They’re just whetstones.
For quiet days.
Beavis (Samb/Scylla): Hehehe…I like tried that once. Ehehehe…yeah, I got like, some shoe polish, and some dog crap…but like, it didn’t work. It was pretty cool, though. Ehehehehe…
Now, let’s be fair, pals and gals. All Sam ever said he wanted was a fair hearing, just a smattering of media attention, which is still woefully lacking, there being no plans for a 24-hour telethon on all the cable networks.
Now that you mention it, I’m starting to wonder how the stuff wouldn’t A) disintegrate, B) become infected or C) something else … it just doesn’t sound plausible that organic material such as rice would stay put in one’s body for so many years without something happening to it.
RedFury, I agree with you, but both Sam and Scylla showed before that they are good and capable posters here in the SBMB in other matters than right wing bullshitting. One can miss a good contribution from a member here if one just dismisses posters with a different point of view. Even if you don’t agree with them, one can miss a great lesson from them. That is the main reason why I never subscribe to the idea of ignoring anyone here.
Of course, seeing the context (and that this is the pit), one should not pull punches: This whole deal makes the defenders of the indefensible look discredited in all subsequent discussions.
When I learned (mostly on my own) that the maker of the swifter’s book “Unfit for command” was made by a freeper, and then seeing Scyilla bringing the freeper website and pretend it was a good cite, I did not see evidence, I only saw the biggest mendacity and circular logic (and circular citing) ever seen here in the SDMB. The problem here is that some dopers also put forward the might of their “independent research” as the one that gave them the “insight” to defend the bullswifters. Being shown that the “research” was not even good for getting a “D” in a college research paper, does diminish the debater’s credibility in all subsequent discussions.
That is a lesson that even if they do not learn, other readers here will, The swifter defenders may not care that some leftists, that had a little respect from them, have lost it totally. But they (maybe) will care that even moderate conservatives look at them and wonder were the reasonable part of them has gone.
I forgot what episode was that one from, do you remember what adventure was that Guinastasia?
Uh guys, Kerry got the shrapnel wound in his thigh from his SECOND Purple heart injury - an injury no one disputes:
The wound in his butt at Bay Hap is described by JOHN KERRY in his memoirs as being rice shrapnel from a grenade that he detonated in a rice pile and then failed to clear. James Rassmann was with him, and Kerry’s biography describes the two of them as running like hell laughing their heads off.
There is no - repeat no disputing that Kerry got rice shrapnel in the ass that day. The question I suppose is whether he was wounded with other shrapnel in the same spot several hours later.
And in the other thread, I linked to an article in the Chicago Sun Times citing new evidence that Kerry did in fact write the glowing report of his actions that got him the bronze star. So the ‘official Navy record’ that everyone says closes the story is based on John Kerry’s own report.
What I saw in that article:
If…If… then… If… then. Many ducks in a row are needed to make the article true, so I have to say it is a lie on your part to say that Kerry “did in fact write the report”
Since the article was based in part, once again, on the already proven unrelaible memory of the swifters, I go for the Navy’s record. and the Navy recently checked the record again, and dismissed the swifter allegations.
Stop digging Sam.
But IIRC the bullshitting point of the swifters was to say that Kerry got trough the day with only a rice wound and that virtually no action happened later.
I do remember that the freaking swifter point was that Kerry sufered no substancial injury, ergo no medal was deserved.
I made the point then that you were keeping an idiotic position becouse if Kerry was wounded earlier (even slightly), why then did he got up to see action that would had been more dangerous if he was ALREADY wounded? IIRC you replied to me dismissing my point, but now that evidence of the wound has appeared I have to say: it was idiotic for the swifters to lie about that, and you are trully an idiot, at least in this context…
Hey, you spend four years trying to endorse George W. Bush as your political and ideological leader and see what kind of permanent brain-damaging effects that causes… 
As for overly-tenacious Bush-apologizing Swift-Bullshitter-lovin’ Dopers, you can add Razorsharp to the list, as evidenced by this thread.
