FactCheck.org issues clarification on Swift Liars for Bush

[Spiffarino]

I just received an update to FactCheck's "Swift Boat Liars, Inc." story. I was going to unsubscribe and give FactCheck a piece of my mind, but I may have to rethink that position. The new evidence they have uncovered exposes George Elliot as at best a forgetful idiot, and at worst an abject liar.

http://www.factcheck.org/miscreports.aspx?docid=240


Here's the gist of it

In an Aug. 9 update we stated that Kerry's citation for the Silver Star made no mention of killing a Viet Cong. In fact, there are three citations, and one of the three does indeed mention the killing.This merely strengthens our conclusion that George Elliott's second affidavit is misleading. All three citations make clear that Kerry was not awarded the Silver Star for the reasons Elliott implied. We have amended our article on the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad to reflect this.

Elliott, who was Kerry's commanding officer at the time, now says he believes Kerry shot a Viet Cong in the back, adding: "Had I known the facts, I would not have recommended Kerry for the Silver Star for simply pursuing and dispatching a single, wounded, fleeing Viet Cong." But the one citation that mentions the killing states that the Viet Cong "fled" and that Kerry "pursued," showing Elliott knew the score when he recommended Kerry for the award 35 years ago. Elliott's affidavit also fails to note that the Viet Cong's rocket launcher was loaded, posing a lethal threat to Kerry and his men.

Furthermore, all three versions of the citation make clear that the basis for the award was not "simply" for the killing alone, but for repeatedly attacking enemy ambushers.

[acmavm]

1. What's wrong with these people? What's wrong with our government?

Telling blatant lies, without any pangs of conscience. Don't they think they'll be found out? Or don't they give a damn?

Once upon a time, if a person were caught lying to damage the reputation of someone, or cause damage to the government the people who run it, that person could expect to be run out of town on a rail. But now, lying has become a respected tactic to promote and agenda which obviously is harmful or dangerous because if it wasn't, it wouldn't be based on lies and deception in the first place.

What a screwed up mess we have on our hands. And even worse, the media, who do have the resources to check all the 'facts' out, don't bother. They just go with the story to promote the owner's political views (or their own).

I know that there has always been some dishonesty in the area of politics, but I also know damn well that it was never, ever so blatant and disgusting. Not saying hidden dishonest was a good thing, but Lord love a duck, the dishonesty at that time was partially due to the fact that it was taken for granted that the American people at least had some intelligence and so the subterfuge and deception had to be masked in a way to try to slip it 'under the radar', so to speak. Now, and this is sooooo disgusting, these people operate from the viewpoint that we're all ignorant knuckle-dragging neanderthals without two functioning brain cells.

[WMliberal]

2. they know that if they repeat the lie often enough

voters will believe it as fact.

[Fovea]

4. What is wrong with our government?

It is a criminal conspiracy, that is what's wrong with it.

[Cocoa]

3. compare their treatment of Swifboat Liars vs. Michael Moore

They treat the Swiftboat claims, which are lies, seriously and objectively.

Now, look at their article about Bush AWOL, which is true. I don't even know what to call this crap. Whatever it is, it's NOT fact-checking:

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=131

Bush A Military “Deserter?” Calm Down, Michael

Clark backer Michael Moore calls President Bush a “deserter” for missing Air National Guard drills 31 years ago. Puh-lease!

more...

[trof]

5. I got a snarky reply from them.

-----Original Message-----
From: Massey Lambard
To: [email protected]
Sent: 8/14/2004 11:13 AM
Subject: Swift Boat Veterans

Republican-funded Group Attacks Kerry's War Record

"At this point, 35 years later and half a world away, we see no way to
resolve which of these versions of reality is closer to the truth."
(Note from trof: This is the direct quote of their conclusion, from their website.)

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231
<http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231>

Let's see...a radically partisan group's unsubstantiated hearsay attacks
on a political opponent, versus official, documented U.S. Navy records
and sworn eye-witnesses. Yeah, that's a tough one. A real puzzler.

Sorry, I just don't understand your line of reasoning here.
What WERE you thinking?

Massey Lambard
Foley, AL

Their reply:

Actually, some of those are eyewitness accounts, not hearsay.

You are free to draw your own conclusions. We just state what we know for
sure adn leave the opinions to others. That should not be terribly hard to
understand.

--BJ
And now that I notice the typo in their reply (adn) I know that they don't even use spellcheck.
How meticulous is that?