Dan Rather Makes A Stand (finally)

[zengrifter]

Saturday, 22 September 2007

Dan Rather : 'Somebody's got to take a stand and
say democracy cannot survive... with government interference in news'

'Former CBS anchor Dan Rather recently filed a $70 million lawsuit against CBS, saying they made him a "scapegoat" when he was fired for a September 2004 story on 60 Minutes about President Bush's unsatisfactory service in the Texas Air National Guard ... .. he added, "Somebody, sometime has got to take a stand and say democracy cannot survive, much less thrive with the level of big corporate and big government interference and intimidation in news".'

Read more ...

[Playloud]

The ANG story may have been true, but using documents that were obviously fake is inexcusable. INEXCUSABLE.

[AnIrishmannot2brite]

Originally Posted by Playloud

The ANG story may have been true, but using documents that were obviously fake is inexcusable. INEXCUSABLE.

You don't really know the depth of the Karl Rove like control the administration had on CBS and other media news outlets. It's a real possibility that the fake documents were passed through a White House confederate working at CBS. All done in order to destroy the message AND the messenger

Every time someone has tried to bring up Bush's AWOL in the Air Nat. Guard, his cocaine use, DUI's etc they've all been fired or removed from their positions.

And besides: These creeps in the administration would "Swift boat" a true war hero like John Kerry. What would stop then from destroying Dan Rather? In fact this effort has Karl Rove's handiwork all over it.

The bottom feeder of all slime...

[moo321]

If the press censors their OWN reporters, it's not illegal. It's only if the government does it. That's why I get so pissed off when people talk about Don Imus being punished, and call it censorship, like all censorship is illegal or something. It is censorship, and it's legal, because it's a company censoring it's own shows. Same thing with Rather; unless there's something I'm missing, he got canned, by a private company, for a legitimate reason (lying).

[Playloud]

Originally Posted by AnIrishmannot2brite

You don't really know the depth of the Karl Rove like control the administration had on CBS and other media news outlets. It's a real possibility that the fake documents were passed through a White House confederate working at CBS. All done in order to destroy the message AND the messenger

Every time someone has tried to bring up Bush's AWOL in the Air Nat. Guard, his cocaine use, DUI's etc they've all been fired or removed from their positions.

And besides: These creeps in the administration would "Swift boat" a true war hero like John Kerry. What would stop then from destroying Dan Rather? In fact this effort has Karl Rove's handiwork all over it.

The bottom feeder of all slime...

I am not defending Bush at all.

I am not saying that the administration had no hand in this.

I am saying that Dan Rather should have verified the authenticity of the documents before showing them to the American public.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by AnIrishmannot2brite

You don't really know the depth of the Karl Rove like control the administration had on CBS and other media news outlets. It's a real possibility that the fake documents were passed through a White House confederate working at CBS. All done in order to destroy the message AND the messenger

Every time someone has tried to bring up Bush's AWOL in the Air Nat. Guard, his cocaine use, DUI's etc they've all been fired or removed from their positions.

And besides: These creeps in the administration would "Swift boat" a true war hero like John Kerry. What would stop then from destroying Dan Rather? In fact this effort has Karl Rove's handiwork all over it.

The bottom feeder of all slime...

Too bad you're not more opinionated!

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by moo321

Same thing with Rather; unless there's something I'm missing, he got canned, by a private company, for a legitimate reason (lying).

Rather wasn't lying - he was reporting the story he was assigned. It is a true story. And YES, they (Administration+CBS) stacked the deck with phoney docs so that the messenger and the message would be killed. zg

[Playloud]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

Rather wasn't lying - he was reporting the story he was assigned. It is a true story. And YES, they (Administration+CBS) stacked the deck with phoney docs so that the messenger and the message would be killed. zg

Regardless, Dan Rather should have verified the authenticity of the documents before airing the report. Not doing so is grounds for termination IMHO.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by Playloud

Regardless, Dan Rather should have verified the authenticity of the documents before airing the report. Not doing so is grounds for termination IMHO.

You actually think that TV news anchors verify what they report? Sorry, they are just personalities reading whats put in front of them. Rather was set up as the fall guy. zg

[Brutus]

I was just thinking about the relation to Dan Rather, the victims and the intended victims of the anthrax ordeal post 911. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...ather%2c%20Dan
maybe there is some type of additional conspiracy theory to be found.

Personally, I was a Walter Cronkite fan, and never did like Rather. he always seemed to skew the news. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i214f...elated&search= watch clip, and remind yourself of the candor that is totally missing in todays news.

"They sacrificed support for independent journalism for corporate financial gain, and in so doing, I think they undermined a lot at CBS News," he said.

thats probably a huge understatement.

if rather was merely an actor, reading what he was told to read, then the blame should be on cbs. if Rather was reporting his independent story, then he should have verified all documents.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDNJL...related&search=


Cronkite, you rascal you.