I see that there isn't a thread on this, so I thought I would start out by stating my firm belief that the so-called Killian memos aired by Dan Rather during a 60 Minutes II episode on Wednesday, September 8, 2004 were crude (and "rather" obvious) forgeries.
A definitive analysis is provided here. My degree of confidence on this is, as I've referred to before as my CT test, at the "stake my life" level.
It is certainly weird that this forum of skeptics haven't addressed this topic before, especially since it would seem to be perfect subject matter for the application of critical thinking skills. But now is as good a time as any to discuss it because of a new, revisionist movie that is about to be released called, ironically enough, "Truth".
The film apparently whitewashes the greatest journalistic fraud of the 21st century and treats the perpetrators - Dan Rather and Mary Mapes - as heroes who have been slandered due to pressure on CBS from a right-wing cabal.
The NY Times, naturally, adds its own imprimatur to this disgusting revisionism, by sympathetically interviewing Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, and their Hollywood avatars, Robert Redford and Cate Blanchett (respectively, I think), here.
Dan Rather is allowed to make some rather shocking assertions without being challenged. These include the claim that his "missteps" were within the normal range of journalistic error, and the claim that the story was true, but the problem was that he couldn't authenticate it to the degree required by journalist standards. In fact, the story was wholly untrue. Bush did not shirk his duty in the Texas Air National Guard, and he was actually thought of very highly by his commanding officers. Regardless, a fraud of the scale of Rather's and Mapes fraud, especially 60 days before the Presidential election, does not fit within the normal range of journalism. It doesn't even fit within the normal range of a negative attack ad during a campaign. It is way out there on the fringes of disgusting slander and manipulation of the political process. The fraud is documented in great detail in the CBS-commissioned Thornburg-Boccardi review.
Is Hollywood really so delusional and/or ruthless that it will embrace this movie? Are liberals really so delusional and/or ruthless that they will treat such pathological liars as Rather and Mapes as heroes who have been persecuted?
Inquiring minds want to know.
A definitive analysis is provided here. My degree of confidence on this is, as I've referred to before as my CT test, at the "stake my life" level.
It is certainly weird that this forum of skeptics haven't addressed this topic before, especially since it would seem to be perfect subject matter for the application of critical thinking skills. But now is as good a time as any to discuss it because of a new, revisionist movie that is about to be released called, ironically enough, "Truth".
The film apparently whitewashes the greatest journalistic fraud of the 21st century and treats the perpetrators - Dan Rather and Mary Mapes - as heroes who have been slandered due to pressure on CBS from a right-wing cabal.
The NY Times, naturally, adds its own imprimatur to this disgusting revisionism, by sympathetically interviewing Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, and their Hollywood avatars, Robert Redford and Cate Blanchett (respectively, I think), here.
Dan Rather is allowed to make some rather shocking assertions without being challenged. These include the claim that his "missteps" were within the normal range of journalistic error, and the claim that the story was true, but the problem was that he couldn't authenticate it to the degree required by journalist standards. In fact, the story was wholly untrue. Bush did not shirk his duty in the Texas Air National Guard, and he was actually thought of very highly by his commanding officers. Regardless, a fraud of the scale of Rather's and Mapes fraud, especially 60 days before the Presidential election, does not fit within the normal range of journalism. It doesn't even fit within the normal range of a negative attack ad during a campaign. It is way out there on the fringes of disgusting slander and manipulation of the political process. The fraud is documented in great detail in the CBS-commissioned Thornburg-Boccardi review.
Is Hollywood really so delusional and/or ruthless that it will embrace this movie? Are liberals really so delusional and/or ruthless that they will treat such pathological liars as Rather and Mapes as heroes who have been persecuted?
Inquiring minds want to know.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1MshfU4
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire