But he hasn't presented evidence.

Post #170,541 by Another Scott 8/21/04 10:23:18 AM Reply	But he hasn't presented evidence. Isn't it his responsibility to present evidence for his claims and not poo-poo the evidence that exists? I am convinced ... I can say without a doubt in my mind ... To my knowledge ... I believed then as I believe now ... That's an awfully weak indictment. We're supposed to believe him because he believes these statements? Where's his evidence? For instance, [link\|http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/20/politics/campaign/20swift.html?ei=5006&en=e34a9e1ea32b2dd8&ex=1093665600&partner=ALTAVISTA1&pagewanted=print&position=\|NY Times]: A damage report to Mr. Thurlow's boat shows that it received three bullet holes, suggesting enemy fire, and later intelligence reports indicate that one Vietcong was killed in action and five others wounded, reaffirming the presence of an enemy. Mr. Thurlow said the boat was hit the day before. He also received a Bronze Star for the day, a fact left out of "Unfit for Command." Really marlowe, I'm surprised you're swayed by this stuff. And isn't it silly to be distracted by these arguments about what happend 30+ years ago? What does it have to do with the policies of the next President? "I'm John Kerry and I support rescuing men blown overboard!" :-( Cheers, Scott.
Post #170,546 by marlowe 8/21/04 11:12:13 AM Reply	It's an ewewitness account, dude. If that's not good enough for you, maybe the problem is you. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kerry is a liar and he doesn't tolerate fights from others. "All the news you wish would go away" [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfire...arlowe/index.html]
Post #170,548 by Another Scott 8/21/04 11:53:47 AM Reply	Um, let's review. 1) Contemporaneous reports say that they were under fire. 2) Reports 30+ years later say they were not under fire. Without evidence, why should one believe 2 over 1? Cheers, Scott.
Post #170,687 by jb4 8/23/04 9:57:46 AM Reply	And here's another eyewitness account, dude! Found in [link\|http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/elections/chi-0408220342aug22,1,2523679.story?coll=chi-news-hed\|The Chicago Tribune] The interesting part about this is that Rood is a Chicago ribune editor. this Tribune is known as a conservative rag (not a conservative as Fox news, of course, but then, who is?) I'll see your eyewitness account from a sour-grapes axe-to-grind arch conservative, and raise you one eyewitness account, from a conservative newspaper editor. Your move, fuckwit... jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT

Welcome to IWETHEY!