I have stated repeatedly that I do not know who is telling the truth- Kerry or the Swift Vets. I am predisposed to distrust Kerry, and I have a hard time seeing how all 264 members of the Swift Vets could be liars.
Having said that, John O’Neill’s credibility appears to be dropping:
O’Neill said no one could cross the border by river and he claimed in an audio tape that his publicist played to CNN that he, himself, had never been to Cambodia either. But in 1971, O’Neill said precisely the opposite to then President Richard Nixon.
O’NEILL: I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border on the water.
NIXON: In a swift boat?
O’NEILL: Yes, sir.
It is time for O’Neill to put up or sut up. I don’t know who is telling the truth in the overall big picture, and Kerry’s backtracking about Cambodia and the first Purple Heart were telling, but if O’Neill said this stuff, I don’t see how you can view it as anything but a lie.
Note to the Kerry Campaign- See how easy that is? Provide facts, not lawyers. And just answer the damn questions.
(via Oliver)
*** Update ***
The Instapundit points out that this is not relevant, and I tend to agree with much of what he has to say. If, of course, O’Neill actually was in Vietnam.
HH
CNN is all alone on this, which one would think would be out now already, unless the tape was provided by the Kerry campaign… there seems to be no context whatsoever to this, so let’s see where this goes.
Of course the same people attacking O’Neill have been silent as the grave on this similar apparent contradiction:
HH
Perhaps O’Neill can say that “back then, water and land were absolutely interchangable.”
Slartibartfast
Eh? Who says the Vietnam/Cambodia border can’t be on a river, or cross a river?
capt joe
Well, O’Neil said Kerry was not in cambodia. Did he ever claim he wasn’t?
Consider that O’Neil took over Kerry boat after Kerry went back to be the darling of the anti war set.
I don’t know. I just don’t remember him making the claim that he wasn’t.
capt joe
Also Kerry was on the Daily Show and apparently he wouldn’t answer a direct question about whether he was in Cambodia
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0825kerry-comedy25.html
“I’m sorry,” Stewart said. “Were you or were you not in Cambodia?”
Stewart and Kerry then leaned in and stared each other down before Stewart asked about other things Kerry’s opponents are saying.
Guess, he wasn’t there after all.
So ….
Slartibartfast
Yeah, I’ve been asking that same question, capt. joe. No one’s making the argument that swift boats were never in Cambodia. Some people, however, are arguing that since Cambodia was infiltrated by MACV SOG, it must mean Kerry did in fact ferry some black ops guys over the border on Christmas.
The inconsistency is nearly migraine-inducing.
Slartibartfast
“No one’s making the argument that swift boats were never in Cambodia.”
Retracted. I don’t know this is the case, but I don’t think this is what’s being argued by SwiftVets.
capt joe
With the amount of back pedalling from the kerry camp including the Jon Stewart interchange, I would make it a good bet that Kerry wasn’t really there. After all, why backpedal if it was true or even plausibly true.
form 180. Let’s settle it. Why is Ollie so silent on Kerry signing the form. But he’s not interested in the true, just winning at any cost.
Mikey
The question of whether Mr. O’Neill was in Cambodia with a swift boat has no bearing on whether Sen. Kerry was in Cambodia on a swift boat. To wit:
Was O’Neill in Cambodia? He says he was. Okay, he was in Cambodia at sometime.
Was John Kerry in Cambodia? He said he was, then has said he wasn’t. Okay, he wasn’t in Cambodia. Then why did he say he was the first time?
Trevor
That certainly does raise questions about O’neill’s credibility, but if one untruth is going to completely ruin a person’s credibility, then Kerry should be toast by now. I’d certainly like to hear something from O’neill on this matter, but this entire story should not be devolved into a he said/he said episode. If everyone’s full records were ever released, then we could get past that part of the story and start dealing with the true ramifications of Kerry’s service, and how they relate to his ability to be CiC.
As for the transcript, how funny is it that the host, Aaron Brown, and the CNN correspondent, pat each other on the back for Cable News’ coverage of the story, and for keeping it in the news? What?Then a few lines later, they both agree that the story has just about run it’s course.
