Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Ralph Peters says "I don't want to hear about John Kerry being a combat veteran."
20 views
Skip to first unread message
Candice Morris
Nov 13, 2012, 8:18:03 PM11/13/12
to
'Lickin' Ass and Fakin' Military Service' is a Proven Fraud, a Proven
Liar, a Proven Thief, and recently a Proven Malicious Poster. She is
the most prolific liar in this newsgroup and also the most prolific
thief of other's writings. She is also a Stolen Valor stain on
America. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you encourage them
to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 05:30:09 -0400, Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
<PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On September 14th, the Congressional Research Service published their
>long anticipated study on the correlation between the tax rates and
>economic growth from 1945 to today. If you go to their website today,
>however, the report is mysteriously missing.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO mystery.................
The CRS, a non-partisan arm of the Library of Congress, withdrew the
report in an unusual move late last month, the agency confirmed on
Thursday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/01/us-usa-taxes-idUSBRE8A01NV20121101
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
Liar, a Proven Thief, and recently a Proven Malicious Poster. She is
the most prolific liar in this newsgroup and also the most prolific
thief of other's writings. She is also a Stolen Valor stain on
America. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you encourage them
to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 05:30:09 -0400, Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
<PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On September 14th, the Congressional Research Service published their
>long anticipated study on the correlation between the tax rates and
>economic growth from 1945 to today. If you go to their website today,
>however, the report is mysteriously missing.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO mystery.................
The CRS, a non-partisan arm of the Library of Congress, withdrew the
report in an unusual move late last month, the agency confirmed on
Thursday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/01/us-usa-taxes-idUSBRE8A01NV20121101
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
bustyo...@rocketmail.com
Nov 13, 2012, 8:21:53 PM11/13/12
to
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 21:34:16 -0500, Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
<PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Re: Ralph Peters says "I don't want to hear about John Kerry being a
>combat veteran."
>I know Peters. He worked for me briefly on a temporary assignment.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You were never in the military.....................
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:45:43 -0700 (PDT), "Kickin' Ass and Takin'
Names" <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Perhaps PG needs to read the following criteria for the award of the
>Purple Heart. He should pay special attention to paragraph 2-8 b. ,
>which reads:
>-- quote
>b. While clearly an individual decoration, the Purple Heart differs
>from all other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended"
>for the decoration; rather he or she is entitled to it upon meeting
>specific criteria.
>-- end quote
You FAILED to CITE your source.
This is one such source: http://www.americal.org/awards/ph.htm
You FAILED to consider:
>the wound
>for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical
>officer and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries
>received in action must have been made a matter of official record.
What "official record" would that be?
>(3) When contemplating an award of this decoration, the key issue that
>commanders...
Why would commanders be "contemplating an award of this decoration" if
OFFICIAL APPROVAL WAS NOT REQUIRED?
>The fact that... ...is not sole justification for award.
Why would "justification for award" be REQUIRED if OFFICIAL APPROVAL
WAS NOT REQUIRED?
>(6) ...Commanders must also take into consideration the
>circumstances surrounding an injury....
Why would commanders be considering the "circumstances surrounding an
injury" if OFFICIAL APPROVAL WAS NOT REQUIRED?
In addition to DEBUNKING the Kerry MYTH I have ALSO DEBUNKED the LIE
that YOU had a career in the military.
ONLY a DISHONORABLE LIAR would post material WITHOUT A CITE.
ONLY a DISHONORABLE LIAR with ZERO MILITARY EXPERIENCE would NOT BE
FAMILIAR WITH:
MANUAL OF MILITARY DECORATIONS & AWARDS
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Force Management Policy)
DoD 1348.33-M, September 1996
http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134833m.pdf
C3.3.2. All recommendations for Defense decorations shall be submitted
by official memorandum or letter (original plus 3 copies) through
command or staff channels to the appropriate approval authority using
the format shown in Figure C3.F1.
What part of "ALL RECOMMENDATIONS for Defense decorations shall be
submitted by official memorandum or letter" don't YOU understand?
<PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Re: Ralph Peters says "I don't want to hear about John Kerry being a
>combat veteran."
>I know Peters. He worked for me briefly on a temporary assignment.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You were never in the military.....................
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:45:43 -0700 (PDT), "Kickin' Ass and Takin'
Names" <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Perhaps PG needs to read the following criteria for the award of the
>Purple Heart. He should pay special attention to paragraph 2-8 b. ,
>which reads:
>-- quote
>b. While clearly an individual decoration, the Purple Heart differs
>from all other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended"
>for the decoration; rather he or she is entitled to it upon meeting
>specific criteria.
>-- end quote
You FAILED to CITE your source.
This is one such source: http://www.americal.org/awards/ph.htm
You FAILED to consider:
>the wound
>for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical
>officer and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries
>received in action must have been made a matter of official record.
What "official record" would that be?
>(3) When contemplating an award of this decoration, the key issue that
>commanders...
Why would commanders be "contemplating an award of this decoration" if
OFFICIAL APPROVAL WAS NOT REQUIRED?
>The fact that... ...is not sole justification for award.
Why would "justification for award" be REQUIRED if OFFICIAL APPROVAL
WAS NOT REQUIRED?
>(6) ...Commanders must also take into consideration the
>circumstances surrounding an injury....
Why would commanders be considering the "circumstances surrounding an
injury" if OFFICIAL APPROVAL WAS NOT REQUIRED?
In addition to DEBUNKING the Kerry MYTH I have ALSO DEBUNKED the LIE
that YOU had a career in the military.
ONLY a DISHONORABLE LIAR would post material WITHOUT A CITE.
ONLY a DISHONORABLE LIAR with ZERO MILITARY EXPERIENCE would NOT BE
FAMILIAR WITH:
MANUAL OF MILITARY DECORATIONS & AWARDS
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Force Management Policy)
DoD 1348.33-M, September 1996
http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134833m.pdf
C3.3.2. All recommendations for Defense decorations shall be submitted
by official memorandum or letter (original plus 3 copies) through
command or staff channels to the appropriate approval authority using
the format shown in Figure C3.F1.
What part of "ALL RECOMMENDATIONS for Defense decorations shall be
submitted by official memorandum or letter" don't YOU understand?
bustyo...@rocketmail.com
Nov 13, 2012, 8:22:26 PM11/13/12
to
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 21:34:16 -0500, Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
<PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I know Peters. He worked for me briefly on a temporary assignment.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You were never in the military.....................
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:08:42 -0400, Patriot Games
<PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I know Peters. He worked for me briefly on a temporary assignment.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You were never in the military.....................
<Pat...@America.Com> wrote:
>On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:36:51 -0700 (PDT), "Kickin' Ass and Takin'
>Names" <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>On Jul 7, 1:25?pm, Patriot Games <Patr...@America.Com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 18:22:11 -0700 (PDT), "Kickin' Ass and Takin'
>>> Names" <PopUlist...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> >On Jul 6, 5:55?pm, Patriot Games <Patr...@America.Com> wrote:
>>> >There is no such thing as a recommendation for a Purple Heart.
>>> Wrong.
>>> MANUAL OF MILITARY DECORATIONS & AWARDS
>>> Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
>>> (Force Management Policy)
>>> DoD 1348.33-M, September 1996
>>> http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134833m.pdf
>>> C3.3.2. All recommendations for Defense decorations
>>The key word here is "decorations."
>>> Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
>>> (Force Management Policy)
>>> DoD 1348.33-M, September 1996
>>> http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134833m.pdf
>>> C3.3.2. All recommendations for Defense decorations
>
>Wrong. The important word used to CATCH YOU LYING, AGAIN, is
>"Service" as in SERVICE AWARDS.
>
>>Military medals are of two types: AWARDS and DECORATIONS -- known to
>>anyone who has served a few minutes in uniform is "awards and decs."
>
>Wrong. SERVICE AWARDS are NOT Decorations. The Purple Heart IS NOT a
>Service Award.
>
>>The Purple Heart is an award, not a decoration.
>
>Wrong. But thanks so much for the opportunity to PROVE CONCLUSIVELY
>that YOU ARE A LIAR and that YOU HAVE NO MILITARY EXPERIENCE.
>
>>Once again, ol' PG has his ass handed to him.
>
>Let's recap.
