|
STOP THE STONEWALL, DAN
CBS News and top anchor Dan Rather are digging in their heels - and just maybe digging their own journalistic graves - by continuing to stand by their deeply suspect memos about President Bush (news - web sites)'s service in the Texas Air National Guard.
Indeed, with each passing day, the evidence is becoming ever-more overwhelming that the documents are fake.
Last night, Rather and CBS did it again, insisting beyond credulity that the memos - which purportedly show Bush got special treatment to avoid fulfilling his National Guard duties - are real.
Much like what the Nixon White House did in the early days of Watergate: Deny, deny, deny - and blame 'politically partisan' critics.
Suspicions of a hoax were first raised by denizens of the Internet. These were followed up with corroborating evidence from serious national news groups: the Associated Press, The Washington Post, CNN, ABC News, NBC News, The Los Angeles Times, The Dallas Morning News, Newsweek.
These groups may be partisan - but hardly in support of George Bush (news - web sites).
And yet all of them have disclosed important details that undercut the credibility of CBS' would-be smoking gun.
Yet Rather last night again insisted the memos were real, because, after all, some experts say it was technically possible to create them back in '70s, when they were purportedly created.
But consider the evidence:
* Both the widow and the son of the memos' purported author, Jerry Killian, say they believe the documents are fakes. Killian, they say, wasn't in the habit of typing memos and didn't keep private files. Moreover, says his widow, the wording in the memos 'is very suspect to me.' She doubts 'these are his words.'
* The retired National Guard general cited by CBS as its 'trump card' to verify the documents says he's now convinced they're forgeries - and that he was deliberately misled by CBS, which only read him portions of the memos and implied they were handwritten.
* The Texas Air National Guard commander who is said in the memos to have tried to 'sugar-coat' Bush's record actually retired from the Guard 18 months before the memo's date. Officials confirm that, retired, he would have been powerless to take any action on Bush's record.
* A former National Guard officer reported to have been one of CBS' principal sources suffered two nervous breakdowns and unsuccessfully sued for reimbursement of his medical expenses.
* A key 'expert' identified by CBS as verifying the documents, Marcel Matley, says he actually vouched only for one handwriting sample - and has been ordered by the network not to give any more interviews.
Matley, it turns out, got his start as a graphologist analyzing 'spirituality in handwriting,' The Post's Deborah Orin reports today. Some in the field believe he lacks sufficient credentials.
Two other experts paraded out by Rather last night appeared to back the memos' authenticity, but numerous others vehemently disagree.
'The probability that any technology in existence in 1972 would be capable of producing a document that is nearly pixel-compatible with Microsoft's Times New Roman font and the formatting of Microsoft Word and . . . was in casual use at the Texas Air National Guard is so vanishingly small as to be indistinguishable from zero,' said Joseph Newcomer, a former professor and co-author of a book on Microsoft fonts.
The whole episode demonstrates not just the power of the Internet, but the fact that it can be a positive political force. Without the instant evidence that appeared within hours of the original broadcast on CBS' '60 Minutes,' it's doubtful the rest of the media would be questioning the Rather memos at all.
That would have left Bush on the defensive against what now is shaping up as a malignant, politically inspired hoax meant to discredit his military service.
New York Times columnist William Safire yesterday urged Rather and his bosses to 'call for a panel of old CBS hands and independent editors to re-examine sources and papers.'
We agree.
When a Times reporter's credibility was called into question, the paper moved heaven and earth to determine whether or not the critics were right - and discovered they were.
If Rather and CBS hope to rescue their credibility, they should do no less.
|
