GUARD MEMOS ACCURATE IF NOT ORIGINALS
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 09-16-2004 - 7:43am |
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24633-2004Sep15_2.html<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Rather Concedes Papers Are Suspect
CBS Anchor Urges Media to Focus On Bush Service
By Howard Kurtz
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 16, 2004; Page A01
CBS anchor Dan Rather acknowledged for the first time yesterday that there are serious questions about the authenticity of the documents he used to question President Bush's National Guard record last week on "60 Minutes."
"If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story," Rather said in an interview last night. "Any time I'm wrong, I want to be right out front and say, 'Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.' "
Rather spoke after interviewing the secretary to Bush's former squadron commander, who told him that the memos attributed to her late boss are fake -- but that they reflect the commander's belief that Bush was receiving preferential treatment to escape some of his Guard commitments.
The former secretary, Marian Carr Knox, is the latest person to raise questions about the "60 Minutes" story, which Rather and top CBS officials still defend while vowing to investigate mounting questions about whether the 30-year-old documents used in the story were part of a hoax. Their shift in tone yesterday came as GOP critics as well as some media commentators demanded that the story be retracted and suggested that Rather should step down.
"This is not about me," Rather said before anchoring last night's newscast. "I recognize that those who didn't want the information out and tried to discredit the story are trying to make it about me, and I accept that."
For Rather, 72, it is an all-too-familiar role. In his CBS career, he has survived an impertinent exchange with President Richard M. Nixon during Watergate, a clandestine trek through the mountains of Afghanistan, an on-air confrontation with George H.W. Bush over Iran-contra and a much-debated sitdown with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad.
Now, on the final leg of a career launched by a Texas hurricane, Rather is trying to weather his biggest storm. And some of his closest friends and associates are concerned.
"I think this is very, very serious," said Bob Schieffer, CBS's chief Washington correspondent. "When Dan tells me these documents are not forgeries, I believe him. But somehow we've got to find a way to show people these documents are not forgeries." Some friends of Rather, whose contract runs until the end of 2006, are discussing whether he might be forced to make an early exit from CBS.
In her interview with Rather yesterday, Knox repeated her contention that the documents used by "60 Minutes" were bogus. Knox, 86, worked for Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian while he supervised Bush's unit in the early 1970s.
"I know that I didn't type them," Knox said of the Killian memos. "However, the information in there is correct," she said, adding that Killian and the other officers would "snicker about what was getting away with."
Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. But he said, "I take very seriously her belief that the documents are not authentic." If Knox is right, Rather said, the public "won't hear about it from a spokesman. They'll learn it from me."
But he also delivered a message to "our journalistic competitors," including The Washington Post and rival networks: "Instead of asking President Bush and his staff questions about what is true and not true about the president's military service, they ask me questions: 'How do you know this and that about the documents?' "
CBS News President Andrew Heyward defended the work that went into the Guard story. "I feel that we did a tremendous amount of reporting before the story went on the air or we wouldn't have put it on the air," Heyward said last night. "But we want to get to the bottom of these unresolved issues," including questions about the memos' typography, signatures and format. "There's such a ferocious debate about these documents."
Heyward said the account by Knox is "significant, which is why we're putting it on our prime-time program," "60 Minutes."
Patriotism means to stand by the Country. It does not mean to stand by the President. -- Theodore Roosevelt.

Pages
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24635-2004Sep15.html?nav=hcmodule<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
You are playing with words. If the memos are "reconstructed", they are fake, false documents. Simple as that.
The fact is that the secretary said the memo's are fakes, and said that they did relay the feelings of Killian at the time. She never claimed to have typed original memos that stated the same thing. If she had, they would either be in Killians files, which they are not, or since they involved Bush, in his permanent files, which they are not. The reason is because these memo's do not exist.
The other people you say testified to the accuracy of the memo's is Ben Barnes, who said numerous times to the press and to others that he never used any influence to get Bush into the ANG, and never had any contact with the Bush family about doing such a thing. he said this throughout the 90's when Bush was Governor, but since Bush is now running against Kerry (who Barnes is a chief fund raiser for) his story has changed. How convenient.
First of all, Killian's son stated last night that while the secretary is a very nice lady who he's known for years (he seemd not to want to disparage her), she was not his father's personal secretary, and she would not have been in a position to even be having these kinds of conversations with her father. In any case, she is on record stating that she is opposed to the Bush presidency, saying he was "unfit for office" and "selected, not elected" so her opinion that these memos, while fake, still reflect Killian's feelings about Bush ought to be taken in that partisan context. In any case, my guess is his wife and son are in a better position to gauge the man's feelings towards Bush than this woman was.
Secondly, I believe very few Americans would be surprised to learn that Bush did receive preferential treatment in some respect-doesn't mean they like it, but it is not some big revelation to most people and obviously not one they beleive is inconsistent with serving as governor or president. The Dems are shooting themselves in the foot trying to hammer this point home.
Given that a whole lot of other people close to Killian have said these memos do NOT reflect Killian's view of Bush, I'm sure Rather is VERY relieved to have managed to dig up one single source who says they do, even if she is a vehement Bush opponent.
So you take one person's opinion as "proof", even though her opinion directly contradicts the opinions of those closest to Killian? Sounds to me like an awful lot of people are just believing what they want to believe.
So where are they?
Debateguy,
I'm not sure that I am following you here:
Killian's son has gone on record stating he gave all this information to CBS up front bout 2 weeks before they aired....and had brought up serious doubts about authenticity, and that these "feelings" did NOT reflect his father's mind set. All of these liberal news channels report their own feelings. They pepper the "truth" (and I use that word LOOSELY) with their own emotional feelings. Hey, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, however.....these docs are fraudulent. So, the question is, where did they come from. Is is possible they came from Kerry's camp somewhere along the way? He's already lied about sooooo many things...that anyone that votes for him has absolutely no common sense whatsoever. Look at what Jane Fonda did to our country back in the 70s. Look at what kerry did then. He was just making stuff up.... Kerry was the one that brought up all that vietnam stuff....NOT Bush. Kerry is the one that has been absent for almost all of the homeland security meetings. He does not do his job as a senator...how can anyone expect him to do his job as the president? Like him or not, Bush has proven to be a very strong leader for the US in these times. He did not create the problems that caused the attacks on the world trade center. He inherited them from prior presidents. Matter of fact, Clinton had ample opportunity in his 8 years to do something about Bin Ladin....and he never did. This is coming from someone who worked at the world trade center on a daily basis. I also happen to have family serving this great country of ours. I am VERY proud of my family for doing so.... and am disgusted that the liberals are trying to smear president bush by just making stuff up. Please.....don't believe everything the media tells you...because they have notoriously slanted stories in the past.
The above is good advice!
<> This is not. None of the news outlets (except MAYBE PBS?) is totally unbiased, and this is especially true of Fox, their slant is just a little more obvious! I believe MOST networks are owned by large corporations (NBC=GE; ABC=Disney; Fox= Rupert Murdoch's empire, etc.) with their fingers (and $$$) in lots of political pies, left AND right. For more on Fox, check out "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism." I know, you'll probably think it's biased too, but it sure was interesting....
Pages