 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JROTC
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 83
Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 4:54 pm Post subject: NY Times reviews UFC - they don't like it |
 |
|
Go figure!
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/10/books/review/10MEADOWS.html
This line especially is getting way too old:
| Quote: | | Navy records have discredited the book's claim that Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star and third Purple Heart -- though only after the sensation hijacked cable news for a month. |
_________________
"It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it" - General Douglas MacArthur |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jerake
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 91
Location: IL
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kmudd
Master Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 16 Aug 2004
Posts: 825
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The New York Times had to have 17 pages of retractions after they couldn't cover for Jason Blair anymore . According to their own standard the NYT is discredited. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anker-Klanker
Admiral
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 1033
Location: Richardson, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ask yourself this: Unfit for Command has been on the top selling book list for weeks - why is a review just now coming out? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
6 whole paragraphs for the #1 BESTSELLER on it's own list for several weeks? 
| Susannah Meadows wrote: |
If John Kerry loses the presidential election, ''Unfit for Command,'' by John E. O'Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, will go down as a chief reason. The book -- a sort of companion piece to the political attack ads placed by O'Neill's group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth -- is a furious assault on Kerry's character and service in Vietnam. Navy records have discredited the book's claim that Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star and third Purple Heart -- though only after the sensation hijacked cable news for a month. |
Ah.....so as I read this, Ms. Meadows (of Newsweek by the by) specifically concedes that Kerry LIED about "Christmas in Cambodia" and his FIRST Purple Heart. Now that the NY Times Book Review has established Kerry as LIAR and a FRAUD, it's, now, only a matter of degree. I'll look forward to her highlighting that as I continue to read her review. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Truegrit
Lieutenant
Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 246
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 6:42 pm Post subject: NYT Review is no surprise |
|
|
The NYT crew, like most of the MSM, have bought into the Big Lie -- perhaps forgetting this isn't Germany in the 1930's, and they don't have to worry about getting shipped off to a concentration camp if they fail to heed Herr. Dr. Goebbels' "talking points".
But they have taken the Kerry camp talking points and refuse to budge. I bet very few take the time to read the documentation, not just UFC, but the forensic discussion of Kerry's own statements, and how they contradict one another over the years!
Now, over 70 years after Joseph Goebbels perfected the art of modern propaganda using the radio and newspaper (and he was, truly, an innovator of mass propaganda), the media has allowed itself to be "goebbelized" -- by the smear campaign launched by the Kerry camp against the Swiftees and their allies.
How can we fight this?
_________________
Ted Harwood, Ph.D.
Enlisted, U.S. Army ('57-'60)
Last edited by Truegrit on Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:30 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anker-Klanker
Admiral
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 1033
Location: Richardson, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can't believe how many people (even in this forum) still believe that some of the news media haven't actually crossed over the line and have ceased even attempting to keep some pretense at objectivity and "news"; in the last couple of months some of the leading media outlets have become outright partisan, and are now bordering on becoming official propaganda machines for the Kerry campaign.
Do some searching off this site associated with the news media and you will find records of them dated months ago debating and arguing why they should no longer be bound by objectivity in reporting. I'm not kidding - it's there if you look.
NYT, Boston Globe, LA Times, CBS, (now) ABC, CNN, and Newsweek, as a minimum have all crossed this line, in my opinion, and NYT is probably the worst of all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom Poole
Vice Admiral
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 914
Location: America
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Truegrit, just don't let them stand behind you and tell you it's raining.
_________________
'58 Airedale HMR(L)-261 VMO-2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Beldar has officially weighed-in...
| Beldar wrote: | Sunday, October 10, 2004
Sorriest excuse for a book review I've ever read
A helpful reader, Allan J. Favish, has emailed me to point out that finally, in Sunday's edition, the New York Times has finally gotten around to reviewing John O'Neill's Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry. I say "finally" because this week, the book holds the number three spot on the NYT's own best-seller list for the second week in a row; it held the number one spot three, four, five, and six weeks ago; and it's been on the list now for eight consecutive weeks.
