[Rhodes22-list] Ben C continues to disappoint

Benjamin Cittadino bigben65 at earthlink.net
Thu Oct 2 20:03:24 EDT 2008 

Dear Brad, Pete, Ed:

Did you hear something?   

I thought I might have heard something?


No, it was nothing........just the wind.


Best wishes to you;


Ben C.




hparsons wrote:
> 
> Oh my, a personal attack. Elle, you gonna blow your whistle.
> 
> But Ben, one really has to wonder, why DO you want him to do that? 
> Sounds a little ... strange.
> 
> The accusation made by 60 minutes WASN'T that Bush didn't finish his 
> service, did you see the segment? Go back and look again, and see if 
> that was what they claimed.
> 
> 
> Benjamin Cittadino wrote:
>> Ed and Brad;
>>
>>
>> You guys are way off base on this.  
>>
>> First, the "underlying facts" to which I referred are those which
>> demonstrate quite clearly that W never completed his required active
>> service
>> in the Texas Air Guard.  
>>
>> Second, how you spin that into some rediculous theory that I somehow
>> don't
>> respect the bravery and skill it takes to be a fighter pilot is beyond
>> me.
>>
>> Third, I served as a line officer (not JAG) at sea in the US Navy,
>> although
>> why you asked that question I have no idea.
>>
>> Oh, and by the way, my oldest son is currently a navy  F/A 18 pilot
>> headed
>> to the war zone as we speak. So Ed, KISS MY ROSIE RED............
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ben C.
>>
>>
>>
>> Brad Haslett-2 wrote:
>>   
>>> Ed,
>>>
>>> You nailed it!  The odds were greater of surviving Vietnam on the
>>> ground than the F-102 in the air Stateside.  Gore risked his life
>>> behind a typewriter in Saigon for five months, and Kerry survived 120
>>> days total in country, 90 days in harm's way. Some of Kerry's fellow
>>> combatants thought he was a reckless glory seeker with ulterior
>>> motives.  Over the years, I've had 6 former Vietnam POWs as coworkers.
>>>  I only flew with two but we didn't talk war or politics.  I have
>>> flown with some older Navy fliers who were very critical of McCain.
>>> As the story goes, the initial target was heavily defended (he was a
>>> bomber pilot, not a fighter pilot) and made a poor choice to hit a
>>> second one that was even more heavily defended. Wherever the truth
>>> lies, he certainly paid a price. The other part of that tale (never
>>> verified) was that the POWs were pissed that he didn't take the early
>>> release offered so he could get the story out about how they were
>>> being mis-treated. Jane Fonda certainly didn't get the job done.
>>>
>>> Did Bush skip his obligations to the Alabama Guard?  Maybe.  The war
>>> was over and there was a lot of looseness and forgiveness at the time.
>>>  Did we ever get to see Kerry's Navy records?  Nope, didn't think so.
>>>
>>> Double standard.
>>>
>>> Brad
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
>>>     
>>>> Benjamin Cittadino said, "Dan Rather lies?  What lies?  He was
>>>> criticized
>>>> for
>>>> poor documentation of the Bush National Guard story, but nobody ever
>>>> showed
>>>> that the underlying facts about Bush were wrong."
>>>>
>>>> I am disappointed that you as a lawyer demanding falsehoods and
>>>> wrongful
>>>> innuendo to be disproven.
>>>>
>>>> Like Bush I served in the Air Force.  I served on the same status as
>>>> pilots.
>>>> I associated with many National Guard, Reserve [like me] and Regular
>>>> Air
>>>> Force pilots.  Most of the pilots that I associated with flew the F-105
>>>> a
>>>> newer cousin of the F-102 that Bush Flew.
>>>>
>>>> Both of these airplanes were referred to as cockpits on a smokestack. 
>>>> Both
>>>> airplanes had high failure rates.  I respected any pilot who flew them. 
>>>> You
>>>> should too.   It was more dangerous to fly the 102.  That is why they
>>>> were
>>>> assigned to two guard wings.  They had good A & P's trying to keep them
>>>> flying.
>>>>
>>>> The end of their service happened near the end of Bush's service.  He
>>>> volunteered to train on a new plane.  Because the Air Force had trouble
>>>> keeping pilots who flew the 102 he was deemed critical to that
>>>> aircraft.
>>>> Shortly after he left active duty the wings were combined to one and as
>>>> soon
>>>> as Viet Nam started phasing down that last wing was grounded.
>>>>
>>>> All the garbage said about his service is garbage.  Yes he drank.  All
>>>> the
>>>> pilots of those aircraft, both 102's and 105's drank after they landed. 
>>>> Do
>>>> some research and see how many of those aircraft failed in flight. 
>>>> Then
>>>> see
>>>> how many pilots did not get out of the planes.  The pilots needed to
>>>> drink
>>>> to calm down and get sleep.
>>>>
>>>> Bye the way, what branch of the U. S. Military did you serve in?
>>>>
>>>> Ed K
>>>> Greenville, SC, USA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tootle wrote:
>>>>       
>>>>> Ben C is again citing the New York Times as authority.  And it is its
>>>>> biased editorial staff no less.  I am sorry to disagree with Ben
>>>>> because
>>>>> I
>>>>> advocate ethical conduct of politicians.  However, I have to believe
>>>>> that
>>>>> citing the New York Times as a good source of information is egregious
>>>>> hypocrisy.  The New York Times supported the Dan Rather lies. It is
>>>>> not
>>>>> an
>>>>> honest information souce.
>>>>>
>>>>> An Attorney General or assistant attorney general is a political
>>>>> position.
>>>>> An attorney general has a right to dismiss assistant attorney generals
>>>>> for
>>>>> any reason.  Ben fails to cite the enabling legislation saying that a
>>>>> politically appointed assistant attorney general can only be fired for
>>>>> cause.  Ben has  access to the laws, he needs to post the law that
>>>>> says
>>>>> assistant attorneys general can only be fired for specific causes? 
>>>>> Ben
>>>>> is
>>>>> confusing career civil service with politically appointed jobs.  And,
>>>>> it
>>>>> is obvious this is intentional deception.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Attorney General does not have to personally fire the assistants. 
>>>>> He
>>>>> can use an intermediate assistant to do so. Again, show us the
>>>>> specific
>>>>> law that says he cannot delegate an assistant to fire a subordinate
>>>>> assistant.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about wrong doing by Obama, or his shady acceptance of
>>>>> contributions?
>>>>> Just look at the sources of his internet contributions.  Has he denied
>>>>> or
>>>>> vigorously stopped them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, there is a ethical problem of supporting intentional deception.
>>>>> This is not mere puffing and discusssion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed K
>>>>> Greenville, SC, USA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> View this message in context:
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Ben-C-at-it-again...-tp19777306p19784592.html
>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>
>>   
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Ben-C-at-it-again...-tp19777306p19789958.html
Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list