How far will CBS Dig the Hole

Is China in sight yet?

Published on September 17, 2004 By Dr Guy In Politics

Let me see if I have been accurately following this CBS story. They air an article on a subject 30 years old, that has already been beat to death. But this time, they come up with some new evidence. Ok, that looks good. Then the 'new' evidence is found to be forgeries. Oops! Caught with their knickers down. And that was after 5 years of research. Hmmmmm......wondering who was doing the research.

Then, after stonewalling for days on the forgeries, do they say "oops, we been had!". Nope, they try to defend it. Then the contemporaries get involved, and not even the left leaning media will back up their story, and so if starts to fall apart. And this was after 5 years of research.

But after one week of major CYA, they find who? A secretary! NOt just any secretary, but one that tells them they have fake documents, but the spirit was right. So why did they not find this source in the 5 years of research? Hmmmmmm......

Aw, but it gets better. Seems this source is a rabid democrat still smarting over Al Gore's loss in 2000! (Selected not elected). And it also seems that she is not really the Colonel's personal secretary as Dan Rather and She would have believe, but a pool typist! Hmmmmmm.......

And what is happening at the CBS Bastille? Still trying to defend the documents, still trying to defend the hatchet job. Still trying to save Dan Rather's tail. All the while, the rest of the country is laughing at them and what they have become. At one time, the mighty CBS seemed to be an icon of hard hitting journalism, a source of truth that America could turn to when they thought things were wrong in Washington.

Well, guess what? Things are still wrong in Washington, but instead of Watergate coverup, we have Rathergate coverup! The press has become what they use to report on!

The biggest fallout from this is not whether CBS did a hatchet job or not. The biggest fall out is that no one will trust them ever again. Every breaking story that comes from them is now suspect and most people will not even attempt to quote them as a source without independant verification (SHOCK! Why didn't CBS think of that before inserting foot in mouth?).

Inquiring minds are not even listening to CBS anymore. Instead they are seeking other sources for the latest in this scandal, and putting the pieces together themselves.

There is a lesson here for Joh Kerry. Dan Rather Hatest he Bush's with an all consuming passion, and for that he will pay with his reputation. JOhn Kerry cant keep fomenting the hate against Bush, or he will fall into the same trap. Maybe he will see the problem here, and start bringing usa positive message. A Reason to vote FOR him and not against Bush. But I doubt it.

Comments (Page 2)

1tomot1

on Sep 18, 2004

If Bush got out of vietnam service, good for him, im sure many of his detractors would have done the same if they too had been born into wealth and privilege.

The thing that's offensive about Bush's dodge is that he supported the war in Vietnam. He just didn't want to fight it himself. I beleive the term for someone like that is "chicken-hawk."

Sure if he was opposed to the war and tried to get out of combat, that would be a different story. Same with Cheney.

Now these two high profile chickenhawks are supporting wars that once again won't impact them personally.

Go figure.

drmiler

on Sep 18, 2004

Reply #20 By: 1tomot1 - 9/18/2004 9:18:35 PM
If Bush got out of vietnam service, good for him, im sure many of his detractors would have done the same if they too had been born into wealth and privilege.

The thing that's offensive about Bush's dodge is that he supported the war in Vietnam. He just didn't want to fight it himself. I beleive the term for someone like that is "chicken-hawk."

Sure if he was opposed to the war and tried to get out of combat, that would be a different story. Same with Cheney.

Now these two high profile chickenhawks are supporting wars that once again won't impact them personally.

BEFORE you call GW a "chicken hawk". I REALLY think you should read this link Link

And please "try" to read it with an open mind. i realize that might be hard for you left-leaners!

1tomot1

on Sep 19, 2004

BEFORE you call GW a "chicken hawk". I REALLY think you should read this link Link

True, I think anyone (right or left) would have a hard time swallowing that article. Why? Because not even right wing political pundits agree or support the outline provided by that argument.

Was Bush assigned to AL-ANG? No. He REQUESTED a transfer in order to work on a political campaign. Would anyone refute that? No, not yet at least.

If you followed the news about six months ago you would remember this because there was a mild controversy about Bush's request for a transfer. The controversy being that his initial request had been denied, yet he went anyway. And it wasn't because he remained a member of the TXANG. I don't think even Bush would try to defend that.

The comparison with with Kerry's service?

Once again, please. Bush's TXANG unit wasn't just any unit. They didn't refer to it as the Champagne unit for nothing. It was called that by other military men because it's ranks were padded with many other privileged sons of the wealthy and powerful that were trying to avoid combat in VIetnam.

Chickenhawk sticks.

drmiler

on Sep 19, 2004

Reply #22 By: 1tomot1 - 9/19/2004 1:40:01 PM
BEFORE you call GW a "chicken hawk". I REALLY think you should read this link Link

True, I think anyone (right or left) would have a hard time swallowing that article. Why? Because not even right wing political pundits agree or support the outline provided by that argument.

Was Bush assigned to AL-ANG? No. He REQUESTED a transfer in order to work on a political campaign. Would anyone refute that? No, not yet at least.

If you followed the news about six months ago you would remember this because there was a mild controversy about Bush's request for a transfer. The controversy being that his initial request had been denied, yet he went anyway. And it wasn't because he remained a member of the TXANG. I don't think even Bush would try to defend that.

