 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
GT
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 90
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 2:45 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| From all the posts I've read here and elsewhere, as well as articles, documentation, etc. it appears Kerry's actions in March '69 just don't warrant the Silver Star. That's not to put down or discount any other swiftboats which were involved at that time (to the contrary - they seemed to see more action), although it appears their actions weren't elevated to the level of Kerry's for some peculiar reason. My husband served in the infantry as a combat medic grunt and said he should have 50 Silver Stars if Kerry's actions are the criteria for getting a Silver Star. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cipher
Vice Admiral
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 902
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
What follows is my (preliminary) disassembly and analysis of the ABC News companion piece to the ABC Nightline program aired on 14 October 2004. My comments appear in bold and in "quote" boxes.
As this article is fairly long, and requires frequent references to multiple documents, I’ll handle it without footnoting. The references are commonly available, and include the Kerry biographies and his own accounts, and the Navy documents of the actions, written by Kerry, or based on reports written by Kerry.
While reading this, consider the following:
Why is ABC interested in THIS particular action? This is perhaps the weakest of the SVPT arguments against Kerry, and the ONLY reason it is even included in the book is to illustrate the point that Kerry was “gaming the system” to garner glory.
What you need to “follow the bouncing ball”:
1) The Market Time SPOT Reports (MTSR) dated 28 Feb 69. There are four pages of them, available here: http://www.swiftboatarchives.com/ . You need to go to “Documents” tab (upper left), and on the next page, go to “FEB69 Market Time Spot Reports Operation Sea Lord”. You want the last three pages, dated 28 Feb 69. Two of the pages are available on Kerry’s website, however the critical FIRST page of the report that PROVES Kerry himself wrote and submitted the report of his own actions is curiously absent.
2) The three separate Silver Star commendations of the action, or for simplicity, you can see the DIFFERENCES here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1202276/posts While not SOURCE documents, the simplicity of the differences will help the MEGO factor.
3) The Zumwalt commendation, available here: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/SpotReports_February1969.pdf (page 33 of 37)
4) (source link for the original printable version of this article: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Nightline/print?id=166434 )
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What Happened in Kerry's Vietnam Battles?
'Nightline' Speaks to Witnesses of Disputed Firefights
By ANDREW MORSE
Oct. 14, 2004 -- Oct. 15, 2004 - In the controversy over Sen. John Kerry's service in Vietnam, Americans have heard from Kerry, from the crew [sic] of the Navy Swift boats he commanded
| Quote: | | There were at least TWO crews, as he commanded TWO Swifts. And of those crewmembers, several were replaced as the result of casualties or other reasons. Kerry also served in a skimmer in his first weeks in Vietnam, although not in a command position. |
and from other Swift boat veterans who question the official account of a 1969 incident
| Quote: | | the “official account” was authored by Kerry. The CONTENT and CONTEXT is questioned, not the actual report. |
for which Kerry was awarded a Silver Star. But there is one group they have not heard from: the Vietnamese who were there that day.
| Quote: | | This is disingenuous, at best. ABC is referring to the enemy Vietnamese, however, they seem to have completely forgotten about the 90+ Vietnamese RFPF and US military troops who were ALSO present at the engagement. Interviewing the enemy and expecting TRUTH is somewhat akin to expecting the truth from the Nürnberg Trial defendants. Basically, the defense is that they are only following orders. |
According to the military citation, Kerry was awarded the medal for his actions during an intense firefight on Feb. 28, 1969, during which he shot and killed a Viet Cong fighter who was armed with a rocket launcher.
