EXMAN, but you agree with me that Rove is behind the memo right? That he created it? Or did I misunderstand you?
Originally posted by: EXman
Originally posted by: wiin
It's not gonna be until after the election because should the collusion between CBS and the kerry campaign comes out now, it would be devastating to kerry. And we don't want that. After all the purpose
is to protect cbs and the kerry campaign.
There already has been collusion the senior Edit under Rather called Mr Lockhart from Kerrys campaign (After he came in for damage control) to set up Burkett and Lockhart to talk about what to do with the "Files." She has not been fired cause she knows were the bodies are buried for CBS I suppose.
True they are trying to insulate Kerry by not reporting.
Meanwhile, a real scientist rips David Hailey a new one.Originally posted by: conjur
Interesting, but detailed, study of the documents and the fonts:
http://imrl.usu.edu/bush_memo_study/index.htm
0wned"...this is science, not opinion..."
[...]
I conclude that Dr. Hailey's process for comparison has not only ignored many known facts about the environment, culture, syntax, and form of the documents, but is also scientifically flawed. Many of his assertions without proof are meaningless, and his conclusions, which includes the sentence "there seems to be nothing in the memos that indicates they are faked" cannot be supported by what he calls the "mechanics of the documents". The mechanics of the documents provide overwhelming evidence that his hypothesis is false. I conclude his methodology is poor, his assumptions are too often unfounded, and his evidence does not support his conclusion. He has ignored many fundamental principles of information theory, computer graphic theory (especially pixel quantization), and tends to make claims that are the opposite of what anyone in possession of the CBS files can themselves demonstrate beyond any question. He makes arguments that he claims would invalidate other studies, and at least two of these (his 111th example; transformations under copying, faxing, etc. changing the documents so comparisons are meaningless) are not only without merit, but contradicted by actual experience with the documents in question, a fact he is apparently able to ignore.
In addition, he makes statements that are either meaningless (allusions to "flat earth" legends) or designed to distract the reader from the actual issue (the damaged type examples, transformations under copying and faxing causing distortions that would invalidate any other study).
His results are erroneous, or unsupported by his methodology or his evidence. I state, as a peer reviewer of this paper, that his paper demonstrates a remarkable amount of poor scientific methodology, and ultimately in no way supports the hypothesis that these documents were typed on a physical typewriter that was in existence in 1972.
Originally posted by: SirStev0
anyone who says rathers should step down should agree that bush, cheney, and rummy should step down, they did the same thing, except what they did killed thousands of people
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: SirStev0
anyone who says rathers should step down should agree that bush, cheney, and rummy should step down, they did the same thing, except what they did killed thousands of people
In 3 weeks, you have the option to force those referenced to step down.
Rather's situation revolves around the legitimacy of the 4th estate.
Originally posted by: SirStev0
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: SirStev0
anyone who says rathers should step down should agree that bush, cheney, and rummy should step down, they did the same thing, except what they did killed thousands of people
In 3 weeks, you have the option to force those referenced to step down.
Rather's situation revolves around the legitimacy of the 4th estate.
what about all the news organizations that backed up everything they were saying...
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Given Cheney's lies the other night I don't think it's a shock to anyone that the neocons have ochestrated this memo thing and framed Dan Rather. They set him up.
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Given Cheney's lies the other night I don't think it's a shock to anyone that the neocons have ochestrated this memo thing and framed Dan Rather. They set him up.
If that is the case, the bait was dangled and they (CBS) took it; hook, line and sucker.
And they were told that there were signed posted No Fishing
Authorities consider probing National Guard memos given to CBS
BY JACK DOUGLAS JR. AND TONI HEINZL
Knight Ridder Newspapers
FORT WORTH, Texas - (KRT) - Fifty-one members of Congress have requested an investigation into the suspected forgery of memos used by CBS to report on President Bush's service in the National Guard.
Kathy Colvin, a spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney's office in Dallas, said Tuesday that federal officials were "still consulting" with the Justice Department in Washington and that no decision had been made on whether to launch an investigation.
The Texas Rangers, meanwhile, have also been asked to look into the matter by U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, in a letter signed by him and other Republicans in Congress.
"We've received a copy of the letter, but we're not doing anything at this time," said Tela Mange, a Rangers spokeswoman in Austin. "We're still looking at it."
