Quote:
Originally posted by ronin
it is if he didn't
|
How about if he didn’t enter Cambodia, but believed that he did? I doubt that all the river passages had ‘Welcome to Cambodia’ signs at the border. How about if he was relying on inaccurate information- ie. WW2-era maps, a fallible navigator etc? Would he be responsible for relying on bad information and deemed a liar because of it when Bush is pardoned for the same fault? Why would the word of the Swift Boat Veterans, none of whom were on his boat, be considered ‘proof’ when Kerry’s word, as someone who was on the boat, is not?