SwiftVets.com

[ETSHD]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/21/133353.shtml

New York Times: Every Network Should Show 'Stolen Honor'

The first sentence of the New York Times' review today of "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" was what we expected: It said Sinclair Broadcast Group should not show the documentary. Then the pro-Kerry daily explained why in a stunning recommendation:



"It should be shown in its entirety on all the networks, cable stations and on public television."

Story Continues Below



This is the same paper that ran such a bizarre, hateful campaign against Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" and trashed "Unfit for Command" while touting Kitty Kelley's anti-Bush gossip?


TV reviewer Alessandra Stanley indicates she doesn't like the fact that "Stolen Honor" will hinder Sen. John Kerry's candidacy, but she nonetheless advises that "it does help viewers better understand the rage fueling the unhappy band of brothers who oppose Mr. Kerry's candidacy and his claim to heroism."

Stanley writes:


This film is payback time, a chance to punish one of the most famous antiwar activists, Mr. Kerry, the one who got credit for serving with distinction in combat, then, through the eyes of the veterans in this film, went home to discredit the men left behind. The film begins with dirgelike music and a scary black-and-white montage of stark images of soldiers and prisoners as a deep voice sorrowfully intones, "In other wars, when captured soldiers were subjected to the hell of enemy prisons, they were considered heroes." The narrator adds, "In Vietnam they were betrayed."

The imagery is crude, but powerful: each mention of Mr. Kerry's early 1970's meeting with North Vietnamese government officials in Paris is illustrated with an old black-and-white still shot of the Arc de Triomphe, an image that to many viewers evokes the Nazi occupation of Paris. ...

The film's producer, Carlton Sherwood, a former investigative reporter and a Vietnam veteran, gives his own testimony, explaining that even though he has uncovered all kinds of misdeeds in his career, the history of Mr. Kerry's antiwar activism is "a lot more personal.'' He recalls listening to Mr. Kerry's testimony in 1971, saying, "I felt an inner hurt no surgeon's scalpel could remove.''

That pain is the main theme of the documentary, which can be seen in its entirety on the Internet for $4.99. One former P.O.W., John Warner, lashes out at Mr. Kerry for having coaxed Mr. Warner's mother to testify at the Winter Soldier Investigation, where disgruntled veterans testified to war crimes they committed. Calling it a "contemptible act," Mr. Warner, who spent more than five years as a prisoner, tells the camera that Mr. Kerry was the kind of man who preyed on a mother's grief "purely for the promotion of your own political agenda."
_________________
USMC 1966-1970

False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.

[Anker-Klanker]

Huh???? Astounding! (Movie and entertainment reviewers are usually the biggest liberals.)

[flagreen]

Could this be an indication of just how powerful Stolen Honor really is? Has it converted a reporter for the NYT? I hope so!

[Me#1You#10]

Read the fine print..."histrionic?", "often specious?". Where was it "specious"? She simply doesn't say. She is, however, apparently impressed with the "artistry" of the film and, perhaps, it's historical perspective, for what that's worth.

I suppose simply the fact that the NYT even chose to review it is a moral victory of sorts, but I don't see this as a NYT or even this reviewer's endorsement of the validity of the POW's accusations against Kerry.

Did I miss something?

NY Times (note: requires free registration)

[one more captins mast]

One more lie, someone "up" the food chain, gave her the "review"

pre-written, and she was told to use her by/line or she would not

get a new contract, or would be on "death watch at a Hospital"


it is pure crap all of it. they are all drinking of the "acid rain" from

the Northeast, and they love it.
_________________
the strange mr aj

[Anker-Klanker]

Who cares that the reviewer wasn't completely sold. What matters is her quote:

Quote:

"It should be shown in its entirety on all the networks, cable stations and on public television."

Let the viewer decide. Isn't that all we've been asking for?

[Me#1You#10]

[msindependent]

strange, is this a trick.

[neverforget]

[wednesdaychild]

well, I am fairly intelligent and I think i see the plan. THEY FEEL

this is an excellent example of propaganda and one should know what propaganda looks like so one can be prepared to cope with it.

A NUMBER OF THE RIGHT SAID THE SAME ABOUT MICHAEL MOORE 's MOVIE they often said:
Fareinheight 911-it is a masterful piece of propaganda and should be required viewing in Government 101 classes. (they being the right in this instance)of course it was an outstanding piece of propaganda)
so they aren't saying anything nice, its a film they feel any intelligent person will see as propaganda and are saying
BRING IT ON.
GO SEE, (THERE BY DEFUSING THE FILM)
GOOD FOR INTELLUCUAL LEARNING,(learn to recognize propaganda)
OR JUST READ MY REVIEW-
SORT OF LIKE CLIFF NOTES U KNOW
so now the new yorkers can say,
we are so enlightened
we read the review
and we didn't suppress freedom of speech
the liberal mind
_________________
"...for the good of believing in life after birth..."
Jim Steinman

[ocsparky101]

"This film is payback time". That says it all. She is considering the film some sort of payback instead of a historical correction of the facts. What she is saying is for all the networks to show the film if you are interested in watching a bunch of people paying back John Kerry for what he did after Vietnam you know getting us out of that hell. It is a very poor try at reverse psycology.

[sillykc]

I watched the Stolen Honor documentary online with my husband.
It's much of the same of what we already knew....but most Americans
who haven't had the time to watch the news the past 6 months, really do
need to watch this....
It really is the veterans turn to have their side of the story told...
And people need to know both sides of the story....
We already heard John Kerry's view....."and I do not think he in any
way qualifies to be anyone's president.."
Anyone who doesn't want to watch and listen to our American Heroes
are close minded and afraid of the truth....
The democrates used disgraceful tactics to stop Stolen Honor
from being shown on TV.... "just what exactly are the democrates
afraid of"? The truth perhaps...?
Threatening America's advertisers from showing the other side
of the vietnam war....is so un American... in a country that
protects freedom of speech...
Micheal Moore had his say....no matter how dishonest he was.
I can't believe anyone believed the things that were in his
simple minded imagination that created the film..
Then CBS had their say...by accusing our sitting president of
failing to perform his service duties...and then we find out that it's
unreliable information and a forged.... But that sure didn't stop
them from airing it...!! Nor did anyone specifically apologizing to
the president......"just goes to show how sad some people really are".
Im voting for George Bush...and I'm proud of it...!
I want to also thank all of our Veterans who served in any war...for
making America what it is today....If it wasn't for you all risking
your lives to protect our Liberty and Democracy.....this country would
not be the most wonderful place to live on the face of this earth....
We salute all the brave men and women who made this country great..!!!

God Bless America...
George Bush fo 4 more years..!

sillykc
_________________
Is there another way to watch Stolen Honor without having to go through PayPal ... since I cant remember my paypal password and it will take 14 days through regular mail...for them to send me a new one...

[hatecelebs]

Here's the NY Times review:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/21/arts/television/21stan.html?ex=1099022400&en=3d84a732b293b65f&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1

An Outpouring of Pain, Channeled via Politics
By ALESSANDRA STANLEY

Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," the highly contested anti-Kerry documentary, should not be shown by the Sinclair Broadcast Group. It should be shown in its entirety on all the networks, cable stations and on public television.

This histrionic, often specious and deeply sad film does not do much more damage to Senator John Kerry's reputation than have the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's negative ads, which have flooded television markets in almost every swing state. But it does help viewers better understand the rage fueling the unhappy band of brothers who oppose Mr. Kerry's candidacy and his claim to heroism.

Sinclair, the nation's largest television station group, reaching about a quarter of United States television households, backed down this week and announced that it would use only excerpts from the 42-minute film as part of an hourlong news program about political use of the media, "A P.O.W. Story: Politics, Pressure and the Media.'' That's too bad: what is most enlightening about this film is not the depiction of Mr. Kerry as a traitor; it is the testimony of the former P.O.W.'s describing the torture they endured in captivity and the shock they felt when celebrities like Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden visited their prisons in North Vietnam and sided with the enemy.

The former prisoners - now old and graying - are not just talking about their sense of betrayal by fellow Americans. They also seize the Kerry candidacy as a chance to recall their experiences: the kinds of torture they endured and the ruses they invented like tap-code communication between cells to boost morale. Illustrated with black-and-white film clips of prisoners in the "Hanoi Hilton" and sepia-toned re-enactments of starving men being led through dank, dark prison corridors, those recollections resemble the slow-paced, detailed documentaries that fill the History Channel.

But the History Channel tends to focus on the heroic moments of World Wars I and II. The Vietnam War is almost always revisited through its moral and strategic ambiguities and its effect on American society in the 1960's and 70's.

