Posted on 01/10/2005 2:16:16 PM PST by swilhelm73
Of course there was no political bias. Just because CBS spent five years trying to find some evidence that Bush may have missed some guard meetings, but wouldn't even ask Kerry to release all his documents. Who could suggest that there was political bias?
I find that they could not say for certain the documents were fake to be laughable. The amount of evidence against the documents is enough to even convince to OJ jury.
The fact that Dan Rather was not fired is actually an insult. They are basically saying Rather is just a dumb TV anchor who reads the story and not a journalist.
Good post. Thanks.
Dan rather has been holding a grudge against Bush since the 1970's. You can't tell me there was nothing but animosity in the decision to get Bush with that completely untrue and forged CBS journalist hit job.
I cannot imagine that within all of this there could not be the fundamentals for a shareholders lawsuit.....
Pres. of CBS should have been fired along with Rather and Mapes. There then should have been a very public apology. Because none of this happened, the network has lost what credibility it had, it's losing viewers, revenue, and employees' (the little guy), jobs will be cut. But Rather and the bigwigs will slide out from under because they live in rarified PC land and as usual, it's the guy at the bottom who gets kicked in the teeth.
All this and the sole motivation was to be the first to get the story out ? Cut me a break.
Of course it wasn't politically motivated. Everyone hates Bush, don't they ?
43 years at SeeBS and Rather now has a legacy. And ain't it great? Forever known, not for 43 years in the news but for this scandal. YES!
Yep. Sweet, isn't it? Here's hoping the Killian family has some form of legal claim in the memory of their father. Confidential $$ settlement and public apology from Rather and CBS comes to mind. Just a little more for the legacy...
Another example of the power of Okham's Razor:
Ockham's Razor (also Occam's Razor or any of several other spellings), is a principle attributed to the 14th century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham that forms the basis of methodological reductionism, also called the principle of parsimony.
In its simplest form, Ockham's Razor states that one should not make more assumptions than needed. When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred. A charred tree on the ground could be caused by a landing alien ship or a lightning strike. According to Ockham's Razor, the lightning strike is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions.
The principle is most often expressed as Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, or "Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity", but this sentence was written by later authors and is not found in Ockham's surviving writings. William wrote, in Latin, Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, which translates literally into English as "Plurality should not be posited without necessity".
"Rather informed the Panel that he still believes the content of the documents is true because “the facts are right on the money,” and that no one had provided persuasive evidence that the documents were not authentic."
Unbelievable. He should have been fired. Andrew Heyward should be fired also.
CBS Radio News at 5:00 CST leads off with the mudslide and rains in California. It does get to Rathergate as the second story.
I think it's a whitewash. Rather and the executives who produced the story must have known that the documents were faked. They claimed that "experts" vouched for their authenticity, but in fact none of the experts did anything of the kind.
Ten days later and they were still lying and stonewalling.
I also fail to see why the investigators could not trace the provenance of the documents. Did they ASK Mary Mapes where she got them? Did they follow the back trail? Did they look at telephone records between CBS and the DNC? Considering the amount of time they took to produce this report, they surely could have done far more.
Does the word "forgery" appear anywhere in this long document?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.