John Kerry Tried to Stop You From Seeing This Film

[GPF]

Now go watch the 911 film by Moore. IT has a lot more against Bush. Bush was discharged from the service which proves right there Kerry had a better war record. Also if you remember correctly the Swift Boat ad from the Republicans was pulled from the air and the people who was involved was fined and served jail time since it was simply un true. That makes the 2nd ad that was pulled from TV by the republicans trying to make Bush look better. The first one was the one where Bush tried to use 911 saying he was a big hero and such. It wasn't soon after that 911 victims was protesting and it was removed.

As I have said before, I don't see how a sane person who pays any attention to politics can vote for Bush. Im not just saying this cause I seen the 911 movie, I am saying this cause I have followed the crap he has pulled in his 4 years of office. I have seen him lie about WMD in Iraq, because of this lie over 1000 u.s. troops are dead. I won't even go into the innocent Iraq's who was killed over this. Then there is the Patriot Act that managed to get voted in during a secret meeting in the middle of the night. Read up on what the Patriot Act involves, its some bad stuff. Because of it innocent people are being put in jail cause of stupid stuff. Because a old man thinks Bush is a asshole the FBI raids his house.

I mean did all these Bush supporters actually watch the debates on TV and still want to vote for the guy? I mean every time he was asked a question about something he did wrong he would just start talking about something else. He is asked about the WMD and all he has to say is "The world is a safer place without Saddam." Yea we can all agree on that, but answer the question! He is asked about the Tax cut he gave to the rich, his response is some BS about how he cares about the children and there education? What does Children and Education got to do with giving rich people a tax cut? Any question he was asked he just evaded with something completely unrelated.

Again you are wrong Bush never lied about WMD. He was giving the same intelligence reports that our country and other coutries determined that Iraq had them. Kerry voted to give Bush the authority to go to war because he believed Iraq had WMD's, so was Kerry lying ?(yes or no)

Kerry says the same thing all the time that "The world is a safer place without Saddam." So who is wrong?

Its not just rich people who received a tax cut, I am definetly not rich and twice in the last 4 years I have received a check for $400 from this president. No other president has ever sent me $800. That right there is reason enough for me But to get back to the point the tax cuts is what has made the clinton/gore recession the shortest recession in history. Largest job gains for a president - research it- there are a lot of jobs that are not covered by the payroll report, which was incorrect anyway- the one Kerry kept mentioning in the debates.

I don't see how a sane person could vote for Kerry. I understand your point of view(anyone but Bush), but vote for Nader or some other 3rd party candidate who actually stands for something and has a plan that they will share with people. If enough of you "Anyone but Bush" supporters actually got behind a 3rd party canidate, like Perot was back in 84(before his withdrawal) there might be some significant change in this country.

[Ex-Cyber]

Largest job gains for a president

Gross jobs created, maybe, but on its own that's a pretty meaningless measure of economic performance - it's like measuring a student's academic performance solely by GPA increase. IIRC it's standing at a net negative right now if you actually compare the number of jobs now vs. what he had coming into office. That's not to say it's his fault, but I don't think it's very believable to say that he was only responsible for gains and not losses.

[ragnarok2040]

Again you are wrong Bush never lied about WMD. He was giving the same intelligence reports that our country and other coutries determined that Iraq had them. Kerry voted to give Bush the authority to go to war because he believed Iraq had WMD's, so was Kerry lying ?(yes or no)

Kerry says the same thing all the time that "The world is a safer place without Saddam." So who is wrong?

Actually, Bush did lie about having concrete evidence of WMD's. It was reported that experts, within the government even, disputed the evidence he had at the time he was presenting it as a case to go to war. Kerry voted for the authority for Bush to go to war, but the bill had strong influences for pressuring Saddam politically and to go to war as a last resort.

Is the world safer after Saddam? I don't know, he was controlled, he wasn't a friend to Al Qaeda, not sure about other terrorists. We went in, dismantled a stable government, but to avoid being a country builder, we avoided replacing it with one of our own and instead let the Iraqi's build it, which caused a period of seeming lawlessness. Now, Anti-American sentimism is at its highest, Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists which has boosted Al Qaeda's ranks to 18,000. Whether or not you believe Bush lied is irrelevant. It is proven that mistakes have been made all throughout the war, which has caused Iraq's slide into chaos. If Iraq can be made a powerful influence in the Middle East, then yes, the world might be safer, but as it is, I don't think Bush or his administration can do it.

Iran, which does have links to Al Qaeda, and where Osama is currently believed to be hiding, will soon have nuclear capability. Iran, unlike Iraq, is a rich country, we destroy their nuclear sites, they'll build new ones, and hate us all the while, although I think they do already. Iran used even more deadly chemical weapons in the Iran/Iraq war than Iraq did, especially since they used blood agents.

My mind can't comprehend all of the political nuances and etc., but all I know is, that I don't think the world is safer after Bush has been president.

As for jobs, Bush hasn't enacted any type of legislative action to increase jobs, and doesn't have any other plan except for cutting taxes, and the taxes he wants to cut don't even correspond with increasing job gains.

[Orange_Ribbon]

I wasn't alive when this happened and i want to know what he will do for me now. Does that make me a bad voter?

Long answer: Yes with an if
Sgort answer: No with a but

I know those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. But I think right now there are more important things. I really don't care about Bush's records [in the military] also. Also sGort?

[AuroEdge]

Sorry about taking so long to reply to my own post. It is important to look at the past of presidents. There's several arguments that the press seem to focus on:

1.) Were they honorable serving their time in the military and thereafter?

- Bush: He served in the Air National Guard. He was a pilot with over 100 hours under his belt and was instrument licensed on several different airplanes. You may remember him landing on the Nimmitz (it may have been another carrier) in a prop. plane. The issue with Bush's military service that the press seems to focus on can be placed in two different topics. The first is that he didn't actually serve in Vietnam, he served state side. My look on that is he served his country and did not avoid going over to Vietnam, he just chose not to. If he was looking to avoid Vietnam, he could've just gone to college and be exempted from the draft. I may be biased on that because I have an uncle who served in the Army National Guard and deeply respect him for his service. The second issue is what the recent CBS scandal dealt with. Was he disciplined while in the military and if so what for? As it looks now, he didn't do anything and the provider of the information was a disgruntled man who served with Bush. I won't touch on this issue because I didn't serve with him, but I will say that everybody he served with seemed to praise him. However, they could be "bribed and coerced" (which is what Kerry called Poland and other countries that joined the US in Operation Iraqi Freedom). End Point: While he wasn't a hero who was tortured in a POW camp and he might've been a disorderly soldier, he did more than most Americans can say they did at the time.
- Kerry: The big stink with Kerry is his possible bad conduct while serving as a Swift Boat captain and what he said after returning home. Most of the information we receive about his time as a Swift Boat captain comes from the privately funded Swift Vets that denounce Kerry. The one person that I've seen talk well about Kerry's service that also served with him, didn't really serve with him at all. It's a woman whose husband served with Kerry. The Swift Vets don't really have anything to gain from their efforts except keeping Kerry out of office, which they openly admit is their motive. With this new documentary coming out, that I originally posted about, which deals with discounting Forbes-Kerry's military record, and the Swift Vets message it's hard to believe that they're lying and Kerry is telling the truth. Another hot debate is that Kerry might've 'forged' some of his home movies from Vietnam, in addition to the films that were for sure recorded in Vietnam it looks like he made them to make himself look good. And on the flip side, when he returned home from Vietnam he denounced the war and made false accusations (they're false through and through, there's no arguing that) of American soldiers raizing villages, attaching phone wires to men's genitals, and other horrific acts. If you're old enough or have researched the past you would know that Jane Fonda protested the war. However, she apologized unlike John. Whether or not you agree with the Vietname war, it is not just to dishonor the troops that were over there even if one indulged in LSD and wouldn't shoot at the enemy for example.

So in conclusion about Bush's and Kerry's military records and post-war activities, they can't even be compared. If you look at the worst possible actions that Bush might've done and the least amount of bad things Kerry might've (not) done, there's nothing to even debate about. And.... you can probably see why most people don't thouroughly debate this election. Look at this one part of the situation and it's only between two candidates.

Something else I'd like to add is that the war in Iraq is an illegal war. Even the Patriot Act which I despise does not make it legal. So is the world safer without Saddam? Probably, but he was illegally removed. The US Military is only legally given the ability to provide a national defense, not an international offense...

[Ex-Cyber]

The one person that I've seen talk well about Kerry's service that also served with him, didn't really serve with him at all. It's a woman whose husband served with Kerry.

