Come at me!

[101ABN]

commonsense said:

When were you in Vietnam? I remember that you were but I never knew exactly when.

1966-67

[stratagosv]

admin said:

stratagosv said:

Really? Wow, give me a link.


P.S. if the link is to a site entitled fuckjohnkerrythattraitorbastard.org.... that doesn't count!

I couldn't link to that website but here are some others.

www.stopjohn.com/

ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php

I hope you don't think you'll find anything of value on the DNC site.




Yeah, the pic is a photoshop job but it sure suits the bastard.

... Okay... look... you MUST have found a less bias site. Now, don't get me wrong, it's not like I'll consider any site to be bias if it has info that goes against kerry... but... look I wouldn't refer you to moveon.org for info on bush you know? stopjohn.org... seems to "maybe" "perhaps" have a tad bias in info they might have... so if you could show me a more... legit site that would be helpful. I'll search too, and I won't go to any site called johnkerryisastandupguy.org you know?

[leftisthater]

I take issue with one thing you mentioned:

I believe in conditional abortion - Abortion of convenience, emphatically - NO! Abortion due to;[sic] incest, rape, mother’s health, and other special circumstances - yes.

[ EMPHASIS ADDED ]

I want to know why a child has to die because of the sins of the father? Regardless of how that child was conceived, it is still a child and deserving of life. Granted, I would not want to keep a child of my wife getting raped in my house and raise it, but then again, maybe I would because it's still a child and deserving of a good home.

As for incest, again, that child doesn't deserve to die because of the disgusting perversion that brought about its conception.

I believe that God has a purpose for everything; even the most minute details. I know that God surely didn't intend on people to abort babies ("Before I formed you in the belly, I knew you. Before you came forth out of the womb, I sanctified you...").

As for the issue of the mother's health, I'm going to be under the assumption of the mother's mortality. More often than not, that is with the issue of the embryo attaching to the fallopian tube (spelling?). In this case, if the baby were to continue growing and thus rupture the tube, then both the mother and child are going to die. In this case, there is truly no other choice.

In the others, however, I cannot agree with you.

[101ABN]

... Okay... look... you MUST have found a less bias site. Now, don't get me wrong, it's not like I'll consider any site to be bias if it has info that goes against kerry... but... look I wouldn't refer you to moveon.org for info on bush you know? stopjohn.org... seems to "maybe" "perhaps" have a tad bias in info they might have... so if you could show me a more... legit site that would be helpful. I'll search too, and I won't go to any site called johnkerryisastandupguy.org you know?

Biased?

Of course theyre biased. We hate the sonofabitch. Learn to look beyond the bias and find the truth at the core, the reason for the anger.

StopJohn is an anti-Kerry site but the info is on the money which is why I gave it to you.

The Winter Soldier site is full of info and links.

Here's another link

www.nationalreview.com/owens/owens200401270825.asp

Do your own research but remember as you read about it, some of us around here lived it.

[Husky23]

leftisthater said:

I take issue with one thing you mentioned:

I believe in conditional abortion - Abortion of convenience, emphatically - NO! Abortion due to;[sic] incest, rape, mother’s health, and other special circumstances - yes.

[ EMPHASIS ADDED ]

I want to know why a child has to die because of the sins of the father? Regardless of how that child was conceived, it is still a child and deserving of life. Granted, I would not want to keep a child of my wife getting raped in my house and raise it, but then again, maybe I would because it's still a child and deserving of a good home.

As for incest, again, that child doesn't deserve to die because of the disgusting perversion that brought about its conception.

I believe that God has a purpose for everything; even the most minute details. I know that God surely didn't intend on people to abort babies ("Before I formed you in the belly, I knew you. Before you came forth out of the womb, I sanctified you...").

As for the issue of the mother's health, I'm going to be under the assumption of the mother's mortality. More often than not, that is with the issue of the embryo attaching to the fallopian tube (spelling?). In this case, if the baby were to continue growing and thus rupture the tube, then both the mother and child are going to die. In this case, there is truly no other choice.

In the others, however, I cannot agree with you.

Well, OK then....

Here’s a few more Leftis:

"The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin" (Deut. 24:16).

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him" (Ezek. 18:20).


Now, without us getting in and batting Biblical verses back and forth each subscribing to each’s position, of which you’d find that, besides me being rusty as hell in that area, I inherently believe as you do here. The Bible makes it clear that each person is responsible for and accountable to God for his own sin. No person is accountable for the sin of any other person. I agree; that it is an innocent child conceived in sin of the man and not the woman. The Bible speaks much of accountability – in the case of rape or unwanted incest (which I suppose can be grouped in as a rape); the woman is a victim, not accountable for the actions that took place. It may well be, that the woman will conclude the same; either keeping the child or placing up for adoption. But “I” cannot hold her accountable for an act the she neither wished nor desired. And cannot in the righteousness of my mind compel her to nurture this creation to full term, bear the birth, and accept the full weight and responsibility of raising a child that was conceived in this manner. Is it wrong to kill this innocent child? Of my morality; probably, yes. Is it wrong to hold the innocent female victim accountable? Again, I conclude, yes. To me is a true case of, allow the victims to decide within the context of their faith, beliefs and morality. That’s how I come to grips with this.

God will most certainly hold the man here accountable for his sin. God will hold the woman accountable for the decision she makes, whatever that decision; the accountability will be based on her hearts motivation and reasoning. The innocent growing unborn child is taken care of in either case.

[retire05]

OK, let's get some real facts about Kerry out there.

He tried to get a deferment from the draft, draft board said "no". He joined the Navy to emulate his hero JFK. He admits to Boston Globe reporter that he volunteered for swift boat duty because they were not involved in the war, but rather patrolled off shore. But by the time he arrived in VN, that changed.
He was part of the in group (Kennedys) and knew about the three and out rule. Hence, purple hearts for rice in the ass.
His VVATW buddies were NOT all vets. He aligned himself with Al Hubbard who totally lied about his war record (Hubbard was never in-country). He lied about his participation in the plot to kill congressmen then when he was found out he tried to do the old CYA two step.
He testified to Congress on hearsay. Information that would never have been allowed in any court in the U.S. He admitted it was hearsay. None of his testimony had ever been proven.
He threw away his metals, he didn't throw away his metals.
He went to Paris, not once, BUT TWICE, to parlay with the NVC. He did this without U.S. sanction, constituting a treasonous act. But the Dems were in power at the time and he was an insider (Kennedys again) so no one took him on.
His bunch of rag-tag (get out and get high) peace groups were funded by NVC and the Communist Party. The proof of that is there for anyone who is willing to look for it.
CODEPINK, UPJ, ANSWER, NION, all spinoffs of the old Communist Party of America, World Workers Party and other communist groups.
Kerry was/is a traitor. He should not be holding the office he holds. But unlike the Rosenbergs, he and Fonda were never held accountable for their actions.

The NVC admitted that they could not have won the war against the U.S. except for the "peace" protesters who changed America's opinion of the war.
Now, comes Cindy Sheehan. The darling of the media. The Ditch Witch of the left. Who is funding her? The same groups (perhaps with new names) who protested the VN war. SSDD.
But this time Americans are not going to be silent. This time the peace protesters will have opposition. It is about time. It is about time that we realize that Communism is not dead. It is alive and flourishing in the U.S. and the same usual suspects are trying to undermine our determination to win the war on terrorism.
Cindy Sheehan was a Bush supporter. Just ask the military moms and wifes who live in Vacaville.
But here are some questions I would ask of you:

Why are there no pictures of Vacaville on the news? Because there are yellow ribbons and American flags everywhere. MSM doesn't want you to see that.

Why is Cindy Sheehan now slamming the American Gold Star Mothers?

Why did Cindy Sheehan support the president and then change her mind? Could it have been because of her visit from John Kerry just months after her son died? What caused her to campaign for Kerry, a fact the MSM seems to ignore? Could it be that she wanted the attention that she was getting from the Kerry campaign when they started paying her (and her daughter's) travel expenses? Did she receive a salary for that? And why isn't Kerry there with her? Why has he distances himself from her?

