Anatomy of a Smear, Part 2

Does this surprise anyone?

Published on October 26, 2004 By Dr Guy In Current Events

In September, we had Rathergate, forged documents that were proven forged by little old bloggers, not the 'main stream' media with their wealth of resources. We should have learned from that, then and there, that some members of the mainstream media were just not playing with an unbiased book. Indeed, CBS and Dan Rather have never apologized for the smear they tried to perpetrate.

Now we appear to have caught the NY Times, that [sarcasm] bastion of non-partisanship [/sarcasm] with their pants down. They reported a story that was 18 months old as if it happened in the last month. OMG! 380 tons of weapons just up and disappeared on the Bush Watch!

But alas, it was not the blogosphere that outted this as another attempt at a smear. It was NBC News that reported it 18 months ago. Why? Because they were there!

But today, more dirt has surfaced. It appears that CBS also had the false story before the NY Times, and was going to run it on Sunday, October 31st, just 2 days before the election! The reason they did not? They did not think it would hold until then! Not that they wanted to report the truth, for it would only have taken a few hours, not 5 years, to reveal the truth to this lie. No, they wanted to sabotage the Bush campaign again. And behind it all, was none other than……drum roll…….Dan Rather!

These 2 episodes are not isolated incidents; just the most overt examples of what the main stream press, and in particular, the NY Times, CNS and Dan Rather, are really all about. Not the truth, but smear, smear and smear.

Now some on this blog may be liberal, and some are conservatives, but no honest person can argue that the mainstream media is impartial. Not with this deceit and deception and outright lies that they push as news.

The really sad part about this whole sordid affair is that Dan Rather got a second chance to smear the president. That shows that CBS is rotten to the core, and as trustworthy as Saddam Hussein. I wonder when the CBS (VIACOM) stock holders are going to just pull the plug on this sleaze outfit? It is their money that they see spiraling down that toilet bowl.

Addendum - 10/27/2004:

f there was any doubt this was a planned smear, just check out this link:

http://www.johnkerry.com/video/102604_obligation.html

It clearly shows that the day after the story broke, Kerry had an ad out. You cant produce an ad in less than 24 hours, without prior knowledge to the story. Just another example of the biased nature of the mainstream media, and how they have lost all claim to objectivity.

Comments (Page 1)

Daiwa

on Oct 26, 2004

Surprised? I think not.

Increased violence in Iraq during the run-up to the election (maybe even here) has been predicted all along, so should not be played in the press as somehow shocking. Blaring old news as if it were new News is one of the few tactics left to them, I guess. Anything they can think of to cast Bush in a negative light, they will do, pure & simple. They are on a jihad, after all.

The increase in mainstream press attacks is just as predictable and expected. There is a difference now, however - the availability of rapid access to alternative sources of information has made the last-minute-unfounded-too-close-to-the-election-to-be-discovered-as-false-attack much more difficult to pull off. I expected nothing less of the NYT or CBS, though. At least CBS pulled the piece when they figured out they had been "scooped," not just by a week but by 18 months. What a joke. They are both rapidly relegating themselves to the ranks of the ignored.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Dr Guy

on Oct 26, 2004

Daiwa,

You are correct in not being surprised. However, I was a bit surprised that Dan Rather would try it again so soon. He must be desperate. And a little surprised that ViaCom would let him. Can anyone trust CBS for a credible news source now? I think not.

apdelong31

on Oct 26, 2004

Interestingly enough, the "liberal media" plans on OVERRIDING the broadcasting of 62 subsidiaries to air an anti-Kerry movie before the election, and I haven't seen it yet. Still a week remaining, so I'd count on it.(Link Link)

Everything's a liberal conspiracy nowadays, ain't it?

Dr Guy

on Oct 26, 2004

Interestingly enough, the "liberal media" plans on OVERRIDING all subsidiary broadcasting to air an anti-Kerry movie before the election, and I haven't seen it yet. (LinkLink)

Not even close! And they have already pulled it. That was Sinclair, and they dont do news, they just own some tv stations (about 60 I think), not even a whole network.

next time you enter a battle with supposed facts, check the validity and pertinence to the debate at hand of them before making a fool of yourself.

