Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: kevykev56 on September 09, 2004, 04:59:38 PM
-
http://www.cnsnews.com (http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200409\POL20040909d.html)
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
By Robert B. Bluey
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
September 09, 2004
(CNSNews.com) - The 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by the CBS News program "60 Minutes," shedding a negative light on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard, may have been forged using a current word processing program, according to typography experts.
Three independent typography experts told CNSNews.com they were suspicious of the documents from 1972 and 1973 because they were typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program.
The "60 Minutes" segment included an interview with former Texas lieutenant governor Ben Barnes, who criticized Bush's service. The news program also produced a series of memos that claim Bush refused to follow an order to undertake a medical examination.
The documents came from the "personal office file" of Bush's former squadron commander Jerry B. Killian, according to Kelli Edwards, a spokeswoman for "60 Minutes," who was quoted in Thursday's Washington Post. Edwards declined to tell the Post how the news program obtained the documents.
But the experts interviewed by CNSNews.com homed in on several aspects of a May 4, 1972, memo, which was part of the "60 Minutes" segment and was posted on the CBS News website Thursday.
"It was highly out of the ordinary for an organization, even the Air Force, to have proportional-spaced fonts for someone to work with," said Allan Haley, director of words and letters at Agfa Monotype in Wilmington, Mass. "I'm suspect in that I did work for the U.S. Army as late as the late 1980s and early 1990s and the Army was still using [fixed-pitch typeface] Courier."
The typography experts couldn't pinpoint the exact font used in the documents. They also couldn't definitively conclude that the documents were either forged using a current computer program or were the work of a high-end typewriter or word processor in the early 1970s.
But the use of the superscript "th" in one document - "111th F.I.S" - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it's not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.
"That would not be possible on a typewriter or even a word processor at that time," said John Collins, vice president and chief technology officer at Bitstream Inc., the parent of MyFonts.com.
"It is a very surprising thing to see a letter with that date [May 4, 1972] on it," and featuring such typography, Collins added. "There's no question that that is surprising. Does that force you to conclude that it's a fake? No. But it certainly raises the eyebrows."
Fred Showker, who teaches typography and introduction to digital graphics at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Va., questioned the documents' letterhead.
"Let's assume for a minute that it's authentic," Showker said. "But would they not have used some form of letterhead? Or has this letterhead been intentionally cut off? Notice how close to the top of the page it is."
He also pointed to the signature of Killian, the purported author of the May 4, 1972, memo ordering Bush, who was at the time a first lieutenant in the Texas Air National Guard, to obtain a physical exam.
"Do you think he would have stopped that 'K' nice and cleanly, right there before it ran into the typewriter 'Jerry," Showker asked. "You can't stop a ballpoint pen with a nice square ending like that ... The end of that 'K' should be round ... it looks like you took a pair of snips and cut it off so you could see the 'Jerry.'"
The experts also raised questions about the military's typewriter technology three decades ago. Collins said word processors that could produce proportional-sized fonts cost upwards of $20,000 at the time.
"I'm not real sure that you would have that kind of sophistication in the office of a flight inspector in the United States government," Showker said.
"The only thing it could be, possibly, is an IBM golf ball typewriter, which came out around the early to middle 1970s," Haley said. "Those did have proportional fonts on them. But they weren't widely used."
But Haley added that the use of the superscript "th" cast doubt on the use of any typewriter.
"There weren't any typewriters that did that," Haley said. "That looks like it might be a function of something like Microsoft Word, which does that automatically."
According to an article on the CBS News website, the news program "consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."
-
Dammit you conservative guys this is not fair!!! Why cant we fake stuff? What is flailing and issueless campaig to do??
-
http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/year_1941.html
(http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/images/typewriter.jpg) IBM announces the Electromatic Model 04 electric typewriter, featuring the revolutionary concept of proportional spacing. By assigning varied rather than uniform spacing to different sized characters, the Type 4 recreated the appearance of a printed page, an effect that was further enhanced by a typewriter ribbon innovation that produced clearer, sharper words on the page. The proportional spacing feature became a staple of the IBM Executive series typewriters.
(http://www.dubyasworld.com/dubya-lie-medals.jpg)
-
Originally posted by rpm371
(http://www.dubyasworld.com/dubya-lie-medals.jpg)
Man are you Kerry scum desperate..
Maybe we should just caption that picture:
I'd like to get my hands on the bastard that voted to send me here then voted against the body armor to protect me..
-
Originally posted by rpm371
http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/year_1941.html
(http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/images/typewriter.jpg) IBM announces the Electromatic Model 04 electric typewriter, featuring the revolutionary concept of proportional spacing. By assigning varied rather than uniform spacing to different sized characters, the Type 4 recreated the appearance of a printed page, an effect that was further enhanced by a typewriter ribbon innovation that produced clearer, sharper words on the page. The proportional spacing feature became a staple of the IBM Executive series typewriters.
(http://www.dubyasworld.com/dubya-lie-medals.jpg)
rpm371 thats very tasteless picture. it also says all anyone needs to know about extreme left and their attitude towards military.
-
My attatude towards the military is VERY pro. Anyone that would try to belittle a war injury is the one with a poor attitude towards the military.
-
Yea that the hillarious thing about the 2004 campaign, liberals who 30 yaers ago would spit on veterns as baby killeres are now in love with a guy whoose only campaign issue is one about killing babies, raping women, blowing up bodies and shooting crippled VC in the back.. Right rpm, that is what kerry said went on in his area of vietnam regularly? Right??
-
Originally posted by rpm371
My attatude towards the military is VERY pro. Anyone that would try to belittle a war injury is the one with a poor attitude towards the military.
But it is OK to belittle National Guard soldiers?
-
Personal attack
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
But it is OK to belittle National Guard soldiers?
If they go AWOL or use drugs, yes.
-
But killing babies in Vietnam is OK?
-
That fancy typewriter doesn't prove the airforce would have used it..I imagine it would have been expensive during a time of shrinking military budgets.
-
No, it was not.
Anon, you are the one that is overtly concerned with the political battle. I believe anyone that goes thru a battle and recieves a medal is a person of honor. To belittle it is unpatriotic.
If you, yourself, have or ever recieve a medal you have my gratitude and thanks. I don't care what your political affiliation is. It would sicken me to think that a soldier fighting or wounded in Iraq today would have his Purple Heart or decoration smeared in 30 years when he decided to run for public office.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
No, it was not.
Anon, you are the one that is overtly concerned with the political battle. I believe anyone that goes thru a battle and recieves a medal is a person of honor. To belittle it is unpatriotic.
If you, yourself, have or ever recieve a medal you have my gratitude and thanks. I don't care what your political affiliation is. It would sicken me to think that a soldier fighting or wounded in Iraq today would have his Purple Heart or decoration smeared in 30 years when he decided to run for public office.
ill take your word for it. if you bothered to take the time to say it you probably mean it. i still dont like the picture though. and i think the sense of honor you have on the matter isnt shared by the people who made the picture. i have some medals. i also strongly believe in the concepts of "for every medal awarded theres a thousand or more guys who should have the same medal but no one saw them do what they did and they died doing it" and "you wear your medals for those guys who should have one but dont". thats why kerry chucking the medals bothers me so. i dont care about his medals. i care about what he said when he got home. i could get into things like when some political hack calls him a "hero" with a straight face because they dont know a thing about the military i think of guys i know who turned down purple heart because they only took one "clean through the meat" and their close buddy ended up paralyzed so them getting the same medal didnt seem right. i can tell you for certain that if i did four months in country if people in my campaign started calling me a hero id say stop it save that for the grunts who did one or two full tours on the ground. id be embarassed for someone who doesnt understand military or warriors to call me a hero. kind of like how bob dole was. big news story on 10MTN in world war two and how they forerunner of modern army sf and they go ask dole about this and how he part of 10MTN and this is while dole is running for president and he says in live interview "10MTN guys were elite i was only a replacement officer you cant count me in that group when youre talking about all their training". ill stop rambling. im sorry i said what i said about you i believe you support military. i really dont like that picture is all.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
No, it was not.
Anon, you are the one that is overtly concerned with the political battle. I believe anyone that goes thru a battle and recieves a medal is a person of honor. To belittle it is unpatriotic.
If you, yourself, have or ever recieve a medal you have my gratitude and thanks. I don't care what your political affiliation is. It would sicken me to think that a soldier fighting or wounded in Iraq today would have his Purple Heart or decoration smeared in 30 years when he decided to run for public office.
It sickens me to realize that an admitted war criminal that aided the enemy faked his purple heart and silver star with the combat v.
-
Rpm..
You ever thought about how many medal winners the left is smearing? You are all bent out of shape because 1 person really has a lot of explaining to do ,yet at the same time 250 plus navy men are called liers,and other names.
Now the ex pows are saying the same thing and 1 of them has the Medal of Honor,and guess what ,they are self serving pigs according to the left.
So rpm how many against those 11 or 12....? THOUSANDS ?...
I have seen you write,where theres fire there is smoke...what happen? Still not enough smoke?
Why arent the liberals crying out at kerry to release his records??
-
Originally posted by demaw1
Why arent the liberals crying out at kerry to release his records??
Jay Severin was all over that today. It's funny how they went so far as to sue to get Bush's records, but won't even ask Kerry to release his.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
It sickens me to realize that an admitted war criminal that aided the enemy faked his purple heart and silver star with the combat v.
Admit it Martlet, your boy was a drunk, a druggie and a draft dodger. All Dubya can do is try to smear Kerry's medals because his own service was lacking any award short of winning the "Chug-Off" at the Ellington O' Club.
-
demaw, name 1 medal that those men earned that the Dem's are calling undeserved. Just 1.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Admit it Martlet, your boy was a drunk, a druggie and a draft dodger. All Dubya can do is try to smear Kerry's medals because his own service was lacking any award short of winning the "Chug-Off" at the Ellington O' Club.
GW Bush is on record, repeatedly, for praising Kerry's service - even go so far as to say that he believes Kerrys service was more honorable than his.
Contrastr that to Kerry, a man who IIRC just days ago questioned Bush service..
Listen up rpm - and listen good. :)
KERRY HAS NOTHING TO RUN ON EXCEPT HIS FOUR MONTHS OF VIETNAM - NOTHING
Thats why he is loosing the race as of today, why are you insiting that more attention be paid to that issue?
-
Originally posted by rpm371
You mean like AP, the group that sues to get every last Bush recored even when Bush allready gave his papers but idly sits by as Kerry refuses to open his records..
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Admit it Martlet, your boy was a drunk, a druggie and a draft dodger. All Dubya can do is try to smear Kerry's medals because his own service was lacking any award short of winning the "Chug-Off" at the Ellington O' Club.
Bush served his time honorably.
Kerry got turned down for a deferment, applied for ferry duty, got sent to combat instead, then "earned 3 purple hearts in under 4 months without missing a bit of service. He lied about going to Cambodia, then came home and lied about people he never served with.
He now displays medals on his page that he never even earned and is being investigated by the Dept. of the Navy.
Bush told the truth about his service. Kerry made his service his campaign, then it turns out it's all fiction.
Bush's service (http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx)
-
Forgive me, I didn't realise they were newbies invented for the campaign.
About The Associated Press: Founded in 1848, The Associated Press is the world's oldest and largest newsgathering organization, providing content to more than 15,000 news outlets with a daily reach of 1 billion people around the world.
-
didnt matter in 99 and won't stick in 04
LOL get over it rpm
LANDSLIDE BUSH!!!!
-
RPM what will you with your life when the election is over?
-
RPM.....
I have heard no one say anything about their medals, but if all those guys are liers and pigs wouldnt that bring there medals into question?
-
Originally posted by demaw1
RPM.....
I have heard no one say anything about their medals, but if all those guys are liers and pigs wouldnt that bring there medals into question?
The military is usually very thorough before handing out medals. So, the answer is no.
-
Story was broken by two BBS forum members last night when they noticed that 60 minutes linked the docs on its website. confirmed by ABC news....
