I think CNN edited a transcript from 2004. I don't know how to prove it.

[madfloridian]

It has worried me for a while, but I just didn't address it because how do you address something that isn't there anymore? Sometimes I will save controversial pages to my hard drive, but a CNN transcript should not be considered controversial.

I was watching the Frontline special tonight. They as much as said we nearly destroyed the city. We here knew that, but our media never talks of such things. Fallujah broke my heart because it was done knowing many civilians would die. I wrote about it.

"Send in the Clown"...a look at the horrors we did in Fallujah.

It was painful to write or think about.

Now to the 2004 transcript and how it came about.

I posted something on April 28, 2004 about how sad it made me when I heard General Clark speak on Fallujah on CNN. So I honestly posted about it. In the comments, #108, I found the transcript and posted it...and here is what I posted.

My post from April 28 2004 after I heard him on CNN...I found the transcript
and posted 4 paragraphs in the same thread.

Clark's statement:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1489306

CLARK: Well, I think we do have to finish the problem with Fallujah. And, I
would advocate that we finish it, if they're not going to negotiate, that we
finish this with force. We do it quickly, not slowly, not drawn-out. Put
sufficient troops up there, and I don't think there are sufficient troops
there, based on what I'm reading in the press, to actually do the job,
finish the job, get it over with. Get rid of the bad news. You've got to
work Najaf separately. It should be negotiated, brokered, and let Sustani
and the Shia leadership handle it.

The most important thing to think about is what happens after the 30th of
June. I know we've got to get there, but think about this, Judy. After the
30th of June, what is it that our military is supposed to do there? What's
the mission? It's not defense, it's not attack. What is it? We're not
policemen. We cannot police Iraq.

WOODRUFF: Keep the peace? Keep the country secure?

CLARK: Well, sure, but, I mean, what does that mean? Do we do house-to-house
searches? We've already got Saddam Hussein, and we know that there are no
weapons of mass destruction. We're there at the sufferance of the Iraqi
people. When they say it's time to go, whether or not they have the
democracy we want them to have, I think we're going to end up recognizing
that we can't stay.

But here is what is in that transcript when I found it again today.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0404/28/ip.00.html

"WOODRUFF: And in a moment, we'll hear more on all this from retired General
Wesley Clark, former candidate for the Democratic nomination for president.
We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(AUDIO/VIDEO GAP)

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), U.S. ARMY: But soon enough, we will get to all
that. Actually do the job, finish the job, get it over with, get rid of the
bad news. You've got to work Najaf separately. It should be negotiated and
brokered and let Sistani and the Shi'a leadership handle it.

It is quite different.

I see no reason for it to have been edited, but the part that I bolded here and in the original post has disappeared. Clark was speaking as a general would in military terms...so my issue is why the difference.

I almost did not post it, but how can we hold media accountable if we don't mention things like this.

[InternalDialogue]

1. Here's the one page archived in the Wayback Machine.

Save this one and compare it to the one you have.

At first glance, it appears that some of the omitted information is on the archive from 2005, but not everything you have from 2004.


http://web.archive.org/web/20051126180101/http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0404/28/ip.00.html

[madfloridian]

2. It appears to be the same words that are there now.

"GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), U.S. ARMY: But soon enough, we will get to all that. Actually do the job, finish the job, get it over with, get rid of the bad news. You've got to work Najaf separately. It should be negotiated and brokered and let Sistani and the Shi'a leadership handle it."

None of the bolded part is there. .

I have tried there several times at the wayback machine with no luck. Thanks for finding it.

[InternalDialogue]

3. Do you know anyone who works with Lexis Nexis access?

That'd be my next attempt. A journalist friend or the like?

[madfloridian]

4. I can't think of anyone right now....but I will try.

Isn't there another site like the Wayback machine? I have used it but just can not think of the name now. They save a lot of articles that get disappeared.

Wasn't there a memory hole? I will check.

[InternalDialogue]

5. There's a memoryhole.org

But it's more of a selective archive of documents. It's searchable though, but I'd doubt it would hold much in the way of TV transcripts.

Other than that in the way of web archive, I don't know. I wonder if there's any sort of media watch like Robert Greenwald's group that might have a library of direct recordings of it. Maybe that's a lead?

[madfloridian]

6. It doesn't appear to be searchable right now.

But I doubt it would archive that transcript. It would have to be from the video I guess. And if they edited the transcript....well. what can I say.

Why would they bother?

[Adelante]

7. I suggest you write to CNN and ask them

About the difference between what you posted Clark said and their transcript of what Clark said.

[madfloridian]

8. I did that last year.

Because it bothered me. I got no answer.

[Totally Committed]

9. Maybe you should call and ask to speak to someone actually in charge

of the news or their website, get a private e-mail to send you concerns to, and take it from there.

