Where Was W Waldo?

In a new twist on this old affair ...Error 404 (Not Found)!!1

quote:

---

Dan Rather filed a $70 million lawsuit against CBS and his former bosses Wednesday, claiming they made him a "scapegoat" for a discredited story about President Bush's military service during the Vietnam War.

​

The 75-year-old Rather, whose final months were clouded by controversy over the story, said the actions of the defendants damaged his reputation and cost him significant financial loss.

​

The lawsuit, filed in state Supreme Court in Manhattan, claims the network intentionally botched the aftermath of the story about Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard and had Rather take the fall to "pacify" the White House. He was removed from his job at "CBS Evening News" in March 2005.

​

The story relied on four documents, supposedly written by Bush's commander in the Texas Air National Guard, the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. Critics questioned the documents' authenticity and suggested they were forged.

​

A CBS review determined the story was neither fair nor accurate. CBS fired the story's producer and asked for the resignation of three executives because it could not authenticate documents used in the story, and Rather was forced out of the anchor chair he had occupied for 24 years.

​

Rather's lawsuit says he was forced to apologize, although "as defendants well knew, even if any aspect of the broadcast had not been accurate, which has never been established, Mr. Rather was not responsible for any such errors."

---

Thus we will see this replayed again eh?Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

That chart is super. It still shows he met his obligations because he was discharged. I was discharged 3 months early from my 3 years of active duty. I was able to get out early beause I had 60 days leave saved up and wanted to start college the next semester. College drops are common and usually take 6 months "off" your contract. You are still honorably discharged. You still go into the IRR to finish your service. It happens all the time. On the other end of that spectrum stop loss happens all the time, which places you on active duty longer than your contract. Neither a stop loss nor an early discharge are breaches of contract.As to the AWOL not being AWOL, the definition of not fulfilling your commitment is the DEFINITION of AWOL. The military can either extend you or let you go early. Either way, once you are discharged your active duty obligations are complete and you go on IRR status.

---

If those WMD that don't exist were easier to identify and handled properly, then this would not have occurred.

Remarkable that no one has thought to mention that W was discharged early for college.Not the military, not his defenders, nobody.I bet there's a paper trail for college discharge too.Wonder why that's disappeared.Yup. That sure is strange.

Except that his discharge papers have false information, so he was discharged improperly.You're really digging, Tal, and you're not making any sense. He failed to meet his obligations. That his family influence was enough to get people not to complain about it is irrelevant, setting aside the fact that many of his commanders did complain about it.He didn't meet his obligations. Can you explain why, after signing a legally-binding pledge to report to a duty station in Mass. he failed to ever do so?

Tal writes:

quote:

---

As to the AWOL not being AWOL, the definition of not fulfilling your commitment is the DEFINITION of AWOL.

---

No, it isn't. Now you're trying to have it both ways. First you said that CBS claimed he was AWOL and wondered why they never called you to look up certain documents.But it turns out that CBS never claimed he was AWOL. Therefore, why would such documents be in existence?AWOL is not the same thing as desertion, for example. If you're gone for less than 24 hours, you're considered "failure to go," not AWOL.But again, there's still the problem of your charge that CBS said Bush was AWOL when they never brought up the term.

quote:

---

Either way, once you are discharged....

---

You are assuming the discharge was valid. There is evidence that it was falsified.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.