Smith sent the letter last week to state Attorney General Greg Abbott and U.S. Attorney Richard Roper in Dallas. Abbott referred the letter to the Texas Rangers. . . . . .
Never in his 24 years at CBS News, says 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft, has there been so little information at a time of such high anxiety and drama.
"It's a company full of reporters, of nosy busybodies, but this is one case in which I don't think anybody has a handle on what's going to happen," he says. "What's been going on is very closely held. There's a lot of uncertainty."
Says Kroft's boss, Jeff Fager: "People are looking forward to it being finished. It hovers over the organization."
They are referring, of course, to the mood around CBS News as an independent panel prepares to release its findings on the circumstances surrounding Dan Rather's controversial "Memogate" piece on the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes this fall that questioned President Bush's National Guard service.
The findings, which are due in days, could result in some longtime CBS News veterans such as Rather, his producers and CBS News higher ups being sanctioned or even fired. CBS chief Leslie Moonves said last week that although he has not yet seen the report, he expects Rather to continue reporting for 60 Minutes. But the fate of many others is less certain, and it weighs heavily at CBS News. . . . . .
Originally posted by: crimson117
Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor:
1) given documents he thought were true
2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4) when confronted with the facts, apologized and launched an
immediate investigation
5) retracted the story
6) number of Americans dead: 0
7) Republicans believe he should be fired as CBS News Anchor
George W. Bush, President of the United States
1) given documents he thought were true
2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
4) when confronted with the facts, continued to report untruth and
stonewalled an investigation for nearly a year.
5) has never apologized or accepted responsibility
6) number of Americans dead: 1100 and rising; Number wounded: 7000 and rising
7) Republicans believe he should be given four more years as President
of the United States
Originally posted by: burnedout
'Impending doom' is the mood at CBS - USA Today
[Hat tip: Charles Johnson]
Never in his 24 years at CBS News, says 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft, has there been so little information at a time of such high anxiety and drama.
"It's a company full of reporters, of nosy busybodies, but this is one case in which I don't think anybody has a handle on what's going to happen," he says. "What's been going on is very closely held. There's a lot of uncertainty."
Says Kroft's boss, Jeff Fager: "People are looking forward to it being finished. It hovers over the organization."
They are referring, of course, to the mood around CBS News as an independent panel prepares to release its findings on the circumstances surrounding Dan Rather's controversial "Memogate" piece on the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes this fall that questioned President Bush's National Guard service.
The findings, which are due in days, could result in some longtime CBS News veterans such as Rather, his producers and CBS News higher ups being sanctioned or even fired. CBS chief Leslie Moonves said last week that although he has not yet seen the report, he expects Rather to continue reporting for 60 Minutes. But the fate of many others is less certain, and it weighs heavily at CBS News. . . . . .
Perhaps old Mary "Mary Quite Pro Kerry" Mapes could be on the way out. We'll find out shortly.THOMAS: I mean, come on, it's silly. I have it. I'll show it to you. Mary makes the top producer on the National Guard memo thing within, I'm told, by top CBS source, and had a 68 page statement about herself and her own role in this ? the Thornburgh Commission that is looking into this issue.
I'm told that there are going to be not only the obvious heads rolling, like ["60 Minutes" producer] Mary Mapes, and Rather is already leaving, but even higher ups and possibly I'm told that Andrew Heyward (search), the president of CBS News, his job might be in jeopardy too, which Sumner Redstone (search), the chairman of Viacom, when asked first of all if Rather's position was safe, he had said "Let's wait `til the report comes out." That's not a ringing endorsement of anybody's behavior.
BURNS: The report, Jim, which, we're told, may come out some time next week.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about the Thornburgh commission. Last question. It?s coming out. It?s an in-house effort by the CBS network news department to try to find out if they did anything wrong with regard to the president?s National Guard records, particularly with regards to that story which used that document which turned out to be phony.
Do you think it?s going to shake up the newsroom of ?The New York Times? as well?
OKRENT: No, I don?t think so.
Interestingly, ?The Times? was on to that story as well. I did some reporting. They didn?t go with it because they weren?t confident in the documents. And I think that it?s clear that somebody at CBS made a terrible mistake. . . . .