While Geo Allen was praying to the confedacy , hating blacks and draft dodging

[Amianthus]

So please quite using your bullshit line that I am arguing for the incident happening based on the absence of police reporting that it did.  That's just not true and you know it.

Actually, it is. There is no corroborating evidence that the event happened, yet you present the event as having been proven to have happened.

If it happened, why don't we have any evidence other than the word of a couple of people? You'd think that the family it happened to would have come forward by now as well. No police reports, no news reports, nothing. The people who claim it happened can't even pin down a date outside of a two year range. Any attorney worth his salt would have no problem dismissing their testimony for lack of credibility, yet you take it on faith. But with Byrd, there are physical letters written years after he claimed to have left the KKK, which you dismiss out of hand.

[Michael Tee]

<<There is no corroborating evidence that the event happened, yet you present the event as having been proven to have happened.>>

What the hell is the matter with you?  One guy was there and he saw it happen.  He's corroborated by the guy who heard pretty much the same story from the other member of the party.  They're further corroborated by other evidence of Allen's racist attitudes (the noose, the Confederate flags, the frequent use of the N-word.)

How much fucking corroboration do you need?  People have been hanged on less.

<<If it happened, why don't we have any evidence other than the word of a couple of people? You'd think that the family it happened to would have come forward by now as well. No police reports, no news reports, nothing.>>

The family?  Who the fuck knows that the family even knew about it?  You think the guy who finds the deer head in the mailbox is gonna run back into the house, waving the thing triumphantly round over his head, wake up the wife and kids, "Hey look what I found in the mailbox kids!!!  Santa came early this year!!!  Whoooeee!!!  Deer's head!"  Why don't you just for ONCE try to figure out how real people act in real life instead of your bullshit fantasies, "Hmm.  Deer head in mailbox.  Very serious thing.  Must take this down to police chief Bubba.  Bubba will be very concerned.  Why, this might be a hate crime.  Bubba would really want to punish these guys."  Jesus Fuck for once in your life, GET REAL.  Try it.  One time.

<<The people who claim it happened can't even pin down a date outside of a two year range.>>

One guy's dead, and I don't think Macacawitz entered this in his journal.  They were all drunk at the time.  It's not the sort of thing anyone would particularly want to remember, like your first kiss or the day you proposed to your wife.  So if you want to attach any significance to a lack of precise date - - November 22, 1963! - - that's OK with me.  It's actually very much in keeping with the rest of your deductive powers.

<<Any attorney worth his salt would have no problem dismissing their testimony for lack of credibility>>

If he were lucky enough to find one guy on the jury as dumb as you, maybe.  Or, more in line with the real world, where people normally aren't that dumb,  if he could get just one fucking racist on his jury.  And we all know that acquittal by jury means it didn't happen, right?  Just like poor persecuted OJ couldn't have killed Nicole and whatisname.

BTW, you can leave Byrd out of this.  I don't have to defend him, he IS a fucking racist and the apology was bullshit.  But it's got nothing to do with Macacawitz and the Republicans.  Byrd is a last remnant of the racist Southern Democrats.  The rest of them are Republicans.  Most of them, anyway.  There's never 100% migration of anything. 

[Plane]

On 10 July 1969, while participating in a company-sized search and destroy operation deep in hostile territory, First Lieutenant Webb's platoon discovered a well-camouflaged bunker complex which appeared to be unoccupied. Deploying his men into defensive positions, First Lieutenant Webb was advancing to the first bunker when three enemy soldiers armed with hand grenades jumped out.

Reacting instantly, he grabbed the closest man and, brandishing his .45 caliber pistol at the others, apprehended all three of the soldiers.

Cool!

Is he likely to run for president later?

[Amianthus]

You think the guy who finds the deer head in the mailbox is gonna run back into the house, waving the thing triumphantly round over his head, wake up the wife and kids, "Hey look what I found in the mailbox kids!!!  Santa came early this year!!!  Whoooeee!!!  Deer's head!"

