PDA

View Full Version : Dan Rather: "I know this story is the truth"


RINGLEADER
09-10-2004, 11:43 AM
From CNN, courtesy of KerrySpot:

"I know this story is the truth...There will be no retraction...When people talk about where we got the story they're only doing it because they don't like the story..."


No, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the documents are flawed on any number of levels...keep digging Dan...keep digging!

Donger
09-10-2004, 11:47 AM
From CNN, courtesy of KerrySpot:

"I know this story is the truth...There will be no retraction...When people talk about where we got the story they're only doing it because they don't like the story..."


No, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the documents are flawed on any number of levels...keep digging Dan...keep digging!

Did he really say that?

jAZ
09-10-2004, 11:48 AM
No, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the documents are flawed on any number of levels...keep digging Dan...keep digging!
Muddy the waters RL! It's a good strategy!

Joe Seahawk
09-10-2004, 11:51 AM
Here you go MR Rather, here's a document that proves Kerry was in Cambodia!!

http://acepilots.com/mt/archives/001216.html

RINGLEADER
09-10-2004, 11:51 AM
Did he really say that?

According to Kerry Spot...I'm sure CNN will be replaying it if they got it on tape...I just love how Rather "KNOWS this story is the truth"...how could he know it was true? They seem to be hanging all of their credibility on a guy who says that's what Killian was thinking at the time (despite the fact that other documents that aren't dubious in nature say the opposite thing). So far there have been no other forensic experts coming forward explaining how they could have been created in the early 70s. I think the ball is in CBS' court to prove they're real at this point.

As I said in another thread, the best case scenario is that this is a transcription of a hand-written note or something...but then the question is why not just release the hand-written note to begin with. Absent that, this story is not only DOA, but the whole argument that Bush was AWOL is DOA as well.

Which is kind of a shame since the Dems look so petty in parading around yelling about it...

RINGLEADER
09-10-2004, 11:53 AM
Muddy the waters RL! It's a good strategy!


Yeah, there's nothing wrong with the documents. That's why the Washington Post, ABC, the New York Times and the AP have all run stories citing their own forensic experts who say the documents look like forgeries.

But thanks for playing Jaz!

Donger
09-10-2004, 11:55 AM
http://www.drudgereport.com/cbsd2.htm

RATHER DIGS IN: THE DOCUMENTS ARE AUTHENTIC

CNN TRANSCRIPT:

CBS by the way, though, is standing by its report, and now some sound from the CBS news anchor Dan Rather.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN RATHER, CBS NEWS ANCHOR: I know that this story is true. I believe that the witnesses and the documents are authentic. We wouldn't have gone to air if they would not have been. There isn't going to be -- there's no -- what you're saying apology?

QUESTION: Apology or any kind of retraction or...

RATHER: Not even discussed, nor should it be. I want to make clear to you, I want to make clear to you if I have not made clear to you, that this story is true, and that more important questions than how we got the story, which is where those who don't like the story like to put the emphasis, the more important question is what are the answers to the questions raised in the story, which I just gave you earlier.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

headsnap
09-10-2004, 11:57 AM
Muddy the waters RL! It's a good strategy!
hey jAZ, what do you think about Danny-boy Rather's daughter working on campaigns in TX with Ben Barnes?

conflict of interest? on CBS? NO WAY!!!!




developing...

Taco John
09-10-2004, 11:58 AM
According to Kerry Spot...I'm sure CNN will be replaying it if they got it on tape...I just love how Rather "KNOWS this story is the truth"...how could he know it was true? They seem to be hanging all of their credibility on a guy who says that's what Killian was thinking at the time (despite the fact that other documents that aren't dubious in nature say the opposite thing). So far there have been no other forensic experts coming forward explaining how they could have been created in the early 70s. I think the ball is in CBS' court to prove they're real at this point.

As I said in another thread, the best case scenario is that this is a transcription of a hand-written note or something...but then the question is why not just release the hand-written note to begin with. Absent that, this story is not only DOA, but the whole argument that Bush was AWOL is DOA as well.

Which is kind of a shame since the Dems look so petty in parading around yelling about it...



It's interesting how wildly inconsistent your standard for determining what is relevant and what isn't between this and the Swift Boat deal... Interesting indeed.

Michael Michigan
09-10-2004, 11:59 AM
http://www.drudgereport.com/cbsd2.htm

RATHER DIGS IN: THE DOCUMENTS ARE AUTHENTIC

CNN TRANSCRIPT:

CBS by the way, though, is standing by its report, and now some sound from the CBS news anchor Dan Rather.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN RATHER, CBS NEWS ANCHOR: I know that this story is true. I believe that the witnesses and the documents are authentic. We wouldn't have gone to air if they would not have been. There isn't going to be -- there's no -- what you're saying apology?

QUESTION: Apology or any kind of retraction or...

RATHER: Not even discussed, nor should it be. I want to make clear to you, I want to make clear to you if I have not made clear to you, that this story is true, and that more important questions than how we got the story, which is where those who don't like the story like to put the emphasis, the more important question is what are the answers to the questions raised in the story, which I just gave you earlier.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

The video clip should have shown him whistling past the graveyard.

Donger
09-10-2004, 12:03 PM
What's the frequency, Kenneth?

headsnap
09-10-2004, 12:05 PM
It's interesting how wildly inconsistent your standard for determining what is relevant and what isn't between this and the Swift Boat deal... Interesting indeed.
DEVASTATING!



ROFL

Baby Lee
09-10-2004, 12:08 PM
It's interesting how wildly inconsistent your standard for determining what is relevant and what isn't between this and the Swift Boat deal... Interesting indeed.
I see no such wild inconsistency between discarding the Swift Boat retutation, which consists largely of "these are bitter guys" and "they weren't saying this when he was a Senator," and accepting the evidence that the documents on Bush's service are a technological and chronological impossibility. One goes to the heart of the facts alleged and the other smears by indirection.