Jay
John, here is the transcript of Hannity & Colmes last night and O’Neill gives his explanation. It sounds plausible to me.
swampfox
http://www.instapundit.com
explains why this isn’t really relevant
Tim
Trevor, it doesn’t undermine O’Neill’s credibility at all – after all, he served AFTER Kerry, well into the early ’70’s when, under the Nixon Administration, we *DID* go into Cambodia. That O’Neill was part of the force that was in Cambodia during his time in the Vietnam War in no way undermines his credible (and so far unaddressed by the Kerry Campaign) charge that Kerry was *NEVER* in Cambodia.
Adam
Note that O’Neill was still with the Swift Boats in APril of 1970, when they began operating in Cambodia, after the border obstructions were removed.
See http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/vietnam/vietnamization/cambodia.aspx for more details.
So this does not impact O’Neill’s credibility, unless he was claiming to have been there in 1969.
Slartibartfast
…with John Kerry, inserting covert agents across the Cambodia border. And getting a hat, in exchange.
George
What O’Neill said is not contradictory. He said that “no one could cross the border by river” as Kerry would have to do in that division during that period.
O’Neill did not say that he crossed the border by the river. He could have been in the ocean near the S. Vietnam/Cambodia border.
I would like an explanation from O’Neill but I’ll bet money that he has a valid explanation while Kerry does not.
M. Simon
The full conversation gives a different meaning to this snippet. Another pathetic attempt to prove what John Kerry has already repudiated (well at least the Christmas part). But you do have SDandusky contradicting Kerry’s diary by saying he went to Cambodia with Kerry plenty of times.
The campaign is three or five stories behind itself.
Pathetic.
Did you hear this one going around?
There is a big difference between William Calley and John Kerry. William Calley is a proven war criminal. For John Kerry we only have his word as an officer and a gentleman.
Pierre Legrand
O’Neil was not stationed at the same base so it is possible that he could have gone into Cambodia. It is important to note as well that O’Neil wasnt using the story to push a political campaign or viewpoint as Kerry was attempting to do.
It is very important to note that Kerry was at a different Base so it was not possible for Kerry to go to Cambodia because of the blockades previously set up.
ONeil’s credibility is beyond doubt if you read the book. The most serious charges against Kerry are indisputable. He admitted meeting N.Vietnamese while he was still active duty reserve, he is on record calling his own crewmates rapists, murderers, and baby killers. The case against Kerry is just getting rolling. If you havent read the book I cannot recommend it highly enough.
Pierre
George
Yes, it turns out that when O’Neill said he was on the Cambodian border, it was on the west coast border near the Gulf of Siam. Kerry did not serve there; he served in the Mekong Delta which is 50 miles from Cambodia. The Mekong was physically blocked to prevent swift boats from passing.
no
According to this CNN transcript, O’Neill stated “in an audio tape that his publicist played to CNN that he, himself, had never been to Cambodia either”. No issue as to dates, just a flat “never”. So there are some contradictory statements here from O’Neill as to whether he’d been to Cambodia.
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0408/24/asb.00.html
Lee
I saw O’Neill challenged on this point last night on either MSNBC or Fox News, and he said that he his langauge was imprecise and that the second sentence wsa what he intended. Interpreting this to mean that he was well inside Cambodia is parsing a casual statement too closely. On the other hand, Kerry unequivocally stated that he was in Cambodia. He did not follow with a corrective sentence like O’Neill that he was along the border.
Fresh Air
John Cole–
You have missed the point. According to this history, U.S. troops, consistent with official U.S. policy invaded Cambodia on April 30, 1970. We pulled out on June 29, 1970.
From a National Review story about O’Neill:
After a year on the Woodpecker, O’Neill transferred to the Swift boats in the spring of 1969, serving on them until the summer of 1970.
If O’Neill was in Cambodia, he obviously could have been doing it while it was legal to do so and official U.S. policy. There was no period during Kerry’s service there in which he could have been there legally. And the whole point of Kerry’s claim is that he had been sent there at a time when it was illegal to do so and while the president was publicly denying it. Never mind that Kerry got the president in December 1968 wrong.
Frank
Kerry was there when Johnson was President…and Nixon didn’t come into office until 20 Jan…Oneill came after Kerry who left in March. The point is Nixon didn’t come into office saying lets go into Campodia…Kerry heard later that some boats went into Cambodia and as he heard much later about the Khmer Rouge who in 68-69 a very very small group that no body had heard of. Kerry picks up on things and embellishes them like coming into port the day Robert Kennedy was killed in the book but it was 2 days later. Or saying a he did that he was in Vietnam the day Martin Luther King was killed at a civil rights function. Kerry had been gone for 4months. Kerry embellishes a lot and thats why he wrote the after action reports. After action reports are what the recommendation for awards are written from. Kerry carried a typewriter with him. a MOVIE CAMERA AND A TYPEWRITER…
Buster
I’ve heard very little about the fact that swiftboats weren’t even operating in the Delta until shortly after Kerry took command of one. So he wasn’t looking for a fight on costal patrol. I can encounter more real heroes in a good night at Goob’s Tavern.
AP
Is it possible that when O’Neill says he was “in” Cambodia he was referring to violating the waters of Cambodia’s coastal boundary?
bb
I think it is quite relevant if O’Neil claimed that he was never in Vietnam– I just wish the same scrutiny given to O’Neil’s claims were given to Kerry’s.
HH
Nice to see the journalistic standards of Aaron Brown hold up per usual… I’m just surprised that Chris Matthews didn’t present it first, dragging in Michelle Malkin to body-slam her.
Another Thought
O’Neill cleared this up on Hannity and Colmes:
He didn’t cross over into Cambodia at the same place that Kerry said he did in Christmas of 1968.
Also, even if O’Neill got it wrong, who cares? He was speaking in conversation with the president…I am sure many people mispeak in conversation, especially if you are nervous being around the president. But O’Neill never claimed the Cambodia incident was “seared” into his memory, nor did he repeatedly make that claim in public forums, including in the US Senate, over the years.
In short, Kerry must fulfill a much higher standard than O’Neill.
What?
Sorry to sound like Clinton but this depends on What? the definition of “in” in this case is.
Is it “in” as in inside? (which causes O’Neil some serious creadibility problems as it would refute things he has said)
Or
Is it “in” as “in the vicinity of”? The immediate following statement seems to give some veracity to this interpretation being quite plausible.
One thing we can say, O Neil is answering the hard questions and is providing details that can be explored and falsified if he slips up.
Slartibartfast
“he was referring to violating the waters of Cambodia’s coastal boundary”
How does one violate water, exactly? I’ve heard of violating a piece of liver (good God, not a Philip Roth reference), but water seems…inviolable.
Ernest Brown
“How does one violate water, exactly? I’ve heard of violating a piece of liver (good God, not a Philip Roth reference), but water seems…inviolable.”
Ask the Coast Guard, they’ll be happy to tell you.
ed
Hmmm.
So what?
The worst that could be said is that O’Neill misspoke and then corrected himself.
Did O’Neill assert he was in Cambodia 50 separate times? No.
Did O’Neill assert he was in Cambodia on the Senate floor during a debate? No.
Did O’Neill assert he was in Cambodia in several biographies? No.
Did O’Neill assert he was in Cambodia in a multitude of newspaper articles and TV shows? No.
Did O’Neill assert he was in Cambodia in a multitude of speeches in front of the public? No.
So f-ing what? People misspeak all the time. That’s why President Bush said “misunderestimated” and why Kerry talked about raising taxes on the middle class lowers taxes on the middle class.
Anyone can misspeak once or twice as long as they try to correct the record and not do it again. It’s the 50+ times that Kerry talked out of his butt about getting ordered on secret missions into Cambodia that wreck’s his credibilty.
Geoff Matthews
I have to agree with Ed. I’m willing to forgive the odd instance of not being clear. Heaven knows I have the problem at times. But 50 times? That isn’t a mistake, that’s a fraud.
ken burke
CNN finds one marginally debatable inconsistency, and attempts to impeach the SBFTs entire catalog. But that criteria, one marginally debatable inconsistency does not apply to Kerry? this does not demonstrate an issue of O’Neill’s credibility. it demonstrates CNNs overzealous prosecution of O’Neill’s credibility and their double-standard. don’t be a moron to debate any of Aaron Brown claims, because it allows that you watched him. morons.