Naw, ya don't say?! Say it ain't so!
BRRAAWWWWWAHAHAHAHAHAH THAT'S A GOOD ONE!
Oh really, then please do me the favor of pointing out stories you culled from other media outlets that were supportive of the SwiftBoat Vets. The sanctimony of these newspapers really brings on the gag reflex.
Where is the apology??? I did not find "we are sorry President Bush".
"The Globe had no reason at that point to doubt the network's judgment. And newspapers routinely report important news generated by other media outlets as a way of keeping readers informed."
(Our source was a biased one. Why would we doubt them?)
I suspect that "some" actually translates to "thousands upon thousands".
Liberal appology.
Collapse? If they had had anyone who had ever been in the military read the letters they would have known instantly that there was no credibility to collapse.
Vigilance isn't the word for smear. It smeared the President plenty. It produced Michael Kranish, who like AP writers, had a conflict of interest in reporting on Kerry.
The newspaper wishes to maintain the illusion that it is unbiased by behaving in a fashion which provides evidence of its own leftwing, pro-Kerry bias. And they think people won't notice.
One of these fine days, the subscription numbers can't be fudged any longer. I think that goes for the NY Times, for the LA Times, and assorted regional leftie rags that are at odds with the views of the local population.
When they fold, it will seem of no importance. People will wonder, in hindsight, how such unprofessional reporting had been thought to sway so much opinion.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Gee, I wonder why?
These liberal Democrat scumbags answer to the scumbags down at the NY Times. Just imagine if this was a hoax perpetrated against THEIR candidate, John Kerry? Man, they would have been on it like Oprah on a ham. Bias? What bias? HAHAhahahaaaa....!
Thank God that Dan Rather and CBS News have hastened the rapid descent of the "mainstream" liberal news media down the toilet. I just wish that turd would hurry up and flush.
The Boston Globe is one of the most biased, anti-American papers in the country. They know a thing or two about forgery. Consider this from the Boston Herald:
Globe caught with pants down: Paper duped into running porn photos
By Herald staff
Thursday, May 13, 2004
The Boston Globe was reeling yesterday after graphic photos of alleged sexual abuse of Iraqi women by U.S. soldiers turned out to be staged shots from a hardcore porn Web site.
``This photo should not have appeared in the Globe,'' editor Martin Baron said in a statement. ``First, images portrayed in the photo were overly graphic. Second, as the story clearly pointed out, those images were never authenticated as photos of prisoner abuse. There was a lapse in judgment and procedures, and we apologize for it.''
The ``lapse'' came after City Councilor Chuck Turner and perennial pot-stirrer Sadiki Kambon called a press conference in the wake of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal to display more purported abuse photos. Turner claimed they came from ``a very legitimate person'' but admitted they hadn't been authenticated. Kambon said he got them from a representative of the Nation of Islam. Neither Turner nor Kambon returned calls.
But yesterday, WorldNetDaily.com reported the pictures - which show hard-core sex acts and genitalia - came from a pornographic site.
The Globe ran a picture of Turner and Kambon displaying the images. In a large shot in the paper's early editions, pornographic details are clearly visible. In later editions, the photograph was reduced, making the images slightly more obscure. A number of news outlets - including the Herald and The Associated Press - attended the conference but did not run a story after determining the photos were highly suspicious.
The issue reportedly was the subject of much Globe newsroom debate. According to WorldNetDaily, Globe reporter Donovan Slack did not approve of the photos being published but they were OK'd by ``three Boston Globe editors.''
Her story did note the pictures ``bear no characteristics that would prove the men are US soldiers or that the women are Iraqis.''
Slack told the Herald she had ``no comment,'' then hung up. But she is quoted on the Web site saying she was ``surprised'' the Globe decided to run the story.
``It's insane,'' Slack said. ``Can you imagine getting this with your cup of coffee in the morning? Somehow it got through all our checks. Our publisher's not having a very good day today.''
Later she quips, ``I'll be working at Penthouse soon!'' The president of the Globe's parent New York Times reportedly is ``furious.''
http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=27679
bttt
They didn't, of course, because Dan Rather's story dovetailed so neatly with their own view of reality. They would be no more inclined to question such a story than breaking news of the sun rising in the east.
...not that they're *GASP!* biased, or anything of the sort!
The WaPost pulled the strip that week as well. McGruder can say all sorts of vile things about Bush and Rice et al, and it's just A-OK with these papers. But if he pokes fun at black culture, they're appalled, and won't run the cartoons.
I do not agree with readers who say the Globe should have held off writing about the CBS broadcast until it made its own verification. The Globe had no reason at that point to doubt the network's judgment"
Actually, the Globe reported the Story on page A1 on Sept.8th--BEFORE the CBS 60 Minutes report. She's lying!
( Boston Globe Archives, 2004-09-10 )
THE GLOBE SPOTLIGHT TEAM HAS SCORED ANOTHER BULL'S-EYE WITH ITS REPORT ON GEORGE W. BUSH'S VIOLATION OF HIS CONTRACT WITH THE GOVERNMENT FOR SERVICE IN THE AIR NATIONAL GUARD, AND HIS STAFF'S SUBSEQUENT EGREGIOUS DENIAL AND MISREPRESENTATION OF THE FACTS (PAGE A1, SEPT. 8).
1.What did the Spotlight team know--and when did they know it?
2.Who gave them the information?
3.Why did the Boston Globe rely on the same expert as the NYT, Colonel Gerald Lechliter (ret.), as the source for an analysis of the Air National Guard service record? Who is Col. Lechliter? Did he contact the Globe? Shouldn't his background be a matter of public record under the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics?
Wasn't this a case of the Kerry campaign coordinating an attack with the NYT, Globe and CBS on Bush's Air National Guard Service on the same day?
" The Globe had no reason at that point to doubt the network's judgment. "
What about at this point? LOL
This is not an apoloy at all!
What is not shown is the opening paragraph of the article where the writer REPEATS THE UNPROVEN ACCUSATIONS AGAINST BUSH.