Brian Williams' Admission: Deception Indicated

                                   Being shot down is not something you or I might forget. 

Brian Williams reported to be on an aircraft under fire, years ago.  He was recently "outed" as lying, by the soldiers on board the attacked aircraft.  In fact:  he arrived an hour after the event. 

This past week, he continued the lie, at a New York Rangers game, but has been forced to make a statement.  

What does his statement show?

Does he "confess", that is, admit what he has done, and admit that it is wrong?

Does he "admit", that is, acknowledge what he has done, but not admit it was wrong?

Or, does he blame someone else?

Is he truthful in his admission?

Is it a "lie" or is it just a "mistake"?

 Here is his written response:  

To Joseph, Lance, Jonathan, Pate, Michael and all those who have posted: You are absolutely right and I was wrong.

In fact, I spent much of the weekend thinking I'd gone crazy.  I feel terrible about making this mistake, especially since I found my OWN WRITING about the incident from back in '08, and I was indeed on the Chinook behind the bird that took the RPG in the tail housing just above the ramp. 

Because I have no desire to fictionalize my experience (we all saw it happened the first time) and no need to dramatize events as they actually happened, I think the constant viewing of the video showing us inspecting the impact area — and the fog of memory over 12 years — made me conflate the two, and I apologize.

I certainly remember the armored mech platoon, meeting Capt. Eric Nye and of course Tim Terpak. Shortly after they arrived, so did the Orange Crush sandstorm, making virtually all outdoor functions impossible. I honestly don't remember which of the three choppers Gen. Downing and I slept in, but we spent two nights on the stowable web bench seats in one of the three birds.

Later in the invasion when Gen. Downing and I reached Baghdad, I remember searching the parade grounds for Tim's Bradley to no avail. My attempt to pay tribute to CSM Terpak was to honor his 23+ years in service to our nation, and it had been 12 years since I saw him. 

The ultimate irony is: In writing up the synopsis of the 2 nights and 3 days I spent with him in the desert, I managed to switch aircraft. Nobody's trying to steal anyone's valor.  Quite the contrary:  I was and remain a civilian journalist covering the stories of those who volunteered for duty.  This was simply an attempt to thank Tim, our military and Veterans everywhere — those who have served while I did not."

Here is the same statement, with emphasis added:

"To Joseph, Lance, Jonathan, Pate, Michael and all those who have posted: You are absolutely right and I was wrong.

Note that others being "right" comes before his being "wrong", which we now look to see if this is a theme in his statement; that is, reducing priority of lying. 

In fact, I spent much of the weekend thinking I'd gone crazy.  I feel terrible about making this mistake, especially since I found my OWN WRITING about the incident from back in '08, and I was indeed on the Chinook behind the bird that took the RPG in the tail housing just above the ramp. 

Note the order:

1.  "I'd gone crazy"

2.  "I feel terrible"

3.  "this mistake"

He then explains that it is "since" he found his OWN WRITING, with the capitalization showing emphasis.  

"about the incident" , which avoids saying what the "incident" was:  

The aircraft under fire, or the lie?

from "back" in 08 may be an attempt to show something so long ago that it is difficult to remember. 

Please note that in life or death situations, the increase in hormones often leaves a powerful imprint meaning:  it is not something someone might forget unless under severe trauma (amnesia) 

He was "in deed" on the Chinook behind" indicates a need to emphasize.  

Because I have no desire to fictionalize my experience (we all saw it happened the first time) and no need to dramatize events as they actually happened, I think the constant viewing of the video showing us inspecting the impact area — and the fog of memory over 12 years — made me conflate the two, and I apologize.

Here he avoids saying that he lied, and he speaks in the present tense.  He does not say "I desired to fictionalize my experience", reaching into the past, but stays in the present.  

The events "made me" conflate the two.  Therefore, it is not his fault.  They, the events, "made him" do it. 

He blames external circumstances.  If one questions whether he is telling the truth or not, he does not make you wait long for the answer:  

I certainly remember the armored mech platoon, meeting Capt. Eric Nye and of course Tim Terpak. Shortly after they arrived, so did the Orange Crush sandstorm, making virtually all outdoor functions impossible. I honestly don't remember which of the three choppers Gen. Downing and I slept in, but we spent two nights on the stowable web bench seats in one of the three birds.

