CBS document forgery

Discussion in 'Politics' started by madanthonywayne, Sep 11, 2004.

  1. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
    This story is really starting to fall apart.

    Two of the CBS-paid document experts were on ABC News tonight claiming that they were not listened to by 60 Minutes when they criticized the documents and cited numerous problems with their authenticity. Both refused to back the documents. A third consultant, who appeared with Dan Rather on Friday (who billed him as an expert supporting the documents) today announced that he refuses to authenticate the documents.

    Also the secretary of the man who allegedly wrote the documents claims they are forgeries. Since her position is pro-Kerry (she believes her boss felt that way, but that the documents are faked), she seems like a valid source as well.

    But the main thing to watch here is just the fact that ABC News "went after" 60 Minutes tonight. It was actually a "close up" special report, with special investigator Brian Ross, and it was quite long and detailed. The newsies NEVER go after their own unless they've really got something to stand on. The payback can be a real bear.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,390
    As far as I'm concerned, it's over except for the question of who's responsible. Safire, I think, had a piece in the New York Times that I'm too lazy to dig up, but it spells the indictment pretty well while chiding Dan Rather for his behavior since the forgery issue arose.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Gravity Deus Ex Machina Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,007
    Well, like most things these days - it appears that its a matter of which news source you want to believe. They seem pretty equally divided . . . and pretty much along typical party lines.

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

    Media Should Probe Bigger Questions About Bush's Record
    by Common Dreams (Approved for copy & forwarding)


    WASHINGTON - September 14 - In the past week, a handful of stories have cast doubt on whether George W. Bush fulfilled his National Guard obligations 30 years ago. Reports by the Associated Press (9/7/04), Boston Globe (9/8/04) and U.S. News & World Report (9/20/04) have all raised new questions about Bush's military service. Though each of these stories has been accompanied by significant official documentation, developments in the investigations by AP, U.S. News and the Boston Globe have been largely sidetracked by the fixation on questions about the authenticity of documents aired on CBS on September 8.

    Weighing the credibility of evidence is an essential function of journalism. Experts have weighed in on both sides on the authenticity of CBS's so-called Killian memos (New York Times, 9/14/04; Washington Post, 9/14/04); efforts to establish the origin of those documents should continue. However, news outlets that focus on this tangent of the National Guard story to the exclusion of the unchallenged new evidence that has recently emerged are neglecting another essential journalistic task: holding powerful people and politicians accountable.

    In the wake of the stories scrutinizing Bush's stateside service during the Vietnam era, it's hard to imagine a better situation for the White House than to have the press corps ignore a range of evidence raising questions about Bush's fulfillment of his obligations while obsessing singularly on one set of documents from one story.

    A review of some of the information uncovered in recent news reports:

    * The September 7 Associated Press story, based on new records the White House had long maintained didn't exist, debunked a Bush assertion that he'd skipped his flight physical because the jet he was trained on was becoming obsolete. According to AP, Bush's unit continued to fly the same jets for two years after the missed physical.

    * The September 8 Boston Globe expose concluded that Bush failed in his military obligations by missing months of duty in Alabama and in Boston.

    As the Globe revealed, Bush had signed contracts on two separate occasions swearing to meet minimum Guard requirements on penalty of being called up to active duty. According to the military experts consulted by the Globe, Bush's Guard attendance was so bad "his superiors could have disciplined him or ordered him to active duty in 1972, 1973 or 1974."

    * U.S News & World Report (9/20/04) reviewed National Guard regulations and reported that the White House has been using "an inappropriate-- and less stringent-- Air Force standard in determining that he had fulfilled his duty." The magazine noted that Bush committed to attend at least "44 inactive-duty training drills each fiscal year" when he signed up for the Guard, but that Bush's own records "show that he fell short of that requirement, attending only 36 drills in the 1972-73 period, and only 12 in the 1973-74 period." The magazine explains that even by using the White House's preferred methodology for measuring Bush's service, he still fell short of those minimum requirements.

    * An NBC Nightly News segment (9/9/04) played a clip of Bush being interviewed in 1988, acknowledging that favoritism sometimes played a part in getting into the National Guard. While he had said that he didn't think that happened in his case, he did voice his approval of the practice: "If you want to go in the National Guard, I guess sometimes people made calls. I don't see anything wrong with it." (He continued with a remark that could be taken as an insult to the men and women who did face combat during the war: "They probably should have called the National Guard up in those days. Maybe we'd have done better in Vietnam.")

    Even CBS's September 8 broadcasts, the subject of so much scrutiny, included important information beyond what is contained in the disputed memos. On the CBS Evening News and 60 Minutes II that night, CBS featured Ben Barnes, the former speaker of the Texas legislature, describing how he used his political influence to help a young George W. Bush bypass a waiting list and secure a coveted position in the Guard. In addition, the CBS stories also featured an interview with Robert Strong, a former colleague of Bush's commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the purported author of the disputed documents. Strong described the pressure Bush's commander was working under: "He was trying to deal with a volatile political situation, dealing with the son of an ambassador and a former congressman.... And I just saw him in an impossible situation. I felt very, very sorry because he was between a rock and a hard place."

