[extropy-chat] Reaction to government lies, and the lack thereof

[spike]

> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Olga Bourlin
> ...
> The CBS incident has continued to perplex me.  The tactics employed by CBS
> and Dan Rather were wrong, wrong, wrong (and the imbroglio actually served
> the Repubs by taking away the focus from Bush's embarrasing "military"
> record and throwing the spotlight on CBS's and Rather's credibility), but
> didn't Bush in fact *get* preferential treatment during his military
> stint? Is there any doubt about this?  Observe:
> 
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2004/09/29/notes092904.DTL&nl=f
ix
...
> 
> Olga


Olga the sfgate site is exactly the kind of stuff that got w elected.
All shrill screechy accusation, no actual evidence.  I see little
difference between what this site is doing and what cBS did.
Serious accusations require serious proof.

Is there any doubt about this?  Well, yes.  Without defending w,
I can easily imagine an alternate scenario.  The commander has
a young officer that isn't particularly valuable.  There are
plenty of F102 jockeys and no real application for them.  The
young officer wants to go to Harvard for an MBA.  A Harvard
MBA would be enormously valuable to the commander, so he makes
a handshake agreement with the lieutenant: go get that MBA, and 
you still owe us 6 years afterwards if we need you, stay at it, 
don't quit.  No documents are made or filed, none needed.

Of course I have no evidence of this, but I am not accusing
anyone of a crime.  For a soldier, disobeying a direct legal order 
is a crime.  Forgery is a crime.  But speculation is perfectly
legitimate.  When cBS accused w of disregarding an order,
using falsified evidence, it committed a crime that changed
the way we look at the mainstream media.  The sfgate site
accuses Carl Rove of creating the forgeries, but does not attempt
to prove it, doesn't offer a shred of evidence.  Is not this
exactly the kind of stuff that is pushing the U.S. to the
right?

spike