Kerry is a pilot?

Tarver Engineering wrote:

"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
...

in article , Tarver Engineering at
wrote on 1/25/04 6:21 PM:


"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
.. .

in article , Jim Fisher at
wrote on 1/25/04 11:02 AM:


Well, there's at least one redeeming quality.

To go along with the Silver Star, the Bronze Star and three Purple

Hearts.

And all in a war he was opposed to. I find that somewhat redeeming.

Except ther is no silver star.

Are you saying there's no such thing as a Silver Star, or that Kerry never
got one? In both cases you'd be wrong.


Kerrey was put in for a silver star and awarded bronze.

According to CNN (and numerous other sources), Kerry has been awarded both
distinctions:
"It was in 1971 that Kerry, then 27, appeared before the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee to speak out against U.S. policy in Vietnam.

His stance drew attention both because of his military record -- he had
served as an officer in the Navy and had been awarded a Silver Star, Bronze
Star and three Purple hearts ..."
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/spe...tes/kerry.html

"Peter" wrote in message
news:LA%Qb.152462$na.260922@attbi_s04...
Tarver Engineering wrote:

"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
...

in article , Tarver Engineering at
wrote on 1/25/04 6:21 PM:


"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
.. .

in article , Jim Fisher at
wrote on 1/25/04 11:02 AM:


Well, there's at least one redeeming quality.

To go along with the Silver Star, the Bronze Star and three Purple

Hearts.

And all in a war he was opposed to. I find that somewhat redeeming.

Except ther is no silver star.

Are you saying there's no such thing as a Silver Star, or that Kerry
never
got one? In both cases you'd be wrong.


Kerrey was put in for a silver star and awarded bronze.

According to CNN (and numerous other sources), Kerry has been awarded both
distinctions:
"It was in 1971 that Kerry, then 27, appeared before the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee to speak out against U.S. policy in Vietnam.

My mistake then.

Kerry sounds a lot like Davis.

"Peter" wrote in message
news:LA%Qb.152462$na.260922@attbi_s04...

According to CNN (and numerous other sources), Kerry has been awarded
both
distinctions:
"It was in 1971 that Kerry, then 27, appeared before the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee to speak out against U.S. policy in Vietnam.

And that testimony is going to be a part of his downfall when it gets
thoroughly analyzed during the later campaign.

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:45:05 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

"Peter" wrote in message
news:LA%Qb.152462$na.260922@attbi_s04...

According to CNN (and numerous other sources), Kerry has been awarded
both
distinctions:
"It was in 1971 that Kerry, then 27, appeared before the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee to speak out against U.S. policy in Vietnam.

And that testimony is going to be a part of his downfall when it gets
thoroughly analyzed during the later campaign.

Why might that be?

Corky Scott

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:45:05 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

"Peter" wrote in message
news:LA%Qb.152462$na.260922@attbi_s04...

According to CNN (and numerous other sources), Kerry has been awarded
both
distinctions:
"It was in 1971 that Kerry, then 27, appeared before the Senate
Foreign
Relations Committee to speak out against U.S. policy in Vietnam.

And that testimony is going to be a part of his downfall when it gets
thoroughly analyzed during the later campaign.

Why might that be?

Gross slander and dereliction of duty for starters.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:45:05 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

"Peter" wrote in message
news:LA%Qb.152462$na.260922@attbi_s04...

According to CNN (and numerous other sources), Kerry has been
awarded
both
distinctions:
"It was in 1971 that Kerry, then 27, appeared before the Senate
Foreign
Relations Committee to speak out against U.S. policy in Vietnam.

And that testimony is going to be a part of his downfall when it gets
thoroughly analyzed during the later campaign.

Why might that be?

Gross slander and dereliction of duty for starters.

What a totalitarian sentiment. "Slandering the state" is what the Soviet
Union used to charge dissidents with when they denounced acts of
international aggression committed by their country, as Kerry had the
courage to do with regard to the US invasion and conquest of South Vietnam.

Dereliction of duty? One of an officer's principal duties under domestic
and international law is to prevent his own side from committing war crimes.
If Kerry had remained silent about the massive, systematic atrocities
committed by the US in its brutal attempt to impose a puppet dictatorship
upon the people of South Vietnam (killing literally millions of people in
the process), THAT would have been a dereliction of his legal and moral duty
as a soldier, a citizen, and a human being.

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:qgtRb.127200$5V2.656621@attbi_s53...
"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...


Why might that be?

Gross slander and dereliction of duty for starters.

What a totalitarian sentiment. "Slandering the state" is what the Soviet
Union used to charge dissidents with when they denounced acts of
international aggression committed by their country, as Kerry had the
courage to do with regard to the US invasion and conquest of South
Vietnam.

Where did I say he slandered the "state"?


Dereliction of duty? One of an officer's principal duties under domestic
and international law is to prevent his own side from committing war
crimes.

Yes, it is. So why did he "see" so many attrocities and do nothing, as he
would be required to do in his duty as an officer, about them?

If Kerry had remained silent about the massive, systematic atrocities
committed by the US in its brutal attempt to impose a puppet dictatorship
upon the people of South Vietnam (killing literally millions of people in
the process), THAT would have been a dereliction of his legal and moral
duty
as a soldier, a citizen, and a human being.

Before you decide to spin for the fellow, you might look past your rhetoric
and review his remarks and his actions.