Stay Sassy, Senator McCain - Bonus Stolen Memory Edition!
So Senator McCain, as part of the now-familiar Pimp My Bio effort, frequently tells the moving story of the cross in the dirt that gave him courage and the will to go on. Funny thing is, this extraordinarily cinematic tale wasn't part of McCain's earliest recounting of his POW experiences. Even funnier? It's very similar to a story told by the greatest man of the previous century, Alexander Solzhenitsen.
Leaving his shovel on the ground, he slowly walked to a crude bench and sat down. He knew that at any moment a guard would order him to stand up, and when he failed to respond, the guard would beat him to death, probably with his own shovel. He had seen it happen to other prisoners.As he waited, head down, he felt a presence. Slowly he looked up and saw a skinny old prisoner squat down beside him. The man said nothing. Instead, he used a stick to trace in the dirt the sign of the Cross. The man then got back up and returned to his work.
As Solzhenitsyn stared at the Cross drawn in the dirt his entire perspective changed.
Hey. Maybe that's not actually funny.
Andrew Sullivan noted this first. He's now asking a relevant question. When was the first time McCain told this moving biographical anecdote?
Betcha there's some folks digging, and digging hard, right now. And yes, I'm sure it's all true and I'm sure we'll get some kind of confirmation in the next few days because I know Senator McCain would never ever inflate or embellish like that. Any more than he would use his POW experiences as a campaign prop. He's just not that kind of man.
Unless he did, of course. And then...?
Heh.
UPDATE! Speaking of embellishing, hey, if nothing else? It wouldn't be the last time. Here.
BONUS UPDATE! At last night's Saddleback Forum, Pastor Rick made it clear that Senator McCain was in a 'cone of silence' so that he would not reap undue advantage, eg know what questions were coming before they were asked. Senator McCain even joked about trying to listen through a wall. Heh. Except it turns out McCain wasn't even in the church during the first half hour of Obama's hour long segment. Gee. That's not quite an embellishment, but. Oh never mind.
BONUS BONUS UPDATE! The Story of the Cross begins to spread. Hey, remember Senator Clinton and the tarmac? Heh.
--
"How is the world ruled, and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read." -- Karl Kraus, 1909
--
To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Harley's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Do you believe "Sully", or Soly's biographer? Or is Stoly a factor? Are you now running with the Jesse Helms angle (that would be fun), or are you rereading The Gulag Archipelago hoping to see something others missed in the overall gestalt of the book? Claiming prescience w/r/t Solzhenitsyn's biographer's statements? Inquiring minds want to know.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
)It looks like you may have blown this one big time. OUCH!!
"The story originated on the dKos blog" shoulda been a red flag bigger than China's. Whee!
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
)"The story about Alexander Solzhenitsen and the old man who made the sign of the cross was first told by Solzhenitsyn to a group of Christian leaders and later recounted by Billy Graham in his New Year's telecast, 1977. It has been retold subsequently, most publicly by Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC)."
So...it looks like the Solzhenitsen story was rather familiar in right wing circles.
It might not have happened to Solzhenitsen, but that doesn't mean that people didn't believe the story or that the Kos diary made it up. It's origins appear much further to the right.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )which here is called a plagiarism from "the greatest man of the previous century" and in Harley's links is specifically identified as a theft from the text of The Gulag Archipelago. Do you?
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I don't read Kos much at all and I have no problem with the idea that McCain might have gotten the idea from some background story that's been around for years.
So by not reading Kos, I became aware of the "cross in the dirt" story as something that might not have happened to McCain afterall...though being acquainted with a mildly pstd veteran or a few, myself..I can understand how it might have become part of McCain's own narraitve, if you will.
Truth be told...I am really sick of narratives.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The whole thing is a waste of time and a distraction from the Olympics.
Sure, McCain could have stolen the cross story; he's a politician after all, a member of a class noted for stealing other people's ideas and calling them their own. The moderately funny part was the certainty with which the "stolen from Soly" meme bounced from one liberal blog to another and came to rest here in this diary. But since the whole issue is minor, that is, too. If this wasn't Harley's piece, I wouldn't even have brought it up. %^>
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )But that use of 'not' is solely the provenance of men over 40 who think being hip is to continually copy to a trend they picked up on in 1991.
Something stinks about McCain's latent use of that anecdote. I think the Ds should explore it since it speaks to his inauthentic relationship to the R right + hits him at his PoW strength.
Unrelatedly, what was the following image doing at the bottom of your link prefaced by the words:
No Marxist Coons!
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I linked to the article printed there, but now it's gone so I can't even tell what else was on the page with it. The AOL site where I originally found the article apparently is an unmoderated message board with more than it's fair share of loons, always a bad combination.
I'm having a large batch of red, white and blue "OBAMA/CARTER 08" bumper stickers printed up. How many would you like?
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )She's can get the job done.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Though that clip is an old one, her capabilities have withstood the test of time.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )In the 1980s I once saw a t-shirt a guy was wearing that said "Sure I'm a Marxist" and beneath it was a pic of Groucho, Harpo and Chico.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You can be suspicious as you like, but when someone specifically claims the story was cribbed from The Gulag Archipelago without even confirming that it appeared there in the first place, some significant quantity of crow needs to be eaten.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )- Login or register to post comments
| parent )gets closer and closer to the wurlitzer it don't.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Completely wrong on the facts but right on the meme - and proud of it, too. Kudos.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ):)
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I'd say all these attacks on McCain re plagiarism are because Biden is Obama's choice for VP. That way, Dems could employ the "everybody does it" defense.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
)Now that's funny. Might even be true. Understand, this is just something I enjoy. Poking holes in the larger narrative, getting the McCain team all het up about something they shouldn't be wasting their time on -- their pissy demand that NBC meet with them to discuss biased coverage is pretty funny, btw. Damn that Andrea Mitchell!!
But no. It's not all that important. And yes, I think Biden's the guy. Tho' I now believe that Hillary is moving up the probability ladder. Which would be interesting.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )what the hell?
War on drugs proponent, Bush's cheerleader on Iraq from the beginning, actually urged Kerry to pick McCain (!) as his VP in 2004, voted for Defense of Marriage Act, 60% rating from ACLU, supported the Patriot Act both times around, supports the embargo on Cuba, supported the bankruptcy bill.
Oh, but he has foreign policy experience. Who else is on that shortlist? Dick Cheney?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Biden is horrible. Unless he's just being "considered" as a way to make someone else look better (a la the Tom Ridge -> Mitt Romney setup McCain appears to be pulling), this says a great deal more about Obama's temperament than most liberals would care to admit.
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )There's gotta be somebody better than Biden. There has to be. Out of all the possibilities out there...Biden?
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gxVW-aUPQsPkU0JKEleSPNCyxSsAD92L2HJ80
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"No profanity."
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Under the circumstances, I believe the comment is within the spirit of the rules.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Nate Silver is pretty smart on this. That the more build-up there is, the more it appears we'll be getting a big name, rather than someone whose relative lack of name-recognition would serve as an anti-climax. That rules out the lesser known names on the list -- Chet Edwards, Jack Reed. I think it even knocks folks like Bayh and Dodd off the list.
Biden hangs right in there. But interestingly enough, so do the A-list surprises.
Which would be Hillary, Kerry, Gore, and Colin Powell.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You know that as well as I do. All we can hope is that the pundits are dead wrong.
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I can see the comedy skits!!!
Seriously, I thought and hoped that Powell had lost all credibility after his alarmingly dishonest UN performance.
--Me: We! -- Ali
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Lotta talk about McCain bringing his good buddy Joe Leiberman onto the ticket. Which is cool and certainly a record setting opportunity.
Joe can FUBAR not one, but two tickets in a lifetime. That's not nothing.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Unlike McCain, Obama doesn't need someone to bring fresh ideas and a new approach to the campaign, that's Obama's job. Obama needs someone with foreign policy cred and experience on the job. Biden does both, is great on camera, and a very very good attack dog when necessary. Reporters like him a lot, and respect him too. I prefer him to Nunn and Bayh and Dodd and, uhm, Edwards. I'm sorta agnostic about Hillary, believe it or not. The part of me that likes a good show is curious to see how that would play out. But the part of me that is not completely insane understands the larger risks.
We could do much worse than Biden. And so could you.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"Obama doesn't need someone to bring fresh ideas and a new approach to the campaign." You're giving me too much material! But that said, Biden's OK, 'cept I don't like the way that he loves the sound of his own voice. Frankly, I'd have thunk Bayh or Nunn would've been better choices.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It's about time we had a failed comedian as a VP. Is there somewhere I can send money to help that happen?
