Was Dan Rather Right? Interesting

[mfcorey1]

Truth or Consequences

Eight years ago, Dan Rather broadcast an explosive report on the Air National Guard service of President George W. Bush. It was supposed to be the legendary newsman’s finest hour. Instead, it blew up in his face, tarnishing his career forever and casting a dark cloud of doubt and suspicion over his reporting—and that of every other journalist on the case. This month, as Rather returns with a new memoir, Joe Hagan finally gets to the bottom of the greatest untold story in modern Texas politics, with exclusive, never-before-seen details that shed fresh light on who was right, who was wrong, and what really happened.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/2012-05-01/feature.php

[MadHound]

1. Yes, Rather was indeed right,

But the Bush Crime Family had enough money and enough pull that they could basically pull a smear job on Rather and make it stick.

[freshwest]

25. Exactly. And GE had purchased CBS and media consolidation went wild under Powell.

And how much damage they've done since then...

[RockaFowler]

29. Not correct

GE owned NBC. CBS was purchased by Westinghouse in 1995. Viacom purchased them in 2000. They split from Viacom in 2005 to form 2 companies - CBS Corporation and Viacom.

[freshwest]

30. Thanks. Was Dan Rather right?

[baldguy]

2. Yes, Dan Rather was right.

And he was fired because of it.

[pinboy3niner]

3. Yes, Rather was right

Here's an excerpt of what I wrote to applaud Dan Rather and CBS' "60 Minutes" for pursuing the B*sh TANG story:

"I knew more than 60 guys who were killed in Vietnam, including a couple of roommates from Army training (one of whom was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously after serving what some might call a "mere" three months in combat).

"The show triggered old feelings of loss and grief . . . and then, anger.

"That the sons of privilege, the elite, the wealthy, the powerful, the connected were able to avoid service and send others in their place to risk their lives and to die fills me with outrage. That one of these "fortunate" sons has gone on to become a self-proclaimed "war President" who is attempting to win re-election by lying about his own record while smearing the honorable and valorous combat service of his opponent offends my sense of justice.

President Bush has led a life of privilege, "entitled" to be above the rules, while a lot of the friends I had never had the chance to live life at all."

[karynnj]

15. Excellent and moving response

I can't begin to imagine how hard that time was for you. I can't imagine losing 60 people I knew - most likely just beginning their adult lives. Thank you for your service.

It is sad that the point that anyone with any honesty knew true - that Bush avoided Vietnam by pulling strings should NEVER have been in question. That he obviously did not do that job as required was almost beyond the point in 2004 - it should have sunk him in 2000 - but as a sitting President his disreputable actions in his youth were no longer the issue.

What hurts the most is that this was manipulated to vindicate Bush and to make it impossible to raise the character issue.

[calimary]

24. I'd recommend this post a million times if I could!

To add insult to injury, NONE of the fucking panty-waists in bush's regime who pushed hardest for the Iraq war - EVER SERVED, ANYWHERE. Only rummy came close. He served between wars and yes, he wore his country's uniform. But he never saw combat. Everybody else had their convenient excuse - or a rich, prominent, well-connected dad - or both.

I'm glad this is being revisited. It should NEVER be forgotten or swept under the rug. Other people DIED because dubya hung out in Texas or Alabama, getting his dental work handled and sitting around the office bragging about how much he'd had to drink while out boozing the night before, and then left EARLY, some three months I think it was - before his formal time of "service" was concluded.

He squatted in that job in OUR White House for eight years. And he left an unrepentant WAR CRIMINAL.

You bet your sweet ass Dan Rather was correct. We ALL were, who raised objections of any sort to anything these bastards were up to, of which we caught wind. They were able to muzzle him, eventually - a hard-on george senior had against Dan Rather since their live confrontation on the "CBS Evening News" one night. ghwb would have loved nothing more than to destroy him. Well, it took awhile but it kinda worked.

However, they can't muzzle ALL of us, or dictate that we forget. If they do, some of us - as dubya's boss, dick cheney, would say - will have other priorities.

[pinboy3niner]

4. Oh, yeah--and here's a fuckin' clue for GWB...

[liberal N proud]

5. Yes and he was punished for telling the truth.

[Cirque du So-What]

6. Yes, Dan Rather was right

The RW noise machine managed to drop a turd in the punch bowl which cast doubt on the entire report.

[wendylaroux]

7. the troops were probably better off

without that simpering little nitwit among them,and that goes for nugent too,both of them would been a detriment to those around them. punks.

[leveymg]

12. F-102 crews did nothing except sit alert on runways at TSNAB waiting for North Vietnam bombers

Last edited Tue Apr 17, 2012, 11:30 AM - Edit history (1)

that didn't exist. That's why that (already long obsolete) type interceptor, slated for retirement, was flown by that TANG unit set aside for sons of privilege. Little or no chance any of them would ever actually get into combat.

[bongbong]

18. Interesting

That's an interesting point, since it shows his cowardice was double since he didn't even want to risk being within 10,000 miles of Vietnam.

