Media and combat expert Andy Martin says Bill O’Reilly clearly exaggerated and inflated his “combat” and “war” experience

Media critic and war/military/intelligence expert Andy Martin says that Bill O’Reilly clearly inflated his “combat” or “war” credentials by claiming a civil disturbance in Buenos Aires was a combat or war situation. Andy wades into the O’Reilly/Mother Jones/CBS News/New York Times and Washington Post “conflation” over what Bill O’Reilly did in Argentina over thirty years ago. “Bill O’Reilly has shot himself in the foot,” Andy says. “Instead of ignoring Mother Jones, O’Reilly has opened up floodgates concerning how he has misrepresented his experiences during and after the Falklands Islands War.

NEWS FROM:

                                                                                          

ContrarianCommentary.com

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin,  J. D.

adjunct professor of law

executive editor

one of America’s most respected

independent authors/investigators

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

you can call Andy:

New Hampshire (603) 518-7310

National (866) 706-2639

Cell (917) 664-9329

you can email Andy:

andynewhampshire@aol.com

you can write Andy by

faxing (866) 214-3210

Blogs/web sites  (partial):

ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com

www.AndyMartin.com

www.FirstRespondersOnline.us

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to andynewhampshire@aol.com and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line.

Andy Martin says Bill O’Reilly clearly inflated and distorted and misrepresented O’Reilly’s “war” and “combat” credentials

Andy says that O’Reilly has opened up a mess that is of his own making, and O’Reilly is certain to be a loser when the exchange is over

(New York, NY) (February 23, 2015) Let me start with a disclaimer or series of disclaimers. I do not like Fox News. Fox News has treated me abysmally. I have every reason to dislike the place. I do like Bill O’Reilly’s show, watch it regularly and I think he does an excellent job of focusing on threats to our national security. So I bear Bill no personal animus or hostility.

But O’Reilly is clearly wrong in claiming he “covered a war” and saw “combat” in Argentina over thirty years ago.

If O’Reilly had come to me for advice on how to handle Mother Jones, I would have proffered an aphorism from my late Uncle Bill Vasiliou, who schooled me on how to deal with such nonsense. But O’Reilly, pugilist that he is, has now waded into a battle with CBS News, the New York Times, the Washington Post and only incidentally Mother Jones.

One more disclaimer: Bill O’Reilly’s misconduct is not even remotely related to or on a par with Brian Williams’ misconduct at NBC News.

When attacked, O’Reilly doubled down on his ridiculous claim that he was in combat, and is now dealing with a conflagration of his own making. O’Reilly is trying to bluster his way over the voices of his critics but he is doomed to failure. The match is no longer between Fox News and Mother Jones. CBS, the Times and Post level the playing field in this street fight.

First, in a generic sense O’Reilly was sent to Argentina to “cover a war.” The only problem was that you could not get to the war one from Argentina. Urban demonstrations such as O’Reilly claims to have covered are neither “combat” nor “war” as revived research concerning the aftermath of Argentina’s defeat is now confirming (see below).

O’Reilly’s ridiculous claim that he obtained the “greatest war film ever” is insulting to anyone’s intelligence who has any knowledge of real combat coverage and footage. I was in Viet-Nam, Cambodia, Laos, Iraq and other war zones. And I was actually out in the field in actual combat zones (pictures at AndyMartin.com). But I would never have considered a street demonstration in DaNang or Saigon a “combat” situation (at least not until the Tet Offensive or the final days when Saigon collapsed and fell to the North).

Is what O’Reilly is guilty of the same level of lying as Brian Williams? Absolutely not. Brian Williams lied to his audience this month. O’Reilly has inflated something which took place decades ago at CBS, long before he was hired by Fox News. So O’Reilly’s claim that the attack on him is a tit-for-tat for Williams is, if true, complete nonsense. O’Reilly was and is clear on that front.

But, as often happens, O’Reilly’s latest exaggerations and misrepresentations in defending himself against Mother Jones may have reopened the statute of limitations over a dispute concerning what happened 33 years ago. On that basis he may suffer some ignominy similar to Williams’. If O’Reilly had kept his mouth shut, that would have been the end of the flare up. By reclaiming and reviving his goofy exaggerations and self-inflated views of combat and war in Argentina over thirty years ago, O’Reilly may now be doing unnecessary, but now unavoidable, damage to his brand.

