Wounded vet not a "True Hero"

[daveman]

Really now....not too shabby for an ex Navy Lieutenant

It's not at all surprising that you'd cheer a man agreeing the United States should surrender to Communists and giving them aid and comfort.

Normal people call that treason. Retards say it's not too shabby.

Wow...Kerry said we should surrender to the Communists

That is historically significant. You wouldnt happen to have a link would you?

Of course I do. You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it.

STEVE SHERMAN:

In 1971, Le Duc Tho came to take over the negotiations on behalf of the North Vietnamese. Now, he was a very influential friend and partner of Ho Chi Minh and went way back into the foundation of the Communist Party in North Vietnam. When he came to Paris, very shortly after that, Madame Binh developed what she called an 8-Point Peace Proposal, which was a very important proposal, because it suggested that our POWs would be released as soon as we set a date to withdraw from Vietnam. Now that meant we declared that we lost, we paid war reparations, etc. Now, if you can find, Scott, the article, and then lo and behold, we find John Kerry holding a press conference in Washington DC in which he advocates to President Nixon to accept Madame Binh’s peace proposal. So now John Kerry is assuming the role of being a spokesperson for the Vietnamese Communist delegations in Paris, advocating their peace proposals to the United States government.​

Kerry rubber-stamped our enemy's demand for our surrender.

Apparently, that's being a "good Democrat".

 

[daveman]

Obama was fully vetted by the Republicans

They brought up Reverand Wright, Bill Ayers, Birth Certificates, Michelle hating America

Didn't work too well did it?

Because it wasn't reported in the Obama-felching media, and you idiots swooned over speeches and hopey-changey empty promises.

You backed an incompetent.

Republicans seemed to vet it frequently

Didn't work well did it?

That's because you idiots refused to believe anything negative about your little tin god.

 

[daveman]

I would agree, if that were all you had to go on. Add in a Harvard Law degree, eight years in the Illinois Senate and four years as a US Senator and you start to get some cred

Don't forget to toss in a media that refused to vet him

FOXNEWS, Breitbart.com, Rush, Sean, Levin, Savage, Coulter, Malkin, Ingraham, Washington Times, WSJ, every Rightwing newspaper and every Rightwing talk show host REFUSED to vet him????

Why did they do that?

Dumbass.

And CBS, NBC, ABC, and most of the media kissed his ass.

Did you really think you had a point? Did you think at all?

The evidence suggests not.

and stupid voters who swooned over speeches and hopey-changey empty promises.

You wingnut extremists just CANNOT STAND Americans who won't vote the way you tell them to vote.

Tough shit, Nancy!

That's funny. I say "stupid voters who swooned over speeches and hopey-changey empty promises", and you pop up!

Obama thanks you for your useful idiocy.

 

[daveman]

one...impressive

Oh, but we were assured it NEVER happened!

Looks like your side lied, huh? Tell me, as a veteran -- how does it feel to defend the people who would spit on you?

Pathetic, coming from someone who - to this day - defends people who outed a covert CIA agent.

Hey, you shouldn't quote posts of mine that ask Bode uncomfortable questions. It's harder for her to pretend they don't exist.

And by the way, please show where I defended Richard Armitage, the guy who outed a desk analyst.

 

[rightwinger]

It's not at all surprising that you'd cheer a man agreeing the United States should surrender to Communists and giving them aid and comfort.

Normal people call that treason. Retards say it's not too shabby.

Wow...Kerry said we should surrender to the Communists

That is historically significant. You wouldnt happen to have a link would you?

Of course I do. You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it.

STEVE SHERMAN:

In 1971, Le Duc Tho came to take over the negotiations on behalf of the North Vietnamese. Now, he was a very influential friend and partner of Ho Chi Minh and went way back into the foundation of the Communist Party in North Vietnam. When he came to Paris, very shortly after that, Madame Binh developed what she called an 8-Point Peace Proposal, which was a very important proposal, because it suggested that our POWs would be released as soon as we set a date to withdraw from Vietnam. Now that meant we declared that we lost, we paid war reparations, etc. Now, if you can find, Scott, the article, and then lo and behold, we find John Kerry holding a press conference in Washington DC in which he advocates to President Nixon to accept Madame Binh’s peace proposal. So now John Kerry is assuming the role of being a spokesperson for the Vietnamese Communist delegations in Paris, advocating their peace proposals to the United States government.​

Kerry rubber-stamped our enemy's demand for our surrender.

Apparently, that's being a "good Democrat".

I should have known better than to expect you to have any proof. Nowhere in your "proof" does Kerry mention surrender. In fact, Kerry is advocating the release of our POWs. You assertion that removing troops from VietNam equates to surrender is laughable

 

[Peach]

It's not at all surprising that you'd cheer a man agreeing the United States should surrender to Communists and giving them aid and comfort.

Normal people call that treason. Retards say it's not too shabby.

Wow...Kerry said we should surrender to the Communists

That is historically significant. You wouldnt happen to have a link would you?

Of course I do. You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it.

STEVE SHERMAN:

In 1971, Le Duc Tho came to take over the negotiations on behalf of the North Vietnamese. Now, he was a very influential friend and partner of Ho Chi Minh and went way back into the foundation of the Communist Party in North Vietnam. When he came to Paris, very shortly after that, Madame Binh developed what she called an 8-Point Peace Proposal, which was a very important proposal, because it suggested that our POWs would be released as soon as we set a date to withdraw from Vietnam. Now that meant we declared that we lost, we paid war reparations, etc. Now, if you can find, Scott, the article, and then lo and behold, we find John Kerry holding a press conference in Washington DC in which he advocates to President Nixon to accept Madame Binh’s peace proposal. So now John Kerry is assuming the role of being a spokesperson for the Vietnamese Communist delegations in Paris, advocating their peace proposals to the United States government.​

Kerry rubber-stamped our enemy's demand for our surrender.

Apparently, that's being a "good Democrat".

He was President at the time?

 

[daveman]

Not by any stretch of the laws of the United States. Citizens of the United States have an obligation to voice opposition to wars that are unwarranted. Kerry was proven right by history in his opposition to Viet Nam

But they don't have to right to meet with representatives of the nation we're at war with

They most certainly do.

No, they don't.

18 USC § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments | LII / Legal Information Institute

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

And then there's the UCMJ:

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.​

But you'll continue to bitterly cling to your ignorance.

and rubber-stamp their terms for our surrender.

Kerry did that in Paris.

What was Kerry's authority to speak for the U.S. government?

Oh, that's right - he didn't have any.

No shit. And he broke the law.

Hey braveman: Right here, right now, I am rubber-stamping our surrender to the North Koreans!

Doesn't mean shit, does it?


Dumbass.

That you'd advocate the US surrender to Communists is not at all surprising.

 

[daveman]

Obama was fully vetted by the Republicans

They brought up Reverand Wright, Bill Ayers, Birth Certificates, Michelle hating America

Didn't work too well did it?

Because it wasn't reported in the Obama-felching media, and you idiots swooned over speeches and hopey-changey empty promises.

You backed an incompetent.

It just burns your butt that Americans exercise their Constitutional rights, doesn't it?


Dumbass.

Not at all. You have the Constitutional right to vote for an incompetent simply because it makes you feel good.

Of course, that's your only motivation. You don't comprehend facts and logic. All you have is emotion.

 

[daveman]

Wow...Kerry said we should surrender to the Communists

That is historically significant. You wouldnt happen to have a link would you?

Of course I do. You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it.

STEVE SHERMAN:

In 1971, Le Duc Tho came to take over the negotiations on behalf of the North Vietnamese. Now, he was a very influential friend and partner of Ho Chi Minh and went way back into the foundation of the Communist Party in North Vietnam. When he came to Paris, very shortly after that, Madame Binh developed what she called an 8-Point Peace Proposal, which was a very important proposal, because it suggested that our POWs would be released as soon as we set a date to withdraw from Vietnam. Now that meant we declared that we lost, we paid war reparations, etc. Now, if you can find, Scott, the article, and then lo and behold, we find John Kerry holding a press conference in Washington DC in which he advocates to President Nixon to accept Madame Binh’s peace proposal. So now John Kerry is assuming the role of being a spokesperson for the Vietnamese Communist delegations in Paris, advocating their peace proposals to the United States government.​

Kerry rubber-stamped our enemy's demand for our surrender.

Apparently, that's being a "good Democrat".

I should have known better than to expect you to have any proof. Nowhere in your "proof" does Kerry mention surrender. In fact, Kerry is advocating the release of our POWs. You assertion that removing troops from VietNam equates to surrender is laughable

Yup, I called it: "You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it."

 

[daveman]

He was President at the time?

Are you being stupid on purpose, or is it natural?

 

[rightwinger]

But they don't have to right to meet with representatives of the nation we're at war with

They most certainly do.

No, they don't.

18 USC § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments | LII / Legal Information Institute

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

And then there's the UCMJ:

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.​

But you'll continue to bitterly cling to your ignorance.

What was Kerry's authority to speak for the U.S. government?

