Why would anyone even mention the SWIFT BOAT book?

[cardcounter0]

This post is yet another fine example of your typically neo-nazi debating tactics, i.e., deflecting discussion from the main issue, attacking the source, etc. Here are some facts.

1) Bush has repeatedly tried to make Kerry's Vietnam service a cornerstone of his election campaign.
2) Bush didnt do the same in the case of his service, because he pulled every sting imaginable to avoid service, was technically AWOL, and ended his obligation early.
3) It has already been shown that Bush has misled people about the nature of many of his acts in the White House.

[cardcounter0]

Would this be similar to Bush strutting around on an Air Craft Carrier in his Flight Suit, like some Top-Gun wanna-be?

[The once and future king]

Prove it is obviously fabricated.

Also I have yet to see any evidence that you yourself possess : 1) Open Mind, and 2) Logic .

[cardcounter0]

Yes, I would like to keep an open mind about these things.
Could you tell me more about the lizards, please?

[MMMMMM]

Look, you are confusing things here.

The issue is NOT the difficulty of proving or disproving a negative proposition--that is essentially irrelevant to whether the book should be blanketly dismissed based on one's opinion of the authors.

The book contains reports from those who served with Kerry. The book contains SOME facts, anyway--and probably quite a bit of opinion. Some reported facts may be disputed.

Blanketly dismissing everything in the book based on one's dislike or distrust of the authors is STUPID--because the book contains objectively verifiable information, such as quotes from those who served with him.

I really don't see why you are diverting the topic to such an extent.

My point is that there are facts which should be reviewed in the book--and just because the authors may be weirdos or even liars (not saying they are) doesn't change that, especially since some material is no doubt objectively verifiable anyway.

[cardcounter0]

I'm still trying to have that open mind, but I can't find any reference to lizards in your post.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
This post is yet another fine example of your typically neo-nazi debating tactics, i.e., deflecting discussion from the main issue, attacking the source, etc. Here are some facts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Congratulations for being the first person to find a way to connect me somehow with neo-Nazis.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Bush has repeatedly tried to make Kerry's Vietnam service a cornerstone of his election campaign.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bush has not said much about Kerry's war service and has distanced himself from the Swift Boat Veterans issue.

[ QUOTE ]
2) Bush didnt do the same in the case of his service, because he pulled every sting imaginable to avoid service, was technically AWOL, and ended his obligation early

[/ QUOTE ]

Bush was in the ANG, are you implying that those that serve in the reserves / National Guard are less patriotic or commited? That he was AWOL has yet to be proven and people leave military service early all the time.

[ QUOTE ]
3) It has already been shown that Bush has misled people about the nature of many of his acts in the White House

[/ QUOTE ]

Please name some, Id be happy to discuss.

Nice attempt at parody. I notice though that you didnt take me up on my offer to discuss Kerry's ultraliberal voting record. Also please try to avoid calling me neo-Nazi or implying any sort of connection such as you did. If being called a liberal or calling your debating tactics liberal insults you, please let me know and I will refrain.

[The once and future king]

"--because the "book contains objectively verifiable information, such as quotes from those who served with him."

Yes and I served with Agent 13456 (Bush) during the solaris project stardate 12223344. I can supply as many "objective quotes" from this period as you like. Obviously you will have to work hard to disprove them because your earth "science" is years behind ours.

P.S. Nothing by definiton can be more subjective than a quote.

I would say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing but in your case I cant be confident you posses even that. Especialy as you cant see the relevancy of my posts in relation to yours.

[cardcounter0]

"liberal debating tactics"?

I was unaware there was such a thing. What exactly does that mean?

Let's use the word "poopie-loopie" instead. poopie-loopie debating tactics. poopie-loopie media. poopie-loopie french-loving wing nuts. Makes about as much sense.

So the next time you want to label 'liberal' thought, or 'liberal' actions, or 'liberal' this, that, or the other.
Especially when you want to modify it with the word 'typical'. Then don't be insulted with a 'typical neo-nazi' reply.

I find it amusing that in typical neo-nazi fashion, you don't want to be called a neo-nazi.

[cardcounter0]

Tell me more about this Solaris project. My open mind would like to objectively investigate these facts that you present.