Who is paying her bills now? Why is her own family, coming out against her? Where is her funding coming from other than Fenton Communications (George Soros), UPJ, CODEPINK and other communist fringe groups?

And who the hell is the gay Marine, who has made a porno flick, alongside her?

Perhaps, unlike we did with Kerry, we should question the motives of Cindy Sheehan. The MSM will not do it. Maybe the American people should. We owe it to our military.

[101ABN]

" It is about time that we realize that Communism is not dead. It is alive and flourishing in the U.S. and the same usual suspects are trying to undermine our determination to win the war on terrorism."

You damnbetcha, Retire!

The only difference is the Soviet Union is out of the picture. Cuba, China, and the DPRK are still very much in it and are abetted by CODEPINK, UPJ, ANSWER, NION and others.

[jaber1]

So, I guess you do not support this perspective, 101 ...

[FightingFalcon]

Husky I agree with everything except these two:

"I believe in capital punishment - you take a life, you forfeit your own.

I believe in Euthanasia under special circumstances."

I do not support the Death Penalty.

I also do not support Euthanasia under any circumstances. However, I would not make it illegal. But my personal morality is opposed to it.

Other than that I agree with you pretty much 100%. Nice post.

"I believe kids should get out more and climb trees."

Bah forget climbing trees - I just spent a month climbing all sorts of things

[retire05]

You damnbetcha, Retire!

The only difference is the Soviet Union is out of the picture. Cuba, China, and the DPRK are still very much in it and are abetted by CODEPINK, UPJ, ANSWER, NION and others.

101, I have been called radical, paranoid, living in the past, brainwashed and any other thing someone can call me for my views on Communism. I have read J. Edgar Hoover's book on the communists in America and I don't see a lot has changed. Just the names of the people who still want communism/socialism or any other ism that is against our way of life.
Some of the responses on THC are pure communism.
Now, we have two enemies to face. Those who will kill us because we are non-belivers (infidels) and those who would destroy our government because they do not agree with it and want some form of ism. I don't see a hellofa lot of difference between the two.

I have always wondered, if the MSM is so pro-America, why they do not report on these groups. Instead, they have demonized Hoover and McCarthy. Two men who really understood the threats to America and the goals of these people. Tenacity is their strong point. They are willing to lurk in the shawdows, plant their seeds of dissent and wait for someone like Cindy Sheehan to come along. And we let them.
There is a new book out "The Politics of Peace". You should order it (it is only 20 bucks with shipping) and read it. It is an investigative report on the infiltration of the communists into the "peace" groups.
But there are some of us who understand the threat. We understand that the one threat to these ism groups is capitalism. We understand that a free Iraq, smack dab in the middle of the Middle East is a threat to the totalitarianism of Syria and Iran. We understand that a prosperous nation (Iraq) is a threat to what they want. We understand that as Iraq becomes a world player, with a prosperous people, that the regimes of Iraq and Syria are in jeopardy. Human nature will always prevail. When the rest of the Middle East sees Iraq flourish and their citizens prospering, the people of those rogue nations will want the same thing.
I recently read an article about Winston Churchill. He warned of the evils of allowing Hitler to gain power. He warned that Hitler was a threat to all of Europe. NO ONE LISTENED TO HIM. They thought him to be a fool. Appease Hitler the European powers said. He will never leave Germany, the European powers said. Churchill proved them wrong and millions died.
Perhaps, one day when history judges him, Bush will be looked upon as one of the great leaders of our times. One who understood the threat to the free world and tried to do something about it. One who was not willing to lay down, to appease, to condescend only to lose millions of lives to another dictator.

Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?

A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely cecure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney Gerneral Ramsey Clar and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.

Bui Tin, former colonel in the NVC army.

[101ABN]

jaber1 said:

So, I guess you do not support this perspective, 101 ...

I guess you'd be correct.