Dear CBS Colleagues,

[JonTheRvelator]

Dear CBS News Colleagues,

Many of you have expressed understandable concern about the disputed documents used in the 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY report on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard.

Obviously, 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY had full confidence in the original report or it would not have aired. However, in the wake of serious and disturbing questions that came up after the broadcast, CBS News has done extensive additional reporting in an effort to confirm the documents' authenticity. That included interviews with Marian Carr Knox, secretary to the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the officer named as the author of the documents; an interview with Bill Burkett, the former Guard officer who provided the memos to 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY; and a further review of the forensic evidence on both sides of the debate.

Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret.

CBS News and CBS management are commissioning an independent review of the process by which the report was prepared and broadcast to help determine what actions need to be taken. The names of the people conducting the review will be announced shortly, and their findings will be made public.

Nothing is more important to us than our credibility and keeping faith with the millions of people who count on us for fair, accurate, reliable, and independent reporting. I know all of you work tirelessly to be worthy of that trust. I hope today's public statements about the documents are an important first step in restoring YOUR confidence in the standards and systems we have in place to ensure that we live up to our obligations to our viewers, listeners, and readers -- and to one another.

Thanks
Andrew


:lol I love it.

[JonTheRvelator]

please note:

We do not apologize however for misrepresenting the president. We stand by the content of this document. Even if its a lie.

After all we only apologize to people that support our agenda.

[cyberhound]

This is interesting:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&u=/ap/20040921/ap_on_el_pr/cbs_guard_kerry_1&printer=1

Why would a CBS news producer call the Kerry campaign to suggest Joe Lockhart get in contact with the person they got the forged documents from before they broke the story?

[marco j]

question? how do you verify authenticity of a photo copy????

[cyberhound]

question? how do you verify authenticity of a photo copy????That's part of the problem. However, experts can determine many things from the typefaces on the documents. And according to them, the documents are forged, and most likely were created in Microsoft Word and not a circa late 60's-early 70's typewriter. There are other things in the documents such as wording, and a fake PO box that raised red flags.

[marco j]

i've also heard that there were some (few to be sure) typewriters out at the time hat also produced the same type of comma's ect.. and what is this about wording???

[cyberhound]

i've also heard that there were some (few to be sure) typewriters out at the time hat also produced the same type of comma's ect.. and what is this about wording???
The "typewriter" (singular) that some purport could have done so is an IBM Selectric Composer. And actually it's not a typewriter, but rather a typesetting machine that was used to produce justifed camera ready copy for publications. It's cost in 1972 was about $4000. That's about $17,000 to $18,000 in today's dollars. You don't really believe that a National Guard Lt. Col. (who couldn't type by the way, and the secretary for his unit says she never typed them) typed memos in 1973 on a "typewriter" with that equivalent cost, do you? You should know, however, that the Air National Guard, then and now, generally receives much of its equipment as hand-me-downs from the Air Force.

[Davenumber40]

I don't care about specifics. They ran a story that they didn't do enough checking up on to verify. Several weeks ago a Boston Globe reporter said the swift boat vets didn't "meet the burden of proof" in making their claims worthy of major media attention (call me crazy but I thought that was the journalists' job). I think this just shows that many in the media look at things with liberal blinders.

[marco j]

i saw part of the rather interview and heard the 80 year old woman speak. it was hard to tell if she meant when she said"i did not type those documents" "but i have typed a
letter with the exact content". the reason this is weird is because this essentially lets her and cbs off the hook. it can mean both. she typed the originals...."not those documents" (because the ones referred to are photo copy's , also it can mean "i didn't type thos documents" meaning not the ones represented but ones similar. anyways.
we still know bush was never there and probably was discharged for failing his physical
(drug test). no biggie.

[Davenumber40]

i saw part of the rather interview and heard the 80 year old woman speak. it was hard to tell if she meant when she said"i did not type those documents" "but i have typed a
letter with the exact content". the reason this is weird is because this essentially lets her and cbs off the hook. it can mean both. she typed the originals...."not those documents" (because the ones referred to are photo copy's , also it can mean "i didn't type thos documents" meaning not the ones represented but ones similar. anyways.
we still know bush was never there and probably was discharged for failing his physical
(drug test). no biggie.

That's the attitude. We have no proof but we all know it's true.

[DMBSignGuy]

I'm curious about something. here people are asking for rathers to resign because he got bad information and ran with it. so how is this any different than when bush got bad information and ran with it? should he not be held responsible as well?

[JonTheRvelator]

That's the attitude. We have no proof but we all know it's true.

= the liberal mentality.

[DMBSignGuy]

= the liberal mentality.

ah yes i do remember reading that in my training manual. :rolleyes:

[Evans]

I am LOVING this whole CBS fiasco...it is true proof of a liberal agenda on the part of the media. These people who are supposed to be the pillars of objectivity now find themselves a disgrace to their own profession. Caught with their pants down...this is so great!

[JonTheRvelator]

ah yes i do remember reading that in my training manual. :rolleyes:


well then, I rest my case.

[DMBSignGuy]

double post :p

[DMBSignGuy]

well then, I rest my case.
:freak

[JonTheRvelator]

:freak

:goat

[DMBSignGuy]

:goat

oh yea...take this :ggoat

[cyberhound]

I'm curious about something. here people are asking for rathers to resign because he got bad information and ran with it. so how is this any different than when bush got bad information and ran with it? should he not be held responsible as well?
Did Bush know the information was bad at the time? I'm not entirely sure. Either way, I don't think we should have invaded Iraq. For that and other reasons I want him gone. Kerry, however, is no real and viable alternative. As for Rather, he and others at CBS ignored contrary evidence and warnings about those documents. He knew the information was bad and ran with it. And it appears his producer made contact with the Kerry campaign in order to either tip them off to it or to use it (access) as help to get the phony documents. Whether he should be fired or not is the problem of his CBS superiors.

[DMBSignGuy]

Did Bush know the information was bad at the time? I'm not entirely sure. Either way, I don't think we should have invaded Iraq. For that and other reasons I want him gone. Kerry, however, is no real and viable alternative. As for Rather, he and others at CBS ignored contrary evidence and warnings about those documents. He knew the information was bad and ran with it. And it appears his producer made contact with the Kerry campaign in order to either tip them off to it or to use it (access) as help to get the phony documents. Whether he should be fired or not is the problem of his CBS superiors.

True true, it wasnt a Kerry plug. I was asking how the CBS fiasco was any different. Bush also recieved information that said the intel may not be 100% accurate or that the evidence given is only speculation. You could say bush ignored contray evidence and warnings about the intel he recieved. again, not justifying CBS or advocating Kerry. Just pointing out the comparison and the different reaction to each, ie. Bad intel for Bush, not his fault. Bad intel for Rathers, his fault.