Please fix misspelling in this headline to Cronkite. Thank you!

Walter Cronkite is calling C-B-S' report on President Bush's National Guard service "embarrassing." No joke; you ol' liberal fart.

Guess Who's a GOP Booster? (Sumner Redstone!)

Walter Cronkite in recent years has revealed his TRUE beliefs as a pro-world-government-globalist. He was very successful in hiding this from the American public all those years.

A speech by Walter Cronkite -

United Nations, national sovereignty and the future of the world

upon receiving the Norman Cousins Global Governance Award,
on October 19, 1999, at the UN Delegates Dining Room

" I am greatly honored to receive this Norman Cousins Global Governance Award for two reasons:

First, I believe as Norman Cousins did that the first priority of humankind in this era is to establish an effective system of world law that will assure peace with justice among the peoples of the world.

Second, I feel sentimental about this award because half a century ago Norman offered me a job as spokesman and Washington lobbyist for the World Federalist organization, which was then in its infancy.

I chose instead to continue in the world of journalism. For many years, I did my best to report on the issues of the day in as objective a manner as possible. When I had my own strong opinions, as I often did, I tried not to communicate them to my audience.

Now, however, my circumstances are different. I am in a position to speak my mind. And that is what I propose to do.

Those of us who are living today can influence the future of civilization. We can influence whether our planet will drift into chaos and violence, or whether through a monumental educational and political effort we will achieve a world of peace under a system of law where individual violators of that law are brought to justice.

For most of this fairly long life I have been an optimist harboring a belief that as our globe shrank, as our communication miracles brought us closer together, we would begin to appreciate the commonality of our universal desire to live in peace and that we would do something to satisfy that yearning of all peoples. Today I find it harder to cling to that hope.

For how many thousands of years now have we humans been what we insist on calling "civilized?" And yet, in total contradiction, we also persist in the savage belief that we must occasionally, at least, settle our arguments by killing one another.

While we spend much of our time and a great deal of our treasure in preparing for war, we see no comparable effort to establish a lasting peace. Meanwhile, emphasizing the sloth in this regard, those advocates who work for world peace by urging a system of world government are called impractical dreamers. Those impractical dreamers are entitled to ask their critics what is so practical about war.

It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace.

To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order.

But the American colonies did it once and brought forth one of the most nearly perfect unions the world has ever seen.

The circumstances were vastly different, obviously. While the colonies differed on many questions, at least the people of the colonies were of the same Anglo-Saxon stock. Yet just because the task appears forbiddingly hard, we should not shirk it.

We cannot defer this responsibility to posterity. Time will not wait. Democracy, civilization itself, is at stake. Within the next few years we must change the basic structure of our global community from the present anarchic system of war and ever more destructive weaponry to a new system governed by a democratic UN federation.

I suppose I'm preaching to the choir here. So let's not talk generalities but focus tonight on a few specifics of what the leadership of the World Federalist Movement believe must be done now to advance the rule of world law.

For starters, we can draw on the wisdom of the framers of the US Constitution in 1787. The differences among the American states then were as bitter as differences among the nation-states in the world today.

In their almost miraculous insight, the founders of our country invented "federalism," a concept that is rooted in the rights of the individual. Our federal system guarantees a maximum of freedom but provides it in a framework of law and justice.

Our forefathers believed that the closer the laws are to the people, the better. Cities legislate on local matters; states make decisions on matters within their borders; and the national government deals with issues that transcend the states, such as interstate commerce and foreign relations. That is federalism.

Today we must develop federal structures on a global level. We need a system of enforceable world law-- a democratic federal world government--to deal with world problems.

What Alexander Hamilton wrote about the need for law among the 13 states applies today to the approximately 200 sovereignties in our global village:

"To look for a continuation of harmony between a number of independent, unconnected sovereignties in the same neighborhood, would be to disregard the uniform course of human events, and to set at defiance the accumulated experience of ages."

Today the notion of unlimited national sovereignty means international anarchy. We must replace the anarchic law of force with a civilized force of law.

Ours will neither be a perfect world, nor a world without disagreement and occasional violence. But it will be a world where the overwhelming majority of national leaders will consistently abide by the rule of world law, and those who won't will be dealt with effectively and with due process by the structures of that same world law. We will never have a city without crime, but we would never want to live in a city that had no system of law to deal with the criminals who will always be with us.

Let me make three suggestions for immediate action that would move us in a direction firmly in the American tradition of law and democracy. 1. Keep our promises: We helped create the UN and to develop the UN assessment formula. Americans overwhelmingly want us to pay our UN dues, with no crippling limitations. We owe it to the world. In fact, we owe it as well to our national self-esteem. 2. Ratify the Treaty to Ban Land Mines, the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the Convention to Eliminate All forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Most important, we should sign and ratify the Treaty for a Permanent International Criminal Court. That Court will enable the world to hold individuals accountable for crimes against humanity. 3. Consider, after 55 years, the possibility of a more representative and democratic system of decision making at the UN. This should include both revision of the Veto in the Security Council and adoption of a weighted voting system for the General Assembly. The World Federalists have endorsed Richard Hudson's Binding Triad proposal. George Soros, in his recent book, "The Crisis of Global Capitalism" has given serious attention to this concept which would be based upon not only one-nation-one-vote but also, on population and contributions to the UN budget.