Well, if a deer's head was stuffed into my mailbox, I'm pretty sure I'd remember it for years. Talk about it, even.

Funny that never happened. Coincidence, maybe?

[Plane]

You think the guy who finds the deer head in the mailbox is gonna run back into the house, waving the thing triumphantly round over his head, wake up the wife and kids, "Hey look what I found in the mailbox kids!!!  Santa came early this year!!!  Whoooeee!!!  Deer's head!"

Well, if a deer's head was stuffed into my mailbox, I'm pretty sure I'd remember it for years. Talk about it, even.

Funny that never happened. Coincidence, maybe?

In the Old Testiment there are some very seriouls punishments for some infractions , but also there is a rule for trials such that no one may be convicted on the evidence of one witnesses testimony.

[Mucho]

Anyone would prefer brave men such as Kerry & Webb over cowards like Bush & Allen.

Apparently Mikey doesn't hold Webb in high regard. Perhaps he values human life over deer.

Basically a guy like Webb is what they deserve.  He won't have any more regard for them than for the Vietnamese resistance fighters that he tortured and killed.  He'll fuck them up the ass first and every chance that he gets and line his pockets while they go from bad to worse, till he gets caught, retires or dies. 

I do not have to like every Dem I vote for. I hold my nose to vote frequently. Right now we have many different choices among Dems. In this case, it is evil & cbravery vs the unmitigated evil and cowardice of the Bush administration.

[Michael Tee]

<<Well, if a deer's head was stuffed into my mailbox, I'm pretty sure I'd remember it for years. Talk about it, even.

<<Funny that never happened. Coincidence, maybe?>>

No it's proof positive that the incident never happened.  Every black man who ever had a deer head stuffed in his mailbox about it would not only blab to all his friends about it but make sure that the friends he told about it would make sure it got into the media either at the time or twenty years later when it became a public issue.  How do we know this?  Easy. It's because Ami says that's what he'd do, and we can't conceive of any individual on earth, let alone some terrorized black guy from Virginia, who wouldn't act EXACTLY the way Ami thinks he himself would act in the circumstances.  Ami, you see, is the model for all of humanity.  As Ami goes, so goes the entire human race.

Ami, did it ever occur to you that the guy after 20 years might be dead?  That he might not have mentioned it to anyone?  That whoever he mentioned it to is dead or in a nursing home?

What about the guy who was there?  How do you explain his story?  Say he's opposed to Macacawitz politically.  Does that make him a liar?  Does the guy who heard the story from the dead hunter also become a liar to save the first guy?  Why?  Have either of them ever concocted falsehoods before to disgrace someone they disagreed with politically?  What are the odds that these two guys just happen to be "bad apples" - - evil liars who for some reason unknown only to themselves spontaneously decided to ruin the career of a great American (who keeps nooses and Confederate flags in his office and liberally uses the N-word,) the potential saviour of his country?  Why? 

There is your evidence and corroboration of these two guys.  WHY are they lying?  When did they ever lie before?  Why wouldn't the second guy remember the racial element of the story if what he was confirming was all a concocted lie anyway?

I used to have more respect for your opinions.  Lately you've just been all fulla shit.  You don't think.  You don't use your head.  You adopt ridiculous unsustainable positions and you defend them past all reason (yet you have the fucking balls to accuse me, in another context, of tenacity.)  Not only that, but as if to cover up the weakness of your own position, you consistently try to misrepresent mine.  This fucking bullshit that I prove the case against Allen by the absence of evidence - - you KNOW that isn't true, but it doesn't stop you.  There's more than enough evidence and you even take the trouble to try to debunk it, but you have no hesitation in claiming I rest my case solely on an absence of evidence.  Fuck, man, pull up your fucking socks.

[Michael Tee]

<<In the Old Testiment there are some very seriouls punishments for some infractions , but also there is a rule for trials such that no one may be convicted on the evidence of one witnesses testimony.>>

A good rule to follow when the consequences of an adverse judgment are death.

In this case, unfortunately, nobody is going to execute Sen. Macacowitz for being an ass-hole.  So we conclude on evidence that may fall short of two eye-witnesses. 