Next time, Bill, call me before you want to inflate your resume. My own Uncle Bill has the answer.

LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/02/23/bill-oreillys-implosion-at-cbs-following-his-falklands-war-combat-reporting/?hpid=z5

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/02/23/former-new-york-times-correspondent-cited-favorably-by-bill-oreilly-rips-bill-oreilly/?hpid=z3

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/23/business/media/bill-oreilly-fox-news-host-fights-back-at-claims-of-exaggerated-stories.html

New citations after emailing:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/business/media/bill-oreilly-and-fox-news-redouble-defense-of-his-falklands-reporting.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

WHAT OTHERS SAY:

“Andy Martin is revolutionizing journalism… [Andy] brings to online journalism what Rush Limbaugh [brings] to radio or Michael Moore to film: sleek little stories that fit into larger political narratives…”

“The only American journalists that are “standing UP” [to Obama] are, Andy Martin…”

ABOUT ANDY:

Andy is a legendary New Hampshire, New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, talk television pioneer, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. Andy’s family immigrated to Manchester 100 years ago; today his home overlooks the Merrimack River and he lives around the corner from where he played as a small boy. He has forty-five years of background in radio and television. He is the author of “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” [www.OrangeStatePress.com] and he produced the Internet film “Obama: The Hawaii’ Years” [www.BoycottHawaii.com]. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of the “Internet Powerhouse,” www.ContrarianCommentary.com. He comments on New Hampshire, national and international events with more than four decades of investigative and analytical experience both in the USA and around the world. For more, go to: www.AndyMartin.com

Andy has also been a leading corruption fighter in American politics and courts for over forty-five years and he is executive director of the National Anti-Corruption Policy Institute. He is currently sponsoring www.AmericaisReadyforReform.com. See also www.FirstRespondersOnline.us; www.EnglishforAmerica.org

He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).

UPDATES:

www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA
www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

Andy’s columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]

----------

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2015 – All Rights Reserved

Andy Martin remembers being targeted for presidential abuse because of his Viet-Nam War reporting

New Hampshire’s Andy Martin, one of America’s leading conservative authors/investigators, has had a media career that stretches back into the 1960’s. He is the youngest person ever authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to own and operate a TV station. As a result of a series of chance meetings in Washington - some day to be a major novel - he ended up in Viet-Nam as an independent producer and investigator. He also may have ended up as one of the earliest names on President Nixon’s enemies’ lists. Andy knows what James Rosen, Fox News, Sharyl Attkisson and The Associated Press are going through. He’s “been there, done that.” Attacks on the media never change, as Andy’s recollections from an earlier era confirm.

NEWS FROM:

ContrarianCommentary.com

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin, J. D.

adjunct professor of law

executive editor

America’s most respected

independent author/investigator



“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”



you can call Andy:

NH (603) 518-7310

NTL (866) 706-2639



you can email Andy:

andynewhampshire@aol.com



you can write Andy by

faxing (866) 214-3210



Blogs/web sites (partial):

ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com

www.AndyMartin.com

www.FirstRespondersOnline.us

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com



To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to andynewhampshire@aol.com and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line.



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:



Conservative columnist and corruption-fighter Andy Martin

remembers being the target of presidential fury during the crisis over the Viet-Nam War’s My Lai massacre



“I know what the reporters are going through,” Andy says. “I lived through the same experience in the pre-Internet age.”



(WASHINGTON, DC) (May 23, 2013)



I have a sense of what James Rosen, Fox News, The Associated Press and Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News are feeling. I went through a similar experience with President Nixon forty-four years ago in 1969.



Yesterday I received a call from a New Hampshire journalist who asked my views on the current media scandals. As his questions probed, I started to drift back in time to 44 years ago when I was the target of presidential anger and earned my place on the first of three presidential enemies’ lists.



In 1969 there were no cell phones, no Internet, no 24-hour news cycle. Media had barely advanced since World War II. I was a recent law school graduate who among other endeavors was selling news and commentary and deciding what to do with my life. But then as now I knew people around the world and could draw on sources and resources that were otherwise not available.