Hey, dumbass. The article specifically refers to the Swiftie lie about rice in the ass and offers the confirmation that he has metal shrapnel in his ass. You have been served. bitch. Suck it up.
Your other atricle didn’t confirm jack shit about what John Kerry wrote, it just regurgitated Swiftie lying horseshit and it ignores the fact that there were multiple other reports of the incident that can definitely be proven NOT to have come from John Kerry.
I’m frankly fucking sick of listnening to a fucking foreigner- a goddamn CIVILIAN at that- denigrate an American war hero. Go Cheney yourself, asshole.
At this point, anyone who believe the Swifties or defends them is hopeless. Look, I don’t care if Kerry’s injury was metal shrapnel, mutant rice, OR a polished turd. An injury is an injury. Period. So he got hit in the ass. He could have just as easily been hit in the throat, the eye, or who knows where. If the blast had been bigger or if he had been closer, he might have been hamburger. All these efforts by a bunch of proven liars to discredit him are despicable. He could have stayed home, started a collection of deferments (other priorities), or joined (and then deserted) a “champagne unit” instead. But then, I guess it’s OK for our draft dodging leaders to attack the people who did do what was expected. They did it to Max Cleland and John McCain, now it’s Kerry’s turn. If it was Ike or Audie Murphy they’d be doing it to them too. How can anyone believe anything from a group that has already been caught in so many lies?
Do we really need to bring xenophobia into this? :rolleyes: I don’t see how ones country of origin has anything to do with ones ability to evaluate claims of heroism. A stupid partisan douche is a stupid partisan douche, regardless of nationality.
Way to demonstrate Brutus’ point. Frankly, DtC, I’m disappointed.
I should have figured as much. When fourteen leftists try to pile into a phone booth and outscream each other, it’s pretty hard to hear any useful syllables. I also noticed that in every case, you yourself did not make any accusation, but rather cited accusations made by other reports. I’m pulling for Kerry this time around, but that’s no reason to make up things and attribute them to you. Hang in there, Sam.
Unfortunately, no. I know it was when they were watching a video, but I don’t even remember what video it was.
Either way, they’ve got that turd so rubbed it’s imbedded in the carpet and ain’t comin’ out.
To Diogenes the Cynic:
Dammit, Dio.
We cannot fight scumbaggery with more scumbaggery. You’re most assuredly NOT a scumbag. Please buck up, admit the shrapnel’s from the 2nd purple heart wound, and move on to more serious subjects. (As far as I know, the Swift Boat Liars for Bush aren’t running for office.)
To Sam Stone:
Examining lies in order to expose the truth is one thing. Defending and promoting lies is no different than creating them. So I must disagree with Libertarian; don’t “hang in there, Sam.”
Our president doesn’t seem to understand how his favorite philosopher feels about false witness, so screw him. I pray the we vote the bastard out of office next month. Unfortunately, we can’t vote dissemblers off of the SDMB. All we can do is point and laugh.
::Pointing and laughing at Sam Stone…::
Two things: (1) assuming that it is now known to be false, given the extremely generous assertion that we should trust the NY Times, Sam could not have known this before; and (2) there still seems to be some controversy, according to Sam, over which medal this new report covers.
There is no real controversy. This whole thing revolves around yet another acusation from a group of liars (Swifties). At this pont, anyone who dredges up anything those people say, and circulates as “fact” it is just as guilty (or blind) as they are.
So, if the SBVT says that pi is a transcendental number, we should consider it as evidence against the fact?
Lib:
First, sorry about that “-ertarian” instead of “-eral”; old habits die hard. It was an unconscious mistake, I assure you.
Second, it’s not this particular purple heart/rice shrapnel subdiscussion that I’m referring to as “defending and promoting” the SBVFT lies. Sam continues to cheerlead for this group, about whose proven improbity he has no excuses for ignorance.