Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Ask yourself this: Are the memos the ENTIRE story here? Or was there an ongoing investigation wherein CBS conducted interviews and research? Are the memos just ONE element of the story? I'm not trying to say anything definitive (yet), I'm merely raising questions.Originally posted by: digitalsm
Rather nor CBS has come out with evidence supporting the documents. Thats why they are in the mess they are in. Good ole Andy Rooney has apparently jumped ship because he feels they are false and Rather & CBS need to own up to their mistake.
I have concluded that Rather is trying to make a point here. Maybe he will play the card, too.
What about the Wmd issue, with the lack of Wmd? How could Rather use that argument to his advantage?
Just a thought....
Will we find out Wednesday?
Originally posted by: burnedout
CBS originally aired the story on 9/8/04 between 6:00 PM and 6:20 PM PDT.Originally posted by: DealMonkey
The problem is, "Buckethead" (as I like to call him ) just floated the theory -- he has no way of knowing definitively and neither do any of you, and neither do any of the "document experts" who have weighed in thus far. So as Cad so expertly parrots in every single post, time to ante up the original docs or STFU.
I'm not saying there's any "conspiracy" surrounding Buckethead and/or his proclamations as a freeper, it only serves to bring up more questions.
For example, how would anyone be able to make a detailed examination of the memos when the story just aired on TV? The story aired Sep 8th and the documents were posted online Sep 9th. Buckethead's Sept. 8 late-night posting ? written less than four hours after the CBS report - would come before the documents were available online. Did he record the show and then freeze the frame in which the memos were shown? I'm sure that's a credible method for verifying the authenticity of a document. Oh brother.
Interesting ... very interesting ...
Two hours after the report aired, a link to the documents was posted on Free Republic in this thread, found in post #11 at 8:17 PDT
Buckhead comments at 8:59 PDT in post #47. So much for that conspiracy theory.
Reached by telephone today, MacDougald, 46, confirmed that he is Buckhead, but declined to answer questions about his political background or how he knew so much about the CBS documents so fast.
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Interesting, the 'Fact's - LA Times
It was the first public allegation that CBS News had used forged memos in its report questioning President Bush's Air National Guard service ? a highly technical explanation posted on the Web within hours of airtime, citing proportional spacing and font styles.
But it did not come from an expert in typography or typewriter history, as some first thought. Instead, it was the work of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes who had helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal, the Los Angeles Times has learned.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Something about him:
MacDougald is a lawyer in the Atlanta office of the Winston-Salem, N.C.-based firm Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice and is affiliated with two prominent conservative legal groups: the Federalist Society and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, where he serves on the legal advisory board.
-------------------------------
What he did in the past:
MacDougald helped draft the foundation's petition in 1998 that led to the five-year suspension of Clinton's Arkansas law license for giving misleading testimony in the Paula Corbin Jones sexual harassment case.
And he assisted in the group's challenge to the campaign finance law sponsored by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.). The challenge, which went to the U.S. Supreme Court, was funded largely by the foundation with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the law's chief critic, and handled by former Clinton investigator Kenneth W. Starr.
-------------------------------
What's he doing now ?
MacDougald is also a Republican appointee to the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems he knew that regardles of what the facts were about the documents and their actual authenticity,
all he had to do was toss out some unsubstantieated fabricition (Like a LIE) and it would gain a life of
it's own, since there was some way of the information being moved to him internally, and the 'Party'
would make sure that all the Conservative Hosts got the appropriate 'Talking Ponts'
I would bet dollars to donuts that they are in face genuine, actually copies and the 'Originals' are
held so they cannot be obtained without the Freedom of Information Act, which will take time to get.
Looks to me like he's a paid GOP operative, active in subverting the election to his constituents.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: burnedout
How gullible are "See BS" and Dan Rather? Take a look here at this side-by-side comparison of an authentic Killian document and one that Dan Rather fell for.
[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]
So can you prove the CBS doc's false???
CAN YOU?
Let's see it then. LOL. If it could be done, it would have been done by now.
I have top go now, have fun with your circle jerk. :laugh:
Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: burnedout
CBS originally aired the story on 9/8/04 between 6:00 PM and 6:20 PM PDT.Originally posted by: DealMonkey
The problem is, "Buckethead" (as I like to call him ) just floated the theory -- he has no way of knowing definitively and neither do any of you, and neither do any of the "document experts" who have weighed in thus far. So as Cad so expertly parrots in every single post, time to ante up the original docs or STFU.
I'm not saying there's any "conspiracy" surrounding Buckethead and/or his proclamations as a freeper, it only serves to bring up more questions.
For example, how would anyone be able to make a detailed examination of the memos when the story just aired on TV? The story aired Sep 8th and the documents were posted online Sep 9th. Buckethead's Sept. 8 late-night posting ? written less than four hours after the CBS report - would come before the documents were available online. Did he record the show and then freeze the frame in which the memos were shown? I'm sure that's a credible method for verifying the authenticity of a document. Oh brother.
Interesting ... very interesting ...
Two hours after the report aired, a link to the documents was posted on Free Republic in this thread, found in post #11 at 8:17 PDT
Buckhead comments at 8:59 PDT in post #47. So much for that conspiracy theory.