    Instead of asking the White House tough questions about the well-documented information contained in these reports, media have focused almost exclusively on the claims and counter-claims made about the Killian memos-- as if the discrepancies over Bush's service record stand or fall based on this one set of disputed documents. It's the equivalent of covering the sideshow and ignoring the center ring.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2004
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
    Oh I don't think there's any question that the issues and instances reflected in the allegedly forged documents are accurate, or at least reasonably so. There doesn't appear to be any question at this point that Bush dodged the draft, used family influence to do so, and perhaps even failed to fulfill his guard duties.

    But the documents appear to be forgeries. And IMO what that says about CBS News and the forgers is really interesting, partisan issues aside.
     
  8. fadingCaptain are you a robot? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,762
    Wacky times we live in. Maybe some nutty repubs did it to overshadow Bush's shady guard record. Who knows. CBS better come clean soon cause they are losing credibility by the assload.
     
  9. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    some liberals accuse the Bush campaign team for releasing the memos with the purpose of them getting exposed as fakes, thereby hurting Kerry's credibility

    THAT'S how bad these memos are

    and CBS is still clutching to this story as "authentic"
    what a way for Dan Rather to finish his career.. if it doesn't completely end it in the next week or two, he'll at least have a huge stain on his reputation which he will take to his retirement.
    the 'big bang' he will finish his career with is the FRAUD

    poor man... poor partisan, incompetent, malicious man...
     
  10. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
    I think CBS News lost its credibilty when Lowell Bergman left 60 Minutes.
     
  11. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    The newsies NEVER go after their own unless they've really got something to stand on.

    i was thinking, the mainstream media organizations should put away their blatant political bias for a moment and think of it in practical terms: if one of their competitors is exposed as a fraudster, then they can take up this fraudster's market share.

    CBS exposed as a fraud = more money for CNN or whatever.
    the fact that these networks are reluctant to go after this fraud story only further exposes their pro-Kerry bias
     
  12. Gravity Deus Ex Machina Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,007
    Yeah, why can't they all be Fair and Balanced like Fox News?!
     
  13. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
    Or the Clinton News Network.
     
  14. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
  15. Gravity Deus Ex Machina Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,007
    If forgeries happened, the perpetrators should be punished. BUT also the golden-spoon born blueblood chickenhawk coke-snorting moron should be tossed -- lets not let this distraction diminish that core *fact*.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Clinton news network?

    I think the greatest problem with the media here is the merging belief that watching two conflicting bias news networks will result in getting the whole picture. This is untrue as either side could be right and the merged belief can and will be equally wrong. A attempt at neutral news should always be preferred, in which case un-politicized facts are used over propaganda, twist truths and lies.

    In the CBS case they should have said “We have these documents here that show poorly on Bush’s vietnam era military service, we are not yet sure of the documents are legitimate though.” would have been the correct factual answer, rather then liberal bias : “We have these documents here that show poorly on Bush’s Vietnam era military service!” or Conservative Fox News bias “CBS is lying with forged documents!”

    But this neutrality is maintained not by trying to appeal to both sides, rather by stating pure facts. Even then though when ever facts come to favor one political ideology over another, the other side will cry out “media bias” while the first side will vigorously amplify those facts into propaganda. So even if neutral factual media is present the parties will make crap of it. The world of politics is not scientific or logical it involves the twisting of truth to appease political beliefs. When ever the media has to speaks of politics this twisting is guaranteed to occur.
     
  17. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
    Just an old joke about CNN. (grin)

    Fox analysts are saying that CBS was duped, by the way, not that CBS participated in a conspiracy. Not that that's any less self-serving, of course.

    What mostly struck me was not Fox's reaction, but rather ABC's. Jennings and Koppel and company still carry weight with me in terms of their efforts to remain credible and objective. I don't harbor any illusions about lack of bias, but as many have pointed out, everyone has bias. The question is how (and whether) you use it.
     
  18. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
  19. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    The fact that they went ahead with this story implies that CBS is either grossly incompetent or nakedly partisan. Or maybe a little of both.
     
  20. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Well it least Fox is openly partisan.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
    Well tonight Rather Dan and Company took the position that whether the documents are forgeries or not is irrelevent because the facts of the case are not disputed by those involved.

    Fine. But what about the facts of the case of whether or not CBS News blew a story and made one of the biggest mistakes in recent times? To me that's actually a lot more interesting than whether or not there's more evidence of something we already knew about Bush.
     
  22. Pangloss More 'pop' than a Google IPO! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    767
    Good story on this here on Reuters' site:

    http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6248598

    The most revealing aspect of this is the simple fact that other news agencies and far-left organizations aren't backing CBS News. The LA Times today said outright that "CBS News was had". Hiding behind Republican attacks on the story isn't going to get them out of the doghouse. This time they're going to have to answer for their mistake.

    By the way, I imagine Bernard Goldberg must be really chortling right now. Not so much because they blew the story, but in the way CBS News has circled the wagons, just exactly as Goldberg describes in his book "Bias". He couldn't have scripted it better.
     
  23. Gravity Deus Ex Machina Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,007
    Dan Rather Challenges Books: "If you can’t deny the information, then attack and seek to destroy the credibility of the messenger, the bearer of the information." It's the Bush Cartel Way to Divert Attention from Their Lies. 9/16

    http://observer.com/pages/nytv.asp
     

Share This Page