IKON
-
Originally posted by rpm371
The military is usually very thorough before handing out medals. So, the answer is no.
depends on the medal the situation and the command and the era. ive seen medals handed out to people who did not deserve them. usually big difference is point when you add a v to a bronze and upward.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/year_1941.html
(http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/images/typewriter.jpg) IBM announces the Electromatic Model 04 electric typewriter, featuring the revolutionary concept of proportional spacing. By assigning varied rather than uniform spacing to different sized characters, the Type 4 recreated the appearance of a printed page, an effect that was further enhanced by a typewriter ribbon innovation that produced clearer, sharper words on the page. The proportional spacing feature became a staple of the IBM Executive series typewriters.
(http://www.dubyasworld.com/dubya-lie-medals.jpg)
:aok
-
Originally posted by rpm371
The military is usually very thorough before handing out medals. So, the answer is no.
They don't seem to be as sure as you are. They're investigating it.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Admit it Martlet, your boy was a drunk, a druggie and a draft dodger. .
Why are you bringing Bill Clinton into this?
-
Son of the late officer/writer also questions the memo. (http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040909_1710.html)
Gary Killian, who served in the Guard with his father and retired as a captain in 1991, said one of the memos, signed by his father, appeared legitimate. But he doubted his father would have written another, unsigned memo which said there was pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's performance review.
"It just wouldn't happen," he said. "The only thing that can happen when you keep secret files like that are bad things. ... No officer in his right mind would write a memo like that."
-
But the use of the superscript "th" in one document - "111th F.I.S" - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it's not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.
Those of us who typed on the new Selectrics beginning in the early 60's appreciated the new features and ease of use....here's a neat little explination of the 'th' and how it was used on the SelectricII which had been available since the early 60's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Selectric_typewriter
The Selectric II had a lever (above the right platen knob) that would allow the platen to be turned freely but return to the same vertical line (for inserting such symbols as subscripts and superscripts), whereas the Selectric I did not.
Some expert...huh?
-
Originally posted by MrLars
But the use of the superscript "th" in one document - "111th F.I.S" - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it's not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.
Those of us who typed on the new Selectrics beginning in the early 60's appreciated the new features and ease of use....here's a neat little explination of the 'th' and how it was used on the SelectricII which had been available since the early 60's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Selectric_typewriter
The Selectric II had a lever (above the right platen knob) that would allow the platen to be turned freely but return to the same vertical line (for inserting such symbols as subscripts and superscripts), whereas the Selectric I did not.
Some expert...huh?
Still nothing that says the Texas Air National guard had that particular expensive typewriter.
By the way..I don't know why..but your avatar pi$$es me off.
-
Originally posted by MrLars
But the use of the superscript "th" in one document - "111th F.I.S" - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it's not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.
Those of us who typed on the new Selectrics beginning in the early 60's appreciated the new features and ease of use....here's a neat little explination of the 'th' and how it was used on the SelectricII which had been available since the early 60's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Selectric_typewriter
The Selectric II had a lever (above the right platen knob) that would allow the platen to be turned freely but return to the same vertical line (for inserting such symbols as subscripts and superscripts), whereas the Selectric I did not.
Some expert...huh?
The Th isnt the smoking gun, the kerning or letter spacing wasn't an option on any Selectric typewriter.. Anyway they overlayed the document on top of a word 2000 doc and the spacing lined up perfectly... The doc was written with a word processor....
Is it so hard to believe someone could pass a forged doc?!
seems like a normal election stunt this year!
IKON
-
Election year politics are just getting too nasty...what has democracy in America come to..Matbe we should let Congress appoint a dictator and hang up this Presidential Election BS....Just getting sick of it...sick of the jabs from both sides...sick of people who are getting dang near militant with their attack and their defense of their canidates.
-
In every military instllation, both Active and Guard / Reserve, that I have been in I have never seen a typewriter like that picture posted on this BBS. The ones I saw were the basic IBM selectric, no frills and certainly no spacing changes. You could change the type ball but that was it.
Funny it seems that a couple weeks ago kerry was demanding Bush stop the negative attacks on kerry's service record. Bush never did any of the attacks and in fact said publicly he honored kerry for his service, but now kerry is all over Bush and attacking his service. Quite hypocritcal IMO.
-
(http://www.pogbird.com/X45/090904.jpg)
-
Originally posted by rpm371
(http://www.dubyasworld.com/dubya-lie-medals.jpg)
(http://www.pogbird.com/X45/skerry-lie-medals.jpg)
-
Originally posted by IK0N
The Th isnt the smoking gun, the kerning or letter spacing wasn't an option on any Selectric typewriter.. Anyway they overlayed the document on top of a word 2000 doc and the spacing lined up perfectly... The doc was written with a word processor....
Is it so hard to believe someone could pass a forged doc?!
seems like a normal election stunt this year!
IKON
Kerning was automatic on the Seletrics and if the docs typeface and inclusion of subscript etc. are suspect then GWB's AF7 is also.
Type spacing and virtualy all aspects of manual typography have been pretty much standardized since the early 30's. It's not hard with todays computers to be able to create an overlay showing exact same image but the ability to so so easily when working from a typewritten and printed original would take skill and time....how hard was it for these people to tweak their overlay to match should be the question.
Lastly, the Whitehouse released the same documents, do you think they'd release forged docs without indicating what they were?
-
Lastly, the Whitehouse released the same documents, do you think they'd release forged docs without indicating what they were?
The Whitehouse released the documents they got from CBS.
-
Originally posted by MrLars
Kerning was automatic on the Seletrics and if the docs typeface and inclusion of subscript etc. are suspect then GWB's AF7 is also.
Type spacing and virtualy all aspects of manual typography have been pretty much standardized since the early 30's.
So how would one go about typing a superscript 'th' on a selectric?
You roll up the carriage 1/2 a line and then... do you then have to change the ball to get a smaller font for the superscript then change back for typing the remainder of a rountine memorandum?
Or possibly was there a ball available that has special 'th', 'st', and 'nd' small font superscript characters available? What button do you push on the keyboard to access this function?
Just asking...
-
Ole Danny boy must be feeling kind of stupid right about now. His rectum must be tighter then a mummies tomb, if those docs are indeed fakes.
Hay Dan instead of rushing out to shill for Kerry, you should practice sound journalism and Corroborate the story.
"The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected," a top CBS source explained late Thursday.
The source, who asked not to be named, described CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather as being privately "shell-shocked" by the increasingly likelihood that the documents in question were fraudulent.
Rather, who anchored the segment presenting new information on the president's military service, will personally correct the record on-air, if need be, the source explained from New York
-
Rather might correct the record but he'll never undo the damage done to his and CBS' reputation. Wonder how many times the NYT will carry this on their front page?
-
Originally posted by rpm371
http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/year_1941.html
(http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/images/typewriter.jpg) IBM announces the Electromatic Model 04 electric typewriter, featuring the revolutionary concept of proportional spacing. By assigning varied rather than uniform spacing to different sized characters, the Type 4 recreated the appearance of a printed page, an effect that was further enhanced by a typewriter ribbon innovation that produced clearer, sharper words on the page. The proportional spacing feature became a staple of the IBM Executive series typewriters.
(http://www.dubyasworld.com/dubya-lie-medals.jpg)
rpm371,
You know you might just get better results by sticking to the original message about debunking the story rather than a sensitive image not pertaining to the type story. Those you wish to change their minds will see nothing in your posts if you resort to such images and statements.
If those statements and images are important enought to you, start a new thread with them.
Otherwise, you're just wasting bandwidth (IMHO).
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Rather might correct the record but he'll never undo the damage done to his and CBS' reputation. Wonder how many times the NYT will carry this on their front page?
It will be on the frontpage for three days (including the weekend) and the retraction will be on page nine of the Tuesday edition.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Rather might correct the record but he'll never undo the damage done to his and CBS' reputation. Wonder how many times the NYT will carry this on their front page?
*If* it is fake, at least once to announce it. And then two or three more times at least after heads roll at CBS and either candidate speaks to it directly.
I trust the NY or LA Times about a thousand times more than CNS news, whatever the hell that is.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Rather might correct the record but he'll never undo the damage done to his and CBS' reputation. Wonder how many times the NYT will carry this on their front page?
Just checked. They ran it today on the front, below the fold.
Also saw this..
NEW YORK TIMES
The Times Refuses Reprint in Moore Book
By EDWARD WYATT
Published: September 10, 2004
he publisher of a coming book by the filmmaker Michael Moore said yesterday that The New York Times had denied permission for Mr. Moore to include in his book a May article in which The Times reviewed shortcomings in its own reporting about the events leading up to the war in Iraq.
Advertisement
Publishing industry executives say that such denials are rare, and executives at Simon & Schuster, the publisher, said The Times was the only one of several publications it had approached to deny permission to reprint articles, photographs, cartoons or editorials in the book.
In a statement, Catherine Mathis, a spokeswoman for The Times, said: "We strongly value The Times's neutrality in its election coverage and we are determined not to associate ourselves with any work in film or print that attacks either candidate. Our note, 'The Times and Iraq,' was not intended to become part of a political battle."
Ms. Mathis said the decision to deny permission to reprint the article was made by Bill Keller, the executive editor of the newspaper, in conjunction with Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher.
The book, "The Official 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Reader," is scheduled to be published next month, timed to the release of the DVD version of "Fahrenheit 9/11." The film has generated widespread controversy for its antiwar tenor, and critics of Mr. Moore have raised questions about some of the film's assertions.
The book is to contain a transcript of the screenplay, source materials for assertions made in the film and critical response to the documentary, including reprints of articles, reviews and editorials.
David Rosenthal, the publisher of the Simon & Schuster imprint and an executive vice president at Simon & Schuster Inc., said that The Times refused to allow Mr. Moore to reprint the 1,220-word article, published May 26. The article, which carried the headline, "From the Editors: The Times and Iraq," said that in the prelude to the war some of the paper's coverage, especially about the issue of Iraq's weapons, "was not as rigorous as it should have been."
"In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged," the article stated.
The article stirred considerable discussion among journalists and politicians over whether news organizations had been skeptical enough about the Bush administration's reasons for going to war in Iraq.
Mr. Moore, in an interview, said the book did not attack either presidential candidate. The purpose of reprinting the Times article, he said, "was essentially to applaud The Times for having the courage to admit their mistakes; it had nothing to do with Bush or Kerry.''
The Times "never asked to see the rest of the book or asked what is in the book,'' Mr. Moore said. "They made the determination of what is in the book without having read it. I think that's pretty lame.''
Mr. Rosenthal said Simon & Schuster received permission to publish about two dozen items from several publications, including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. He said the book would include two largely blank pages where the article from The Times was to appear.
Special Offer: Home Delivery of The Times
-
CBS News released a statement yesterday standing by its reporting, saying that each of the documents "was thoroughly vetted by independent experts and we are convinced of their authenticity." The statement added that CBS reporters had verified the documents by talking to unidentified individuals who saw them "at the time they were written."
CBS spokeswoman Kelli Edwards declined to respond to questions raised by experts who examined copies of the papers at the request of The Washington Post, or to provide the names of the experts CBS consulted. Experts interviewed by The Post pointed to a series of telltale signs suggesting that the documents were generated by a computer or word processor rather than the typewriters in widespread use by Bush's National Guard unit.
A senior CBS official, who asked not to be named because CBS managers did not want to go beyond their official statement, named one of the network's sources as retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, the immediate superior of the documents' alleged author, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian. He said that a CBS reporter read the documents to Hodges over the phone, and that Hodges replied that "these are the things that Killian had expressed to me at the time."
'Trump card'
"These documents represent what Killian not only was putting in memoranda, but was telling other people," the CBS News official said. "Journalistically, we've gone several extra miles."
The official said the network regarded Hodges's comments as "the trump card" on the question of authenticity, as he is a Republican who acknowledged that he did not want to hurt Bush.