Resolutions adopted by majorities in each of these three areas would be binding, enforceable law. Within the powers given to it in the Charter, the UN could then deal with matters of reliable financing, a standing UN Peace force, development, the environment and human rights.

Some of you may ask why the Senate is not ratifying these important treaties and why the Congress is not paying our UN dues. Even as with the American rejection of the League of Nations, our failure to live up to our obligations to the United Nations is led by a handful of willful senators who choose to pursue their narrow, selfish political objectives at the cost of our nation's conscience.

They pander to and are supported by the Christian Coalition and the rest of the religious right wing. Their leader, Pat Robertson, has written that we should have a world government but only when the messiah arrives. Any attempt to achieve world order before that time must be the work of the Devil!

This small but well-organized group, has intimidated both the Republican Party and the Clinton administration. It has attacked each of our Presidents since FDR for supporting the United Nations. Robertson explains that these Presidents were and are the unwitting agents of Lucifer.

The only way we who believe in the vision of a democratic world federal government can effectively overcome this reactionary movement is to organize a strong educational counteroffensive stretching from the most publicly visible people in all fields to the humblest individuals in every community. That is the vision and the program of the World Federalist Association.

The strength of the World Federalist program would serve an important auxiliary purpose at this particular point in our history. There would be immediate diplomatic advantages in just the world knowledge that this country was even beginning to explore the prospect of strengthening the UN. We would appear before the peoples of the world as the champion of peace for all by the equitable sharing of power. This in sharp contrast to the growing concern that we intend to use our current dominant military power to enforce a sort of pax Americana.

Our country today is at a stage in our foreign policy similar to that crucial point in our nation's early history when our Constitution was produced in Philadelphia.

Let us hear the peal of a new international liberty bell that calls us all to the creation of a system of enforceable world law in which the universal desire for peace can place its hope and prayers.

As Carl Van Doren has written, "History is now choosing the founders of the World Federation. Any person who can be among that number and fails to do so has lost the noblest opportunity of a lifetime.""

United Nations page

Cronkite hates Rather. When Cronkite stepped down as CBS anchor, he was promised a series of "Walter Cronkite Reports" specials. Rather was concerned because Cronkite was so popular, and moved behind the scenes to make sure that Cronkite didn't get any face time on CBS. Therefore, none of the specials materialized. Of specific concern to Rather was the fact that CBS News ratings dropped significantly when he took over, and that another anchor, Roger Mudd, who was at least as popular as Rather, had left the network when Rather got the anchor job. Rather didn't feel secure in his position, and had Walter whacked. Cronkite brooded about it for years, before speaking out about it last year.

I sent one.

Always interesting to hear what Walter Krackpot has to say.

Fascinating what is falling out of the woodwork on 'ole Walter.

Thanks for the posts (and info).

Yeah, well, that's the way it is for See BS (and AP on America) for Campaign 2004.

Dear Sirs,
We are all subject to mistake but the recent episode with Dan Rather goes far beyond that human frailty and comes closer to outright criminal behavior.
I would hope your station would send a message that this type of journalistic malfeasance and misfeasance will not be tolerated.
Please remove Dan Rather from your station.

"The long-time C-B-S anchor says after that, (investigation) people can decide what their reaction should be."

Why thank you so much Daddy Cronkite. May I go to the bathroom now?

Before I pass judgement on Cronkite, I want to know whether the "embarrassing" is for...

...trying to influence the election using false charges,...
...failing at the attempt, or...
...getting caught.

Money says it's not #1.

My tagline sez it all.

So does your screen name. It is tough in this state, being sighted in the land of the blind, isn't it?

Walter still thinks he can hide behind his former reputation as the most trusted man in America.

In the 60's my father was in the Air Force Intelligence business. They referred to Uncle Walt as the American Mouth of the Communist Party back then.

He has been "outed" along with his fellow travelers for several years now.

To hear the comrade chime in at this point is good for a chuckle if nothing else.

May Walter rot in Hell, and the sooner the better.

If the news looks bad for dems, will CBS hold the report until after the election?

Also, where in hell is ABC and NBC? Are they in bed with CBS? Sounds like a story to me!!!

Do they really believe we are crazy enough to think that CBS would back off a business to give them time to "investigate" internally the business' mistake. Get real! They would be at the front doors and following every officer until they brought the company down and they turned over records. CBS is already getting a pass.

Walter Cronkite = Operation Mockingbird

Operation Mockingbird

No one ever turned a suspicious eye on Walter Cronkite, a former intelligence officer and in the immediate postwar period UPI's Moscow correspondent. Cronkite was lured to CBS by Operation MOCKINGBIRD's Phil Graham, according to Deborah Davis.

Clinton and Cronkite: Odd Couple?