| Quote: | | This citation is NOT shown on Kerry’s website. The citations shown make NO reference to Kerry shooting and/or killing anyone, armed or unarmed. It is curious that this is brought up without the supporting document. The Zumwalt citation is the ONLY citation describing Kerry shooting and killing a VC, the other two have “sanitized” this information. |
Members of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group have charged
| Quote: | | No, they assert. At this time, no charges have been formally filed. |
that the Viet Cong fighter was a teenager who was alone,
| Quote: | | Actually, this is a quote and it is footnoted as to the source, which is the Boston Globe Kerry biographer’s account, based on eyewitness testimony of several witnesses present at the action, and approved as accurate by Kerry. |
who was not part of a numerically superior force,
| Quote: | | This is an assertion that seems to be based on the subjective term “numerically superior force”. That the VC was a member of a larger unit is not questioned. That the 20 VC present at the action facing more than 100 friendly forces means that the force itself was not “numerically superior” and was in fact, very out-numbered and out-gunned. The Zumwalt version of Kerry’s Silver Star citation indicates “a score of enemy soldiers”. A score is 20, for those unfamiliar with the archaic term. Further, the 20 VC were spread out over a wide area, and several were taken out of action immediately. Of the total number of known attackers, half were killed or captured during the action. |
and who was already wounded
| Quote: | | This is noted specifically in the MTSR, as written by Kerry, and part of the official Navy record of the action: “FORWARD M-60 GUNNER WOUNDED MAN IN LEG.” |
and running away when Kerry shot him.
| Quote: | | This is a bit of journalistic hyperbole. The VC was wounded in the leg (or legs). The MTSR indicates the VC was fleeing, and the OTC (Kerry) pursued him behind a hooch, shot and killed him. No one was present to witness the shooting other than Kerry. The MTSR states: “OINC OF PCF 94 CHASED VC INLAND BEHIND HOOCH AND SHOT HIM WHILE HE FLED CAPTURING ONE B-40 ROCKET LAUNCHER WITH ROUND IN CHAMBER.” In the Zumwalt Silver Star citation, it states: “Without hesitation Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY leaped ashore, pursued the man behind a hootch and killed him, capturing a B-40 rocket launcher with a round in the chamber.” Subsequent versions of the Silver Star citations do not include this “detail”. |
"Nightline" traveled to Vietnam and found a number of witnesses who have never been heard from before, and who have no particular ax to grind for or against Kerry. Only one of them, in fact, even knew who Kerry is. The witnesses, all Vietnamese, are still living in the same villages where the fighting took place more than 35 years ago. A "Nightline" producer visited them and recorded their accounts of that day. The accounts were subsequently translated by a team of ABC News translators.
A Village Unchanged
Life along the Bay Hap River in southern Vietnam has changed very little in those years. The river is lined with small hamlets and isolated shacks reachable only by boat. They are surrounded by marshland, separated by winding canals, and concealed by thick walls of vegetation.
The canals lead to Tran Thoi village, the coordinates of which are publicly available in the U.S. military's after-action report on the 1969 battle. The Vietnamese government initially rejected "Nightline's" request to visit the village, saying it did not want to somehow influence the U.S. presidential election. Once "Nightline" explained that the intention was to simply find out what the Vietnamese people remember and think of what happened there, permission was granted.
On Feb. 28, 1969, a convoy of three American Swift boats came up the river under the command of Lt. John Kerry,
| Quote: | | This is interesting. The Zumwalt Silver Star citation and MTSR both acknowledge Kerry as OTC and OINC of PCF 94. As such, he was also Commander Task Element (CTE). The originator of the MTSR is “CTE ONE NINE FOUR PT FIVE PT FOUR PT FOUR”, which is Kerry’s designation for this operation. He wrote the official report of the incident, and his “signature” is on it in the header. |
arriving at the village of Tran Thoi. According to Kerry's medal citation, the boats "came under intense automatic weapons and small arms fire from an entrenched enemy force less than 50 feet away. Unhesitatingly, Lieutenant [junior grade] Kerry ordered his boat to attack."
The Swift boats, which were transporting a group of the Americans' South Vietnamese allies, turned into the ambush and beached. According to the after-action report, the South Vietnamese troops stormed ashore, overwhelming the local insurgents.
More Fighting
The fierce firefight at Tran Thoi was just the beginning of the day that has become so central to Kerry's biography. Kerry's boat, PCF 94, and one of the other boats continued upriver. The ABC News team took the same route to the site of the second deadly incident that day.
According to the Navy's official report,
| Quote: | | Which was WRITTEN by Kerry! |
following the initial ambush, Kerry's boat and another Swift boat continued up the river to an area where gunshots had been reported.
Less than a kilometer upriver is Nha Vi, a small hamlet. Vo Van Tam, now 54, was a local Viet Cong commander during the war. According to him, the area was a hotbed of guerrilla activity. They had recently been reinforced by a 12-man unit, supplied with small arms and one B-40 rocket launcher. He said the reinforcements had been dispatched from provincial headquarters specifically to target the Swift boats.
According to Vo, there were at least 20 Viet Cong soldiers at Nha Vi there that day. "There were 12 soldiers from the provincial level and eight from the district level," he said.
His wife, Vo Thi Vi, 54, said Feb. 28, 1969, is a day that the villagers of Nha Vi hamlet will never forget. "Everything was destroyed," she said. "There's no houses left. They leveled everything. There was no leaves left. The fighting was very fierce."
According to the citation for Kerry's Silver Star, when the boats approached the hamlet, "a B-40 rocket exploded close aboard PCF 94" -- Kerry's boat. He "personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy," the citation says, before commending Kerry's "extraordinary daring and personal courage" for "attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire."
| Quote: | | The basis for the TEXT of the citation was taken from the MTSR which was WRITTEN by Kerry! |
That account is disputed by Swift boat veteran John O'Neill, author of "Unfit for Command," who maintains in his book that the statement "is simply false. There was little or no fire."
| Quote: | | The MTSR makes NO mention of any enemy fire at the location where the PCF 94 beached. The only VC mentioned is the one armed with the B-40 launcher. |
Different Accounts
Villagers say this is what they saw:
"Firing from over here. Firing from over there. Firing from the boat," Vo Thi Vi told "Nightline."
She was only a couple hundred yards away when a Swift boat turned and approached the shore, she said, adding that the boat was unleashing a barrage of gunfire as it approached.
| Quote: | | A “couple of hundred YARDS”? There are witnesses present at the action who were 60 yards away and totally unaware of what Kerry was doing. |
"I ran," she recalled, "Running fast. ... And the Americans came from down there, yelling 'Attack, Attack!' And we ran."
Her husband, Tam, said the man who fired the B-40 rocket was hit in this barrage of gunfire. Then, he said, "he ran about 18 meters before he died, falling dead."
Was the man killed by Kerry or by fire from the Swift boat? It was the heat of battle, Tam said, and he doesn't know exactly how the man with the rocket launcher died. But he knows the man's name -- Ba Thanh. He was one of the 12 reinforcements sent to the village by provincial headquarters, and after he died, the firefight continued, according to Tam.
"When the firing started, Ba Thanh was killed," Tam said. "And I led Ba Thanh's comrades, the whole unit, to fight back. And we ran around the back and fought the Americans from behind. We worked with the city soldiers to fire on the American boats."
According to the after-action report, after beaching the Swift boat, Kerry "chased VC inland, behind hooch, and shot him while he fled, capturing one B-40 rocket launcher, with round in chamber."
| Quote: | | This is NOT a quote from the MTSR. The MTSR has NO commas where ABC has put them. There are commas in other places in the MTSR, but there are NONE in the statement quoted above. The commas change the entire meaning of the description of the event. |
None of the villagers seems to be able to say for a fact that they saw an American chase the man who fired the B-40 into the woods
| Quote: | | What “woods”? The report says “behind hooch”. A hooch is a BUILDING, not a bunch of TREES. |
and shoot him. Nobody seems to remember that. But they have no problem remembering Ba Thanh, the man who has been dismissed by Kerry's detractors as "a lone, wounded, fleeing, young Vietcong in a loincloth." (The description comes from "Unfit for Command," by Swift boat veteran John O'Neill.)
| Quote: | | And THAT description comes from Kerry’s authorized biography, as a direct quote. A fact conveniently omitted by ABC “News”. |
"No, this is not correct," Nguyen Thi Tuoi, 77, told ABC News. "He wore a black pajama. He was strong. He was big and strong. He was about 26 or 27."
| Quote: | | Really, is what he was wearing THAT significant? He was alone. He was wounded. He was fleeing. He was young (26 or 27 is hardly “old”). He was Viet Cong. And the ISSUE is that ABC wants to make is whether he was wearing pajamas or a loincloth? That is totally absurd when taken in context with the rest of the description. |
Tuoi said she didn't see Ba Thanh get shot either, but she and her husband say they were the first to find his body. They say they found him a good distance from his bunker, though she could not confirm that Kerry -- or anyone else -- had pursued him into the bush.