The comparison with with Kerry's service?

Once again, please. Bush's TXANG unit wasn't just any unit. They didn't refer to it as the Champagne unit for nothing. It was called that by other military men because it's ranks were padded with many other privileged sons of the wealthy and powerful that were trying to avoid combat in VIetnam.

Oh you don't agree with the article because why? It don't fit with your ideas maybe. You obviously missed the point where he "tried" to volunteer for combat and was turned because of NOT enough flight hours. His own skipper backs up the FACt he stayed in TXANG! And weather or not you "swallow" the story is immaterial. Everything in there is verifiable! He even tells you just "where" he got his info!
So get "real" and quit swallowing the left's BS.

Helix_the_II

on Sep 19, 2004

Drmiler, quit swallowing the left's BS? Aw, come on now..if they did that, all they would have are monkey jokes and making fun of the way the president talks. Surely you can't rob them of this. ;o) They need fuel for the Anti-Bush fire everyone is trying to burn brightly..without it, all they got is a little smoke and mirrors.

drmiler

on Sep 19, 2004

And smoke can be "blown" away by the wind! Mirrors.......hell. Just start throwing rocks.

drmiler

on Sep 19, 2004

I think those that dodged the draft for Vietnam are lower than pond scum!!!!

Hell, i question the sanity of anyone who VOLUNTEERED to go....(like Kerry, meaning he supported the war, too, enough so that he was willing to risk a bit of shrapnel in his ass to earn a few medals from blowing up rice supplies.)

Hey lil whip read this first.

Here is some information that the ''objective'' media avoids telling you. John Kerry joined the Navy Reserve, he did not JOIN the Navy. The Reserve was just like the National Guard. Kerry did NOT know he would be sent to Vietnam.

George Bush joined the Guard for a SIX-year term. If you are drafted, you only have to serve TWO years. Bush probably did not need to pull strings to get into a jet fighter unit. Jets required a greater time commitment than normal Guard postings. Pilots from the unit that he joined were being sent to Vietnam. All the publications that have researched this have concluded that there is NO evidence that he used any influence to get into the Guard. The liberal publications will say that there is no evidence, but it is still suspicious. That is a good journalistic standard? So, do you get it? Bush joined a unit that at the time was serving in Vietnam.

The following is research from aerospaceweb.org:

Nevertheless, we have established that the F-102 was serving in combat in Vietnam at the time Bush enlisted to become an F-102 pilot. In fact, pilots from the 147th FIG of the Texas ANG were routinely rotated to Vietnam for combat duty under a program called ''Palace Alert'' from 1968 to 1970. Palace Alert was an Air Force program that sent qualified F-102 pilots from the ANG to bases in Europe or southeast Asia for periods of three to six months for frontline duty. Fred Bradley, a friend of Bush's who was also serving in the Texas ANG, reported that he and Bush inquired about participating in the Palace Alert program. However, the two were told by a superior, MAJ Maurice Udell, that they were not yet qualified since they were still in training and did not have the 500 hours of flight experience required. Furthermore, ANG veteran COL William Campenni, who was a fellow pilot in the 111th FIS at the time, told the Washington Times that Palace Alert was winding down and not accepting new applicants.

Link

1tomot1

on Sep 19, 2004

Oh you don't agree with the article because why? It don't fit with your ideas maybe

No. More appropriately that the article doesn't agree with the majority of information available. Chronwatch? Come on. Sure CBS is now questionable, but that doesn't mean we should make the continuously questionable our first line of defense.

drmiler

on Sep 20, 2004

Reply #28 By: 1tomot1 - 9/19/2004 11:06:50 PM

Oh you don't agree with the article because why? It don't fit with your ideas maybe

No. More appropriately that the article doesn't agree with the majority of information available. Chronwatch? Come on. Sure CBS is now questionable, but that doesn't mean we should make the continuously questionable our first line of defense.

And OBVIOUSLY you didn't comprehend what you read! He VERY specifically gives ALL his sources of info! So basically you saying Bush's own commanding officer is full of BS? And where would you be getting "your" info from? A source as close to the fact as his commanding officer? I think not.

Chemicalkinetics

on Sep 20, 2004

I think the problem of CBS is not that they reported a false new. Every news agency does it sometime. The problem is that CBS has not yet admitted the mistake, and retrack the story. No one will make a fuss if CBS came out and said, "We were trying to break a story, and we are not as careful". End of story. I won't care. The problem is that Dan Rather started to attack other news agencies and said, "... unless someone proves the memo is certainly false, I am standing by it....". No, the responsibilty is on you, CBS, not others. According to what Rather said, he can report whatever he likes and unless you prove him wrong, he will continue to report. No. It should be: unless you are sure the memo is correct, you don't report it. And in the case of a honest mistake and someone points out the obvious, come out and say you made a mistake.

Dr Guy

on Sep 20, 2004

Thank you ChemicalKinetics for bringing the thread back on topic. This thread is to discuss the self implosion of Dan Rather and CBS News. It does not matter if the subject of the broadcast is right or wrong. It does matter that the whole basis for the report has since been shown to be forgeries. And that simple fact should scare everyone, liberals and conservatives.

Please stay on topic from here on out.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!