The "Truth" About McCain??

Salaam (Peace) to all...

After reading Mr. Richter's article (http://www.counterpunch.org/) besmirching the character of Sen. John McCain, somewhat hoping to gain deeper insight into the reasons behind the ill-feelings of his detractors, I must say I was sorely disappointed. While I am certainly no fan of John McCain, I also am not a fan of shoddy sensationalism.

Mr. Richter's article was, at best, a sloppy attempt to malign McCain through the use of innuendo and "guilt by association", along with a list of vague, unsupported assumptions that the reader is expected, apparently, to just "swallow" as actual fact.

Examples:

"Gen. Telford Taylor, a chief U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials after World War Two, told me that he strongly supported the idea of trying the U.S. pilots captured in North Vietnam as war criminals - and that he would be proud to lead in their prosecution.
"...While he did not mention any pilot's name, then U.S. Navy Lieut. Commander John McCain who was captured a year later, would have been among the group Taylor wanted to prosecute."

Here, Mr. Richter is employing the use of an "authority" figure and his personal views to legitimize the subsequent assumption that McCain "would have been" among the group Gen. Taylor wanted to prosecute. "Would have been"??? Excuse me??? Either he was, or he wasn't. Did Mr. Richter ever bother to ASK the good General whether Sen. McCain was among those he wanted to prosecute? If not, how on earth could Mr. Richter make such an assumption? Would such an assumption hold up as "evidence" in a court of law? Hardly.



"Why would anyone have wanted to prosecute McCain and the other captured pilots? Taylor's argument was that their actions were in violation of the Geneva conventions that specifically forbid indiscriminate bombing that could cause incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects."

Here, again, is a sly "guilt-by association" tactic...promoting a conclusion that has not been logically or factually established: "Why would anyone have wanted to prosecute McCain and the other captured pilots?"

Again, Mr. Ricther has not established, definitively, that Sen. McCain deserves to be lumped together with those "other captured pilots" who, by the way, were never actually mentioned by name. Perhaps Mr. Richter's claim is actually true...but he did not established such in his presentation, which is more along the lines of fallacy than deductive reasoning.



"In one of his autobiographies McCain wrote that he was going to bomb a power station in “a heavily populated part of Hanoi” when he was shot down."

Ummm...WHICH ONE of his autobiographies? Which page? And what is the full context of the "quote" cited in the above claim? And if, as Mr. Richter claims, Sen. McCain is recorded as having participated in "23" bombing runs...why not provide statements or references to more than "ONE", supposedly mentioned in "one of his autobiographies"?



"The targets McCain and his fellow pilots actually bombed in Vietnam and his justification then or now for the actions that led to his capture, are no longer simply old news. They are part of what must be taken into account today, as voters weigh support for him or Obama to be the next President of the United States.
"This is not about the hugely unpopular war in Vietnam. It is about the character of a man who seeks to be U.S. President, who perhaps was not simply a brave warrior, but a warrior who by his own admission, bombed and was ready to bomb targets in violation of the Geneva conventions and Nuremberg principles."

Pardon me, but..."perhaps"??? The problem with "perhaps" is that it leaves equal room for the possibility of "perhaps NOT", especially in the absence of any credible supporting references.

Sadly, yet ironically, this is a clear reminder of the "Truth" of the words of Hiram Johnson (1866-1945) - a Progressive Republican senator in California -- "The first casualty, when war comes, is truth".

Apparently, this phenomena is not restricted only to military action campaigns, but also applies to political campaigns, as well. What must be the net effect on the citizens who look to their political leaders for guidance?

Little wonder that the "sky" over America....is falling.

RM