Dodd, with his $75K bribery taint? Seriously?
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Okay.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )All of the ones I supported have been very successful. Who are you talking about?
Does your petulance mean you're going with Biden, or is Dodd now the guy because he already has kilobucks of Countrywide money in his kitty? Or will Chuck Indy MacShumer throw his had into the ring to give the Obama cmpaign much-needed expertise on collapsing banks? Please don't keep me in suspense like this.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Also the proper word should have been 'authoritarian', but I quibble. With myself.
My petulance means I'm not sure what either guy is going to do. As is usually the case, the choices all have negatives -- if they didn't, they'd be doing the choosing.
Dems. Biden is actually not a bad choice. He brings some foreign policy chops, he's a good attack dog, and while it will drive some of the leftward members of our big tent a little crazy, that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. Think of him as Bayh with a personality. After that? Who knows. I still think all this build-up suggests a familiar name, so that leaves out all the newbies (Kaine, Reed, etc.) And there's still a chance that the recent tightening in the national and state polls will push the Obama team toward a choice they'll simply have to endure. That being Hillary, of course.
Repubs. Who knows? The chief strength of the Obama campaign is the candidate. The chief weakness of the McCain campaign? The candidate. McCain prides himself on making bold decisions only he truly understands, and I'm betting he's had to grit his teeth now and again while following Schmidt's marching orders re smearing Obama or pretending he's the kind of conservative that makes Rush tingle. He's got one chance to show his independence before going back to following orders. And that's by choosing his BFFL -- Best Friend For Life! -- Joe Leiberman. Which would be catastrophic and would keep me in smiles for at least two months. Other than that? Who knows. Mitt is still in the game. Pawlenty is a good safe choice.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )who isn't being given a chance to show his stuff. Naturally I disagree with your claim that Obama is stronger than Superman and Hercules combined; if he was, there wouldn't be such edge-of-the-seat suspense about who he will pick and how that pick might strengthen a moribund campaign. Thus the talk about "enduring" the endearing Ms. Clinton.
As for the Repubs, all I hope for is someone interesting enough to interest me enough to actually look at McCain and his campaign, instead of the little snippets of energy and immigration policy that play to my compulsions.
Pawlenty; Don't know the guy but I'll bone up on him.
My post had way more typos than yours. What do I win?
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )until after the conventions when most of America begins to wake up to the fact that there's a Presidential election on.
As for Pawlenty, bone up on his taxation regime and the knock on effect on Minnesota's infrastructure problems, in particular its bridges.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Best comedy line of the campaign so far.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Watching heads explode over at dKos and HuffPost over the choice would be weeks of good, clean fun. Plus Joe isn't such a bad sort, really--at least compared to most of the other candidates for the spot on the ticket.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )necessarily in this context. But come on, MS - those baseball analogies?
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Biden is quite far from "a buffoon", unless you mean in the literal sense of making an occasional inappropriate joke (e.g., Indian convenience store owners).
I said during the primaries that I thought he was the best of the Democratic candidates.
He's an intelligent, insightful guy, with a strong foreign policy background. I remember watching him on one of the Sunday morning talk shows, perhaps MTP, as he discussed key foreign policy issues in depth and fielded questions with substance, and I said to someone "I just can't imagine 'W' Bush doing what Biden is doing". Not that "W" is a high bar (he sure ain't), but Biden is at the other end of the spectrum, as politicians go.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The more Biden talks, the less seriously people will take him. Watch and see.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Depends on which "people" you're talking about. For people who place a high value on things like foreign policy insight, they will gain MORE appreciation for Biden the more he talks [edit: unless they, for some reason, feel very confident -- rightly or wrongly -- that they know better than what he's contending and advocating]. For people who focus on YouTube-worthy gaffes like the one about Indian convenience store owners, you may turn out to be right.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )particularly his idiot questions and antics during various supreme court confirmation hearings; my view that he is a chump isn't based on someone else calling him one. (And I don't even know what you're talking about w/r/t Indian convenience store owners.) So we differ on the guy - that's not a shock.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )just curious -- why do you say "that's not a shock"?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )with slickness and that thin veneer of faux wisdom that many of the old pols get as they gradually mutate into permanent mold stains on the Capitol restroom walls. IT's not surprising that you and I may have seen two sides of the same counterfeit coin.
In the USSC confirmation hearings where I watched him (supposedly law is his forte), Biden was banal, corny, and at times embarrassingly off-base on issues like supreme court precedent and the nominees' records. His "questions" were the usual speeches and attacks, delivered with a sh!t-eating sneer on his kisser and waggling Groucho-esque eyebrows, as if to say to viewers "we know none of this is serious, right, folks?" Which confirmed my conclusion that he is a witless buffoon.
You saw him somewhere else, where he apparently was serious enough to impress you; the discussion probably wasn't the typical opera bouffe and clown parade that passes for Congressional hearings these days.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )too late to edit my edit. Wanted to add after the word "advocating":
", but the typical Rush ditto-head, with the typical high ratio of what they think they know to what they actually know, won't take Biden seriously from the start anyway"
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )insecurity sufficient enough to compel a man to get hair transplants should automatically disqualify him from any real role in the NCA.
--Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )hmm, Pelosi's face looks a little "tight" to me. Whaddaya think?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )when you combine the words "Pelosi", "face" and "tight" my cognitive abilities shut down.
sort of an override/crowbar protection circuit.
--Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I just meant to say that it looks like a plastic surgeon pricked Pelosi and banged away those stinky wrinkles. Sorry if the words I chose could have been mistaken for veiled sexual references -- sometimes I'm not a very cunning linguist.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )generator emails to me. Some of them have become quite sophisticated.
Speaking of which, it's been over a day since I linked to the Autorantic
--Virtual Moonbot. Thanks for the reminder.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Man, it's getting like swatting mosquitos in Alaska in June. The corroboration of McCain's account here.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
)I will vaguely recall that as a witty remark some day.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I could've used a better writer on that one.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Turns out Mr. Swindle -- He's the Swindler! -- had a completely different memory in May of this year.
Funny how his recalling got clearer on the whole faith thing when it was required of him. Hilarious, in fact.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OGZiOGI3OTQ3YWMxYzFhM2UyYTk3NzJ...
- Login or register to post comments
)http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,164859_1,00.html
They are coming out of the woodwork.....
--~At times like these I am reminded of the immortal words of Socrates when he said...."I drank what?"
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )(nt)
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )McCain and his campaign cite his time as a POW as proof of many things. That he would never tell a lie, among them. They pimp the past almost every biographical ad they run. Again, as if it meant he would be a good president.
So here's a guy who sat there with him and has a somewhat different and less reverent take on the matter.
Clearer?
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )...this country spent the better part of the month of August listening to Vietnam era soldiers tell stories about a presidential candidate's Vietnam experience....
Here we go again...
--~At times like these I am reminded of the immortal words of Socrates when he said...."I drank what?"
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )No POW exceptions, it's a wash.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"Returned With Honor" I believe is the difference.
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )were they men of honor too?
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )so you be the judge. All were vets AFAIK, which at least gave them the right to dispute Kerry's "winter soldier" version of the war, don't you think?
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Kerry's crew and command were the only people who had a valid opinion of his service. The rest of those jackasses can keep their opinions to themselves.
There's a general rule of thumb about these things: if you were there, you have an opinion. Otherwise STFU, listen and learn. Vietnam wasn't one war but many. There were Americans in there before Elvis ever got to Sun Studios and there will still Americans there when Elvis did his last real tour. The whole of Elvis' career neatly brackets the American involvement in SE Asia, and like Elvis, that war got really stupid, fat, ugly and just wasn't worth it.
Oh, plenty of people still want to sit around and talk trash about how we could have won in SE Asia. Mostly they're people who never got outside the wire, what they'd call Fobbits today. Riding up and down the river in a little speedboat acting like Billy Bad Ass, wow-ee, pull up to the dock and eat a good warm meal and poop in a real toilet and wipe your butt with a real roll and take a shower every morning. You slog around in the weeds for a few weeks and dig catholes and eat LRRPs, then you can talk about fighting a war, and I don't care what those goddamn Swift Boaters had to say about Kerry. None of them fought with him. They didn't like Kerry because he said the war was wrong, and horrible things were happening. Anyone who thinks the war was right and all was well over there got a hot shower every morning. End of transmission.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )but when the Congress cut the funding (the obligations we had made) to the SVA the die was cast.
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The die was cast when we committed troops to the Viet Nam region.