You might be interested to know that laws of criminal justice have evolved somewhat since the days of the Old Testament, as have many other areas of human knowledge and endeavour.  For instance, the role of circumstantial evidence has been more appreciated over the years.

[Amianthus]

No it's proof positive that the incident never happened.

No, it's "proof positive" that there is no corroborating evidence.

If you have nothing other than the accusation of a couple people - who claimed that they were even drunk at the time - then just say so.

Of course, from now on, I assume you will take the word of anyone who makes accusations, even if they have no corroborating evidence, right? From any side?

I like how we're all supposed to take your viewpoints for granted, yet everyone else has to back up their statements.

What about the guy who was there?  How do you explain his story?  Say he's opposed to Macacawitz politically.  Does that make him a liar?  Does the guy who heard the story from the dead hunter also become a liar to save the first guy?  Why?  Have either of them ever concocted falsehoods before to disgrace someone they disagreed with politically?  What are the odds that these two guys just happen to be "bad apples" - - evil liars who for some reason unknown only to themselves spontaneously decided to ruin the career of a great American (who keeps nooses and Confederate flags in his office and liberally uses the N-word,) the potential saviour of his country?  Why? 

It makes his story questionable. I'm sorry that you're upset that I would question someone who claims to be drunk at the time of the story they're relating, but you know, I don't have to accept their story on their or your say-so. And sometimes, people will lie to get their "15 minutes of fame."

Can you say Tawana Brawley?

[Michael Tee]

<<No, it's "proof positive" that there is no corroborating evidence.>>

You obviously have no idea what corroborating evidence is.  The two guys who tell the story aren't a team.  They came forward independently and there is nothing to link one to the other. 

The first guy's story is the primary evidence.

The second guy's story corroborates the first guy's.

The other evidence of Allen's racism further corroborates the first guy - - the nooses and Confederate flags in the office, the Confederate flag on the vehicle, the common use of the N-word.

So there are multiple pieces of corroborative evidence, not all of equal strength.  Obviously every guy with a Confederate flag in his office doesn't go around stuffing deer heads in mailboxes.

<<If you have nothing other than the accusation of a couple people - who claimed that they were even drunk at the time - then just say so.>>

I have the corroborated story of one eye-witness who had consumed some alcohol and was probably showing the effects at the time.  If you are aware of any psychological, toxicological or legal doctrine that says that nobody who was drunk can ever give a true account of what he witnessed in that condition, please let me know.  It will be very surprising.  Speaking as one who has been drunk on very few occasions in his life, I can assure you that I have been able to remember the salient points of each and every one of those evenings.  Drunkenness (except in the world of right-wing crazies) is NOT a synonym for "total amnesia."  I know that and you should know that.  Please try to keep your arguments within the limits of common sense and common knowledge.

Senator Macacawitz, though drunk, was able to drive his car to and from the black part of town, stuff the mailbox and drive home, all without causing any accident or running the car off the road.  Not only did his companion remember the salient points of the evening, so did the other guy, who either (1) forgot the racial element or (2) did not want to mention the racial element to his friend or (3) mentioned the racial element to his friend, who then forgot it.  Regardless, you have the story of an eyewitness, and you have corroboration, by hearsay, from another eye-witness, now dead.  If you want to rest your case on the speculation that the participants were so fucking wasted that one of them imagined the whole thing and the other one imagined the exact same thing, go ahead.  But it won't fly.  It's bullshit and most people would be able to recognize it as bullshit.

<<Of course, from now on, I assume you will take the word of anyone who makes accusations, even if they have no corroborating evidence, right? From any side?>>

Would you for the love of sweet suffering Jesus just buy yourself a fucking dictionary and look up the word "corroborate" before you continue to misuse it as ignorantly you have been doing?  I'm not your fucking high-school teacher.  If you don't know what a fucking word means, just look it the fuck up.