Oh, that's right - he didn't have any.

No shit. And he broke the law.

Hey braveman: Right here, right now, I am rubber-stamping our surrender to the North Koreans!

Doesn't mean shit, does it?


Dumbass.

That you'd advocate the US surrender to Communists is not at all surprising.

Damn Dave......you are really off the deep end on this one

Treason, surrendering to the enemy,.....you are not usually this bizarre

The alleged proof you are posting is just rightwing propaganda taken to the extreme

 

[BDBoop]

They most certainly do.

No, they don't.

18 USC § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments | LII / Legal Information Institute

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

And then there's the UCMJ:

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.​

But you'll continue to bitterly cling to your ignorance.

No shit. And he broke the law.

Hey braveman: Right here, right now, I am rubber-stamping our surrender to the North Koreans!

Doesn't mean shit, does it?


Dumbass.

That you'd advocate the US surrender to Communists is not at all surprising.

Damn Dave......you are really off the deep end on this one

Treason, surrendering to the enemy,.....you are not usually this bizarre

The alleged proof you are posting is just rightwing propaganda taken to the extreme

Yup.

 

[rightwinger]

Of course I do. You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it.

STEVE SHERMAN:

In 1971, Le Duc Tho came to take over the negotiations on behalf of the North Vietnamese. Now, he was a very influential friend and partner of Ho Chi Minh and went way back into the foundation of the Communist Party in North Vietnam. When he came to Paris, very shortly after that, Madame Binh developed what she called an 8-Point Peace Proposal, which was a very important proposal, because it suggested that our POWs would be released as soon as we set a date to withdraw from Vietnam. Now that meant we declared that we lost, we paid war reparations, etc. Now, if you can find, Scott, the article, and then lo and behold, we find John Kerry holding a press conference in Washington DC in which he advocates to President Nixon to accept Madame Binh’s peace proposal. So now John Kerry is assuming the role of being a spokesperson for the Vietnamese Communist delegations in Paris, advocating their peace proposals to the United States government.​

Kerry rubber-stamped our enemy's demand for our surrender.

Apparently, that's being a "good Democrat".

I should have known better than to expect you to have any proof. Nowhere in your "proof" does Kerry mention surrender. In fact, Kerry is advocating the release of our POWs. You assertion that removing troops from VietNam equates to surrender is laughable

Yup, I called it: "You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it."

Yup...you predicted right

You knew I would refuse to accept it because it is the most ridiculous claim you have ever posted. I know you eat up the right wing blogs, but to put forth garbage like you posted and claim it supports Kerry advocating surrender is just plan foolish

 

[daveman]

They most certainly do.

No, they don't.

18 USC § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments | LII / Legal Information Institute

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

And then there's the UCMJ:

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.​

But you'll continue to bitterly cling to your ignorance.

No shit. And he broke the law.

Hey braveman: Right here, right now, I am rubber-stamping our surrender to the North Koreans!

Doesn't mean shit, does it?


Dumbass.

That you'd advocate the US surrender to Communists is not at all surprising.

Damn Dave......you are really off the deep end on this one

Treason, surrendering to the enemy,.....you are not usually this bizarre

The alleged proof you are posting is just rightwing propaganda taken to the extreme

So, facts and logic are extreme propaganda to you.

I'll keep that in mind.

 

[daveman]

I should have known better than to expect you to have any proof. Nowhere in your "proof" does Kerry mention surrender. In fact, Kerry is advocating the release of our POWs. You assertion that removing troops from VietNam equates to surrender is laughable

Yup, I called it: "You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it."

Yup...you predicted right

You knew I would refuse to accept it because it is the most ridiculous claim you have ever posted. I know you eat up the right wing blogs, but to put forth garbage like you posted and claim it supports Kerry advocating surrender is just plan foolish

Really not my fault that you're totally unwilling to accept anything negative about a leftist hero.

You probably think he threw his OWN medals over the WH fence, don't you?

Idiot.

 

[rightwinger]

No, they don't.

18 USC § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments | LII / Legal Information Institute

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

And then there's the UCMJ:

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.​

But you'll continue to bitterly cling to your ignorance.

No shit. And he broke the law.

That you'd advocate the US surrender to Communists is not at all surprising.

Damn Dave......you are really off the deep end on this one

Treason, surrendering to the enemy,.....you are not usually this bizarre

The alleged proof you are posting is just rightwing propaganda taken to the extreme

So, facts and logic are extreme propaganda to you.

I'll keep that in mind.