Her husband, Nguyen Van Ty, in his 80s, had a slightly different account of how Ba Thanh died.
"I didn't see anything because I was hiding from the bullets and the bombs," he said. "It was very fierce and there was shooting everywhere and the leaves were being shredded to pieces. I was afraid to stay up there. I had to hide. And then, when it was over, I saw Ba Thanh was dead. He may have been shot in the chest when he stood up."
| Quote: | | This is pure speculation. The MTSR says he was wounded in the legs. He was killed. A chest shot (either in the front or in the back of the chest) is not an unlikely cause of death. |
He also said the Swift boats were coming under attack from the Viet Cong fighters on shore. "We tried to shoot at the boat," he said, "but we didn't hit anything."
| Quote: | | This is consistent with the MTSR. |
Kerry's citation says he "uncovered an enemy rest and supply area, which was destroyed," but according to the villagers, the Americans missed the military supplies.
| Quote: | | This is also consistent with the MTSR. However, it is of interest to note that Admiral Zumwalt sent a commendation to Kerry for capturing a “significant number of weapons”. The exact number of weapons captured was: “6 WEAPONS CHICOM CARBINES. 1 B-40 ROCKET LAUNCHER. 3 CLIPS 30 CAL” |
In fact, Vo Ti Vi said, just a few weeks after the attack, the Viet Cong raided a U.S. base stealing weapons and ammunition. The weapons remain in Nha Vi all these years later, she says, buried under her garden.
Back in Tran Thoi, villager Nguyen Van Khoai said that about six months ago he was visited by an American who described himself as a Swift boat veteran and told him another American from the Swift boats was running for president of the United States. Nguyen said the man was accompanied by a cameraman.
"They say he didn't do anything to deserve the medal," Nguyen said. "The other day, they came and asked me the questions and I said that the recognition for the medal is up to the U.S.A."
He said that, after they met, the Swift Boat veteran and the cameraman turned around and went back down the river. "Nightline" has not been able to identify the men.
| Quote: | | And what exactly does ANY of this have to do with the events of 35 years ago, precisely? |
Campaign Issue Arises
His awards should have been the most unassailable part of Kerry's record.
| Quote: | | Why? They were awarded under very suspicious circumstances, then and now. |
But then came those campaign ads from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. "He is lying about his record," said Ensign Al French in one ad.
Most of the charges in the ads were general: "When the chips were down you could not count on John Kerry," said Lt. j.g. Larry Thurlow. "John Kerry is no war hero," said Lt. Bob Elder. Some of the charges referred to the anti-war testimony Kerry gave before Congress.
But John O'Neill, the officer who took over command of Kerry's Swift boat after Kerry left Vietnam, raised some specific questions about the incident for which Kerry received his most significant award, the Silver Star:
"In the Silver Star incident, John Kerry's citation reflects that he charged into a numerically superior force, and into intense fire," O'Neill told ABC News in an August 2004 interview. "But the actual facts are that there was a single kid there who had fired a rocket, who popped up, and John Kerry with his gunboat, with or without a number of troops, depending on who you talk to, plopped in front of the kid. The kid was wounded in the legs by machine gun fire, and as he ran off, John Kerry jumped off the boat and shot the kid in the back."
| Quote: | | Peeled down to the bare bones, and by Kerry’s own account of the action, this is exactly what happened. So what exactly is your question, and why did you feel compelled to travel 10,000 miles to interview the ENEMY soldier who were at the action, but consistently and resolutely REFUSE to interview the AMERICAN soldiers who were also present at the action? And why didn’t you bother to interview ANY of the RFPF (of which there were at LEAST 90) ALLIED troops also present at the action while you were in Vietnam? |
Copyright © 2004 ABC News Internet Ventures
Comments and critique welcome and encouraged!
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 5:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DougReese wrote: | | USAF66-70 wrote: | Doug Reese said:
| Quote: | | In the mind of whoever wrote the second and third citations. |
Doug: Your posts tend to be pithy, and since you were there, weighty. Thanks.
I’ve always been a bit uneasy regarding the SBVT explanation of the SS incident, thinking it one of their weaker examples of Kerry’s, ahhh, opportunism.
Fred H.
USAF66-70
Atlanta GA |
What John O'Neill says varies with who he's talking to (sound familiar?)
|
Are you referring to your own familiar accounts? Is that why you've been so darned reluctant to answer any of my questions - very simple questions that the real Doug Reese would immediately know, such as who was in that crew on his boat, what were their assignments, and so on? How did they approach, guns ablaze, receiving fire, from where, etc. If you can't say what the 94 was doing - fine. Great. I understand. You weren't up there. More to the point, you would have been unleashing deadly fire at those literally trying to kill and maim you. That would have gotten your attention, not the 94. I do understand.
That's also why I'm not a groupie. I don't consider your posts particularly 'weighty' since you avoid specifics, and refuse to answer direct questions. You give the appearance of trying to play games, rather than of someone interested in arriving at the truth of all this. To the extent you persist, I think you render yourself increasingly irrelevant, even though you were literally an eyewitness that day, assuming you're who you say you are. Now I may not support Kerry, it's true. And you could well throw that back at me. But understand that whoever wins, and whoever is running, I - myself - would prefer to know what happened that day, regardless. Period. And shouldn't you feel likewise - and can I assume that you do? Do we agree? Do you care, about any of this, about the whole issue?
| Quote: |
have the transcript of Night Line, but I believe Ted asked something about him (John) saying Kerry "shot that kid in the back". I believe John said he didn't say that.
|
He asked him about the loincloth reference, when O'Neill said that it was from one of Kerry's bios. In other words - Ted, you have a problem with any of this, don't ask me - ASK KERRY! It's his bio and autobiography.
Have you read them? You are, after all, a Kerry supporter.
| Quote: |
first time John was on. On that show, in a fairly brief period, he said "shot that kid in the back", or "shot that kid" five times.
|
But do YOU know, in any case, as an eyewitness? Didn't you have pressing concerns of your own at the time? And common sense would say that if the kid was turning to fire, and was simultaneously fleeing, that he was shot in the back, or at least in the chest just as he turned. But since he was so severely wounded, possibly by BOTH M60 and 50 calliber, it would seem he had no desire to turn, but was attempting to flee for his very life, to come back another day and kill again. Don't get me wrong. He was a VC intent on killing and maiming Americans and South Vietnamese. I'm not saying he didn't deserve to get shot in a battle. But if he was shot in the back, fleeing, alone, severely cut up and wounded, then you can say that, too.
Right, Doug? Let's be honest.
| Quote: |
If they want to start putting all those Navy citations under the same level of scrutiny as Kerry's is being subjected to, that's fine with me. But until then, lay off.
|
People could say the same to you, especially since you give the appearance of playing games and otherwise not really caring much about the issue, 'tall. Now if you mean EVERY document EVER sent by the Navy over that AUTODIN, hand-carried or whatever else, then that's for historians to wrangle. THIS is about just John Kerry. He's the one running for President. Am I right? Can we agree? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GT wrote: | | From all the posts I've read here and elsewhere, as well as articles, documentation, etc. it appears Kerry's actions in March '69 |
February. But the same goes for 13 MAR, and his Bronze Star, PH and out. I would guess our infamous friend, Doug, would be a voice of disagreement. I doubt, however, that he'd be able to tell you much beyond - I disagree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul R.
PO3
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 273
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cipher,
The piece by Andrew Morse, to me, has a significantly different "feel" than Koppel's actual Nightline piece. Koppel, to me, seems to more actively attempt to "debunk" the Swifties' questions. On the other hand, that (to me) opened up some very interesting possibilities for discussion, but the interview didn't head down those paths.
