TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Apparently they go to the Vietnamese village where the incident occured that resulted in Kerry's Silver Star being awarded. Could be interesting. http://www.abcnews.go.com/Nightline/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Did anyone see this last night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Have any major media outlets done praise pieces on bush? Or did ABC reporters not kiss enough kerry ass after the memo that got sent out last week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCTAU 3,336 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 I saw some of it. It was too boring to watch too much of it. Besides. I DON'T CARE ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO. Only the last 20, of which sKerry spent screwing the taxpayers as well as the richer woman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 16, 2004 Author Share Posted October 16, 2004 Did anyone see this last night? 111620[/snapback] Yep. The short of it: They went to the village where Kerry's Silver Star was earned. Many of the villagers remember the day because it was a fierce battle and much of their small village was damaged. One of them was the wife of a VC killed that day. Others were VC. The guy who the Swifties refer to as a 14 year old in a loin cloth was described as strong man of about 26-27, they knew his name, he was a VC sent there with about 11 others to shore up the 8 VC already there to ambush swiftboats. No one seemed to see him get shot, but it sounded chaotic, people were hiding to avoid being shot and he was in a heavily vegetated area. They did remember seeing a swift boat turn into the fire, and running ashore as stated in Kerry's citation. They largely supported the scenario in citation. They added that the Americans missed the largest cache of weapons that were hidden and supposedly still buried under a garden. One of the men interviewed said an American came there about 6 months ago with a camera and said he had was trying to prove that a man running for President didn't deserve his medals. John O'Neil was on afterwards and was the most obnoxious person in the history of nightline. Even for him. Facts can be a b#tch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,433 Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 1) No one saw Kerry come ashore. 2) No one saw Kerry shot the guy. 3) I am sure that transklations can be "pushed" in the right direction. 4) I am sure that if any thing remotely bad for Kerry was left on the editting room floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 16, 2004 Author Share Posted October 16, 2004 1) No one saw Kerry come ashore.2) No one saw Kerry shot the guy. 3) I am sure that transklations can be "pushed" in the right direction. 4) I am sure that if any thing remotely bad for Kerry was left on the editting room floor. 111708[/snapback] In other words, you made up your mind to discount it before it ever aired, unless, of course, it supported your case, then your all over it. If, as your paranoid delusion suggests, this was a pro-Kerry set up, why not just have the villager say, "Yes, I was hiding behind a bush trembling and saw a tall American shoot the VC and say, 'Not on my watch, Charlie.'" Kerry's own men saw him go ashore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaTiger 0 Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 In other words, you made up your mind to discount it before it ever aired, unless, of course, it supported your case, then your all over it. If, as your paranoid delusion suggests, this was a pro-Kerry set up, why not just have the villager say, "Yes, I was hiding behind a bush trembling and saw a tall American shoot the VC and say, 'Not on my watch, Charlie.'" Kerry's own men saw him go ashore. 111716[/snapback] exactly what are we discounting, TT? the word of villagers who live in a communist country ... the word of people who had a gov't overseer there as they recounted their stories...the word of the enemy? further, this account directly contradicts kerry's own words, as well as that of his biographers, where both accounts note a sole person at the scene. so, who do we believe in this case...kerry or the enemy. wait...awww nevermind. ct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 16, 2004 Author Share Posted October 16, 2004 In other words, you made up your mind to discount it before it ever aired, unless, of course, it supported your case, then your all over it. If, as your paranoid delusion suggests, this was a pro-Kerry set up, why not just have the villager say, "Yes, I was hiding behind a bush trembling and saw a tall American shoot the VC and say, 'Not on my watch, Charlie.'" Kerry's own men saw him go ashore. 111716[/snapback] exactly what are we discounting, TT? the word of villagers who live in a communist country ... the word of people who had a gov't overseer there as they recounted their stories...the word of the enemy? further, this account directly contradicts kerry's own words, as well as that of his biographers, where both accounts note a sole person at the scene. so, who do we believe in this case...kerry or the enemy. wait...awww nevermind. ct 111718[/snapback] there was one man at that spot. there were twenty scattered all around a large area. no contradiction. actually, you've already discounted the United States Navy so I don't know why you would feel any compunction about accepting the word of the "other" side. for you guys the United States military is also on the "other" side on this issue. anyone not saying what you want to hear is the "other" side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaTiger 0 Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 there was one man at that spot. there were twenty scattered all around a large area. no contradiction. actually, you've already discounted the United States Navy so I don't know why you would feel any compunction about accepting the word of the "other" side. for you guys the United States military is also on the "other" side on this issue. anyone not saying what you want to hear is the "other" side. 111743[/snapback] TT, if this were a non-issue, as you seem to contend, why did ABC feel the need to go 'prove' what is already readily accepted. is ABC also guilty of casting doubt on kerry's medal, since they stooped so low as to even investigate its legitimacy? i know...since those lying SBVs stirred up such a hornet's nest, somebody had to come to the defense of kerry. far be it for KERRY himself to prove things by releasing his records. it just seems a very peculiar way to go about proving a point...go ask the enemy what happened...when that enemy has already honored kerry...when