Shit Dave...if that is what passes as Facts or logic in your parts, you are farther gone than I thought

 

[Synthaholic]

It's not at all surprising that you'd cheer a man agreeing the United States should surrender to Communists and giving them aid and comfort.

Normal people call that treason. Retards say it's not too shabby.

Wow...Kerry said we should surrender to the Communists

That is historically significant. You wouldnt happen to have a link would you?

Of course I do. You will, however, predictably refuse to accept it.

STEVE SHERMAN:

In 1971, Le Duc Tho came to take over the negotiations on behalf of the North Vietnamese. Now, he was a very influential friend and partner of Ho Chi Minh and went way back into the foundation of the Communist Party in North Vietnam. When he came to Paris, very shortly after that, Madame Binh developed what she called an 8-Point Peace Proposal, which was a very important proposal, because it suggested that our POWs would be released as soon as we set a date to withdraw from Vietnam. Now that meant we declared that we lost, we paid war reparations, etc. Now, if you can find, Scott, the article, and then lo and behold, we find John Kerry holding a press conference in Washington DC in which he advocates to President Nixon to accept Madame Binh’s peace proposal. So now John Kerry is assuming the role of being a spokesperson for the Vietnamese Communist delegations in Paris, advocating their peace proposals to the United States government.​

Kerry rubber-stamped our enemy's demand for our surrender.

Apparently, that's being a "good Democrat".

George Bush, Dick Cheney Accused of War Crimes


See? Anyone can be accused of anything.


Oh, wait....they were also convicted of war crimes:

Bush Convicted of War Crimes in Absentia



Kuala Lumpur — It’s official; George W Bush is a war criminal.

In what is the first ever conviction of its kind anywhere in the world, the former US President and seven key members of his administration were yesterday (Fri) found guilty of war crimes.

Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were tried in absentia in Malaysia.

The trial held in Kuala Lumpur heard harrowing witness accounts from victims of torture who suffered at the hands of US soldiers and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They included testimony from British man Moazzam Begg, an ex-Guantanamo detainee and Iraqi woman Jameelah Abbas Hameedi who was tortured in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.

At the end of the week-long hearing, the five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered guilty verdicts against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their key legal advisors who were all convicted as war criminals for torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.

Full transcripts of the charges, witness statements and other relevant material will now be sent to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission is also asking that the names of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Yoo, Bybee, Addington and Haynes be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals for public record.
​

Dumbass.

 

[Synthaholic]

Don't forget to toss in a media that refused to vet him

FOXNEWS, Breitbart.com, Rush, Sean, Levin, Savage, Coulter, Malkin, Ingraham, Washington Times, WSJ, every Rightwing newspaper and every Rightwing talk show host REFUSED to vet him????

Why did they do that?

Dumbass.

And CBS, NBC, ABC, and most of the media kissed his ass.

Is this your concession and admission that the so-called "Liberal media" is actually the only legitimate media?

Because you just said:

Don't forget to toss in a media that refused to vet him

​

It's obvious that you don't consider FOXNEWS and wingnut newspapers to be legitimate newspapers, since they vetted him completely.

Did you really think you had a point? Did you think at all?

Point successfully shoved up your ass.

and stupid voters who swooned over speeches and hopey-changey empty promises.

You wingnut extremists just CANNOT STAND Americans who won't vote the way you tell them to vote.

Tough shit, Nancy!

That's funny. I say "stupid voters who swooned over speeches and hopey-changey empty promises", and you pop up!

Obama thanks you for your useful idiocy.

Despite your hissy fits and crying jags, we Americans will continue to exercise our Constitutional rights.

You lose again, Nancy.

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, but we were assured it NEVER happened!

Looks like your side lied, huh? Tell me, as a veteran -- how does it feel to defend the people who would spit on you?

Pathetic, coming from someone who - to this day - defends people who outed a covert CIA agent.

Hey, you shouldn't quote posts of mine that ask Bode uncomfortable questions. It's harder for her to pretend they don't exist.

And by the way, please show where I defended Richard Armitage, the guy who outed a desk analyst.

Are you now claiming that Plame was not a covert agent?

 

[Synthaholic]

But they don't have to right to meet with representatives of the nation we're at war with

They most certainly do.

No, they don't.

18 USC § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments | LII / Legal Information Institute

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

​

That pertains to private correspondence - Look! It's right there in the title! Kerry was very public.

And then there's the UCMJ:

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.​

But you'll continue to bitterly cling to your ignorance.

Since we didn't declare war on Vietnam, perhaps you can find an official proclamation from the U.S. government declaring Vietnam our enemy.

Perhaps not.