posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 11:13 PM
Wow, hearing Dan Rather talking in a manner that Noam Chomsky would approve of, makes me wonder again as to the truth of what really happened
with regard to his leaving 'active journalism'.
Has he been railing like this all along, and we're only seeing glimpses (such as this) of it? What he says seems true, and he has the
authority of experience to back it up.
I'm wondering now -- was the scandal regarding false documents, that got him booted out of the anchor chair, a response somehow to him getting 'out
of control' in expressing his opinions? That scandal always seemed manufactured to me -- my suspicion (unproven) was that the documents were
actual documents, but retyped or modified slightly, deliberately, so they would pass journalistic 'vetting', but so that they could later be
'revealed' as 'false' -- killing two birds with one stone: getting Rather out of the bully-pulpit, and undermining objections to Bush's war
record as 'based on false propaganda'.
How much of the real Rather was starting to express itself, that we didn't hear, before that scandal broke? Makes ya wonder.