Rathergate

[achilleus]

OK, the article is here.

Anyone else find this ridiculous?

Isn't this what are esteemed president did? Act on incorrect information? Where were these people then? Were they champion Bushgate and calling for impeachment?

[Soldier]

Why do you need that? We've already got the hordes of ravening liberals screaming "Elect anybody but Bush!!" And if he's not out of the office in a couple of months, then you (the American people in general) have nobody to blame but yourselves.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by Soldier

Why do you need that? We've already got the hordes of ravening liberals screaming "Elect anybody but Bush!!" And if he's not out of the office in a couple of months, then you (the American people in general) have nobody to blame but yourselves.

Actually, people did put out bumperstickers that said 'Impeach Bush', but it was a pretty small movement.

I'm just curious if anybody else sees the hypocrisy of these people, and wondering if CBS will cave.

[mrbiggs]

The Daily Show did a HILARIOUS thing based exactly along these lines.

Click on "Media Culpa"

[Inquartata]

Yes, much depends on whose ox is being gored. ( The fact there is such a proverb illuminates the widespread nature of the human tendency. )

I think, though, that what exercises many is that Rather has demonstrated a long-standing propensity for favoring a certain point of view or political weltanschaaung under the guise of objectivity, and sought to forward certain agendas whilst claiming not to do so.

"Under the cloak of a great reputation it is possible to hide a whole wardrobe of folly". This incident merely tugged the cloak side for an instant, and exposed the truth beneath it.

But to be fair, yes, there are a lot of people on the right going about in cloaks these days, too.

[jeff]

And, to use another long, German word: schadenfreude is gleefully being exercised...

[Rogue]

Let's see,
Bush-
The CIA director (appointed by Clinton) say's "it's a slam dunk!" referring to WMDs
Rather-
2-3 experts out of 4 state that the documents are fake.



BTW enough WMD to kill 500,000 to 1m have been found in Iraq. And don't forget the massive amounts found in Siria.

[jeff]

Originally Posted by Rogue

BTW enough WMD to kill 500,000 to 1m have been found in Iraq. And don't forget the massive amounts found in Siria.

Really? You got a cite for that?

[Soldier]

German's great for long words like that.

Did you know they have one word for the pension that is paid to the widow of a first mate of a merchant vessel on the Rhine?

[Epee_Pox]

Originally Posted by jeff

Really? You got a cite for that?

Not my post, but I recall reading several accounts in the news (usually buried -- sorry, couldn't help myself) about finds of mustard gas, sarin, and other nerve agents.

I also recall several reports from Iraqis that most remaining weapons were transported to Syria, not a difficult task.

However, I don't recall ever reading potential body counts such as mentioned above, nor do I recall hearing that any WMD were actually recovered in Syria.


All that aside, I fail to see what the one has to do with the other. The US Congress and President, along with nearly 2 dozen other nations, relied on intelligence that was believed to be true not only by the CIA but by every intelligence agency out there, as well as the UN.

CBS, on the other hand, happily reported as true and vouched for items that were not only clearly fraudulent, but which were unsubstantiated by any sources other than the forger himself, a clear violation of journalistic integrity. The forger had a well-documented history of trying to discredit Bush by similar means, but CBS did not care that its source was known to be fraudulent. A very different situation than the WMD case altogether.


Of course, the more serious matter with the whole CBS brouhaha is the potential involvement of the Democratic National Committee. A number of eyebrow-raising coincidences (such as the airing of DNC commercials based on the CBS story almost simultaneously with its first broadcast) have led many sober observers to consider the possibility that the story was fed to CBS by the DNC. If that was the case, then the scandal would be truly disastrous, both for CBS' reputation and for the Kerry campaign.

[jeff]

To the first part: I also have not heard anything other than rumors that WMD had been moved to Syria. Nothing recovered or substantiated.

To your second part: as has been discussed on this board and in the real world endlessly till we're all sick of it, it is not true that everyone in the CIA or intelligence community believed it, and in fact, one of the telling features of this story is that every part of the intelligence reports that expressed doubt about WMD was censored when the administration presented it to the public. They hyped and exaggerated what was given to them, and used sources that at the time were already discredited - like the Nigerian yellow cake story.

So, contrary to your point: they used sources that were dubious at the time, exagerated what they thought they knew. Unlike the CBS story, where the facts haven't been particularily challenged but the source has, with the WMD issue the facts have come down against what the Administration claimed. Unlike with the CBS story: many people have died because of policy based on the WMDs story, and unlike the CBS story, the administration has refused to concede that the information they presented to the US public and the world was flawed, if not totally incorrect.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by jeff

To your second part: as has been discussed on this board and in the real world endlessly till we're all sick of it, it is not true that everyone in the CIA or intelligence community believed it, and in fact, one of the telling features of this story is that every part of the intelligence reports that expressed doubt about WMD was censored when the administration presented it to the public. They hyped and exaggerated what was given to them, and used sources that at the time were already discredited - like the Nigerian yellow cake story.

Citations?

[Rogue]

Originally Posted by jeff

Really? You got a cite for that?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123680,00.html

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/23807.htm

Unable to find info regarding Syria. When I heard the report, it seemed substantiated. I withdraw the Syrian wmd contention for the moment.

[Rogue]

Originally Posted by jeff

... like the Nigerian yellow cake story.

9/11 commision say's the yellow cake incident did, in deed, happen.

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by Rogue

BTW enough WMD to kill 500,000 to 1m have been found in Iraq. And don't forget the massive amounts found in Siria.

10-12 rounds from the Gulf War? Weakened? Might be enough to give 30-40 people bad sinus problems for a couple of days...

[Rogue]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

10-12 rounds from the Gulf War? Weakened? Might be enough to give 30-40 people bad sinus problems for a couple of days...

Still non-compliance with UN resolution 1441(I think thats the right #, There were so many)

[jeff]

Originally Posted by Soldier

Citations?

Ha, good one. Not right now, but I know we discussed it to death.

I wont go looking for it now because I am in Paris on business, and half of the keys on the keyboard are in different place. I touchtype and this is driving me nuts. Moved keys include: a; z; m; w; at-sign, comma, period, etcetera. Grrr. Tomorrow I go to Geneva to appal them with my awful French there; then Zurich so I can speak really bad German instead.

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by Rogue

Still non-compliance with UN resolution 1441(I think thats the right #, There were so many)

Yes, apparently we're in non-compliance with the UN (different resolution) too.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by jeff

every part of the intelligence reports that expressed doubt about WMD was censored when the administration presented it to the public.

Wait...intelligence reports are classified...so how do you know what "every part" of them expressed?

They hyped and exaggerated what was given to them, and used sources that at the time were already discredited - like the Nigerian yellow cake story.

Which, as it turns out, maybe wasn't so discredited. At least not according to the Intelligence Commission findings.

Now, the guy who said there was nothing to the report---HE has been discredited...

Unlike the CBS story, where the facts haven't been particularily challenged but the source has,

Er---what? If the only "source" of the supposed facts is fake, how are their contents anything but invention thus far?

"Wait---the Hitler Diaries and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are fake, but their contents are still true!"

unlike the CBS story, the administration has refused to concede that the information they presented to the US public and the world was flawed, if not totally incorrect.

Well, one accurate claim out of a dozen or so, that's better than Dan Rather has managed!

[Capt. Slo-mo]

As I recall, the secretary to the National Guard commander who prepared the reports confirmed their contents as accurate...but denied that the actual physical letters provided to CBS were the same ones she typed.

Which makes one wonder: if so, why not just provide the originals? And if these were re-writes of originals, what was left out or added in?