Guest Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 The most devestating news story to hit the Bush Administration was the prison torture piece on 60 minutes...uncovered by one of their top producers...Ms. Mapes. Knowing what you know about this administration...do you find it pure coincidence that the following has transpired? In examining where the network had gone wrong, officials at CBS News turning their attention to Ms. Mapes, one of their most respected producers, who was riding particularly high this year after breaking news about the Abu Ghraib prison scandal for the network. In a telephone interview this weekend, Josh Howard, the executive producer of the "60 Minutes'' Wednesday edition, said that he did not initially know who was Ms. Mapes' primary source for the documents but that he did not see any reason to doubt them. He said he believed Ms. Mapes and her team had appropriately answered all questions about the documents' authenticity and, he noted, no one seemed to be casting doubt upon the essential thrust of the report. "The editorial story line was still intact, and still is, to this day,'' he said, "and the reporting that was done in it was by a person who has turned in decades of flawless reporting with no challenge to her credibility.'' http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/politics...ml?pagewanted=2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twignberries Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 I feel for Dan Rather, but he clearly let his personal views get in the way of good journalism in this case. Whether or not the documents were planted by republicans (and they very well could have been), is irrelevant. CBS and Rather had an obligation to do their own due diligence - and they didn't. Unfortunately, the Democrats are sharing the consequences this time. If you send government related documents directly to the White House for their review, and their top communications spokesperson does not question their legitimacy, is it not implied that the White House deems the documents to be accurate and authentic? Would you seek confirmation of their authenticity beyond the confirmation of the spokesperson who is speaking on behalf of the target of the documents? By implying their confirmation that the documents were authentic, the White House itself becomes part of the scheme. Right? What higher authority would you have sought out for confirmation if you had been the editor of the piece? A direct interview with the President's spokesperson is about as good as it gets. How about just looking at the documents themselves? The most obvious sign that the documents were fraudulent was that the typeface was inconsistent with the technology of the time when the documents were supposedly created. Rather's political views blinded him to the evidence. For pete's sake, others were able to spot the fraud immediately upon seeing the typeface on TV. Why not CBS, who had the documents sitting on their desks? The Whitehouse could very well have been involved here - I'm not saying they weren't. If they were, they should face the appropriate punishment. But ultimately, Rather is responsible to verify what he reports, and he didn't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeakOil Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Light Crude: CL Oct. $46.19 +0.59 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rog Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 I feel for Dan Rather, but he clearly let his personal views get in the way of good journalism in this case. Whether or not the documents were planted by republicans (and they very well could have been), is irrelevant. CBS and Rather had an obligation to do their own due diligence - and they didn't. Unfortunately, the Democrats are sharing the consequences this time. If you send government related documents directly to the White House for their review, and their top communications spokesperson does not question their legitimacy, is it not implied that the White House deems the documents to be accurate and authentic? Would you seek confirmation of their authenticity beyond the confirmation of the spokesperson who is speaking on behalf of the target of the documents? By implying their confirmation that the documents were authentic, the White House itself becomes part of the scheme. Right? What higher authority would you have sought out for confirmation if you had been the editor of the piece? A direct interview with the President's spokesperson is about as good as it gets. That's a little backwards, no? If I send a bill to the White House requesting $2m in payment for my share of the public lands and they do not send back an itemized rebuttal of my claim, am I then entitled to the money? I cannot believe that the press and the dems continue to beat this dead horse. The public already believes that young George got preferential treatment. So what? So did many other privileged citizens. The man has a long record as Governor, President and Commander in Chief. So long as the opposition focuses on irrelevant details from events 30 years ago it reinforces the view that they have nothing to offer as alternative for the future. Vietnam is the past, rehashing the past will never advance a vision which is the one thing that a challenger needs to do to unseat an incumbent President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian4 Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Good Morning Crew- This is going to be a good day, futrues are well below fair value and the technical and Astro landscape are not friendly to the bulls, we will open down and into a long window of 65 minutes. The set up for resurrection of the Draft is underway...Cnn is running an article quoting the Head Puppet saying Terrorists are flooding into Iraq from all over the Arab World and to prevail we need more troops. The lead story in the National Post this morning has the headline...Send more Soldiers Bush urged...sub headline...Leading Republicans call for "More Boots on the Ground" in Iraq. Leading the charge in the Article are Senators John McCain and Chuck Hagel, McCain talks of the need for another 125,000 Troops and urges the Prez to enlarge the Army and Marines. Methinks Iran lies in the backgound here, Kerry better win-Huh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiHat Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Volatility should increase now and larger moves kick in. Today is a pivotable day..........as to direction of more up or retrace. i vote retrace, but verdict is out. Today could get wings and become trend day down.......................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The brown one Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Looks like the U-Ropean markets are sitting around waiting for the arrival of The Loan Stranger(aka 990N) to get them Hi-Ho sliver away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twignberries Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 In a telephone interview this weekend, Josh Howard, the executive producer of the "60 Minutes'' Wednesday edition, said that he did not initially know who was Ms. Mapes' primary source for the documents but that he did not see any reason to doubt them. "did not see any reason to doubt them"? Is he kidding? How about healthy skepticism? As long as the media acts with such stupidity and naivet?, they will be ripe for manipulation by the agents of power. It's time to "man up", admit the mistake, and make changes so it doesn't happen again. Scapegoating and sluffing responsibility only helps the bad guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearbones Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 I don't get it. The president gets bad information, acts on it, and thousands of people die. Dan Rather gets bad information, acts on it, and there are people calling for his dismissal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 The reason the 60 Minutes story is important has nothing to do with Bush's service record. The story is important because if the White House can dupe them - and destroy their credibility - and bring down the only remaining news organization with the gonads to take them on - it's over. That's what this is about. Do you care? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NWD Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Methinks Iran lies in the backgound here, Kerry better win-Huh! Greetings Brian4. Sen. Kerry functions as a screen onto which people, who are fed up with the war-starting behavior of the current administration, project their hopes and wishes. However, in his published utterances, Sen. Kerry gives us no particular reason to assume that he's any more peaceful than Pres. Bush. On the contrary, he has said pretty openly that he's no peacenik. I question how much difference it makes, from the standpoint of US policy in the Middle East, who wins the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machinehead Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 Light Crude: CL Oct. $46.19 +0.59 Lest we forget, Oil Shock III (crude oil over $40) has been underway for about four months now. That's VERY different from 1990 (Iraq War I), when crude oil spiked to $40 in an environment of press hysteria, and promptly collapsed. This time, there's great complacency, while the price keeps drifting upward. Cumulative economic damage is occurring as these high prices persist. The economy's crack habit is getting worse. Its tongue has gray fur, and there are ugly tracks and pock marks on its veins ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The brown one Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 The reason the 60 Minutes story is important has nothing to do with Bush's service record. The story is important because if the White House can dupe them - and destroy their credibility - and bring down the only remaining news organization with the gonads to take them on - it's over. That's what this is about. Do you care? Now that sounds most probable.Rove will not tolerate any media dissent. The last nail in the media coffin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yobob1 Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 The coming devlauation then will not necessarily be against the other major currencies, although that still is more than likely. But it will be devalued against a basket of 'real' goods - oil, gold, etc.. Some commodities and especially RE may decline in nominal terms, but overall dollars will buy less as time goes on. If all currencies remain in a relatively stable trading range (which is what I've been saying would be the probable outcome for a prolonged period), then you're implying rising commodity prices in all currencies? Oil is a wild card and could go either way depending on ultimate demand and geopolitical concerns. NG seems destined to go higher, however if the economy rolls over seriously even that could be suspect not to mention the normal reaction to higher prices, i.e. t-stats get lowered. PMs may remain stuck for a while longer IMO A major slump in RE, particularly in the US, combined with lifted tarifs on Canada could cause lumber to soften considerably. Copper too is vulnerable on the home front and the resolution of several ongoing strikes. Most base metals are well off their highs and agricultural products are headed down if one looks at the GSI. Cattle remain penned up by mad-cow trade constraints IMO the slowdown in consumption, first in the US and rapidly spreading first to Asia and then onto Europe and the rest of the globe will cause the funds & hedgies to run screaming from their positions. Then and only then will we find out just where we stand in the new commodities bull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian4 Posted September 20, 2004 Report Share Posted September 20, 2004 stop 1130 watch 10215 a break there and and its a cliff dive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.