If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#251
|
|||
|
|||
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message om... If there was no enemy fire, or at least enemies present, why was the M-79 grenade fired? You'd have to ask John Kerry. If so, why was the nomination accepted? Unknown. The records have not been revealed. For Mr Hibbard to have first hand knowedge of the incident he would have had to witness it himself. He doesn't ocme out and say one way or the other but it seems that his account is based on what he heard from others, including Kerry, making it second hand, not firsthand. Hibbard spoke with other crewmwmbers, who indicated there was no enemy fire. Their information is first hand. Did you see this in USA TOday, or did you get it from somewhere else? I saw it in USA Today. Except for an accompanying photo of Kerry and it's caption, it's a direct scan. Oh, so Bush did get out of serving in Vietnam. Smart move, IMHO. Mine too. I have seen only a handful of ads for Kerry and do not recall them even mentioning his service in Vietnam. I have seen more than a handful and many have touted his Vietnam service. You can check out his website he http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html I see no mention of his military service at all on the frontpage and only two sentences devoted to it in his biography. Do you know if it was more prominent before the questions about his first Purple Heart were raised? Ofhand, I'd have to say that your statement "Vietnam has been the key issue in their campaign to defeat Bush." is completely unfounded. AFACT, Iraq has been the key issue in their campagn to defeat Bush. But you indicated you've not seen many of his ads. I have. |
#252
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message link.net...
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message om... State and Federal criminal laws, among others. It wasn't a trick question, I'm not clear on what you didn't understand. I was giving the benefit of the doubt. There's no similarity between someone stealing a car and Congress or the President or the USSC acting contrary to the Constitution. IMHO, accusations that the USSC acts contrary to the Constituion are typically hot air and sour grapes. As to the Congress or the President, the USSC has just recently stepped up to the plate and put them both in their places IRT unconstituional law and unconstitutional executive action. Even when ruings by the USSC are successfully defied, the Constitution itself remains intact. The Constitution is our contract with our government, the USSC is the arbiter of that conract and when that arbiter sides with us it is our job to collect. Were essential elements of the Constitutino to be repealed, for example to give the President the power to suspend habeas corpus, levy taxes, or to establish courts martial then the Constitution would no longer be intact. Until then, if our government defies the Constitution successfully we can only blame our lack wisdom and resolve as citizens for our failure to force our government to comply with our Constitution. Yet the Constituion itself will remain intact, patiently awaiting enforcement by a people of higher character. -- FF |
#253
|
|||
|
|||
|
#254
|
|||
|
|||
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:
IMHO, accusations that the USSC acts contrary to the Constituion are typically hot air and sour grapes. [....] Even when ruings by the USSC are successfully defied, the Constitution itself remains intact. The Constitution is our contract with our government, the USSC is the arbiter of that conract and when that arbiter sides with us it is our job to collect. [....] Yet the Constituion itself will remain intact, patiently awaiting enforcement by a people of higher character. WELL SAID, FRED! And, yes, that praise is appropriately shouted. Thankfully there are a few here like you and Rasimus who know how to state the case (not to mention also being able to see through the fog of war, politics, & just plain BS in the first place). -- Jack "Cave ab homine unius libri" |
#255
|
|||
|
|||
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:
I was the commanding officer to whom Kerry reported his injury on Dec. 3, 1968. I had confirmed that there was no hostile fire that night and that Kerry had simply wounded himself with an M-79 grenade round he fired too close. He wanted a Purple Heart, and I refused. Louis Letson, the base physician, saw Kerry and used tweezers to remove the tiny piece of shrapnel - about 1 centi*meter in length and 2 millimeters in di*ameter. Letson also confirmed that the scratch was inflicted with our M-79. If there was no enemy fire, or at least enemies present, why was the M-79 grenade fired? I can not say this for certain, but it has been stated in other threads that the grenade was fired during what is often termed "reconaissance by fire." That is to say, if there MIGHT be an enemy hiding in a tree line, or behind that haystack, or in those woods, a grenade is a relatively cheap and (usually) safe way for you to find out- and potentially avoid an ambush if there are in fact bad guys there intent on doing you harm. If there isn't actually an enemy around, then you've spent a grenade for peace of mind (and a small shrapnel wound in the case in question- got to watch how close you set off things that go boom). Mike Williamson |
#256
|
|||
|
|||
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message om... IMHO, accusations that the USSC acts contrary to the Constituion are typically hot air and sour grapes. Then you are either unfamiliar with USSC rulings, the Constitution, or both. |
#257
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message link.net...
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message om... ... For Mr Hibbard to have first hand knowedge of the incident he would have had to witness it himself. He doesn't ocme out and say one way or the other but it seems that his account is based on what he heard from others, including Kerry, making it second hand, not firsthand. Hibbard spoke with other crewmwmbers, who indicated there was no enemy fire. Their information is first hand. And his is second hand though he said it was first. Did you see this in USA TOday, or did you get it from somewhere else? I saw it in USA Today. Except for an accompanying photo of Kerry and it's caption, it's a direct scan. Ok. I have seen only a handful of ads for Kerry and do not recall them even mentioning his service in Vietnam. I have seen more than a handful and many have touted his Vietnam service. You can check out his website he http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html I see no mention of his military service at all on the frontpage and only two sentences devoted to it in his biography. Do you know if it was more prominent before the questions about his first Purple Heart were raised? Dunno, I never looked at the webpage before. Ofhand, I'd have to say that your statement "Vietnam has been the key issue in their campaign to defeat Bush." is completely unfounded. AFACT, Iraq has been the key issue in their campagn to defeat Bush. But you indicated you've not seen many of his ads. I have. I saw two or three in Ohio. Maybe a sentence like "Three times decorated Vietnam Veteran' was in the ad, I don't recall. But it wasn't the cornerstone of the ad, and I ahve a hard time beleiving that it would be. This is probably regional variation. Here in Maryland and in neighboring DC almost any Democrat is a slam dunk for the Presidency nad in Virgina any Republican. Consequently there is virtually no political advertising going on around here. -- FF |
#258
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message hlink.net...
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message om... IMHO, accusations that the USSC acts contrary to the Constituion are typically hot air and sour grapes. Then you are either unfamiliar with USSC rulings, the Constitution, or both. Or you won't show an example of a USSC ruling that goes against the Constitution. I'll agree as they occur, but they are rare. -- FF |
#259
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: Could the Press Grow a Spine?
From: (Fred the Red Shirt) Date: 7/10/2004 11:58 PM Pacific Or you won't show an example of a USSC ruling that goes against the Constitution. I'll agree as they occur, but they are rare. The SCOTUS over ruling a state supreme Court. Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
30 Jan 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 31st 04 03:55 AM |
11 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | November 11th 03 11:58 PM |
04 Oct 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 4th 03 07:51 PM |
FS: Aviation History Books | Neil Cournoyer | Military Aviation | 0 | August 26th 03 08:32 PM |
07 Aug 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | August 8th 03 02:51 AM |