A question for Kerry supporters

[Schultz]

and just for Clarification Multipak there Ip address's are not the same.. They are two different people.. And from two different parts of the US.. so you can set that aside..

[Japschin]

Shultz reports, multipak decides.........
Oh man! I'm bored.....

[Cidien]

multipak... I don't see what you are hoping to do by drawing your theoretical lines between two different posters.
It is wholy possible that two different people with similar ideologies have joined our boards and enjoy supporting each other.

To Ryo and Cidien, I would like to see what traitorous action Kerry has taken that would make you use that word. To call someone a traitor is akin to calling someone a murderer. You need evidence of their crimes beyond any difference of opinion you may have. I suggest that you find a different term to use to describe Mr. Kerry unless he is called before a grand court and convicted. By calling him a traitor currently, without a conviction, you are guilty of libel.

Multipaks just trying to get me banned now.

As for Kerry, just about everything he's ever done has worked to the detriment of our country. He is a weak person that should be booted out of office. What is traitorous? Not that, that only shows he's unpatriotic. (imo, handing over our countries action to the UN doesn't sound like a patriotic thing to do to me...) Now the reason I call him a traitor is the way he acted when he came back from the Vietnam war. He lied about what went on in Vietnam. He lied about what HE did in Vietnam. It's pretty obvious he lied about it. I've already posted on that topic... He threw away his ribbons or medals (whatever they were, the retard has me confused now) in protest of the war. He supported people who claimed to have commited war crimes while in Vietnam. Almost every one of those people has been proven a complete liar, or they aren't a credible person. Why do I consider him a traitor? Because he denounced a just war and made up horrible accusations offending most vietnam soldiers/vets while at the same time doing harm to POW's still in captivity.

I could go on for a long time but i've written many posts like this on other boards and I myself am getting tired of writting the same things over and over.

If you havn't, watch this movie. Unless of course, you think vietnam POW vets are more biased than Michael Moore....

http://www.buttondepress.com/BostonManif...nhonor.wmv

Just read your last post Schultz. Thanks.

[rarnom]

Wow, just happens that I saw 'Stolen Honor' last night! A gentleman was showing that and FarenHYPE 9/11 as a free double feature. While I was watching 'Stolen Honor' I was thinking about this whole 'Kerry is a traitor' stuff and Cidien's comments. Regardless of what anyone thinks, there are in this film 7 POW's who all very much think Kerry is a traitor. And I am sure they are in the position to make that judgement. It was pretty interesting.

The FarenHYPE 9/11 was also interesting. I haven't seen Moore's film, but nonetheless if he did what they said he did, then he has a lot of explaining to do about the fabrications and out and out lies and such that he put in his film.

The most impressive and at the same time angering piece of information I learned was that France had been promised (written promisary notes) from Sadaam Hussein that they would get the 'best' oil fields and 10,000 or so barrels at $10 a pop once the sanctions against Iraq were lifted. So, basically, France is NO WAY going to support our war in Iraq if they have their own oil interest. It is so funny how other countries and critics say it is all about oil for the US. But, the fact is is that many many countries care a lot about oil. France is not supporting us because of their desire for oil. It really made me doubt all this media crap that said we were there just for oil. We weren't. The way I see it we were there to stop a dictator, and we did just that. Yet, none on the left will mention that. They also fail to mention anything about the Kurdish people that HATED Sadaam and now are a free and happy people thanks to us.

Anyway, that is just what I saw. Believe it or not. I already was in the mind set to agree with it and it just made my convictions more solid.

I do plan on watching Moore's film, just because I want to get a picture of both sides, even though I already think very little of Moore. That being said, I also think that if people have seen Moore's film, they should check out FarenHYPE 9/11, just to see things from the other angle. There were interviews with people who Moore had used in his film and they were very upset that he did use them and that he twisted their words, as well as other documented errors with the information Moore used in his film.

[multipak]

there Ip address's are not the same.. They are two different people.. And from two different parts of the US.. so you can set that aside..

I don't trust IP addresses. Anyone with a little knowledge can fake one of those easily enough

......................

[multipak]

if you are basing all your opinions on 'Farenheit 9/11', you have to realize that that film is not the god's honest truth.

And in regards to you watching 'Farehneit 9/11', I appreciate that you don't take it as the absolute truth at all times and that you use other information to form your opinions.