Why the secrecy?
Reached by telephone today, MacDougald, 46, confirmed that he is Buckhead, but declined to answer questions about his political background or how he knew so much about the CBS documents so fast.
By PEGGY ANDERSEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
SEATTLE -- A radio talk-show host said Saturday he has been fired for criticizing CBS newsman Dan Rather's handling of challenges to the credibility of memos about President Bush's National Guard service.
"On the talk show that I host, or hosted, I said I felt Rather should either retire or be forced out over this," said Brian Maloney, whose weekly "The Brian Maloney Show" aired for three years on KIRO-AM Radio, a CBS affiliate here.
Maloney says he made that statement on his Sept. 12 program. He was fired five days later on Friday, he said.
"What they have expressed is essentially that my show went in a direction they're not comfortable with," Maloney said.
KIRO Radio's general manager, Ken Berry, declined to return a call from The Associated Press about Maloney's status. A staff member at the station said Berry would not comment because it is a personnel matter. . . . . .
Originally posted by: burnedout
Criticizing RAthERGATE costs jobs.
Radio station fires talk-show host over "See BS" document flap
[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]
By PEGGY ANDERSEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
SEATTLE -- A radio talk-show host said Saturday he has been fired for criticizing CBS newsman Dan Rather's handling of challenges to the credibility of memos about President Bush's National Guard service.
...
KIRO-AM Radio, a CBS affiliate here.
...
No, you know what I'm going to do instead? I'm going to call your employer and tell them what an ass I think you are and that your political opinions have gotten totally out of hand and that he should fire you as soon as possible. Then I'm going to get all of my friends and everyone I know to do the same thing. And then I'll start a web site to take donations so we can hire attorneys to harass your employer until he fires you.Originally posted by: Falstaff
CBS 60 Minutes Hit Piece on Bush
http://img41.exs.cx/img41/5551/60minbusted.swf(GREAT OVERLAY PIECE)
Contact CBS and voice your disgust about Dan Rather. Second, about CBS's anti-Bush taint, and third, send media links to the controversy to the advertisers and lodge a complaint with the advertisers that they must repudiate the 60 Minutes hit piece.
Complain to CBS advertisers. Most of these are advertisers that were involved with the 60 Minutes slam on Bush, but hey, complain to them and ask for them to pull their advertising from the Bush Hating CBS...
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
No, you know what I'm going to do instead? I'm going to call your employer and tell them what an ass I think you are and that your political opinions have gotten totally out of hand and that he should fire you as soon as possible. Then I'm going to get all of my friends and everyone I know to do the same thing. And then I'll start a web site to take donations so we can hire attorneys to harass your employer until he fires you.Originally posted by: Falstaff
CBS 60 Minutes Hit Piece on Bush
http://img41.exs.cx/img41/5551/60minbusted.swf(GREAT OVERLAY PIECE)
Contact CBS and voice your disgust about Dan Rather. Second, about CBS's anti-Bush taint, and third, send media links to the controversy to the advertisers and lodge a complaint with the advertisers that they must repudiate the 60 Minutes hit piece.
Complain to CBS advertisers. Most of these are advertisers that were involved with the 60 Minutes slam on Bush, but hey, complain to them and ask for them to pull their advertising from the Bush Hating CBS...
How's that sound?
Not really. Just proves to me that iof you don't do your work properly it will come back and bite you in the ass.Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
No, you know what I'm going to do instead? I'm going to call your employer and tell them what an ass I think you are and that your political opinions have gotten totally out of hand and that he should fire you as soon as possible. Then I'm going to get all of my friends and everyone I know to do the same thing. And then I'll start a web site to take donations so we can hire attorneys to harass your employer until he fires you.Originally posted by: Falstaff
CBS 60 Minutes Hit Piece on Bush
http://img41.exs.cx/img41/5551/60minbusted.swf(GREAT OVERLAY PIECE)
Contact CBS and voice your disgust about Dan Rather. Second, about CBS's anti-Bush taint, and third, send media links to the controversy to the advertisers and lodge a complaint with the advertisers that they must repudiate the 60 Minutes hit piece.
Complain to CBS advertisers. Most of these are advertisers that were involved with the 60 Minutes slam on Bush, but hey, complain to them and ask for them to pull their advertising from the Bush Hating CBS...
How's that sound?
I realize many here are partisan, but don't you think Rather has a higher burden to society, and a higher ethical standard than some middle manager? I mean c'mon!
Half an hour later, Roberts called "60 Minutes" producer Mary Mapes with word that Bartlett was not challenging the authenticity of the documents. Mapes told her bosses, who were so relieved that they cut from Rather's story an interview with a handwriting expert who had examined the memos.
At that point, said "60 Minutes" executive Josh Howard, "we completely abandoned the process of authenticating the documents. Obviously, looking back on it, that was a mistake. We stopped questioning ourselves. I suppose you could say we let our guard down."
CBS aired the story eight hours later, triggering an onslaught of criticism that has left Rather and top network officials struggling to explain why they relied on a handful of papers that even some of Rather's colleagues now believe to be fake.
