Bush was given an honorable discharge from the National Guard. He fulfilled
his enlistment.
What is your problem Jonathan? judyt
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 12:51:27 -0400 "Hughes Jonathan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
As a follow-up, the information contained in the memos is true. Note how the Bush administration has not denied it. The memos themselves are forged. Can you see the difference?Jonathan
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Judith H Taylor
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 12:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dan Rather
CBS has apologized and Rather is still sticking to his guns, there is something wrong with this picture but not much pointin arguing about it since noone knows what Rather knew or how/when he knew it. It's just sad that he chooses to hold to thelie when his story has been exposed already. As for the WMD issue. The jury is still out on that one It's good not to be partof other men's sin.judytOn Wed, 22 Sep 2004 11:46:38 -0400 "Hughes Jonathan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:Jonathan in blue.In a message dated 9/22/2004 5:30:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:24 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dan RatherDan Rather, CBS News Anchor
1) given documents he thought were true
no evidence for this whatsoever
Other than his own word. You may dislike Rather (and I am probably in that crowd) but there is no reason to think that he is stupid. To put out documents that he knew were false just to slander a president is highly unlike who Rather has shown himself to be. Once again, he is not stupid.2) failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
within 3 hours of the release of these "documents," they were fully exposed as fake -- proving that almost no investigation was necessary. All other news agencies (NBC, Time for example) tuned done the initial offering out of hand.
They were not "fully exposed as fake" within 3 hours. Web logs (called blogs) called their authenticity into question within 3 hours. The proof was still being worked on. As we all know the investigation has to be into why the fact-checking was not done. Rather does the interviews and reads copy. Don't confuse him with being the person who did the initial investigation.3) reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
the only news anchor to do so
Aye but not the only news agency/paper. I believe it was first done in the Boston Globe. It spread on the internet like wildfire. Every news agency talked about it.4) when confronted with the facts, apologized and launched an investigation
two weeks later and after being under intense pressur to do so .. his initial response was one of defiance.
His initial response was that he thought they were true. Interestingly enough the Bush administration has not denied the actual charges. The people who came forward to say that the documents were forged also came forward to say that the sentiment and the information behind the documents was true. It matters not one whit that the documents were forged if the facts contained in them are true which certainly seems to be the case. Contrast this with the Swift Boat crowd. Their documents and their facts were both false.5) number of Americans dead: 0
Well, one out of six isn't bad (?)6) should be fired as CBS News Anchor
Since I stopped watching Blather after his kiss up interview with Saddam, I don't really care. Network news has lost nearly 70% of its audience since the early 1980's.
Except for Fox :)
It can be argued that Larry Flint's filth has caused "0" deaths -- but Flint's standard of worth is not the war issue. Understand that I am not arguing for the war in Iraq. It is just that the implied standard of judgment should not be whether or not someone has died.
The standard of judgment here is consequences. Rather's consequences for using forged documents are trifling. Bush's are enormous. At least one apologized.
a brother
John
This e-mail and any attachments contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. Thank you for your cooperation in connection with the above.
Ce courriel ainsi que tous les documents s’y rattachant contiennent de l’information confidentielle et privilégiée. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire visé, s.v.p. en informer immédiatement son expéditeur par retour de courriel, effacer le message et détruire toute copie (électronique ou autre). Toute diffusion ou utilisation de cette information par une personne autre que le destinataire visé est interdite et peut être illégale. Merci de votre coopération relativement au message susmentionné.