[leveymg]

21. F-102 had only 3 real combat losses in VN as opposed to 382 F-4s shot down.

The biggest danger to F-102s were Vietcong sappers blowing up parked aircraft. Compare the losses of other types of US fixed-wing jet aircraft in Vietnam. See, Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War

* F-4 Phantom II-- --445 total, 382 in combat

-First loss was operational (non-combat), F-4C 64-0674 (45TH TFS, 15th TFW) which ran out of fuel after strike in SVN on 9 June 1965; first combat loss F-4C 64-0685 (45th TFS, 15th TFW) shot down Ta Chan, NW NVN on 20 June 1965. 9 of the losses were parked aircraft struck by rockets.
-Final loss 1973

* F-5 Freedom Fighter-- --9 total

-First loss 1965, final loss 1967

* F-100 Super Sabre-- --243 total, 198 in combat

-First loss 1964, final loss 1971

* F-102 Delta Dagger-- --14 total, 7 combat

-First loss 1964, final loss 1967. 4 of the combat losses were parked aircraft

* F-104 Starfighter-- --14 total, 9 combat

-First loss 1965, final loss 1969

* F-105D Thunderchief-- --335 total, 283 in combat

-First loss 62–4371 (36th TFS, 6441st TFW) written off from battle damage over Laos 14 August 1964, at Korat, Thailand
-Final loss 61–0153 (44th TFS, 355th TFW) shot down Laos 23 September 1970, pilot Capt. J. W. Newhouse rescued

* F-105F/G Thunderchief: "Wild Weasel," "Ryan's Raiders," "Combat Martin"-- --47 total, 37 combat

-First loss EF-105F 63-8286 (13th TFS, 388th TFW) shot down by AAA RP-6 July 1966, Maj. Roosevelt Hestle and Capt. Charles Morgan KIA
-Last loss F-105G 63-8359 (Det.1 561st TFS, 388th TFW) shot down by SAM 16 November 1972, RP-3, crew rescued

* F-111A "Aardvark"-- --11 total, 6 in combat

-First loss mission-related TFR failure, 66-0022 (428th TFS 474th TFW, Project Combat Lancer), 28 March 1968, Maj. H.E. Mccann and Capt. D.L. Graham MIA
-Final loss 67–0111 (474th TFW) mid-air collision over Cambodia, 16 June 1973, both crewmen rescued

[lunatica]

8. The answer is yes. He was right

And everyone knew it at the time. He was punished for it.

[sunwyn]

9. I have been trying to get this link to load all morning with no luck...could the site be down?

[bluethruandthru]

10. It's probably overloaded with people trying to get on it.

I've had the same problem.

[Oilwellian]

17. I read the first page

and can't get any further. I want more, more! LOL. I'm so happy to see Dan Rather's reputation restored, somewhat. Now if CBS Evening News revisited this story...

[leveymg]

11. Right on the story, but got scammed by Rove on the documents. Should have made the scam the story

I could never figure out why Rather and his Producers dug in their heels when it became apparent that they had been handed copies.

They could have saved their own reputations by turning this into a story about Rover's dirty-tricks operations, and refocused the narrative on the DoD and TANG file cleansing and cover-up, and a real dirty-tricks operation that they could then prove actually happened. That would raise the obvious question: why were the original documents removed and who was really behind this scam?

Instead, they clung to an untenable position, which was really a distraction from the real story about Dubya's AWOL, psychiatric and drug problems.

[Blue_Tires]

14. +1

[Overseas]

16. I agree!

[hughee99]

26. +1

[wiggs]

31. The secretary who produced the original document and who confirmed that

the copy was not original....herself said that the CONTENT was accurate. And what was the response to that? crickets.

[leveymg]

32. CBS corporate allowed the other side to set the narrative. Rather was sacrificed by the suits.

I recall that there was an interview with the Secretary who said that. But, it was just a small part of a larger, badly-constructed apologia. The network execs were afraid of a repeat of the Westmoreland law suit, which created a lot of ideologically-charged bad publicity.

That's why there wasn't a much more aggressive expose of the original cover-up and file cleansing. When it was clear there was a switching of documents, the focus could have shifted to the dirty-tricks operation against CBS that was part of that further cover-up and spoiling operation, with a probe of those behind it. But, the network wouldn't let Rather and the producers do that. CBS had moved to the Right under Sumner Redstone after the acquisition of CBS by Viacom, and the network executives didn't want to take on the Bush machine.

[panader0]

13. K and R

I hope this story, and ALL of the BS Bush did, never goes away. May the people find out the truth about the Bush Evil Empire.

[UTUSN]

19. R#22 for, why is there a question mark about Dan being right?!1

I read the whole thing in another thread looking for something new, but apart from some knitting-together details, all of it has been out there almost from the start. It was always about Shrub saving his ass and most of all taking revenge on one of his and Poppy's enemies. The best part of this publication now is that it will launch a new round of hashing it all over and will permanently seal it to Shrub indelibly.

[spanone]

20. k&r...

[GardeningGal]

22. A long read but well worth it.

Pretty much gives enough information to connect the dots that Bush covered everything up and lied about his guard service.

[kentuck]

23. I always thought Rather was right...

Then the Republican arm of the media got a hold of the story and destroyed him...

[NRaleighLiberal]

27. I never doubted that Rather was correct. n/t

[crunch60]

28. Must make sure this report makes it into Bush lie-brary.