SwiftVets.com

[Me#1You#10]

I recently revisited an Aug 18, 2008, commentary by James Piereson in The New Criterion entitled "Senator Kerry & the Swift Boat vets" in which Mr. Piereson reflected upon Kerry's strategic failure to effectively neutralize the revelations of the SVPT campaign by attempting to initiate, instead, a counter-attack on Bush via the "Rathergate" debacle (a great read btw). It reminded me, once again, of the reportage by WAPO's Michael Dobbs...which reached it's zenith (and inexplicably sudden terminus) almost concurrent with the initial allegations of "Rathergate".

For the record, it is, I think, revelatory to take a look at a few of the numerous responses by Mr. Dobbs in his Aug 30 2004 online interview which marked his curiously abrupt bailout (or was it removal?) from the SVPT story...

• In my previous reporting, I focused on one particular incident, on March 13, 1969, as a result of which Kerry won a Bronze Star. I feel that my reporting refutes some claims of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, but not all. I have not examined all their claims in detail.
  
• I feel that a serious newspaper like the WP has an obligation to independently examine claims and allegations that are being debated on every talk show in the nation. There are some things that newspapers can do better than TV talk shows, and this is one of them.
  
• I have repeatedly asked the Kerry campaign to provide me with access to his journals and writings, particularly those relating to the Bronze Star incident which I have written about in detail. They have declined my requests so far.
  
• I hope to return to this subject at some point to update readers on what I have learned since the original piece appeared. Kerry has given interviews to the press on this subject in the past, but you're right, he doesn't seem to have given any since the current controversy flared up again in early August. I would very much like to talk to him, but have had no luck so far in my requests for an interview.
  
• I plead guilty to being interested in this story, but then I am a bit of a history nut, and I am fascinated by the way that Vietnam continues to be such a source of continuing division and acrimony in this country.
  
• I think the press should continue to do its job, namely conduct a fair and dispassionate inquiry into the holes in the records.
  
• See my answer to the previous question. As you point out, Kerry spokesmen have repeatedly said that he has put his entire military record on the web (johnkerry.com). If this is so, I cannot see why they should have an objection to an independent researcher (myself or someone else) taking a look at the original file.
  This is still unresolved. There are arguments to be made on either side, and I may come back to it. You are right that portions of the report (ed. addressing a question on the the Bay Hap River after action report) do seem to be written from the perspective of PCF-90 (sic).
  
• I can only speak for myself. I am asking for independent access to his records.
  
• I think I am working toward a fairly complete understanding of what took place on the river on March 13, 1969.

Subsequent to this online interview, Michael Dobbs was not heard from again on the Swiftvets/Kerry story, save for tangential pieces on Sep 30 and another on Oct 16 in which he shared a byline.

Why? What transpired that appears to have so suddenly terminated Mr. Dobb's clearly expressed (and well-received - see C-Span Interview) interest in pursuing the "Truth" of the SVPT/Kerry allegations? Some surmise that the commencement of "Rathergate" drew away all of his journalistic focus. I don't buy that for one minute given his statements above. He was a journalistic bloodhound hot on the scent...and, at least I believe, his leash was purposefully tightened when his reportage threatened to render laughably moot the SVPT "widely discredited" meme, not "Truth", the MSM was so blatantly committed to establishing.

I hope one day Mr. Dobbs will be forthcoming in addressing the above. History and journalistic integrity would be the better for it.