« Are Germany's Nazis Back? | Main | Islamists in Germany: You're Welcome! / Islamisten in Deutschland: Herzlich willkommen! »


SPON carries (hidden on the sidebar, of course) Saffire's rebuttal of the documents.

There was a commentary on Deutschlandfunk today, along the line of "another round of the [typical] dirt campaign of U.S. elections".

But by and large, not much else.

You missed one: Bush' reply to his commanding officer, as cooked up by a US technology writer John Dvorak. Hillarious!

Does this mean Bush really was in Vietnam, in combat, and the media is just conspiring to portray him as someone who joined the TANG to avoid service in Vietnam?
Just asking...


That was weak Vic, even by German sarcasm standards. Just an example for you, my stepfather joined the Army (~1967) and volunteered for the 82nd Airborne and didn't get sent to Vietnam, while his buddy thought he could go into the Reserves and avoid Vienam, well he ended up being sent to Vietnam. It wasn't cut & dry who could avoid deployment in Vietnam and who wouldn't. But if a German implies that ANG are a way to avoid war, then it must be true. Nevermind the history of the ANG.


Non sequiter much, Vic? Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand. So you seem to be saying that if you don't like someone, then it's okay to lie about him. So if I don't like John Kerry, I can forge documents that say he burnt down orphanages or cheated on his SATs? ooookay.

Good stuff Ray, but the "Hitler diaries" were at least a serious attempt at a forgery. The Microsoft Word-processed Bush 1973 National Guard memos don't even rise to the level of forgery. They're more like a joke that somehow got out of control when people took it seriously. Also, the creator of the "Hitler diaries" had motives that were only semi-dishonorable ... he just wanted to make some money off of gullible journalists. CBS News is much much more sleazy.

For the uninitiated in Europe, Dan Rather's smokeing gun documents were supposed to be "personal notes" written by George Bush's supervising officer in the TANG in 1972: written in Microsoft Word!

I guess even Bill Gates didn't know that he invented MS Word in 1972. Go figure!

Einer der wenigen vernünftigen Stimmen in der "Times" schreibt dazu:

Those Discredited Memos

Washington — Alert bloggers who knew the difference between the product of old typewriters and new word processors immediately suspected a hoax: the "documents" presented by CBS News suggesting preferential treatment in Lt. George W. Bush's National Guard service have all the earmarks of forgeries.


Heads up to the people here who are not Americans.

In the U.S. this has become a story about media whores. Dan Rather may or may not go down with the ship, but the erosion of the credibility of mainstream media continues unabated.

Which, of course, is the purpose, of this blog. It really is too bad. Dan Rather will be remembered in history as no better than an abetter of lies.

And just so you know, Ben Barnes, who is undergoing the shredding of his reputation - and rightly so - just happens to employ Dan Rather's daughter.

Quite of few of us suspect that Rather's stonewalling is his attempt to protect his child.


At least the Hitler diaries produced a wonderful satire, the German film "Schtonk" which protrayed the affair with the names changed to keep from being sued by the guilty. At least in the film the forgers went through a little bit of trouble (soaking the paper in coffee) to make the documents appear genuine.

So who's going to play Dan Rather in the film version?

Everyone look at Vic's post. This is the core of the liberal mind; a weakness and desperation to cling to the foolish religion of hate and class envy.

Getting desperate vic? What's worse, is that the election is just around the corner.

Can anyone honestly say that mainstream media is not biased? CBS is attempting to stonewall the issue hoping it goes away. It is clear that they have something to hide. What I want to know is who the source was for this document.


I suspect the trail will lead right back to the Democratic party.

@andrew2: for once I'll side with the press: journalists will and should never reveal their source. It is kind of a common law in journalism, protect your source at any costs. However: I guess that does count only, if the source is correct in its statement/information/material. If the source can be suspected to be fraudulent, maybe this rule does not count. Any journalists among the bloggers care to comment on that ethical code

One other thing I do not understand: how hard is it to get a pre-1972 typewriter (maybe with a little research it can be even determined, what kind of typewriters have been in use at the National Guard and Army etc).? That should be the first thing someone who wants to create an old document should look for. How stupid can one be....... Kudos to Kujau who went to so much efforts to create the HITLER diaries!

