Rather INFURIATED

Let's look at the CBS story for a minute...

An anonymous person faxes Texas National Guard documents which are not complimentary to the President of the United States.

CBS sends the faxed documents to document analysists who indicate that the documents are questionable at best, both in typeface and in signature.

As a matter of fact the font in which the documents were created wasn't even INVENTED until YEARS after the "document" was written.

Yet CBS used the documents as part of the backbone of a report aired on their flagship news show - 60 Minutes.

After a furor started first on the internet, and then in the mainstream press, Dan Rather first defended CBS News and himself. It took Dan almost two weeks to come to terms with the fact that he was incorrect.

What happened?

Dan Rather didn't do his homework. He is paid millions of dollars as the Senior News Director at CBS News. What did this man do? Dan Rather passed the buck. He took the word of his underlings and let them run wild. I don't think wild is too strong a word.

When a news department attacks the reputation of a standing President - they better have gotten their facts straight. Saying that the meaning of the documents was correct but the documents were false doesn't cut the mustard.

Dan "let it slide".... WHY? because he either a) he didn't care enough to look at the details (a document expert rebuff is an document expert rebuff), or b) because he agreed politically with the point or c) there was an incentive - perhaps monetary, perhaps ego.

Let's say that Dan let the story slide for the sake of his ego. Then you have to call into question every single story CBS News has ever produced and broadcast. Dan singlehandedly broke his unwritten agreement with the people of the United States, and of the world and his place of employ.

Is a call for Dan's resignation too harsh?

No. Not when you look at his history, Dan attacked George Bush Senior during an interview in the 1980s, also with bad information. One can surmise that Dan Rather doesn't like the Bush Family.

Dan allowed his bias to blind himself and jeopardized the entire network's reputation.

Dan Rather shouldn't have apologized tonight. He should have explained WHY his judgement is clouded, and where else this cloud could have hurt the facts.

Until Dan's resignation or retirement is complete, steer clear of CBS News.

The U.N. (again!)

The UN promise, when it was conceived, was to give the little countries an equal voice to the big rich countries. Every country had a vote - at least in the General Assembly.

The UN has failed - yet again - most recently in Sudan. Sudan's genocide is another example of failure. Innocent people are dying!

Can someone remind me of a UN success?

Thank you.

Debate Amnesia

Every four years the American media gives up on its own reporting of the Presidential Race. Then the media says "it will be all decided in the debates".

We ALL forget that the debates aren't debates, but 2 minute platform soundbites.

After the debates finish, then we remember how worthless they are, and then discuss how the debates should be more engaging for the candidates including head to head discussions, not just statements.

This year will probably be no different.

*sigh*

Set an example

So here we have it.

Terror funded by the countries who objected to the resolutions to help the Iraqi people.

The US takes a leadership role (rightly or wrongly) and tries to clean up the mess left behind by saddam's old regime.

Other nations sit on the sidelines as Iraqi (and Spanish) innocents are blown up in acts of terror.

Terror knows no borders. The Spanish found that out, and decided to dive under the rug. The Russians recently found that out too. Their answer is to take the same "preemptive" doctrine Bush developed in late 2001/early 2002.

Yes, you Euro rug divers, you haven't taken the bull by the horns. The world has changed since 2001. It's a different world. No, you won't be getting your oil for food dollars, and yes, you have decided to passively take it out on the US, without any leadership suggestions of your own, just complaining and whining.

If the US fails, the dissenting UN countries will have to take what is handed them, whether they like it or not. There may not be a US to rescue them as the US did in WWI and WWII.

So the warning is - be careful what you ask for, you might get it.....

The U.N.

When is enough enough?

This windbag of an institution should condemn ITSELF for what it currently allows.

Let me remind you:

The UN allowed itself to be partisan in the Balkan peninnsula only after nearly complete genocide took place. Genocide Pres. Bush Sr. allowed to happen. A genocide my family heard me deplore as it was happening.

The UN Security Council voted on and PASSED resolution 1441, and 1472 in favor of military action as a last resort against Iraq.

In resolution 1483 the UN acknowledges the US/UK authority in Iraq.

In resolution 1511 the UN tells itself to increase its own presence in Iraq.

My question is: "WHERE THE HELL IS THE U.N. AS INNOCENT PEOPLE CONTINUE TO BE BOMBED??????"

Now the public hears that our sandal wearing friend saddam diverted the "oil for food" program money to terrorists, and that the UN is going to open an "investigation".

NO WONDER that koffi's office had so many bugs! yeesh, not only did the US and UK have an interest in what was happening, so did all those neat euro-buddies of ours - France, Germany, and Russia.

When does this UN get demolished and eventually rebuilt?

Why do the Democrats take this institution so seriously? so much so, that if Bill Clinton ran for a third term, the US would have fully disarmed and GIVEN ALL our tech to the asking - namely China.

WHY HAVEN'T ANY UN TROOPS BEEN DISPATCHED TO IRAQ? IS IT TO PUNISH THE US?

It's obvious that the iraqi people are naturally benevolent. have you heard about the towns which shut their lights off so the US chopper pilots can fly in and use their nightsight glasses? the iraqi want peace the way any society after war wants peace. they want to grieve the loss of the hundreds of thousands of innocently killed individuals they've lost in the last 20+ years.

Here is the reason why no troops have been dispatched. It's because the old guard in Europe is tired of the US's agenda. They don't want to take orders anymore, they think the US is arrogant. Yes, maybe we are, and we've exported our Disney trash and hip hop music, but hell, if a Euro-renaissance was going to take place in the meantime, WHERE IS IT?

The US is the best this planet's got going right now. If the rest of the world wants a cultural war - so be it - but let's NOT involve the deaths of innocent Iraqis.

Truly, the blood of the American soldiers are on the hands of every dissenter at the UN.

Bottom line is, although the US "occupation" of Iraq looks bad right now, the mission/goal to free the Iraqi people from a dictator, bring stability to the region, and allow self rule was a good one.

Life would be better if the countries of the world (like France and Germany) would join in and CLEAN the US's mess. Instead they sit on the sidelines or run away (thanks Spain). Who REALLY ends up paying? the average Iraqi citizen. the same citizen who now signs up for the national police force and is blown up by terrorists.

another national security issue....

the failure of the palmdale california atac center. there are about a handful of these centers in this country. IF this was a terrorist radio jamming incident (the back up systems failed as well), then it would be very easy to jam the few stations around this country which control almost all flights.

think about it. all the atac stations jammed and planes in high altitude flight can't navigate themselves. several issues:

a) the successful thwarting of terror was in part due to the grounding of airliners on the afternoon of 9-11-01. these big birds had to be "talked down" to the nearest airport, by, you guessed it, atac centers like the one in palmdale.

b) if all the atacs were shut down then you'd have "blind" commercial aircraft with innocent travellers who wouldn't know where to go - loaded with fuel.

i think you can see where this scenario might go.

a national security threat

the los alamos missing fissionable nuclear material. yes, 5 people were fired the other day, but should the al qaeda be even close - this material could tip the scales toward their success.

Dan Blather and CBS

this is another example of the continued dismantling of a 20th century structure.

the continued credible sea change in the way people of influence get their information. this is another angle of what drudge started a few years ago with the bill/monica story.

what is alarming is that viacom doesn't intervene and reprimand dan rather. the news division (and network) may never recover from this blow to its integrity.

it means a potential loss of revenue, and when properly addressed, it may be too late.