had .5 combat hours. He got it on
the
way
| to Thailand in a C-141 during the Vietnam war.
|
| It's just phenomenal the amount of **** in Art's brain.
|
| Being an Instructor has very little to do with combat. Many combat vets
| take awhile before they can become effective teachers. They tend to be
| perfectionists, and are used to crews who are their peers. Once back at
| the training center, the pace and mistakes cause them to wash students
| out. We had one guy who washed his first three students out, and the
| board reinstated all of them with a new instructor. The bad instructor
| was sent packing.
|
|




OK guys, I've been following this discussion (and others) for a while
now.

I've noticed a fair amount of frustration in both sides of the argument
that's drifting into personal invective. Can we all remember that Art
is one of us, he's a regular here ?

Art has demonstrated a marked propensity for making outright false
statements. It would be one thing if he misspoke and then accepted the
corrections offered by others--instead he steamrolls along, repeating the
same falsehoods over and over again. That unwillingness to accept the truth
when it has been presented to him, and his continued spouting of that
incorrect information, is what draws the line between an innocent mistake
and willful lying. A few sycophants pop up out of the woodwork and give him
a misdirected pat on the back, and he's off again, creating new falsehoods.
First it was the Guard he denigrated, whose members had been on active duty
for over two years by the time Art entered the service, had already suffered
casualties, had already seen some of its members endure the Death march at
Bataan; even in the face of repeated proof being presented to him by
numerous posters, Art continued with his claims that the Guard during WWII
was the home of shirkers and a "laughingstock" for the *real* he-men such as
himself. Now his false statements have been expanded to include those men
who stayed behind and made sure the soldiers, airmen, and sailors had the
tools they needed to conduct the fight. Of course, his previous broad brush
approach has even included those servicememebers who did their duty yet did
not see direct combat during the war--Art is, after all, something of an
equal opportunity kind of fellow when it comes to denigration.



Whether you agree with him or not, perhaps we can all treat him with the
respect due to any senior citizen, any veteran and any gentleman that we
meet somewhere.

Funny thing about respect--it is a two-way street. Art has failed to give
respect to many more people than he has in return had demonstrated against
him. One of my first posts in this NG, a few years back, was offered up in
defense of Art; I can recall thinking at the time how a WWII veteran
deserved better respect than what the poster I responded to had shown him. A
bit more time observing Art's posts changed my mind--here we have a guy who
feels compelled to tear down others' accomplishments or contributions
because he feels it makes his own look somehow more vital. That trait in and
of itself is enough reason to deny Art any significant degree of
respect--that he also has a proven integrity problem is just icing on the
cake.



Don't get me wrong, I'll be the first to call a spade a spade when some
no-name coward chucks **** at someone here, for no real reason, but some
of the comments that have been flying around in this discussion, simply
show no respect.

Because we have none for him. Because someone should also be willing to
speak up in memory of those who Art has falsely labled, and who can no
longer defend themselves (like all of those Guardsmen who died at Buna,
Bataan, Normandy, Guadalcanal, the Ardennes, and the Rapido River in Italy).
Because some folks actually take Art's rants as being historically correct,
when the record all too often proves otherwise (even when it comes to his
own specialty, B-26 operations in the ETO; he has repeatedly claimed his
group never missed its target, yet the B-26 bomb group that was recognized
as having the best record for operational bombing accuracy itself missed at
least six of its assigned targets according to one of their bombadiers who
kept a record of their performance). As others have also noted, when a man
is caught lying, it is hard to know whether anything he says afterwards is
true or not. Often Art's lies start out with him merely spouting off about
things he himself has not ever bothered to actually find the truth
regarding, such as this latest claim that old men and women made up the
majority of the civilian work force during the war--he has been presented
evidence that proves this was not the case (far from it, in actuality), but
you'll note he has not changed his story.


I guess I'd like us to seperate what he's saying from who is sayng it and
treat Art with a little more courtesy, as is his due.

Not when he sees fit to treat countless others as he has, and continues to
do. Note the wide range of posters who have taken Art to task for his posts
of late--many are generally responsible and respectful posters in most
circumstances. You'll note that most have avoided dropping into name
calling, etc., but finally pointing out after repeated corrections have been
offered that Art is indeed a proven liar is not so much a personal attack as
a statement of fact.



In turn, Art can take a deeper breath and do the same.

To do that, Art would have to humble himself by admitting that his
characterizations of the Guard and the civilian workforce during WWII have
been wrong, and he'd have to acknowledge that all of those men and women who
have honorably served, in whatever capacity, deserve the same level of
respect for their service that he expects to be given himself; I wouldn't
hold my breath waiting for that if i were you.

Brooks





Thank you gentlemen



Dave Kearton