"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.


What is wrong with that? They duped and used CBS. I don't
see why CBS is beholden to them to protect their identity.
Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

I think it's far more likely to be from the Kerry campaign than some plot by
Karl Rove.

"johnebravo836" wrote in message
...

If he was (it's highly unlikely we'll ever know, of course), I have to
. In any event, I
can't help but be astonished that CBS News went with this story when
they did, knowing what they apparently knew.


in one word, arrogance.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

We've already seen the absurdity of Robert Novak calling on CBS to
reveal its sources.


What is wrong with that?

Novak refused to identify the source he used to expose Valerie Plame.

They duped and used CBS. I don't
see why CBS is beholden to them to protect their identity.
Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

I want to know who burned CBS, too.

They burned themselves by being so eager to attack Bush.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:QdN1d.90376$yh.74553@fed1read05...
ABC news just reported on the 6 PM news that 2 document analysts who were
employed by CBS told CBS before the program aired that the documents had
numerous problems and could not be authenticated. They interviewed the
analysts, one saying she e-mailed CBS the night before the broadcast
warning
them that if they went on the air with those documents, by Thursday
morning
they would be getting the same questions from hundreds of document
analysts
that she raised. One expert CBS quoted on Friday now says he could not
authenticate any documents. He only looked at the signature.

ABC also produced a typewriter expert who said that the IBM Selectric
Composer (the most advanced typewriter at the time) could not produce
those
documents.

The bloggers are now calling for Congressional hearings to find the
source
for the docs and determine if CBS is guilty of election altering fraud
attempts. At this point, since CBS is not forthcoming, I think
congressional hearings are in order. I have not heard anyone speculate
that
any sort of criminal investigation is underway, so I can think of no
other
body to take the lead on this.

ScottW



I DESPISE Congressional investigations. Politicians are incapable of
truth-
fully, honestly and competently investigating anything.

The only thing worse is "Blue Ribbon Committees" where Congress abdicates
their job and passes it off to people no longer in office but just a
partisan.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
johnebravo836 wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

[snip]


That's different, since it was not, to my knowledge, a story that was
dug up and "broken" by a major news network -- it was a story that was
already floating around and clearly being talked about widely, and any
minimally competent network would have addressed it. I haven't seen
any
reports as to how NBC, CBS, ABC, or PBS dealt with the story, though,
so
I can't comment on how fair their coverage of it was.


All fared badly, fairness-wise.
And the NG story has been floating
around for months, and was revived in the last few weeks, since Ben
Barnes repeated his story about getting W into the guard at a Kerry
rally here in Austin. The docs were a small part of Rather's story,
and
oddly, no one is disputing their content.

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear -- I was referring to how the major broadcast
networks handled the SWIFT Boat group story.

That's what I meant. The Swift story was repeated often but but debunked
hardly at all.

[snip]

My thought is that the original source recreated the memos. This
doesn't
make it right for CBS to do as they did, but it does raise the
possibility that they found the original source to be personally
credible.

That may be, but once they had been put on notice by their own
consultant that the authenticity of the documents was questionable, that
should have created some corresponding doubt (or at least hesitation)
about the original source of those documents, I would think! I'm just
amazed that they could have been so foolish.

I think that because CBS knew who recreated the memos, they were
comfortable shopping for consultants.

What do you mean by 'recreated'? Do you have evidence
that these same memos once existed, and were lost
or destroyed, and that somebody tried to recreate them
from memory?

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 04:32:39 GMT, "GeoSynch"
wrote:

Clyde 'while Fester's still around, just call me' Slick wrote:

Those preps are hoaxters and frauds. Sure, if it were a
legitimate source, CBS should fight to withold the id.
But the clown who is the CBS source gave up rights to
protection by perpetrading a fraud upon CBS.

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.


GeoSynch

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove.

Based on what evidence?

Do you really think that
Begala and Carville would sabotage a four year Democratic term just to
help Hillary?

Abso-****ing-lutely.

If so, I think you need to step back and think
logically.

Irony?

Giving the Repbulicans four more years is in no way helpful
to either Senator Clinton *nor* the Democratic Party platform

Of course it is. The odds of winning the White House for the same party
after having one of their own in for 2 terms are very slim.

(especially when you consider the possibility of another couple of
Supreme Court justice appointments).

