Swiftboat Vets startin' to look pretty good.

[Scylla]

@Diogenes the Cynic

Is it more likely that three people would be mistaken or that one person would be mistaken?

One of the guys, Valadonis I think, doesn’t seem very sure of much, so the two that disagree may be taking their cues from each other.

The problem is that there are too many possibilities to choose from. You’ll note that my scenario means that nobody is mistaken or lying. They are just testifying to different events.

I assume this admiral to be honorable, and I assume the two crewmembers to be honorable.

[Sam_Stone]

O’Neill served in two different locations: Sa Dec, and An Thoi. An Thoi is actually off the coast on Phu Quoc Island, and from An Thoi you can be ‘in Cambodia’ simply by sailing north on the sea a couple of miles into Cambodian waters. You can also patrol the coastline of Cambodia from there, or go inland into Cambodia from the sea.

Sa Dec is inland, and it is this area that John Kerry served around Christmas. Sa Dec was the northernmost point of Kerry’s patrol area from Camh Ranh Bay. The Cambodian border is 55 miles from Sa Dec, straight up the Mekong river. From what I understand, it is the Mekong river and tributaries that were blockaded and patrolled to prevent accidental incursions into Cambodia - just before the time that John Kerry said going into Cambodia was ‘routine - no one gave it a thought’, an LST accidentally sailed into Cambodia and created an international incident. After that, the river entries were guarded and barricaded.

John Kerry served at Camh Ranh Bay, inland. He was sent to An Thoi, but for some reason only spent a week or so there before being assigned back to Camh Ranh Bay.

[Scylla]

But I gotta beleive Schacte was there. He was in command, you know. The Boston Globe biography version seems to have him on the scene.

[jshore]

@Atticus Finch

He’s never claimed that’s his only or primary qualification to become President. Sure, during the Dem Convention and in other speeches he talked about his service in Vietnam a great deal, but how can you blame a politician (or more accurately his advisers, presumably) for pointing out that he’s a war hero? This is standard practice, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it, whether it’s Bob Dole or George Bush talking about WW2, or Kerry, Cleland or McCain talking about Vietnam. All these people emphasized their service while running for national office. All were entitled to do so.

His emphasis of Vietnam was also necessitated by the fact that the Republicans have long been using scare-tactics and scurrilous attacks to imply that the Democrats are not sufficiently patriotic or willing to defend the country or what-not.

So, it is somewhat disingenuous for the Republicans to now be claiming that they had the right to go around and start this gutter-attack because Kerry brought up his service. It is rather like someone spreading rumors about how you are likely the type who beats your wife…And then when you talk about what a warm loving relationship you and your wife have, they argue that it is now open season to pry into every aspect and to dig up people of dubious connections who say various scurrilous things about you and your wife and all that.

On the other hand, you do have to give Karl Rove and company a certain amount of credit as evil geniuses. They certainly know how to keep an election away from a discussion of the issues.

[Scylla]

@Sam Stone

O’Neill served in two different locations: Sa Dec, and An Thoi. An Thoi is actually off the coast on Phu Quoc Island, and from An Thoi you can be ‘in Cambodia’ simply by sailing north on the sea a couple of miles into Cambodian waters. You can also patrol the coastline of Cambodia from there, or go inland into Cambodia from the sea.

Sa Dec is inland, and it is this area that John Kerry served around Christmas. Sa Dec was the northernmost point of Kerry’s patrol area from Camh Ranh Bay. The Cambodian border is 55 miles from Sa Dec, straight up the Mekong river. From what I understand, it is the Mekong river and tributaries that were blockaded and patrolled to prevent accidental incursions into Cambodia - just before the time that John Kerry said going into Cambodia was ‘routine - no one gave it a thought’, an LST accidentally sailed into Cambodia and created an international incident. After that, the river entries were guarded and barricaded.

John Kerry served at Camh Ranh Bay, inland. He was sent to An Thoi, but for some reason only spent a week or so there before being assigned back to Camh Ranh Bay.

I stand corrected.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

So we agree that O’Neil lied when he said swift boats never went to Cambodia.
And I’ll take the word of two uninterested parties over the word of anyone belonging to a discredited political smear campaign.

