Alan Skorski is a hero, cant wait to read his Franken book...This is
too good to be true.

Monday, Oct. 11, 2004 9:57 a.m. EDT Dan Rather: CBS's Michael Moore

Could it be that "CBS Evening News" anchorman Dan Rather has lower
journalistic standards than even Michael Moore, whose conspiracy film
"Fahrenheit 9/11" may be a model piece of political propaganda, but
doesn't come close to qualifying as "journalism"?

Last week the web site Ratherbiased.com quote Moore saying he rejected
the same forged military records Rather used in his disastrous Sept. 8
broadcast to trash President Bush.

"Back when I was making Fahrenheit, I was offered the same documents
that were given to CBS but I didn't use them because we couldn't
verify them," Moore said following a speech at the University of
Central Arkansas. The radical filmmaker said he also rejected other
scoops that sounded "too good to be true," like the story from a woman
who claimed she had dinner with Bush and the family of Osama bin
Laden.

According to Alan Skorski, a former congressional candidate who's
writing a book about Al Franken, Rather and Moore have something in
common - a London-based reporter named Greg Palast.

In fact, Palast has claimed credit for reports broken by both Moore
and Rather over the years.

In a recent screed he titled, "The Lynching of Dan Rather," Palast
wrote, "Dan is in hot water for a report my own investigative team put
in Britain's Guardian papers and on BBC TV years ago" - referring to
the story that Bush got favorable treatment in the National Guard.

On the eve of the 2000 election, Palast interviewed Bill Burkett, the
former National Guard officer who would later pass bogus Guard records
to Rather's news team. Burkett talked about Bush's records being
scrubbed, but at the time had no documents to back the claim up.

The expatriate journalist says he's also been feeding movie-maker
Moore info on Bush for years. This past May Palast wrote:

"In fact, our joke in the London newsroom is that if we can't get our
story on to American airwaves, we can just slip it to the fat guy in
the chicken suit. Moore could sneak it past the censors as
'entertainment.'"

Palast says Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" is a direct rip-off of his
material, claiming in the same report:

"I know, because, with my investigative team at BBC television and The
Guardian of Britain, I wrote and filmed the original reports on which
Moore's new documentary are based."

Could it be that Rather and Moore actually share the same sources? Not
exactly. At least Moore deserves credit for not getting conned by Bill
Burkett's phony documents.

Maybe when Rather retires, CBS should replace him with the more
discerning "fat guy in the chicken suit."

I was offered the same documents
that were given to CBS but I didn't use them because we couldn't
verify them," BRBR


You don't get it. The documents aren't the story. Bush's AWOL status is the
story.


Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com

EganMedia wrote:

You don't get it. The documents aren't the story. Bush's AWOL status is the
story.

Like the comedian said, "This election is not about who served his
country on the battlefield in wartime and who was a chicken****
deserter..."

--
ha

"hank alrich" wrote ...
Like the comedian said, "This election is not about who served his
country on the battlefield in wartime and who was a chicken****
deserter..."

If Bush pulled the kind of stunts in his supersonic aircraft that Kerry
did in his boat he'd be long dead and we wouldn't be having this
discussion.

Richard Crowley wrote:

If Bush pulled the kind of stunts in his supersonic aircraft that Kerry
did in his boat he'd be long dead and we wouldn't be having this
discussion.

Since he didn't show up for the physical he had to pass ont the stunts
opportunity.

--
ha

In article ,
"Richard Crowley" wrote:

"hank alrich" wrote ...
Like the comedian said, "This election is not about who served his
country on the battlefield in wartime and who was a chicken****
deserter..."

If Bush pulled the kind of stunts in his supersonic aircraft that Kerry
did in his boat he'd be long dead and we wouldn't be having this
discussion.



of course he would be
he was unfit to fly due to all the coke he was snorting
George

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 07:43:28 -0700, "Richard Crowley"
wrote:

"hank alrich" wrote ...
Like the comedian said, "This election is not about who served his
country on the battlefield in wartime and who was a chicken****
deserter..."

If Bush pulled the kind of stunts in his supersonic aircraft that Kerry
did in his boat

You mean like actually showing up and fighting?

Al

I've heard Greg Palast interviewed on radio a fair number of times,
including one interview last week on subject matter closely related
to the original post in this thread. The quotes attributed to Palast
in that post really don't read as if they could have come from him.
They don't resemble his attitude or viewpoint at all.

Palast has a Web site at www.gregpalast.com where his views on various
matters (including the Burkett story and the Killian documents) are posted.

I rather suspect that the original posting in this thread is a fabrication
in itself.

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message ...
"hank alrich" wrote ...
Like the comedian said, "This election is not about who served his
country on the battlefield in wartime and who was a chicken****
deserter..."

If Bush pulled the kind of stunts in his supersonic aircraft that Kerry
did in his boat he'd be long dead and we wouldn't be having this
discussion.


If Only.

Bush didn't even make it to his supersonic aircraft for two years,
when the aviation medical examiner started drug testing.

If Kerry had a dad that pulled strings to get him out of that war,
he wouldn't have won 4 medals.

EganMedia wrote:

I was offered the same documents
that were given to CBS but I didn't use them because we couldn't
verify them," BRBR


You don't get it. The documents aren't the story. Bush's AWOL status is the
story.


Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com

If the documents are bogus, they become the story.

--
Les Cargill

Les Cargill wrote:
EganMedia wrote:

I was offered the same documents
that were given to CBS but I didn't use them because we couldn't
verify them," BRBR


You don't get it. The documents aren't the story. Bush's AWOL status
is the
story.

Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com


If the documents are bogus, they become the story.



No, they become ANOTHER story. And that one is about bogus documents.
The AWOL fact remains, and keeps its significance, with the added
feature that a misdirection was attempted (and you bit).

S O'Neill
No, they become ANOTHER story. And that one is about bogus documents.
The AWOL fact remains, and keeps its significance, with the added
feature that a misdirection was attempted (and you bit).

The fact is without the bogus evidence they didn't have enough of story
to even run it, for a major news organization it would have been laughable.
They *needed* the lies to justify running the story.

Clearly political Bias was being expressed in presenting false documents
to prove the case (which should have been debunked) and false testimony by
Democrat activists to prove the case (who were on the public record
contradicting themsleves already, so that should have been debunked as well).
They ended up with no credible testimony or documents to prove their
accusation.

Fruit of the poison tree as they say in the legal profession.

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

S O'Neill wrote:

No, they become ANOTHER story. And that one is about bogus documents.
The AWOL fact remains, and keeps its significance, with the added
feature that a misdirection was attempted (and you bit).


I like a Republican that doesn't just spew the party line. That's the
way I was, but I had to leave with the McCain BS in NY (and SC) in 2000.

Don Cooper wrote:


S O'Neill wrote:


No, they become ANOTHER story. And that one is about bogus documents.
The AWOL fact remains, and keeps its significance, with the added
feature that a misdirection was attempted (and you bit).



I like a Republican that doesn't just spew the party line. That's the
way I was, but I had to leave with the McCain BS in NY (and SC) in 2000.


Well, I just registered that way to screw up their statistics, but I was
able to vote against Pete Wilson in the Calif Republican primary: I
voted for Eldridge Cleaver instead. That was a good day to be a Republican.

In article , S O'Neill
wrote:

Don Cooper wrote:


S O'Neill wrote:


No, they become ANOTHER story. And that one is about bogus documents.
The AWOL fact remains, and keeps its significance, with the added
feature that a misdirection was attempted (and you bit).



I like a Republican that doesn't just spew the party line. That's the
way I was, but I had to leave with the McCain BS in NY (and SC) in 2000.


Well, I just registered that way to screw up their statistics, but I was
able to vote against Pete Wilson in the Calif Republican primary: I
voted for Eldridge Cleaver instead. That was a good day to be a Republican.


I did the exact same thing! With open primaries on the ballot in California,
this will become the norm if it passes. Oh, boy, open the flood gates!

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x

S O'Neill wrote:

Well, I just registered that way to screw up their statistics, but I was
able to vote against Pete Wilson in the Calif Republican primary: I
voted for Eldridge Cleaver instead. That was a good day to be a Republican.


Some states have "open" primaries. They can really be screwed up.

Jay Kadis wrote:

I did the exact same thing! With open primaries on the ballot in California,
this will become the norm if it passes. Oh, boy, open the flood gates!


Oh, I hadn't read yours, Jay.

I have some very Republican friends who voted for Al Sharpton in the
Democratic Primary.

Then there's the Republican Nader supporters.

"WillStG" wrote in message
...
S O'Neill
No, they become ANOTHER story. And that one is about bogus
documents.
The AWOL fact remains, and keeps its significance, with the added
feature that a misdirection was attempted (and you bit).

The fact is without the bogus evidence they didn't have
enough of story
to even run it, for a major news organization it would have been
laughable.
They *needed* the lies to justify running the story.

I agree. It would have been a non-story without the documentary
evidence. Certainly not worth the air time.

Clearly political Bias was being expressed in presenting false
documents
to prove the case (which should have been debunked) and false
testimony by
Democrat activists to prove the case (who were on the public record
contradicting themsleves already, so that should have been debunked
as well).
They ended up with no credible testimony or documents to prove their
accusation.

However, I don't believe it was "political" bias that did it; it was
the bias towards a juicy story. It may be true that the majority of
journalists favor Kerry, but that's an order of magnitude less
important than the newsworthiness of the story.

Norm Strong

Clearly political Bias was being expressed in presenting false documents
to prove the case BRBR

I don't think it was verified that the documents were false.

If they were, it's just like the O.J. case. They framed a guilty man.

-R