TANG - geez - know-nothings learn one word at a time and get siezed on it in a desparate attempt to look like the bucket that they're carrying contains a plausable argument. Is there Tang in there?

It's like this lefty radio dork I was listening to - while covering the RNC. She kept stumbling when referring to the Secret Service detail that was there, calling them 'Secret Agents". The co-host tried to subtly correct her, but she just wouldn't let him. Typical.

Still no coverage about this hilarious story in the (old) german media. Only Spon has the NYT-article, but not translated to german.

So it's true? George W. Bush actually *did* volunteer for Vietnam?

Man, i'm so glad that checkbox "document" was finally exposed as the vicious forgery i alwas knew it was!

Eat my ribbons, Dan Rather!

@Hans Solo

Instead of volunteering for Vietnam, George Bush learned to fly the complicated F-102 Delta Dagger in the Texas Air National Guard. (TANG) His efficiency reports (not forged) reveal that he was a more than capable pilot who had abilities that exceeded his peers.

Unfortunately, The U.S. Air Force decided to take the F-102 out of service while George Bush was still serving in the Guard. The F-102 never flew missions in Vietnam.

So, Hans, how many missions did your Milenium Falcon fly over Vietnam?

What's scary is how many leftists are cheerfully going down with this rapidly sinking ship. There is no longer any credible doubt about the Killian documents. They are forgeries, period. For that matter, there was very little doubt five days ago that they were forgeries. Nevertheless, hosts of leftist bloggers, Dan Rather and the other CBS bonzes, and the bulk of the mainstream media in the US continue to frantically grasp at straws or stonewall, denying the obvious. For them, ideology trumps reality. If reality conflicts with their world view, they simply alter it, and, evidently, believe in the new version with all their hearts. Incidents like this separate the wheat from the chaff. Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo by far the best and most credible of the leftist bloggers in the US, and always worth reading, smelled a rat from the start. "The Washington Post," apparently the only major leftist newspaper in the US with any residual regard for its credibility, printed a devastating debunking of the memos today, taking half of page 6. It's sad that there are so few influential voices on the left with similar moral courage. And the Democratic Party. Well, I've been a registered Democrat in the State of Maryland for over ten years, and shortly after the Killian "scoop" came out on "60 minutes" I got an e-mail from the Kerry campaign citing "new documents" that "proved" Bush had shirked his National Guard duty. We were encouraged to write to the Bush campaign, etc., and protest this "outrage." In a word, it's certainly not out of the question that the forgeries came from the Kerry campaign.

Just to ask a nerdy question: What does the CBSnews story have to do with "Politically Incorrect Observations on Reporting in the German Media"? I'm assuming you had to rehash the ancient Stern-Hitler-diary story to keep the cover?

Stern - "Germany's left wing magazine" **ROTFL**

Note from David: Hmm... just wondering. Same IP address as "Jo".
Regarding your question: read the full posting. You might be able to find the answer to your question...

Do you really expect leftists to READ things before they demean them?

@Jo/just wondering:


Evidently you haven't been reading the comments. Check, for example, my ZDF link in "A Message to the World of Biased Media." The story is the nonstory as far as the German media are concerned. They're doing their very best to pretend that this huge story just doesn't exist. "Killian who?" "Dan Rather? We never heard of him!" Anyone who thinks that a) Pitzke and the rest of the German MSM hacks haven't been following this story religiously, and/or b) they really consider it "insignificant," is clueless indeed.

David, you caught me ;)

"Do you really expect leftists to READ things before they demean them?"

We leftists really don't know how to read...


Thanks for reminding me of confidentialy of the press, but I believe forgery to bring down the President is a felonious offence. This could result in a criminal investigation, CBS may be forced to reveal their source.

If they have to reveal their sources, and it points into the direction of the Democrats, it's over for Kerry....

"Netzeitung: Was unterscheidet den deutschen Rundfunk von dem in anderen Ländern?

Pleitgen: Ich möchte den Deutschen keine amerikanischen Verhältnisse zumuten. Das US-Fernsehen hat vor dem Irak-Krieg seine Verantwortung nicht wahrgenommen. Statt dem Publikum ein objektives Bild von der wahren Lage zu geben, hat es sich in «patriotischer» Weise in den Dienst der Regierung und ihrer Politik gestellt. Dies wirkt sich nun nachteilig für das Ansehen der USA in der Welt aus.

