Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/14/2004 9:43:29 PM PDT by charleston1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: charleston1

Good job. Welcome. Ignore the thread sheriffs unless they're mods.


60 posted on 09/14/2004 10:27:58 PM PDT by Jenya (Buy Unfit for Command. Donate to Swiftvets.com. It's your American duty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
I still fondly remember the Dan Rather that went to Afghanistan to report on the Mujadin.

Get off it charleston, you're adding nothing to the breaking news. I remind you that Buckhead and others who started the ball rolling on this scandal didn't have to post their groundbreaking remarks as vanities. Enough vanities!

As poster Steven W said here or elsewhere this evening these so called journalists have been doing this for years and only now got caught, and any informed person would know it. For your benefit I'll relate a well known and once reliably reported anecdote about your one time hero.

After the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in San Francisco, your hero flew to the City (as SF is known to its residents), stood in front of a pancaked freeway across the water in Oakland, dressed in military fatigues, one or two day shave (or unshaven make up) on his face and "reported" while people behind him were literally dying inside the rubble. Just off the camera, as reported Herb Caen, at the time a columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle, was parked your hero's black limo and through the open door of it were observed plates of fresh fruit, a bottle of french champagne and a bowl of caviar! What then was the complete unreported news? The complete, unreported (except by Caen in a local rag) news, the complete picture which you never saw on your screen, was of a millionaire television personality, dressed in a rented actor's costume, prancing for the camera in front of a scene of a great tragedy while being pampered and attended to. And that was likely the picture in Afghanistan, and that is with variations the picture of your idiot box news every day, your hero or any other pretty face. The camera chooses, the camera hides more than it shows, it's not news, it's show biz!

75 posted on 09/14/2004 10:46:11 PM PDT by Revolting cat! ("In the end, nothing explains anything!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

Looks like you've been vindicated!!


88 posted on 09/14/2004 11:14:06 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
I have posted with link back to this page HERE!
113 posted on 09/15/2004 12:19:23 AM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

I love it when freepers score! Anybody working at the old major media tonight? Send them the thread for a byline...


122 posted on 09/15/2004 1:30:40 AM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

Excellent score!

And your point is -very- relevant to mine... put your point together with mine, and the Smoking Gun evidence is -complete-.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1215403/posts


Qwinn


127 posted on 09/15/2004 2:56:35 AM PDT by Qwinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

This qualifies as BREAKING NEWS, IMHO.

And a heck of a lot more than that. If it can be shown that CBS shopped the authentication and rejected documents shown to be forgeries while airing documents with all the same flaws, then they can be shown to be acting with malice. This is the critical legal distinction when it comes to libel. This is the critical distinction that will remove their legal protection when they are investigated for fraud. If malice can be proven, they will have to reveal sources and tell the investigator where the documents came from.

This is HUGH.


130 posted on 09/15/2004 3:12:36 AM PDT by gridlock (BARTENDER: Why the long face? HORSE: Ha ha, old joke. BARTENDER: I was talking to Kerry!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

Here are 2 posts I put on another thread, which may fit into yours
_________________________
Post #1

Iwonder if Kerry thought the Swiftee's devestating blow would come during the weekend timed with the rally of Viet Nam Vets Against Kerry. That would explain dusting of the AWOL charges yet once again of the CBS 60 Minutes piece. Why would Dan Rather go public with a story filled with so many holes? Scum or not, he is not stupid.

Two things have bothered me since the CBS story broke wide open.

One report has the documents in the possession of the dems for at least 6 weeks. That was the time Kerry staked his whole future on his Swift Boat tour. I suspect they had those ready to go if Bush or someone from the RNC attacked Kerry's record as factually false.

But the President did not bite. He did what people like Kerry hate. By being gracious and praising Kerry's service, he denied Kerry an avenue of attack.

Mr Killian's son said that the producer from Dallas called him about 2 weeks ago asking if the family had these documents. She stated she heard they exsisted and was looking for them.

I can't help but think there is a signifigance between the 6 weeks and 2 weeks, but cannot figure it out.
_____________________
Post #2
I guess I am wondering how long CBS had the documents in their possession. For discussion's sake let's say the DNC "received" those documents at any point of time in the 6 week 2 week time frame. Let's say 4 weeks.

6 weeks ago DNC received memos
4 weeks ago gave them to CBS (my random date)
2 weeks ago the producer contacts the Gillian family looking for memos. She "heard the exsisted.

IF it is true the DNC had the docs & gave them to CBS--what would be the significance for the producer to contact the Gillian family?

Because they knew they were fake or because they were copies a firestorm would (and did break out).