I think Moore is dishonest????.
He is all about scare tactics, leftist propaganda, and socialism.
Mike Moore is one of the most radical left wing bomb throwers out there.

You repeated how people shouldn?t take Fahrenheit 9/11 seriously.

Wow, just happens that I saw 'Stolen Honor' last night!???? Regardless of what anyone thinks, there are in this film 7 POW's who all very much think Kerry is a traitor.

The word traitor is not something people should label others so lightly. There are no ifs and buts about it. It seems many Bush supporters are so desperate as to go extreme lengths to portray Kerry as a traitor in order to gain political advantages.

Stolen honor is a propaganda film made by Bush supporters for a sole purpose to attack John Kerry. As seen above, you condemn Michael Moore and Fahrenheit 9/11 repeatedly as a dishonest, leftist propaganda. Yet you use information from right wing propaganda film in your attempt to portray Kerry as a traitor.
Does your favorite word ?hypocritical? ring any bell?

You asked me before when you called others hypocrites. Here you go.

If Kerry blames Bush, then he is a hypocrite.

As I see it you(Kakomu) ARE wrong and you ARE a hypocrite.

I just found his(Michael Moore) behavior hypocritical and that is why we made a stink about it.

[Schultz]

belive what you will multipak but no more conspiracy theory posts ok?

[Cidien]

Wow, just happens that I saw 'Stolen Honor' last night! A gentleman was showing that and FarenHYPE 9/11 as a free double feature. While I was watching 'Stolen Honor' I was thinking about this whole 'Kerry is a traitor' stuff and Cidien's comments. Regardless of what anyone thinks, there are in this film 7 POW's who all very much think Kerry is a traitor. And I am sure they are in the position to make that judgement. It was pretty interesting.

The FarenHYPE 9/11 was also interesting. I haven't seen Moore's film, but nonetheless if he did what they said he did, then he has a lot of explaining to do about the fabrications and out and out lies and such that he put in his film.

The most impressive and at the same time angering piece of information I learned was that France had been promised (written promisary notes) from Sadaam Hussein that they would get the 'best' oil fields and 10,000 or so barrels at $10 a pop once the sanctions against Iraq were lifted. So, basically, France is NO WAY going to support our war in Iraq if they have their own oil interest. It is so funny how other countries and critics say it is all about oil for the US. But, the fact is is that many many countries care a lot about oil. France is not supporting us because of their desire for oil. It really made me doubt all this media crap that said we were there just for oil. We weren't. The way I see it we were there to stop a dictator, and we did just that. Yet, none on the left will mention that. They also fail to mention anything about the Kurdish people that HATED Sadaam and now are a free and happy people thanks to us.

Anyway, that is just what I saw. Believe it or not. I already was in the mind set to agree with it and it just made my convictions more solid.

I do plan on watching Moore's film, just because I want to get a picture of both sides, even though I already think very little of Moore. That being said, I also think that if people have seen Moore's film, they should check out FarenHYPE 9/11, just to see things from the other angle. There were interviews with people who Moore had used in his film and they were very upset that he did use them and that he twisted their words, as well as other documented errors with the information Moore used in his film.

1) I've been telling people France was corrupt from the beginning. Moreso than the others, but Germany and Russia had their claim to protect as well.

"It really made me doubt all this media crap that said we were there just for oil."

I have no doubt Iraq was higher up on the list because of their oil reserves, but unlike other countries, we were protecting our interests. We aren't getting any bonuses from taking out Saddam. We're getting just what we always got. Gas prices are high atm 'cuz the OPEC CEO's are being dicks and taking advantage of the war.... But more importantly, we were taking out a cruel dictator who Kerry himself stated posed a grave threat to the U.S.

2) Michael Moore doesn't "lie". That's why he offerd 10 grand to someone who can point out a "lie". What Moore does is intentionally leave out or misrepresent something that happened to make it appear as though something happened that didn't.

[Cidien]

......................

Looks like he's still trying to get a reply from me still.


"Stolen honor is a propaganda film made by Bush supporters for a sole purpose to attack John Kerry. As seen above, you condemn Michael Moore and Fahrenheit 9/11 repeatedly as a dishonest, leftist propaganda. Yet you use information from right wing propaganda film in your attempt to portray Kerry as a traitor.
Does your favorite word ?hypocritical? ring any bell?"

Of course its a biased movie. These POW's feel Kerry is a traitor to their country and explain why. They do this because Kerry is running for president and they don't ever want to see him as their commander in chief. Would you rather these POW's try to be "objective" instead of stating their feelings on the matter or what? Perhaps you'd rather they not speak up at all and let Kerry slide for his traitorous actions. Well, I know you would... stupid question.

[Zagatto]

I don't think he was speaking against the POWs for their point of view.

I think what he was pointing out is that the POWs were stating opinions supported by a few facts much like Michael Moore shows his opinion supported by a few facts.

To say that one has a valid view point but not the other is hypocritical.

[Cidien]

By the way, I want babyeater banned. He posted:

"Cidien shut the hell up, last exile posted this merely because he thought it was interesting. He was not trying to start up some dumbass debate about ethics."

And all I did was make a common sense post about what LE posted. I got banned because I replied to something very awful babyeater said....

[Cidien]

And no, Michael Moore intentionally tried to lead his viewers to believe something that isn't true. The POW's are stating what they EXPERIENCED as prisoners of war WHILE Kerry was making these accusations. These men are speaking from what they experienced, Moore is talking out of his ass. I see a huge difference. Now, I havn't seen ferenhype yet, but from what i've read i'll agree it too is at least close to as biased as Moores film. I will not agree these POWs are speaking out of bias other than what they experienced. Out of any people in the U.S. that have a right to speak up about the things Kerry has done, these men have the right.

[Cidien]

I see his title has banned now. Thanks.

[rarnom]

You repeated how people shouldn’t take Fahrenheit 9/11 seriously.

What's your point? Do you consider Moore's film to be 100% fact? I dare you to answer that one.

Stolen honor is a propaganda film made by Bush supporters for a sole purpose to attack John Kerry. As seen above, you condemn Michael Moore and Fahrenheit 9/11 repeatedly as a dishonest, leftist propaganda. Yet you use information from right wing propaganda film in your attempt to portray Kerry as a traitor.
Does your favorite word “hypocritical” ring any bell?

O.k., you are really eager to call me a hypocrite, but you missed the point of my post. I am not calling Kerry anything, I was pointing out that it doesn't matter what I think about Kerry, but there are people who are very entitled to think he is a hypocrite. I think that any POW who was in Vietnam and suffered that much can call Kerry a traitor. I am in no position to call Kerry a traitor. I think that what he did was weak. That is why I said this:

Regardless of what anyone thinks, there are in this film 7 POW's who all very much think Kerry is a traitor. And I am sure they are in the position to make that judgement. It was pretty interesting.

So, take that as you will. The film is obviously a film that is anti-Kerry, but it is your call if the word of the POW's is truth or not. I believe that they think Kerry is a traitor. I think that Kerry's protest of the Vietnam war was weak. That is my opinion. If it continues to irk you, then um, go smoke or something.

You asked me before when you called others hypocrites. Here you go.

Actually here was my quote in its entirety again:

As far as me calling others (plural) hypocrites, the only person I can think of that I labeled as a 'hypocrite' was kakomu, and that was during that whole 'war/fighting/threat' conversation.

So, I already said I called kakomu a hypocrite in that thread. What is your point? Are you now upset because when I said 'others' I was ONLY referring to forum members? You need to lighten up man. I can call Michael Moore a hypocrite all I want. Reread what I said. It is all based on things that I expereinced. I was there, Moore was not practicing what he was preaching. I can also call Kerry a hypocrite and there is plenty of evidence to back that up. As far as forum members, you didn't prove anything I haven't already owned up to.

You really like taking my statements and only showing part of the quote. You also did that in the 'paper about Bush' thread and you were utterly confusing, trying to show that I said I was 'non-partisian' :confused:


You really need to relax. I just noticed that mess of a fight you and Cidien had in the 'rants' section. Yikes. :eek:

[Cidien]

You really like taking my statements and only showing part of the quote. You also did that in the 'paper about Bush' thread and you were utterly confusing, trying to show that I said I was 'non-partisian' :confused:

He's a democrat. Does that surprise you? Multipak reminds me a lot of Moore. He doesn't "lie" in his arguements, he just tries to mislead the readers into thinking something else is the real truth.