that enemy would have the ability to censure(sp?) anything its people said. isn't that just the least bit suspect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 17, 2004 Author Share Posted October 17, 2004 there was one man at that spot. there were twenty scattered all around a large area. no contradiction. actually, you've already discounted the United States Navy so I don't know why you would feel any compunction about accepting the word of the "other" side. for you guys the United States military is also on the "other" side on this issue. anyone not saying what you want to hear is the "other" side. 111743[/snapback] TT, if this were a non-issue, as you seem to contend, why did ABC feel the need to go 'prove' what is already readily accepted. is ABC also guilty of casting doubt on kerry's medal, since they stooped so low as to even investigate its legitimacy? i know...since those lying SBVs stirred up such a hornet's nest, somebody had to come to the defense of kerry. far be it for KERRY himself to prove things by releasing his records. it just seems a very peculiar way to go about proving a point...go ask the enemy what happened...when that enemy has already honored kerry...when that enemy would have the ability to censure(sp?) anything its people said. isn't that just the least bit suspect? 111766[/snapback] It is your own paranoid delusion that leads you to state ABC went to VN to "prove" anything in particular. They found what they found. Had they found evidence that indicated Kerry's medal wasn't earned, wouldn't that be a far bigger story? The enemy hasn't "honored" Kerry. That is another myth embraced by the cult of hatred to which so many of you guys belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaTiger 0 Posted October 17, 2004 Share Posted October 17, 2004 hey TT: first off, i deleted your double post and moved the quote box to where it distinguishes your post from mine...hope that's OK. now, paranoid delusion? i didn't say they went to prove 'anything in particular'. i find it interesting they went where they went to prove anything at all! if there were no questions concerning kerry's medals in the first place, then their trip would've been pointless. yet, they felt it was necessary to investigate the story, lending credence to those who are suspect of his record. given that, i'm just surprised in the sources they chose to believe...that's all. on another point, if Kerry hasn't been honored by NV, then why didn't koppel challenge that on his show? koppel must be studying from the 'dan rather' book of journalism.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 17, 2004 Author Share Posted October 17, 2004 hey TT: first off, i deleted your double post and moved the quote box to where it distinguishes your post from mine...hope that's OK.now, paranoid delusion? i didn't say they went to prove 'anything in particular'. i find it interesting they went where they went to prove anything at all! if there were no questions concerning kerry's medals in the first place, then their trip would've been pointless. yet, they felt it was necessary to investigate the story, lending credence to those who are suspect of his record. given that, i'm just surprised in the sources they chose to believe...that's all. on another point, if Kerry hasn't been honored by NV, then why didn't koppel challenge that on his show? koppel must be studying from the 'dan rather' book of journalism.... 111921[/snapback] This issue has been raised, the swifties got a lot of attention and will get more with Sinclair broadcasting. A group receives millions of dollars to run ads and it impacts a campaign. Their claims are news whether credible or not. Where else does an investigative journalist go at this point? The records have been examined, the swifties have had their say, Kerry's boat mates have had their's-- are there any clues at the scene of the event? Dunno, lets see. They reported what the people in the village said. Did you see the report? These folks are very isolated. They didn't support every jot and tittle of Kerry's version, although they also didn't necessarily contradict it. ABC didn't say, we accept everything they say as true-- some villagers had slightly different recollections. But what is there motivation to lie? We have normalized relations with Viet Nam. We are no longer "enemies". We fought Japan and Germany and Italy a little while back, but we are not now "enemies." What is the incentive of these villagers to lie one way or another-- especially to support the guy who helped to kill spouses and friends and destroy their village? Beyond paraonia, what is the incentive? I don't know if Koppel prepared himself for every possible myth the Kerry hating right might throw at him since it was not Koppel's job to defend Kerry and frankly, O'Neil was all over the place and not engaging in a give-and-take discussion. The picture he and other nuts point to was Kerry going back as a Senator in the early 90s on an official mission to explore normalization-- it was not of Kerry as a protestor. More myths, more lies, more distortions, and more pure unadulterated crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaTiger 0 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 so, TT, what do we know now that we didn't know before the ABC news[i/] special? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 18, 2004 Author Share Posted October 18, 2004 so, TT, what do we know now that we didn't know before the ABC news[i/] special? 112141[/snapback] Another account that it was nasty that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaTiger 0 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 so, TT, what do we know now that we didn't know before the ABC news special? 112141[/snapback] Another account that it was nasty that day. 112200[/snapback] right...much ado about nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 18, 2004 Author Share Posted October 18, 2004 so, TT, what do we know now that we didn't know before the ABC news special? 112141[/snapback] Another account that it was nasty that day. 112200[/snapback] right...much ado about nothing. 112267[/snapback] Which explains why you were so intent on exposing it as a plot designed by the so called Librul Media and the Commies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaTiger 0 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 i'm not sure what you meant by that, but i do think it was a pointless trip to vietnam. you admit we learned nothing new... 'another account'. i think the deck was stacked against ABC learning anything remotely reportable as 'new & interesting' from taking this trip. just propaganda, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.