One day in September, 1969 I opened the Chicago Sun-Times and saw the Evans-Novak “Inside Report” headline: “Presidential fury at Robb affair.” Evans-Novak were reporting that President Richard Nixon was furious. At me.



It was not a pleasant experience.



Seymour Hirsch had blown open the My Lai massacre and on a trip to Washington he and I met very briefly.



My experiences were unusual because I had spent time in northern South-Viet Nam in 1967 and 1968, and particularly in “I Corps” which was a U. S. Marine area of operations. I remember my first meeting with Captain Charles Robb, President Johnson’s son-in-law, who was commanding a Marine company southwest of Da Nang. Commanders rotated, so a company might have more than one officer during the course of a year. Robb was a relatively recent commander. He mistook me for one of his replacement troops.



The Marines had thrown up a perimeter around Robb and no media were allowed to be with Robb when he was in the field. I slipped through the cordon due to friends in the Marine Corps.



Not far from Robb’s base was an area called the “Arizona Territory.” The men told me they had gone into the Arizona Territory over and over again, and engaged in indiscriminate killing. My Lai was about indiscriminate killing. I connected My Lai with the Arizona Territory. The Arizona territory was a similar “killing field;” (please see link #1) today there are tours to visit this blood-soaked region (link #2)



The resemblance between My Lai (a U. S. Army operation) and what happened in the “Arizona Territory” was uncanny. The “Arizona Territory” was also a surprising area because in I Corps Marines had developed one of a small number of successful counterinsurgency formulas. They would position platoons in harm’s way, and encourage the men to work with and get along with local people. They called them “CAP” units (please see Link #3). Mass killing was against the Marines’ overall policy except in a pitched battle such as the Tet Offensive or combat assaults.



Because counterinsurgency and special operations were my specialty I paid particular attention to the question of why operations in the “Arizona Territory” were treated differently than Marine operations in other areas.



As I write today in 2013 I don’t have a clue how or where I published my Captain Robb/Arizona territory story. Back in 1969 there were no blogs, no email blasts and no Internet PR services. There was no instant communication (wire services, of course, existed but there was a definite news “lag”).



Someone picked up my story and ran with it.



While I can’t remember how I published my story, I do remember one fact very distinctly: my report reached the White House immediately. Even before the Internet, the White House still had ways of rapidly receiving information.



My remarks were simple and factual. Indiscriminate killing had not been an American “policy” per se, but indiscriminate killing had taken place and been tolerated across the war zone, particularly in I and II Corps. (IV Corps in the Mekong Delta was largely a South Vietnamese operation and III Corps was closer to Saigon and received much greater scrutiny). I believed it was wrong to retroactively punish soldiers for what had been acceptable conduct and widespread practices in an earlier period of the war. Retroactive punishment amounted to political scapegoating.



President Nixon blew his stack when he was made aware of my report. Nixon was trying to maintain a close relationship with former President Johnson and thought my writing was an effort by his political enemies to drive Johnson and Nixon apart by targeting Johnson’s son-in-law. In reality, I had no political motive whatsoever for my writing. I merely restated the facts as I had found them in Viet-Nam.



Shortly thereafter I passed the Illinois bar exam and found myself in a Star Chamber inquisition orchestrated by corrupt justices of the Illinois Supreme Court. The justices already had a reason to hate me because while still a law student I had helped expose corruption and helped set the stage for the removal of two justices from the court.



You can guess the rest of the story: what did the Illinois Supreme Court’s “character and fitness” representatives ask me about? Some things never change, from Andy Martin and My Lai in (by then) 1970 to the Tea Party in 2012: [1] Who and what were your sources in Vietnam? [2] How much did you receive for your writing? [3] Who purchased your reporting? [4] Where are the records of your Viet-Nam research? [5] What was your relationship to Professor Bernard Fall? And so on. The Illinois Supreme Court “investigated” me for three years before deciding I was too honest to practice law in Illinois.



And so, while I was not one of the first names on President Nixon’s enemies’ lists I had pride of place for telling the truth and standing up to a president who later shredded the Constitution. I stood up for the GI's and tried to help them avoid being scapegoated. I told the truth.