IIRC, some of the survivors of his Swift boat crew have spoken at his rallies. I can try digging up references if you're interested, but I thought this was common knowledge.

With this new documentary coming out, that I originally posted about, which deals with discounting Forbes-Kerry's military record, and the Swift Vets message it's hard to believe that they're lying and Kerry is telling the truth.

How does this make it hard to believe? IIRC Stolen Honor is financed by some of the same people who financed SBVT. Is it hard to believe that someone can engage in a multi-pronged smear campaign?

Another hot debate is that Kerry might've 'forged' some of his home movies from Vietnam, in addition to the films that were for sure recorded in Vietnam it looks like he made them to make himself look good.

I've never heard of this. Got any good sources? (and by "good sources" I don't mean sites like Indymedia or What Really Happened or Worldnetdaily or Free Republic where seemingly anyone with an intriguing story gets headlined regardless of whether or not anything is verified, or indeed even plausible).

If you're old enough or have researched the past you would know that Jane Fonda protested the war. However, she apologized unlike John.

Fonda had a hell of a lot more to apologize for than just "protesting the war"; she actively participated in a publicity stunt to whitewash the Viet Cong, which is why she stands alone in infamy and had no career to speak of after the war. That's also why a handful of anti-Kerry nutjobs have been so eager to associate the two. AFAICT, the closest they ever got to collaborating is that they were both featured speakers at a VVAW rally (and he didn't share the stage with her; that photo has been confirmed a hoax by the photographer of one of the source pictures).

And on the flip side, when he returned home from Vietnam he denounced the war and made false accusations (they're false through and through, there's no arguing that) of American soldiers raizing villages, attaching phone wires to men's genitals, and other horrific acts.

How do you know that they're false? I do think it's quite likely that at least a few of the anecdotal stories he relayed from others were fabricated or exaggerated, but you're making a stronger statement than that. What is it based on?

[AuroEdge]

Ex-Cyber, before I go into any of this, I will say that I am not the most informed or best speaker/debater out there. I'm trying my best to present this situation without taking a side with Bush or Kerry.

To answer all of your responses... here goes:

"IIRC, some of the survivors of his Swift boat crew have spoken at his rallies. I can try digging up references if you're interested, but I thought this was common knowledge."
- While this may be true, it doesn't go without saying that if they really were there that most of the people that served day-in and day-out with John Forbes Kerry are behind the Swift Vets movement. Something that I don't think most people in the US understand is the comradery and seriousness of being in the military. These people are not out to smear Kerry because they're jealous or some other reason. I've actually emailed a Swift Vet talking to them about what they're doing. The way it appears is they're doing this because they honest to God think it's the right thing to do. And, I do agree with them. They can't just be written off as screwballs; if they're speaking the truth that's one more strike against Kerry being Commander-in-Chief.

Quote:
With this new documentary coming out, that I originally posted about, which deals with discounting Forbes-Kerry's military record, and the Swift Vets message it's hard to believe that they're lying and Kerry is telling the truth.
"How does this make it hard to believe? IIRC Stolen Honor is financed by some of the same people who financed SBVT. Is it hard to believe that someone can engage in a multi-pronged smear campaign?"
- I do not know if Stolen Honor was financed by the same people who sponsered the Swift Vets. Either way, there are many sponsers for the Stolen Honor film so it doesn't matter if they gave them any money or not.

Quote:
Another hot debate is that Kerry might've 'forged' some of his home movies from Vietnam, in addition to the films that were for sure recorded in Vietnam it looks like he made them to make himself look good.
"I've never heard of this. Got any good sources? (and by "good sources" I don't mean sites like Indymedia or What Really Happened or Worldnetdaily or Free Republic where seemingly anyone with an intriguing story gets headlined regardless of whether or not anything is verified, or indeed even plausible)."
- No, I do not. I saw this on FoxNews in addition to MSNBC on television. To be honest, who knows if they're forged or not. Either they are or somebody with influence put up another dumb 'conspiracy' sort of deal.