--Me: We! -- Ali
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I'm happy to let them play with imaginary soldiers and imagined lost glory as long as they stop letting real soldiers die in an endless attempt to prove that they were right.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )and what that Congressional Funding may have avoided.
If you want to pull out, don't execute the Diem Brothers.
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )So something a decade later and a couple of administrations down the road..?
JFK wanted to pull out and so let the Diem brothers be killed, so it's his fault...or what. I'm confused.
Should the folks a decade later have gone back in their time machine and "un" assassinated Diem?
It wasn't, though, as though Diem was all peace and prosperity either...not saying he should have been killed, but who knows what would have transpired in that intervening decade?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )on commitments made and never followed up on.
I'm of the opinion that the offing of the Diem Brothers was the turning point in our commitment followed by our ultimate failure to meet our obligations. I'm sure you would recognize the party to both was the same.
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I repeat: Kerry testified before Congress w/r/t conditions supposedly prevailing on the battlefield in Vietnam. It clearly was intended to be a "we/they/us", not an "I" narrative. People who served there had an absolute right to say he was full of sh!t with his generalizations if that's what they thought. If Kerry had said, for example, "I established a free-fire zone and shot any man, woman or child who stepped into it", he was free to do so. But that's not what he testified to.
Your charming old "STFU and listen" shpiel is completely irrelevant here, as is any reference to a nonexistant argument about whether the US could have won Vietnam.
EDIT: here's the exact quote from Kerry's testimony I was referring to:
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Are you trying to deny the obvious here? Really, this should be sorta interesting. I'd really like you to deny that free-fire zones existed, or that anyone caught in them was shot. Now Kerry says he was shooting in a free-fire zone, are you saying you know he was lying about what his ROI let him do?
Here's your chance, Tomsyl.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Some soldiers who were there have said there were free-fire zones in Vietnam, and I assume they were telling the truth w/r/t their own experiences. But you just got done lecturing us about how everyone there has the right to their own opinions about their own service. Meaning Kerry did not have the right to speak for others, or to condemn them, which is what he did in his Congressional testimony. That is so obvious I can't see why you are arguing the point.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Let me tell you how it worked. A free-fire zone was used to clear out a sector. That was all day all night. But after dark, there were curfews pretty much everywhere, so anything that moved outside the wire got lit up, including monkeys and water buffalo and well just anything.
Kerry certainly had a right to speak for VVAW and its members. Kerry wasn't condemning anybody expect the coverup artistes. May I recommend a book to you, A Bright Shining Lie. That pretty much says it all. There were massive coverups, huge mistakes, genuine atrocities, enormous lies. America didn't really understand the war, not the way it's getting to understand Iraq and to a lesser extent Afghanistan, but they knew the stories weren't squaring up with the happy crap coming out of MACV about successes and happy Vietnamese and all that.
But in a way, America did get to see more of Vietnam than Iraq or Afghanistan. The press has been caged off by the military, very few reporters embedded in country. There will be no Joe Galloways coming out of Iraq. The PIs are better prepared, telling better lies. Like this Surge for instance. Complete fiction. You can tell a better lie with PowerPoint than any doctored picture.
It's all a bunch of hooey. The Swift Boaters were liars with a big chip on their shoulder, and there were plenty of them in SE Asia, too. Mostly they stood behind the podium and told the Bright Shining Lies.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )by commenting on the Vietnam service experiences of people you've never met and know nothing about except that they were part of an anti-Kerry political movement.
Nothing in Kerry's testimony indicates he was limiting it to VVAW and it's members; he said he was speaking on behalf of far more than that.
A Bright And Shining Lie isn't exactly new, nor is it the only book written that purports to tell the "true story" about Vietnam. Like you yourself said, Vietnam was made up of many wars, so no surprise that there are many stories, some of them conflicting.
Where are you getting the idea that I (or anyone else that posts here, for that matter) have all of these starry-eyed illusions about the Vietnam War, how it was conducted, whether it could be won, that I haven't read something as basic as A Bright And Shining Lie, and so forth? If you claim it's something I supposedly said, quote it to me verbatim so I know what you are talking about.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )But wherein lies the tort? That he said these things, representing VVAW and not himself alone? He had plenty to say of his own conduct, and made it clear he wasn't the bright shiny hero those medals might lead you to believe he was. Seems to me he was doing exactly what I recommend, speaking for himself. Wars are political, to everyone but the soldiers who fight them. We have no record of Kerry opposing the orders he was given at any point. By all accounts, his behavior was exemplary.