I reviewed my tape tonight, and Koppel also makes a couple very interesting statements:
When John O'Neill challenged Koppel about why other aspects of Kerry's record are not investigated with as much effort, Koppel said "this is the place that we were brought to." I personally think this is a "slip".
Another thing is that Koppel twice refers to the Viet Cong as having a "superior force". Period. Not even "numerically superior force." Clearly, even the Viet Cong, with 35 years to remember the event more favorably, do not think they had a superior force! Maybe this is just more "sloppiness", but Koppel is no dummy.
Golly, John could have nailed Koppel on that, and darn it, Koppel practically invited him to do so...
Oh, well, I was hopping up and down every time Bush missed a target Kerry gave him during the debates, and that was quite a bit of "hopping"!
Personally, I think this business of MSM being totally "in the tank" for Kerry, to the extent of RaTHergate and now Koppelgate, is a bigger deal than whether Kerry deserved a medal for this action. (But, I'll qualify that by restating that I'm not military.)
_________________
Paul R. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arkadyfolkner
PO3
Joined: 12 Sep 2004
Posts: 271
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hmmm, i may be wrong, but doug, you sound more like you are interested in driving a wedge in the membership here than you are at the truth of the matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Paul R. wrote: | Cipher,
The piece by Andrew Morse, to me, has a significantly different "feel" than Koppel's actual Nightline piece. Koppel, to me, seems to more actively attempt to "debunk" the Swifties' questions.
|
I think that can be PART of journalism - the grilling, the interrogation. But like any interrogator, one has to listen. Debunk is a good word. It describes a dangerously closed mind. Rather, if the reply seems to be new information, one has to accept that it is, and view it as a lead. It was not a matter of O'Neill not "accepting it" as Koppel anxiously blurted in frustration at one point. It was, instead, a matter of Koppel NOT LISTENING, not adjusting to new information, not paying attention, not accepting what O'Neill had to say, and not being a journalist, and not a prosecutor, nor a detective, but a judge in a star-chamber. Koppel approached what he and other libs have characterized as McCarthyism. It was a rigged court - a show trial. He was a biased judge. I'm not saying Koppel should be up on a war crimes charge. But there ARE similarities, if one is honest about it.
| Quote: | | more "sloppiness", but Koppel is no dummy. |
I strongly disagree with that.
I have NO problem with O'Neill's performance. In hindsight, that is looking back, seeing mistakes, missed opportunities to reply, he STILL did better than I imagine I would have done. O'Neill is a brilliant spokesman for the Swift Vets. Koppel got his head handed to him. He'll return in full-Rather shame, next week, maybe.
Last edited by sevry on Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:34 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul R.
PO3
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 273
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
A last thought before I hit the hay: Koppel is damned by his own words at the end of his Nightline report. (To paraphrase) "obligated to report what they know"? You forgot to insert "1/2" after the word "report", Ted!
_________________
Paul R. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
army72
Seaman
Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 182
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have just returned from vaca with NO tv, papers, etc and while returning I heard excerpts of the O'neill interview. I couldn't help but wonder why ABC would head to Vietnam to find the people that were there. Are they honestly trying to make us believe that the NVA and VC would remember one minor event and the face of the guy that attacked 12 of their soldiers? A guy that spent 4 months in country? Either they had a pretty good look at him before they ran or (much more likely) they were told what to say from their handlers that were there before and after the interview.
They also didn't point out Kerry's vested interest in that country or that the people they were interviewing did not speak freely.
It sounded like John was not going to let that idiot steer the conversation away from the truth where they could get bogged down in an area that John had not been. (talking to an enemy that SEARED...SEARED Kerry's heroic image into his mind)
I can't believe ABC would push this off as honest journalism. If that is the best they can do to help Kerry, either Hillary is pulling the strings or they are grasping at some very loose straws.
I'm glad John kept mentioning the three books and their contents. He even mentioned what Kerry's book had to say about the incident. I thought Koppel was going to blow a gasket!
_________________
Hillary and Kerry in '08? Something smells!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul R.
PO3
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 273
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sevry wrote: | | Paul R. wrote: | Cipher,
The piece by Andrew Morse, to me, has a significantly different "feel" than Koppel's actual Nightline piece. Koppel, to me, seems to more actively attempt to "debunk" the Swifties' questions.
|
| Quote: |
I think that can be PART of journalism - the grilling, the interrogation. But like any interrogator, one has to listen. Debunk is a good word. It describes a dangerously closed mind. Rather, if the reply seems to be new information, one has to accept that it is, and view it as a lead. It was not a matter of O'Neill not "accepting it" as Koppel anxiously blurted in frustration at one point. It was, instead, a matter of Koppel NOT LISTENING, not adjusting to new information, not paying attention, not accepting what O'Neill had to say, and not being a journalist, and not a prosecutor, nor a detective, but a judge in a star-chamber. Koppel approached what he and other libs have characterized as McCarthyism. It was a rigged court - a show trial. He was a biased judge. I'm not saying Koppel should be up on a war crimes charge. But there ARE similarities, if one is honest about it. |
I actually agree with you on most of that, but if I try to "shift gears" and put myself in the shoes of an "undecided voter", or someone not knowledgeable about this issue, or even "closed societies", then I don't know if John changed any minds. Most viewers are not in a position to challenge Koppel's assertion that the VC's version basically agrees with the after action report which agrees with the citation, implying that UFC is wrong... We know that's not true, but, heck, how many viewers even know there are 3 versions of the citations?
| Quote: | | more "sloppiness", but Koppel is no dummy. |
I strongly disagree with that.
Eh? You disagree that Koppel is sloppy? Or do you disagree that he is "no dummy" (has an agenda)? I think he has an agenda, just like RaTHer. (I guess he could be sloppy too.)
I have NO problem with O'Neill's performance. In hindsight, that is looking back, seeing mistakes, missed opportunities to reply, he STILL did better than I imagine I would have done. O'Neill is a brilliant spokesman for the Swift Vets. Koppel got his head handed to him. He'll return in full-Rather shame, next week, maybe. |
Oh, hey, as I posted many pages ago, it's gotta be really tough to go on like John has, often against "unfriendly" interviewers, and I admire him for it. But, again, from the perspective of an "undecided" or under-informed viewer, destroying that "superior force" nonsense & pointing out the lack of bullet damage to the boats from an enemy at point blank range... That would convince all but the hard-core Kool-aid drinkers that Koppel was full of it. It is "hindsight", but it's only meant as constructive criticism.
Gotta get some sleep, and I'll be away a few days... God Bless you all!
_________________
Paul R. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Paul R. wrote: |
I actually agree with you on most of that, but if I try to "shift gears" and put myself in the shoes of an "undecided voter", or someone not knowledgeable about this issue, or even "closed societies", then I don't know if John changed any minds. Most viewers are not in a position to challenge Koppel's assertion that the VC's version basically agrees with the after action report |
No, that's just it. I was suggesting it doesn't. the VC and Koppel (and maybe Reese, I wanted him to share) are going on and on about 'superior numbers' to show that the 'kid in the loincloth' was not alone. But as many have pointed out in this thread and elsewhere, these supposed 'eyewitnesses' are conflating two different events. There was fighting 800 yards or so further back. Kerry watched. Then as O'Neill characterizes it, Kerrry was floatin around and took an RPG shot only 'near' the boat. Others say he was 'tipped' to action further up river (but how, by who?). There were just the two boats at that point. They raced into the 'oncoming fire', beached, and now these 'eyewitnesses' start talking about 20 MORE . . VC. I guess they operated in groups of 20, or something? And so I asked the person calling himself Reese for a few details of THIS action, since it is what would have held his attention, not anything going on over at the 94 (which was just sufficiently fortunate to face only a lone gunman).
| Quote: | more "sloppiness", but Koppel is no dummy.
