I don't like the way the Telegraph used us as if we were Kerry's campaign.

[blm]

I think that Telegraph article is written in a way so that if ANY little detail is in error, it will reflect directly on Kerry and his actual campaign team, and not a casual Democratic message board investigation co-op.

Anyone else uncomforatable with the way they described us?

It doesn't help knowing the Telegraph is a right wing rag. Hard to believe they would represent the story appropriately or in a way favorable to Kerry.

>>>>>>>>

Supporters of Senator John Kerry yesterday warned of "blowback" against President George W Bush for the political "attack ads" by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth which have damaged Mr Kerry's election campaign.

After weeks of denigration of the Democratic challenger's Vietnam war record, Mr Kerry's backers have responded with allegations against the President - including the claim that he was once photographed in uniform wearing a medal ribbon he had not earned.

As polls showed that Mr Bush had edged ahead of Mr Kerry for the first time, a pro-Kerry organisation labelled the President an "impostor" over the photograph, taken in 1970 and discovered in his father's Presidential Library in Houston, Texas.

The ribbon is an Air Force Outstanding Unit Award - which was not awarded to the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron in which Mr Bush served until 1975, five years after the photograph was taken, according to the group US War Report.
<snip>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml

[CatWoman]

1. were there any errors in Walt's story?

if not, what is there to worry about?

like there's not enough to worry about?

[blm]

6. The way it was worded, Cat.....

didn't come off as an honest representation. As if the writer INTENDED it to be inextricably attached to the Kerry campaign.

[NMDemDist2]

2. nope, just glad they picked it up

and if the campaign gets questions, they can run with the story too

[seabeyond]

3. i agree and there were areas and it isnt the campaign

it is important to understand, that there is way many more people out there doing the research and paying attention and this is nothing ot do with kerry's campaign but a citizen doing the work reporters use to do

[IndianaGreen]

4. I think Walt Starr performed a great patriotic service and he should be

commended instead of having some apparatchiks from the campaign try to second guess him.

Great job Walt!

:toast:

[blm]

7. I agree that it was a great service. The Telegraph had a different agenda,

imo.

Are there any reports that anyone from Kerry's actual campaign team is second-guessing him? I didn't see that anyone weighed in on this yet.

[IndianaGreen]

10. The Telegraph is a respected conservative paper in the UK

Using Thanfully_in_Britain as a reliable source, here is what she posted in DU back on Jan-20-02:

CONSERVATIVE

Before I start may I remind you that many of these papers supported Blair at the last election thanks to Blairs rightward drift and the pathetic state of the tory party. That does not change the fact that they do lean right.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

The main bastion of conservatism we have in this country. This is a reputable source and quite well written in my opinion. This one is however a big favourite of the freepers so you know what side they're on. This was the only paper to have openly supported the conservatives at the last general election.

[blm]

14. So's the Wall Street Journal, but how many times has it been used by

BushInc to promote its dirty work?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

5. Big Thread Discussing your points

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x684479

[blm]

9. I saw the OP in LBN.....

Yes, I see in your thread that some others feel similarly.

I want to scream and whoop it up, but, the wording they use is just a too bit cagey in its reaching to attach us to the campaign.

[Kagemusha]

8. Supporters, backers... this is wrong why?

People are free to support candidates without their permission, right?

It's America, right?

Right?...

[DoYouEverWonder]

12. The headline stated the "Kerry Campaign"

there's a big, big difference between the Kerry Campaign and Kerry Supporters.

First of all, the Kerry campaign is subject to election laws, supporters are not.

Second, they are trying to make this look like the Kerry Campaign coordinated an attack against Bush in retaliation for the SBVs, dragging Kerry into the same mud that they are playing in.

Instead of telling the truth, that a concerned citizen took this upon himself, to look into this issue and found, what may be, a very serious violation of military rules.

That's why this headline is a problem. The Telegraph deliberately broke the story in such a way, to manipulate the way people would react to it.

[gulliver]

11. It bothers me too.

It looks like hanky-panky to me. Like the Repubs see it coming and are trying to seed it with their spin before it hits big in the states.

[DoYouEverWonder]

13. Exactly

You just said it, in fewer words than I did.

Thanks.