Right up until he got out of uniform, and started speaking his mind about a war which had made a hero of him. When he says terrible things about the conduct of that war, he speaks from experience, and if in the course of that testimony he says others feel as he does, and condemns the war in toto, where exactly are you getting off saying the Swift Boat Veterans can hide behind their medals and call him unfit for command?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It's about what I actually have said here, not what you think I meant, what my motivations might be, or whatever else you want to conjure up. This discussion does not remotely relate to Kerry's fitness for command; I never said it did, don't have the basis for any opinion there, and don't give a flying fig about that subject. Reread my post no. 110524 and 110529 to see how this discussion started and what it's been about all along. What I think of Kerry has nothing to do with it, and never did.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Me: We! -- Ali
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Want to explain your comment, or just let it lie there acting clever but meaningless?
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You imply, though I could be wrong, that the Swift Boaters complained the Kerry impugned the honor of our Fightin' Men with his Winter Soldier campaign, and mentioned they had the right to do so. Nobody's yet disputed that right, yet somehow here we are, indented a long way to the right of that initial bit of snark.
Your problem resolves to you saying I was completely off-point for noting Kerry's crew were the only valid judges of what Kerry had done in that period of time. The Winter Soldiers Investigation pointed out the atrocities being done in our name, on an ongoing basis, as an extension of military and foreign policy. Nobody has ever debated the veracity of those accounts.
Instead, what we got then, and what we get from you now, is a lawyerly approach to the problem, as if the Swift Boaters have the right to cast doubt on what the Winter Soldiers said. They cannot say the atrocities did not happen, that much is obvious. Instead, you tell us these men have the RIGHT to perpetuate the lies of the period.
There were atrocities, you can't deny that. They were a matter of policy. No denying that either. Kerry was right to bring these issues to the table, though you haven't admitted that. Instead, I'm supposed to stand aside and admit I don't know why you'd bring this up.
It would seem to me you are defending the rights of liars to lie about the now-well-documented but then secret policy of atrocity. Well, I suppose, everyone gets the right to plead Not Guilty at arraignment, and slander their opponents via Sullivan, but you aren't quite in that position. You're here to once again, in your role as Designated Dead Horse Beater, to tell me I'm Missing the Point, and grant you some slack. You will not get any, not from me. Now the Swift Boaters told a pack of lies, as they told them then, and you'd be best served to not drag them into any further discussion of Honor, "don't you think?"
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )should just "STFU and listen" when Kerry purports to speak on their behalf? Or is it now you that knows everything that happened in Vietnam, so we should all "STFU and listen" to you? At what point does Kerry have to "STFU and listen" to other Vietnam vets whose experiences contradict his claims?
Apparently you think so, judging by this comment:
Instead, you tell us these men have the RIGHT to perpetuate the lies of the period.
Who decided they are lies? You? Kerry? Answer this simple question: did any of the multitudes of soldiers soldier who served in Vietnam and did not participate in atrocities have the right to say so? To say that they did not do any of the things John Kerry claimed were endemic? Once you agree they have that right, the rest of your argument is reduced to whether they are banned from making their statements in certain contexts like an anti-Kerry rally, or as part of a group that didn't want him elected.
Your statement that no one has challenged the veracity of the stories told during the Winter Soldier media extravaganza is flatly wrong. The Army tried to conduct criminal investigations into many of the atrocities alleged by the group, but most of the cases floundered when the accusers were unable or refused to give any substantiation of their claims.
My response to your original "STFU and listen" statement was the exact opposite of how you characterize it. Go reread the comment and your mistake will be obvious.
I'm don't remotely need slack or anything else from you, except more of an effort to read what I say and respond to that, not what you wish I said, what you think I'm thinking, what you believe I really meant, and all the other tacks you've been taking throughout this. Look again and you'll see that my points are simple ones that in some instances play directly off your own comments. If OTOH you want to take up your cudgel against someone who is a fan of SBVT, you'll have to look somewhere else.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )When a man has no reason to lie, and when everyone's DD-214 is in their briefcase, yeah, generally speaking that's the rule. You listen. Obviously not you, but then, even from an ant's eye view people do hear things. Now, we have the paperwork, well, about one-third of it, but the rest was pulled out of Nick Turse's hands. We know, based on the Vietnam Crimes Working Papers, these incidents were covered up, were not pursued.
