Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
ScreamingEagle said:Dan Rather isn't the only one going down....Bill O-Reilly is going to sink right with him, the fool.
krisy said:I take you don't think too highly of ol Bill. Out of curiousity,why don't you like him? I like him pretty much and have almost finshed his book "Who's Lookin Out For You". Sometimes he ticks me off,but I think he leans to the right more than the left.No doubt,at times he is arrogant.
ScreamingEagle said:O'Reilly's OK in a lot of ways and I don't care if he is arrogant as long as he presents the real story but I see him backing away from some important news events. btw I read both his books and liked a lot of what he said too.
However, he fell flat on his face when he brushed off the Swift Boat Vets. I got pretty ticked that he considered the opinion of 200+ decorated vets who actually served in the same unit with Kerry to be non-important. That's one major thing. Now he is supporting Dan Blather saying that Dan would not have aired the attack on Bush's military service if he had known the documents were false. Pretty thin if you ask me - Dan is a big boy and has been in the business for a long time. He could have admitted a mistake made by his producers but he has not and he is also not offering up the source either. Then Bill turns right around on his show and says he will not interview that Dottie? woman about the Bush family because she just writes about hearsay and he just can't deal with unsubstantiated personal attacks. I think Billy boy is losing it. :duh3:
Bonnie said:He seems to over compensate at times by bending too much in the other direction just to keep up the aura of an open mind......trouble is he picks the wrong topics to do this with.
ScreamingEagle said:SeeBS
Actual Malice
Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse for CBS News, they do. Two document experts have now come forward to say that they were consulted by CBS, but warned the network that the documents did not appear to be genuine. ABC, which has played a creditable role in exposing the 60 Minutes hoax, reports:
Two of the document experts hired by CBS News now say the network ignored concerns they raised prior to the broadcast of 60 Minutes II about the disputed National Guard records attributed to Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.
"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday if they ran that story," Will said.
But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.
"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told ABC News.
That's my nominee for understatement of the year. To continue:
A second document examiner hired by CBS News, Linda James of Plano, Texas, also told ABC News she had concerns about the documents and could not authenticate them.
"I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," James said. "And that's why I have come forth to talk about it because I don't want anybody to think I did authenticate these documents."
Pathetically, CBS News tried to hold up the house of cards that is now rapidly collapsing around it:
"CBS News did not rely on either Emily Will or Linda James for a final assessment of the documents regarding George Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. Ms. Will and Ms. James were among a group of experts we consulted to assess one of the four documents used in the report and they did not render definitive judgment on that document. Ultimately, they played a peripheral role and deferred to another expert who examined all four of the documents used," the network said in a statement.
Sure, we understand. CBS consulted a group of experts, and all but one said the documents were a fraud. CBS took the opinion they liked and ran with it, slandering President Bush in hopes that they could help John Kerry win the election. It's all sickeningly clear. Except it's even worse than that: the "expert" referred to in CBS's statement, who supposedly was the basis for the story, was Marcel Matley, who has gone to great lengths to disassociate himself from the 60 Minutes piece, and will tell anyone willing to listen that he did not authenticate the documents.
So CBS News was warned that the documents were forgeries, by at least two experts that we know of, while no one vouched for their authenticity. CBS News published them anyway, knowing that they were perpetrating a fraud.
From this point on, why should any of us believe anything that we see on CBS News?
Posted by Hindrocket at 09:02 PM
Bonnie said:He seems to over compensate at times by bending too much in the other direction just to keep up the aura of an open mind......trouble is he picks the wrong topics to do this with.
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: 
