LG - We are miles from the topic which is boxing and I really feel like we are beating dead horse here but the article says about the document:
During a Sept. 16 meeting at the Pentagon, the Army surgeon general, Lt. Gen. Patricia D. Horoho, recommended to the superintendent at West Point, Lt. Gen. Robert L. Caslen Jr., that the Army delay responding to The Times’s request, according to the document. General Horoho then suggested trying to get The Wall Street Journal or USA Today to publish an article about a more favorable Army study on concussions.
According to the document, described by Army officials as an executive summary of the meeting, the public affairs staff at West Point and the surgeon general’s office were instructed to promote that study, by a West Point sports medicine doctor, Col. Steven Svoboda, to the other publications.
“I recommend you let us publish this article BEFORE you release the FOIA to the NYT reporter,” General Horoho is quoted as saying in the summary, using an acronym for the Freedom of Information Act.
“Timing is everything with this stuff,” she added, according to the document. Neither the Journal nor USA Today published an article about the Svoboda study.
Both generals acknowledged the authenticity of the summary [emphasis added], but said it misrepresented their discussion. The Times obtained the summary from a military official who opposed the Army’s plans to delay release of the concussion information. The official said not being transparent with journalists “damages democracy.”
Caslen is then quoted as saying:
In a statement last week, General Caslen said the document had “inaccurately portrayed my discussion with Lieutenant General Horoho.”
“I allowed it to be distributed without my review and take full responsibility for any misperceptions this may have caused,” he said.
One may like or dislike the NYT but can we at least agree that if they were inaccurate with regards to Caslen's quote or the summary contents which they describe and which the Army acknowledged as authentic, they could be facing libel charges? Is it fair to say that they are not that stupid? They are a business and this is pretty simple risk/reward math.
My point is only that the document - the minutes and summary - is authentic and almost certainly says
exactly what the article says it says. No amount of hatred for the NYT (not from you) can change that simple apparent reality. This is why as a parent who has only had positive things to say about West Point, to say I am unimpressed is to put it mildly. It give me serious pause about their leadership.
I have read your postings, respect your view (it was intended as a joke as I said) and I would guess that if you really read the article carefully and reflect on it, I suspect we would actually align if not agree. I doubt we are far apart on the boxing issue either. My wish is that USMA put as much effort into studying the boxing and concussion problem and finding solutions as they apparently and almost certainly did in my opinion put into ducking and bobbing and weaving to avoid timely responding to a FOI request on the same topic.
I say that as a parent with a second child who has some interest in USMA.
As for this weekend, perhaps we will pass in the lot. I promise to leave the gloves at home.
Go Navy; beat Air Force. I am sure you will agree that.