« Movie daydreams | Main | Multi-tasking »
Thursday, August 19, 2004
NYT late and lame to the SwiftVets controversy
Not like it's a surprise or anything.
The same day Kerry holds a press conference in which he finally acknowledges the SwiftVets controversy out of his own mouth, the New York Times discovers there's a story there!
I've got only two questions:
- Why did it take two NYT reporters to photocopy the Kerry Campaign's pre-digested innuendos and ad hominem attacks?
- They put up a nifty chart, but why'd they leave out the line connecting Karl Rove to Adolph Hitler? D'oh!
I'd fisk this sucker, but it's late at night, I'm dog tired, and every bit of the crap in the NYT article is stuff I've written about (and others have written about) over and over again.
There's exactly one new bit in the entire story, the allegation that Thurlow's boat had three bullet holes in it after the Bay Hap River action for which he and Kerry both received Bronze Stars — an assertion for which I've yet to see any primary source documentation, and to which I'm eager to see the SwiftVets' response (or that of any of my readers, who are very welcome to enlighten me in the comments section).
Otherwise, I adopt and incorporate by reference the remarks of Captain Ed. But feel free to talk (or jeer, or gape in disbelief) among yourselves in my comments. Update: Patterico notes in his own righteous fisking, "I don't think I have ever seen such a partisan hit piece in my life." See also Dale Franks' and Jon Henke's posts on QandO, the latter of which has a buncha links to blogospheric reactions. McQ of QandO arrives late but definitely not lame with his own analysis.
Posted by Beldar at 11:24 PM in Mainstream Media, Politics (2006 & earlier), SwiftVets | Permalink
TrackBacks
Other weblog posts, if any, whose authors have linked to NYT late and lame to the SwiftVets controversy and sent a trackback ping are listed here:
Comments
(1) crushkerry made the following comment | Aug 20, 2004 12:18:33 AM | Permalink
Beldar - As I posted on the Captain's site, www.crushkerry.com predicted this specific Times attack 2 weeks ago. It's classic "Brown Book" material
Here's our take on the smear piece: HERE
(2) Polaris made the following comment | Aug 20, 2004 12:46:20 AM | Permalink
Captain,
Good to be here. I did some preliminary research, and I think I found the origin of the three bullet theory. If you go to Kerry's site, he has the spot report (it is a GENSER style communications....but fortunately I was an Intelligence/Communications Puke in the air force). The damage including small arms damage is listed in that spot report....but I was unable to find *damage* reports for the swiftboats (different animals entirely...and sent to different addresses with a different format).
It is clear as an former commuications officer that Kerry did indeed author the spot report. I can not prove it in a court of law but in my expert opinion, it had to originate from Kerry. That is because the originating address (the GENSER Code) and the classification (confidential) coupled with the use of *meters* rather than yards or nautical miles seems to cinch it for me. However, I can not prove beyond reasonable doubt that some other officer couldn't have sent it...so take with the appropriate caveats. That said, communications tend to be terse and use of non-standard units/lingo is frowned upon in official communications. That is why I am willing to go on a limb and say the author was probably Kerry.
In short, the only documentation that supports three bullet holes in my opinion as a former communications-intelligence officer comes from Kerry's own hand.
-Polaris
(3) Polaris made the following comment | Aug 20, 2004 1:57:38 AM | Permalink
Captain,
I see I wasn't clear before. Confidential information requires special handling, and thus such a message would generally to handled by an officer and taken in person to the commo shack. Basically judging from the little information I have, an officer had to send it. It wasn't the OIC from PCF-3 and Lt (JG) Thurlow has stated that it wasn't him (and that is accepted by both sides). That reduces the number of authors right there. Couple that with the use of meters (which implies a non-US education), and it has Kerry's fingerprints all over it. This is comminications anlysis, but IMHO it is *good* analysis and if I were in the service, I would forward it...with the appropriate caveats.
-Polaris
(4) Norman Rogers made the following comment | Aug 20, 2004 5:42:12 AM | Permalink
And NO mention in the article about the Judicial Watch Petition.
And no mention in Google News, either
(5) Loren made the following comment | Aug 20, 2004 11:31:14 AM | Permalink
Polaris,
I am not a vet, but I believe that the military does all reports in meters. So that does not necessarily point to Kerry.
Doesn't eliminate him either.
(6) J_Crater made the following comment | Aug 20, 2004 2:39:39 PM | Permalink
""The influence of this ad is a function not of paid exposure but of the ad's treatment in free media," Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center said."
That drip drip sound is not leakage from small arms fire, but rather erosion around the base of "mainstream mdedia".
With all the detailed charges about parallels between the Swiftvets organization and the (evil) Bush campaign, it is easy to wonder, given today's article in the New York Times, if they, themselves, are coordinating with the Kerry Campaign? I hear some Democrats actually work at the Times, and they have friends that know people ...
(7) Polaris made the following comment | Aug 20, 2004 7:20:02 PM | Permalink
Loren,
In the army, yes. All distances are in meters, but not in the Navy. Could a squid weigh in on this? Also bear in mind this was 1969. I am almost certain that the military still used yards.
Something else struck me too. The spot reprot is very long and written in an almost narrative style. That is unusual. Most military communications are terse in the extreme. Remember that until recently the Communications guy had to TYPE this stuff out on a teletype. Again, not completely conclusive but another indication that points the finger at Kerry.
-Polaris
(8) Al Saletta made the following comment | Aug 24, 2004 9:30:09 PM | Permalink
You wrote:
"There's exactly one new bit in the entire story, the allegation that Thurlow's boat had three bullet holes in it after the Bay Hap River action for which he and Kerry both received Bronze Stars — an assertion for which I've yet to see any primary source documentation, and to which I'm eager to see the SwiftVets' response (or that of any of my readers, who are very welcome to enlighten me in the comments section)."
On Fox TV tonight, 24 Aug:
John O'Neill responded to a question from Colmes regarding the damage noting that the damage reported was done the day before. There was no damage reported by any of the boats the day of the action. O'Neill spoke well, telling Holmes exactly where and when the damage discussed in the report occurred. Sorry I don't remember his answer verbatim. This of course was Colmes interrupting O'Neill while he was describing all the many ways that Kerry, or rather Kerry's campaign, has had to backpedal on the Stay in Cambodia, the first Purple heart, and whether Kerry's boat stayed or left then returned.
The comments to this entry are closed.
