Liberial Bias from the NYT.

If she intentionally did something like that, it is reprehensible. But please compare that to the swift-boating of people like Kerry and Cleland, which is a thousand times worse.

The website you gave us is right-wing crap. It largely relies on O'Neill, who is a huge liar, and who was caught in a big one. He contradicted Kerry's statement that he was in Cambodia, saying none of the swiftboaters went there. However, the Nixon tapes have O'Neill telling Nixon how he was in Cambodia on a swiftboat.

The Swift Boat veterans presented much corroborated evidence and witness reports, and other researchers confirmed many elements.

The major media, then till now, have mostly failed to investigate the charges or press Kerry for his claims or records, and some major venues collaborated with Kerry to squelch the charges.

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.

'Al-Qaida is on the run,' the president said last week. 'That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly, but surely, being decimated. . They're not a problem anymore.'"

"Al-Qaida is on the run. That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly, but surely, being decimated. Right now, about half of all the top Al-Qaida operatives are either jailed or dead. In either case, they're not a problem any more."

'Al-Qaida is on the run,' the president said last week. 'That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly, but surely, being decimated. . They're not a problem anymore.'"

While I dont know about the particular ad you are arguing about,

But since she writes opinion columns,its ok for her to change statements made by others, or to totally eliminate whole sentences, just to try and make a point?

mysteryman wrote:

While I dont know about the particular ad you are arguing about,

Since that's what the thread's been about, why don't you look into it? Did you read the thread?

The old gray lady has some explaining to do.

Officials at the New York Times have admitted a liberal activist group was permitted to pay half the rate it should have for a provocative ad condemning U.S. Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus.

"We made a mistake," Catherine Mathis, vice president of corporate communications for The Times, told the newspaper's public editor.

Mathis said an advertising representative left the liberal group with the understanding that the ad would run that Monday even though they had been charged the standby rate.

The group should have paid $142,083 to ensure placement that day.

Did MoveOn.org get favored treatment from The Times? And was the ad outside the bounds of acceptable political discourse?

The answer to the first question is that MoveOn.org paid what is known in the newspaper industry as a standby rate of $64,575 that it should not have received under Times policies. The group should have paid $142,083. The Times had maintained for a week that the standby rate was appropriate, but a company spokeswoman told me late Thursday afternoon that an advertising sales representative made a mistake.

The answer to the second question is that the ad appears to fly in the face of an internal advertising acceptability manual that says, "We do not accept opinion advertisements that are attacks of a personal nature." Steph Jespersen, the executive who approved the ad, said that, while it was "rough," he regarded it as a comment on a public official's management of his office and therefore acceptable speech for The Times to print.

So,apparently moveon DID get special treatment after all.
Now, since the NY Times is admitting it,how can you on the left continue to deny it?

DTOM, Mr. Kerry smeared the entire military, but somehow that was okay, but the Swiftees setting the record straight about Kerry is somehow a smear? Like when Kerry was in Cambodia and that was seared into his memory, although he was never there, just one example. Then he acts like a fool by driving a boat into Boston and making that clumsy salute, what a show?

Why do we have to keep replowing this same old pathetic ground.

okie wrote:

DTOM, Mr. Kerry smeared the entire military, but somehow that was okay, but the Swiftees setting the record straight about Kerry is somehow a smear? Like when Kerry was in Cambodia and that was seared into his memory, although he was never there, just one example. Then he acts like a fool by driving a boat into Boston and making that clumsy salute, what a show?

Why do we have to keep replowing this same old pathetic ground.

i'm unaware that he "smeared the entire military". what i did see and hear him say was that there was some bad **** going on. not by every soldier, but by a few.

or have you forgotten Lt. Calley ?

you also seem to have forgotten, as parados pointed out, that o'neill swore up and down that kerry couldn't possibly have gone to cambodia because swift boats didn't go there... and then he is clearly heard on a nixon tape affirming that he, o'neill, a swift boat commander, did go there.

so which one of o'neill's statements is a lie ?

but i really don't want to pursue this old news.

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

i'm unaware that he "smeared the entire military". what i did see and hear him say was that there was some bad **** going on. not by every soldier, but by a few.

...not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command...."

He might as well have indicted the entire military, DTOM.

might as well is not the same as "did".

Quote:

or have you forgotten Lt. Calley ?

This was a special case, untypical, and highly unusual, and a subject unto itself.

not really. bad **** did go down. and in a war that lasted that long be assured it went down more than once. some people wear down under the strain and make a mistake, some just lose it and don't care. it happens.

but ignoring it neither makes it go away or helps us figure out how to avoid it.

Quote:

you also seem to have forgotten, as parados pointed out, that o'neill swore up and down that kerry couldn't possibly have gone to cambodia because swift boats didn't go there... and then he is clearly heard on a nixon tape affirming that he, o'neill, a swift boat commander, did go there.

so which one of o'neill's statements is a lie ?

but i really don't want to pursue this old news.

I don't either but I do like to set the record straight as opposed to the history revisionists. It is my understanding that Kerry being in Cambodia, the story kept changing to different versions, but he retracted his claim that he had been in Cambodia and under fire on Christmas, the memory that was "seared" into his memory. At least at Christmas as he had claimed, and that friendly fire from Vietnamese celebrating Christmas was part of it, then he changed it to January or February when it was pointed out he was 50 miles from Cambodia on Christmas, so now we are left to wonder why the Vietnamese were celebrating Christmas in January or February?

never got a date wrong about something that happened 35 years ago, eh ? i remember a really great outdoor festival my band played at in 1972. it was sometime in the summer. people were setting off fire crackers. it might have been the 4th of july.

on the other hand, it could have just been people setting off fire crackers to celebrate a beautiful day outdoors having a great time.


In regard to Oneil, Parados took the statement out of context, as he said in a more detailed explanation in the next breath or part of the same sentence that "he worked along the border," which does not indicate being inside Cambodia.

i've heard the tape. several times. sounds a hell of a lot like a cobtradiction to me.

here. check these transcripts...

From Unfit for Command: Kerry was never in Cambodia during Christmas 1968, or at all during the Vietnam War. ... Areas closer than 55 miles from the Cambodian border in the area of the Mekong River were patrolled by PBRs, a small river patrol craft, and not by Swift Boats. Preventing border crossings was considered so important at the time that an LCU (a large, mechanized landing craft) and several PBRs were stationed to ensure that no one could cross the border. [pp. 47-48]

O'Neill on ABC's This Week With George Stephanopoulos: How do I know he's [Kerry] not in Cambodia? I was on the same river, George. I was there two months after him. Our patrol area ran to Sedek, it was 50 miles from Cambodia. There isn't any watery border. The Mekong River's like the Mississippi. There were gunboats stationed right up there to stop people from coming. And our boats didn't go north of, only slightly north of Sedek. So it was a made-up story. [8/22]

As CNN congressional correspondent Joe Johns reported on the August 24 edition of CNN's NewsNight with Aaron Brown, "O'Neill said no one could cross the border by river, and he claimed in an audiotape that his publicist played to CNN that he himself had never been to Cambodia either. But in 1971, O'Neill said precisely the opposite to then-President Richard Nixon." CNN then aired the audiotape of O'Neill telling Nixon that he was, in fact, in Cambodia during the Vietnam War:

O'NEILL: I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border on the water.

NIXON: In a swift boat?

O'NEILL: Yes, sir.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2007/08/08/winter_soldier_syndrome