MSNBC (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5955784/)
Ted Koppel said on tonight's Nightline that if the story had been dropped in his lap instead of Rather's he would have run it. He also raised the question: If the memos are fake, were they planted by Republicans as sabotage? It was an interesting show on the art of dirty politics.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
He (Kopple) also raised the question: If the memos are fake, were they planted by Republicans as sabotage? It was an interesting show on the art of dirty politics.
Perhaps they were planted by the Kerry campaign to look like the Republicans planted them to use against the Kerry campaign, so that Kerry could claim that the Republicans are up to their old dirty tricks, but in they were in fact planted by the Republicans to look like they were planted by the Kerry campaign to look like the Republicans planted them to use against the Kerry campaign, so that the Republicans could claim that the Demos are up to their old dirty tricks.
I think that this is the most plausible explanation.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
when Bush allready gave his papers .
Apparently not Grun. As the papers this week are new and found because of Lawsuits and the freedom of information act. So I guess they werent previously all released.
Kerry has released all "pertinant" papers. The only things not released are personal med records. What do you hope to find?
One canidate served in combat and one didnt. End of story. Who cares?
I just want to know what they are going to do for me and my country now. And I will remind you that 9/11 happened on GWB's watch.
-
Silat whats your e-mail?
-
Originally posted by Silat
And I will remind you that 9/11 happened on GWB's watch.
Silat,
I didn't want this to be deleted as we're going off topic. I'm opening up a new thread to respond.
-
Originally posted by Silat
Apparently not Grun. As the papers this week are new and found because of Lawsuits and the freedom of information act. So I guess they werent previously all released.
Kerry has released all "pertinant" papers. The only things not released are personal med records. What do you hope to find?
One canidate served in combat and one didnt. End of story. Who cares?
I just want to know what they are going to do for me and my country now. And I will remind you that 9/11 happened on GWB's watch.
thanks for reminding us of something that has no bearing on the problems and issues at hand. youve been a great service to your own ego.
-
The document was created from technology that was only available to typesetters in 1972.. If you had ever used a IBM selectric 1 and 2 you would understand... Changing balls in mid memo would be stupid for 2 letters, once you had the balls and ribbon in place you left it alone until you were done. Maybe on a selectric 2 you would get fancy and switch balls cause they made it easier, but it had to be a very special document.
2 cents
IKON
-
Originally posted by Silat
I just want to know what they are going to do for me and my country now. And I will remind you that 9/11 happened on GWB's watch.
what an intelligent statement ... when was the plan masterminded, what years, under which admin?
anyone care to list the terror attacks btwn 92 and 00 ??? before 92??
yep, all GW's fault - LOL
please give us another tid bit of your genius...
-
so the document is most likely a fake? figures. The whole campaign is nothing but 1972 at this point.
Is there any document that shows Bush helping jane fonda to kill troops?
lazs
-
Silat,
Yes Kerry served in combat for 4 months. Good for him. And we now know that you feel those 4 months are important in his qualifications to be president...
But what do you make of his 20 years in the Senate? 20 years where he never showed leadership on any particlar issue. Hardly ever wrote or co-sponsored any bills - and certainly no significant ones. 20 yaers where he missed viatl intelligence hearings. 20 years of no achievents whatsover..
What do you make of that service?
Please remember that we allready know what you think of Bush and I assume it will be tempting for you to say "but what has Bush done in only 4 years a governor of Texas before the 2000 race." However that doesnt answer the question and that has nothing to do with Kerry's 20 years on uninspired service.
Also drawing such a contrast would essientially make your pitch for Kerry be the following: "Bush had 4 years of poor govt service before becoming president, but Kerry had 20 years of poor servuce - so Kerry is better!!!"
Finally just saying "I dont like President Bush and the job he has done" says nothing about how you view Kerry's poor 20 service in the seante..
So please tell us what you think of Kerry's 20 year senate record?
-
lol Faked? lmao!! You Bush supporters clearly have forgotten your foil hats! Let me help yall with that:
http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
I hear they have a new liner inside.
lol damn nutjob conspiracy junkies! Dont yall EVER go away?
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
lol Faked? lmao!! You Bush supporters clearly have forgotten your foil hats! Let me help yall with that:
http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
I hear they have a new liner inside.
lol damn nutjob conspiracy junkies! Dont yall EVER go away?
Do you nutjobs that support someone who avoids talking about today's issues Ever go away?
Oh I forgot he's afraid to talk about the issues because he knows he'll just contradict himself a weeks down the road.
-
Oh boy, CBS screwed the pooch big time! Look at their CYA:
"As importantly, 60 MINUTES also interviewed close associates of Colonel Jerry Killian. They confirm that the documents reflect his opinions and actions at the time."
-
CBS NEWS executives have launched an internal investigation into whether its premiere news program 60 MINUTES aired fabricated documents relating to Bush's National Guard service.
"The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected," a top CBS source explained late Thursday.
The source, who asked not to be named, described CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather as being privately "shell-shocked" by the increasing likelihood that the documents in question were fraudulent.
Rather, who anchored the segment presenting new information on the president's military service, will personally correct the record on-air, if need be, the source explained from New York.
-
http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200402180840.asp
read em and make up your mind, i find the answer acceptable.
-
Former Guard Colonel Disputes Authenticity of Memos
BY PETE SLOVER AND TANYA EISERER
The Dallas Morning News
DALLAS - (KRT) - A former Texas Air National Guard colonel relied upon by CBS News to support the authenticity of memos about President Bush's military service said he never saw the memos before the show aired, and that he doesn't now believe they are authentic.
Retired Col. Bobby Hodges of Arlington, Texas, also said that one of the memos' references to undue pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's evaluations rings false. He said the colonel that supposedly applied that pressure did not interfere in Guard affairs after his retirement, 18 months before the date on the disputed memo.
I guess it is not just about typography anymore...this is getting interesting.
-
Whats the font size kenneth?
-
it doesn't take the wishful thinking liberals much in the way of bait to get em to jump into the mud puddle so...
this could very well be the plot of some evil conservative to make 60 minutes look bad and prove it to the 6 viewers left who might think of 60 minutes as an "unbiased news source".
lazs
-
Well.... I don't know who's responsible for this but they got the 'hook' set so hard in CBS they'll never get off the line. Just reel them in nice and slow.....
Didn't the 'Godfather' say "Don't hate your enemies, it clouds your mind" ?
-
What about the AP???
WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) - President Bush on Friday wished Bill Clinton ''best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''
''He's is in our thoughts and prayers,'' Bush said at a campaign rally.
Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Bush did nothing to stop them.
Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.
Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and ''the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president.''
-
Originally posted by anonymous
thanks for reminding us of something that has no bearing on the problems and issues at hand. youve been a great service to your own ego.
Well I lost my ego at Woodstock.:)
But if I had any idea what you are talking about Id respond.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
what an intelligent statement ... when was the plan masterminded, what years, under which admin?
anyone care to list the terror attacks btwn 92 and 00 ??? before 92??
yep, all GW's fault - LOL
please give us another tid bit of your genius...
Well since I dont know your IQ I wont comment. But I do appreciate you noticing my high intellect.
But I never said it was all his fault.
What has happened while he is president is what we have been concerned with Eagler. Its his watch. I suppose you dispute that too?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Silat,
Yes Kerry served in combat for 4 months. Good for him. And we now know that you feel those 4 months are important in his qualifications to be president...
But what do you make of his 20 years in the Senate? 20 years where he never showed leadership on any particlar issue. Hardly ever wrote or co-sponsored any bills - and certainly no significant ones. 20 yaers where he missed viatl intelligence hearings. 20 years of no achievents whatsover..
What do you make of that service?
Please remember that we allready know what you think of Bush and I assume it will be tempting for you to say "but what has Bush done in only 4 years a governor of Texas before the 2000 race." However that doesnt answer the question and that has nothing to do with Kerry's 20 years on uninspired service.
Also drawing such a contrast would essientially make your pitch for Kerry be the following: "Bush had 4 years of poor govt service before becoming president, but Kerry had 20 years of poor servuce - so Kerry is better!!!"
Finally just saying "I dont like President Bush and the job he has done" says nothing about how you view Kerry's poor 20 service in the seante..
So please tell us what you think of Kerry's 20 year senate record?
Grun I have never even mentioned that his service had anything to do with his qualifications for President.
But your imaginary conversation that I would have is another nice spin.
And I shouldnt have to lead you by the nose to GOOGLE his senate record. And I dont mean the Hannity version.
His 20 years of government experience certainly stacks up to Bushs government experience.
As far as his time in the Navy it is all documented by the Navy. Are you saying the Navy is lieing?
Why dont you take the time to check the facts before you start arguing by making up conversations I might have.
The outright lies by both sides are outrageous but the right is much better at it.
Kerry enlisted with the U.S. Navy in Feb 1966 and was discharged honorably from the Navy in Jan 1970. In between, he requested to be sent to Vietnam and he served two tours, only one of which lasted over 4 months.
http://swiftvets.eriposte.com/othersbvlies.htm - Links so you dont have to google to much:)
Senate record links.
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0421103
http://kerry.senate.gov/bandwidth/issues/legislation.html#
Cheney's record because George didnt serve in the house.
He opposed federal funding for abortions -- with no exceptions in the case of rape or incest.
He voted against the Equal Rights Amendment for women, along with 146 other members of Congress in 1983.
On Education, he consistently opposed funding of Head Start and voted against creating the Department of Education.
Cheney was raised in Wyoming and opposes, as many Westerners do, gun control limits.
He was one of just 21 members of Congress, in December of 1985, to vote against a ban on armor piercing bullets -- called cop killer bullets.
Three years later he was one of only four members of the House voting against a ban on plastic guns that could slip through airport security machines undetected. The National Rifle Association did not oppose this ban.
Also in 1988, Cheney voted to scrap a proposed national seven-day waiting period on handgun purchases.
On the environment, Cheney opposed refunding the Clean Water Act. He voted to postpone sanctions slapped on air polluters that failed to meet pollution standards.
And he voted against legislation to require oil, chemical and other industries from making public records of emissions known to cause cancer, birth defects and other chronic diseases.
Cheney voted as a fiscal conservative too, supporting legislation to balance the national budget.
http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/cheney_record/ - More of his voting record. You might notice that alot of his "votes" are the same as Kerry's although he criticises Kerry for the same vote.
-
Well I cant find much online positive about Bush as Gov of Texas. Maybe you can educate me.
To be fair, Texas was at the top of some ratings:
* 1st in pollution released by manufacturing plants;
* 1st in pollution by industrial plants in violation of the federal Clean Air Act;
* 1st in greenhouse gas emissions;
* 1st in number of working parents without health insurance;
* 1st in percentage of children without health insurance.
* 2nd in number of children living in poverty;
* 2nd in percentage of population without health insurance;
* 2nd in number of children without health insurance (1st in percentage)
* 3rd in percent of non-elderly population without health insurance
* 5th in poverty rate;
* 5th in teen birth rate.
Here's a listing of where Texas is at or near the bottom relative to other states:
* 50th in teacher salaries plus benefits ("No Child Left Behind"? you've got to be kidding!)
* 50th in per-capita spending on government administration;
* 50th in per-capita interest paid on state's general debt;
* 49th in per capita general revenue;
* 49th in spending for the environment;
* 49th in per-capita spending on natural resources;
* 49th in percent of adults voting in November 1996
* 48th in per-capita spending for public health;
* 48th in per-capita spending for public parks and recreation;
* 48th in per-capita spending for public arts programs;
* 48th in per-capita tax revenue;
* 47th in delivery of social services;
* 47th in per-capita spending on highways;
* 46th in welfare benefits as a percentage of poverty-level income;
* 42nd in state and local government welfare spending;
* 42nd in per capita high school completion rate (from the "Education President"?)
* 42nd in per-capita revenue from current charges (tuition, fees for products/services, highway tolls, etc.)
* 42nd in spending for public libraries (the First Lady is a librarian!)
* 39th in physicians per capita
* 38th in immunization rates;
* 35th in per-capita education spending for K12 and higher;
* 32nd in average life-expectancy;
* 31st in infant mortality rates.
-
One little thing about "the education President", When Texas TAAS test scores rose, so did the drop out rate. Just force the slow ones to quit and it makes the rest smarter.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
(http://www.dubyasworld.com/dubya-lie-medals.jpg)
Poor taste.
-
Yall have poor taste, slamming our president, and slamming a veteran..
-
Originally posted by Silat
Well I cant find much online positive about Bush as Gov of Texas. Maybe you can educate me.
To be fair, Texas was at the top of some ratings:
* 1st in pollution released by manufacturing plants;
* 1st in pollution by industrial plants in violation of the federal Clean Air Act;
* 1st in greenhouse gas emissions;
* 1st in number of working parents without health insurance;
* 1st in percentage of children without health insurance.
* 2nd in number of children living in poverty;
* 2nd in percentage of population without health insurance;
* 2nd in number of children without health insurance (1st in percentage)
* 3rd in percent of non-elderly population without health insurance
* 5th in poverty rate;
* 5th in teen birth rate.
Here's a listing of where Texas is at or near the bottom relative to other states:
* 50th in teacher salaries plus benefits ("No Child Left Behind"? you've got to be kidding!)
* 50th in per-capita spending on government administration;
* 50th in per-capita interest paid on state's general debt;
* 49th in per capita general revenue;
* 49th in spending for the environment;
* 49th in per-capita spending on natural resources;
* 49th in percent of adults voting in November 1996
* 48th in per-capita spending for public health;
* 48th in per-capita spending for public parks and recreation;
* 48th in per-capita spending for public arts programs;
* 48th in per-capita tax revenue;
* 47th in delivery of social services;
* 47th in per-capita spending on highways;
* 46th in welfare benefits as a percentage of poverty-level income;
* 42nd in state and local government welfare spending;
* 42nd in per capita high school completion rate (from the "Education President"?)
* 42nd in per-capita revenue from current charges (tuition, fees for products/services, highway tolls, etc.)
* 42nd in spending for public libraries (the First Lady is a librarian!)
* 39th in physicians per capita
* 38th in immunization rates;
* 35th in per-capita education spending for K12 and higher;
* 32nd in average life-expectancy;
* 31st in infant mortality rates.
Isn't that right inline with the Conservative platform?
-
Very poor taste RPM...
-
Silat, there did you get the data on Texas?
-
Originally posted by rpm371
...If the memos are fake, were they planted by Republicans as sabotage? ...
Of course the Republicans did this to themselves... a lib can never do ANYTHING wrong/illegal and be held accountable for it. Even if he did it, it wasn't his fault.... :rolleyes:
what retarded, twisted thinking the handsomehunkcras are getting into now - and we are still about 7 weeks out - LOL LOL LOL
-
nice list silat... looks like a border state with mexico from the list.
can you tell me which of those things got worse under Bush's watch as governor?
seems that set scores for kids who don't speak english might be a little low as would be the salaries and schooling in extremely poor districts.
lazs
-
FWIW, my wife has been a secretary for a well-known phone company for 35 years, and has used almost every kind of typewriter of the major manufacturers that's ever been out on the market. She says she used a proportional-space machine back in the 70's, but the superscript feature simply wasn't possible unless you used an IBM selectric and went through the trouble of changing the ball in the middle of whatever you were typing. No one did that, in her experience.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
One little thing about "the education President", When Texas TAAS test scores rose, so did the drop out rate. Just force the slow ones to quit and it makes the rest smarter.
No one is forced to quit. "No child left behind" isn't about lowering standards so that everyone passes though. That seems to be the liberal way. The conservative way is to set reasonable standards, require them to be met and help everyone willing to do so. Slackness in enforcing the standards turns everyone into slackers.
I would very much like to see your source on your stats Silat.
-
CBS News is standing by their report.
A bunch of biased web sites passing judgement by looking at scanned PDFs of copies is not convincing, unless you're a talk radio zombie, then you'll believe anything.
-
How hard would it be for CBS to acquire a typewriter used by the Air Force in 1972 and reproduce (using only one ball of course) an identical document? This would lay to rest much of the speculation that they reported on forged documents. That they haven't done this speaks loudly.
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
CBS News is standing by their report...
so what ... to do otherwise is to toss the match on the gasoline soaked skerry campaign --- LOL
-
Here's one of Bush's records from 1968, released to the media by the White House itself.
Would ya look at that?! A raised "th". How could it be???
What's the other claim issued by the wingnuts? Times Roman wasn't available then? It's been available since 1931.
Anything else?
(http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/superscrptth.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Eagler
so what ... to do otherwise is to toss the match on the gasoline soaked skerry campaign --- LOL
They are a reputable news organization, a totally alien concept to those who live in the right-wing echo chamber of Rush, Washington Times, etc. If they thought they were wrong they would admit it.
-
What's the date of that document Nash?
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
They are a reputable news organization, a totally alien concept to those who live in the right-wing echo chamber of Rush, Washington Times, etc. If they thought they were wrong they would admit it.
You are very trusting of news organiztions but not so trusting of government eh?
-
Nash, what I find interesting in THAT document is that on the first line mentioning the "111th" the "th" is raised. The next THREE times the "111th" is mentioned the "th" is NOT raised.
What's up with that? Just sayin'.
I used one of those IBM's. I remember changing the ball to get different scripts. Would I bother to do it for "111th"? No way; that's a waste of time.
I used it when I quoted something and put it in italics, like a whole paragraph or something. There's no fargin' way anyone in their right mind would quit typing and swap typing balls to just have a "raised th".
IMO.
I'm still waiting for something definitive to come out on this. Seems to have dropped from the news. Anyone got "fresh links"?
-
The document that Nash posted was typed no earlier than late 1973, could have been later, it isn't dated. Certainly wasn't typed in 1968 as he seemed to be stating.
Guess it could have been early 1973. No evidence of the '73 dates being written over white-out.
-
That document you show is obviously a fake made by Edward R. Murrow. Nash, stop throwing facts on the tracks of radical innuendo. LANDSLIDE BUUUUUUUSH!
-
Originally posted by AKIron
You are very trusting of news organiztions but not so trusting of government eh?
What?
I trust the government on some things, "Water polluted - No swimming."
On other things, I am skeptical. "We had nothing to do with that bungled coup in (oil rich) Venezuela."
-
I think the reason for the one raised "th" as compared to the others which were not raised is because these lines represent entries made at different times, and undoubtedly by different people.
The "th" line was typed in '68 (date is to the left).
The others were entered onto the record after that... the last being October of '73.
-
Originally posted by Nash
I think the reason for the one raised "th" as compared to the others which were not raised is because these lines represent entries made at different times, and undoubtedly by different people.
The "th" line was typed in '68 (date is to the left).
The others were entered onto the record after that... the last being October of '73.
I don't think it was typed in '68. The written in dates are too clean. Have you ever written over white-out? I have, lines written over white-out are not that clean.
-
lol.... geesh.... how far some people will go if they want to believe something....
The written dates were written after the final entry. I mean, it does say "date of last order". Probably the last thing they do when a record no longer needs updating... like after Bush was discharged.
Look at the difference between the last line in '73 as compared to the 1st line in '68. Does it not appear that there's some deterioration? Or perhaps yer suggesting that this was all typed at once, and that the more you type, the more inky the ribbon becomes.
Come on...
-
Originally posted by Toad
Nash, what I find interesting in THAT document is that on the first line mentioning the "111th" the "th" is raised. The next THREE times the "111th" is mentioned the "th" is NOT raised.
What's up with that? Just sayin'.
I used one of those IBM's. I remember changing the ball to get different scripts. Would I bother to do it for "111th"? No way; that's a waste of time.
I used it when I quoted something and put it in italics, like a whole paragraph or something. There's no fargin' way anyone in their right mind would quit typing and swap typing balls to just have a "raised th".
IMO.
I'm still waiting for something definitive to come out on this. Seems to have dropped from the news. Anyone got "fresh links"?
That page out of his service record is constantly updated. It was typed on several typewriters over several years, starting in 1968. Any of you guys ever been in the service?
Seems like all the arguements for it being fake are being debunked rapidly. First they said the font was'nt available. Turns out New Times Roman was available since 1931. Then it was the porportional spacing typewriter. Sorry, those came out in 1945. Then the "th". IMPOSSIBLE for that to happen. Enter the IBM Selectric and Bush's records he previously released.
Face it, he screwed the pooch and never stood tall before the man.
-
mz... 60 minutes has retracted stories in the past but only when faced with lawsuits or such a blatant lie that they couldn't help it.. 60 minutes is probably one of the most left wing and dishonest shows on the tube.
weren't they the ones who planted flares in a Chevy truck to make it look like it exploded when hit from the side?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
mz... 60 minutes has retracted stories in the past but only when faced with lawsuits or such a blatant lie that they couldn't help it.. 60 minutes is probably one of the most left wing and dishonest shows on the tube.
weren't they the ones who planted flares in a Chevy truck to make it look like it exploded when hit from the side?
lazs
That was Dateline NBC
-
What does it say when they've retracted stories in the past (have they really?) but are standing by this one?
Read why. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml)
-
The OER is a recurring evaluation report and the date will be changed when a new one is written. In times past it wasn't uncommon to use whiteout when changing the date on a document. It also wasn't uncommon to retype a worn document or one with excessive whiteout on it. The date of the last OER was written in '73 and was documented on this form after it had been written. This date looks clean to me, I could wrong since it is after all a photocopy.
It could have been retyped in '73 or later. However, the type in '73 is darker while all the entries up through '70 look the same. Have to admit it looks like it was typed in '70 to me. Still doesn't explain the lack of whiteout or tape evidence in the date of last oer block.
-
Originally posted by Nash
What does it say when they've retracted stories in the past (have they really?) but are standing by this one?
Read why. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml)
Great. Now, how do you account for the Killian memo having the wrong deadline, and citing the wrong regulation.?
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3833
This is supposed to be someone who had an old IBM Selectric Composer who tried to reproduce part of one of the memos on it. The black is from the original memo and the red is from the attempt to reproduce it.
(http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/images/comparison2.jpg)
http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/2004/09/the_ibm_selectr.html
This point was so important to Gerry that he went out of his way to mention it to me again later in the day: centering type is hard on the Selectric Composer. Two of the memos, May 4 and August 1, 1972, feature a three-line centered head. Each of those lines of type had to be centered by measuring it carefully, doing some math, then advancing the carrier to just the right point on the page. The margin for error would be pretty wide because type can be off by a few points in either direction and still look pretty well centered. It wouldn't be objectionable unless you went looking for it. So it wasn't necessary for Lt. Col. Killian — or his typist — to be millimeter-precise.
And yet … he was.
(http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/centered.jpg)
Two letterheads typed three months apart can be superimposed on each other so perfectly that no difference at all can be seen. It's the same deal as before: the red in front was superimposed over the black behind it. You just can't see the black copy because the red copy is perfectly aligned with it. These letterheads weren't centered to within a couple of points of each other. They were centered exactly the same. Three months apart.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Have to admit it looks like it was typed in '70 to me. Still doesn't explain the lack of whiteout or tape evidence in the date of last oer block.
Good.
So you're saying that the only thing that may somehow disprove this document, and by extention this whole BS fraud claim, is the lack of any sign of whiteout or tape in this bad photocopy?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Great. Now, how do you account for the Killian memo having the wrong deadline, and citing the wrong regulation.?
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3833
This is supposed to be someone who had an old IBM Selectric Composer who tried to reproduce part of one of the memos on it. The black is from the original memo and the red is from the attempt to reproduce it.
(http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/images/comparison2.jpg)
http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/2004/09/the_ibm_selectr.html
I guess we have to take Rip's word. This guy "supposedly" owns an IBM typewriter and a computer graphics program. He "allegedly" could not "reproduce" the memo. Rock Solid reporting there! CASE CLOSED!
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I guess we have to take Rip's word. This guy "supposedly" owns an IBM typewriter and a computer graphics program. He "allegedly" could not "reproduce" the memo. Rock Solid reporting there! CASE CLOSED!
