Bush documents fake, CBS apologizes

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
sharky said:


Really? Because I still haven't seen any apologies from the news organizations that let those Swift Boats guys run their mouths and pass that off as truth. Many reporters were dupped into thinking those guys were impartial when they obviously weren't.

And NB -- honorable discharge? So what? Bush still has not proven that he ever set foot on an Alabama base other than to get his teeth checked. Prove he was there with documents and collect the $50,000.
Click to expand...

The Swift Boat Veterans are privately funded ads (essentially commercials). Also their ads run thorugh several issues about Kerry and not just the criticism of whether or not he deserved his medals. These news organizations were running with news stories and THEY did run critical commentary on the ads with the vets involved.

CBS wouldn't even take into consideration the words of the family, Col. Staudt, their own experts, experts outside of CBS, etc... CBS really screwed it up and if Kerry's campaign can actually be linked to those memos, I don't think the debates will make a difference. That is a big IF though.
 
Last edited:
Flying FuManchu said:
CBS really screwed it up and if Kerry's campaign can actually be linked to those memos, I don't think the debates will make a difference. That is a big IF though.
Click to expand...

Yeah that would be on the scale of another Watergate type scandal.

I have one question for all Bush bashers/Kerry lovers though: If Bush is sooooo bad, soooo wrong and sooo stupid why do people have to start faking things to make him look bad? Wouldn't there be enough on him already? :scratch:
 
the democrats are understandably scrambling in response to this. what we have seen is incredible.
one of the most venerable news outlets of our time and its star have both lost face, the influence of bloggers has never been greater.

the democrats, or those close to the party, felt it necessary to lie about something that there is good existing evidence to prove true and the republicans/swift boat veterans have managed to make truth out of statements that are contrary to official documents that were uncontested for decades and are vouched for by many.

it is unbelievable.
 
Going To Any Lengths To Beat Bush?

Political Affiliations of Viacom Board Could Impact CBS Case

Experts in corporate governance say the directors of CBS's parent company, Viacom, are obliged to assume some role in resolving the fiasco over CBS News's use of what appear to be fake documents about President Bush's military record.

The political affiliations of Viacom's board and senior management, however, could undercut the credibility of any action the board may take.

Viacom's chairman and chief executive, Sumner Redstone, is a self-described "liberal Democrat" and a prolific donor to Democratic campaigns. Of the company's 13 board members, eight contribute primarily to Democratic candidates and party committees. Two other members of the board, Joseph Califano and William Cohen, held cabinet posts under Democratic presidents.
Click to expand...
 
One for the left:

wasserman.gif


One for the right:

grondahl.gif
 
nbcrusader said:



The Honorable Discharge creates the presumption that GWB completed his service.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it creates a presumtion. How do we know his superiors WEREN'T pressured give him an honorable discharge? Why won't he release his FULL records which prove he did his FULL time and his FULL service in Alabama and Boston? If he was honorably discharged, he has nothing to hide by releasing ALL documents including attendance records from Alabama and Massachusetts.

As for Lockhart, two links below.

Full disclosure but this if from the DNC -- makes you wonder if the RNC was making Kerry look bad.
http://www.democrats.org/news/200409210003.html

This is a transcript from Bill Hemmer's interview with Lockhart.
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0409/21/ltm.03.html
 
Do you think if anyone was doing this they'd be out in the open about it? You will not find links for underhanded stuff. Of course there would be coverups too!
 
Sep 21, 2004

McAuliffe: Will GOP Answer If They Know Whether Stone, Others Had Involvement With CBS Documents?

Washington, D.C. - In response to false Republican accusations regarding the CBS documents, Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued this statement:

“In today’s New York Post, Roger Stone, who became associated with political ‘dirty tricks’ while working for Nixon, refused to deny that he was the source the CBS documents.

“Will Ed Gillespie or the White House admit today what they know about Mr. Stone’s relationship with these forged documents? Will they unequivocally rule out Mr. Stone’s involvement? Or for that matter, others with a known history of dirty tricks, such as Karl Rove or Ralph Reed?”
Click to expand...
 
Letters to the editor from my local newspaper - The OC Register


Where's the Bush apology for Iraq?

So CBS has apologized for a "mistake in judgment." How about an apology from George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to the more than 1,000 servicemen who have died and the many more injured in Iraq because of their "mistake in judgment"?

We have occupied another country under false pretenses. Seems like this error is much more serious than a media error about some old service record.

Marcha E. Katz

Seal Beach
Click to expand...
 
Hmm....

Dan Rather
-- had fake documents
-- used fake documents to tell story

Bush
-- had fake documents
-- used fake documents to take us to war
Anyone remember that Nigeria yellow cake?
 
Just to save you some time on the niger docs:

In the main body of its unanimous report on pre-war intelligence on Iraq, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence made a startling statement about former Amb. Joe Wilson--whom the CIA sent on a brief trip to Niger in February 2002, and who accused President Bush of lying when the President said in his 2003 State of the Union address that British intelligence indicated Iraq had sought uranium in Africa.

The unanimous report states:
"The former ambassador also told the committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article ('CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,' June 12, 2003) which said, 'among the envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong"' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have 'misspoken' to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were 'forged.' He also said he may have become confused about his own recollections after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself."

From the mouth of the source: He may have "misspoken" And he was confused. I'm not sure if I would want to base an argument on a guy who no longer even sticks by his story.

Also:
Six days after the committee released this report, the British determined in their own investigation of pre-war intelligence that their conclusion that Saddam was seeking uranium in Niger was credible. Their intelligence, it turns out, was not based on the forged documents cited by Wilson that purported to show an Iraq-Niger uranium deal. More interestingly, those forged documents, the Senate Intelligence Committee reported, did not even come into the hands of the CIA until October 2002, eight months after the agency sent Wilson to Niger.
 
Last edited:
drivemytrabant said:
Just to save you some time on the niger docs:

In the main body of its unanimous report on pre-war intelligence on Iraq, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence made a startling statement about former Amb. Joe Wilson--whom the CIA sent on a brief trip to Niger in February 2002, and who accused President Bush of lying when the President said in his 2003 State of the Union address that British intelligence indicated Iraq had sought uranium in Africa.

The unanimous report states:
"The former ambassador also told the committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article ('CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid,' June 12, 2003) which said, 'among the envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong"' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have 'misspoken' to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were 'forged.' He also said he may have become confused about his own recollections after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself."

From the mouth of the source: He may have "misspoken" And he was confused. I'm not sure if I would want to base an argument on a guy who no longer even sticks by his story.

Also:
Six days after the committee released this report, the British determined in their own investigation of pre-war intelligence that their conclusion that Saddam was seeking uranium in Niger was credible. Their intelligence, it turns out, was not based on the forged documents cited by Wilson that purported to show an Iraq-Niger uranium deal. More interestingly, those forged documents, the Senate Intelligence Committee reported, did not even come into the hands of the CIA until October 2002, eight months after the agency sent Wilson to Niger.
Click to expand...


Reprinting falsehoods and lies does not
change the truth.
 
What are you talking about, the fraudulent documents were not the ones used by the British and Italians in their estimates. There was solid evidence of Iraqi government officials going to Niger to discuss expanding their "business relationship". All the while Joe Wilson was getting his wife to get him an assignment to go out to a hotel and spend his time sipping cool green tea.
 
Can CBS at least attempt to be fair? Can they please report news instead of politics? Well... to answer my own question, it IS the Barbara Streisand channel.
 
"Kenneth, what is the frequency?"





dan-rem.jpg



CBS News anchor Dan Rather, renowned for his unusual expressions and sayings, has led a colorful life. However, one bizarre event really takes the cake.

One night in October 1986, Rather was walking down a Manhattan street when he was punched from behind and thrown to the ground. His assailant kicked and beat him while repeating, "Kenneth, what is the frequency?"

No one could explain the event, and the rumors flew fast and wide. Some speculated the assailant was a KGB agent, while others claimed the attack was the work of a jealous husband. Rather himself couldn't shed any light on the subject. His explanation at the time?

I got mugged. Who understands these things? I didn't and I don't now. I didn't make a lot of it at the time and I don't now. I wish I knew who did it and why, but I have no idea.

Apparently the strange event moved R.E.M. singer Michael Stipe, who said of the incident:

It remains the premier unsolved American surrealist act of the 20th century. It's a misunderstanding that was scarily random, media hyped and just plain bizarre.

The attack inspired the 1994 R.E.M. hit "What's the Frequency, Kenneth." Being a good sport, Dan Rather even accompanied the band when they performed the song on a Late Show with David Letterman appearance.

In 1997, based on a tip from a psychiatrist, Rather's attacker was identified as William Tager. According to the psychiatrist, Tager, who was currently serving time for killing an NBC stagehand, blamed news media for beaming signals into his head, and thought if he could just find out the correct frequency, he could block those signals that were constantly assailing him. Hence the enigmatic inquiry.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MrsSpringsteen
Eliza Dushku OpEd
Replies
1
Views
755
Moonlit_Angel
Moonlit_Angel
LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 2 Listening Thread
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
6K
namkcuR
N
jaimearodriguez
Miami New Times: Millenials Don't Give a Shit About U2
3 4 5
Replies
145
Views
9K
coolian2
coolian2
lharper
Innocent Experience - Chapter 5
Replies
0
Views
1K
lharper
lharper
LemonMelon
Desert Island X: Master List and Discussion Thread
3 4 5
Replies
133
Views
9K
cobl04
cobl04

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom