Post by Joseph GwinnPost by DanPost by Joseph GwinnPost by Bob BrockPost by Gunner AschPost by DanPost by Gunner AschOn Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:15:56 -0700, Too_Many_Tools
Post by Too_Many_ToolsActually Rather got fired because CBS needed a scapegoat.
Rather is now suing them and will likely win.
The disaster that caused Rather's dismissal was caused by CBS GUTTING
their fact checking department and forcing Rather to present the story
before it was throughly verified...all management driven
Bullshit.
Like so many libtards..the moment a "fuck Bush" document appeared..he,
like so many of his ilk, jumped over the traces to stick it up Bush's
ass.
And like so many other Libtards...they were shown to have fucked the
pooch.
Only problem is...the other Libtards let em off the hook.
This time..being who it was, and what it was all about...CBS couldnt
let it slide. Their "crediblity" was at stake...and they were going to
get nailed to the wall.
So they did what they could to minimize the damage....ran one of the
ring leaders off.
Your platitudes and apologetics for typical Libtard malfeasense is so
fucking transparent and expected. After all...you are a Libtard and
like a dog returns to eat its own vomit...its in your nature.
Gunner
Runner, you really shouldn't show your ignorance so plainly. Not one
single half-truth, let alone actually true statement in your entire
post. That is good, even for you...
Dan
Again Commie Dan is in denial. True to his nature.
See Rather is now suing CBS?
Snicker
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/19/tv.ratherlawsuit.ap/index.html
My question all along was who the hoaxers were and what were their
motives. I've never seen this discussed let alone documented by a
credible source.
Whoever they were, Rather took the bait hook, line, and sinker. When
the story first broke, I rummaged around and got a photocopy of the
famous memo, and knew instantly that it had to be fake. How? Because
it was too pretty, clearly having been produced using MS Word, which did
not exist at the time.
I worked at the Federal Communications Commission in the early 1970s,
and all the typewriters then available were worn-out Underwoods left
over from WW2. There were a few expensive IBM Selectric typewriters
that could do something resembling that memo, but no ordinary National
Guard organization had any such thing, and even if they did, they would
not waste it on ordinary personnel memos.
And this is what puzzled me. Rather is old enough to remember the
typewriters of that day, in fact probably banged out many a story on
one, and should have known that something that typographically pretty
could not be what it claimed. My guess was that his desire to believe
exceeded his reporter's sixth sense.
Joe Gwinn
Well, the fact that the information contained in the memo has been
confirmed by other sources to be true certainly helped. Yet, after all
this time, the memo has not been demonstrated to be a forgery... and
people who remember the time better than you claim they are perfectly
reasonable for the time and place. Go figure.
Huh? CBS certainly thinks that the memo was a forgery, and an obvious
one at that.
Your evidence for this assertion is?
Post by Joseph GwinnIf they had not so concluded, they would not have fired
Rather and four or five others.
"Business Major" are you? Try Political Science 101, then trace
loyalties of CBS management, especially the top, then follow up with
actions taken in the year or so prior to, and subsequent to, Mr.
Rather's ejection. Get back to us, won't you!
Post by Joseph GwinnThey would have instead stood by Rather
and pressed the knife home into Bush.
"They who?
Post by Joseph GwinnBut they couldn't. It cannot have been pleasant.
Sure, I believe that. Where did you say that bridge was?
Post by Joseph GwinnNor does it matter if some things said in the memo later turn out to be
true, or not.
Not "later turn out to be true," were verified to be true long before
the episode was aired.
Post by Joseph GwinnThe issue is that the document is a forgery, and good
forgeries are usually a mixture of fact and fiction.
You have evidence for this assertion, that the document was a forgery?
It has been, how long, and none have come forth with any EVIDENCE that
the document was a forgery. Now much of what the Bush administration
has proffered for their little forays into international politics,
proven to be forgeries...
Slight difference in requirements between someone pedaling news to the
masses and a Resident selling the deaths of tens of thousands to
millions of people, don't you think?
Post by Joseph GwinnIf there were
documents proving *all* the assertions in the memo, why generate a
forged document? Just publish the other documents.
EXACTLY!
Post by Joseph GwinnI'd really like to know where the hoax came from, and why.
Joe Gwinn
The hoax came from a previously unknown blogger who, within minutes of
the broadcast, posted his "evidence" that the memo was a fake, then
taken up by the entire MSM without a bit of research within hours.
But I'll let you figure out where the hoax is.
Dan