Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daswig
Well, given that there were numerous people who were there that said it was indeed used, and NOBODY says it wasn't, I don't think there's much doubt about it.
Tell you what. Would you feel comfortable going to an arbitrator and representing that such a thing didn't happen, when confronted by the witnesses that said it DID happen, and that they were there, and had the documentation to back up their presence there?
Eyewitness testimony is indeed admissable in a court of law, and that's what "Stolen Honor" documented...
|
actually, Dawsig, vets did appear on O'Reilly's show and state that kerry's statements were definately not used against them. All the vets on the show were a bit emotional and the ones countering the vets for truth were reluctant to speak bad about their fellow vets-so they decried the fact that partisan politics had vets speaking against vets, drudging this pain all up again, and then they wouldn't speculate as to whether or why the vets for truth were only speaking up now or whether they had actually been tortured with kerry's statements.
your statement, based on an incomplete knowledge of the evidence, is demonstratably false. However, in contrast to an earlier discussion, I don't think it invalidates your entire point.
