Article

2004-05-18 Home Front: Politix

Kennedy and Hersh Depend on LaRouche for Antiwar Information

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-05-18 10:24:46 AM|| || Front Page|| [11139 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Beat me to it by half an hour! Aaaarrrugh!

Posted by Mike 2004-05-18 11:01:57 AM|| 2004-05-18 11:01:57 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 I went and read (tried to read) the entire article at the Nation Review site. I could follow it until this sentence: "Upon her retirement, Kwiatkowski took her story to Jeff Steinberg, editor of the Executive Intelligence Review, the journal of Lyndon LaRoucheâs movement."

From that point on, the article is hard to understand beyond the idea that the author doesn't think that Kwiatkowski, Steinberg, Hersh, etc., are reliable. I think the article needed an editor. I can't figure out the narrative that is supposed to be told here.
.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2004-05-18 11:14:38 AM|| 2004-05-18 11:14:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 FOX News? Hello? Can any of you guys or gals pick this up and make it a cohesive story to get it out there?

SENATOR BAGOGAS and LOONY LYNDON . . . this is too good!

Posted by BigEd 2004-05-18 11:44:07 AM|| 2004-05-18 11:44:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 The key points of the article as I saw them:

- Kwiatkowski wanted to get in on the Internet publishing thing and used her position to do so.

- She wrote about areas of the Pentagon she had never visited and made very basic mistakes.

- Nonetheless, the people who published her work, or took it further, as the case may be, took her at her word, based on her position.

Bottom line - In this era of 24-hour, non-stop news, The Scoop is all, and fact checking merely holds you back. In short: Journalism today is so much passing on of whispers from supposedly inside sources.

Add to the mix "name journalists", such as Hersh, who long for the good old days when a Republican President could be hounded from office, and you've got "newspapers of record" being on par with the Weekly World News, and Senators spouting ridiculous conspiracy theories.

Posted by eLarson 2004-05-18 1:52:24 PM|| 2004-05-18 1:52:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 eLarson - Unfortunately I think the Weekly World News is more accurate more often than the "newspapers of record."

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2004-05-18 3:58:33 PM|| 2004-05-18 3:58:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#6
Re #4: The basic mistakes described in this article don't have anything to do with what Hersh reported, as far as I can tell.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2004-05-18 4:59:48 PM|| 2004-05-18 4:59:48 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 RE #6

I don't get your point, Mike. Rubin doesn't attempt a point by point exposee of the various (alleged) mistakes in Hersh's article. Maybe you think he should have, but I think it would have mired him in the details of a sub-plot.

Also, I don't really get your first comment, either. eLarson's comment is a good first stab at a summary, doncha think?

Posted by Wuzzalib 2004-05-18 7:21:56 PM|| 2004-05-18 7:21:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 I think Rubin should have written the article so that the story makes sense. Starting right after the sentence I quoted, I became thoroughly lost. There's some deposition. There's some e-mail. There's some wheel chair. There's some people with wrong ranks. There's something about Powerpoint. It's incoherent.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2004-05-19 12:15:36 AM|| 2004-05-19 12:15:36 AM|| Front Page Top

13:58 Jarhead
13:25 11A5S
09:45 Robert Crawford
07:55 Mitch H.
04:44 Anonymous4617
04:13 Phil B
02:52 Mark Espinola
01:21 Lucky
01:14 Anonymous4617
00:32 Mike Sylwester
00:25 Zenster
00:19 RMcLeod
00:16 Bomb-a-rama
00:15 Mike Sylwester
23:53 Mark Espinola
23:46 Anonymous2U
23:40 Anonymous2U
23:34 JDB
23:23 Pappy
23:12 Edward Yee
23:10 Edward Yee
23:01 rex
22:59 ex-lib
22:52 Mike Sylwester