<<I like how we're all supposed to take your viewpoints for granted, yet everyone else has to back up their statements.>>

You don't have to take anything for granted.  I suggest to you that you just learn what corroboration really means, ask yourself why these two guys are lying, ask yourself how many times you've been drunk, and of those times how many times were you so drunk that you don't know what happened?  AND:  use your fucking brain.

[Amianthus]

The first guy's story is the primary evidence.

The second guy's story corroborates the first guy's.

So, even though the stories are inconsistent with each other, they corroborate each other?

Also, three other teammates at the time of the alledged incident deny that it happened. They said none of the three ever mentioned it happening at the time.

[Michael Tee]

<<So, even though the stories are inconsistent with each other, they corroborate each other?>>

Ami, if corroboration had to match the original down to every last detail, nothing would ever corroborate anything, it would just be a question of drilling ever deeper until one single discrepancy was found.

The gist of the story - - a hunting party, the night-time, the three persons present, the deer's head, the car, the driver, the booze and the mailbox all match.  One detail missing: that it was a black guy's mailbox.  Keeping in mind that the second guy was relating the story second-hand, it's natural that he wouldn't have as many details as the guy who was actually there.

<<Also, three other teammates at the time of the alledged incident deny that it happened. >>

There are teammates who deny that Allen used the N-word, which is meaningless.  Just because they were on his team does not mean they heard every word the guy uttered while he was on the team.  There wasn't ONE "alleged incident."  He was said to have used the term on many occasions.  Some guys heard, some didn't.  That's about all you can take from that.

<<They said none of the three ever mentioned it happening at the time.>>

Well, that could be true, but even if it were, so what?  Do I go tattling to everyone every time I hear a racial epithet?  Do you?

You should also keep in mind, it wasn't just his team-mates who say he used the N-word.  A girlfriend of his wife's also heard him use it regarding the edibility of turtles in his pond ("Only the niggers round here eat'em.")  Was she lying too?

I remember Tawana Brawley, sure.  That was a classic case of totally uncorroborated evidence from a single source.

[Amianthus]

The gist of the story - - a hunting party, the night-time, the three persons present, the deer's head, the car, the driver, the booze and the mailbox all match.  One detail missing: that it was a black guy's mailbox.  Keeping in mind that the second guy was relating the story second-hand, it's natural that he wouldn't have as many details as the guy who was actually there.

So, tell me what you thought of the accounts of the "Swift Boat Veterans" group?

[Michael Tee]

<<So, tell me what you thought of the accounts of the "Swift Boat Veterans" group?>>

I thought they were bullshit, primarily because they were demeaning the heroism of somebody who had put himself in harm's way.   I don't really know if Kerry behaves as heroically as his supporters claim he did or not, but the fact is, he had enough balls to be on a boat in a river where he could have been blown out of the water at any moment.

Guys like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowicz, Perle and the rest of them made God-damn sure they would never be in harm's way.  Once a guy is in combat, some will duck, some will even run, nobody knows how he or she will behave under fire, but I give a great amount of credit to the courage of someone who has the balls to go as far as you have to go to find out how you will perform, because that in itself is going to a point from which you might never be able to come back.  And I'm pretty sympathetic to the guy who, once in combat, freezes, or keeps his head down, or doesn't try to be John Wayne. 

Kerry might be a self-promoting ass-hole who parlays a grazed finger into a third Purple Heart, but  whatever grazed that finger could just as easily have severed his spinal column.  He put his ass on the line.  That he put his ass on the line in a criminal war of aggression makes him no better than an S.S. Oberleutnant with an Iron Cross, but nevertheless, it's a sleazy tactic to impugn his courage, and even more sleazy when employed on behalf of a bunch of draft-dodging cowards who never stuck their necks out at all.

[BT]

I don't really know if Kerry behaves as heroically as his supporters claim he did or not, but the fact is, he had enough balls to be on a boat in a river where he could have been blown out of the water at any moment.

Those who questioned Kerry's heroics served along side  him on the Swift Boats. The had their balls blown out of the water. They took fire from the shore.

To this day Kerry has still not released ALL his military records.