PAPER TRIAL. John Kerry has reportedly put the Boston Globe in an awkward position. Kerry has declined to release his latest round of military records to the New York Sun, according to that newspaper, even though he has already given them to the Globe and the Los Angeles Times.
Also, Thomas Lipscomb, a scholar at the University of Southern California who writes a column for the Chicago Sun-Times, called the Globe and asked if the paper would make Kerry's records available to him. The answer, from managing editor Mary Jane Wilkinson: no.
"It is my understanding that Kerry will release these papers to anyone else now that he has signed the Form 180," Wilkinson told Lipscomb. "The Boston Globe is not going to make available the papers we have received."
Of course, the Globe has an ethical obligation not to release those records. That would be like turning over unpublished photos or notes to law-enforcement officials to help them with an investigation. But now that Kerry has decided to put his records out there, he ought to make them available to all comers.
(There also appears to be some dispute as to whether Kerry actually has released everything - though I suppose John O'Neill is going to keep crying foul until he turns up a document showing that Lieutenant Kerry pledged allegiance to the North Vietnamese government.)
This was always a phony issue, which I imagine is why Kerry continues to seem so offended by it. But he's only made it worse by simply not shoveling the stuff out there. (Via KausFiles.)
BRAYING AGAIN. Speaking of the Globe, technology columnist Hiawatha Bray - last seen in Media Log when he was ordered to stop posting anti-Kerry comments on blogs - has found a new cause.
Bray is running as a write-in candidate for an at-large position on the executive committee of the Newspaper Guild to protest remarks by Newspaper Guild president Linda Foley. Bray writes:
On May 13, in a speech in St. Louis, Newspaper Guild president Linda Foley accused the US military of deliberately murdering journalists in Iraq. She presented no evidence for this assertion, and has refused to offer any. I know, because I've phoned her multiple times. Foley has said that she will make no further public comment on the matter. This won't do.
Here is a report on Foley's remarks by the trade magazine Editor & Publisher. (To the Newspaper Guild's credit, I found this linked from its website.) Here is part of what she said:
Journalists are not just being targeted verbally or politically. They are also being targeted for real in places like Iraq. And what outrages me as a representative of journalists is that there's not more outrage about the number and the brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military toward the killing of journalists in Iraq. I think it's just a scandal.
Naturally, the Guild, according to E&P, has been the target of vicious right-wing attacks ever since Foley spoke up. Not that Foley's doing herself any favors - she says her words were taken out of context, but that doesn't seem to be the case. (Via InstaPundit.)
Sen. JFK's Orwellian doublespeak is really getting tedious. Apparently he paid more attention at the knee of D.A. Garrett Byrne than he did at Yale, (learning to be a MA pol). I think we can presume that the Washington Times won't get the Form 180 info any time soon but a sufficiently "progressive" paper will have no problem. David Wade has the toughest job in town.
So Hiwatha Bray needs evidence that the U.S. military deliberately targeted journalists? Here it is:
On March 26, 2003, the U.S. bombed the headquarters of Iraq's state-run television station, in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit targeting civilian buildings unless it offers a "definite military advantage."
In a March 30, 2003, interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Gen. Richard Meyers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, defended the strike.
"Absolutely, it's a legitimate target," he said. "The regime uses it for command and control. That's how the leadership gets the message out."
You can read the transcript of the interview here:
And here is a demand from the Committee to Protect Journalists for an investigation of the incident: http://www.cpj.org/protests/03ltrs/Rumsfeld28mar03pl.html
If that's not enough for Bray, perhaps he take a look at this story from the Washington Post that describes how U.S. forces beat and humiliated three Reuters employees in January 2003: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37729-2004May18.html
Or this story from The Nation about how U.S. forces detained and abused two Al-Jazeera employees: http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040329&s=parenti
Or this press release from Reporters Without Borders, titled, "Reporters Without Borders accuses US military of deliberately firing at journalists": http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=5975
And so on and so on. This is publicly available information from repsected news outlets, and yet Bray calls Foley a liar and a slanderer for repeating it.
I'm getting really tired of listening to grandstanding journalists who sell out their colleagues to score points with indignant right-wingers. Hiawatha Bray should be ashamed of himself.
As opposed to grandstanding activists who have nothing to lose. Hiawatha Bray made it into newsroom at Morrissey Blvd., so he's no right-winger.(Plus, he knows his stuff). The internet has given people with an axe to grind an unlimited ability to cite specious sources, (RSF.org, what a joke). Some kid from Arkansas f**ks up and suddenly American military is the equivalent of the Iraqi Republican Guard. Meanwhile, daily acts of humanity and decency by the same American soldiers are ignored. I'm done taking crap from the likes of Eoin.
Hiawatha Bray is a right-winger, he works on Morrissey Blvd. because he knows his stuff.
However, reading Foley's comments, I didn't interpret them as meaning she thought the US military was targeting journalists, just that she thought they didn't give a damn about it.
Sad thing is, compared with his colleagues, he IS considered right wing. Boston ain't the USA, by a long shot.
The US military did attempt to kill an Italian journalist who was being released by kidnappers. "Fortunately" they only killed her bodyguard.
Based on this incident alone, I'd say that Linda Foley's remarks are spot on.
Releasing records is a slippery slope, and Kerry was smart enough to recognize it -- even if the media aren't. He gets accused of having something to hide regardless of whether he releases all, or just some, records. If he releases everything, he is handing his enemies ammo -- especially considering GW and his Nazi colleagues have effectively suppressed *everything* -- and those who had the gumption to go looking lost their jobs (see also: a certain Maine newspaper reporter).
Kerry shouldn't release anything. And he should tell those who cry foul to piss off. Fight fire with fire. It wasn't until Clinton said he'd wring the neck of any Republican jackass who picked on his wife that America stood up and took notice that he was a force to be reckoned with.
Foley has clearly accused the US Military of murdering journalists. She should either attempt to prove it or resign.
Interesting comment. Just like all those folks who called Kerry a coward and a liar during the war -- knowiing full well he wasn't -- resigned their jobs.
Oh wait...I guess they didn't.
Projection -- what psychologists call the act of a person accusing others of what they are guilty of-- is the damnest thing.
Post a Comment