[jim35]

Oh, Joy, sweet rapture, at last some of the evil ones are taking a fall, hoist upon their own petard! Sweet, sweet justice. I am filled, my cup runneth over. Thank you, God. What's the frequency, Kenneth? It's Internet 2004 on your computer dial, radio FREEP. Eat that, LIB PROPOGANDA MACHINE!!!

[Travis McGee]

Rather can't brush off a torpedo from Safire. He has to answer it, or be snickered at for the rest of his life as a fool who bought the world's clumsiest forgeries, and stuck with them.

[NonValueAdded]

The L.A. Times also checked out a handwriting analyst, Marcel Matley (of Vincent Foster suicide-note fame), who CBS had claimed vouched for the authenticity of four memos. It turns out he vouches for only one signature, and no scribbled initials, and has no opinion about the typography of any of the supposed memos.

I wonder if Matley knows the signature he vouched for was on a photocopy and not an original. Maybe that is why C^BS doesn't want him talking to the media. BTW, would an intersting side effect of Fontgate be to reopen the Foster case? Woo hoo!

[An.American.Expatriate]

When questioned concerning CBS's bias, Rather responded, "Until someone shows me definitive proof that they are not , I don't see any reason to carry on a conversation with the professional rumor mill."

Uh, Dan?? Normally it is the "accuser" who must validate the authenticity of the charges made, and, if I remember the journalistic ethics I was taught many years ago correctly, it is the journalist who is repsonsible for verifying the accuracy of his story.

Of course, I realize that you are not a journalist (although you do portray one on television). I guess high paid teleprompter reader's are exempt from this - after all, you're just following orders right??

[BunnySlippers]

The Washington Post reported Dan Rather's response to questions about the documents' authenticity: "Until someone shows me definitive proof that they are not, I don't see any reason to carry on a conversation with the professional rumor mill" and questioned the critics' "motivation."

Rather apparently thinks that the douments are real "until someone shows me definitive proof that they are not" ... that's not the way for a real newsman to approach the burden of proof. Furthermore, one would be well to question his "motivation".

[Dane]

The same article has made the German magazine, Der Spiegel.

Link

[GailA]

All efforts has been focused on the type/font and some on the language and dates. But no focus has been put on the fact these are photo copies which can NOT be subjected to scientific testing such as checking rag content of the paper, ink components, carbon dating, measuring paper size, and putting it under a microscope to see if they were produced by a computer printer which would spray/float the ink on the surface of the paper vs the typewriter keystriking the paper and embeding the ink into the paper.

A hunt and peck typist would have a different patter of typing than a proficient typist would produce.

Without 'REAL' scientific testing cBS and 60 mins have diddly squat in evidence!

No defense lawyer worth his salt would let a prosecutor get away with such shoddy evidence as danny boy has presented in a court of law.

[handy]

How ironic. NYT opinion columnist reports the news since he knows the "reporters" won't do it.

[kellynla]

Thanx for posting.
It would be the only way I would get to read it since I don't even bother to go to the NYT website anymore...

But Safire after revealing all the MSM who contradicts Dan Blather appears to be trying to make excuses for the bias at "See B.S."...

Guess what Safire...that dog won' hunt..
Blather & company just got "punked"...
and now they're the laughing stock of the world!

[Biblebelter]

This is the article that Rather cannot run from. It is good summary of the problems with the forgeries. It appears in the NYT. It is written by someone who probably has some affection for Rather unlike me and everyone else on this forum.

[xzins]

At the end of this piece, Safire tries to pull Rather's chestnuts from the fire. Pretty much says, "I owe him one 'cause he did me a favor once."

If Rather is complicit, Safire, that is the more important issue.