Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CagedTroll Asking to prove a negative? Seriously???  |
No, asking to look at his medical records to see if the doctor that is claiming he treated him is on there. If he's not on the medical records, while that wouldn't conclusively prove he didn't treat him, it would offer enough proof for everyone to believe he didn't. Would you agree?
Quote:
The vast bulk of Kerry's official records are available at his website. Louis Letson is the doctor's name, can't find it anywhere in those records, and his claim is that Kerry's crewmates confessed afterwards they didn't recieve enemy fire. NOT ONE of Kerry's crewmates is confirming Letson's story, and there's nothing in the official record to confirm his story. Letson hasn't produced any records to confirm his story.
Also, and I'm not so sure about this, I don't think Kerry's boat was the only one in the area at the time, so if there was no enemy fire (as Letson claims) then there should have been "after action" reports from other boats in the area that said as much.
The burden of proof, in this case at least, should be on Letson, or O'Neill, or CORSI, at least in this case. Because it's relatively easy to "prove a positive".., if it's true.
|
Now that wasn't too hard to do was it? Actually arguing the facts instead of assassinate someone's character? That showed a lot of maturity. Good job.
I agree that the book is questionable at best. But again, just because it's questionable and the author isn't very credible, that doesn't change the facts.