[Rhodes22-list] Effros is Misleading

[Steve]

Bill
Just noted you mention Killian secretary.  Why on
earth would you stoop to that level.  Dan Rather is
using her to prop up his liberal story of forge
documents.  Now you know that secretary do nothing but
talk on the phone & gossip.  Do you really think that
she is the one that kept all the Officer in line line
reported by CBS & Dan Rather.  

Come on now, Where do you mention that Killian family
do NOT support anything that was reported by CBS. 
Surely, your whole point is not based on some
secretary.  That very low to take her side over the
Family of the dead man being quoted.  Think about
this, when Kerry campain leak this to CBS, thier using
a DEAD man to support thier forge documents. 
Seriously, why go there!!!!!!
Steve

   
--- Bill Effros <bill at effros.com> wrote:

> Ed,
> 
> Please stop calling me names.  I don't call you
> names.
> 
> My political views don't fit neatly into any box. 
> Neither do Stan's, nor Brad's, nor yours, nor
> anybody else's for that matter.
> 
> Did you read the New York Times piece I cited this
> morning?  I think they got their facts right.  If
> you can show that their facts are wrong, I'd love to
> see the evidence.  The New York Times used documents
> released by the White House, by the military, and
> interviews.  I had seen most of the material
> previously, and drew the same conclusions from it.
> 
> I never said "W. is a deserter" and I won't be put
> into the position of trying to defend statements
> made by people I don't know, saying things I don't
> believe.
> 
> Here's what I said: "The point of the National Guard
> issue is not Vietnam, any more than the Clinton
> Impeachment was about sex.  Both hinge on the
> question of Presidential misleading."
> 
> In your reply, you said you agree with me.  You said
> "Clinton committed perjury in a civil lawsuit;" and
> "The National Guard issue is based on forged
> documents."  I will say it again: "Both hinge on the
> question of Presidential misleading."
> 
> What pains me about this discussion is that we can't
> agree on the facts.  I think you've got your facts
> wrong, both with regard to Clinton, and with regard
> to Bush.  I am unwilling to go through the Clinton
> exercise again, we did that 4 years ago.
> 
> So let's stick to Bush, and lets stick to the
> issues.  I am not interested in how you characterize
> documents--what I want to know is whether the facts
> portrayed in those documents accurately state the
> views of the people quoted, or not.
> 
> Apparently they do.   Killian's secretary said she
> did not type them, but she also said they accurately
> portrayed his views, and the views of others at that
> time.  If you have facts to the contrary, I would be
> anxious to see them.
> 
> In any event, it is quite clear that W. has misled
> the country on this issue.  If you can show me any
> evidence that he showed up in Alabama, I'd love to
> see it.  So far he has not been able to provide it,
> and everyone who was there is on record saying he
> was never there.  Notwithstanding those facts, the
> administration continues to try to leave the
> impression that he did report for duty.  I call that
> misleading.
> 
> He got an honorable discharge, but he clearly pulled
> strings to get it--and according to military
> records, he failed to fulfill the military
> requirements.  For him to now say that because he
> got the honorable discharge he must have fulfilled
> the requirements is misleading. 
> 
> With regard to all of the other issues I raised, I
> would be happy to go over them with you, point by
> point, if you like.  In each and every case I know
> he said one thing and did another.  These are
> demonstrable facts, and even his putative allies are
> starting to call him on these matters.
> 
> "We made serious mistakes," said Republican Senator
> John McCain yesterday.
> 
> "The fact is, we're in deep trouble in Iraq ... and
> I think we're going to have to look at some
> recalibration of policy," said Republican Senator
> Chuck Hagel yesterday.
> 
> "This is the incompetence in the administration,"
> said Republican Senator Richard Lugar yesterday.
> 
> You don't call them names.  Why me?
> 
> If you have the facts to refute the Senators, I'd
> love to see them.
> 
> Bill Effros
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: ed kroposki 
> To: 'The Rhodes 22 mail list' 
> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 12:06 PM
> Subject: [Rhodes22-list] Effros is Misleading
> 
> 
> 
> Reply is after quote:
> 
> "Brad,
> The point of the National Guard issue is not
> Vietnam, any more than the
> Clinton Impeachment was about sex.  Both hinge on
> the question of
> Presidential misleading." 
> 
> Wrong conclusion - and misleading too boot:  Clinton
> committed perjury in a
> civil lawsuit.  He was disbarred in Arkansas for
> committing a felony, that
> is, the crime of Perjury which is false statements
> under oath.
> 
> The National Guard issue is based on forged
> documents.  Bush completed
> enough flying hours to meet his National Guard
> requirement.  Your assumption
> expected him to compete with those other pilots who
> still needed time flying
> F 102's for the limited number of hours available to
> stay current.  You are
> not going to find it in writing anywhere, but the
> truth was that since he
> was not going make a career in the Guard, those
> other pilots who needed the
> flying time came first.  At that time there was a
> dwindling number of hours
> available in the F 102 because the number that they
> could keep in flying
> condition was getting smaller fast.  There were only
> two (2) squadrons still
> flying the F 102, and they were phasing them out. 
> If you notice, but I am
> sure you did not, there were not any F 102's in the
> regular Air Force. 
> As to the physical question, if there was a national
> emergency and
> they needed him as a pilot, they could have given
> him a physical in a couple
> of hours.  What is not said, is that in an
> emergency, the Wing Commander
> could have waived the immediate physical requirement
> and said that take
> physical when you get back on ground.
> You and other liberals are trying to read into the
> National Guard
> and military in general things and ways of doing
> daily business that they
> did not take so serious when they occurred.  When he
> completed his required
> hours for flying, which he did, at that point he was
> surplus.  He was not
> really needed, just marking time, a very common
> military tradition, which
> you do not comprehend.  
> 
> "George W. Bush ran for President on this issue,
> saying repeatedly that he
> would not mislead the American people.  The extent
> to which he has misled
> the American people about his National Guard record
> is emblematic of the way
> he has misled the American People about virtually
> everything else."  -- a
> very untrue and inaccurate statement.  
> 
> "And it doesn't matter on which side of the
> political fence you place
> yourself."  Except to watch you distort the truth! 
> 
> "Did W. report for duty in Alabama as ordered?  No,
> he did not." --You were
> not there and can not be the authority for the
> truth.  When someone arrived
> on a base, you told some sergeant that you were
> there and told him where you
> could be reached.  It was put on a note pad for
> office use, and not keep as
> a military record.  I cannot see a duty sergeant or
> officer remembering who
> came and went after a short period of time.  While
> he was assigned TDY, they
> knew how to get him.  Once he was gone, that record
> would not have been
> kept, especially for your benefit.
> 
> "But the issue is not military records.  It is
> misleading."  Yes it is
> misleading and You are the one misleading and
> distorting history!
> 
> It is sad that you, Dan Rather, Bill Moyers and
> others let your dislike for
> Bush let you lie and distort history.
> 
> I was never a fan of George Bush, but your lies and
> distortions make me
> defend that part of the past.  I was a military
> officer during that time.  I
> base my comments on observations of how it was. 
> Were you in the military
> doing a similar job during that time?  
> 
> Ed K
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> www.rhodes22.org/list
> 



		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com