No, the more likely source would be Rove and *his* ilk. That's what's
fishy to me, *if* they are forgeries, which isn't yet proven. What's
bizarre is CBS' gullibility if this ends up being the case.

What's bizarre is your paranoia.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction
if it gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.

Typical obfuscation of the main topic and far more relevant fact:


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/I...ments_040914-1
.html

I saw the complete report this morning, thanks. The Dallas Morning News
tracked down Killian's typist. I may take the trouble of registering
with their website to read more. I'll bet the story is linked somewhere
out there in blogland.

Actually, arguing about this stuff obfuscates the greater issue of
Bush's National Guard service, which itself is a lesser issue than his
presidential record.


Not a very good Democratic election strategy, eh?
What kind of idiots are running the Kerry campaign?


Actually arguing about this stuff obfuscates the greater issues facing
the electorate regarding national security, social security, etc., etc..

This is a bunch of brats squabbling in the sand box.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if
it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Why forge something with accurate content?


It wasn't accurate content. The reason to forge a document
with 'that' content was because no real document with
'that' content exists.


Bingo!

CBS is trotting out the former secretary to Killian who says that she
believes the memos are forged as well, but that they reflect his thinking at
the time.

IOW CBS is staking their credibility on hearsay.

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

I think that because CBS knew who recreated the memos, they were
comfortable shopping for consultants.

What do you mean by 'recreated'? Do you have evidence
that these same memos once existed, and were lost
or destroyed, and that somebody tried to recreate them
from memory?

Speculation. Tune in to 60 Minutes tonight for an interview with
Killian's secretary.

Stephen

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction
if it gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.

Typical obfuscation of the main topic and far more relevant fact:


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/I...ments_040914-1
.html

I saw the complete report this morning, thanks. The Dallas Morning News
tracked down Killian's typist. I may take the trouble of registering
with their website to read more. I'll bet the story is linked somewhere
out there in blogland.

Actually, arguing about this stuff obfuscates the greater issue of
Bush's National Guard service, which itself is a lesser issue than his
presidential record.


Not a very good Democratic election strategy, eh?
What kind of idiots are running the Kerry campaign?

Not Dan Rather...

In article et,
"Michael McKelvy" wrote:

My thought is that the original source recreated the memos. This doesn't
make it right for CBS to do as they did, but it does raise the
possibility that they found the original source to be personally
credible.

If they never saw the originals how could they find their source credible?

Good question! It would have to depend on the source.

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if
it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Why forge something with accurate content?


It wasn't accurate content. The reason to forge a document
with 'that' content was because no real document with
'that' content exists.


Bingo!

CBS is trotting out the former secretary to Killian who says that she
believes the memos are forged as well, but that they reflect his thinking
at
the time.

IOW CBS is staking their credibility on hearsay.



....and sinking their own boat, without realizing it.
They have completely abdicated professional journalisitc standards.
IT's ok to present forged documents, as long as the content is 'correct'.

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Separate the memo from the man. She said what Killian was thinking. She
also says she didn't type them.

Why forge something with accurate content?


It wasn't accurate content. The reason to forge a document
with 'that' content was because no real document with
'that' content exists.

Wait and see.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

I think that because CBS knew who recreated the memos, they were
comfortable shopping for consultants.

What do you mean by 'recreated'? Do you have evidence
that these same memos once existed, and were lost
or destroyed, and that somebody tried to recreate them
from memory?

Speculation. Tune in to 60 Minutes tonight for an interview with
Killian's secretary.



Again, what do you mean by recreated?

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction
if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Separate the memo from the man. She said what Killian was thinking. She
also says she didn't type them.


She can speak to what Killian actually said, not to what
he might have thought.

"johnebravo836" wrote in message
...


MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
johnebravo836 wrote:

[snip]

But, no, I don't think an anti-Kerry accusation would be better vetted.

Here I would have to disagree -- I can't imagine that CBS News would have
broken such a story about Kerry without investigating the authenticity of
the documents *much* more thoroughly. Certainly, once they were told by
consultants they hired that the documents were highly questionable, they
would have taken further steps to look into it, and waited with the story.
Certainly you don't doubt that Dan Rather personally is more sympathetic
to Kerry, do you? For that reason alone, I would have thought you'd agree
that documents pertaining to Kerry would have received additional
scrutiny. That would just be human nature.

Look at how the Swift Vets charges were circulated: big publicity for the
smears, little or none for the refutations.