[Scylla]

@jshore

His emphasis of Vietnam was also necessitated by the fact that the Republicans have long been using scare-tactics and scurrilous attacks to imply that the Democrats are not sufficiently patriotic or willing to defend the country or what-not.

“They made me do it.” doesn’t work as an excuse for my five year old.

[Scylla]

@Diogenes the Cynic

So we agree that O’Neil lied when he said swift boats never went to Cambodia.

That’s not what I said. Please don’t mischaracterize my statements. Plus, what I said appears to be wrong. O’neil’s and Kerry’s locations were not the same.

And I’ll take the word of two uninterested parties over the word of anyone belonging to a discredited political smear campaign.

Zaldonis doesn’t remember whether they had a grenade launcher or whether they took fire. Runyon reported concerning Kerry’s wound “I couldn’t say one way or the other (Regarding taking fire,) I know he did get nicked, a scrape on the arm.”

However, Runyon also told the Globe reporters that he “never knew Kerry was wounded.”

So there’s some problems with remembrances on their part. Kerry has two different stories about the incident, one where it was a “half-assed action that hardly qualified as combat,” and another where it’s his “first intense combat” and the “most frightening night” of his life.

Schacte on the other hand was only the officer in command. It was his boat. He was training Kerry. He originated the tactic. How do you explain him not being there?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Scylla

That’s not what I said. Please don’t mischaracterize my statements. Plus, what I said appears to be wrong. O’neil’s and Kerry’s locations were not the same.

O’Neill told CNN that he personally had never been in Cambodia. Locations and times are irrelevant. Never means never. He told Nixon something else. Either he was lying to Nixon or he was lying to CNN. There’s no way out of it.

[quote]
Zaldonis doesn’t remember whether they had a grenade launcher or whether they took fire. Runyon reported concerning Kerry’s wound “I couldn’t say one way or the other (Regarding taking fire,) I know he did get nicked, a scrape on the arm.”

However, Runyon also told the Globe reporters that he “never knew Kerry was wounded.”[/qote]
So what, so what and so what? What does any of that have to do with whether Schachte was on the boat?

So there’s some problems with remembrances on their part. Kerry has two different stories about the incident, one where it was a “half-assed action that hardly qualified as combat,” and another where it’s his “first intense combat” and the “most frightening night” of his life.

It was one of Kerry’s crewmates (one of the guys who was actually on the boat, unlike the lying sack of Schachte) whi called it “the most frightening night of his life,” not kerry. Actually, this crewmate says that his words were distorted by the Swifties to make it appear as if he believed they did not come under fire that night.

Kerry’s story has never changed, He has never once stated that he knew where the shrapnel came from everyone on the boat says that he was looking down at his weapon when he was hit. He has never denied that the shrapnel could have been friendly. He didn’t know and his crewmates didn’t know. You can ridicule him for being lucky enough not to be more seriously injured (as Sam Stone often does), but there isn’t a damn thing dishonorable or illegitimate about that Purple Heart.

Schacte on the other hand was only the officer in command. It was his boat. He was training Kerry. He originated the tactic. How do you explain him not being there?

I don’t have to explain it, he does. I think it’s horseshit that Kerry couldn’t go out alone. He was on his second tour. He wasn’t that green.

[Scylla]

Diogenes:

This is… interesting.

Zaldonis is a member of Kerry’s Band of Brothers, so he’s not necessarily disinterested as Kerry had been putting him up in hotels and flying him around during the tour.

This cite has him serving at AnThoi/Cat Lo at the time in question (look for PCF-31) and not at Cam Ranh Bay.

I’m not going to say that he was lying and wasn’t there based on this alone, but it is worth noting.

Not sure if this is comprehensive.

[Scylla]

@Diogenes the Cynic

However, Runyon also told the Globe reporters that he “never knew Kerry was wounded.”[/qote]
So what, so what and so what? What does any of that have to do with whether Schachte was on the boat?

He’s contradicting himself concerning the incident. It goes to credibility.

It was one of Kerry’s crewmates (one of the guys who was actually on the boat, unlike the lying sack of Schachte) whi called it “the most frightening night of his life,” not kerry. Actually, this crewmate says that his words were distorted by the Swifties to make it appear as if he believed they did not come under fire that night.