Soupnazi
09-10-2004, 12:10 PM
It must be absolutely seared-seared-into Dan's mind.

jAZ
09-10-2004, 12:13 PM
I see no such wild inconsistency between discarding the Swift Boat retutation, which consists largely of "these are bitter guys" and "they weren't saying this when he was a Senator," and accepting the evidence that the documents on Bush's service are a technological and chronological impossibility.
If only those were the facts of either situation... but they aren't. But as long as you have convinced yourself that those are the facts, that's all Rove wants... right?

Baby Lee
09-10-2004, 12:19 PM
If only those were the facts of either situation... but they aren't. But as long as you have convinced yourself that those are the facts, that's all Rove wants... right?
Oh go f@ck yourself. I'm so f@cking tired of every time you are proven wrong about something, it's not the facts of the matter, but some mechination by Karl Rove to oscure the truth. At this point if you, Frankie or Taco were to post that the sky was blue, I'd be rushing to the window fully expecting to kind something much different.


BTW - FTR, Rove doesn't control the color of the sky either.

KCWolfman
09-10-2004, 12:26 PM
Oh go f@ck yourself. I'm so f@cking tired of every time you are proven wrong about something, it's not the facts of the matter, but some mechination by Karl Rove to oscure the truth. At this point if you, Frankie or Taco were to post that the sky was blue, I'd be rushing to the window fully expecting to kind something much different.


BTW - FTR, Rove doesn't control the color of the sky either.

jAZston Smith has the Orwellian history re-written. Facts are not a priority in the new assignments.

Mr. Kotter
09-10-2004, 12:36 PM
...
"I know this story is the truth...There will be no retraction...When people talk about where we got the story they're only doing it because they don't like the story..."



THAT does it; if it's good enough for Left Wing Dan, it's good enough for me....

I'm votin' Kerry. :thumb:





:rolleyes:

Saggysack
09-10-2004, 12:41 PM
Facts are not a priority in the new assignments.

What facts are you speaking of?

The facts we don't know as of yet?

KCWolfman
09-10-2004, 12:49 PM
What facts are you speaking of?

The facts we don't know as of yet?
See the headline of the article. Evidently Dan Rather disagrees with you and has already made up his mind, just as jAZocrite has done.

RINGLEADER
09-10-2004, 12:53 PM
It's interesting how wildly inconsistent your standard for determining what is relevant and what isn't between this and the Swift Boat deal... Interesting indeed.


The difference is that there are key points of the swift boat story that Kerry and his campaign now agree with. Show me what the Bush administration has admitted is true in these documents. The only parts of the swift boat story that I care about are those parts that are being agreed to by the Kerry camp (either through his own words, his own journals or via interviews with his boatmates and campaign):

Kerry campaign has stated that he wasn't in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968 as he claimed in the senate. Kerry campaign said other members of his 94 boat would testify that he was in Cambodia at a different time, but to date neither the promised Douglas Brinkley article nor the names of his boatmates promised by John Hurley (Kerry's veterans director) have materialized.

Kerry campaign has stated that he may have received his first purple heart for a self-inflicted wound.

Kerry campaign says that Kerry's swift boat was the only one to leave the scene after the 3 boat was mined (after Kerry and his supporters earlier said, at various times, that HIS boat was hit by the mine and that all the boats had fled and only Kerry returned).

Kerry campaign first said that Jim Rassmann was knocked off the boat behind Kerry's. Then it said he was knocked off when a second explosion grazed Kerry's boat. Then he said in the congressional record in 2000 that Rassmann fell off his boat when he made a high-speed turn. Which is it?

Kerry supporter Jim Rassmann told the Washington Post that Kerry got shrapnel that is listed on his third purple heart when the pair exploded a rice cache in the absence of the enemy earlier the same day that Rassmann was plucked from the water.

Kerry's Bronze Star citation says he rescued Jim Rassmann while he was bleeding from his arm but it has since been revealed that he had a "contusion" that was not bleeding.

Kerry claimed that he encountered a sanpam in January, 1969 and in the report that was filed he claimed that five VC were killed. Later he admitted in his biography that he had killed a child and his father (yet he omitted them from his report) that day.

Why are there multiple versions of his silver star citation and why was he awarded the most recent over 25 years after the incident? Why did the citation change through the years to include more laudatory language?


Kerry could start with these issues...but we're going on day 39 of Kerry hiding out from the media so I doubt we'll hear anything...

But if you want to know the difference, that's the difference...

RINGLEADER
09-10-2004, 12:54 PM
The video clip should have shown him whistling past the graveyard.


Was Rather wearing a Kerry/Edwards button when they interviewed him? Because he sure sounds like he's trying to carry their water today...

StcChief
09-10-2004, 01:01 PM
I'll go with Technology, If it couldn't be done in '72,
then the documents are fake.

Mr. Kotter
09-10-2004, 01:01 PM
It's interesting how wildly inconsistent your standard for determining what is relevant and what isn't between this and the Swift Boat deal... Interesting indeed.

What's MORE interesting is how skeptical you are of admitedly disjointed and conflicting stories offered by Swiftboat types, but how strangely silent you are as to the veractity of these increasingly dubious "documents." :hmmm:

And you wanna talk about hypocrisy and "objectivity"??? :)

Ultra Peanut
09-10-2004, 02:00 PM
What's the frequency, Kenneth?Google Image Search for "April showers":

<img src="http://www.nexisofworlds.net/files/april_showers.jpg" style="width: 478px; height: 677px; border: 0" alt="" />