Originally Posted by Scipio

I have a question. Is North saying that none of those things went on, or is he saying that Kerry shouldn't have pointed it out? It would be irrational to actually think Kerry accused all soldiers/veterans of doing those things. He merely said that it was more widespread that usually reported, that he knew people who had done or witnessed some of those things, and that wartime misbehavior was something of an open secret in the army chain of command.

It strikes me that North is simply trying to cut off discourse 30 years after the fact. He's upset that the idealized image of the US soldier got a little bit tarnished during Vietnam, and Kerry has become a convenient target during this presidential campaign. Even Kerry himself admits that he was young, emotions were high, and that claims were in some cases exaggerated for effect. The truth is, his claims had to go through a congressional committee and media scrutiny, and he wasn't laughed out of Washington for what he said.

Of course, Ollie North and the rest of the Army good ol' boys just can't stand it when someone breaks ranks, and yes, I think the source is fair game, as is the message. Bias is a real thing, and words don't exist in a vacuum.