An examination of the process that led to the broadcast, based on interviews with the participants and more than 20 independent analysts, shows that CBS rushed the story onto the air while ignoring the advice of its own outside experts, and used as corroborating witnesses people who had no firsthand knowledge of the documents. As CBS pushed to finish its report, it was Bartlett who contacted the network -- rather than the other way around -- at 5:30 the evening before to ask whether the White House could respond to the widely rumored story.
Later, Bartlett would explain why he did not challenge the documents with a question: "How am I supposed to verify something that came from a dead man in three hours?"
[...]
Emily Will of North Carolina, one of the experts CBS had asked to examine the memos, sent Mapes an e-mail outlining her concerns over discrepancies in Killian's signature. She also phoned CBS and raised more questions about whether the typography in the memos existed in 1972 and differences with other military documents. "They looked like trouble to me," Will said.
Linda James, a document examiner who lives near Mapes, was raising similar questions. The two memos she looked at "had problems," James recalled telling CBS, and she could not rule out that they had been "produced on a computer."
Document analyst Marcel Matley flew from California to New York, and Rather interviewed him on Labor Day, Sept. 6 -- footage that would end up on the cutting-room floor. But Matley limited his examination to Killian's signature, which he believed was probably valid, but not certain -- the lowest endorsement he offers. Because the memos were copies, Matley said in a recent interview, "there's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them. . . . I can't say either way from my expertise, the narrow, narrow little field of my expertise."
None of the analysts, including the fourth, James J. Pierce of California, provided the network with a written report before the broadcast. Howard said Mapes told him the analysts' concerns had been addressed.
Rather said he grew more confident when Mapes began speaking with retired Col. Bobby W. Hodges, Killian's superior in the Guard. Hodges said Killian felt that Bush had been treated too leniently in those days. That was important, in Rather's view, because Hodges remained a staunch supporter of the president. But Hodges later said that he felt "misled" by CBS, that the memos were read to him over the phone and that he believes from discrepancies in the military abbreviations that they are forgeries. . . .
[...]
After the show, one colleague asked an elated Rather whether he was sure the documents were real. "I have never been more confident of a story in my life," he said.
[...]
It quickly became clear that the people CBS hired to authenticate the documents had -- and claimed -- only limited expertise in the sometimes arcane science of computer typesetting technology and fonts. Such expertise is needed to determine whether the records could have been created in 1972 and 1973. Independent experts contacted by The Post were surprised that CBS hired analysts who were not certified by the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners, considered the gold standard in the field.
[...]
One telltale sign in the CBS documents is the overlapping character combinations, such as "fr" or "fe," said Joseph M. Newcomer, an adjunct professor with Carnegie Mellon University. Blown-up portions of the CBS documents show that the top of the "f" overlaps the beginning of the next letter, a feat that was not possible even on the most sophisticated typewriters available in 1972. Newcomer calls the documents "a modern forgery."
Tests run by Thomas Phinney, fonts program manager for Adobe Systems, show that none of the possible font widths available on any typewriter or any IBM device from 1972 are able to produce an exact replica of the CBS documents. "Can they do something 'similar'? Sure," Phinney said. "Could they produce those exact memos? Impossible."
CBS insiders are increasingly worried that the credibility of the network's news division has been grievously damaged by anchor Dan Rather's persistent defense of a story which relied on questionable documents about George W. Bush's National Guard service. "This has clearly hurt us," one veteran correspondent told NEWSWEEK. Network sources describe finger-pointing within the news division, with concerns greatest among "60 Minutes" producers, who fear the issue has tainted their entire program. While CBS News president Andrew Heyward has publicly backed Rather, the network has quietly assembled a team of additional producers to work the case. Rather is privately telling colleagues he remains "confident" that the story, and the memos, will be vindicated.
One problem is that the network has not explained where the purported Texas National Guard records have been for the last 30 years and why they happened to surface in the closing weeks of a presidential campaign. Emily Will, a documents expert approached by CBS to examine the memos, told NEWSWEEK that she was told by a CBS News producer that the network's source had received the memos anonymously through the mail.
Originally posted by: Ornery
You are SO missing the big picture here, junior. W will go on to be YOUR president for 4 more years, and nobody will give a damn about what happened 30 years before. Meanwhile, ole' Danny boy's credibility will be in tatters forever more. 'Bout damn time!
Originally posted by: Ornery
You are SO missing the big picture here, junior. W will go on to be YOUR president for 4 more years, and nobody will give a damn about what happened 30 years before.
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Ornery
You are SO missing the big picture here, junior. W will go on to be YOUR president for 4 more years, and nobody will give a damn about what happened 30 years before.
:beer:
The Sad thing is that 30 years in the future, any lessons that we learn now, right or wrong, will likely be forgotten or incorrectly archived into the oblivion that we call history...
Originally posted by: ntdz
cbs recived the documents from an admitted democrat, and didnt even authenticate it properly. I think they had wishful thinking and assumed it was true and aired it w/o checking it correctly. They deserve ALL the blame for this. Was it illegal? nah. Was it unethical and stupid? Damn straight.