Quote:
If you're old enough or have researched the past you would know that Jane Fonda protested the war. However, she apologized unlike John.
"Fonda had a hell of a lot more to apologize for than just "protesting the war"; she actively participated in a publicity stunt to whitewash the Viet Cong, which is why she stands alone in infamy and had no career to speak of after the war. That's also why a handful of anti-Kerry nutjobs have been so eager to associate the two. AFAICT, the closest they ever got to collaborating is that they were both featured speakers at a VVAW rally (and he didn't share the stage with her; that photo has been confirmed a hoax by the photographer of one of the source pictures)."
- Jane Fonda was just an actor, John Forbes Kerry was a soldier for four months thereabouts. For a soldier to say the things he did are almost unforgivable. It's kinda like it doesn't matter if you win the race by a foot or a mile, a win is a win. Doesn't matter on the severity anyway.

Quote:
And on the flip side, when he returned home from Vietnam he denounced the war and made false accusations (they're false through and through, there's no arguing that) of American soldiers raizing villages, attaching phone wires to men's genitals, and other horrific acts.
"How do you know that they're false? I do think it's quite likely that at least a few of the anecdotal stories he relayed from others were fabricated or exaggerated, but you're making a stronger statement than that. What is it based on?"
- Well, sure there were people in the US Military that commited atrocities on the Vietnamese people. It wasn't commonplace like John purported it to be. Currently at http://www.ebaumsworld.com there's a soundboard of John Kerry. The bottom left soundbite is of Kerry claiming that these things happened rampantly in Vietnam. This is not where I originally heard him say that, I think I heard it played on The Savage Nation talk radio network.

[Ex-Cyber]

Okay, I guess IHBT. Carry on then.

[Orange_Ribbon]

- Bush: He served in the Air National Guard. He was a pilot with over 100 hours under his belt and was instrument licensed on several different airplanes. You may remember him landing on the Nimmitz (it may have been another carrier) in a prop. plane. The issue with Bush's military service that the press seems to focus on can be placed in two different topics. The first is that he didn't actually serve in Vietnam, he served state side. My look on that is he served his country and did not avoid going over to Vietnam, he just chose not to. If he was looking to avoid Vietnam, he could've just gone to college and be exempted from the draft.

Thing is, when he entered the draft was in effect, and the National Guard was not accpting as many recruits. He got in anyway while other people were being sent off to Vietnam.

PS I have a freind going into the National Guard, and it is something to be proud of.

[AuroEdge]

- Bush: He served in the Air National Guard. He was a pilot with over 100 hours under his belt and was instrument licensed on several different airplanes. You may remember him landing on the Nimmitz (it may have been another carrier) in a prop. plane. The issue with Bush's military service that the press seems to focus on can be placed in two different topics. The first is that he didn't actually serve in Vietnam, he served state side. My look on that is he served his country and did not avoid going over to Vietnam, he just chose not to. If he was looking to avoid Vietnam, he could've just gone to college and be exempted from the draft.

Thing is, when he entered the draft was in effect, and the National Guard was not accpting as many recruits. He got in anyway while other people were being sent off to Vietnam.

PS I have a freind going into the National Guard, and it is something to be proud of.

Good for him (your friend)! Assuming Bush did pull some strings through his father or somebody he was in good with who had a lot of power, that's obviously not respectable. While that action is not respectable, his service was. You would think though that on the basis of how they've served their country you wouldn't want anybody that held back their abilities. Ah oh well, it's a good thing I don't support Bush or Kerry... I'd have a helluva time truthfully supporting them

[Sir Slash]

Bush also didn't show many times,as said by the people who served at the same base before he was exspelled .... he was out drinking and not showing... thats not exactly respectable either. The canidates that are in this election have many downsides... why we the people can't have more of a say in which candiates will be able to be elected is a mighty downfall for this country. Though Kerry has many questionable past records...Bush IMO has more current questionable decisons ..... his either with me or a tratior deal is unacceptable to me

[AgentGreen]

I saw this on FoxNews in addition to MSNBC on television.

There's the problem, FoxNews is more like propoganda than news and they share a lot of "news" sources with MSNBC. Can you cite a more trustworthy source?

EDIT: Nevermind, i neglected the "No I Can't" part for a second there

[Lartrak]

There is that talk that he shot a kid in the back,

He shot a soldier in the back, one who was carrying an RPG launcher and moving into a new position to fire at them from. I don't see what the problem with that is.

[ragnarok2040]

From what I heard, it was a 25 or so year old man, and even if it was a kid, what was he gonna do? Was he going to spank him and say, "That's bad, don't kill people with grenades," heh?