That's different, since it was not, to my knowledge, a story that was dug
up and "broken" by a major news network -- it was a story that was already
floating around and clearly being talked about widely, and any minimally
competent network would have addressed it. I haven't seen any reports as
to how NBC, CBS, ABC, or PBS dealt with the story, though, so I can't
comment on how fair their coverage of it was.

They tried to ignore it and hope it would go away..... like the Kerry
advisers apparently told them to do. BTW, this alleged refutation is highly
debatable. A former VVAW member is now claiming Kerry coached him on his
"war atrocities" testimony effectively undermining Kerry's claim that he was
just repeating what he heard at the winter soldiers thing. Now we have a
participant claiming Kerry helped stage the thing.

ScottW

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
johnebravo836 wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
johnebravo836 wrote:

[snip]

But, no, I don't think an anti-Kerry accusation would be better vetted.

Here I would have to disagree -- I can't imagine that CBS News would
have broken such a story about Kerry without investigating the
authenticity of the documents *much* more thoroughly. Certainly, once
they were told by consultants they hired that the documents were highly
questionable, they would have taken further steps to look into it, and
waited with the story. Certainly you don't doubt that Dan Rather
personally is more sympathetic to Kerry, do you? For that reason alone,
I would have thought you'd agree that documents pertaining to Kerry
would have received additional scrutiny. That would just be human nature.

Ah, but I was looking at CBS's record instead of adopting a right-wing
stereotype of a liberal Dan Rather.

You're entitled to disagree.

Look at how the Swift Vets charges were circulated: big publicity for
the smears, little or none for the refutations.

That's different, since it was not, to my knowledge, a story that was
dug up and "broken" by a major news network -- it was a story that was
already floating around and clearly being talked about widely, and any
minimally competent network would have addressed it. I haven't seen any
reports as to how NBC, CBS, ABC, or PBS dealt with the story, though, so
I can't comment on how fair their coverage of it was.

All fared badly, fairness-wise. And the NG story has been floating
around for months, and was revived in the last few weeks, since Ben
Barnes repeated his story about getting W into the guard at a Kerry
rally here in Austin. The docs were a small part of Rather's story, and
oddly, no one is disputing their content.

Indeed, the White House tried to put the NG story to bed in February by
releasing what they said were all the relevant papers, but that led to
the US News story.

It's tough for Democrats
and liberals to get a fair shake in the media.

Needless to say, only very liberal viewers are likely to see it that
way. Conservatives are just as vehement in insisting that *they* can't
get a fair shake, as I'm sure you're aware.

That doesn't make it true. They've been playing the media like a drum
since the Clinton years.

Who's playing the DNC like a drum with their incredibly stupid internet ad
which uses 60 minutes footage and the phony docs? It's also interesting to
note that both NBC and CBS have asked they pull the ad for unauthorized use
of copyrighted material. The democratic party leadership appears to have
departed the planet for destination unknown.

ScottW

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
johnebravo836 wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

[snip]


That's different, since it was not, to my knowledge, a story that was
dug up and "broken" by a major news network -- it was a story that was
already floating around and clearly being talked about widely, and any
minimally competent network would have addressed it. I haven't seen any
reports as to how NBC, CBS, ABC, or PBS dealt with the story, though,
so
I can't comment on how fair their coverage of it was.


All fared badly, fairness-wise.
And the NG story has been floating
around for months, and was revived in the last few weeks, since Ben
Barnes repeated his story about getting W into the guard at a Kerry
rally here in Austin. The docs were a small part of Rather's story, and
oddly, no one is disputing their content.

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear -- I was referring to how the major broadcast
networks handled the SWIFT Boat group story.

That's what I meant. The Swift story was repeated often but but debunked
hardly at all.

Kerry has the power to debunk it if it can be debunked by releasing all his
military records.

ScottW

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...
IOW CBS is staking their credibility on hearsay.



...and sinking their own boat, without realizing it.
They have completely abdicated professional journalisitc standards.
IT's ok to present forged documents, as long as the content is 'correct'.


Maybe they know (because of their past) that their credibility is shot and
felt they needed proof?

