him credit for having the courage of his convictions?
Dana
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:11:59 -0500, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think only the far right nuts have called Kerry un-American, and i
> completely disagree with anyone who says he is. I'd also never argue against
> his right to free speech, especially as a veteran of the war, he has every
> right to comment on it on his return home.
>
> That being said, he absolutely HAS to know, that by speaking out, he's
> taking a huge risk....namely the kind of backlash that he's seeing today.
>
> So i'm simply saying that freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence,
> and you shouldn't be surprised that some people were, and still are,
> genuinely upset by his comments. They have the right to speak of their
> feelings too.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gruss Gott
> To: CF-Community
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 4:30 PM
> Subject: Re: From the right
>
> > Dana wrote:
> > Personally I find it offensive that the man's exercise of his free
> > speech perogatives is being portrayed as unamerican.
>
> I agree with Dana and think there are 4 points worth bringing up:
>
> 1.) Questioning medals the Navy sanctions as legitimate puts into
> question all Navy medals. What message does this send to veterans?
> How do I know all Navy medals aren't forged, faked, or fraud?
>
> 2.) Mr. Kerry spoke out to end a war that just about every American
> agrees was foolish and unwinnable. Mr. Kerry got what he asked for,
> the end to the Vietnam war. Is the argument that we should restart
> it? If not, then how is he "anti-American"
>
> 3.) While there are many swift boat vets willing to denigrate Mr.
> Kerry's service, all of the troops that served directly under Mr.
> Kerry are supporting him. (ok I think 1 wasn't, by the vast majority
> are.) The best measure of military officer is the opinion of those
> that served under him.
>
> 4.) Mr. Kerry served in combat - whether you think he was a coward or
> not, he still was there getting shot at. Mr Bush was not. This is
> important because there is a legitimate question whether Mr. Bush
> should've sent US troops into combat. Someone who's been in combat is
> likely to be more cautious than someone who wasn't. Based on the data
> it looks like Mr. Bush should've been more cautious and continues to
> mismanage US forces. (Senators from his own party have called his
> handling of Iraq "incompetent")________________________________
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
