[Peace-discuss] Cockburn on Vietnam POWs

[C. G. Estabrook]

I admit that Schanberg has been a dutiful imperial scribe.  Here's Chomsky on 
him more than 15 years ago:

     "...the press wasn't reporting what it knew. Until this day, we don't know 
a lot about the secret bombing of Cambodia, for a very simple reason - 
journalists like Sidney Schanberg, who is supposed to be 'the conscience of the 
press,' were sitting in Phonm Penh, refusing to interview the million and half 
refugees who were literally across the street. That's why we don't know about 
the secret war. It's not because of government lying..."

I do however remind you of what we've called "The Incompleteness Principle" on 
News from Neptune: "No one can be wrong all the time."


On 5/29/10 1:10 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> My memory is that Franklin (an acute, leftist literary critic) analyzed
> the motives, during the Reagan years, for believing in POWs-MIAs left
> behind: he saw at as part of the attempt to reverse the pervasive
> "Vietnam Syndrome."
>
> But it's always important to distinguish the motives for holding a
> belief from the evidence for that belief. It's better to see what
> evidence Schanberg has than to ignore it. --CGE
>
>
> On 5/29/10 10:46 AM, David Green wrote:
>> For the record, AC is right about the USS Liberty, very very very likely
>> wrong about Vietnam POWs. A pretty shocking support for the POW
>> conspiracy theory. H. Bruce Franklin has been all over this for years.
>> http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn05282010.html
>> http://www.thenation.com/article/powmias-amp-john-mccain
>> DG
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.