CBS owned up to their mistake, will DU'ers?

[Red State Rebel]

Last week during the heat of the memo questions, I saw more than one thread where anyone who actually doubted the authenticity of those memos was - shall we say - treated badly. While I'll be the first to say I admire the fire and enthusiasm of people on DU who fight for our cause, it does us no good to attack each other.

How many people do we drive away from here by refusing to allow others to look at things differently? I know it's hard to weed out all the trolls, but our cause needs all the help it can get.

There is such a thing as respectfully agreeing to disagree, I think a little civility would have gone a long way in this situation. I personally was too afraid to post my views as I knew I would get slammed along with everyone else who dared say it. That climate of fear and intimidation is not what I believe the ideals of our party stand for.

I hope those of you that were so harsh will take think twice before attacking the next time someone on here disagrees with your views.

[vi5]

1. I tend to agree, although I will be in the minority on this thread...

..that much I can predict for you.

Some of us were so desparate for payback on the swift boat vets thing that we jumped on this and wouldn't let it go no matter how much evidence there was to the contrary.

I still say that none of us actually know and there is still no definitive answer on this stuff. But the degree to which we tried to put all our eggs in one basket with this and now look silly is and was troubling.

[Cocoa]

2. none of us knew whether they were authentic

actually, this is still the case, even if CBS does retract the story.

All we knew is that there was a familiar rush on the Internet by the right wing to assert that they were fake, with dubious evidence.

Can you blame people for not wanting DU to be part of that premature rush?

[Red State Rebel]

8. CBS already has according to this mornings NYTimes

I'm not blaming people for having their opinions, it's just the way people were treated who disagreed with them.

[Warpy]

22. CBS said from the very beginning

that their experts said there was no way to authenticate them fully, since they were copies of other documents, not original. They said that according to every source they had (including handwriting experts, colleagues of Killian, forensice experts), that the memos were likely genuine. They need to stand by this. There is no reason to retract the substance of those memos, since that substance has been confirmed by more than one person, including Killian's secretary.

Sorry, freeps, but the network always claimed the memos were "probably genuine." No retraction is necessary.

Retracting the whole story is simply not in the cards. After all, the White House never denied the contents of those memos. In fact, no one has come forward to deny a single word contained in those memos.

That is the real story, you know, not the nitpicking.

[Kierkegaard]

26. The White House has turned the tables:

"...White House officials have said they saw no reason to challenge documents being presented by a credible news organization."

So, instead of examining the documents themselves, they took CBS's word for it. Slick. Rover's MO.

Whether they're copies, duplicates or inspired by God, the content is still viable as confirmed by two independent sources. That SHOULD be the story, but not here in the alternate universe. Unbelievable.

[Paradise]

3. :) it ain't easy but i'll try hard. :) n/t

[AP]

4. DU'ers need to appreciate the Rove strategy. Bush did do what the memos

said, but now the story is about the medium and not the message. It's about fonts and motivations, and not about the allegations the memos contain.

[Cassandra]

7. Which suggests to me that...

all roads lead to Rove.

[WilliamPitt]

5. It was a good try

The Parlock story is a case in point: Folks here got wise to it, thanks to Rezmutt, and we stomped the "Democrat Union Bully" story to death in a day. That was an example of how we can help turn the news. Unfortunately, the freeps did the same with the Guard memos story.

I can't say I'm sad the story is dead now. I'm not. We've got other fish to fry.

[Red State Rebel]

14. Exactly! We pulled together and made a positive difference...

it was great seeing that process in action last week!!

[Stephanie]

6. I still haven't seen evidence that they are fake

Have you?

[Rose Siding]

33. Fake media reached fake conclusion to the advantage of a....

fake president.

CW is Controlled Reality.

[GiovanniC]

38. Bravo

Well said.

[John BigBootay]

48. I still haven't seen evidence that we went to the moon, either...

[seabeyond]

9. point taken,.....though i sat back and listened cause i didnt know

but there is more to the story. how "forged" they are i think is in question.

[Catt03]

10. so....they are definitely fake?

[Cocoa]

15. no

[the Kelly Gang]

11. who says they are fake..unless you believe Sludge's misleading headline

[WilliamPitt]

16. Um

http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/politics/campaign/20guard.html&OQ=pagewantedQ3DallQ26positionQ3D

[Cocoa]

19. that article says CBS is going to retract its story

it doesn't say the memos are fake. I don't think the NYT has a copy of the memos, so the NYT couldn't conclude such a thing.

It also says the CBS decision to retract isn't final.

[the Kelly Gang]

31. these days..I believe it when CBS says it

[imax2268]

12. I'm glad that I stayed somewhat out of this one...

but what get's me is that the message in those documents was ignored...the whole purpose of the right wing attacks on them...they figure that the documents are fake so the facts in them must be fake also...

[el_gato]

13. I for one, never gave a rats ass either way

You see, I've got better things to do than get caught up in the latest phoney issue du jour.

People are still dying in the desert for a lie.
Bush is still lying through his teeth.
Our democracy is still in jeopardy.
And all some of you want to do is follow the latest bullshit that the t.v. is telling you to follow.

[Rambis]

17. The bottom line is...

What the memos say has never been in question! The content is consistant with everything the sec., the dead guy , and all the anti bush people have said all along. The POS didn't do his duty and they will never be able to proove that he did.

[Cocoa]

23. that's true

and it's possible for that part of the story to get out. CBS could weather the coming firestorm, and continue reporting on the story like they said they would.

I hope that's what happens.

[papau]

18. "forged" or Faked or planted with correct information? What was "mistake"?

CBS said its mistake was going to air and not expressing doubts as to the provability of the documents being written in 72.

Not quite saying they were fakes.

If Bill Burkett says he faked them and faxed them to Cleland, then they are fakes, then perhaps folks that question the motives of others at DU that claim they were fake now have egg on their face.

Otherwise, CBS made a presentation error in telling a true story - and got conned - be it by Rove or by Burkett.

As to "There is such a thing as respectfully agreeing to disagree, I think a little civility would have gone a long way in this situation" you are stating a motherhood/apple pie truth that I hope you do not expect many at DU to disagree with!

peace

:-)

[spanone]

20. CBS is investigating. Not proven fake yet dude.

There is nothing indicating this turn on the CBS website so therefore I doubt it's authenticity. Besides DUers made no mistakes, they were only reacting to the news as it was reported. So hold your finger-waving at DU and let the facts speak.

[F.Gordon]

37. You might want to check again

It does seems that the "media" has already decided what CBS will say.

CBS sources confirm that the network plans to issue a statement but would not comment on its content. Additional reporting on the documents dispute will air on Monday's CBS Evening News.

and bush* has gone from "not recalling seeing these documents" to..

"There are a lot of questions about the documents, and they need to be answered."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml

[spooky3]

21. does anyone find it strange that CBS is not the first to "report"

this story? Why wouldn't they make an announcement (or maybe I missed it) on one of their news shows?

And how do they feel currently about the CONTENT of the memos, which is what they have contended to be the main focus of the story all along?

[Cocoa]

24. unofficial leaks?

I assume CBS would prefer doing it your way, but individuals decided to talk on their own.

[spooky3]

35. probably; in any case, this is why I want to hear the whole story

from them before drawing conclusions about what CBS has or has not decided.

[Bridget Burke]

25. Let's see the actual CBS statement first.

Of course, Matt Drudge & the august New York Times never report with a slant.

[ClassWarrior]

29. Bingo!

[digno dave]

27. Sadly, DUers sometimes let their biases sway their reasoning

[NV1962]

28. *cough*

And you derive from CBS's disclaimer what exactly?

That the docs are inherently proven to be bogus?

Oh dear:

1. I'll accept the possibility that part of the "new" docs are, well, new. Killian's secretary wasn't quite sure of the authenticity of all of 'em - but she patently allowed that the content of those memos appeared authentic.
   
2. I'm not done yet with the "typographical superduper experts" (like, the Bush campaign-connected lawyer who was first to raise "doubts") Some pretty strong arguments can be found right here on DU - like here.
   
3. Now here's a tactical consideration: even assuming that the "CBS memos" are phony - does that deny the pretty strong circumstantial evidence that Bush went AWOL? I don't think so.
   
4. Building on the previous point, I'll take "memogate" and fan it loud and clear across, because the underlying theme is that Bush is untrustworthy, lazy, dumb, arrogant, and most certainly unfit for the Office of the President of the United States of America.
   
5. Going even further: here's just one more great issue to toss the other guys for a loop with a substantial case of dereliction of duty (with criminal ramifications if it were Joe Schmo!) and you're eager to toss this baby with the bathwater!? I do't think so.
   
6. Finally, the fact that CBS launches a pre-emptive disclaimer doesn't mean anything other than they're doing what the header of that "suspect" memo said: CYA. They have their reasons to get the bushista mob off their back - we don't have to follow them blindly, because we have much less pressing reasons to even avoid the impression of being "biased." We are biased - and damned proud of it. But the issue isn't being biased or not - it's whether it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bush went AWOL. So far, the accusation holds.