On page 36 of UFC they quote Kerry from the Brinkley interview saying it’s the “most frightening night” of his life. Next, you’ll need to cite this “crewmate” who says his words are distorted because UFC cites Zaldonis’ interview not with the Swiftees but with the Boston Globe reporters who wrote Kerry’s biography (page 35)

Finally, you should be careful of what you say about Schacte Rear Adm. William L. Schachte, Jr., was the Acting Judge Advocate General of the Navy upon his retirement. Admiral Schachte’s honors include–the Defense Distinguished Medal; the Defense Superior Service Medal; the Legion of Merit with Gold Star; the Bronze Star with `V’; Combat Action Ribbon; and the Meritorious Service Medal with Gold Star. He served for 30 years and was the veteran of 99 combat missions.

“Sack of shit” Shame on you.

Kerry’s story has never changed,

I’ve already cited two different versions of it.

I don’t have to explain it, he does.

He does. He was the commander in charge. He was training Kerry. That was the whole reason Kerry was there. To get trained. That was the reason Kerry was on the boat. To get experience from Schacte. That’s why he was in Cam Ranh Bay. For training on how to command a boat. He was “Batman” and there were apparently several “Robins” at different times.

I think it’s horseshit that Kerry couldn’t go out alone. He was on his second tour. He wasn’t that green.

The first tour was on the Gridley. From June to November of 67 the Gridley was off the California coast. It went back to Long Beach, I believe and in January went on an extended cruise down to Australia and back to Long Beach in June of '68. In the course of this cruise it spent 5 weeks or so in the Gulf of Tonkin. The Gridley, a guided missile frigate was a deep fleet vessel.

So yes, it was Kerry’s second tour, but it was radically different from his first. Regardless of whether you think it was horseshit Kerry’s purpose in Cam Ranh Bay was to receive training to prepare him for command of a Swiftboat. It appears that you are trying to argue that a guided missile frigate is interchangeable with a Swiftboat.

[Scylla]

@Scylla

This cite has him serving at AnThoi/Cat Lo at the time in question (look for PCF-31) and not at Cam Ranh Bay.

Forgot to put the cite in:
www.swiftboats.net

[Atticus_Finch]

@Scylla

Forgot to put the cite in:

www.swiftboats.net

That’s not a cite, that’s merely a repetition of the allegation. There is no appeal to authority there. It’s like saying “Bush snorts cocaine off hookers’ breasts” - www.kittykelley.com or “Clinton, Gore: Illuminati Space Aliens!” - www.lyndonlarouche.com. Couldn’t you be bothered linking to Free Republic or something?

[rjung]

That’s the Modern Republican “Debating” Tactic for you; just keep repeating the same garbage in hopes of driving away your opponents in exasperation, then declare yourself the “winner” by default.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@rjung

That’s the Modern Republican “Debating” Tactic for you; just keep repeating the same garbage in hopes of driving away your opponents in exasperation, then declare yourself the “winner” by default.

Actually, this is all part of the Karl Rove experience. At Talking Points Memo Josh Marshall discusses a story coming out in Atlantic Monthly:

An article out this week in The Atlantic Monthly focuses specifically on a series of races Rove ran in Texas and Alabama in the 1990s.

The Alabama races in particular haven’t gotten that much national press attention in the past. And one of the most lizardly passages in the article describes how Rove launched a whispering campaign against one Democratic opponent suggesting that the candidate – a sitting Alabama state Supreme Court Justice, who had long worked on child welfare issues – was in fact a pedophile …

Rove looks at his opponents’ strengths and then attacks them with lies. Muddying the water is a victory.

I just hope that enough decent Republicans begin to see through this and maintain enough honor to salvage their party.

[Rashak_Mani]

@Hentor the Barbarian

I just hope that enough decent Republicans begin to see through this and maintain enough honor to salvage their party.

Apparently winning is more important (to both parties actually) and those republicans who might try to dissent are shut out.

[Mr.Svinlesha]

Scylla:

Okay.

Regarding the “M-79 wounds,” I wrote that it seemed unbelievable that he could wound himself like that twice on purpose, and you respond:

I don’t think anybody thinks he did it on purpose.

My impression, from having perused the Swiftvets message board, is that in fact many people believe just that. YMMV.

They do talk about their rationale on the web site and in the book. They don’t have a problem with exagerrations, or medal hunting.

Then why on earth do these baseless accusations take up so much space, both on their web site and in their book?