I threw that in as an afterthought, but feel free to ignore the gist of my post:
Great. Now, how do you account for the Killian memo having the wrong deadline, and citing the wrong regulation.?
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3833
-
It's no use arguing, we'll get to the bottom of this once CBS finishes its internal investigation.
Oh, wait, CBS ISN'T INVESTIGATING THIS!
-
Originally posted by Nash
Good.
So you're saying that the only thing that may somehow disprove this document, and by extention this whole BS fraud claim, is the lack of any sign of whiteout or tape in this bad photocopy?
Hardly.
I'm saying that we can only guess as to the date the document you posted was actually typed.
I think what Rip just posted should create some question as to the validity of the "BS fraud claim" in the mind of any reasonable person.
-
Originally posted by ra
It's no use arguing, we'll get to the bottom of this once CBS finishes its internal investigation.
Oh, wait, CBS ISN'T INVESTIGATING THIS!
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Heh.....
Take a PDF of a photocopy of a photocopy of an original and expect there to be no distortion... But there is.... so then try to match that distortion on a completely different typewriter than what the original document was created on.
I would be amazed if it did work and everything lined up. 1 in a million if even possible.
But so what? The technology to create the "fraudulent" document existed at the time that the document was created. Seems like a moot point to me.
-
Ockam's Razor was it??
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Hardly.
I'm saying that we can only guess as to the date the document you posted was actually typed.
This shouldn't be hard to find out.
Can anyone here tell us if this type of document was created all at once, or updated?
I know the media is reporting it as being updated, and that the entry for '68 was typed in '68... and that the White House isn't denying that.... but maybe your theory is true?
Again - it's a bit moot - because it was possible to do the raised "th" in '68 no matter if you choose not to see the evidence in this particular document.
Originally posted by AKIron
I think what Rip just posted should create some question as to the validity of the "BS fraud claim" in the mind of any reasonable person.
"Hardly".
-
Originally posted by ra
It's no use arguing, we'll get to the bottom of this once CBS finishes its internal investigation.
Oh, wait, CBS ISN'T INVESTIGATING THIS!
Oh, wait, CBS INVESTIGATED THIS BEFORE REPORTING!
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Ockam's Razor was it??
1. His son (also an ANG Officer) said it was out of character and believed it to be a forgery.
2. His wife said she thought it was a forgery (I think)
3. CBS can't or won't prove it could have come from a 1972 typewriter (very easy to do if possible imo)
4. CBS won't reveal their source
5. Dates and referenced AFM in these documents were inccorrect
Hmmm, thinking ole Bill of Occam would go with the forgery on this one.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Oh, wait, CBS INVESTIGATED THIS BEFORE REPORTING!
As Tammy Wynette said:
Sometimes it's hard to be a woman
Giving all your love to just one man
You'll have bad times
And he'll have good times
Doin things that you don't understand
But if you love him
You'll forgive him
Even though he's hard to understand
And if you love him
Oh, be proud of him
Cause after all he's just a man
Stand by your man
Give him two arms to cling to
And something warm to come to
when nights are cold and lonely
Stand by your man
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the love you can
Stand by your man
Stand by your man
And show the world you love him
Keep giving all the love you can
Stand by your man
-
Originally posted by AKIron
1. His son (also an ANG Officer) said it was out of character and believed it to be a forgery.
2. His wife said she thought it was a forgery (I think)
3. CBS can't or won't prove it could have come from a 1972 typewriter (very easy to do if possible imo)
4. CBS won't reveal their source
5. Dates and referenced AFM in these documents were inccorrect
Hmmm, thinking ole Bill of Occam would go with the forgery on this one.
1. His son??
2. You think??
3. Perhaps they already have.
4. Why should they?
5. I do not know about this.
Occam, Ockham or Ockam.. I have seen all the above used.
You accept the 5 criteria, 2 of which are his family and not sure about both, above the most obvious conclusion that the the docs are real? Humm.. I'm not so certain Bill would agree given no more evidence than presented.. Perhaps if the type was impossible. But, fortunatly it was not an impossibility.
-
Hehehehehe! Time for those tinfoil hats, Kappa, Nash ;)
MEANWHILE, OVER THE WEEKEND journalists from around the country were attempting to track down the original source of the documents. "We're having a hard time tracking how we got the documents," says the CBS News producer. "There are at least two people in this building who have insisted we got copies of these memos from the Kerry campaign by way of an additional source. We do not have the originals, and our sources have indicated to us that we will not be getting the originals. How that is possible I don't know."
[snip]
PERHAPS MOST TROUBLING to the CBS News staff looking into how its story went off the rails is the timing of the memos' appearance. "Some 60 Minutes staffers have been working on this story for more than three years off and on," says the CBS News producer. "There have been rumors about these memos and what was in them for at least that long. No one had been able to find anything. Not a single piece of paper. But we know that a lot of people here interviewed a lot of people in Texas and elsewhere and asked very explicit questions about the existence of these memos. Then all of a sudden they show up? In one nice, neat package?"
This CBS New producer went on to explain that the questions 60 Minutes folk were asking were specific enough that people would have been able to fabricate the memorandums to meet the exact specifications the investigative journalists were looking for.
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7099
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
1. His son??
Yes: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/politics/2787324
2. You think??
Yes, she said the "records" are a farce and that her husband did not keep files during a telephone interview. Heard this on television. Look it up yourself.
3. Perhaps they already have.
Right, they just don't care about their credibility and so aren't offering this evidence?
4. Why should they?
Well, maybe for the same reason you asked for mine?
5. I do not know about this.
Read Rips link and decide for yourself.
Occam, Ockham or Ockam.. I have seen all the above used.
You accept the 5 criteria, 2 of which are his family and not sure about both, above the most obvious conclusion that the the docs are real? Humm.. I'm not so certain Bill would agree given no more evidence than presented.. Perhaps if the type was impossible. But, fortunatly it was not an impossibility.
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
1. His son??
2. You think??
3. Perhaps they already have.
4. Why should they?
5. I do not know about this.
Occam, Ockham or Ockam.. I have seen all the above used.
You accept the 5 criteria, 2 of which are his family and not sure about both, above the most obvious conclusion that the the docs are real? Humm.. I'm not so certain Bill would agree given no more evidence than presented.. Perhaps if the type was impossible. But, fortunatly it was not an impossibility.
4. If CBS wants to prove they are genuine and not faked they should come out with their source so it can be scrutinized.
As for 1 & 2..what would the family members have to lose? They knew the man better than anyone else. Why not take their word for it?
-
Monkey's flying out of your bellybutton isn't an impossiblity, it is, however, very unlikely.
-
If the documents can be proven a forgery then I believe CBS must be made to reveal it's source. Doncha think?
-
Originally posted by Nash
What does it say when they've retracted stories in the past (have they really?) but are standing by this one?
Read why. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml)
Nash, just curious (if you haven't run from this thread with your tail between your legs), what exactly does it say to YOU?
-
I'm still waiting for something definitive one way or the other on this latest flap.
However, the problem I have with you RPM is that you fail to show the respect for Bush's Guard service... in fact you show a lack of respect for just about EVERYONE'S Guard service... during the VN war.
Yet you demand respect for Kerry's service.
I respect them both and can't respect anyone that doesn't.
So, I pretty much ignore your rants; you're as unreasonably biased as anyone on this board IMO.
-
I think it was a huge mistake if perpetrated by the Kerry camp. Even if true it doesn't really tell us anything new about Bush but will completely destroy Kerry if it is a forgery and can be tied to him. Right up there with Watergate.
-
I seem to be in good company Toad.
I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed ... managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units .... Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to their country (Colin Powell, My American Journey, p. 148)
If they were "using" the Guard to avoid Vietnam so others would take their place, it was not a very honorable. The Guard today and the Guard in 1960-1970's are 2 very different things.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Hehehehehe! Time for those tinfoil hats, Kappa, Nash ;)
Run from this thread with my tail between my legs? You are extraordinarily dense is the only conclusion I can draw.
Dude - it's your side that's wearin' the hats.
No - this document can't be real, it's gotta be one giant conspiracy.
And it doesn't matter how irrelevant (a son says it'd be out of character), or untrue (you can't do "th's" back then) the charges are, or how many holes continue to get punched into this conspiracy theory, you'll never accept that this document just is what it is.
Just like you'll never believe a thing about Kerry's service to your country unless it paints him as an enemy to your country.
Wingnut s'all I can say.
Just so we're on the same page, there exists not one scrap of evidence that proves that these documents are fake. You have to concede that. It's just a bunch of junk experiments like matching computers to typewriters and speculative jabbering.
Which was always the point of the "forgery" accusers. The signal to noise ratio is so messed up now that the only thing anyone will really be able to recall about the whole thing was that it had something to do with typewriter balls.
So once again - good job.
Swift Boats & Typewriter Balls - the Story of the 2004 Election. Democracy in action, yegads.
Toad - What do you think of my answer to your question about the Bush file, regarding seperate entries one of which was typed in '68? You wouldn't say that the document that debunks the fraud charge is also a fraud, would you? My God! Forgeries everywhere you look! All lies! LIES I tell you!
-
Nash, everytime you are faced with facts, you go into a rage. Is this normal behavior for you, or is it due to the fact that your drastic lifestlye in the last 6 months still affects you?
-
Originally posted by Toad
However, the problem I have with you RPM is that you fail to show the respect for Bush's Guard service... in fact you show a lack of respect for just about EVERYONE'S Guard service... during the VN war.
Why not? It was mostly a big joke, a place for DRAFT DODGERS with family connections.
From the ANG's website:
Vietnam revealed a negative aspect of relying on reservists. For largely domestic political reasons, President Johnson chose not to mobilize most of the nation's reserve forces. The 1968 callups were only token affairs. Johnson's decision to avoid a major reserve mobilization was opposed by the senior leadership of both the active duty military establishment and the reserve forces, but to no avail. The Reserves and the Guard acquired reputations as draft havens for relatively affluent young white men. Military leaders questioned the wisdom of depending on reserve forces that might not be available except in dire emergencies.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Nash, everytime you are faced with facts, you go into a rage. Is this normal behavior for you, or is it due to the fact that your drastic lifestlye in the last 6 months still affects you?
That was pretty freakin low Rip. Standard practice for your side tho. Well played.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
That was pretty freakin low Rip. Standard practice for your side tho. Well played.
Its a well known fact that recovery from any substance abuse can lead to unpredictable ( and sometimes violent in nature) behavior. I'm here to help. Best to discuss these things rather than keep them bottled up inside.
-
I've seen no facts here..
Iron, I'm sorry you thought I was questioning your sorces. I did not mean it that way. I was only questioning the son as being witness. I admit I know very little about this. I just thought the flip conspiracy 'idea' was fun.. cheers :)
-
Originally posted by AKIron
If the documents can be proven a forgery then I believe CBS must be made to reveal it's source. Doncha think?
The only way they can be proven a forgery is if CBS cooperates. But CBS is closing the book on this particular episode of 60 Minutes.
If forgery was prooved then a crime has been comitted, and that might end up embarrassing some Democrats. Not what CBS had in mind.
ra
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Its a well known fact that recovery from any substance abuse can lead to unpredictable ( and sometimes violent in nature) behavior. I'm here to help. Best to discuss these things rather than keep them bottled up inside.
wow.. even lower. who'd have thunk it..
-
The guy below takes the investigation to a new level, good read too, he clears up a few mistakes that the Blogger guys missed...
Attempts to recreate the memos using Microsoft Word and Times New Roman produce images so close that even taking into account the fact that the image we were able to download from the CBS site has been copied, scanned, downloaded, and reprinted, the errors between the "authentic" document and a file created by anyone using Microsoft word are virtually indistinguishable
Link (http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm)
-
Lol - you trying to bait me Rip? You cannot be serious...
You keep saying this kinda stuff, and as usual I aint gonna respond to it. It's lower than it is retarded, which is a hell of an accomplishment if it weren't coming from you.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Lol - you trying to bait me Rip? You cannot be serious...
