CBS vs. FOX
 

On one had the liberal media says we need to stop re-fighting Vietnam..but then 60 minutes decide to do a special on Bush's war record..which seems to be "made up"... By the way..CBS has yet to describe the discrepancies


What say you? ;)
Apologies if this is posted already!


Bush Piloted Guard Trainers Before He Quit

Friday, September 10, 2004



WASHINGTON — George W. Bush (search) began flying a two-seat training jet more frequently and twice required multiple attempts to land a one-seat fighter in the weeks just before he quit flying for the Texas Air National Guard (search) in 1972, his pilot logs show.

The logs show Bush flew nine times in T-33 trainers in February and March 1972, including eight times in one week and four of those only as a co-pilot. Bush, then a first lieutenant, flew in T-33s only twice in the previous six months and three times in the year ending July 31, 1971.

The records also show Bush required two passes to land an F-102A fighter on March 12 and April 10, 1972. His last flight as an Air National Guard pilot was on April 16.

Meanwhile, questions were raised Thursday about the authenticity of newly unearthed memos purporting to have been written by one of Bush's commanders in 1972 and 1973. The memos, which were publicized by CBS News on its "60 Minutes" program, say Bush ignored a direct order from a superior officer and lost his status as a Guard pilot because he failed to meet military performance standards and undergo a required physical exam.

The network defended the memos, saying its experts who examined the memos concluded they were authentic documents produced by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian (search).

But Killian's son, one of Killian's fellow officers and an independent document examiner questioned the memos Gary Killian, who served in the Guard with his father and retired as a captain in 1991, said he doubted his father would have written an unsigned memo which said there was pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's performance review.

"It just wouldn't happen," he said. "No officer in his right mind would write a memo like that."

The personnel chief in Killian's unit at the time also said he believes the documents are fake.

"They looked to me like forgeries," said Rufus Martin. "I don't think Killian would do that, and I knew him for 17 years." Killian died in 1984.

Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software. Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript — a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" — as evidence indicating forgery.

Microsoft Word automatically inserts superscripts in the same style as the two on the memos obtained by CBS, she said.

"I'm virtually certain these were computer generated," Lines said after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.

The Defense Department released Bush's pilot logs this week under pressure from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Associated Press. The logs do not explain why Bush was flying T-33s or why he twice needed multiple approaches to make landings.

White House spokesman Trent Duffy said Thursday said he had no information on the reasons behind the multiple-approach landings or the surge in training-jet flights.

"He did his training and was honorably discharged," Duffy said.

Read rest here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,131961,00.html

Wow.

It shows you what lengths that people will go to in order to discredit him. As I said before, the truth has become unimportant in the eyes of too many.

CBS needs to apologize for this. Even if they didn't create it, they certainly bought into the forgery without considering the obvious -- if it is too juicy to be true, it probably is.

And as for the people that forged it.

How lazy can you get? Could you not go somewhere and borrow an electric typewriter?

Exactly. But I doubt CBS will apologize. The liberal media is throwing all they can at GWB...but it aint sticking... they really don't know what to do what themselves....neither does the John Kerry campaign thats in disarray.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a CBS apology. If they did make the mistake, it's a careless one at best.

Wow.

You really believe it was careless? C'mon.. I know you don't really believe that.:rolleyes: :mad:

I'd have to say that it was careless. I don't think the liberal media has any kind of planned agenda. It's just that their own personal opininos and prejudices come through in their reporting -- especially on what they choose to report on.

But do I think there's some kind of vast left-wing conspiracy? Not at all.

Democrats are liars it seems.

Not only that but they're 2 faced. They got upset when Kerry's service was questioned, so what do they do? They create fake documents about Bush's service and insult the thousands of men and women who served honorably in the National Guard.

-Rudey

This isn't even the most hypocritical thing that the Dems have done. These are the same people that supported Bill Clinton in '92 and '96. The same man that burned his draft card and REALLY dodged the draft.

They are really so two faced in this that it's unbelievable.

Deptartment of Defense at it's best. Next time they should double-check their forgeries before they release them.