And BTW, it is not anti -Kerry. It is Vietnam vets speaking out against his anti-war statements 30 years ago. So you would deny vets their right of free speech?

apdelong31

on Oct 26, 2004

From the Sinclair Broadcasting Group website, they own 62 television stations in 39 markets including ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX affiliates.

As for the documentary, I stand corrected. "Stolen Honor" was not aired, but I did find this on the Sinclair website:

And I really appreciate being called a fool, thanks for that.

Dr Guy

on Oct 26, 2004

I did not call you a fool (and your link did not come through, but like I said, about 60). I said you made a fool of yourself. And now that you know the truth, do you not admit that your previous post was 'foolish'? that was all I said.

Dont be so touchy. If I had made a boner like that (and I have), I felt like a fool as well. That does not make me one. i just made sure not to make another one like it.

For the Record, it was only through this controversy that I learned that our Fox affiliate is Sinclair owned. But we are not in a swing state. Still, I would have liked to see it. Now I can. it is available for downloafrom the web!

apdelong31

on Oct 26, 2004

www.sbgi.net

It was foolish. Seem to have to make that statement a lot on JU. Now we can play nice.

Dr Guy

on Oct 26, 2004

Reply #7 By: apdelong31 - 10/26/2004 5:02:01 PM

www.sbgi.net

It was foolish. Seem to have to make that statement a lot on JU. Now we can play nice

Most of the time I just hide. It takes a big man to say that. I doff my chapeau to you. And you have my respect.

Nadeon

on Oct 26, 2004

As for the documentary, I stand corrected. "Stolen Honor" was not aired, but I did find this on the Sinclair website:

I did see a bootleg copy of this, and quite frankly it was a tenuous stretch to call it anti-Kerry. I am a Bush supporter, but I failed to see where this was going to benefit his campaign or hurt Kerry's. To me it seemed a bit of a "patched together" mess. Old news and old wounds that didn't need to be reopened. I have strong feelings about what he did, and I have infinite respect for what the POWs went through; however it did appear to me that the interviewees (is that a word?) were not directing criticism at Kerry specifically. There were many Americans whom travelled to Hanoi, or spoke out against that war. His tetimony before the House was despicable coming from a man who now claims heroic service for a 4 month period, a full two thirds less of a tour than the average "In Country" vet did. It did serve to emphasize that he really has not changed much from those days. It was obvious he had an agenda then, namely getting a political career started at the expense of the truth. I guess he must have found those medals, or is it ribbons, no it was medals today, maybe ribbons tomorrow, that he threw away in protest. His posturing as a decorated war vet is shameful and disgusting in the face of all those that served in that distant place and time and did so honorably. You can't stand at the foot of a mountain and claim to have conquered Everest. War isn't a ticket punch. If you're going to talk the talk, walk the walk.
Sorry for digressing. I think we're all getting just a little worn around the edges by this campaign. The networks need something else to focus on instead of creating news. The 4th estate has become a real sham. So how about those Red Sox!

Dr Guy

on Oct 26, 2004

Reply By: Nadeon Posted: Tuesday, October 26, 2004
As for the documentary, I stand corrected. "Stolen Honor" was not aired, but I did find this on the Sinclair website:

I did see a bootleg copy of this, and quite frankly it was a tenuous stretch to call it anti-Kerry. I am a Bush supporter, but I failed to see where this was going to benefit his campaign or hurt Kerry's. To me it seemed a bit of a "patched together" mess. Old news and old wounds that didn't need to be reopened. I have strong feelings about what he did, and I have infinite respect for what the POWs went through; however it did appear to me that the interviewees (is that a word?) were not directing criticism at Kerry specifically. There were many Americans whom travelled to Hanoi, or spoke out against that war. His tetimony before the House was despicable coming from a man who now claims heroic service for a 4 month period, a full two thirds less of a tour than the average "In Country" vet did. It did serve to emphasize that he really has not changed much from those days. It was obvious he had an agenda then, namely getting a political career started at the expense of the truth. I guess he must have found those medals, or is it ribbons, no it was medals today, maybe ribbons tomorrow, that he threw away in protest. His posturing as a decorated war vet is shameful and disgusting in the face of all those that served in that distant place and time and did so honorably. You can't stand at the foot of a mountain and claim to have conquered Everest. War isn't a ticket punch. If you're going to talk the talk, walk the walk.
Sorry for digressing. I think we're all getting just a little worn around the edges by this campaign. The networks need something else to focus on instead of creating news. The 4th estate has become a real sham. So how about those Red Sox!

I have not seen the download copy, and I really respect your views on it. Not about the Red Sox tho!

But lets end this thread and get back to the subject. The anatomy of a smear, starring Dan Rather.

CrispE

on Oct 26, 2004

Dr. Guy:

So you mean the United States goes into Iraq to look for WMD's and we find a Al Qaaqa that is supposed to have explosives as reported by the IAEA and now, even 18 months later, the White House said Monday they didn't know what the story was in the first place? That isn't a story?

Dr Guy

on Oct 26, 2004

So you mean the United States goes into Iraq to look for WMD's and we find a Al Qaaqa that is supposed to have explosives as reported by the IAEA and now, even 18 months later, the White House said Monday they didn't know what the story was in the first place? That isn't a story?

Wrong story. They did not know what CBS was reporting since CBS did not know what they were reporting!

The story is, CBS and NYT tried an october smear. NBC torpedoed it. The white house did not know WTF CBS was reproting as it was 18 months old.

Get it? Or are yo uso dense as to beleive it? Please defend it more so we can see how moronic you really are!

or are you smarter than that?

Thats the facts jack!

blogic

on Oct 26, 2004

For anyone who's interested, the claim of the lead post is really shaky.

The reason this is news now is that people didn't connect the dots until the last few weeks regarding just how many tons of explosives had gone missing. Apparently, the Bush government has known for months, but didn't bother telling anyone. Of course, that's not clear, because the Pentagon has been inconsistent in its responses to reporters' questions, and George Bush wasn't willing to say anything about this yesterday

Meanwhile, Bush supporters are knocking themselves out that the explosives were missing before the troops got to the site. The problem with that is that there's no evidence of this. CNN and Drudge are the main ones hyping that story, except that the supposed source of the story, NBC, pulled the story with that claim because the reporter in question says that the troops didn't do an obvious search of the site, and she wasn't able to say whether or not the explosives were missing. The commander of the first military unit to arrive at the site says that they neither searched the site nor secured it against looting, precisely because they were focused on the invasion fight.

So much for the basis of the claim that the explosives were missing when the American troops first captured the area. The actual reporter involved says there's no reason to think that.

Meanwhile, we know that the explosives were there right before the war, and we know the Bush administration had been warned of the importance of the site.

Anyway, I'm just telling people not to take the parent post's claims at face value. Frankly, the post's claims aren't supported. For a fairly in depth discussion of the missing explosives, go to the Talking Points Memo. That site has a fairly exhaustive discussion of the claims of Bush critics, Bush supporters, the Pentagon, the Bush Administration, Drudge, CNN, NBC, etc., etc., and etc.

blogic

on Oct 26, 2004

This is why this became a story now:

International Atomic Energy Agency spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said Tuesday that the Iraqis have not told the IAEA about any other missing materials since their Oct. 10 letter stating that the weapons vanished from Al-Qaqaa as a result of "theft and looting ... due to lack of security" sometime after coalition forces took control of the capital.

So much for conspiracy theories regarding the timing, unless Bush supporters are saying that the Allawi government is trying to bring down Bush. Once again, my advice is to check out http://talkingpointsmemo.com so you don't have to depend on my spin, or the spin of anyone else at JU.

messybuu

on Oct 26, 2004

I like how the news sources that Democrats support are the same ones pumping out all the dishonest shit.

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!