So, there’s to be, or has been, an ABC Nightline report tonight about some of the SwiftVet allegations and thier investigations thereof. (It may have been on already, I don’t know, I live in Minneapolis. Winter is coming, and we dare not waste precious whale blubber to power the TV…)
You will find a report from thier team who went to Viet Nam to see if any eyewitnesses remained who might corroborate or refute any testitmony. For the most part, its all pretty confused, but seems to largely support Kerry’s version.
But more interesting is the following testimony…
Now I’m pitting this lovely because it has such weak prospects for debate, seeing as how there is no way to prove that the Swift Boat vet and his cameraman were connected to the SwiftVets. It could just be a coincidence, just one of the numerous camera teams roaming rural Viet Nam…
Devil made me do it. I put up a fierce struggle, you may be sure. But, in the end… Besides, repentence is much more palatable after you’ve had a good gloat.
I just finished watching it a bit ago, and wondered if there would be a thread. I hadn’t paid much attention to swift boat veterans on this subject (for or against). I watched the Frontline Election 2004 piece on Bush and Kerry the other night (was on again tonight), and thought Kerry came out sounding like Rambo. Pretty impressive, so I figured before I was too impressed, I’d watch this show to see what other eyewitnesses had to say.
I can’t say I came away thinking Kerry was any more heroic than anyone else who fought in the area that day, but the independent eyewitness testimony did hold more weight for me than a veteran (however much I respect his service) with an agenda. The amount of difficulty reportedly involved in actually finding the correct area was stressed pretty heavily, and so it lowered the likelihood of coincidence in my eyes.
I’m sure Koppel had a few ideas of his own, and maybe that’s why it was stressed, but I do think he did a pretty good job in the interview. His line about (paraphrased) “So you think a bunch of peasants in a few isolated areas, have an agenda regarding this presidential election?” He asked the question, in various forms, a few times. I suppose the answer to that could be yes, if you buy some type of Vietnamese governmental conspiracy. I just wonder if the latter were the case, why the people who were there mentioned they were hiding at various times and didn’t recall seeing how the man with a rocket launcher was gunned down? Just seemed to me they would be more specific about the various claims in dispute, rather than talking about the VC based there and what their own role was in the fighting.
Oh, I also wondered if Koppel’s closing words about reporting what they found, would have been reported positive or negative, and something about integrity was a jab at the previous american who described himself as a swift boat veteran.
How anyone can seriosuly pretend that this wasn’t a Rove go operation from the get go is beyond me. The Sinclair thing is even goofier: this is a company who recieved special largesse from the Bush administration in the form of special defense contracts, a company who believes that it’s financial future relies upon Bush winning so that the the FCC can do away with the laws that prevent them from monopoloizing local tv markets instead of just dominating them. They’ve never aired a documentary before, and indeed almost never had this sort of order from on high about what all the local stations must pre-empt to show. Now they are airing a 50 minute Swift Boat Vet advertisement for free, produced by a right-wing Moonie kook?
Rove said, out loud, to journalists, that he had some good stuff prepared for the final weeks to smear Kerry with. We aren’t supposed to make the connection?
Watched the program and seeing O’Neill’s pitiful performance when caught with his pants down, couldn’t help but think of Brother Whack-a-Boaters, Sam and Scylla, and how much better they might have fared under Ted’s prove. Unless of course, as O’Neill, they can only spin from the comfort of their desks where time is not a factor and semantic games trump visual evidence.
O’Neill sole line of “defense” consisted in pointing out that he was “very disappointed” that Nightline would take the words of people from a “closed society” over his and his Shifties – and alegedly, those in Kerry’s own bio. I say “alegedly” because he was conflating two distinct issues.
One was Kerry’s narration of the Vietcong fighter he chased and killed and his description of said event, when he said, and I paraphrase, “thank God there’s was only one.” The other one was the overall number of Vietcong involved in the firefight – there were many, as confirmed by the after-report of the incident, the Navy’s own Silver Star citation, and now by the very Vietnamese that were present and/or participated in the skirmish.
O’Neill’s one-note “defense” also included lots of book waving which only made him look siller – if that’s possible – for in the normal wide shots taken during interviews, all you could see was a lying nutter holding some sort of book next to his face. Koppel told him as much. Though to my regret, he was a bit more polite than I would have been and obviated the “lying nutter” part.
Then again, the whole thing was rather obvious and self-descriptive.
PS-cichlidiot, you may well be right in your interpretation of Koppel’s parting words, but the first thing that came to my mind was that he was referencing and taking a slight dig at the whole CBS scandal – and in particular, the alledgedly damaging forged documents report that has been withheld because of it.
Is it part of the story that the Swift Boat Veterans, in their search for truth, travelled to Vietnam and interviewed the appropriate persons: finding that the witnesses confirmed Kerry’s heroism and repudiated their own narrative they then omitted to publish their findings?
According to the story, an unidentified swift boat veteran went to Vietnam with a cameraman in an effort to find evidence to use against John Kerry (claiming he didn’t deserve his medals), but were unsuccessful, seeing as how the locals interviewed tell a story that pretty much mirrors that which was in the after action report and the medal citation.
The group known as Swift Veterans and POWs for Truth deny that the swift boat veteran who went there was anyone affiliated with them.
The odds that there could possibly be a swift boat veteran who isn’t affiliated with the Swift Boat Liars, who was interested enough in John Kerry’s actions in Vietnam to travel there to get the story, but who didn’t end up reporting what they learned, is so infitessimally small that it utterly defies logic or reason to believe that they weren’t.
But of course you know that that won’t stop some people from believing it, nonetheless.
On the one hand, it isn’t that implausible. There is quite a bit of veteran tourism to Viet Nam. From what I hear, which ain’t that much, it is a perplexing environment: the Viets need the money but are naturally somewhat conflicted about the circumstances. So it is not entirely out of the question that a veteran and a cameraman not affiliated with the Swifties might undertake such an endeavor.
So lets add in the “ka-ching” factor: whoever did make the trip previously likely has an opportunity for 15 seconds of prime-time fame. In America, this is going to Heaven without having to die. So it is likely that the persons involved will come forward…assuming that they are not, in fact, associated with the Swifties.
If they are, of course, they will remain silent and hope it all just goes away.
Please tell me my reading comprehension skills have fled me! I read it as a news organization sitting on presumably damning evidence of malfeasance by the President of the United States and/or his administration that led to WAR is waiting till AFTER the election to report it because it might influence the election???
So, the American public is meant to be kept in the dark and possibly re-elect a criminal or at least someone who is criminally stupid so as to be stuck with the guy for another 4 years???
What frickin genius thought that was a good idea? If CBS has evidence of wrongdoing by our elected officials it it their duty, IMO, to let the public know.
On the flip side if the evidence supports Bush and that he and his administration made the correct decisions that is likewise very important and needs to be released BEFORE the election.
Not to do so is criminal in my view. Not saying there is an actual law to prosecute them on for it but rather in an ethically criminal sense.
No need, Isky. Its kind of like the SDMB version of a “flash mob” - something happens which shows again the rampant and enthusiastic mendacity of the Forces of Darkness. Like the endless conga line of WMD lies that the Bushiviks saw shot out from under them, almost on a daily basis.
So I have don’t have to look to “bring allies to the table”. Half the time, they’re already there, I just bring a hotdish, maybe some beer…
