Now This

This blog is now read by more machines than humans: RSS robots, spam-laying insectopoids, echoes of blog-gathering .edu projects. This essentially is the state of affairs that all human activities w

Cleaning Up the Nation

Austin Bay:

If Air America were a conservative radio network its corrupt funding trail and cynical abuse of a poverty program would be front page news at the NY Times and full-time mega-scandal at

Rank Materialism

Freedom. I am now the proud new owner of a Gateway 6020GZ laptop, perfect for students and others with limited means. I can now go into a Starbucks or a Barnes & Noble and look like I'm doing some

Fallujah Fonda

Uh-oh. From the Telegraph comes this exciting news:

Jane Fonda is returning to anti-war activism and embarking on a cross-country tour to call for an end to US military operations in Iraq.

Acros

John Pilger: Partner in Terrorism

In an outrageous piece of terrorist propaganda appearing on the cover of today's New Statesman, John Pilger puts the blame for the 7/7 London attacks not on the terrorists, but rather on Tony Blair:

Faith-Based Journalism

Since Friday, at the very latest, CBS News has been a news network deranged. CBS News is practicing faith-based journalism, and I don't mean that in a good way.

There's no evidence that the forgeries are not forgeries. CBS only sought support for their story; they didn't seek critical opinions. They didn't want to talk to people whose views CBS was sure would not fit CBS's narrative. They exaggerated the tepid support that they could glean from half-informed witnesses and professionals whose expertise was limited in scope. CBS is not performing like a news organization seeking the truth. CBS is acting as a cult which has absolute faith in their own truth, and is seeking converts. Getting people to believe their truth is the most important thing, and lies in the service of this truth are no lies at all.

By now what little testimony that existed for the documents being real has almost totally peeled away. Yet Dan Rather is telling the public that he believes, and you should believe too. The documents are genuine because they speak to the truth. Prove that they don't! Don't let your senses get in the way of the beautiful truth (which is real).

There are many disciples out there, you've read them, paying their respects to CBS's truth. All it takes is a will to believe and a trick of the mind that makes transubstantiation seem straightforward by comparison. IBM Executive Selectric Composer with proportional fonts and a dozen font balls- sure, why not? Bush is the devil and to defeat him you've got to have faith that these documents are real. So do whatever it takes to believe.

And when Grand High Exalted Father Rather comes crashing down, dragging what's left of the credibility of a major news organization with him, blame the devil and look for the next high priest.

In the meantime, CBS News execs and employees are either in thrall to the religion, bedazzled by Rather's cult, or are being held hostage by the true beleivers. Slapping the believers in the face probably won't make them snap out of it. Is there a journalist in that organization who'll rise up, and go, go to the window, open it, and shout "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!"?

Hey, whatever happened to Connie Chung?

Trackbacks

Comments

Posted elsewhere, too:

Either Rather plus his producers are colossally stupid, really, or they know what they said Monday night and hoped to fool some colossally stupid people. I go with Rather is colossally stupid, as follows:

We say they are forgeries because we say someone went out of their way to make them look original.

Here is what Rather said tonight:

1. "We checked the signature handwriting on the copies!"

We say, sure, but I can myself easily go out of my way to make documents with copies of Killian's signature. So could any forger. What's your point?

2. His expert said, "The documents show that the same key was used for a character one and a character ell. If you used different keystrokes in a Word Processor a laser printer would never print them the same!"

We say, sure, but I can myself easily go out of my way to make documents with the same key used for a character one and a character ell. So could any forger. What's your point?

3. His expert said, "The documents have a superscript 'th' and same-size-lower-justified 'th'. Someone using a word processor would have to go out of their way to duplicate that!"

(Uh, gee, can't even brain-dead Dan Rather see through that one????)

We say, sure, but I can myself easily go out of my way to make a superscript 'th' and same-size-lower-justified 'th'. So could any forger. What's your point?

(Not to mention that the Blogs are full of the fact tonight that clearly lowercase ells were used to turn off auto-superscripting!!!")

4. Rather says, "Look here, some of the dates in our documents match some other dates known in the public domain. That contributes to their authenticity."

This is really getting tiresome. Dan Rather really is as stupid as he looks.

We say, sure, but I can myself easily go out of my way to find public domain dates to put into a document. So could any forger. What's your point?

5. I wasn't going to add this because it doesn't have the same idiotic obvious flavor of the others, but it bears saying.

That "expert" Glennon (let's hear it for 15 minutes of fame!) says that all of the features in the memo were existent at that time and could be ordered as special features. Rather said essentially the same thing in his first defense on Friday.

We have no interest in a general assertion of that nature. Show us the machine that had ALL of them simultaneously, period. And I add, that machine must have the pseudo-kerning of the documents, it must tuck the "r" under the "f" in "from" and it must do it in a reasonably automatic way that would make us think a 1972 Lt. Col. would use it to dash off memos.

(All of those type capabilities probably existed SOMEWHERE in 1950, 1925, 1875? I'm just guessing. The issue is not did the type capabilities exist but did they exist in one machine that a 1972 Lt. Col. would use to dash off memos?)

So, really, multiple times tonight Rather and his experts used the defense "you would have to go out of your way to get those results in a WORD PROCESSOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Uh, yes, that is by definition what a forgery is.

So, I reiterate, if Rather could not see that he is monumentally stupid (my explanation) or, it was so painfully obvious the extraordinarily transparently bad logic that I had to consider the possibility that he knows better and just figured it would totally dupe his stupid listeners. I admit I had to re-play the part about the 1's & l's to fully grasp the total stupidity what they were saying, so maybe Dan is right and can get away with it.

Respectfully submitted,

jwniii

Check for new comments.

Add Your Comment

Name (required)

Email (not required, not displayed)

Web (optional - will be linked)

Comment (max 4000 characters)


Reload Image

Enter Code

Top Tags
Archives