Netzeitung: Ähnliches ist für Deutschland nicht vorstellbar?

Pleitgen: Für das deutsche Fernsehen kann ich solche Fehlentwicklungen ausschließen. Wir werden unabhängig von dem, was die politische Führung will, immer einen kühlen Kopf bewahren. Unsere Aufgabe ist es, die Bevölkerung umfassend und wirklichkeitsgetreu zu informieren, damit sie zu einem abgewogenen Urteil kommen kann."


Pleitgen bezeichnet also die einseitige Hetzberichterstattung in Deutschland als objektiv. Wie blind ist dieser Mann?

@George M.
G.W.Bush volunteered for Palace Guard twice. Palace Guard was a program that sent National Guard pilots to Vietnam as replacements. Both times he was turned down due to insufficient flight hours.

@Han Solo
There is no way that Rather will get a chance to eat my ribbons. They cost too much to replace, I think about four bucks now.

ok, it would be Über-over for Kerry.... :-)

But is'nt it great? It's the power of the Blogsphere.

Mutmaßlicher Al-Qaida-Führer zieht nach Berlin
Reda Seyam will seine Kinder an die König-Fahd-Schule schicken
Von Michael Behrendt
Geheimdienste der USA, Deutschlands, Asiens sowie das Bundeskriminalamt stufen den 46-Jährigen als einen der fünf wichtigsten Al-Qaida-Führer in Europa ein.


Palästinensische Motive
Michael Lüders

Doch so einfach liegen die Dinge nicht. Die Palästinenser leben seit 37 Jahren unter israelischer Besatzung und haben im Westjordanland rund die Hälfte ihres Landes an israelische Siedler verloren, ganz zu schweigen von ihrer systematischen Entrechtung im Alltag. Nur Ahnungslose und Propagandisten werden behaupten, dass es zwischen dem israelischen Siedlungskolonialismus und dem palästinensischen Terror keinen Zusammenhang gebe. Selbstredend ist Terror niemals zu rechtfertigen. Wer ihn jedoch "verurteilen und ausschalten" will, muss die Frage beantworten, warum die westliche Wertegemeinschaft in bestimmten Krisenregionen, im Nahen Osten ebenso wie in Tschetschenien, in der Regel keinen Handlungsbedarf sieht, um die verantwortlichen Regierungen politisch unter Druck zu setzen - auch dann nicht, wenn sie eklatant gegen internationales Recht verstoßen. Bedingt anhaltendes Unrecht nicht zwangsläufig Widerstand? Und wo verläuft die Grenze zwischen Widerstand und Terror? In welche Kategorie fällt ein Angriff auf amerikanische Besatzungssoldaten in Irak? Auf eine israelische Patrouille im Gazastreifen? Auf russische Soldaten in Tschetschenien?

Strategen wie Richard Perle interessieren sich nicht für die Legitimität ihres Handelns. Sie sehen sich als Teil eines archetypischen Kampfes von "Gut" gegen "Böse": Hier die Freiheit, die es zu bewahren gilt, dort die Bedrohung durch islamischen Fanatismus und Gewalt. Die Bevölkerung in Staaten, die von Terroranschlägen heimgesucht werden, befürwortet in der Regel Vergeltungsmaßnahmen und hält Ursachenforschung für Schwäche. Die Lügen des Irakkrieges jedenfalls haben Präsident Bush bislang nicht ins Abseits gedrängt, auch nicht tausend gefallene US-Soldaten."


Wenn man also 20 Schulkinder in einem Bus in die Luft sprengt, tut der das, weil ...? Weil? Ich verstehe Herrn Lüders nicht. Warum haben dieTerroristen in Beslan den Kindern in den Rücken geschossen? Warum? Aus Widerstand?

