Originally Posted by Blueflame
The proof is out there, Mosca.
2) The debate is not "he said" vs. "he said"... it's the swiftliars' unsubstantiated claims vs. established military records. Has one swiftvet produced an iota of evidence beyond their affidavits regarding events that occurred 30+ years ago?
Why do the established military records require more proof than unsubstantiated... contradictory... and in some cases, thoroughly discredited... allegations?
ok, i've went and read up a little on the issue, particularly concerning kerry recieving his 3rd purple heart. and i agree with you that the military records should not require more proof than simple allegations made by the swiftvets. i'm skeptical of their account of the bay hap river incident, particularly about them not coming under enemy fire, but hey, if they want to say that what really happened was different than the military records of the event, then that's their right. let the public believe what they may.
this leads me back to what i was originally addressing, your statement that "I think ads should automatically be pulled from the public airwaves the moment proof is presented that the ad contains a lie..." granted, the military records contradict what the swiftvets say in this case, but i don't think this constitutes 'proof' that they are lying.