Have you been following the Dan Rather controversy over the possibly forged documents on George W. Bush's National Guard service? (One link assortment on this can be found at http://instapundit.com/archives/017710.php )
An error? Rather and his CBS cohorts were fleeced in theire exuberance in finding dirt on Bush
They should just admit that they are nuancing the news to benefit Kerry at the expense of Bush. They have an agenda, and I no longer can say it is just sloppy newswork. Maybe some higher ups are using the sloppiness of reporters in the field.
Did you hear of the AP apology. They reported that Bush supporters booed when Bush mentioned that he hopes Clinton the best with his medical problems. Instead it was an ooed. The mainstream media is too quick to report things from one perspective, but too slow from another perspective. Just look at the emphasis on these controversies.
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ."Colossians 2:7
No expert document examiner worth his reputation would give an expert opinion based on what CBS and others now say they have as evidence. This is evidenced by this statement “And these forensics experts, unlike CBS's, have names.” Every time a document is copied it is somewhat distorted (spacing, type face, etc change). If copied enough it does not even look like the original document. Look at the wording used here in the news article:
I'm not up to expanding on this inquiry, but I feel certain that other people will be looking into it.
"Very likely forgeries."
"ABC'S NIGHTLINE DOING THE forgeries tonight, and their experts say most likely forgeries.”
"The wording in these documents is very suspect to me," she told ABC News Radio in an exclusive phone interview from her Texas home.
More than half a dozen document experts contacted by ABC News said they had doubts about the memos' authenticity.
"These documents do not appear to have been the result of technology that was available in 1972 and 1973," said Bill Flynn, one of country's top authorities on document authentication. "The cumulative evidence that's available (but not the originals) … indicates that these documents were produced on a computer, not a typewriter:"
This is NOT evidence, it is news hype, speculation, and lies. There is not a definite statement in the whole report! Assassination by implication. CBS and Dan Rather should be sued.
Even if the documents turn up to be forged, the News Media is irresponsible in its reporting. They should report “facts” not “hype.” Of course, those that have been around a while know the media is liberal in its appeals, but for the young voters—they know no better.
If we look hard enough I bet we would find a Kerry bite (KB, representing quality of evidence as opposed to quantity) of information behind the whole thing! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/my2cents.gif" alt="" />
I just as soon the elections were over myself. I try to keep myself away from all the political commentary and other hijinks once they had descended into mud slinging. I have made my decision already and plan to stick by it.
Peter
If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself. Augustine of Hippo
I had met Dan Rather back in 1978. I was at CBS baby sitting some equipment that CBS had rented for the off year election coverage. When it was over (about 2:20 AM), I introduced myself and mentioned one of his old professors, who I knew as an RE at the church I was attending at the time.
It was clear from Dan Rather's comments, that he knew where this professor stood theologically. Too bad none of that or the professor's ethics got through. (But then if it did he wouldn't be on CBS every night!)
CBS News has lost what credibility they might have still had, in my opinion. It simply amazes me that the Big Media tried to sit on the Kerry/Cambodia story and then made such a production about these "documents" on Bush's National Guard service. I don't remember even the 2000 elections being this bad for media bias.
Just in case anyone has missed the latest news on this. Dan Rather has ate humble pie and admitted that he had made a mistake. His mistake was basically based on his trust in a source (a Democrat by the way) that he put great trust in. He now admits that there is no way to confirm the information one way or another.
At the moment I don't have a source you can see about this for yourself. I watched this admission by Dan Rather on the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) news tonight. But I am sure this news is probably quite well known by now.
What's interesting is that the CBS producer that Rather used contacted a Lockhart from the Kerry campaign to ask a question regarding the story.
Then, apparently the source of the story has some relationships to some in the Democratic Party.
One more, did you see where a judged finally had to excuse herself in ruling on the Nadar placement on the ballot. Why, because she contributed to Kerry's campaign.
If these stories happened to the other side, the mainstream press would be all over themselves in getting to the bottom of it. Let's see what will be their actions in investigating these.
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ."Colossians 2:7
![[Linked Image]](http://home.earthlink.net/~johnfschultz/logos/GTownCovenanterLogo.gif)