"Der Standpunkt des Autors

Der Kurs Russlands und der USA ähnelt sich: Islamistische terroristische Gruppen sind zu verurteilen und auszuschalten. Es hat keinen Zweck, sie aus ihrem Kontext verstehen zu wollen. Die EU sieht das etwas anders: Politische, soziale und wirtschaftliche Krisen in den jeweiligen Regionen bedürfen parallel zu militärischen Interventionen ebenfalls einer Lösung. Unser Autor Michael Lüders befürwortet letzteres, nicht zuletzt, weil bedingungslose Gewalt auch bei gemäßigten Muslimen Ablehnung hervorruft. Lüders ist Islamwissenschaftler, Nah-und Mittelost-Experte."

@ Mike

"G.W.Bush volunteered for Palace Guard twice."

Mike, I didn't know that. I thought the reason why Bush was never deployed to Vietnam was because the F-102 was being dropped from the Air Force inventory.

If GW did volunteer for such a program, that is an important story. Do you have any links to it?

What did Dan Rather know and when did he know it? And when will the German media report this story? Ok, I'm not holding my breath.

A few myth debunkers.

Kerry "volunteered". Using the same criteria applied to Dick Cheney, Kerry had four derrments - his fifth requests was turned down (he wanted to study in Paris). So, Kerry enlisted in the Naval "Reserve", inactive, to avoid being drafted by the Army.

Kerry's "two" tours in Viet Nam. A tour was generally considered 12 months. Kerry spent approximately seven months on a destroyer before being transferred to the Swift Boats (approx four month service).

Kerry volunteered for Swift Boats to see "action". At the time Kerry requested the transfer the Swift Boats were a relatively safe assignment - patroling the coasts, not the interior rivers.

Stay tuned on further info regarding Kerry's service. Documents were retrieved Mon from Naval Archives pertaining to Kerry's period of service. One document has already been posted regarding his Silver Star action. Looks like it corroborates everything the SwiftVets have been claiming, including that Kerry wrote the Spot.

How did I misspell deferment above?

IMHO - Ra'th'ergate has the potential of being bigger than Watergate. We have a major (liberal) media outlet pushing a smear campaign using fraudulent documents against a sitting President during an election. If the source is ever revealed it will probably be relatively easy to trace it back to either the Kerry Campaign or the DNC. Then watch out.

The only question will be - who's deep-throat?

Ich wette, diese Meldung taucht dann in den deutschen Medien (Spiegel-Online, stern, Focus, Netzeitung, FAZ, SZ, FR) nicht auf, oder?

Reports Fuel Doubts on CBS Bush Story

Published: September 14, 2004

Filed at 11:20 p.m. ET

NEW YORK (AP) -- Two experts hired by CBS News to examine records of President Bush's Vietnam-era service in the Texas Air National Guard told ABC on Tuesday that they could not vouch for the documents' veracity.

Meanwhile, a former secretary in the guard said she believed the documents CBS used were fake, although they accurately reflected the thoughts of one of Bush's commanders.

As questions continued about Dan Rather's report on ``60 Minutes'' last week, CBS News on Tuesday said it did not rely on assessments made by the two examiners quoted in the ABC report, and found it notable the secretary affirmed the content of the documents.


“Der deutsche Rundfunk möchte den Deutschen keine amerikanische Verhältnisse zumuten...”
Also sprach Herr Pleitgen.
Gabi zeigt sich erstaunt: “Er bezeichnet die einseitige Hetzberichterstattung in Deutschland als objektiv. Wie blind ist dieser Mann?” (Kommentar hier oben, d.d. 14-9)
Es gibt viele Männer wie Pleitgen in der Medienlandschaft. Wenn sie ihr Beruf zum Journalismus ernst nehmen, dann haben sie sich natürlich darum bemüht einige relevante Fachliteratur zu lesen, damit sie wissen und verstehen was Medienmanipulation und Propaganda bedeutet. Als besonders einleuchtend gelten einige Bücher von sehr gelehrte amerikanische Autoren, die wissen worüber sie reden, z.B.:
Edward Hermann and Noam Chomsky: Manufacturing Consent (New York : Pantheon Books, 1988)
Noam Chomsky: Necessary Illusions, Thought Control in Democratic Societies (Cambridge Mass.: South End Press 1989)
David Barsamiam and Noam Chomsky: Propaganda in the Public Mind (Boston: South End Press, 2001)
Noam Chomsky: Media Control, 2nd ed. (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2002)
Titel wie diese erregen natürlich auch unsere Interesse, zumal weil Chomsky in bestimmte Kreisen als einer der klugste Köpfe Amerika’s zelebriert wird.

In “The Anti-Chomsky Reader” (Peter Collier & David Horowitz, editors, San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2004, sehr empfehlenswerte Lektur) finden wir die Ansichten Chomsky’s über die sogenannte amerikanische Verhältnisse folgenderweisen durch Eli Lehrer zusammengefasst:

“Chomsky’s ideas about media spring from and reinforce his ideas about global politics. They rest on three principal claims:
First, all major media are controlled by a small group of corporations and extremely wealthy individuals that are “with rare exceptions…culturally and politically conservative.”
Second, beginning with World War I, the United States government has run a significant propaganda operation intended to hoodwink the American public and “ mobilize support for the [largely right-wing] special interests that dominate the state and political activity.” The media, likewise, are entirely “undemocratic,” and speak only for the ruling classes.
Third, these propaganda operations, which continue to the present day, have been almost entirely successful: The decisions to publicize certain stories and downplay others are made in ways that “serve political ends” of America’s ruling class.
Collectively, these premises make up what Chomsky calls a “propaganda model.” Blinded and bemused by the filters and screens created by powerful interests, the mainstream media report only facts and stories that serve the interests of the ruling elite. A free press, Chomsky claims, is an illusion cynically perpetuated by the media. The media keep their audience amused, but their chief function is to inculcate the values that compel obedience to the myths sustaining an aggressive and immoral capitalist system. Thus they disseminate propaganda rather than information per se.”

Eine beruhigende Gedanke: Chomsky redet nur von den amerikanische Verhältnissen. Bei uns, in Deutschland, is alles besser. Das verdanken wir u.a. solchen wachen Geiste wie Herr Pleitgen.

The amazing story of CBS and the forged documents continues to develop. CNN finally caved today, one day after the fake documents were exposed in the "Washington Post." At the moment the headline on their website reads, "CBS experts deny authenticating Bush memos." Of course, they've know this for the last five days as well as anyone else who has a computer, but were evidently betting CBS could successfully stonewall the issue. As recently as yesterday CNN tried a diversion in the form of the important "news" that a Democrat stooge in Texas was offering $50,000 to anyone who could "prove" Bush fulfilled his National Guard service as claimed. This lame canard was the top headline at their site for awhile. I see that the Focus magazine website, hopelessly out of touch as usual, swallowed the bait and has a similar headline this morning. You know, "Focus," that other German "news" magazine that occasionally put in a good word for the US until its editors discovered that there was big money in anti-American hatemongering in Germany and decided to become whores like the rest. The fact that they are trying to run with the $50,000 story is, of course, ample proof in itself that they and the rest of the German media are well aware of what's going on. Apparently they've decided that, unlike the cheap $50,000 publicity stunt, the story that one of the major US news organizations attempted to smear a sitting president shortly before an election with forged documents isn't "important" enough for the German public to read. In other words it doesn't conform to the ideologically distorted version of reality that the German media are promoting.

As for the US media, evidently they've now concluded that the game is up, and are not pulling any punches this morning. It's astounding it took them so long. Evidently these old news dinosaurs are so out of touch they were betting against all odds that this story would just fade away. After Laura Bush's opening salvo yesterday, other leading Republicans are now demanding answers from CBS, and even CNN was forced to conclude that the stonewall would not succeed. I think we'll now see many similar denunciations in the US mainstream media, and CBS will be isolated like a leper. No doubt CNN, ABC, USA Today, and the rest will try to rationalize their initial stalling as a desire for "fairness," and the subsequent scurrying of the rats off the rapidly sinking CBS ship will be attributed to their "balance" and "objectivity." In a word, get ready for some good laughs.

It will be interesting to watch the reaction of the German media in the face of the CBS meltdown in the coming days. They know the heavily filtered version of reality they will feed the German people won't face nearly the challenge from alternate sources of information that it would in the U.S. Unlike their colleagues in the US, they can also continue to ignore the issue. Stay tuned.

