Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Muckmaw1 on September 20, 2004, 11:50:30 AM
-
EXCLUSIVE // Mon Sep 20 2004 11:58:02 ET
STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER:
Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question—and their source—vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.
Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where—if I knew then what I know now—I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.
But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.
-
Ehhrm RPM, now its your turn.. The documents are fake, yiu agree, correct?
-
Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically.
Well, when you're getting a big 10 digit salary as the cream of the crop, and your producers and reporters are getting good 6 digit salaries and your fact checkers are making a good living YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THIS **** BEFORE YOU RUN THE STORY, handsomehunk. Lazy, sensational corporate journalism. Not surprising though. When I worked in PR the worst, least interested in accuracy, media outlet I dealt with was Time Magazine.
Charon
-
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully. [/B]
Wow, the balls on this guy.
-
Everbody knows that the technology to create these documents was available in 1931. It is shameful for CBS to pretend these documents were created on a modern computer. They are just another part of the right-wing media, covering for Bush.
-
Off topic
-
It's about time....Though I wouldn't call that a retraction..I think he's still with the mentality of "So the documents were fake, It's the content thats important"
and "ra" I hope you were being sarcastic.
-
Originally posted by ASTAC
and "ra" I hope you were being sarcastic.
Of course he is! (http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/images/smilies/slap.gif)
-
Im so sorry I tried to fix a presidential election by using forged incriminating documents in an attempt to further my own political beliefs...
Must be some serious pressure on Rather to make him cave to the Pajama Bloggers!
Must be the fact that ratings are lower for his show then Moesha reruns!
IKON
-
"WHATS THE FREQUENCY KENNETH"????
-
Originally posted by ra
Everbody knows that the technology to create these documents was available in 1931. It is shameful for CBS to pretend these documents were created on a modern computer. They are just another part of the right-wing media, covering for Bush.
Wow. Keep grasping.
-
Rather this weekend interviewed Bill Burkett, a retired Texas National Guard officials who has been mentioned as a possible source for the documents. His interview will be on "CBS Evening News" on Monday.
CBS said Burkett acknowledged he provided the documents and said he deliberately misled a CBS producer, giving her a false account of their origin to protect a promise of confidentiality to a source.
What's the penalty for Forgery in Texas?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
See that blank up there where it says "posted by Ripsnort"... it signifies the relevence of his post.
Now why .. Oh why .. would you feel the need to take my comment on a separate item and post it here as if it meant something? Have you lost all sense of decorum? Is there nothing you won't do to make a lame pointless point?
Silly and below you Rip. I'd be ashamed.
-
Midnight, here is your "concession" you said you did not see in the other thread when the writing looked to be on the wall.
-
I like Dan Rather's haircut, and I think it makes him look like an honest guy. And I think this retraction goes a long way to reinforce my belief.
-post Skuzzy edit edit-
-
Off topic
-
Off topic
-
Off topic
-
Off topic
-
I like the cut of Dan's jib too, it goes well with the nightly news.
-post Skuzzy edit edit-
-
I cant' wait to see how this plays out. Forging government documents is a felony, right?
And to think they forged the documents just to try to diminish Bush's guard service.......which nobody cares about, even if it were true.
Amazing.
-
I believe they burn you alive with that. BURN HIM!
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Midnight, here is your "concession" you said you did not see in the other thread when the writing looked to be on the wall.
Hehe... I said I didn't see one in that last thread because there wasn't one. So, what exactly is your point?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Hehe... I said I didn't see one in that last thread because there wasn't one. So, what exactly is your point?
My point is perception of "Truth" sometimes can be mistaken for "Yellow Journalism".
-
If there isn't an award for Journalistic BS there should be and this should win hands down.
"It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism."
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
My point is perception of "Truth" sometimes can be mistaken for "Yellow Journalism".
No, and you are dead wrong. The article I was talking about said there was a concession and there was not. PERIOD.
Whether you think there should have been one is not germaine to the argument. You are wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Now go stand in the corner until you can admit it.
-
Originally posted by Muckmaw1
Rather this weekend interviewed Bill Burkett, a retired Texas National Guard officials who has been mentioned as a possible source for the documents. His interview will be on "CBS Evening News" on Monday.
CBS said Burkett acknowledged he provided the documents and said he deliberately misled a CBS producer, giving her a false account of their origin to protect a promise of confidentiality to a source.
What's the penalty for Forgery in Texas?
Not just Texas..there are Federal laws against tampering with an election..this would fall under that. Plus it would probrably be a federal forgery case and not just Texas...I hope they make whoever made those documents pay for it. Stirring so much trouble for nothing.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Ehhrm RPM, now its your turn.. The documents are fake, yiu agree, correct?
As promised, now that CBS is no longer certain they are authentic, neither am I.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.
I also still believe CBS News and Rather, this will only serve to make them a better news organization in the future.
-
:rofl
-
Time for Rather to Retire.
-
see the thread on "presenile dimentia" the old fart probrably fits into that category. Not to mention he has such a fixation on ousting Bush that it has really seriously effected his ability to do an objective story.
-
even famous people make mistakes.
-
Originally posted by ASTAC
Not just Texas..there are Federal laws against tampering with an election..
Good luck with that one... I can hear the snickers from the court already.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Good luck with that one... I can hear the snickers from the court already.
you said that the last time criminal charges came up....why do you think there's no case? Do you think that the people involved shouldn't pay?
-
Election tampering would have to involve manipulating votes on election day.
-
Well, one side got caught. Do any of you suppose the other side will as well before November?