arjr111
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 86
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:58 pm Post subject: NRO Fisks Newsweek |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Newsweek's Evan Thomas and T. Trent Gegax write about the attacks, including this odd paragraph:
An examination of one key incident—Kerry's rescue of a comrade—tends to support Kerry's version of events, though questions remain. Official military records certainly back Kerry, but medal citations are known for making combat seem more glorious than it usually is. On the other hand, the Swift Boat veterans are obviously bitter at Kerry for testifying before Congress in 1971 about alleged war crimes, and their own credibility has proved to be questionable.
Does that wording seem odd to you? Let's go through this in slow-motion with the telestrator:
"An examination of one key incident—Kerry's rescue of a comrade—"
Stop! Wait, why this one? Why not the Christmas in Cambodia story? And why not look at the biggest question about the incident, whether Kerry's allegedly self-inflicted rice-and-shrapnel in the buttocks wound, along with an "abrasion" — bruise — was what got him the third purple heart?
"tends to support Kerry's version of events, though questions remain."
And those questions are? 'Questions remain, but we at Newsweek are not going to tell you what they are.'
"Official military records certainly back Kerry,"
The ones Kerry has allowed to be released, at least. No mention of the 94 pages that haven't been released. Score one point for Team Kerry.
"but medal citations are known for making combat seem more glorious than it usually is."
Subtext: Everybody does it. Your great-uncle's medal up the the attic? Probably what he did wasn't as glorius as he said, or as the citation makes it sound. Move along. Move along.
"On the other hand, the Swift Boat veterans"
Wait, what other hand? You just gave two pro-Kerry arguments! Now, you're moving to the "other hand," balancing the previous sentence with a third pro-Kerry argument?
the Swift Boat veterans are obviously bitter at Kerry for testifying before Congress in 1971 about alleged war crimes,
Completely true, but Newsweek could have mentioned that Kerry never witnessed the massacres he described, and relied on the testimony of some men who had never been in the military, much less in Vietnam.
and their own credibility has proved to be questionable.
Indeed, true. But the seared — seared! — Cambodia story would appear to make Kerry seem questionable, too.
Oh, Newsweek.
|
http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerryspot.asp
_________________
Semper-Fi |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