It's the only way you'll feel better. It's important for Oppo Research to be accurate.

TC

[Adelante]

10. The only other thought I had

Clark came in at the end of a long, ongoing discussion. Perhaps his statement wasn't different enough from others to warrant including it or perhaps to cover a clerical error they put video in that spot instead. Just guessing, though, I really have no idea. But at the top of the transcript it warns it may not be showing the final version, so apparently it's not unusual for there to be a change. The only ones who can tell you are CNN. I hope you get it sorted out. As TC says, this sort of thing should be presented accurately.

[madfloridian]

11. In the latest, possibly edited version, Clark's first words make no sense.

Here is what came just before it, and what he said in the version I think might have been edited..just does not fit or make sense.

MCCAIN: It's not a matter of me being optimistic or pessimistic. It's a matter of we cannot fail. The consequences of failure are so catastrophic that I have refused to contemplate it.

I have great faith in our military leaders, I have great faith in these young men and women who are doing the job over there. And I believe we can prevail.

WOODRUFF: Senator John McCain, thank you very much.

MCCAIN: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WOODRUFF: And in a moment, we'll hear more on all this from retired General Wesley Clark, former candidate for the Democratic nomination for president. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(AUDIO/VIDEO GAP)

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), U.S. ARMY: But soon enough, we will get to all that. Actually do the job, finish the job, get it over with, get rid of the bad news. You've got to work Najaf separately. It should be negotiated and brokered and let Sistani and the Shi'a leadership handle it.

Just makes no sense. The other made sense.

[Totally Committed]

12. I think you need to follow through on this, definitely.

But, you need to tell them that the reason you are writing is NOT because you are a CLark supporter. Make that clear, and they'll bend over backwards trying to bear you out. Trust me, CNN hates Wes Clark. HATES him. They might even give you more information and quotes to use against him if you ask nicely.

They'll help you make sense of it all, no worries. And, make sure you keep us posted on your progress. What's two or three more Clark oppo threads amongst friends? I can't wait!

TC

[Jai4WKC08]

13. Good point, TC

Hi, btw. :hi: Nice to see you posting again.

I don't know about whether the transcript was edited purposely or not. Can't imagine why it would be but, fwiw, I do remember back during Clark's 04 campaign, Frenchie and I were always catching errors in their transcripts, many of them quite substantive. But that doesn't really tell us anything about this incident

But I do want to point out that if Bush and Rove had let the military go into Falujah back in April 04 (as Clark and a whole bunch of other generals advised) instead of waiting until a couple after the November election, there would have been FAR fewer deaths on all part of US forces AND Iraqi civilians. That was Clark's point at the time. When something like this needs doing, it should be done quickly and decisively with as powerful a force as possible.

[Totally Committed]

17. Hi, Jai!

Nice to "see" you again, too! :hi:

TC

[madfloridian]

15. There is no way to follow through really.

I wrote them did not hear back.

I have done a search many times on that date etc.

If I find something, it just says what the 2nd part I posted says.

I posted that 3 years ago....the start of the thread showed I was disturbed at what I heard. Then when I found the transcript I posted it with bold. That part is not there now.

I know what I read there, and I would not have posted it if it were not there on their site. They are words I would hardly make up. The lead in of Clark that is left there makes no sense at all. It is pretty clear something else was there.

It does not have anything to do with whether CNN likes Clark or not. Clark was speaking as a military man would speak....like if you have to do it get it over use force.

If they edited there was no need.

[Clark2008]

18. LOL!!!

:rofl:

I couldn't have said it better.

[madfloridian]

19. You two keep laughing up your sleeves....I find it sad.

That there is no way to hold our media accountable, and you would rather laugh at me.

Now that is just sad.

What is there now makes no sense at all. It is like he started in the middle of a sentence.

We are ongoing in Fallujah and doing the same to Sadr City....killing civilians all the way.

I find it appalling. Why don't you?

I find it appalling.

[Jai4WKC08]

20. We laugh because you're so transparent

You know very well that we are all appalled at the media, and frustrated beyond belief that they answer to no one but their corporate masters. Like I said, assuming this particular editing occurred (I agree that it seems to have) I can't tell that it was done on purpose. You seem to have missed the point that it makes no sense to assume they did it on purpose since CNN has never ever done anything to make Clark look good.

Considering that most of the other networks don't do transcripts at all, and those that do don't usually keep them on-line for very long, I doubt you'll ever get CNN to expend money or manpower to correct one from over 3 years ago. But you knew that, didn't you?

[MalloyLiberal]

14. I looked on my Lexis access

Unfortunately, it only went back to 2005. :(

Edwards 2008 ;-)

[madfloridian]

16. Thanks....

I really don't know how to pursue it. It makes one wonder how often this kind of thing happens.

I did not notice for a long time.