Pilot Retracts Corroboration for Williams' Story

Krell was a pilot in Iraq, and met Williams. But another pilot, Chris Simeone, disputed that he was Williams' pilot on the flight in question. Simeone said he was the pilot, and Williams lied about the encounter.

We didn't get hit by anything but dust, Simeone said.

Well, now CNN's Twitter Witness is withdrawing his previous claims.

Brian Stetler, who came across Krell when Krell contacted him on Twitter, now says he questions his own memory.

On Friday morning, Krell told me that "the information I gave you was true based on my memories, but at this point I am questioning my memories."

...

On Thursday night, two others, Christopher Simeone and Allan Kelly, told The New York Times that they -- not Krell -- had piloted Williams' helicopter, and that "they did not recall their convoy of helicopters coming under fire."

Simeone, Kelly and a third soldier, Joseph Miller, also spoke with The Omaha World-Herald. The newspaper wrote this:

"Simeone and Kelly said only two helicopters were in their group, from Company B of the 159th Aviation. They said Krell was piloting the first helicopter. Simeone and Kelly were pilots on the second Chinook, and Miller was in their crew."

The paper continued: "All three said Williams was riding with them, not with Krell. They all said neither bird took fire at any time that day."

I text-messaged Krell before dawn, and asked him to call me as soon as he woke up. He replied with this text:

"Good morning. The information I gave you was true based on my memories, but at this point I am questioning my memories that I may have forgotten or left something out."

He said, "For the past 12 years I have been trying to forget everything that happened in Iraq and Afghanistan; now that I let it back, the nightmares come back with it, so I want to forget again."

He concluded, "The men in that article deserve respect. Please understand."

The NBC P.R. person now says the network can't confirm which person piloted Williams' helicopter.

Stetler also explains how he came to have Krell as an interview subject -- a question I kept asking him yesterday. (I got no answer.)

But an executive told the LA Times that Brian Williams will face no consequences whatsoever for this -- no suspension, no firing, not even a penalty.

Well, there will be one penalty. They may stop letting him go on Jimmy Fallon to Slow Jam the News.

No really. You think that's a joke. That is really in the mix.

You know who's happy about this?

PJ Media's Tom Blumer.

Americans’ confidence in the establishment press is at an all-time low. But it’s not low enough, even though the difference between newspapers and television news compared to Internet sources has virtually disappeared.

Brian Williams’ continued presence in the Nightly News anchor chair would henceforth make him the press’s poster child. He would become the starting point in any discussion of media bias with those who still believe that the press is fair and balanced --and readers can rest assured that Williams’ track record is a heavily documented, target-rich environment.

If the network continues to keep a serial fabricator on board, it will convince many of those who still buy what the press is selling that something is fundamentally wrong. That would be a fantastic development, because something is fundamentally wrong. The self-described watchdogs have instead become the left’s gatekeepers. The sooner everyone appreciates that, the better it will be for all.

And that's what the LA Times is saying their plan is.

Maybe this is a trial balloon to see how the rest of the industry would greet this decision -- will the rest of the media decide it's best to protect Williams, as they're all dishonest incompetents who could be fired for similar reasons, or will they insist on this childish game of pretending they have integrity and give a f*ck about the truth?

posted by Ace at 11:06 AM

| Access Comments