I think carelessness played a part in it, yes. Do I think that makes it any more excusable? Not at all. I still think it's a big mistake to make.

It's true; Democrats do lie!

-Rudey

I checked the 60 minutes website. Apparently, they're standing behind this story.

Exactly! I was just telling my coworkers at lunch today that the Democrats should not care what Bush did or didn't do. Skipping out all together didn't cost Bill Clinton the presidency.

Apparently, the Democratic party has flip flopped.

OK. Reality time.

If it isn't true, and that still is "if" until someone proves otherwise, you can bet that is was a mistake on CBS's part whether careless or not.

I've said this before, and I can't emphasize it enough, CBS owns TV stations which make a lot of money. Those TV stations are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (which is run by Colin Powell's son Michael).

There is NO WAY they would jeopardize those TV stations licenses by fabricating a story like this.

If the story is proven to be wrong, you can bet they will appologize.

And Republicans don't lie? lol

The topic is Democrats lying ;)

-Rudey
--You know if you boys weren't so ruthless with the attack machine on GC, I think I'd probably relax a little myself

So far, according to the 60 minutes website, they haven't backed down from this.

So it's one of those "Our experts vs. their experts" situations.

You've got to assume that to go that far out on a limb, they're pretty sure of their sources. Can you imagine how tough it would be to get this past the legal department? If this is a hoax, someone has done a damn good job of setting it up.

just a friendly reminder from your resident iconlast
 

FOX is also same network that brought you Married dot dot dot with children and Temptation Island etc. Are they really conservative? Nope. They're just cashing in on advertising revinues.

I so agree! Did Clinton recently tell Kerry to stop bashing Bush over this and start campaining on the issues?

Re: just a friendly reminder from your resident iconlast
 

OP,

You've fallen into a common trap here.

With the exception of common ownership (Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., a global media conglomerate), there is really no connection between Fox NewsChannel and the Fox Television Network. The differences are huge.

Fox NewsChannel is a full time CABLE news channel, headquartered in New York. Fox TV network consists of ON AIR TV stations -- some of which are owned by Fox (called owned and operated stations or O&O's in the broadcast business), but most owned by other people/groups and only affilliated with Fox. It is headquartered in Los Angeles. You will notice that most Fox O&O's and on air affilliates may do a local newscast -- but don't have a national show like NBC Nightly News, etc.

All of the major networks consist of a few O&O's and many more affilliated stations.

The Fox Television Network is purely entertainment driven.

There are also other divisions including Fox Sports and the regional Fox Sports Channel regional cable networks.

It's confusing, but as I said above, there is common ownership, but they are run as totally separate entities.

CBS says their experts say its real.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in641481.shtml

Fox's say its not. Time to get some independant group from out side the US to be the judge.

from mediawatch.org
 

1. Dan Rather's Defense, Memos "Could" Be Authentic, Grows Lamer
Dan Rather's second effort Monday night to defend the authenticity of the memos supposedly about President Bush's National Guard record was even lamer that his first attempt on Friday night, though after having denigrated his critics on Friday as "partisan political operatives," on Monday's CBS Evening News he at least conceded that "some" of the questions about the documents "come from people who are not active political partisans." Rather began his defense by highlighting a shot at Bush from a Kerry operative at a DNC press conference and ended by recounting how "CBS News asked the White House today to give direct answers to a number of questions." Of course, CBS News has so far refused to pose any such direct questions to John Kerry or provide any "direct answers" as to the source or agenda of whoever gave them the supposed memos. Rather provided a low standard of proof as he relayed how document analysts "strongly insist" that the documents "could have been created in the '70s." Amongst his defenses, that overwriting MS Word's automatic superscripting is cumbersome, as if a forger wouldn't make the effort!

2. Olbermann Lays Out Right-Wing Conspiracy Behind Faked Memos
MSNBC's Keith Olbermann sees a grand conspiracy in "how the documents came to be so quickly and thoroughly refuted on a right-wing Web site not two hours after they were first revealed on CBS." Picking up on how a FreeRepublic.com poster, "Buckhead," had first suggested a 1970s typewriter could not have produced the memo showcased by 60 Minutes, on Monday's Countdown Olbermann ran through the blogger's resume and concluded, ever so ominously: "So the Killian documents come out and are almost immediately questioned by a lawyer with Republican ties and are distributed to other news organizations without comment by the White House and they suddenly have one of their principal endorsers retract his endorsement. How many rats do you smell?"

3. Killian Colleague Calls Memos "Absurd," Experts Doubt Signature
FNC on Monday morning brought aboard retired Colonel Earl Lively, who ran the Texas Air National Guard operations in Austin during George W. Bush's tenure, and he declared that the memos from his former colleague, Jerry Killian, put forward by CBS News are "absolutely absurd. Anybody that knew anything about the Guard in that period can just read those memos and see that they are completely unrealistic." He also explained how Bush did not jump to the front of a long waiting list. Later in the day, FNC's Special Report with Brit Hume highlighted two document experts who doubted the authenticity of Jerry Killian's signature on the CBS memos as Jim Angle pointed out that CBS's handwriting expert, Marcel Matley, who validated the Killian signature, wrote in a professional journal a couple of years ago that signature's cannot be confirmed from photocopies, which is all CBS has.

4. CBS Expert Denies Authenticating, WPost: Likely Word Processor
In what should be a devastating blow to CBS News and Dan Rather, the Washington Post's Michael Dobbs and Howard Kurtz reported on Tuesday that "the lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush's former squadron commander in the National Guard," Marcel Matley, "said yesterday that he examined only the late officer's signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves." On Friday's CBS Evening News, Dan Rather had declared: "Document and handwriting examiner Marcel Matley analyzed the documents for CBS News. He says he believes they are real." The Post duo concluded that an analysis "shows that half a dozen Killian memos released earlier by the military were written with a standard typewriter using different formatting techniques from those characteristic of computer-generated documents. CBS's Killian memos bear numerous signs that are more consistent with modern-day word-processing programs, particularly Microsoft Word."


(the above are summaries, the full text of these 4 articles can be found at the link below)

http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberal...20040914.asp#1

And has a lot of time on their hands... :rolleyes:

*sigh* Someone please remind me what old military records have to do with upcoming elections and current issues?

I find all of this rediculous.

We're not sure, but Kerry thinks his 4 months of service as well as any lies he can spread about Bush right now since he hired Carville have something to do with the upcoming election and current issues.

-Rudey

Exactly. Lets not forget how Kerry started the Dem Nat'l Convention...."This is John Kerry reporting for duty" **while saluting** :rolleyes:

Not to mention the way he showed all his old Vietnam videos in that Spielberg produced movie.

Re: CBS vs. FOX
 

It's not unusual for pilots to maintain currency flying different aircraft. The T-33 (also known as the T-Bird) was quite a common trainer aircraft at the time, especially in Guard units. Pilots must fly a minimum of five hours a month to continue receiving flight pay.

As for the multiple approaches... it was probably for maintaining instrument proficiency, not because of his piloting skill. Had his skills come into question, they woulda yanked his wings faster than anything.

NOT HOW THEY TEACH IT IN LAW SCHOOL:
 

From The New Republic:

Wow, the second-to-last graf of this New York Times piece on the apparently forged CBS/National Guard documents is truly bizarre:
Asked what role Mr. [Bill] Burkett [a suspected source for the CBS story] had in raising questions about Mr. Bush's military service, [Burkett's lawyer] Mr. [David] Van Os said: "If, hypothetically, Bill Burkett or anyone else, any other individual, had prepared or had typed on a word processor as some of the journalists are presuming, without much evidence, if someone in the year 2004 had prepared on a word processor replicas of documents that they believed had existed in 1972 or 1973--which Bill Burkett has absolutely not done"--then, he continued, "what difference would it make?"

Do lawyers for innocent people normally lay out hypotheticals in which their client commits the offense they're accused of, only to dismiss the offense as inconsequential? Your honor, let's suppose, hypothetically, that my client, or anyone else, had sold crack to elementary school children--which my client absolutely has not done--then what difference would it make? For that matter, do lawyers for guilty people do this? Whose side is this guy on?

-Rudey

Q. "What do you call CBS News after it loses all its credibility?"
A. "Fox News."

- JAY LENO, on Wednesday's 'Tonight Show'

Oh man that was a good one.

Very interesting to see how THIS thread evolved.

Of course, we are still waiting for the CBS apology, following quickly on the heels of Rather's apology and subsequent retirement speech. One can always hope...

Jobbed by a nut case who sees black helicopters and the Masons behind every door, no doubt.
No questions asked by a network and a news reader who desperately wanted it to be true in order to cause harm to Dub's campaign.

And interestingly, represented by a BIG TIME Texas Democratic Party operative who ran to Florida in 2000 to "assist" with the recount. A current candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, and someone who will come under intense scrutiny by the Republican powers that be who RUN that state. Any consequences will be richly deserved.

I say they fire Dan Rather first.


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/po...rint&position=

September 20, 2004
CBS Admits It Was Misled by Ex-Officer on Bush Documents
By JIM RUTENBERG
and MARK J. PRENDERGAST

CBS News acknowledged today that a former National Guard officer from Texas had "deliberately misled" it in its inquiry into President Bush's National Guard service by providing it with "a false account" of the origins of documents used to reinforce questions raised about Mr. Bush's service three decades ago.

"Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report," the president of CBS News, Andrew Heyward, said in a statement issued by the network. "We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret."

"Nothing is more important to us than our credibility and keeping faith with the millions of people who count on us for fair, accurate, reliable, and independent reporting," Mr. Heyward continued. "We will continue to work tirelessly to be worthy of that trust."

The network said the former Army National Guard officer, Bill Burkett, had "acknowledged that he provided the now-disputed documents" and that he "admits he deliberately misled the CBS News producer working on the report, giving her a false account of the documents' origins to protect a promise of confidentiality to the actual source."

"Burkett originally said he obtained the documents from another former Guardsman," the CBS statement said. "Now he says he got them from a different source whose connection to the documents and identity CBS News has been unable to verify to this point."

A new interview with Mr. Burkett will be shown tonight on the "CBS Evening News," the network said.

CBS also announced that it was "commissioning an independent review of the process by which the report was prepared and broadcast," adding that "their findings will be made public."

In a separate statement today, Dan Rather, the CBS anchor who presented the original report on "60 Minutes" on Sept. 8, said that "we made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry,"

The statements ended days of expressions of confidence in the documents' authenticity by the network and Mr. Rather.

Signs of serious misgivings within CBS appeared on Sunday, when network officials, who asked not to be identified, said the network had been deceived about the documents' origins and had begun intensive reporting on where they came from. Executives also said that they were coming to the conclusion that the report was too flawed to have gone on the air.

Officials met Sunday night with Mr. Rather to go over the information it had collected about the documents one last time before making a final decision.

His original report had relied in large part on four memorandums seeming to be from the personal file of Mr. Bush's Air National Guard squadron commander, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, who died 20 years ago. The memos, dated from the early 1970's, said that Colonel Killian was under pressure to "sugar coat" the record of the young Lieutenant Bush and that the officer had disobeyed a direct order to take a physical.

Mr. Rather and others at the network were said to still believe on Sunday night that the sentiment in the memos accurately reflected Mr. Killian's feelings.

The developments on Sunday and today marked a dramatic turn for CBS News, which for a week stood steadfastly by its Sept. 8 report as various document experts asserted that the typeface of the memos could have been produced only by a modern-day word processor, not Vietnam War-era typewriters.

The seemingly unflappable confidence of Mr. Rather and top news division officials in the documents allayed fears within the network and created doubt among some in the news media at large that those specialists were correct. CBS News officials had said they had reason to be certain that the documents indeed had come from the personal file of Colonel Killian.

Sandy Genelius, a network spokeswoman, said last week, "We are confident about the chain of custody; we're confident in how we secured the documents."

But CBS executives decided on Sunday that they would most likely have to declare that they had been misled about the records' origin after Mr. Rather and a top network executive, Betsy West, met in Texas with Mr. Burkett, who had helped the news division obtain the memos.

Mr. Rather interviewed Mr. Burkett on camera this weekend, and CBS said today that his answers to Mr. Rather's questions had led officials to conclude that their initial confidence that the memos had come from Mr. Killian's own files was not warranted. These people indicated that Mr. Burkett had previously led the producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, to have the utmost confidence in the material.

In an e-mail message on Sunday, Mr. Burkett declined to answer any questions about the documents posed by The New York Times.

On Sunday, Emily J. Will, a document specialist who inspected the records for CBS News and said last week that she had raised concerns about their authenticity with CBS News producers, confirmed a report in Newsweek that a producer had told her that the source of the documents said they had been obtained anonymously and through the mail.

In an interview on Sunday night she declined to name the producer who told her this, but said the producer was in a position to know. CBS News officials have disputed her contention that she warned the network the night before the initial `60 Minutes" report that it would face questions from documents experts.

In the coming days, CBS News officials plan to focus on how the network moved ahead with the report when there were warning signs that the memorandums were not genuine.

Ms. Will is one of two documents experts consulted by the network who said they raised doubts about the material before the segment was broadcast. Another expert, Marcel B. Matley, said in interviews that he had vouched only for Colonel Killian's signatures on the records and not the authenticity of the records themselves. Mr. Matley said he could not rule out that the signatures had been cut and pasted from official records pertaining to Colonel Killian.

In examining where the network had gone wrong, officials at CBS News turning their attention to Ms. Mapes, one of their most respected producers, who was riding particularly high this year after breaking news about the Abu Ghraib prison scandal for the network.

In a telephone interview this weekend, Josh Howard, the executive producer of the "60 Minutes" Wednesday edition, said that he did not initially know who was Ms. Mapes' primary source for the documents but that he did not see any reason to doubt it. He said he believed Ms. Mapes and her team had appropriately answered all questions about the documents' authenticity and, he noted, no one seemed to be casting doubt upon the essential thrust of the report.

"The editorial story line was still intact, and still is, to this day," he said, "and the reporting that was done in it was by a person who has turned in decades of flawless reporting with no challenge to her credibility."

He added, "We in management had no sense that the producing team wasn't completely comfortable with the results of the document analysis."

Ms. Mapes has not responded to requests for comment.

Mr. Howard also said in the interview that the White House did not dispute the veracity of the documents when it was presented to them on the morning of the report. That reaction, he said, was "the icing on the cake" of the other reporting the network was conducting on the documents. White House officials have said they saw no reason to challenge documents being presented by a credible news organization.

Several people familiar with the situation said they were girding for a particularly tough week for Mr. Rather and the news division should the network announce its new doubts.

One person close to the situation said the critical question would be, "Where was everybody's judgment on that last day?"

-Rudey

If Fox didn't fire Geraldo for giving away troop positions that could have actually killed people I doubt CBS would fire Rather about the memo thing.

That retard should not have been fired to begin with after his old talk show. Regardless I think it's something that happened to a lot of anchors from different networks and I don't think any troop positions were given away - I thought it was a danger that they realized afterwards, no?

-Rudey

Do you mean the retard should have been fired after his old talk show?

He drew in the sand where they army group he was traveling with was going next. Once the army saw that they kicked him out of the country. I can't remember when exactly they realized it but I know it was within a day.

I thought that he was "de-inbedded" because he did give his location -- and what unit he was with. Not 100% sure, though.

As for firing Rather, I suppose it could come to that, but the real reporting errors were aparantely made by Mary Mapes. Network producers have a huge amount of clout, particularly in long form reports such as this. My guess is that she won't survive.

Maybe there's room for her at FOX.

(OK, cheap shot -- I admit it. But it was fun.)

Oh so all Rather does is read what's put in front of him? That's it huh? No responsibility other than being a pretty face and charming voice?

-Rudey