Both men served their country honorably during their service. I have seen nothing to convince me otherwise.

Perhaps. But which one’s service was more honourable, do you think?

*Well… He’s got his journal’s. The way he makes the statement about it being seared into his memory. Christmas is a pretty specific date. I can remember where I was on most every Christmas since I was a kid.

This is a watershed moment in Kerry’s life, according to Kerry. This is when he realized that the war was a hypocritical mess. This is when he became determined to do something about it. This is a Saul on the road to Damascus having the scales lifted from his eyes.

It looks like he made it up. I really think that’s pretty damaging.*

Yet the fact that Bush lied in order to start an unprovoked war of choice in Iraq, which you have freely admitted, somehow doesn’t damage him in your eyes – at least not to the extent that you would consider voting for someone else. I find this discrepancy simply mind-boggling.

I think he’s lying to. I doubt he was ever in Cambodia.

Well, his biographer claims that he was there, but just got confused about the dates. It’s possible that with the passage of years he got confused about the dates and came to genuinely believe he was in Cambodia on Christmas: these things actually happen, as any psychologist can tell you (ask Hentor, for example). Or, indeed, he may have purposely chosen to ”fib” a bit for the sake of rhetoric – how many old vets don’t occasionally exaggerate a war story or two? Or, finally, he may have been lying outright, although this is simply a faith-based assertion on your part, since you have no evidence whatsoever that he wasn’t in Cambodia.

That’s not the question Svin. The question isn’t whether you can get close to Cambodia. The question is whether you can get in there with a Swiftboat. If the entrances are blocked as is maintained by the Swiftees, I’d say not.

No.

YOU ASKED ME TO PRESENT AN EXAMPLE IN WHICH DEMONSTRATED THAT THE SWIFTVETS WERE ”FULL OF IT.” I PRESENTED ONE QUOTE FROM THEIR BOOK WHICH IS DEMONSTRATABLY FALSE.

Whether Kerry ever was or was not in Cambodia is really irrelevant to this point. In the passage from the book cited above, the Swifties claim that NO SWIFTBOATS WERE ALLOWED TO TRAVEL NORTH OF SA DEC IN DECEMBER OF 1968. The cite I’ve presented, which is a history of Operation Sealords, CLEARLY SHOWS THIS CLAIM TO BE FALSE, AND STATES UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT BY LATE NOVEMBER OF 1968, SWIFT BOATS WERE PLAYING AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN SEALORDS OPERATIONS NORTH FROM SA DEC TO WITHIN AT LEAST 5 KILOMETERS OF THE CAMBODIAN BORDER.

Sorry for the all the caps, but I feel like I have to keep addressing the same objections over and over again. You don’t seem to be reading my links very carefully.

The challenge was not to ”prove” the Swifties were lying, by the way, just that they were ”full of it.” One can be full of it because one is flat out wrong, you know.

And by the way: the claim made by the Swiftvets, that the waterways into Cambodia were marked and blocked by concertina wire, pylons, and so forth, is absurd on the face of it, and has also been shown to be false, in the previous thread on this topic. That’s two examples of the Swifties being ”full of it” thus far, with regard to this story alone. But there’s more.

To further back up their statement on this, I read how it would have been a public relations disaster to have a Swiftboat captured in Cambodia, or a helicopter, or anything else that could be shown to demonstrate that we were acting in a neutral country. Therefore, there is some good reasons to think they were pretty strict about stopping incursions into Cambodia, and not really any good ones why the would be sending Swiftboats there.

By spring of 1970, Nixon had officially sanctioned such incursions into neutral Cambodia.

Let’s say I grant that you are correct and the statement that Anderson makes in innacurate. Is this the best you can get on the Swiftees? Because if it is, than I think there claims stand up very well, especially, say compared to Kerry who has multiple contradictory versions of many events on the record.

I can’t really judge if it’s the best. It was just the first example I happened to find handy. We have more, many more. If you concede that this an example of ”inaccuracy” on the part of the Swifties, we can move on to the next one, if you like. I’ve got time.

Frankly, if you are going to say the Swiftvets are a bunch of liars, you need something better than a potential innacuracy on a minor point to prove it.

