On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:52:29 -0600, Dan Minette
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > This may really get into a CIA - Special Forces dispute where probably
> > someone was disparaging the special forces versus using CIA forces.
> > Another option is DoD personnel airing out policy differences.
> >
> 
> That's the sorta thing I was thinking of....Hearsh may have been played a
> bit as part of internal politics...of which either example you gave sounds
> plausible.   IIRC, the claim by the US military was that there were just a
> couple of casualties, with a broken ankle on the jump being a showcased
> example and no deaths.  IMHO, that's the sort of thing that journalists
> could double check later...especially when there are embedded journalists.
> 
> My criticism of Hearsh is not that he lies, I have no doubt that he is
> convinced of what he reports.  It's that he doesn't have a sufficient
> filter on his sources to take what he reports unfiltered.  So, I respond to
> his reporting with both interest and a grain of salt.
> 
> Take today's report.  I'll bet a beer that there is some truth and some of
> him being played for political reasons underlying his information.  So, I'm
> guessing he's both right and wrong.

That may be a difference between us - I know that the military
spokesmen are in a PR position and evaluated on how well they spin the
story the way their superiors want.  (I was an AF brat.)  I find these
reports from inside sources leaking information, even if they are
leaking for their own purposes, at least as credible and usually more
so than what the officials want me to hear.

Gary Denton
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to