Comments on: Rather to Pyongyang?

By: marky48

marky48 — Sat, 05 Mar 2005 03:33:29 +0000

“They did not prove they weren’t either.”

Argument from ignorance.

By: marky48

marky48 — Sat, 05 Mar 2005 03:32:26 +0000

They couldn’t prove they were forgeries since no copies of any document can be. Except here in mudville.

By: charlotte

charlotte — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 21:17:40 +0000

I’m beginning to think that Rather is unhinged. The arrogant MSM have been doing so much value-added “reportage” over the years that they cannot see or admit to even simple truths, verities, fact and reality. In their quest to “educate” the public and set a political/social agenda, they’ve brainwashed themselves. Roger’s mention of North Korea hits the mark.

Was Letterman giving CBS News cover or was he tongue-in-cheek exposing Dan’s tortured rationale? The situation’s so absurd it’s difficult to know

By: Terrye

Terrye — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 20:44:11 +0000

They did not prove they weren’t either.

Ah hell everyone knows Rather is lying. Why bother listening to the man? It is sad….

By: neo-neocon

neo-neocon — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:56:37 +0000

Dan: denial, delusion, or dissemblance?

Only the shadow knows.

By: Kevin P

Kevin P — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:28:28 +0000

Roger:

It is funny to watch Rather struggle to find some form of Nixonian plausable deniability regarding the forged documents. Virtually none of his fellow reporters are using the “they might not be forgeries” fantasy. I wonder if Dan is wandering the halls of his townhouse in a drunken stupor talking to portraits of Huntley, Brinkley, Cronkite, and Murrow. I imagine even those ghosts are telling Dan to give it up.

By: Bruce W.

Bruce W. — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:14:08 +0000

I can’t divulge Ken’s frequency, but the call letters are W-Huh

By: Knucklehead

Knucklehead — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:02:08 +0000

There was absolutely no way that the law firm CBS hired to “investigate” Memog… (oops, sorry), Ratherg… (damn…), the 60 Minutes II TANG Fiasco was going to come out and acknowledge that the memos were forgeries. As money-grubbing as lawyers may be they don’t deliberately provide evidence that sets their clients up to be sued or, perhaps, charge with criminal misconduct.

I’ll give the law firm a pass since they were stuck and couldn’t do the right thing because, well, that would have been doing the wrong thing.

For anyone who claims, however, to be a Seeker of Truth to even bother with any pretension that those memos might not be, let alone are not, forgeries defies belief. The evidence of forgery is overwhelming – it’s not even a contest. No person in their right mind would want to be the lawyer trying to convince a jury that the memos are real and any clever kid playing at moot court could convince a jury that they are forgeries.

I hope this matter some day does wind up in a court of law if even just as a civil action. CBS and Rather better be offshoring their assets ’cause if it does they’re gonna be transferring them to others if that ever happens.

By: ambisinistral

ambisinistral — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 14:50:41 +0000

Hmmm… methinks thou dost protest too much. After all, how do we know for sure this blog isn’t written on a typewriter?

By: Hogarth

Hogarth — Fri, 04 Mar 2005 14:48:44 +0000

Rather is at best completely in personal denial, or at worst as disingenuous as they come.

“Although they had four months and millions of dollars, they could not demonstrate that the documents were not authentic, that they were forgeries,” Rather said.

Dan, the CBS-bought-and-paid-for “investigation” panel could have had forty years and billions of dollars and still would not have found bias or evidence of forgery. They found exactly what they were allowed to find by their corporate masters; no more, and no less. Holding yourself up as not only innocent of bias, but also as having proved the story true, is simply ridiculous.

http://shortfinal.blogspot.com/2005/03/bullshit-alert.html