ScottW

dave weil wrote:

Something extraordinarily fishy about this whole episode.
They were obvious blatant forgeries too easily discredited.
Normally, you'd wonder who this would help, but first
consider who this hurts ... obviously Kerry, with Bush
merely being an incidental beneficiary. Now, who this
really helps is the Clintons, both in unchallenged continuing
control of the Democratic party, and particularly Hillary's
presumptive bid for the presidency in 2008. Yep, this has
all the earmarks of being hatched from the diabolical minds
of Begala and Carville.

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove.

Radioactive risk for chump-change reward? Not likely.

Do you really think that Begala and Carville would sabotage
a four year Democratic term just to help Hillary?

Yes, they would ... and in a New York minute.

If so, I think you need to step back and think logically.
Giving the Repbulicans four more years is in no way helpful
to either Senator Clinton *nor* the Democratic Party platform
(especially when you consider the possibility of another couple of
Supreme Court justice appointments).

Don't be so disingenuous, Dave. Hillary's (or Bill's) ambitions would
trump party loyalty every time. Their ambitions know no bounds, just ask
long-time acquaintances like Web Hubbell or, if you could, Vince Foster.

BTW, the smartest thing Kerry ever did was NOT selecting Hillary for
the VP slot, because if he did and he went on to win the presidency,
he'd know his life wouldn't be worth a plugged nickel.

No, the more likely source would be Rove and *his* ilk. That's what's
fishy to me, *if* they are forgeries, which isn't yet proven.

Come off it, Dave. Even their liberal media brethren, like the Washington
Post and ABC News, have concluded the documents are forgeries.

What's bizarre is CBS' gullibility if this ends up being the case.

A good "mark", by definition, is one eager to be conned. And ever since
old man Bush gave Dan his come-uppance many years ago in a live
interview, Rather has been *seething* for revenge.


GeoSynch

In article VY62d.92735$yh.58499@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
johnebravo836 wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

[snip]


That's different, since it was not, to my knowledge, a story that was
dug up and "broken" by a major news network -- it was a story that was
already floating around and clearly being talked about widely, and any
minimally competent network would have addressed it. I haven't seen any
reports as to how NBC, CBS, ABC, or PBS dealt with the story, though,
so
I can't comment on how fair their coverage of it was.


All fared badly, fairness-wise.
And the NG story has been floating
around for months, and was revived in the last few weeks, since Ben
Barnes repeated his story about getting W into the guard at a Kerry
rally here in Austin. The docs were a small part of Rather's story, and
oddly, no one is disputing their content.

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear -- I was referring to how the major broadcast
networks handled the SWIFT Boat group story.

That's what I meant. The Swift story was repeated often but but debunked
hardly at all.

Kerry has the power to debunk it if it can be debunked by releasing all his
military records.

He doesn't have to. Let the Swifts defend their charges. In the
meantime, you're making up requirements for Kerry.

In article SV62d.92734$yh.83717@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

That doesn't make it true. They've been playing the media like a drum
since the Clinton years.

Who's playing the DNC like a drum with their incredibly stupid internet ad
which uses 60 minutes footage and the phony docs? It's also interesting to
note that both NBC and CBS have asked they pull the ad for unauthorized use
of copyrighted material. The democratic party leadership appears to have
departed the planet for destination unknown.

Okay, that's a week. Good balance for the right-wing decade?

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an over-reaction
if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Separate the memo from the man. She said what Killian was thinking. She
also says she didn't type them.


She can speak to what Killian actually said, not to what
he might have thought.

He probably expressed those thoughts to her in speech.

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

I think that because CBS knew who recreated the memos, they were
comfortable shopping for consultants.

What do you mean by 'recreated'? Do you have evidence
that these same memos once existed, and were lost
or destroyed, and that somebody tried to recreate them
from memory?

Speculation. Tune in to 60 Minutes tonight for an interview with
Killian's secretary.



Again, what do you mean by recreated?



To speculate, it would be copying the original (or recalling it from
memory) and typing it into a word processor.

There are obvious problems with this.

Michael McKelvy wrote:

dave weil wrote:

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove.

Based on what evidence?

Based on this:

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk..._blames_r.html

RATHER BLAMES ROVE IN ROCKET-SKATE MISHAP
NEW YORK - Veteran anchorman Dan Rather implicated White House Political Director Karl Rove as "the
mastermind behind the so-called Acme Group" after his rocket-powered roller skates exploded during a
Wednesday CBS Evening News investigative report.

Rather had donned the controversial Acme skates -- along with an Acme brand Bat-Man suit -- in a
complicated sting operation to reveal what he termed a "deep conspiracy between the White House and
internet partisans to cover up George Bush's shameful military records."

The investigation went awry soon after Rather lit the skates, releasing what NYU Physics professor
Alan Sokol estimated as "20,000 to 30,000 pounds of thrust." The heat of the initial explosion was so
intense that it singed the hair off several nearby CBS reporters, including Rather's anchor
heir-apparent John Roberts.

The blast sent Rather hurtling along 53rd Street toward the Hudson River at speeds estimated upwards
of 200 miles per hour, scarcely slowing as the runaway skates drug the helpless journalist over, under
and through stalled rush hour traffic.

Rather frantically righted himself just in time to hurtle cleanly though the side of an MTA bus at 7th
Avenue, leaving a gaping Rather-shaped hole. The impact sent Rather careening down the stairs of the
50th Street subway terminal, through a turnstile, and onto the tracks of the Uptown-bound 1 train.

"The incoming tunnel was sparking and lighting up, I thought there was some kind of power problem,"
said Carla Robertson, who witnessed Rather speeding through the tunnel at the 34th Street platform.
"Later I realized it must have been his ass hitting the third rail."

Robertson said she didn't pay much attention whe she saw a spread-eagle Rather, screaming along the
tracks on rocket roller skates.

"This is New York, so we see celebrities all the time," said Robertson. "Then I realized he was
heading downtown on the uptown tracks."

Witnesses as far as Chelsea report hearing the collision as Rather met the next oncoming train, which
sent the newsman rocketing skyward through a man hole cover at 31st and Broadway, arms flailing
wildly, his rocket skates sputtering their last spare ounces of fuel.

Midtown bystanders looked on in horror as the award-winning broadcast titan began plummeting from his
3000-foot apex. Amazingly, though, Rather's arm-flailing and prescient decision to wear the Bat-Man
suit had paid off. Regaining composure after the initial shock, he began soaring over the skyline of
Manhattan, swooping through its concrete canyons.

Rather's high-flying antics came to a abrupt conclusion when he splattered into the New York Times
building. Momentarily stunned, he peeled off the side into a desperate pummet, not realizing his
Bat-Man wings remained adhered to a 38th floor window.

Gasping for breath as he climbed from his Rather-shaped crater on 43rd Street, he quickly faced
another ignomy: his impact had jarred loose a grand piano that was hanging from a rope outside William
Safire's 30th-story office. As the shadow of the piano slowly grew, Rather pulled out a tiny umbrella
and picket sign that read "Yipes!!"

His lump-covered head peering through the demolished keyboard, Rather finally played a off-key
rendition of "Taps" his piano-key teeth.

Rather remains in guarded condition at Cedars-Sinai hospital, but says his legendary investigative
ferocity "is as healthy as Olympic weightlifter's liver."

"Batten down the barn door, Aunt Gussie, we're got more stories coming, and I promise you that these
will sting the Bush boys like syphillitic urine," said a defiant Rather.

Rather said that the CBS news team was already working on a new story that would "prove, once and for
all, that Karl Rove made those rocket skates."

"I can't reveal much right now," added Rather. "We're still trying to line up the necessary catapult."

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article VY62d.92735$yh.58499@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

Kerry has the power to debunk it if it can be debunked by releasing all
his
military records.

He doesn't have to. Let the Swifts defend their charges.

Defend them from what? The only defense offered has been on subjective
assessments of battle conditions surrounding some of his medals. Obviously
differences of opinion can exist.

In the
meantime, you're making up requirements for Kerry.

No, I'm holding him to the same standard set by Bush. Bush signed the
release form and made his military records public, Kerry has not.

ScottW

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article SV62d.92734$yh.83717@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

That doesn't make it true. They've been playing the media like a drum
since the Clinton years.

Who's playing the DNC like a drum with their incredibly stupid internet
ad
which uses 60 minutes footage and the phony docs? It's also interesting
to
note that both NBC and CBS have asked they pull the ad for unauthorized
use
of copyrighted material. The democratic party leadership appears to
have
departed the planet for destination unknown.

Okay, that's a week. Good balance for the right-wing decade?

You sound like a raider fan... always living in the past.

ScottW

"GeoSynch" wrote in message
nk.net...
Michael McKelvy wrote:

dave weil wrote:

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove.

Based on what evidence?

Based on this:

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk..._blames_r.html

RATHER BLAMES ROVE IN ROCKET-SKATE MISHAP
NEW YORK - Veteran anchorman Dan Rather implicated White House Political
Director Karl Rove as "the mastermind behind the so-called Acme Group"
after his rocket-powered roller skates exploded during a Wednesday CBS
Evening News investigative report.

Rather had donned the controversial Acme skates -- along with an Acme
brand Bat-Man suit -- in a complicated sting operation to reveal what he
termed a "deep conspiracy between the White House and internet partisans
to cover up George Bush's shameful military records."

The investigation went awry soon after Rather lit the skates, releasing
what NYU Physics professor Alan Sokol estimated as "20,000 to 30,000
pounds of thrust." The heat of the initial explosion was so intense that
it singed the hair off several nearby CBS reporters, including Rather's
anchor heir-apparent John Roberts.

The blast sent Rather hurtling along 53rd Street toward the Hudson River
at speeds estimated upwards of 200 miles per hour, scarcely slowing as the
runaway skates drug the helpless journalist over, under and through
stalled rush hour traffic.

Rather frantically righted himself just in time to hurtle cleanly though
the side of an MTA bus at 7th Avenue, leaving a gaping Rather-shaped hole.
The impact sent Rather careening down the stairs of the 50th Street subway
terminal, through a turnstile, and onto the tracks of the Uptown-bound 1
train.

"The incoming tunnel was sparking and lighting up, I thought there was
some kind of power problem," said Carla Robertson, who witnessed Rather
speeding through the tunnel at the 34th Street platform. "Later I realized
it must have been his ass hitting the third rail."

Robertson said she didn't pay much attention whe she saw a spread-eagle
Rather, screaming along the tracks on rocket roller skates.

"This is New York, so we see celebrities all the time," said Robertson.
"Then I realized he was heading downtown on the uptown tracks."

Witnesses as far as Chelsea report hearing the collision as Rather met the
next oncoming train, which sent the newsman rocketing skyward through a
man hole cover at 31st and Broadway, arms flailing wildly, his rocket
skates sputtering their last spare ounces of fuel.

Midtown bystanders looked on in horror as the award-winning broadcast
titan began plummeting from his 3000-foot apex. Amazingly, though,
Rather's arm-flailing and prescient decision to wear the Bat-Man suit had
paid off. Regaining composure after the initial shock, he began soaring
over the skyline of Manhattan, swooping through its concrete canyons.

Rather's high-flying antics came to a abrupt conclusion when he splattered
into the New York Times building. Momentarily stunned, he peeled off the
side into a desperate pummet, not realizing his Bat-Man wings remained
adhered to a 38th floor window.

Gasping for breath as he climbed from his Rather-shaped crater on 43rd
Street, he quickly faced another ignomy: his impact had jarred loose a
grand piano that was hanging from a rope outside William Safire's
30th-story office. As the shadow of the piano slowly grew, Rather pulled
out a tiny umbrella and picket sign that read "Yipes!!"

His lump-covered head peering through the demolished keyboard, Rather
finally played a off-key rendition of "Taps" his piano-key teeth.

Rather remains in guarded condition at Cedars-Sinai hospital, but says his
legendary investigative ferocity "is as healthy as Olympic weightlifter's
liver."

"Batten down the barn door, Aunt Gussie, we're got more stories coming,
and I promise you that these will sting the Bush boys like syphillitic
urine," said a defiant Rather.

Rather said that the CBS news team was already working on a new story that
would "prove, once and for all, that Karl Rove made those rocket skates."

"I can't reveal much right now," added Rather. "We're still trying to line
up the necessary catapult."


Nothing like top notch journalism. :-0

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:lR62d.92733$yh.35795@fed1read05...

They tried to ignore it and hope it would go away..... like the Kerry
advisers apparently told them to do. BTW, this alleged refutation is
highly
debatable. A former VVAW member is now claiming Kerry coached him on his
"war atrocities" testimony effectively undermining Kerry's claim that he
was
just repeating what he heard at the winter soldiers thing. Now we have a
participant claiming Kerry helped stage the thing.

He was just repeating what he heard at the winter soldiers
meeting............which was the stuff he told them to say.

"GeoSynch" wrote in message
nk.net...

A good "mark", by definition, is one eager to be conned. And ever since
old man Bush gave Dan his come-uppance many years ago in a live
interview, Rather has been *seething* for revenge.


I vaguely rememebr something about this. What are the details?

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...

Kerry has the power to debunk it if it can be debunked by releasing all
his
military records.

He doesn't have to. Let the Swifts defend their charges. In the
meantime, you're making up requirements for Kerry.

I agree. We are 'makiing up' the requirmenet that he disclose the truth.
He shouldn't be required to do that.

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an
over-reaction
if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Separate the memo from the man. She said what Killian was thinking.
She
also says she didn't type them.


She can speak to what Killian actually said, not to what
he might have thought.

He probably expressed those thoughts to her in speech.

I repeat.........

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

I think that because CBS knew who recreated the memos, they were
comfortable shopping for consultants.

What do you mean by 'recreated'? Do you have evidence
that these same memos once existed, and were lost
or destroyed, and that somebody tried to recreate them
from memory?

Speculation. Tune in to 60 Minutes tonight for an interview with
Killian's secretary.



Again, what do you mean by recreated?



To speculate, it would be copying the original (or recalling it from
memory) and typing it into a word processor.

There are obvious problems with this.

If the source had the original, why recreate it?

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


MINe 109 said:

She can speak to what Killian actually said, not to what
he might have thought.

He probably expressed those thoughts to her in speech.

And not just to her... also to whoever (probably) created the documents,
either back then or recently.


Hehe, I thought Killian created it.
he 'signed' it!

You seem to be saying that its just fine to document
one's allegations by creating a forgery that contains
the information one believes is correct.
that contains information you be

"GeoSynch" wrote in message
nk.net...
Michael McKelvy wrote:

dave weil wrote:

Actually it strikes me more likely that it might come from the mind of
the great political trickster, Karl Rove.

Based on what evidence?

Based on this:

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk..._blames_r.html

RATHER BLAMES ROVE IN ROCKET-SKATE MISHAP
NEW YORK - Veteran anchorman Dan Rather implicated White House Political
Director Karl Rove as "the
mastermind behind the so-called Acme Group" after his rocket-powered
roller skates exploded during a
Wednesday CBS Evening News investigative report.

Rather had donned the controversial Acme skates -- along with an Acme
brand Bat-Man suit -- in a
complicated sting operation to reveal what he termed a "deep conspiracy
between the White House and
internet partisans to cover up George Bush's shameful military records."

The investigation went awry soon after Rather lit the skates, releasing
what NYU Physics professor
Alan Sokol estimated as "20,000 to 30,000 pounds of thrust." The heat of
the initial explosion was so
intense that it singed the hair off several nearby CBS reporters,
including Rather's anchor
heir-apparent John Roberts.

The blast sent Rather hurtling along 53rd Street toward the Hudson River
at speeds estimated upwards
of 200 miles per hour, scarcely slowing as the runaway skates drug the
helpless journalist over, under
and through stalled rush hour traffic.

Rather frantically righted himself just in time to hurtle cleanly though
the side of an MTA bus at 7th
Avenue, leaving a gaping Rather-shaped hole. The impact sent Rather
careening down the stairs of the
50th Street subway terminal, through a turnstile, and onto the tracks of
the Uptown-bound 1 train.

"The incoming tunnel was sparking and lighting up, I thought there was
some kind of power problem,"
said Carla Robertson, who witnessed Rather speeding through the tunnel at
the 34th Street platform.
"Later I realized it must have been his ass hitting the third rail."

Robertson said she didn't pay much attention whe she saw a spread-eagle
Rather, screaming along the
tracks on rocket roller skates.

"This is New York, so we see celebrities all the time," said Robertson.
"Then I realized he was
heading downtown on the uptown tracks."

Witnesses as far as Chelsea report hearing the collision as Rather met the
next oncoming train, which
sent the newsman rocketing skyward through a man hole cover at 31st and
Broadway, arms flailing
wildly, his rocket skates sputtering their last spare ounces of fuel.

Midtown bystanders looked on in horror as the award-winning broadcast
titan began plummeting from his
3000-foot apex. Amazingly, though, Rather's arm-flailing and prescient
decision to wear the Bat-Man
suit had paid off. Regaining composure after the initial shock, he began
soaring over the skyline of
Manhattan, swooping through its concrete canyons.

Rather's high-flying antics came to a abrupt conclusion when he splattered
into the New York Times
building. Momentarily stunned, he peeled off the side into a desperate
pummet, not realizing his
Bat-Man wings remained adhered to a 38th floor window.

Gasping for breath as he climbed from his Rather-shaped crater on 43rd
Street, he quickly faced
another ignomy: his impact had jarred loose a grand piano that was hanging
from a rope outside William
Safire's 30th-story office. As the shadow of the piano slowly grew, Rather
pulled out a tiny umbrella
and picket sign that read "Yipes!!"

His lump-covered head peering through the demolished keyboard, Rather
finally played a off-key
rendition of "Taps" his piano-key teeth.

Rather remains in guarded condition at Cedars-Sinai hospital, but says his
legendary investigative
ferocity "is as healthy as Olympic weightlifter's liver."

"Batten down the barn door, Aunt Gussie, we're got more stories coming,
and I promise you that these
will sting the Bush boys like syphillitic urine," said a defiant Rather.

Rather said that the CBS news team was already working on a new story that
would "prove, once and for
all, that Karl Rove made those rocket skates."

"I can't reveal much right now," added Rather. "We're still trying to line
up the necessary catapult."



Beep Beep!

Clyde Slick wrote:

A good "mark", by definition, is one eager to be conned. And ever since
old man Bush gave Dan his come-uppance many years ago in a live
interview, Rather has been *seething* for revenge.

I vaguely rememebr something about this. What are the details?

See http://www.ratherbiased.com/iran-contra.htm and also
http://www.ratherbiased.com/bush_attack.htm

Some time before that, Rather got into a huff with his CBS bosses and
petulatnly walked off the set during the evening news, leaving dead air
for about 7 minutes. This from a third-rate weasel who was nipping at
Nixon's heels for a "third-rate burglary" is about to be brought down
himself for being duped by a "third-rate forgery." Poetic justice, indeed.


GeoSynch

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

I think that because CBS knew who recreated the memos, they were
comfortable shopping for consultants.

What do you mean by 'recreated'? Do you have evidence
that these same memos once existed, and were lost
or destroyed, and that somebody tried to recreate them
from memory?

Speculation. Tune in to 60 Minutes tonight for an interview with
Killian's secretary.



Again, what do you mean by recreated?



To speculate, it would be copying the original (or recalling it from
memory) and typing it into a word processor.

There are obvious problems with this.

If the source had the original, why recreate it?

Speculating again: the source had it temporarily; didn't have it but
memorized it or took notes.

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


The bloggers are, of course, over-reacting,

Translation from the political bigot: It's always an
over-reaction
if it
gores my ox.

ABC quoted a NG secretary who said the docs looked wrong, but the
content reflected what they were thinking back then.


The forged document dontains a forged Killian signature. It was not
what Killian was thinking

Separate the memo from the man. She said what Killian was thinking.
She
also says she didn't type them.


She can speak to what Killian actually said, not to what
he might have thought.

He probably expressed those thoughts to her in speech.

I repeat.........

I don't think you need to be so literal.

In article 0Z82d.92850$yh.60065@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article SV62d.92734$yh.83717@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

That doesn't make it true. They've been playing the media like a drum
since the Clinton years.

Who's playing the DNC like a drum with their incredibly stupid internet
ad
which uses 60 minutes footage and the phony docs? It's also interesting
to
note that both NBC and CBS have asked they pull the ad for unauthorized
use
of copyrighted material. The democratic party leadership appears to
have
departed the planet for destination unknown.

Okay, that's a week. Good balance for the right-wing decade?

You sound like a raider fan... always living in the past.

In the past? The Raiders are still playing.

In article QX82d.92849$yh.34474@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article VY62d.92735$yh.58499@fed1read05,
"ScottW" wrote:

Kerry has the power to debunk it if it can be debunked by releasing all
his
military records.

He doesn't have to. Let the Swifts defend their charges.

Defend them from what? The only defense offered has been on subjective
assessments of battle conditions surrounding some of his medals. Obviously
differences of opinion can exist.

In the
meantime, you're making up requirements for Kerry.

No, I'm holding him to the same standard set by Bush. Bush signed the
release form and made his military records public, Kerry has not.

Shall we offer Kerry the same chance to first have his file 'cleaned up'
the way Bush's was?

Stephen