In an open statement, one can only tell us what they do remember.  His use of "honestly" shows the recognition of its need:  he has not been honest.  

Later in the invasion when Gen. Downing and I reached Baghdad, I remember searching the parade grounds for Tim's Bradley to no avail. My attempt to pay tribute to CSM Terpak was to honor his 23+ years in service to our nation, and it had been 12 years since I saw him. 

Here he gives another reason for his lie; first, it was the circumstances that made him lie, but here it is his desire to honor military personal by "paying tribute"

Is he really this close to him?  The language betrays him:  

The ultimate irony is: In writing up the synopsis of the 2 nights and 3 days I spent with him in the desert, I managed to switch aircraft. 

The word with between people shows distance.  He does not say "we spent" or even "he and I", but uses "with" which reveals the distance. 

Why did he lie?  He does not cause us to wait: 

Nobody's trying to steal anyone's valor.  

He stole someone's valor.  

Quite the contrary:  I was and remain a civilian journalist covering the stories of those who volunteered for duty.  This was simply an attempt to thank Tim, our military and Veterans everywhere — those who have served while I did not."

It was not a lie in his language, but an "attempt to thank Tim" instead.

Williams not only lied about his experience, but he continues to avoid responsibility for his lie, and not only blame others, but credits his motive as honorable.  

He is a pathological liar.  He is the "rare" liar who can fabricate reality.  As he calls himself a journalist, this, alone, should cause a review of his major cases, to learn where else he has not only been deceptive, but has invented 'reality' in his coverage.   

Here is a short exert from Stars and Stripes. In his video, he not only blamed wanting to "thank" someone, but specifically uses the word "we" regarding the soldiers who were shot down.  Pronouns do not lie.  

"I would not have chosen to make this mistake"  is a long way to avoid saying, "I lied. I lied to make myself the news story."

The "apology" cleverly misleads the reader/listener into empathizing with him, as the "good guy" who was only trying to pay tribute to a hero.  

This indicates an inability to tell the truth, something learned from childhood that those close to him can likely give many examples of.  

In recent years, he told Alec Baldwin he thought he was going to die, yet he does not connect himself, linguistically.  In these places, his deception is more the expected among liars...editing out:

“I guess I do say to myself and to others — ‘I’ve got this’ — and I don’t know where that unbridled confidence comes from,” Williams told Baldwin, trying to describe where he gets his thirst for action and challenge.

“And I’ve done some ridiculously stupid things under that banner, like being in a helicopter I had no business being in in Iraq with rounds coming into the airframe,” Williams said.  Note passivity. As early as 2003, he began with vague descriptions, through 2005.  Eventually, the lie became outright.  He used it, as did his network, to increase his own fame and ratings. This in a profession that is founded upon integrity and trust.  He took upon himself a "war hero" status.  In 2013:

In a 2013 clip from the “Late Show from David Letterman,” Williams recounted the fabricated story to the CBS host, in which he claims to have been in the aircraft that came under attack.

“We were in the invasion,” he said, noting it was the 10th anniversary of the incident.

“Two of our four helicopters were hit including the one I was in, RPG and AK-47.”

There is still an element of passivity.  Note the plural "we" he used.  I am continuing to review his statements, as media is pulling out the history of his statements and will update analysis. 

WASHINGTON — NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams admitted Wednesday he was not aboard a helicopter hit and forced down by RPG fire during the invasion of Iraq in 2003, a false claim that has been repeated by the network for years.

Williams repeated the claim Friday during NBC’s coverage of a public tribute at a New York Rangers hockey game for a retired soldier that had provided ground security for the grounded helicopters, a game to which Williams accompanied him. In an interview with Stars and Stripes, he said he had misremembered the events and was sorry.

The admission came after crew members on the 159th Aviation Regiment’s Chinook that was hit by two rockets and small arms fire told Stars and Stripes that the NBC anchor was nowhere near that aircraft or two other Chinooks flying in the formation that took fire. Williams arrived in the area about an hour later on another helicopter after the other three had made an emergency landing, the crew members said.