>
>I provided CITED REFERENCES.
>
>YOU are a PROVEN LIAR.
>
>I provided ORIGINAL MILITARY DOCUMENTATION.
>
>YOU, a PROVEN LIAR, provided WORTHLESS PERSONAL OPINION.
>
>And now I will demonstrate using CITED ORIGINAL MILITARY DOCUMENTATION
>that YOU ARE A LIAR AND A FRAUD:
>
>MANUAL OF MILITARY DECORATIONS & AWARDS
>Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
>(Force Management Policy)
>DoD 1348.33-M, September 1996
>http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134833m.pdf
>C1.1. PURPOSE
>MANUAL OF MILITARY DECORATIONS & AWARDS
>Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
>(Force Management Policy)
>DoD 1348.33-M, September 1996
>http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134833m.pdf
>This Manual explains DoD policies and procedures on awarding Defense
>decorations and SERVICE awards...
>[...]
>AP1. APPENDIX 1
>U.S. MILITARY DECORATIONS
>AP1.1.1. This Appendix contains a brief description of the various
>decorations that have been authorized for the Armed Forces of the
>United States:
>AP1.1.2. Those decorations include the following:
>[...]
>AP1.1.2.21. PURPLE HEART
>[...]
>
>We NOW KNOW for a PROVEN FACT that YOU LIED about having ANY MILITARY
>EXPERIENCE.
>
>I hope you will enjoy having me post this again, and again, and again,
>and again as much as I will enjoy posting it again, and again, and
>again, and again.
>
>YOU ARE NOW A TOTALLY DISCREDITED LIAR AND FRAUD!
=====================================
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 06:20:33 -0700 (PDT), "Kickin' Ass and Takin'
Names" <old_r...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Why is the over-65 crowd so worked up about health insurance reform?
>After all, they (we, actually, I'm on Medicare)
Thanks for admitting YOU NEVER RETIRED FROM THE MILITARY!
Hahahahahahahahha!!
=====================================
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics/msg/c9b8842a2f0982a0?hl=en
From: "Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names" <old_redn...@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
> Military retirees carry TriCare as their primary insurer UNTIL
> AGE 65 AT WHICH TIME WE GO ON MEDICARE with TriCare
> For Life as our secondary insurer.
> http://www.military.com/benefits/tricare/tricare-and-medicare
> I am a military retiree over 65.
> Medicare is my primary,
> TFL is my secondary.
Oops! Busted BAD this time!
"If you are the widow or widower of a service member... you are no
longer covered by TRICARE..."
As I have LONG SUSPECTED we NOW KNOW why you said "I'm on Medicare."
Because YOU NEVER SERVED, but YOUR HUSBAND DID!!
YOU are a OLD BITCH WIDOW HAG!
Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!
=====================================
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:37:30 -0800 (PST), "Kickin' Ass and Takin'
Names" <old_r...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 13, 11:20?am, Patriot Games <Patr...@America.Com> wrote:
>> > Military retirees carry TriCare as their primary insurer UNTIL
>> > AGE 65 AT WHICH TIME WE GO ON MEDICARE with TriCare
>> > For Life as our secondary insurer.
>> >http://www.military.com/benefits/tricare/tricare-and-medicare
>> > I am a military retiree over 65.
>> > Medicare is my primary,
>> > TFL is my secondary.
>> Oops! ?Busted BAD this time!
>Yep -- and you are the one who is busted -- bad -- really bad.
Nope...
>> "If you are the widow or widower of a service member... you are no
>> longer covered by TRICARE..."
>I didn't say I am now covered by TriCare.
>This is what I said:
>>> I am a military retiree over 65.
>> > Medicare is my primary,
>> > TFL is my secondary.
>TFL = TriCare For Life
>http://www.tricare.mil/mybenefit/ProfileFilter.do;jsessionid=K9KR7QXgppyYqgGG2sF2Gyg8MWGTSm9n5FJZt25M4TXZvJCgH1ly!-491296821?&puri=%2Fhome%2Foverview%2FPlans%2FLearnAboutPlansAndCosts%2FTRICAREForLife
>or
>http://tinyurl.com/y9bvca2
>-- quote
>TRICARE For Life
>TRICARE For Life (TFL) is TRICARE's Medicare-wraparound coverage
>available to all Medicare-eligible TRICARE beneficiaries, regardless
>of age, provided they have Medicare Parts A and B.
"TRICARE beneficiaries..."
>While Medicare is your primary insurance, TRICARE acts as your
>secondary payer minimizing your out-of-pocket expenses. TRICARE
>benefits include covering Medicare's coinsurance and deductible.
>-- end quote
>Just in case you missed it, here's the salient point again:
>-- quote
>TRICARE For Life (TFL) is TRICARE's Medicare-wraparound coverage
>available to all Medicare-eligible TRICARE beneficiaries, regardless
>of age, provided they have Medicare Parts A and B.
>-- end quote
"TRICARE beneficiaries..."
You are a 'beneficiary' BECAUSE "you are the widow or widower of a
service member..."
>I just love it when you're busted again and again and again.
In case you haven't noticed THIS IS GAME OVER FOR YOU.
YOU are an OLD WOMAN.
Case closed.
YOU were a Service Member's DOORMAT.
Case closed.
That Service member died, making YOU a "beneficiary" of HIS BENEFITS.
Case closed.
YOU NEVER SERVED.
PROVEN.
Case closed.
And...
Game over.
(The BEST part is that I knew if I waited long enough YOU would
provide the very CITE that WOULD DO YOU IN!)
Hahahahahahahaha!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
<---- Update ----------------------------------------------->
On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 06:56:48 -0400, Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
<PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>She [Angle] is not working but her husband is a retired federal
>guvmint employee who is drawing a nice, fat federal pension
>yet she wants to shut down the tiny social security pension
>that so many of us depend on to stay out of poverty.
"Us?"
Thanks for PROVING YOU DO NOT GET A MILITARY RETIREMENT!
Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!
<---- Update ----------------------------------------------->
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 10:39:17 -0700 (PDT), "Kickin' Ass and Takin'
Names" <old_r...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 22, 9:49?pm, Buster Norris <bustyourf...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 13:16:58 -0700 (PDT), "Kickin' Ass and
>> Takin' Names" <old_redn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >West is not a Colonel (O6). ?He is a Lieutenant Colonel (O5). ?He
>> >retired in lieu of court-martial.
>> LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> The charges were ultimately referred to an Article 15 proceeding
>> rather than court-martial, at which West was fined $5,000. LTC West
>> accepted the judgment and retired with full benefits in the summer of
>> 2004.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_West_(politician)
>Which is a formal way of saying he retired in lieu of court-martial.
MORE PROOF YOU WERE NEVER IN THE MILITARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bret Cahill
Nov 14, 2012, 12:07:52 AM11/14/12
to
> LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just because a black guy got elected president twice doesn't mean
everyone is a liar.
> Nope...
Deny all you want.
Just because a black guy got elected president twice doesn't mean
everyone is a liar.
> Nope...
Deny all you want.
Bernice Melodie Napolitano-Gross
Nov 14, 2012, 7:37:44 PM11/14/12
to
An ultra-left old fool. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:00:35 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<BretC...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
>And a reputable judge bases his decisions on the bench on the law, not
>on politics.
>Justice Scalia, in the spring of 2000, openly stated he'd quit if
>"Gore was elected."
>Where was the uproar?
Where is your cite????????
"In an unsourced report written in April 2000, Novak cited rumors that
Scalia would step down from the court if Al Gore were elected
president."
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/04/02/scalia
>Even "liberals" were quiet.
>Unbelievable!
Try not to spree, Bret, but if you must spree please only shoot
Liberals, k?
encourage them to continue lying.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:00:35 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<BretC...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
>And a reputable judge bases his decisions on the bench on the law, not
>on politics.
>Justice Scalia, in the spring of 2000, openly stated he'd quit if
>"Gore was elected."
>Where was the uproar?
Where is your cite????????
"In an unsourced report written in April 2000, Novak cited rumors that
Scalia would step down from the court if Al Gore were elected
president."
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/04/02/scalia
>Even "liberals" were quiet.
>Unbelievable!
Try not to spree, Bret, but if you must spree please only shoot
Liberals, k?
0 new messages