You keep saying this kinda stuff, and as usual I aint gonna respond to it. It's lower than it is retarded, which is a hell of an accomplishment if it weren't coming from you.
Its all I can assume. You don't give me much to go with Nash. I asked you a simple question, you came back with anger and rhetoric.
With that, I'm logging, dinner, homework...looking forward to your straight answer tomorrow.
-
Anger? Rage? Violence?
What world are you living in?
I'm dissapointed and resigned about a few things maybe... but if I were angry I'd be entitled to that also.
You know, I am angry about what you just posted. So congratulations, and thanks a lot for that.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Toad - What do you think of my answer to your question about the Bush file, regarding seperate entries one of which was typed in '68? You wouldn't say that the document that debunks the fraud charge is also a fraud, would you? My God! Forgeries everywhere you look! All lies! LIES I tell you!
The S/N in this thread is pretty large.
I must have missed it and I'm not going back.
Point me at it, please, I'll give you my opinion.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I seem to be in good company Toad.
If they were "using" the Guard to avoid Vietnam so others would take their place, it was not a very honorable. The Guard today and the Guard in 1960-1970's are 2 very different things.
I think if you equate what you've said about Bush to what Colin Powell has said about Bush... it would simply amaze Powell or any other person capable of rational thought that you believe yourself to be in Powell's "company" on this.
My usual litmus test for pegging out the BS meter is whether or not a person will hold the same position and principles if the situation is exactly reversed.
For example if the Bush/Gore Electoral College fiasco had been exactly opposite, with Bush taking the popular vote and Gore taking the Electoral after Supreme Court intervention, would everyone still hold to the same opinions? Would the Gore supporters that are now the "winners" still be crying that the SC decision was unfair or that the "will of the people" was ignored in the popular vote? Would the Bush guys be saying what they say now?
Given this litmus test, I personally don't think you'd be saying the same stuff if Kerry had Bush's "war record" and Bush had Kerry's "war record".
That's just my impression based on your repeated defamations of Bush you've posted here.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Point me at it, please, I'll give you my opinion.
========================
Toad:
Nash, what I find interesting in THAT document is that on the first line mentioning the "111th" the "th" is raised. The next THREE times the "111th" is mentioned the "th" is NOT raised.
Nash:
I think the reason for the one raised "th" as compared to the others which were not raised is because these lines represent entries made at different times, and undoubtedly by different people.
The "th" line was typed in '68 (date is to the left).
The others were entered onto the record after that... the last being October of '73.
=========================
Now, AKIron suggested that no, this file was all typed at one time - in '73.
The reason why I'm bringing it up again is because I thought you might know about these kinds of records and how they were kept.
When I look at the file, it seems almost obvious that the entries were made seperately (deterioration of the older entries, bolder ink on some entries, some entries are aligned in the boxes and others are not at all).
Based on what you know about these files and this document in particular, what's your call? All at once? Or updated at different times?
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
Why not? It was mostly a big joke, a place for DRAFT DODGERS with family connections.
From the ANG's website:
Vietnam revealed a negative aspect of relying on reservists. For largely domestic political reasons, President Johnson chose not to mobilize most of the nation's reserve forces. The 1968 callups were only token affairs. Johnson's decision to avoid a major reserve mobilization was opposed by the senior leadership of both the active duty military establishment and the reserve forces, but to no avail. The Reserves and the Guard acquired reputations as draft havens for relatively affluent young white men. Military leaders questioned the wisdom of depending on reserve forces that might not be available except in dire emergencies.
Well I gues you're happy then that they are some of the first ones to go nowadays.
-
Originally posted by ra
The only way they can be proven a forgery is if CBS cooperates. But CBS is closing the book on this particular episode of 60 Minutes.
If forgery was prooved then a crime has been comitted, and that might end up embarrassing some Democrats. Not what CBS had in mind.
ra
Kinda suspicious that the aren't cooperating..like they have something to hide..or too much pride to admit they are wrong.
-
I might have one of those forms up in the attic with my old personnel records. Unless maybe it's a "Guard only" form. I should go dig it out but it's about 100 degrees in the attic.
Therefore, my guess at this point is that it's probably a permanent part of the individual's personnel folder that is updated as necessary. That is, additional information is entered on the original form as changes occur.
While I'm not really tuned into this "th" brouhaha, you'd still have to assume that those entries were made by the same unit admin section, so did the 111th use superscript ONLY in 1968 and then stop using it in 1969?
Really, I'm guessing this will be either proven or disproven on something other than the mystery "th". But that's a guess on my part.
Did anyone ever verify whether or not Bush did in fact achieve the necessary Guard "points" to fulfill his committment? I think that might be more germane.
-
Originally posted by Nash
========================
Now, AKIron suggested that no, this file was all typed at one time - in '73.
Having spent 20 years in the Air Force beginning in '73 I've kept a few records myself. As I mentioned, it is not unusual for them to be recreated when worn. I also pointed out the date of the last oer at the top. Without the original document it is impossible for me to tell how many times that date had been replaced with an updated date. However, it appears to be pretty clear. Please don't ignore the fact that I reevaluated the typing and suggested that all of the type from '68-'70 appeared the same to me while the '73 entry looked fresher.
Bottom line, I'm no expert. The experts are saying forgery.
Maybe I'm not being clear about the oer date? What I am saying is that these are required what? Annually? (I was enlisted and wrote a million aprs/eprs but no oers) Anyhow, this record would have been updated everytime an oer was performed, at least 3-4 times if the document was original, yet I see no evidence of that many corrections.
-
Originally posted by ASTAC
Well I gues you're happy then that they are some of the first ones to go nowadays.
No, I am sad that any of them had to go then or now.
All we need is love, love, love....
-
OER's are an annual performance report.
However, there were situations that would require an additional OER. For example, if you or your "rating officer" or "boss" got transferred in the middle of a rating period, the rating officer would write an abbrieviated report for the period you were under his command in that OER cycle.
So, yeah, I can see what Iron is saying as well. If they updated that OER block, it should have been rewritten at least once each year. Given the transfers between units, perhaps even more.
-
Telly Savalas at large.
Who luvs yeah baby!
-
As for this Guard = Draft Dodgers thing, how many of you folks were alive and of military age during that period?
I was. I accepted an AF ROTC scholarship in 1969 prior to the beginning of the lottery.
College was BY FAR the most common "draft avoidance" technique during the course of the VN war.
This is how it worked.
The process of deciding which men were actually drafted was controversial from the earliest days of the Vietnam war. Until the institution of the draft lottery, the sequence of induction from among those available for service was set by order of the President, with the highest priority for ‘delinquents’,
second priority for volunteers, and third priority for non-volunteers between the ages of 19 and 25, in
order of their dates of birth (i.e., from oldest to youngest).
Although other groups could be called, most
draft boards were able to fill their quotas from the these three categories, even at the peak of the draft
Technically, men who had held college or other deferments were eligible for induction until age 35. Since few men between the
ages of 26 and 35 were ever drafted, however, men who were able to maintain a college deferment until their 26th birthday could avoid service.
Those who finished a bachelors degree before reaching age 25 could apply for a graduate deferment in the early and middle years of the war (up to 1968) and could apply for occupational or dependent deferments throughout the period from 1965 to 1970.
It didn't really change after the introduction of the "fair" lottery in Dec '69. You could still get a one year college deferment and due to the reduction in requirements, guys that got a deferment as late as '71 permanently avoided military service.
So, let's look at all this.
Bush, like MILLIONS of others had a standard college deferment until graduation from Yale in 1968. We're not talking the "sons of the rich and famous" here. He got the same standard college deferment that anybody going to college could get at any cow college in the Midwest. There really was no preference shown here and he didn't really "take advantage of the system".
Born in July of 1946, Bush was 22 years old in '68. He now had about 3 years of "draft exposure" because as noted not many were drafted any older than that.
He COULD have gone to Graduate school. There's no doubt he could have gotten in somewhere. As a grad student, he'd have gotten another school deferment and been basically immune to the draft until age 25.
But he didn't go to Grad school although that was the "easy way out".
Instead, Bush joined the Guard and probably did get a "leg up" due to his old man. Again, painting this as something "unusual" just means the painter really isn't in tune with the times. The sons of the rich and famous DID get into Guard units easier than the sons of the plebians. But, as I said, this was just the way it was. Heck, I was a dumbaxe and I KNEW that THEN. We all knew that then. That's how the system worked. Just like if you didn't go to college, you were highly likely to be drafted. That's just the way it worked.
Note, I'm not excusing it as "right" but rather as "the system".
Now, some of you equate this joining the Guard as "draft dodging". Horse doobers. He could have just gone to Grad school, but he joined the Guard.
See "draft dodging" was going to Canada. Joining the Guard, even with the preferential treatment was STILL joining the military and serving your country.
Because the nation required the Guard. Congress wanted it and funded it. SOMEBODY had to join to fill the requirement. Millions did just that.
Was it better than going to VN? Damn straight it was. But those jobs were going to be filled one way or the other.
And for those of you who think Bush is a coward, I invite you to strap on a single-seat all-weather interceptor equipped with instruments that are crude by today's standards and fly night overwater missions returning to penetrate some Houston thunderstorms which are renowned for their ferocity and land safely time after time.
I guarantee you that you will find it more than thrilling.
I really despise those that disparage Bush without having a clue what winning and wearing those wings actually requires.
If I told you what I thought of folks talking through their sphincters like that, it would basically be a line of asterisks.
Now I'll wait and see if the CBS reports stand up to the scrutiny of outside experts. If CBS refuses to allow such scrutiny, I'm afraid I'll have to figure they have something to hide.
-
If anyone has any Idea on how the guard/reserves works here is a little light shedder on GWB's Guard service. 6 successfully completed drill years
The future president joined the Guard in May 1968. Almost immediately, he began an extended period of training. Six weeks of basic training. Fifty-three weeks of flight training. Twenty-one weeks of fighter-interceptor training.
That was 80 weeks to begin with, and there were other training periods thrown in as well. It was full-time work. By the time it was over, Bush had served nearly two years.
Not two years of weekends. Two years.
After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50 points to meet their yearly obligation.
According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis).
Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. Did you know that?
That brings the story to May 1972 — the time that has been the focus of so many news reports — when Bush “deserted” (according to anti-Bush filmmaker Michael Moore) or went “AWOL” (according to Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee).
Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK. Requests like that weren’t unusual, says retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971.
“In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots,” Campenni says. “The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In ’72 or ’73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem.”
So Bush stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points — not much, but enough to meet his requirement.
Then, in 1973, as Bush made plans to leave the Guard and go to Harvard Business School, he again started showing up frequently.
In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year.
Then, at his request, he was given permission to go. Bush received an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months and five days of his original six-year commitment. By that time, however, he had accumulated enough points in each year to cover six years of service.
I fail to see what the point of all this surrounding Bush's guard years. He himself has said that Kerry's service was honorable yet for some reason the "spit on the veteran" types of old need a CIC with nam experience. Sounds desperate to me.
-
That was pretty freakin low Rip. Standard practice for your side tho. Well played.
This coming from a guy who loves to label people "neo con", with practically every other word?
:rolleyes:
-
I havent been following this thread so I apologize if this was mentioned above:
MEANWHILE, OVER THE WEEKEND journalists from around the country were attempting to track down the original source of the documents. "We're having a hard time tracking how we got the documents," says the CBS News producer. "There are at least two people in this building who have insisted we got copies of these memos from the Kerry campaign by way of an additional source. We do not have the originals, and our sources have indicated to us that we will not be getting the originals. How that is possible I don't know."
One individual several news outlets were looking at was Bill Burkett, a former Texas National Guard officer. Burkett in the past has cooperated with both press and Democratic Party opposition researchers in slinging mud at President Bush. Burkett gained some national attention earlier in the campaign when he claimed he was at National Guard headquarters in Austin 1997, when he overheard Guard officials and a representative of then Governor Bush discuss how to sanitize Bush's files. That story was fully discredited. Nonetheless, Burkett sat down for at least three different interviews with CBS News for the story now at the center of the controversy. One of those interviews was with Rather's producer, Ms. Mapes.