[Maybe the DNC did not give the documents to CBS, but the possibility exsists of some form of collusion between Rather and Kerry as far as the story goes.]

So, if the above speculation is close to the truth, then this question begs an answer. Why would Dan Rather run with a story which had (at best) flimsy evidence to back it up?

Timing--If there is a connection between Kerry and Rather, memos aside, Kerry may have said (thru nuance or even directly) This story has to be out now. All of the sudden the AWOL story was being thrown around again. The new ad was in the can. Maybe they were saving it for October, but for some reason (dropping poll numbers or anticipated Swiftee surprise) they had to get it out now to stop the momentum which Bush has gained and Kerry has lost.


131 posted on 09/15/2004 3:33:46 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights (What part of SHALL PASS NO LAW do they not understand?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

I've said this before:

Dan Rather is steadfastly holding his ground because he is knowingly part of a conspiracy to influence the 2004 US Presidential election. Who he is working with is yet unknown, reasonable suspects would include Carville, Begala, McAuliffe, and others inside the kerry campaign.


132 posted on 09/15/2004 4:54:59 AM PDT by astounded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
HIGH QUALITY VIDEO HERE
http://www.dailyrecycler.com/blog/2004/09/hey-hey-hey-goodbye.html

nice job guys
134 posted on 09/15/2004 5:14:21 AM PDT by recycler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
Thurs. & Fri. National FReep CBS Days! A Call To ARMS! FRee Republic ^ | 9/14/04 | Clyde260
136 posted on 09/15/2004 5:38:27 AM PDT by clyde260 (Public Enemy #1: Network News!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

Thanks for your thread. I would have missed your analysis if it was bured in a thread of 300 replies.

I was unaware that there were 6 docs. As you say only 4 were presented on the 60 minutes show.

On Brit's show yesterday, he revealed the "credentials" of Marcel Matley. There are none. He has had no formal training in signature analysis. Apparantly he is self taught, beginning his career with the signature analyses of women, so he could discover different traits of women based on their signatures. Sort of like divining the future in a crystal ball, or palm reading. LOL


138 posted on 09/15/2004 6:07:13 AM PDT by baseballmom (You Know Where I Stand - GW Bush - 9/2/04 We're standing with you, Mr. President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1; Southack

This is the best personal post (vanity does not fit in this case, nothing vain about it) I've ever read on FR. Powerful. Thanks for your analysis.


141 posted on 09/15/2004 6:28:03 AM PDT by buzzyboop (no tags, no fuss)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

When news breaks, we fix it! -- CBS


142 posted on 09/15/2004 6:33:00 AM PDT by paulklenk (FOUR MORE WARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1; All
OKAY FREEPERS, SMILE WE ARE BEING WATCHED OVER AT LUCIANNE'S .......

For Rathergate Buffs (and face it, we're all consumed) A Freeper figures it out. Ignore thread, they yell at each other over there. http://www.lucianne.com/

143 posted on 09/15/2004 6:37:29 AM PDT by AmericanMade1776 ((John Kerry is now in full retreat))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
cut to the chase, charleston1! You should send this to Powerline as an email. They might miss it here. And while you're at it, send it to Brian Ross at ABC as well.
146 posted on 09/15/2004 7:07:56 AM PDT by YaYa123 (@Hiding In Plain View.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1

Too-many-threads-on-this-to-keep-up-with bump.


157 posted on 09/15/2004 11:06:52 AM PDT by tdadams (The only lies 'Unfit for Command' contains are the direct quotes of John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
Fine get. I knew of the difference between the four documents that CBS had posted up, versus the six documents that USA Today posted up. I had not realized until this thread that CBS had shown documents it did not admit that it had, to any of its would-be document examiners.

It just gets worse and worse. It's time to dump Bob Shiefer as a Presidential Debate moderator. It is time for the White House, Senate and House to yank the credentials of CBS until the forgeries are revealed and all those involved have been sacked.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "Time to Talk about the 2008 Election"

If you haven't already joined the anti-CFR effort, please click here.

160 posted on 09/15/2004 11:37:46 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Visit: www.ArmorforCongress.com please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
I still fondly remember the Dan Rather that went to Afghanistan to report on the Mujadin.

I still giggle when I remember another reporter at the time (Britt Hume, I think) referring to Rather as "Gunga Dan"...

164 posted on 09/15/2004 11:56:00 AM PDT by Snardius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: charleston1
Hey, charleston1, my favorite deity is linking to your research:

Allah is in the House , and he has added points you may want to read.

Good work!

166 posted on 09/15/2004 1:08:23 PM PDT by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson