A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dan Rather apologizes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 20th 04, 06:18 PM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dan Rather apologizes


Somewhat smarmy, but welcome nevertheless:

********************************
After extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence
in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them
journalistically," he said. "I find we have been misled on the key
question of how our source for the documents came into possession of
these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been
raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where -- if I
knew then what I know now -- I would not have gone ahead with the
story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the
documents in question."

*****************************

In the Washington Post, which has covered this story honestly from the
beginning:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Sep20.html

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
Expedition sailboat charters www.expeditionsail.com
  #3  
Old September 20th 04, 07:03 PM
Greasy Rider
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit
of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting
without fear or favoritism."


Favoritism? Nah, not the Clinton Broadcasting System.


  #4  
Old September 20th 04, 07:51 PM
Jack G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Guess they are claiming "faulty intelligence" for misleading them into a
"quagmire" from which there is no way out except to "replace the leader"
responsible for making the decision to "go to war" (against Bush).

Jack G.

"Greasy Rider" wrote in message
m...

"It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit
of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting
without fear or favoritism."


Favoritism? Nah, not the Clinton Broadcasting System.




  #5  
Old September 20th 04, 08:40 PM
Bob Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It was a wardrobe malfunction.


  #6  
Old September 20th 04, 09:51 PM
Greasy Rider
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bob Coe" wrote in message
news:flG3d.27364$ni.12445@okepread01...
It was a wardrobe malfunction.


LFMAO!


  #7  
Old September 20th 04, 11:20 PM
Harry Andreas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
wrote:

Somewhat smarmy, but welcome nevertheless:

********************************
After extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence
in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them
journalistically," he said. "I find we have been misled on the key
question of how our source for the documents came into possession of
these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been
raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where -- if I
knew then what I know now -- I would not have gone ahead with the
story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the
documents in question."

*****************************


Also:
"It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit
of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without
fear or favoritism.

Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in
our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully. "

No favoritism?
Fair?
Running a bash-the-candidate story 8 weeks before the election?
That's a new definition of fair to me.
Where is the bash Kerry story that should be there for balance?
This story's mere presence on a highly watched news show this
close to an election demonstrates favoritism.

I have questioned the credibility of television news, 60 Minutes in
particular and CBS in general ever since they ran the Audi unintended
acceleration stories back in the 80's. There have been many, many
instances of biased journalism from this crew since then.

This story bears an uncanny resemblance to NBC's rigged gas tank
explosions in 1992.

Dan Rather's rush to get this story into the news and smear Bush weeks
before the election speaks volumes about his politics and ethics.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur
  #8  
Old September 21st 04, 04:22 AM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Harry Andreas" wrote in message
...

snip cogent and accurate assessment


Dan Rather's rush to get this story into the news and smear Bush weeks
before the election speaks volumes about his politics and ethics.


Yep. It says the first is well left-of-center and the second
is...nonexistent. ISTR Danny Boy was also leading the pack when it came to
trying to trash the reputations of the SBVT after they had the temerity to
dare question Kerry's military experience using his own (therefore not even
a chance of any forgery or slander/libel being involved) past conflicting
accounts; his one-sided (or should I say left-sided) approach to the "news"
is a well established fact.

Brooks


--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur



  #9  
Old September 21st 04, 05:31 AM
Leadfoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Harry Andreas" wrote in message
...
In article ,
wrote:

Somewhat smarmy, but welcome nevertheless:

********************************
After extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence
in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them
journalistically," he said. "I find we have been misled on the key
question of how our source for the documents came into possession of
these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been
raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where -- if I
knew then what I know now -- I would not have gone ahead with the
story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the
documents in question."

*****************************


Also:
"It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit
of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting

without
fear or favoritism.

Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in
our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully. "

No favoritism?
Fair?
Running a bash-the-candidate story 8 weeks before the election?
That's a new definition of fair to me.
Where is the bash Kerry story that should be there for balance?


Give them a good story to bash Kerry with. I think at the moment CBS would
kill for one.

Unfortunately for the repugnants is that the latest on Kerry's medals is
that they were all awarded legitimately according to a navy investigation in
a DOD press release on Friday (the day to release news you want ignored)

I have to admit that I understand why people would think Shrub is smarter.
You have to be really dumb to go to Vietnam if you don't have to. ;-)




This story's mere presence on a highly watched news show this
close to an election demonstrates favoritism.

I have questioned the credibility of television news, 60 Minutes in
particular and CBS in general ever since they ran the Audi unintended
acceleration stories back in the 80's. There have been many, many
instances of biased journalism from this crew since then.

This story bears an uncanny resemblance to NBC's rigged gas tank
explosions in 1992.

Dan Rather's rush to get this story into the news and smear Bush weeks
before the election speaks volumes about his politics and ethics.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur



  #10  
Old September 21st 04, 05:39 AM
Leadfoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
news

"Harry Andreas" wrote in message
...

snip cogent and accurate assessment


Dan Rather's rush to get this story into the news and smear Bush weeks
before the election speaks volumes about his politics and ethics.


Yep. It says the first is well left-of-center and the second
is...nonexistent. ISTR Danny Boy was also leading the pack when it came to
trying to trash the reputations of the SBVT after they had the temerity to
dare question Kerry's military experience using his own (therefore not

even
a chance of any forgery or slander/libel being involved) past conflicting
accounts; his one-sided (or should I say left-sided) approach to the

"news"
is a well established fact.


I guess your ignoring Lambert (who is voting for Bush) and Roods story on
what really happened in two incidents that Kerry was decorated for. I find
it interesting that Thurlow was in the drink when he says he witnessed all
ths crap he is lying about

http://tinyurl.com/48bja

http://tinyurl.com/4nxp4

http://tinyurl.com/4jubk

http://tinyurl.com/4lohz

Read this and you'll find SBVT are lying sacks of ****!!!!




Brooks


--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.