I'm a fan of book reviews, having commissioned and/or edited about a dozen very strong, article-length book reviews — as the first person to hold that editorship unmixed with other responsibilities — for the Texas Law Review. (The reviewers I dealt with included Professors Charles Alan Wright, Herma Hill Kay, Mark Tushnet, Douglass Laycock, Sanford Levinson, and William C. Powers, Jr.) So I'll claim some credentials as, so to speak, a "book review reviewer." But frankly, no expertise is needed to size up this particular book review as a piece of shallow, partisan garbage. Written by "Susannah Meadows[, who] is covering the Kerry campaign for Newsweek," this one concludes:
| Quote: | | Kerry has never been a terribly beloved figure in Massachusetts politics, and in the presidential race he's buoyed more by hatred of Bush than by any passion for his candidacy. But the irony is that this book goes after the one piece of Kerry's history that left the politician with his greatest friends, the lifelong die-hards for the cause. In its determination to wreck Kerry's candidacy, ''Unfit for Command'' seems to reveal more about the authors than about Kerry. |
But Ms. Meadows' extremely superficial review reveals more about herself and her determination to promote Kerry's candidacy than it does about the book. Here, for example, is the review's entire description of the controversy over Kerry's medals:
| Quote: | | Navy records have discredited the book's claim that Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star and third Purple Heart — though only after the sensation hijacked cable news for a month. |
That's it — half a sentence that mentions only half the medals in dispute; and far, far less than half an effort at comprehensiveness or honesty.
Ms. Meadows' begins her review with this statement, very nearly the only accurate one in her entire review:
| Quote: | | If John Kerry loses the presidential election, ''Unfit for Command,'' by John E. O'Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, will go down as a chief reason. |
Yes, ma'am — and you and the NYT will be on record as having completely failed to grasp, much less to honestly deal with, that chief reason. This is an effort so pathetic that it actually should be insulting even to Sen. Kerry's partisans.
BeldarBlog |
Last edited by Me#1You#10 on Sun Oct 10, 2004 8:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wind Walker
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, if the New York Times printed the story, it's got to be true.......isn't it?
 JUST KIDDING FOLKS, PUT THE SAFETY BACK ON (alergic to gun-shots) 
I refuse to register to a RAT paper (web site), regarless if I really desire to read any article  .
However, I do find it odd to see that John Kerry has changed his story a minimum of three times, since the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth has exposed these (we'll call them mis-prints)! 
No I won't..............  LIES, Kerry told & continues to tell 
Have a great day,
Wind Walker  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JROTC
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 83
Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Windwalker - and others:
Sorry about that. I thought that you'd get the linked article, and incorrectly didn't think you'd have to register. After I saw your comment, I went back and sure enough. Anyways ....
| Quote: | 'Unfit for Command': Hostile Fire
By SUSANNAH MEADOWS
Published: October 10, 2004
IF John Kerry loses the presidential election, ''Unfit for Command,'' by John E. O'Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, will go down as a chief reason. The book -- a sort of companion piece to the political attack ads placed by O'Neill's group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth -- is a furious assault on Kerry's character and service in Vietnam. Navy records have discredited the book's claim that Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star and third Purple Heart -- though only after the sensation hijacked cable news for a month.
Advertisement
But for all the impact it's had on the race, the book itself is totally unconvincing. The problem is that John O'Neill, who is the driving force and public face of the book, is so curdled with hatred for Kerry that, as though he were an unreliable narrator in a Nabokov novel, you can't trust what he says. (His co-author, Jerome Corsi, an old friend of O'Neill's, has referred to Kerry on a conservative Web site as ''Commie Kerry.'') O'Neill, himself a Swift boat commander in Vietnam, resents Kerry for testifying before Congress in 1971 against the war. It's an understandable beef, one shared by many veterans, and it's clearly the root of the whole Swift boat controversy.
While O'Neill's anger is real, his claims appear to be faulty. He wrongly asserts, for example, that Kerry branded him (and every other Vietnam veteran) a war criminal. In fact, Kerry took pains not to make such a sweeping charge: in his testimony he cited an investigation during which 150 veterans described atrocities they themselves had witnessed or had committed. Though this part of Kerry's statement is quoted in the book, the distinction is lost on O'Neill and his co-author, who bring up the war crimes issue over 50 times.
More than 30 years ago, O'Neill debated Kerry about the war on ''The Dick Cavett Show,'' and it's clear from the first chapter -- written first-person by O'Neill -- that he isn't over that either. Kerry's performance was effective enough that it is widely regarded as helping to start his political career, but here's O'Neill: ''Kerry performed disastrously. . . . It was in reality a debacle for him''; other veterans, widows and their children, he writes, ''all of them thought that I had won the debate.'' As with many moments in the book, his fixation on attacking Kerry would be funny if it weren't so sad.
But O'Neill and Corsi refuse to back down, even in the face of logic or history. They write that Kerry idealized the Communists, that the triumph of Communism was his goal and that his testimony contributed directly to the Communist victory. The authors say Kerry was ''a ruthless operator in the field with little regard for life'' eight pages after saying he had ''very little nerve for facing serious combat.'' They admit that only one of Kerry's crewmates is against him today. (Though not in so many words. What they actually write is: ''Steve Gardner is the sole crewman who was not swayed by Kerry during his many post-Vietnam years of solicitation aimed at gaining the support of his crew.'') Later, O'Neill and Corsi say the candidate never formed ''the kind of human relationships with his fellow sailors that are essential to effective performance.''