My Lai was covered up, by no less than Colin Powell.
Don't you make this about me, that's a very weak line of argument, counselor. It opens you up to a line of argument I'd rather not pursue.
In short, this isn't a matter of opinion. The atrocities of Vietnam were documented, and are part of the factual record. So the Swift Boaters are liars. Sure, I can print a lie all day long, so, seemingly can you. Black is white. Kerry was a traitor.
The summa of my argument is this: you're equating the Swift Boaters' right to lie with Kerry's Winter Soldiers right to tell the truth.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"I'm right, you're wrong, so STFU etc."
Don't know what you mean by this:
Don't you make this about me, that's a very weak line of argument, counselor. It opens you up to a line of argument I'd rather not pursue.
Pursue whatever you like. You've done a bunch of lecturing here from actual or presumed authority, which I've not responded to. If anyone is making this about you, it's you.
One exception was my agreement with this statement you made:
There's a general rule of thumb about these things: if you were there, you have an opinion. Otherwise STFU, listen and learn.
By the numbers, Kerry said he and others committed atrocities in Vietnam; he was there when those events occurred, I wasn't, so I believe him, as I've already said more than once.
Kerry also testified in a way that many construed to claim atrocities were committed by majority of US soldiers in Vietnam. Many Vietnam vets (including some who where there much longer than Kerry was) disagree, saying that they didn't participate in or observe atrocities. I wasn't with those soldiers or their squads in Vietnam, and neither were you. So when they say no atrocities, you should STFU and listen to them. You have no basis on which to contradict soldiers who say they didn't participate in whatever Kerry was involved in, and you can't credibly claim that their statements are false.
Kerry's Winter Soldier testimony was part of a leftist media event intended to broadcast the claim that widespread atrocities were committed by large numbers of Us soldiers in Vietnam. That doesn't mean it's wrong, but people who served there and disagree with that characterization have a right to say so, regardless of Kerry's opinion, Jane Fonda's opinion, or your opinion of the overall scope of atrocities. You seem to be calling their testimony, based on their Vietnam experiences, a lie because you don't agree with it. You don't have that right because you know absolutely nothing about those soldiers' service, experiences, or any other aspect of their war. Your own service, your belief in Kerry's veracity, reading A Bright And Shining Lie, or whatever doesn't give you the right to call someone else's descriptions of their own Vietnam experiences a lie, which is what you seem to be doing repeatedly.
Some of your Wiki cited indicate you think this debate is about Kerry's medals. It is not, and never has been.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The facts are there. The widespread atrocities did happen. They're documented. The Swift Boaters are liars, that's also documented. So I do have basis to say such things.
And you don't have a leg to stand on, Tomsyl. Not one shred of the evidence supports your claims. Allow me to repeat these incontrovertible facts: not only did atrocities happen, they were a matter of official policy, they were inadvertently declassified, about one-third of the record was copied out and the rest was snatched away.
I don't have to know anything about those soldiers in the Vietnam Crimes Working Documents. I know what the sitreps reported. I know Jerome Corsi cannot be trusted with the truth if it came in a locked steamer trunk with a large red label Incontrovertible Truth. And I'm coming to believe you can't, either. Stop trying to label this a Matter of Opinion.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )in Vietnam, and didn't see them committed or were commanded to commit them, have no right to be heard about the war they fought, and their own lack of involvement in the various My Lais that took place there. And that's because even though you know absolutely nothing about those individuals and their Vietnam experience, you know The Truth, and Vietnam vets who say something different about their own experiences are liars. Let's just put that one up in lights so there's no mistaking it.
From the beginning of this increasingly absurd debate, my "claim" has been elementary: the guys who didn't do the things Kerry said everyone did have a right to say that publicly. You: "Not one shred of the evidence supports your claims." Unless you are saying that every soldier who served in Vietnam committed atrocities, your statement is nonsensical.
Sift through my comments and you won't find a single statement to the effect that atrocities didn't occur in Vietnam. Of course they did - we've got the results of trials and investigations to to prove it. (We've also got a record regarding the inability or outright refusal of many winter Soldier testifiers to substantiate their claims of atrocities, though you apparently believe their words as gospel.) But involving everyone that served in the field? You'll never prove that because that didn't happen, and you know that as well as I do. A conservative estimate of the number of draftees and volunteers serving in-country over the war's course would be at least a million; assume at least a third of those actually were involved in combat, and you're essentially claiming that all or most of a group of almost 350,000 soldiers committed Geneva Convention-level atrocities. Nonsense.
