Bush Texas Air National Guard Memos are Forgeries

[sunmaster14]

I see that there isn't a thread on this, so I thought I would start out by stating my firm belief that the so-called Killian memos aired by Dan Rather during a 60 Minutes II episode on Wednesday, September 8, 2004 were crude (and "rather" obvious) forgeries.

A definitive analysis is provided here. My degree of confidence on this is, as I've referred to before as my CT test, at the "stake my life" level.

It is certainly weird that this forum of skeptics haven't addressed this topic before, especially since it would seem to be perfect subject matter for the application of critical thinking skills. But now is as good a time as any to discuss it because of a new, revisionist movie that is about to be released called, ironically enough, "Truth".

The film apparently whitewashes the greatest journalistic fraud of the 21st century and treats the perpetrators - Dan Rather and Mary Mapes - as heroes who have been slandered due to pressure on CBS from a right-wing cabal.

The NY Times, naturally, adds its own imprimatur to this disgusting revisionism, by sympathetically interviewing Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, and their Hollywood avatars, Robert Redford and Cate Blanchett (respectively, I think), here.

Dan Rather is allowed to make some rather shocking assertions without being challenged. These include the claim that his "missteps" were within the normal range of journalistic error, and the claim that the story was true, but the problem was that he couldn't authenticate it to the degree required by journalist standards. In fact, the story was wholly untrue. Bush did not shirk his duty in the Texas Air National Guard, and he was actually thought of very highly by his commanding officers. Regardless, a fraud of the scale of Rather's and Mapes fraud, especially 60 days before the Presidential election, does not fit within the normal range of journalism. It doesn't even fit within the normal range of a negative attack ad during a campaign. It is way out there on the fringes of disgusting slander and manipulation of the political process. The fraud is documented in great detail in the CBS-commissioned Thornburg-Boccardi review.

Is Hollywood really so delusional and/or ruthless that it will embrace this movie? Are liberals really so delusional and/or ruthless that they will treat such pathological liars as Rather and Mapes as heroes who have been persecuted?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[DavidJames]

Actually, since I was here at the time, I can assure it was discussed rather extensively.

But my real questions is WTF is this topic doing in politics in 2015? Surely you can find a more recent liberal media transgression to "discuss".

 

[Beerina]

There is a major motion picture coming out this Friday. Apparently it is attempting to portray the fraudsters as Woodward and Bernstein-like heroes against The Machine silencing them.

IIRC at the time, their defense, or at least defenders, were like "Well, you all know it is true anyway." Which was like NBC using igniters in GM truck collision tests because "you all know it is true anyway."

This thread might be better recast to discuss that movie.

 

[sunmaster14]

Actually, since I was here at the time, I can assure it was discussed rather extensively.

The thread does not exist. Prove me wrong.

But my real questions is WTF is this topic doing in politics in 2015? Surely you can find a more recent liberal media transgression to "discuss".

It is definitely about USA Politics. It was a scandal of political journalism, and it could have easily changed the course of history by flipping the outcome of a very close Presidential election. Also, the whitewashing of history is being done for political reasons and, I predict, will break down along partisan lines.

 

[Allen773]

Actually, since I was here at the time, I can assure it was discussed rather extensively.

But my real questions is WTF is this topic doing in politics in 2015? Surely you can find a more recent liberal media transgression to "discuss".

It's time to resurrect America's fond memories of George Bush the Younger's reign. After all, his brother is the heir apparent in 2016.

 

[Crossbow]

I see that there isn't a thread on this, so I thought I would start out by stating my firm belief that the so-called Killian memos aired by Dan Rather during a 60 Minutes II episode on Wednesday, September 8, 2004 were crude (and "rather" obvious) forgeries.

A definitive analysis is provided here. My degree of confidence on this is, as I've referred to before as my CT test, at the "stake my life" level.

It is certainly weird that this forum of skeptics haven't addressed this topic before, especially since it would seem to be perfect subject matter for the application of critical thinking skills. But now is as good a time as any to discuss it because of a new, revisionist movie that is about to be released called, ironically enough, "Truth".

The film apparently whitewashes the greatest journalistic fraud of the 21st century and treats the perpetrators - Dan Rather and Mary Mapes - as heroes who have been slandered due to pressure on CBS from a right-wing cabal.

The NY Times, naturally, adds its own imprimatur to this disgusting revisionism, by sympathetically interviewing Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, and their Hollywood avatars, Robert Redford and Cate Blanchett (respectively, I think), here.

Dan Rather is allowed to make some rather shocking assertions without being challenged. These include the claim that his "missteps" were within the normal range of journalistic error, and the claim that the story was true, but the problem was that he couldn't authenticate it to the degree required by journalist standards. In fact, the story was wholly untrue. Bush did not shirk his duty in the Texas Air National Guard, and he was actually thought of very highly by his commanding officers. Regardless, a fraud of the scale of Rather's and Mapes fraud, especially 60 days before the Presidential election, does not fit within the normal range of journalism. It doesn't even fit within the normal range of a negative attack ad during a campaign. It is way out there on the fringes of disgusting slander and manipulation of the political process. The fraud is documented in great detail in the CBS-commissioned Thornburg-Boccardi review.

Is Hollywood really so delusional and/or ruthless that it will embrace this movie? Are liberals really so delusional and/or ruthless that they will treat such pathological liars as Rather and Mapes as heroes who have been persecuted?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Considering that the movie Truth will not be released until 16 OCT 2015, then I suggest that you save your bitching about the movie until you actually see the movie.