Mr. Rosen, AP, and Ms. Attkisson, “welcome to the club.” I know what it’s like to be in your shoes.



----------------------



MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639; CELL (917) 664-9329; E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com



----------------------



LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):

Link #1



http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?99535-

Vietnam-I-Corps-Marines-Check-In!



Link #2



https://www.miltours.com/tours/asia-pacific/recon-in-i-corps-

usmc-reconnaissance-operations-24-aug-6-sept



Link #3



http://www.capmarine.com/cap/thesis.htm



--------------------------



WHAT OTHERS SAY:



“Andy Martin is revolutionizing journalism… [Andy] brings to online journalism what Rush Limbaugh [brings] to radio or Michael Moore to film: sleek little stories that fit into larger political narratives…”



“The only American journalists that are “standing UP” [to Obama] are, Andy Martin…”



ABOUT ANDY:



Andy is a legendary New Hampshire, New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, talk television pioneer, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. Andy’s family immigrated to Manchester 100 years ago; today his home overlooks the Merrimack River and he lives around the corner from where he played as a small boy. He has forty-five years of background in radio and television. He is the author of “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” [www.OrangeStatePress.com] and he produced the Internet film "Obama: The Hawaii’ Years” [www.BoycottHawaii.com]. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of the “Internet Powerhouse,” www.ContrarianCommentary.com. He comments on New Hampshire, national and international events with more than four decades of investigative and analytical experience both in the USA and around the world. For more, go to: www.AndyMartin.com



Andy has also been a leading corruption fighter in American politics and courts for over forty-five years and he is executive director of the National Anti-Corruption Policy Institute. He is currently sponsoring www.AmericaisReadyforReform.com. See also www.FirstRespondersOnline.us; www.EnglishforAmerica.org



He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).



UPDATES:



www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin



Andy's columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com



[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]

--------------------------

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2013 – All Rights Reserved

--------------------------

Andy Martin remembers Walter Cronkite and yesterday's media

Walter Cronkite's passing prompts a reflection and reminiscence by the dean of Illinois' media and communications

ContrarianCommentary.com
Andy Martin
Executive Editor

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Walter Cronkite's passing reminds us how much our own news media have changed since the 1960's

Andy Martin began in a world that was remarkably similar to Walter Cronkite's formative years; with his 42 years of news and information gathering experience, Andy connects Cronkite's world to our own modern media

(NEW YORK)(July 18, 2009) At the bottom of most of our columns we usually refer to me as the "dean" of Illinois media and communications. Watching the coverage of Walter Cronkite's death was enough to make me feel older, and once again remember the 1960's.

NBC News offered me a job 42 years ago. Ultimately I turned the position down. I spent part of 1967 and 1968 in Viet-Nam as part of fly-on-the-wall efforts to create a back channel in Washington (see www.AndyMartin.com for pictures). In 1968 I became an FCC-approved TV station owner. "Video tape" was two inches wide. It all seems so long ago.

News then. News now. Cronkite's news-gathering world has long since passed. But today we still crave the authenticity and experience that Cronkite offered his audience. Here are my thoughts about then and now.

Despite the fact I am closing in on a half century of broadcasting experience, and therefore entitled to be called a "dean" (or perhaps something more sinister), I did not come into my own until the Internet era. And so in the age of today's blow-dried mannequins, I approach commentary and communications just as energetically as the most fresh-faced college graduate.

Cronkite started out when video "news" traveled slowly, by film and propeller airplane, and was displayed in move theaters. Transatlantic telephone service was still a new medium in World War II. When I arrived in Viet-Nam in 1967, "news" was little changed from the Second World War.

We look back and think of Viet-Nam as the "first television war." In some ways it ways; in others not. When you left Saigon or DaNang you were in another world. The war was real. You were alone.

Camera crews in Viet-Nam still used film; that film had to go to Hong Kong or the West Coast for processing. Associated Press and United Press International sent still pictures by wire; and newspaper stories left Saigon by wire. But TV film could not be transmitted directly from Saigon to New York.