"There are rumors here that if there are any real documents, they are hand-written notes from Killian that someone like Burkett was holding, and that instead of using the hand-written notes, someone typed them up to look more official," says the CBS News producer. "They would look better on TV and posted on line if they were typed, but on a number of levels, that story just doesn't hold up. There are too many inconsistencies factually with what is in the memos."
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7099
Could it be the Kerry Campaign or the Dem party is the "source" that provided CBS with the documents in question?
-
oh yeah... this just get's better and better...
lazs
-
Imagine if FoxNews had done a 'news' story about Kerry being a crook and the only sources they had were a Republican fund raiser and some badly forged documents which probably came from the Bush campaign... and then stood behind the story saying "proove we're lying". The lefties would be calling for Congressional investigations. They'd be asking the UN to intervene. Wailing and gnashing of teeth. Al Franken threatening to beat up Brit Hume.
But it's only CBS attacking Bush, so no biggy.
-
lol, you pegged it ra.
-
Better and better?
This story is pretty much dead. For one thing - this document isn't even neccesary to build the case that CBS made... there's a truckload of other sources that basically confirm what the document says.
CBS already investigated this - for 2 years - before reporting it. Don't hold your breath for them to, like, re-investigate it.
The accusations of forgery don't hold up. Each one of them have been easily shot down. The "experts" that were quoted in various papers after the report have almost all recanted.
How did all this hoopla start anyways?
Creative Response Concepts, a Republican public relations firm run by former Pat Buchanan communications director Greg Mueller, with help from former Pat Robertson communications director Mike Russell - the firm hired by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to hype their smear campaign - sent out a media advisory Thursday: "60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake."
While the show was still airing - they flooded the net with this theory.
Their "experts" consisted of William Flynn, a forensic expert who is famous for alleging that the KGB forged John "Ivan the Terrible" Demjanjuk's death-camp ID in order to "frame" him... and Sandra Ramsey Lines whose GOP ties are long and who is a memeber of WISH list - a group that raises money for Republican women running for the House and Senate.
Then the typical gang of chatterers like Rush et al jumped all over it.
And finally, the only thing they needed to make the whole muddling of the story complete, really, was you. Give yourself a pat on the back for being such well behaved and cooperative subjects.
But do not expect this story to develop.
-
The "dead" story is no longer about Bush Nash. It's now a much bigger story about forgery and fraud.
-
Whatever you want to believe.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Whatever you want to believe.
I want to believe that Americans can see the need for reformation in the middle east. That without change, the hate being bred there will swallow us all. That what the US is doing in Iraq is likely our only hope of success. I'd like to believe that Americans can see that while Bush may not be the most eloquent speaker, he is doing what must be done. I'd like to believe that Kerry has the fortitude to continue in this if elected. That may be just too much to ask me to believe though.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Better and better?
This story is pretty much dead. For one thing - this document isn't even neccesary to build the case that CBS made... there's a truckload of other sources that basically confirm what the document says.
CBS already investigated this - for 2 years - before reporting it. Don't hold your breath for them to, like, re-investigate it.
The accusations of forgery don't hold up. Each one of them have been easily shot down. The "experts" that were quoted in various papers after the report have almost all recanted.
How did all this hoopla start anyways?
Creative Response Concepts, a Republican public relations firm run by former Pat Buchanan communications director Greg Mueller, with help from former Pat Robertson communications director Mike Russell - the firm hired by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to hype their smear campaign - sent out a media advisory Thursday: "60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake."
While the show was still airing - they flooded the net with this theory.
Their "experts" consisted of William Flynn, a forensic expert who is famous for alleging that the KGB forged John "Ivan the Terrible" Demjanjuk's death-camp ID in order to "frame" him... and Sandra Ramsey Lines whose GOP ties are long and who is a memeber of WISH list - a group that raises money for Republican women running for the House and Senate.
Then the typical gang of chatterers like Rush et al jumped all over it.
And finally, the only thing they needed to make the whole muddling of the story complete, really, was you. Give yourself a pat on the back for being such well behaved and cooperative subjects.
But do not expect this story to develop.
Thanks Nash. Didnt really have to read past your Creative Response Concepts but the rest was a good read too.. 8)
-
so nash... where did the forged document come from then?
lazs
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I want to believe that Americans can see the need for reformation in the middle east. That without change, the hate being bred there will swallow us all. That what the US is doing in Iraq is likely our only hope of success. I'd like to believe that Americans can see that while Bush may not be the most eloquent speaker, he is doing what must be done. I'd like to believe that Kerry has the fortitude to continue in this if elected. That may be just too much to ask me to believe though.
What the US is doing in Iraqi is exactly the reason hate is being bred in the middle east. Because the US has for decades been doing this very type thing in the middle east. Directly or indirectly.
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
What the US is doing in Iraqi is exactly the reason hate is being bred in the middle east. Because the US has for decades been doing this very type thing in the middle east. Directly or indirectly.
The most recent hatred began when the UN declared Israel a nation in their historical homeland. The hate grows because it is systematically taught and encouraged. It will consume them and many of us if it continues.
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
What the US is doing in Iraqi is exactly the reason hate is being bred in the middle east. Because the US has for decades been doing this very type thing in the middle east. Directly or indirectly.
The problem compounds itself with the policies bestowed upon South America.
Btw interesting info Nash.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so nash... where did the forged document come from then?
lazs
What do you mean by "then"?
It is as if the source for this document needs to be known, otherwise all of the unproven claims of forgery actually holds water.
But they don't, and the crys of "where's the source?" is a smokescreen. It doesn't matter who or what the source was. It doesn't change the document itself, and the document itself isn't even an integral part of the CBS story.
Since when do journalists reveal their sources?
Are they going to change this policy because of some misleading claim concocted by a GOP PR firm? Highly wishful thinking.
It was hilarious that Bob Novak went on CNN and the Captial gang demanding that CBS reveal its source. This from the guy who has strenusously claimed his right as a reporter not to reveal his sources to law enforcement officials in the leak of an undercover CIA agent.
Smokescreen.
-
No doubt that CBS and all the lefties are wishing this story would go away. Disparaging the significance of the alleged forgery and fraud just ain't gonna make it happen though.
-
Originally posted by Nash
there's a truckload of other sources that basically confirm what the document says.
Elucidate if you please.
Exactly what do these documents purport to prove?
What other documentation confirms this?
From CBS:
Did then-Lt. Bush fulfill all of his military obligations? And just how did he land that spot in the National Guard in the first place?
Question one has been answered. It's reported that Bush fulfilled the "point" requirements in every year in question. He received an Honorable Discharge. QED, I'm afraid. The Honorable Discharge alone defeats any "awol" arguments.
Question two really has no bearing. Did he get preferential treatment? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. It's quite clear however that throughout the VN period the sons of the rich, famous and well-connected DID get preferential treatment in many ways.
How many Senator's sons died in VN? Anyone know? I'm betting ZERO. So, what if he did? He'd be no different than probably thousands (ten thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of kids whose parents "knew somebody who knew somebody". It wasn't illegal or even rare.
So, bottom line.......... when are we going to actually discuss the issues? Because VN isn't one of them. They BOTH served honorably.
Some of you guys need a reality check.
-
Nash, you're funny...the story is not going away. The reason it's not going away is that there is a very reasonable chance that they ( the documents) are fake.
-
This is a pretty amazing thread. People are here defending 60 minutes and this memo for what reason? It might be true?
Sorry Nash and RPM, this one is making you two look like blind idiots with your hands over your ears singing lalalalala.
Even if you discount all of the "proof" that they're forgeries, you cannot overlook these two simple facts:
1) CBS does not know where they got the documents
2) CBS could solve this whole thing by getting a typewriter and retyping the memos. They have not. Nobody has.
"We don't have to prove what we are saying, we can just say it. But... You'll need hard evidence to prove that what we say is wrong."
The funny thing is, you two think it's the republicans with the tin-foil hats on right now.
-
Nash will provide evidence that the docs are legitimate five minutes after he tells us one memorable leadership moment or significant accompolishment of John Kerry's 20 year Senate carrer that Nash recalls in all those years that he has been aware of the guy...
:)
-
Originally posted by Mini D
1) CBS does not know where they got the documents
Don't you think that's just a bit unfair? A respected national news source being asked to define the source of their evidence?
I can see the news getting a lot more interesting if CBS doesn't have to produce on this issue. ;)
Headline: Memos document Brittany Spears has Michael Jackson's love child and Bill Clinton delivered the baby!
After all, why should CBS be held to a higher standard than say....... the National Enquirer?
-
This is a pretty amazing thread. People are here defending 60 minutes and this memo for what reason? It might be true?
Sorry Nash and RPM, this one is making you two look like blind idiots with your hands over your ears singing lalalalala.
I like how you always swoop in with some sweeping general statement on the affairs of threads. "This is an amazing thread". Then go on to kindly point out how some of us are wrong. And it's amazing - you always have it right. Funny how that works.
Blind idiots, huh? As opposed to the supporters of the forgery claims being tools or parrots? Whatever you say Deja - you know best.
Even if you discount all of the "proof" that they're forgeries, you cannot overlook these two simple facts:
1) CBS does not know where they got the documents
2) CBS could solve this whole thing by getting a typewriter and retyping the memos. They have not. Nobody has.
1) They just fell into somebody's in-box? But, who cares?
2) Nobody has because nobody can. It's impossible. The same way it's impossible to draw conclusions from people nonetheless trying anyways to duplicate this impossible feat. "Wow! I can't duplicate it! Forgery!"
The funny thing is, you two think it's the republicans with the tin-foil hats on right now.
Hey - you guys are claiming fraud and conspiracy - without proof. But that doesn't count does it?
-
All I've seen is talk from you nash... and a link with CBS insisting they're right.
That's why I jumped on you, because you are being more obtuse is this thread than I've seen from you in a while.
I'd asky why you can't see it for what it is, but that would require you going against your overall tone in this thread.
I didn't post in the first portion of this because I was going to wait and do something silly... see what came of the whole thing. As I'm reading I actually stopped and read the posted links. This became a little more clear.
"This proves it was fake."
"No it doesn't."
"This proves it was fake too."
"No it doesn't."
"This also proves it was fake."
"You're paranoid!"
Notice the absence of something in that argument? Such as: "This proves it was real."
This is another one of those "your rules" threads isn't it? People have to support what THEY say. People can't enter the thread late and criticize YOU. Nonono.... that just won't do.
Sorry Nash, but your desire to prove that everyone is over-reacting by over-reacting to everything they over-react to is getting old. Especially when it's not them that are over-reacting.
-
Now Nash, CBS/Rather are making the accusation that Bush didn't fulfill all of his military obligations and used "influence" to land the National Guard job.
As I said, I could not care less about the "influence" charge. I think most Americans realize that "influence" is used in our society all the time and always has been. It's just not going to resonate, I'm afraid.
On the other charge, failure to fulfill his obligations, the burden of proof is on CBS/Rather. The documents as displayed so far are not any sort of proof that would stand up in court.
They're going to have to detail where they got them and they're going to have to let the Defense examine them and bring in it's own experts.
This is a serious charge and should be treated as such. Making the claim, waving the documents around and then clamming up is making CBS/Rather look like they are hiding something.
Again, it's CBS/Rather's obligation to "prove this case". So far, they haven't do so at all.
Turn it around. Suppose some "previously unreleased memos" fromone of Kerry's commanders surfaced in the hands of Fox News and Fox took the same approach CBS is taking now. Assume the memos say the medals were not really deserved and that Kerry was the victim of 2 self-inflicted wounds in non-combat situations.
What would you be saying then?
Won't wash, will it? You'd be demanding better documentation and an evidence trail.
And you know it.
-
I'd asky why you can't see it for what it is, but that would require you going against your overall tone in this thread.
Oh - do enlighten me. Please.