@ Helian

Funny that frustrated NY Times Publisher "Pinch" Salzburger, (his father's name was "Punch" and was also NY Times Publisher), spoke before a public interest group yesterday and derided bloggers and talk radio for bringing down the level of discourse throughout the presidential debates.

@George M

Right, I'm sure we all know what good old "Pinch" means when he speaks of "keeping the debate at a high level," wink, wink, nod, nod.

Off-Topic: Spörl gibt den Bush-Messer diese Woche sage und schreibe 66 Prozent Siegeschancen:

"It's terrorism, stupid"

Von Georg Mascolo, Washington

Er ist der Mann fürs Grobe in der US-Regierung. Vizepräsident Cheney teilt gern aus - wie jetzt gegen den Bush-Herausforderer John Kerry. Der musste sich vorhalten lassen, er sei ein Sicherheitsrisiko für das Land. Die Bush-Leute setzen im Wahlkampf alles auf die Karte Terror. Und Kerry weiß nicht so recht, wie er kontern soll.


Der Artiekl ist natürlich in einem anti-bushistischen Grundton gehalten.


The meltdown continues. Now, as Andrew Sullivan notes ABC News has piled on with an attack on the CBS forgeries, and the "Washington Post" hammers them again on page A10 with the top-of-page headline, "Document Experts Say CBS Ignored Memo 'Red Flags'." Time to throw in the towel, Dan. Looks like it's all over.

09/14/2004 New York Times: "Memos on Bush Are Fake but Accurate, Typist Says". Just for fun, read the comments on Little Green Footballs ("The NYT wins the award for World's Most Transparantly Biased Headline Ever")


The NBC and USA Today rats just made a rush for the gangplank! Anybody see anything in the German media?

@ Kees Rudolf


I see SPON is immitating the same "award winning" spin. After leading with the transparent "$50K" diversion, they admit, "durch die Blume," that the documents are fake, but explain to their gullible readers that, after all, they SHOULD be true!

I have a quick question for the Germans about Hitler:

What is going on with the movie Der Untergang? I'm reading the NYT, and I see an article on a more sympathetic portrayal of Hitler.

Based off the forged Diaries or something?

*forgive my ignorance*

I am working in New York today, just a few blocks from CBS News Headquarters on West 57th Street.

I was outside to get some espresso and so a disheleved older gentlemen in suspenders and a raincoat running down the street gesticulating wildly.

He was shouting "What's the font size Kenneth" really loudly.

Thanks a lot for the link to the SPON-article on the Texans for Truth. Though this article is not very original, partly repeating, partly paraphrasing what was told in a CNN-report last tuesday (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/14/bush.texans/), it shows clearly how SPON is following in the footsteps of NYT and shares the latter’s intentions. If there is up to now in Germany no more media coverage of Rathergate than just this SPON-article, I think this should be seen as the definitive proof of the insufficiency of the old-fashioned mainstream media (“ye olde media”) and the indispensability of the new “alternative” media for the honestly curious mind.
The present state of affairs is rather ‘Orwellian’ and the following quotes from ‘1984’ come to mind:
BTW, in Holland we have at least one printed weekly magazine (HP/De Tijd) which reported almost exhaustively on the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, was severely critical of Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 and published an extensive review of Hardy & Clarke’s “Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man”. They surely will report on Rathergate too. Unfortunately, it is only for readers who understand Dutch, but I’m happy at least to be able to read sometimes interesting articles in the usual comfortable way, that is to say not from the computer screen. Our formerly most reputed daily newsmagazine (NRC/Handelsblad) appears to be hijacked by leftist intellectuals (with the exception of some rare voices of dissent, just as in NYT). They still pretend to provide their readers with balanced reporting and a variety of opinions both left and right from the centre, but it becomes more and more clear that this is only a pretence. Other newspapers mostly don’t make a secret of their leftist leanings, so in this respect at least they are not dishonest. On the whole, it appears to me that the mainstream media, including television, in Holland and Germany have much in common, as far as politics is concerned, but in Holland I know some exceptions to the overall picture. I would like to know whether similar exceptions exist in Germany too.
Comparing the opinion climate in Holland and in Germany, I think it makes a difference that at present we’ve got a right-wing government (something like what would be a CDU/CSU-FPD coalition in Germany). The leftwing newspapers of course quite strongly and consistently resent this government. But the fact that our political leaders generally abstain from anti-americanism, unlike Schröder, who shamelessly exploited existing anti-americanism to win the elections, probably has a salutary influence, counteracting the awkward media bias. We never had someone like the incredible Hertha Daübler Gmelin, or a minister of Foreign Affairs with a violent protest-generation-past like Joschka Fischer. Anyway, anti-americanism (or anti-Bushism) certainly is not so virulent in Holland as it appears to be in Germany. But it is not absent, and, like in Germany, it flourishes in the media, at the universities, among the intellectuals. The main currents are roughly the same throughout Europe.
For Germany and for Europe, and indirectly for my own country, I can only hope that in the next elections in Germany Schröder will be defeated.