No?

[Red State Rebel]

32. You missed the point of my post....

All indications are that CBS is backing away from the memos. We may never know who made them, but there is no credible source for them. I'm not saying the content isn't true at all.

The point of my post is that people who who disagreed with others on here about whether the documents were real or forged were attacked for having a different opinion.

The best strategy for winning this thing is to admit when it's time to put aside an issue that isn't going anywhere and move on to something that will work for us.

In my personal opinion :) this story has done more harm than the Swift Boat BS because it not only brings into question the credibility of CBS, it brings into question whether the DNC was part of the story and most importantly, it has diverted attention to our fighting on the current issues that are more important.

[Blue_Roses]

30. so the documents arrived anonymously?

this whole story stinks to high heavens! I hope CBS does do a thorough investigation into where these documents came from and THEN air that! Remember when Al Gore's campaign received a copy of the debate tape? Rove, Rove, Rove...:eyes:

[John BigBootay]

49. Be careful what you wish for....

I thought this smelled very Rovian as well when it first broke. I'm now concerned that Burkett is involved and RWers are implicating Cleland. Yeesh...

[Nederland]

34. I was attacked and outnumbered

but I say we move on. No need to focus on what's past. We've got a lot more work to do to unseat Bush, and this is not helping any.

[malatesta1137]

36. You're helping Karl Rove divert attention

This is NOT about CBS or DUers, even if the memos were fake, the information in them is true. THIS IS ABOUT BUSH BEING A COWARD.

[Sparkle]

39. I wasn't one of the ones that said they were authentic.

No one really knew. They looked it to me. But what I want to know is has it been proven that they are not authentic? Did I miss something?

[Mr Blond]

40. I was afraid to post my views...

...because I am new.

I'll admit, I'm no Word or 1970s typwriter expert, but I know two things for sure...

A 1970s Naval Reserve unit is more likely to be using equipment from the 30s than they are likely to be using brand new equipment.

The overlay of the two documents was just too coincendtal.


I wish I had felt at ease enough to post my real views during all that, but I'll accept the fact that "Newbies" need to earn certain rights around here, and also pledge to never treat a newbie badly...We need all the help we can get!!

We can all turn this into a positive if we try. :)

[arbusto_baboso]

41. Mistake? There's still NO proof the memos are fake...

just the suppositions and rumor-mongering of people who WANT them to be fake.

The fact that everything these memos ASSERT seems to be lost on you.

Why should I admit something which hasn't been proved, especially when the burden of proof is on those who call the memos fake?

[Nederland]

44. Give it up

At this point even Rather knows memos were fake, even if he won't use those exact words.

[AmyStrange]

47. exactly...

there is still no proof that they are forgeries, only a statement that CBS can't authenticate them. The point isn't whether they are forgeries, but rather whether the facts asserted by them are true.

What I'm waiting for is the WH saying that the facts stated in the memos is a lie. The fact that they still haven't denied that the facts are lies is a good indication that they are worried that other docs (authentic docs) will surface that prove them wrong.

Keep in mind the deadline a court imposed for ALL the docs to be released by this Friday to AP,

d

[nomatrix]

42. Let me get this straight

Unless you were......

Bush superiors who wrote or received the memo

weren't dead or were willing to come forward

produce a witness who watched you write the memo

have the original

a squadron to attest to character

a doctor to attest to your fitness

a congregation to prove you faith

you would still be doubted, smeared, and left apologizing to get them to leave you and your family alone.

Anyone remember Shandra Levy and Gary Condit?


It is sad that so many do not understand that after 4+ years of this tactic.

Please read experts opinions. Not on the memo.
About the power. Those in power today are....

Worse than Watergate
by John Dean

(If you don't know about the Nixon WH.... consider
G. Gordon Liddy, convicted Watergate burglar, RW radio following.)

Edit to add question.

What are you looking for here, lemmings?

This was always crap shoot.

This isn't over yet.

[cheezus]

43. thanks for the lecture, dad

[bringbackfdr]

45. Consider this a large yawwwn

The memos are fake; the facts within the memos have yet to be proved wrong. When that happens, along with an acknowledgment from the freepers that the United States Navy last Friday confirmed the legitimacy of Kerry's service awards, I'll consider apologizing.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

46. No!!!! Why has Bush been hesitant to release his papers???