This film is payback time, a chance to punish one of the most famous antiwar activists, Mr. Kerry, the one who got credit for serving with distinction in combat, then, through the eyes of the veterans in this film, went home to discredit the men left behind. The film begins with dirgelike music and a scary black-and-white montage of stark images of soldiers and prisoners as a deep voice sorrowfully intones, "In other wars, when captured soldiers were subjected to the hell of enemy prisons, they were considered heroes." The narrator adds, "In Vietnam they were betrayed."

The imagery is crude, but powerful: each mention of Mr. Kerry's early 1970's meeting with North Vietnamese government officials in Paris is illustrated with an old black-and-white still shot of the Arc de Triomphe, an image that to many viewers evokes the Nazi occupation of Paris. The Eiffel Tower would have been more neutral, but the film is not: it insists that Mr. Kerry "met secretly in an undisclosed location with a top enemy diplomat." Actually, Mr. Kerry, a leading antiwar activist at the time, mentioned it in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971.

The film's producer, Carlton Sherwood, a former investigative reporter and a Vietnam veteran, gives his own testimony, explaining that even though he has uncovered all kinds of misdeeds in his career, the history of Mr. Kerry's antiwar activism is "a lot more personal.'' He recalls listening to Mr. Kerry's testimony in 1971, saying, "I felt an inner hurt no surgeon's scalpel could remove.''

That pain is the main theme of the documentary, which can be seen in its entirety on the Internet for $4.99. One former P.O.W., John Warner, lashes out at Mr. Kerry for having coaxed Mr. Warner's mother to testify at the Winter Soldier Investigation, where disgruntled veterans testified to war crimes they committed. Calling it a "contemptible act," Mr. Warner, who spent more than five years as a prisoner, tells the camera that Mr. Kerry was the kind of man who preyed on a mother's grief "purely for the promotion of your own political agenda."

The documentary shows Mr. Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, in which he famously reported that fellow soldiers had "cut off ears," among other atrocities. But the filmmakers were not able to dig up more indicting material from homemade movies or news clips from the era. The picture from an antiwar demonstration, where Mr. Kerry stood a few rows behind Ms. Fonda, is blown up portentously, but there are no shots of them together. The only candid shot of Mr. Kerry gathering material for the Winter Soldier hearings shows him solicitously asking a veteran why he felt the need to speak.

Instead, the film shows lesser-known young, long-haired antiwar activists preparing witnesses to testify to war crimes. In the film these men seem to be prompting a fellow veteran to describe a massacre he did not witness. But one of the veterans, Kenneth J. Campbell, a decorated marine who is now a professor at the University of Delaware, recently sued the filmmakers, claiming the film was edited to take out clips in which Mr. Campbell made clear that only soldiers who witnessed the atrocities firsthand would be allowed to testify.

Those kinds of distortions are intended to hurt Mr. Kerry at the polls. Instead, they mainly distract viewers from the real subject of the film: the veterans' unheeded feelings of betrayal and neglect.

Excerpts from this program will be shown on various stations, but not in the New York metropolitan area; elsewhere check local listings. The entire program can be seen on the Internet on a pay-for-view basis and its audio can be downloaded online, both at www.stolenhonor.com.

Carlton Sherwood, producer. A Red White and Blue Productions Inc.

[shawa]

Hey Guys, why so negative??
This is a huge positive.

THE NEW YORK TIMES SAYS "IT SHOULD BE SHOWN IN ITS
ENTIRETY ON ALL THE NETWORKS, CABLE STATIONS AND ON
PUBLIC TELEVISION"!!!!!!!

We have been handed the leverage to get this film seen! Let's
run with it.

The networks take their marching orders from the NYT.
Their news broadcast every night are taken from whatever the NYT
prints as the news of the day. Every network covers the same topics.
If you switch the channel, there's the same story on the next one.
The NYT sets the agenda.

My point is that the NYT says this film should be seen!!!
On networks, cable and PBS. So we can pressure all the stations
that the public demands it. Even the NYT says so.

Wave the review in their faces, "This film does not do more damage to
Kerry's reputation than have the SwiftBoat Veterans negative ads."
Thank you Swifties!!!!

The review has already had an effect. NBC did a story about it
on the news tonight. Its like the NYT has given the go ahead to
give it some attention.

I really don't see the review as very negative, other than the word "specious".
"This film is payback time". YOU BET!!!!
Vietnam Vets deserve payback!

The few negatives in the review are nothing compared to the
promotion of the film that it gives us! It's way more attention than
has been granted anywhere else!

[Stevie]

what does 'specious' mean?
_________________
Stevie
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage
morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should
be arrested, exiled or hanged.