Network correspondents and cameramen went into the field; days later their material would pop up on the evening news. Then Walter Cronkite went to Viet-Nam during the later stages of the Tet Offensive in 1968. He wanted to "see for himself." When he arrived, the news cycle moved with him. Unlike an ordinary correspondent, Cronkite's remarks were transmitted through extraordinary efforts to get the material out fast.is
Change had come to the battlefield.

Today we routinely expect instant coverage of every event. We are quite surprised when live coverage is unavailable, as it was last month after the Iranian election.

Has "instant" news changed the nature of our information? Indeed it has.

Cronkite was called the "most trusted man in America" because his judgment had been forged on remote battlefields, where independent knowledge and enterprise were essential. That was how he became a "newsman." People trusted his judgment because his judgment was real.

Today, college graduates in "media" programs expect to start in Podunk markets; they will work themselves up the media food chain to New York or LA or Chicago due primarily to their personal appearance and not their news-gathering expertise. These "talking heads" have never been alone on a battlefield. They have never been cut off from their world while they sought to gather information. They have satellite uplinks and sat phones.

By comparison, the judgments and opinions formed by people such as Cronkite, who were forced to develop independent expertise, were vastly different than the judgments formed today by "reporters" who are merely passive observers of news events.

We no longer have the same trust in media. Cronkite was different. People relied on him because he new what he was talking about. He had experience. There is something about being shot at and dodging mortar rounds while you are out there in the middle of hell-on-earth gathering information that changes you. You develop a desire to get the facts right. Today news gathering is a more antiseptic enterprise.

There was one special aspect Cronkite's journalism that no one mentioned in all the coverage of his death yesterday. He was the consummate "outsider." No president ever called Walter Cronkite a crony. "Uncle Walter" was distant and remote from Washington and the political machinations of Washington.

ABC was recently criticized for setting up shop to do "news" about "health care" from the White House. That's what passes for "news" in Obama's Washington. Previously, NBC News also received criticism for allowing Brian Williams to appear as a tool of the Obama administration.

No one ever accused Walter Cronkite of being a tool of anyone, least of all a tool of any politician. Cronkite's gravitas was in part a manifestation of the fact that he kept himself at a distance from politicians, and reported the news independently of DC influence brokers.

The bottom line? Cronkite was a great man. He was independent; he garnered his experience on the battlefield, not in the make-up room. His character was molded by the real world, not in a media hothouse.

Perhaps Cronkite's world was also an easier one for us. There were three networks to choose from, and that was that. One or two dominant newspapers. Today there are dozens of networks. Newspapers are vanishing. I don't know when I last tuned to a network "evening news" broadcast: twenty years ago? Thirty? Newspapers? Don't ask.

Today news comes at us from all directions, not just one source.

ContrarianCommentary.com now draws on information from our resources around the world; we assemble columns and occasionally breaking news from our own independent perspective. But I never felt so alive as when I was out in the field, alone, cut off from the world and forced to rely on my own instincts to search for the truth and find the facts. I was doing that in Viet-Nam 42 years ago, in Iraq six years ago and in Hawai'i ten months ago. I'm still on the same mission. If you don't believe me, just ask Barack Obama. He knows how hard I search. For the facts.

The modern "news" environment is more challenging for the viewer, listener, reader. Everyone must be more alert, observant and critical. The "wheat" is often overwhelmed by the "chaff."

Each of us has become our own "managing editor," filtering in what is credible and filtering out information that that lacks authenticity. It's not easy work.

The job that Walter Cronkite used to do for us every night, we now have to do for ourselves.

And that's the way it is. Good night.

-----------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: Amazon.com or http://OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama raises money to oppose President Barack Obama's radical agenda and also to support www.BoycottHawaii.com.
www.CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama's political agenda is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, no fat cats and no illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to almost everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised a billion dollar slush fund, his opponents lack sufficient resources. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
-----------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting background in radio and television and is the dean of Illinois media and communications. He is currently promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask and producing the new Internet movie “Obama: The Hawai’i years.” Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York. He is an announced candidate for Barack Obama’s former U. S. Senate seat.

UPDATES:
www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA
www.facebook.com/AndyMartin

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
[NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]

MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329 (cell not always on)
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com © Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.