Why is it that when I give you what you request, you always degrade it as a ”potential inaccuracy on a minor point”? This, you claim, is a minor point. That the Kerry campaign has admitted that Kerry ”might” have wounded himself with his own M-79 on December 2, 1968, is a ”minor point,” you tell me.

When does a lie or inaccuracy become a ”major point”?

I did provide you a cite, though a secondhand one, and I did mention that I recalled it. Since it’s minor, I hoped you didn’t need me to go search. If it’s not I will, after this post. Like I said, it’s your call. You want it, I’ll go find it.

I don’t want to send you on a fruitless hours-long search over things you believe to be minor. Concede that you have no real evidence for your statement and we can forget it. But if you want to cling to this claim, or make it in other arguments, then I’m going to be forced to ask you to back it up.

By the way, I don’t really consider this statement to be minor. If the Kerry campaign has admitted that Kerry may have wounded himself, by mistake, with his own M-79, for which he received his first Purple Heart, I would consider it to be major. Remember, though, that the quote in question must specifically concede that, in the incident that led to Kerry’s first Purple Heart, Kerry wounded himself with his own M-79, as claimed by Schacte.

Continuing: with regard to this first Purple Heart, I wrote that ”within 9 days he (Kerry) was commanding a Swift boat all on his own.” You respond:

No. Kerry arrived in coastal squadron one, Cam Ranh Bay on November 17, 1968 for training. On December 6, 1968 he was transferred to An thoi on phu quo Island, coastal division 11 and given command of the Swiftboat PCF 44. That’s like 3 weeks. Does this innacuracy prove you a liar, the way the earlier suggested innacuracy of Anderson makes him a liar? I’m asking rhetorically of course.

?

Kerry received his first Purple Heart on Dec 2, 1968. Yes? He was given command of PCF 44 on Dec. 6, 1968. That’s four days later, which is certainly a period ”within 9 days.” In what way have I been inaccurate?

Finally: I’m not all that concerned about Kerry’s memory. I’m asking you about Hibbert’s memory. See my post #145, bottom section.

[Cartooniverse]

@BrainGlutton

I’m familiar with the three instances alleged in your OP, but the above two are news to me. Cite?

Sure. Dateline:NBC Article including this

Case Studies: The Absence of Gatekeeping in TV News Magazines

        In November, 1992, NBC aired a segment on its then fledgling prime-time news magazine "Dateline NBC" that would catapult the issue of media gatekeeping to the forefront of public consciousness.  The segment, of course, was the memorable report on General Motors' pickup trucks and allegations that side-mounted gasoline tanks could rupture and explode during a collision.  Among the report's sources were families who lost loved ones in fatal crashes involving this particular GM model truck and were now suing GM for their losses.  Among its findings were GM's apparent culpability for a flawed product that the company knew to be flawed.

        On the surface, the story fit all the traditional definitions of news.  In fact, the GM story fits every category of what Hausman (pp. 13-14) describes as the six major criteria for determining news value.  It (1) treated a subject that many viewers could identify with, either directly or indirectly (i.e. the loss of a loved one, either one's own friend, relative, child, or that of an acquaintance) ; (2) had the potential for an immediate and direct impact on news consumers (i.e. most Americans drive and many would be making new car/truck purchase decisions)  ; (3) possessed an element of the unusual (i.e. pickup trucks aren't seen exploding everyday); (4) was of a timely nature (i.e. the trucks in question were still on the market; (5) had dramatic elements (i.e. it had suspense and conflict to keep viewers' attention; and (6) involved magnitude (i.e. GM is a huge corporation that sells millions of vehicles nationwide).

        In the "Dateline" case, the issue becomes one of a distorted balance between and among these criteria.  By emphasizing one of the story's elements--in this case its dramatic potential--each of the remaining five criteria that gave the GM story its news value become subservient.  Each becomes lost in an overriding concern with captivating attention and peaking viewer interest.  The object is to attain  a level of suspense and conflict rivaling what is customary in a movie or similar entertainment programming.  The program's  methodology for presenting this story, as we shall see, focused entirely on using dramatic elements as a means of developing and strengthening each of the other criteria that, minus drama,  still would have collectively constituted grounds for a news story.  The difference in "Dateline's" instance is that by isolating and stressing its dramatic elements it becomes, in the parlance of television, a better  story.  

        To understand where gatekeeping went so terribly wrong in the "Dateline-GM" story one need only consider another statement from Hausman (p. 6) concerning television's ability to distort the news in its quest for a better story.  " Television... is a medium of pictures," he states, "and in many cases a story will not be run if it does not contain pictures, especially good pictures.  Problems can and do arise from such visual requirements."  In the instance of what has since become known as the "exploding pickups" story, NBC news producers clearly used the admonition "a story will not be run if it does not contain pictures, especially good pictures" as the impetus for making sure that a "good"--that is, a visually dramatic--story would end up on air.

        Specifically, when NBC's own videotaped crash tests failed to produce the required dramatic visuals to support its story, "Dateline" producers, it was later determined, mounted incendiary devices on a GM truck.  The result was an impressive inferno that would help ensure the story's dominance not just among the other stories on "Dateline," but also among all other primetime network and syndicated programming.  This concern over the larger television "marketplace" had indeed overshadowed the role of traditional broadcast television.  The emphasis on competition--for individual producers and correspondents to get on the air and for a show itself to stay on the air--can be seen in the context of a multi-channel media world where news programming must now justify its  financial worth and existence alongside other forms of programming. 

        Media critic Ed Siegel suggests that a sequence of high-level management decisions at NBC may have led to the decisions made by "Dateline" producers to explode the GM pickups in 1992.  First was the network's purchase by General Electric in 1986.  "Prior to that," Siegel writes, "when the network was run by RCA and Grant Tinker, the network president, there was still a sense that news was something that a network engaged in as a means of 'giving something back,' as Tinker put it, for using public airwaves to attain profit."  With the coming of GE came a significant shift in that philosophy.  "GE president Jack Welch," Siegel points out, "said with a certain pride that the network should be operated like the toaster division--i.e. strictly for profit" (p. 75). 

        Next came the hiring of NBC news president Michael Gartner who, on several public occasions, reportedly agreed with his bosses that it was irresponsible for a news division not to turn a profit.  At the time, NBC did not have a prime-time news magazine to rival CBS' "60 Minutes" or ABC's "20/20" and it was also the only network news division to lose money.  Siegel, again, suggests that the news division was under tremendous pressure to change this scenario.  In the traditional broadcasting hierarchy, as in most organizations, standards came from the top: from network executives who were the organization's internal gatekeepers over program methodology and content.  

        What the "Dateline" case illustrates is a an abdication by network executives of that gatekeeping function, combined with a failure by skilled and experienced network level news personnel to recognize and implement self-imposed limits.   This would seem to suggest that in the absence of recognized institutional gatekeepers the decision-making process in electronic news magazine programming can become based more in economics than ethics. 

[Sam_Stone]

Well, his biographer claims that he was there, but just got confused about the dates. It’s possible that with the passage of years he got confused about the dates and came to genuinely believe he was in Cambodia on Christmas: these things actually happen, as any psychologist can tell you (ask Hentor, for example).

He started using the ‘Christmas in Cambodia’ story shortly after returning from Vietnam. Within a few years, anyway. He used it on the Senate floor in 1986, 18 years ago. It was already a well-known story by then. You might make a case that if someone asked Kerry about a detail that he had forgotten about 40 years ago, he might remember it incorrectly. But at the time Kerry started using the Christmas in Cambodia story, the events should still have been fresh in his memory.

Plus, this is the ONLY Christmas he spent in Vietnam. Don’t you think he’d remember where he was? Special Christmases like that do not fade from memory.

Plus, Kerry himself claimed that it was ‘seared’ into his memory, not that he’s pretty sure he was there but it was a hectic time and he can’t remember. Until he got caught, the story was told as a certitidude, complete with corroborating details like having the enemy shooting guns into the air in celebration.

There is no doubt about it - Kerry made up that story, and continued to repeat it for decades until someone caught him.

However, I’ll give you an ‘out’. The ‘shooting guns in celebration’ thing confuses me, because Vietnamese are not mostly Christians, and do not celebrate Christmas. But they do celebrate Tet, which I believe was in late January or February. So it’s possible that Kerry conflated that particular detail with seeing a Tet celebration later.

I’m surprised more supporters of Kerry haven’t figured out the Tet angle. I haven’t seen anyone mention it yet.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

I hammered the Tet angle a long time ago back in the other thread. Damned if I’m going to search for it, though.