It has recently been reported that in the midst of his Martha's Vineyard summer vacation, President Bill Clinton went on a boating excursion with former CBS anchor man, Walter Cronkite. Jay Leno gave the standard reaction to this news: "Here we have the most trusted man and the least trusted man in America together." The typical Rush Limbaugh listener, on the other hand, would see nothing particularly unusual about it. Why shouldn't Clinton cozy up to members of the liberal media, after all? Haven't they been very good to him? And for their part it never hurts to be on the good side of a president of the United States. We can recall that when Clinton took his first vacation at this watering hole of the rich and powerful, he resided at the guest house of Washington Post owner, Katharine Graham, and took dinner with her.

But there is good evidence that there is more to this Clinton-CBS-Post nexus than liberal politics. The following excerpt from "Katharine the Great, Katharine Graham and Her Washington Post Empire" by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991) connects a few more dots:

" (The Washington Post's managers') individual relations with intelligence had in fact been the reason the Post Company had grown as fast as it did after the war; their secrets were its corporate secrets, beginning with MOCKINGBIRD.* Philip Graham's commitment to intelligence had given his friends Frank Wisner and Allen Dulles an interest in helping to make the Washington Post the dominant news vehicle in Washington, which they had done by assisting with its two most crucial acquisitions, the Times-Herald and WTOP radio and television stations. The Post executives most essential to these transactions, other than Phil, had been Wayne Coy, who had been Phil's former New Deal boss, and John S. Hayes, who replaced Coy in 1947 when Coy was appointed chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.

"The acquisition of the Times-Herald and WTOP was accomplished by men dedicated to Philip Graham's vision of journalism. Hayes had been commander of the Armed Forces Radio Network ETO (European Theater of Operations) and in that capacity had made intelligence connections all over Europe. He had come to the Post, after turning the network to the service of the Marshall Plan with the title of vice-president for radio and television. In Washington he had become friendly with Frank Wisner, father of MOCKINGBIRD, and with Allen Dulles, an OSS man who became the second director of the CIA in 1953. The relationship with Dulles was particularly important because of Dulles's ties to Wall Street, from which intelligence, industry, and government all draw their leaders." (pp. 172-173)

--------

"Hayes had been able to contribute to Post Company broadcasting largely because of his wartime acquaintance with Colonel William S. Paley, the founder and chairman of the board of CBS. Paley was a businessman who believed that the commercial media, as well as the military, must develop ‘all manner of propaganda' to help in the war effort; Hayes was the director of a radio network that was the military extension of Paley's commercial network. When Hayes came to the Post, which then owned only one local radio station, he looked to Paley, who owned a Washington radio outlet, as the company's entree into national broadcasting.

"Paley's own friendship with Allen Dulles is now known to have been one of the most influential and significant in the communications industry. He provided cover for CIA agents, supplied out-takes of news film, permitted the debriefing of reporters, and in many ways set the standard for the cooperation between the CIA and the major broadcast companies which lasted until the mid-1970s (sic). But in 1948, despite the mutual intelligence connections, when Hayes and Graham asked to buy WTOP-CBS radio, Paley had refused to sell. Within a year, though, an arrangement was worked out, Dulles having spoken of Graham and Hayes to Paley, and fifty-five percent of the WTOP stock was transferred to the Post Company. Wayne Coy at the FCC approved the license reassignment, and CBS and the Post began sharing their Washington news staffs (reporters then worked interchangeably for print and broadcast). In 1950 Phil then bought a small Washington television station, license approved by Wayne Coy, and changed its call letters to WTOP-TV; it became a CBS affiliate. That year he and Hayes also hired a news analyst who for two years after the war had been chief correspondent for United Press International in Moscow, a man who had experience with American intelligence and was also endowed with a good television presence; the man's name was Walter Cronkite. He soon worked his way onto the network staff.

"Paley sold the remaining WTOP stock to Phil in 1953, a year before Wayne Coy died, giving the Washington Post company complete control over the CBS radio and television outlets in Washington, which it retained until required by law to sell the television station in 1977. The Post men continued to see Paley and Cronkite every Christmas at a dinner given by Allen Dulles at a private club called the Alibi. The club is in an old, dark, red brick townhouse in the middle of downtown Washington, the only house on a block of office buildings. It bears a simple brass plaque and brass doorknob; membership is limited to men in or close to intelligence and is by invitation only." (pp. 175-176)

*Davis on MOCKINGBIRD: "Wisner began wide-scale recruitment of foreign students and infiltration of labor unions. But he wanted something more, a way not only to subvert and disrupt, but to give foreign peoples a sense of America, to ‘alter their perceptions' against Communism without violence; and the publisher Philip Graham helped him conceive of a way to use journalists for that objective. Intelligence agencies had used journalists before, but the practice had remained haphazard. This, however, was to be a formal program, structured and run according to high-level policy. The program had the code name Operation MOCKINGBIRD."(p. 129)

Believe me, it's only 'embarassing' because they were caught!

Walter Cronkite is calling C-B-S' report on President Bush's National Guard service "embarrassing."

Yeah, but Walter, what's really embarrassing is you allowing yourself to constantly be referred to as "the most trusted man in America" and knowing that in reality you're a blatant, pathetic, liberal liar masquerading as a credible news reporter.

That's what's embarrassing...or at least it should be.