Die Weltwoche scheint das einzige Wochenblatt zu sein, welches sich dem Thema annimmt:

"Eine dunkle Stunde für die Abendnachrichten
Von Hanspeter Born

Sind die Aktennotizen gefälscht, die George W. Bush als Drückeberger darstellen? Hobby-Rechercheure zeigen sich in Internet-Journalen überzeugt davon. Sollten sie Recht haben, stürzt Dan Rather – das Denkmal unter den amerikanischen Reportern."

Und Ray hat absolut Recht, wenn er die Hitler-Tagebücher damals im "stern" in Vergleich dazu präsentiert:

"Was CBS-News anbetrifft, wird das ehrwürdige Medienunternehmen noch eine Weile an dem Skandal kauen, der einen unweigerlich an die Affäre um die gefälschten Hitler-Tagebücher vor zwei Jahrzehnten erinnert."


@ Kees Rudolf


The same passage occurred to me. Orwell was a giant. Von blinden umgeben, hat er trotzdem durchgeblickt.

@ Downer


I think a lot of journalists just found out that the facts are more important than who finds them out. Facts are facts, even if people who "Die Weltwoche" considers "Hobby-Rechercheure" expose them. They are even still facts if those people wear pajamas.

The latest on this story, in case you haven't been reading the American blogs: The faked memoes came from a Kinko's copy shop in Abilene Texas, not far from the home of former National Guardsman and Democrat Bush basher Bill Burkett. A secretary in the shop reports Burkett was there on Tuesday, September 7. The Washington Post headline on the story today, now on page A1: "Rather Concedes Papers are Suspect." The article quotes Rather as making the ludicrous comment, "If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story." (!!) Ummm, sorry, Dan, but 10,000 bloggers just beat you to it.

Meanwhile, in the German media, according to the ever clueless FOCUS:

"Doch erst um 20 Uhr ließ CBS-Anchormann Dan Rather im wöchentlichen Reportagemagazin „60 Minutes“ die Katze aus dem Sack: Die dem Sender vorliegenden Akten über angebliche Pflichtverletzungen des US-Präsidenten als junger Leutnant in der Garde seien zwar offenbar gefälscht, aber ihr Inhalt würde dennoch stimmen, überraschte der TV-Veteran sein Publikum. Damit, so Rather, seien die Vorwürfe gegen Bush nach wie vor gerechtfertigt."

Peter Gruber was responsible for feeding this particular piece of disinformation to FOCUS' readers. In fact as you can see by reading CBS' own press release, CBS doesn't come anywhere near saying that the documents are "zwar offenbar gefälscht." What their news chief Andrew Heyward actually said is, "we would not have put the report on the air if we did not believe in every aspect of it," and "..enough questions have been raised that we are going redouble our efforts to answer those questions."

The ludicrous "Akten gefälscht, Inhalt stimmt!" argument is handled nicely by James Lileks:

"Relevant info? I paste and copy, you decide. In any case, the whole “fake but accurate” line shows how tone-deaf these people are; it’s like saying a body in a pine box is “dead but lifelike.” It boggles, it really does: the story is true, the evidence is faked, but the evidence reflects the evidence we have not yet presented that proves our conclusion – ergo, we’re telling the truth. They just can’t give it up; they just can’t say the memos were typed by the guy in the “Dude, you’re getting a Dell!” commercial and leave it be, because that that puts the knife in the story regardless of what happened. So they keep going."

The comments to this entry are closed.


The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27