 

[The Big Dog]

Considering that the movie Truth will not be released until 16 OCT 2015, then I suggest that you save your bitching about the movie until you actually see the movie.

You missed the part where he mentioned the interviews that were recently published?

'k.

 

[jhunter1163]

A search for keywords "bush national guard" returns 254 threads. There was, indeed, considerable discussion at the time.

 

[Giordano]

The thread does not exist. Prove me wrong.



It is definitely about USA Politics. It was a scandal of political journalism, and it could have easily changed the course of history by flipping the outcome of a very close Presidential election. Also, the whitewashing of history is being done for political reasons and, I predict, will break down along partisan lines.

Many threads were terminated when JREF became ISF and no new posts were placed in the thread.

Rather then bother to look this one up, I assure you this was indeed discussed at JREF at length at that time.

Believe me or not- frankly I don't care. But why would I and other "old timers" lie?

 

[DavidJames]

The thread does not exist. Prove me wrong.

You should probably take searching lessons from jhunter1163. Nuff said, within the MA

It is definitely about USA Politics. It was a scandal of political journalism, and it could have easily changed the course of history by flipping the outcome of a very close Presidential election. Also, the whitewashing of history is being done for political reasons and, I predict, will break down along partisan lines.

Projecting much? You won't find me in those threads defending Rather. Shoddy journalism is wrong, regardless of who it may benefit, a concept you may want to consider.

 

[Giordano]

A search for keywords "bush national guard" returns 254 threads. There was, indeed, considerable discussion at the time.

Thank you!

 

[varwoche]

Actually, since I was here at the time, I can assure it was discussed rather extensively.

But my real questions is WTF is this topic doing in politics in 2015? Surely you can find a more recent liberal media transgression to "discuss".

Indeed. (I for one acknowledged the dubious nature.)

 

[sunmaster14]

A search for keywords "bush national guard" returns 254 threads. There was, indeed, considerable discussion at the time.

That search turns up all threads in which at least a single post has the words "bush national guard" in it. Hardly the same thing. Just as a point of comparison, a search for the keywords "poopy head" returns 82 threads. I guess there's been considerable discussion of poopy heads over the years.

 

[sunmaster14]

Many threads were terminated when JREF became ISF and no new posts were placed in the thread.

Rather then bother to look this one up, I assure you this was indeed discussed at JREF at length at that time.

Believe me or not- frankly I don't care. But why would I and other "old timers" lie?

How would you know? Your join date is April 2011? In any case, I thought all of the JREF threads were transferred over to ISF, regardless of whether they had been long inactive.

 

[Ziggurat]

But now is as good a time as any to discuss it because of a new, revisionist movie that is about to be released called, ironically enough, "Truth".

I think this movie is a great thing.

Don't get me wrong, it's not going to be a great movie. It's going to be terrible. It will be tedious, preachy, and boring. Almost nobody will see it, and it will crater like Redacted.

Which means that the morons who invested money in it will lose that money, which they clearly deserve. Hence, the movie will be a great thing.

 

[sunmaster14]

I think this movie is a great thing.

Don't get me wrong, it's not going to be a great movie. It's going to be terrible. It will be tedious, preachy, and boring. Almost nobody will see it, and it will crater like Redacted.

Which means that the morons who invested money in it will lose that money, which they clearly deserve. Hence, the movie will be a great thing.

I don't know. I actually suspect that it will be quite a good movie. Cate Blanchett is a damn good actress, and Robert Redford actually looks and sounds like Dan Rather. We'll see I guess, but I bet it gets nominated for several academy awards.

 

[jhunter1163]

I thought at the time that the whole thing was a hit piece against GWB, and I think so still.

 

[Giordano]

How would you know? Your join date is April 2011? In any case, I thought all of the JREF threads were transferred over to ISF, regardless of whether they had been long inactive.

What a strange point on which to focus discussion.

I had been a lurker for many year before 2011, so my sign up date only indicates that I posted no comments on any thread before this date, not that I didn't see them.

Yes, as many other posters here have indicated, there was such a discussion. Searches for the appropriate key words reveal many. You have acknowledged that indeed you can find such posts here. Yes, there may be some that aren't directly relevant, yet I am certain that there are many that are, and in fact you haven't indicated that none of the ones you found are relevant. Why is that? And what is the point at all? Do you really believe that this hasn't been discussed before and that we are all lying to you?

As to if posts have been lost after the switch- I am pretty certain that some post archives I sought were missing. Frankly I don't know. But the Bush/National Guard one appears to have been transferred- maybe I will look. But is this all to make the accusation that this was never discussed here by us "liberals?" Big deal if it wasn't, although it certainly was. If you wish to discuss the upcoming movie or the topic itself, then go ahead. But if I am going to go to the trouble to find the discussion here that you claim never occurred, then your apology that I and others are not liars would be a classy thing to post.

 

[Cleon]

The thread does not exist. Prove me wrong.

Which thread?

This one?

Or this one?

Maybe this one?

There was also this one.

Perhaps this one is what you're looking for.

How about this one?


That's not even all of them. This forum was smothered in threads about those goddamn memos.

 

[Giordano]

Which thread?

This one?

Or this one?

Maybe this one?

There was also this one.

Perhaps this one is what you're looking for.

How about this one?


That's not even all of them. This forum was smothered in threads about those goddamn memos.

Ninja'd by Cleon! Thanks!

An apology for accusing other posters of lying would be very nice right now. But of course I suspect that there is somehow, something in these threads that doesn't quite meet Summaster's criteria, so he will double down on hia original accusation.