Who said "Vietnam wasn't one war but many" in this debate? Hint: you.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )They weren't an aberration. They weren't one-off incidents. They were rules of engagement for any hot province. Forcible resettlement, policy. Free-fire zones, policy. Harassing interdiction fire, policy. Carpet bombing city centers, policy. Agent Orange, policy.
So let's just agree on one thing: this isn't a question of what one guy says and another guy contradicts. This is a matter of US policy, all across the conflict, affecting everyone alike. Everyone got tarred by it, from the top down. To be sure, there were heroic individuals who stood up and were counted, the helo pilot at My Lai, but even when we did the right thing, it was all hushed up. So even then, it doesn't count. Once it's classified, hushed up, you don't talk about it or you're in violation of OPSEC and they'll give you a bunk at Ft Leavenworth Confinement Barracks.
In the face of evil, Tomsyl, I shut my mouth and said nothing. So I'm guilty, too. Just so you know.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )because the vets who opposed the Winter Soldier hearings weren't stating that they hadn't seen atrocities, they were claiming that it was un-American to say that any atrocities had happened at all. And the Swift Boaters weren't saying that they disagreed with Kerry, they claimed that he lied about the circumstances under which he was awarded citations.
You're out on a limb here, even partisan Republicans are admitting that the Swift Boat liars were out of line four years ago. Standing up for them indicates that you aren't paying attention to the details or that you just like to argue for the sake of argument. If you want to back up scumbags like Corsi, have at it, but it does you no credit.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )put some out on a limb, and automatically is a defense of SBVT? Where'd that one come from?
Go back to my comment 110534, where this all started, and then read the "everyone did it" parts of Kerry's WS speech. Then tell me again that soldiers who didn't do what Kerry said he and everyone else did have no right to be heard. Or tell me you believe that every soldier who served in Vietnam committed atrocities, saw them committed, or ordered them done.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )n/t
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Sorry, my French is a little rusty. But I see now that you think everyone who served in Vietnam was guilty. Meaning we part ways here.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )nt
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )In uniform, he was all about derring-do, and if he'd just kept his mouth shut after the war, he'd have been painted as a great war hero. He got involved with VVAW, which wasn't the smart thing to do politically, even then. This was 72 when he was testifying, and it seemed like he was in self-destruct mode.
Maybe he just had better political instincts. In 1972, the war got a lot hotter. Nixon was intent on beating the snot out of the Communists, and the situation on the ground got very weird. We had more soldiers in Vietnam than we did in Iraq at the height of the Surge. South Vietnam was fighting its own war, they had a million men in the Army. It sure looked like we were winning. Victor Charlie was gone, like Al Qaeda is gone in Iraq. The Easter Offensive got REALLY hot, but Hue held. We inflicted horrible casualties on the North, our B52 raids crushed them to atoms. Finally, Nixon gets the ass and just hits the North with everything he's got in December. The B52s never stopped flying, it was like the LA Freeway at rush hour, they stayed over Hanoi and Haiphong and just bombed those people into the Stone Age.
It was by no means the gesture of an Opportunist. Kerry had no reason to believe we couldn't win in Vietnam. I sure thought Nixon would turn RSVN into South Korea. But then, I sorta knew this couldn't hold up, that no matter how deeply committed the Americans were to winning the war, unless the Vietnamese were united, the war would go on forever. But that was just me.
I wasn't brave enough to oppose the war, let's just put it that way.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )height of the Surge. Which simply means that Nixon had materially reduced the number of boots on the ground. By 1973, the number was down to zero.
Kerry clearly understood that to be a successful Democrat his medals were not going to cut it and so he became "hip". And those he p*ssed off remembered and they had very long memories.
The Dems and the media were fully invested in making sure that Nam would be a defeat. Iraq deja vu anybody.
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Are you somehow forgetting who was Commander in Chief in 1973? I was completely amazed at the time. Nixon was going to get out of SE Asia, and leave a gigantic bomb crater where Hanoi used to be. He'd absolutely crushed the North.
But I guess my little stint in the