Kerry has never been a terribly beloved figure in Massachusetts politics, and in the presidential race he's buoyed more by hatred of Bush than by any passion for his candidacy. But the irony is that this book goes after the one piece of Kerry's history that left the politician with his greatest friends, the lifelong die-hards for the cause. In its determination to wreck Kerry's candidacy, ''Unfit for Command'' seems to reveal more about the authors than about Kerry.
Susannah Meadows is covering the Kerry campaign for Newsweek.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/10/books/review/10MEADOWS.html |
Note: Please include a link to a legitimate source when reproducing content in the forum. Thanks.
Note: Link added
_________________
"It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it" - General Douglas MacArthur |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom Poole
Vice Admiral
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 914
Location: America
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like Susannah Meadows and this other member of the ignorant effete are good for the same bird cage. Comparing UFC to Bush on the Couch is comparing history to voodoo. | Daniel Okrent wrote: | ...Al Markel of San Francisco asks why The Times hasn't reviewed the anti-Kerry "Unfit for Command" while Samuel Leff of Manhattan wonders why Justin Frank's critical psychoanalytic study, "Bush on the Couch," has been ignored by the Book Review editors....I will stipulate here that I'll be voting for John Kerry next month and will further admit that I have bent over backward to listen to pro-Bush complaints, in a conscious effort to counterbalance my own prejudices....
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/10/weekinreview/10bott.html?hp |
And to claim the NYT bent over backwards for Bush, puleeeze.
_________________
'58 Airedale HMR(L)-261 VMO-2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
leeinwv
PO3
Joined: 22 Jul 2004
Posts: 268
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well I don't like the New York Times Paper either so who gives a d--
what they think anyway |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lance_Flatchew
Ensign
Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 53
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 10:13 pm Post subject: You guys got it! The NYT said it. |
|
|
You guys got it! The NYT said it. It is the TRUTH. Kerry was wounded three times in combat, deserved each medal and spent Christmas in Cambodia. He never said bad things about his "brothers". He was a hero plane and simple!
So we need to close he board, cancel the ads, turn off the computers and go out and smell some flowers...
_________________
http://www.tangate.com
Yes, you can lie about your war record. You can lie about spending Christmas in Cambodia. You can lie about ... atrocities of your fellow soldiers. But we are going to nail you on tangate 04. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dimsdale
Captain
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 527
Location: Massachusetts: the belly of the beast
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2004 12:55 am Post subject: Re: NYT Review is no surprise |
|
|
| Truegrit wrote: | The NYT crew, like most of the MSM, have bought into the Big Lie -- perhaps forgetting this isn't Germany in the 1930's, and they don't have to worry about getting shipped off to a concentration camp if they fail to heed Herr. Dr. Goebbels' "talking points".
But they have taken the Kerry camp talking points and refuse to budge. I bet very few take the time to read the documentation, not just UFC, but the forensic discussion of Kerry's own statements, and how they contradict one another over the years!
Now, over 70 years after Joseph Goebbels perfected the art of modern propaganda using the radio and newspaper (and he was, truly, an innovator of mass propaganda), the media has allowed itself to be "goebbelized" -- by the smear campaign launched by the Kerry camp against the Swiftees and their allies.
How can we fight this? |
I disagree on one count: the NYTimes IS the Big Lie. One has to wonder if Josef Goebbels learned his craft of propaganda from them back in the thirties. Isn't it curious that all the big scandals in journalism are found in the liberally oriented media. That is no coincidence.
It is SOP for the MSM: Meadows can write whatever she wants, an the NYTimes will dutifully put a retraction or "correction" deep among the tire ads on page Z45, and claim that they have done their duty to journalistic ethics and integrity.
The liberal MSM did it's level best to suppress this story until it, like the CBS forgeries and the ABC pro-Kerry Halperin memo, were outed by the the pajama warriors of the web. Now they smear the SBVT while claiming that the Swiftees are the smearers!! Right out of their hero's play book (Bill Clinton).
We have the power now, and must use it to best effect. Write, call email etc., the truth to any and everyone you know. I also write to the college newspapers, where the students are particularly deluded by their liberal professors.
Never let up. We cannot allow a traitor to America into the Oval Office. Not even for a visit.
_________________
Everytime he had a choice, Kerry chose to side with communists rather than the United States. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
