Click HERE to read PBS's edited interview with Clair Fraser-Liggett. It's titled "Clair Fraser-Liggett: 'This is not an airtight case by any means'."
The PBS journalist doing the interview starts with some good questions then proceeds to ask leading questions which were obviously intended to get answers that would fit with PBS/McClatchy's biased view of the case:
The other conclusion was that it seemed to be that the FBI had overemphasized how the science defined the end results of the case. Explain that.
[Did] the FBI, to some extent, perhaps overemphasize the role of science in proving their case?
Were you surprised at the tone of the FBI as far as how clear they were that Ivins was the man?
Did you feel a little sense of awkwardness about being there, because you realized that you were possibly part of a bit of a charade?
[What about] the thoughts that pressure from the top down, to some extent, perverted the investigation?
So, PBS got the answers they wanted by asking biased questions that would get the right answers from someone who was not really familiar with all the evidence against Bruce Ivins. And they could then report on TV that "one of the FBI's outside experts" didn't fully agree with the FBI's findings.
Discussion?
No comments:
Post a Comment