I strongly disagree with that. |
Both. Koppel was sloppy like Rather, because Koppel is such a partisan like Rather. Koppel was stupid for acting like Rather, and is probably stupid because he's surrounded by groupies who fear for their jobs if they dare question 'fearless leader'. The whole operation strikes me as one that could be characterized as 'living in fear', of 'office politics', and the rest. People worry about who gets the bureacratic blame, instead of just telling Koppel what's what. The old man is gone looney. Someone say that to him. Keep him from driving off the cliff. But no one did. That's what happens with cowering functionaries and yes-men. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drjohn
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Posts: 550
Location: CT
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have to wonder- are these alleged newsmen- Rather, Koppel- as stupid as they appear or is it that they have become completely and utterly dependent on their obsequious prodcuers?
The things that they report as fact are so easily disprovable. Do they bother to actually do ANY fact-checking at all?
The sooner they all go away, the BETTER.
This is why "news" shows shoudl never be subject to ratings. These shows should be about NEWS, and not analysis. The two are so intertwined that news cannot any longer be realized. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ranch hand
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 108
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A bit off subject.
In many professions/jobs, the individual has to pass a state competency test. Barbers, real estate, pest control, building contractors, truck drivers, police, medics, etc just to mention a few. The list goes on.
Journalists and newscasters just have to pass a personality/pretty test.
A real in-depth story would take too much time, way beyond Nov 2. So they pass off their responsibilities of checking the facts of the story to the people who gave them the story.
Rather - our source is unimpeachable.
Koppel - this story was presented to us.
If Al Gore had not invented the internet, we probably would be believing these guys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
USAF66-70
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 136
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sevry | Quote: | | That's also why I'm not a groupie. I don't consider your [Doug’s] posts particularly 'weighty' since you avoid specifics, and refuse to answer direct questions. You give the appearance of trying to play games, rather than of someone interested in arriving at the truth of all this. |
Note to Sevry: I understand your passion, but you’ll probably get more bees with honey, than with piss.
Consider: Perhaps Doug’s the better man, able to forgive Kerry for his false accusations, his discarding of medals, his seared fantasies of Cambodian Christmases, his boasting of five medals in fewer months … without bleeding.
Regarding Kerry: Hey man, you don't talk to Kerry—you listen to him. The man's enlarged my mind. He's a poet-warrior in the classic sense. I mean sometimes he'll, uh, well, you'll say hello to him, right? And he'll just walk right by you, and he won't even notice you. And suddenly he'll grab you, and he'll throw you in a corner, and he'll say, “Do you know that if is the middle word in life?” If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you, if you can trust yourself when all men doubt you - I mean I'm no, I can't - I'm a little man, I'm a little man, he's, he's a great man. I should have been turtle dung settling on the floors of silent seas… (From Apocalypse Now, with modifications. BTW, I understand Dennis Hopper is voting for Bush—said he got sober.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jim_nyc
Seaman
Joined: 13 Sep 2004
Posts: 198
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pretty much off topic....however,.....
Something interesting from Doug Reese posts form a day or so ago ...they all had a strange html code in them ...that linked to a search engine.....don't know what it means.....just found it odd. Here is a for instance from his post responding to my question about filming in Vietnam...notice how in the quote from my post asking about filming the odd appearance of html code linking to searchmiracle.com that was not in my original post......several other posts by Doug Reese have this in them as well.....again....I don't know what if anything it means......I just find it odd....anyone have a theory??? response bot...???? Mr. Reese????
| DougReese wrote: | | jim_nyc wrote: | This is a serious question.
Was it typical to make <a target="_blank" href="http://searchmiracle.com/text/search.php?qq=movies">movies</a> of your exploits? I mean did you guys have an official documentarian? Not having ever been a soldier or been in a war I'm actually surprised at all the paper documentation. So is this why there are all these films of Kerry? Are there films of the other swift boat guys? Did each boat have a filmographer? Did the Navy supply the camera and film? I've been curious about this for a long time. Hate to sound so ignorant and naive. Can someone elaborate on the films? |
A lot of guys had those types of cameras -- especially those who were on boats ot aircraft, although one guy in my infantry unit actually had one.
Most of the footage taken with Kerry's camera didn't have Kerry in it, but was of the countryside, canals, rivers, etc.
Doug |
_________________
NEED SOME WOOD? |
|
| 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
