Centerfield

Title should be, "Washington Post and Ted Koppel shoot self in ass".

The account provided contradicts John Kerry's own account in his own autobiography, in which he himself claims there was only a single individual confronted. Kerry goes on to say in his autobiography how glad he was that there was not more than a single person. The boston globe came to the same conclusion. Kerry's crewmates describe the same. None of this is mentioned in the article... So who do you put your faith in? Kerry's own autobiography, boston globe and Kerry's crewmates -- or an interview with a single man that Vietnamese government minders led the Washington Post to.

Audio of Koppel's interview here: http://s2r-tech.com/swifty/jo-nl.mp3

Susan:

This piece COOBERATES Kerry's story. Practically down to the letter. Kerry never said there was a single individual involved. He said there was a firefight that day. The "single individual" is the guy they refer to later in the story that's alledged to have been ready to fire an RPG at Kerry's boat. This is the guy that O'Neill claims was a young kid in a loincloth. The Vietnamese and Kerry both say it was a man in black pajamas. The Vietnamese say he was a large man, about 26-27 years old. It completely contradicts what John O'Neill has been saying.

Further, the story shows that the Swift Boat Vet people had cameras and individuals over in Vietnam and were given the same story...that which cooberates Kerry....and they've still been accusing Kerry of lying KNOWING otherwise.

I wouldn't say it's anywhere near "the letter," Carla. It doesn't show that Swift boat people were there, just that maybe someone was, probably on their behalf. It doesn't show that Kerry killed Ba Thranh. And what looked like a "big man" to the Vietnamese might very well have looked like a skinny teen to American GI's. (I know a fair number of Vietnamese. I have yet to meet one as big as I am, and I'm not quite 6'.)

It also doesn't show that the medal citation didn't maybe exaggerate on the details--but it does show it wasn't fabricated from whole cloth, as O'Neill alleged. (Not that any wartime citation is ever 100% accurate as to details--most observors are busy moving, dying, shooting, or ducking at the time.)

But it directly contradicts O'Neill's claim that the boats grounded so that Kerry could jump off and shoot one fleeing teenager in the back, and that the boats (and Kerry and crew) weren't under fire or in danger at the time. There was never any doubt that the B-40 was fired at them. O'Neill's contention was that it was a lone teen rocketeer, fleeing, shot in the back. The villagers say it was 20 VC, who fired on the boats and then fell back as the boats turned and beached for counter-attack. Ba Thranh didn't flee fast enough.

O'Neill seems to have fallen into the trap of wanting to believe the absolute worst of his opponent, and thus stretching everything to demonize him. I'm not a Kerry fan (duh!) but one of my pet peeves is exactly that. It annoys me when Michael Moore does it. And it annoys me when John O'Neill does it. It's not as if there's a shortage of substantive reasons to criticize the candidates.

Tully..point taken on the "large Vietnamese" man...although O'Neill describes him as a very young kid in a loincloth...and the Vietnamese (and the Kerry contingent) describe him as a larger man wearing black pajama style clothing.

Btw...in a shameless act of self promotion..I have a piece up today on PK regarding the different approaches to terrorism that I think you might find interesting. I'd love to read your input:

http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives/2004/10/why_do_you_have.html

I'd also love your input on this:

http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives/2004/10/i_find_my_blog.html