-
Nash, what you don't understand is the Republicans have managed to become the "truth" party. Anything coming from their side is the "truth". Anything coming from the Democrats is lie, slander and forgery and is held to a different burden of proof.
No matter that numerous legitimate independant experts have said the docs are legitimate. No matter that documents previously released by The White House have superscript in them. No matter that there are people coming forward saying they did pull strings to ensure Bush got preferential treatment, they have a website that can't duplicate a typed memo perfectly with MS Word. There you have it the "truth".
-
Toad, they have made the document public.
That's why you are able to see it. That's what the "forgery" claimers are basing their experiments on.
As for the source - you mentioned standards. Journalists do not name their sources if the sources don't want to be named. It has been like that since roughly forever. Journalists have gone to jail over it.
You want them to change their tune because of the imagination of a PR firm?
It's funny hearing people demand this. It's not gonna happen. And most of the poeple asking for that know it already.... but they also know that the implication sounds bad for CBS. So they say it anyways, and it works regardless...
-
No matter that numerous legitimate independant experts have said the docs are legitimate.
Name one.
-
Same for you RPM.
Turn it around. Suppose some "previously unreleased memos" from one of Kerry's commanders surfaced in the hands of Fox News and Fox took the same approach CBS is taking now.
Assume the memos say the medals were not really deserved and that Kerry was the victim of 2 self-inflicted wounds in non-combat situations.
What would you be saying then?
Won't wash, will it? You'd be demanding better documentation and an evidence trail.
And you know it too.
You perhaps best exemplify the folks on this board that have a "double standard".
In fact, you are probably the poster child for what you continually decry.
-
Again, Nash........ what would you be saying if this was a similar Kerry slam by Fox?
You'd be crying a river.
Just be honest about that and let's let this thing run it's course.
I'm guessing at least another 5-6 days before any real details/explanation comes out.
-
What..Did you find WMD again?..:rolleyes:
-
Compare the documents yourself..
http://img41.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img41&image=60minbusted.swf (http://img41.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img41&image=60minbusted.swf)
And an excerpt from Neil Boortz
The expert that CBS retained to examine the documents has now come out and said hey...wait a minute...I never really authenticated the documents. He says all he authenticated was the signature. He says he made no attempt to authenticate the documents. Now even the Washington Post has called them into question.
-
No Toad - I'm just not that inflexable.
I wouldn't suddenly demand the naming of sources, and I'd be looking at these junk experiments as just that. I might not come right out and say how embarrassing it all is... but more than likely I'd keep my head down.
-
hmm... sooo..
Every official piece of paper anyone can find says that Bush MORE than fullfilled his duties... CBS goes on a 3 year witch hunt that turns up.... nothing and then... right at the last minute... just before the election..
A "memo" appears? It is suppossedly written by some guy now dead who references a CO who was long retired at the time of the memo... no one who knows these people think the memo is genuine... it is questionable if it could even have been written with the tools at that time...
CBS can't recall where they even got the memo but thinks it came from the kerrie campaign.....
Now, it is "protecting the source" to not reveal how they came by it? Why would you have to protect the source? Nothing illegal here and it is very old news under the freedom of information act.
If it were genuine then the person(s) who brought it to CBS would get lots of protective publicity and michel moore would probly hire them along with any other lefty group... Nothing bad could happen to em.
nash... do you or rpm think that it is a good idea to let any news source just simply present memos (space aliens abduct kerrie and replace him with clone ... memo from DNC) with no burden of proof?
Should a memo from a dead CO of kerries that told of kerrie shooting babies in vietnam be allowed to be published and the source "protected"?
lazs
-
Originally posted by ra
Name one.
Richard Katz
-
Sorry, Nash. Not buying it.
C'mon.... admit it. The truth will set you free, bud. If this were a suddenly appearing memo from a dead commander of Kerry's slamming his hearts as self-inflicted/non-combat you'd be howling.
Of course, Fox would probably save that till the night before the election. Timing is everything, isn't it?
But I'll save the link somewhere so it'll be handy when you need reminding of what you just said. :)
And given the trash spewed out by the national media, we probably won't even have to wait all that long, will we?
It's OK. It happens to all of us now and then.
Personally, I'm still waiting for more info. Both sides seem pretty sketchy to me right now.
-
Nash and RPM you are hillarious..
You guys must be pulling your hair out at the recent developments.
To think of. Going from creaming in your pants at the first relese of these memos to pulling your hair out at them being so thurogly trounced as obvious fakes (even by the super credible washington post newpaper mind you) all in 30 seconds - it must be a record...
:rofl :rofl :rofl
I laugh at you...
-
yep grun... it is typical liberal... when "the arming of america" and farenheigt 9/11 came out the libs wet themselves and were all a twitter and gushing with praise... when those works were found to be fraudulent.... the libs just ignored it but.... they defended both to the bitter end...
you may not believe this but some are still defending michell moores 9/11. you won't find many left who still defend bellisels arming of America tho.
give it time. the libs allways jump the gun... they have no self control.
lazs
-
If this were about a single memo that just appeared, with nothing else to support it nor any other materials that point to the same conclusion - that would be one thing.
But the disputed document is but a fraction of the undisputed evidence in the CBS story. And the undpisputed evidence says the same thing as the disputed document.
It's like saying the moon landings weren't real because one of the documents looks funny...
I have to admit feeling really stupid about talking so much about typewriter balls. It's just what they intended, I know that, yet here I am.
I'm gonna (try!) to bow out... and see what happens. I don't expect much in the way of proof, but maybe stories about how stories are planted and watered. Who knows....
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Nash and RPM you are hillarious..
You guys must be pulling your hair out at the recent developments.
You don't know me very well...
-
Originally posted by Toad
As for this Guard = Draft Dodgers thing, how many of you folks were alive and of military age during that period?
Nope, only old enough to see a friend's father not come back and to see other dads at youth sporting events missing limbs.
I don't think Bush is a coward or an idiot, but I do think he's a bad President.
Anyway, good post.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Richard Katz
Could you post a link to information about this guy's review of these memos?
-
Originally posted by ra
Could you post a link to information about this guy's review of these memos?
LINK (http://www.google.com)
-
Originally posted by Nash
You don't know me very well...
Bald? :D
-
RPM that is retarded... :eek:
-
Originally posted by rpm371
LINK (http://www.google.com)
So you can't. You should work for CBS.
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
I don't think Bush is a coward or an idiot, but I do think he's a bad President.
Excellent!!! Seriously, your post is very nice. Thats what it should be about..
-
What out guys, he is going to start lashing out with the neo con label soon!!:D
-
Originally posted by ra
So you can't. You should work for CBS.
(http://www.gilbertv.com/coppermine/albums/08052004/usegoogle.jpg)
-
Asking you, RPM, to provide sources for your contentions is like asking a dumb question?
Oh wait, never mind...
-
I'm not doing his research for him. Look it up. Better yet, show me a link that says Katz is wrong. That's how ya'll play this game...right?
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I'm not doing his research for him. Look it up.
Intput data into RPM To Reality Translator MkII..
Whirr, buzzzz, zippp, clonk, donk, clok, clang... Ding!
Output:
"RPM cannot back up his rants with facts.."
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Intput data into GRUNHERZ To Reality Translator MkII..
Whirr, buzzzz, zippp, clonk, donk, clok, clang... Ding!
Output:
"Republicans cannot use search engines."
-
Originally posted by Nash
But the disputed document is but a fraction of the undisputed evidence in the CBS story.
And what is the "CBS story"?
Those two salient points are what CBS uses as the "key" questions these documents address.
IE: Did Bush "fulfill his requirements" and did he get into the Texas ANG with "help" and/or "favoritism".
Both of these have been thoroughly addressed. Bush shows the required "points" for his Guard service to fulfill his obligation. He got an honorable discharge. QED.
Did his dad "get him in"? Probably. So? 90% of the dad's then would have done the same thing if they could have. (My dad was in the 10% that wouldn't ;) but then, I happily volunteered. They were going to let me fly jets!!!!)
So what exactly is the "big story" here anyway?
Again, this stuff IS NOT what this election should be about, anymore than it should be about "did Kerry frag himself and get a heart".
This election should be about Iraq, what to do now and where we're going, not how we got in. I want to know Kerry's plan to extricate and Bush's plan to extricate. The milk is spilled; how would each clean it up.
This election should be about health care/ medicare/ prescription drugs for US citizens. I want details, not platitudes.
This election should be about National Security. How ARE we going to prevent what just happened in Russia from happening here.
This election should be about securing our borders in conjunction with National Security. Our borders are sieves.
This election should be about jobs. How we're going to add jobs in the US without violating free trade agreements or... gasp... maybe we have to be a little protectionist right now.
THAT'S what I want to hear about.
Instead, I get Guard Points and Fraggin' for the do-it-yourselfer.
Bah.
And the obfuscators are WINNING! This very thread is proof.
-
So now a link to the google search engine is all the evidence RPM deems neccasry to support one's conclusions..
Neato!
Lets see how this works:
Kerry eats babies and is in league with the devil! LINK! (http://google.com)
The Democratic party is a bunch of communist traitors!LINK! (http://google.com)
The Iraq war was instigated by Ketchup hungry martian aliens in leage with the evil multinational Heinz Corp! LINK! (http://google.com)
This is fantastic, thanks RPM! Much better than having to support stuff I say by posting my sources.. Awesome!
-
This election should be about ...
This thread isn't about the election, it's about Dan Blather and his fanbois.
-
Step 1- turn on computer.
Step 2- open web browser.
Step 3- go to http://www.google.com
Step 4- type Richard Katz CBS
Step 5- Click "search news".
Step 6- Read the top story.
I was asked to name 1 expert. I did. You want to know more about him, do the legwork yourself.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Step 1- turn on computer.
Step 2- open web browser.
Step 3- go to http://www.google.com
Step 4- type Richard Katz CBS
Step 5- Click "search news".
Step 6- Read the top story.
I was asked to name 1 expert. I did. You want to know more about him, do the legwork yourself.
It works!!! Thanks, very convincing article.
http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerry200409141252.asp
-
I just did that and the first story was this:
http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerry200409141252.asp
It doesnt seem to help your cause RPM.
How about this:
1) Post your sources.
OR:
2) Stop this bull..
OK? :)
As for your exopert Richard Katz here is what he said on CBS:
The network also quoted Richard Katz, identified as a software designer, who claimed that the letter "L" was used in the documents in lieu of the numeral "1." The network claimed Katz told them "that would be difficult to reproduce on a computer today."
LOL What BS.. Lets all open MS word and test his idea. That fool is saying that you cant type l and 1 in microsoft word...
-
Gee, in the hour it took you to learn out how to search, another story topped the list. Amazing.:eek:
Try reading the Newsday story, now 2nd on the list.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Gee, in the hour it took you to learn out how to search, another story topped the list. Amazing.:eek:
Try reading the Newsday story, now 2nd on the list.
Well, we can't all be l33tz like you and Richard Katz.
-
I just quoted the newsday story.
In the newsday story yiour expert says that you cant typle a lowercase letter "L" in microsoft word in order to fake a 1..
:rofl :rofl
Just try it, in fact is very east to do.. Try it yourselkf. I urge everone to do it.. Open MS word using times new roman (the program and font used to fake these documents) and you will see that this is very east to do.
Just type alternating 1 and l (lowercase L) and you will see its easy to do... MS word does not prohimit you from doing it..
There RPM that disproves your idiot katz expert..
-
You better call The RNC with you unrefutable proof GRUN. They will have you on the front page tommorrow with you shocking proof!
In the newsday story yiour expert says that you cant typle a lowercase letter "L" in microsoft word in order to fake a 1
That is not what he said. You are twisting his words to suit your purpose. If you are going to quote, do it accurately.
"that would be difficult to reproduce on a computer today."
But back to the root of your complaint. Did he say he thought they were authentic? Yes. Are there more? Yes. Do you like what they say? No. Is that my problem? No.
-
"that would be difficult to reproduce on a computer today."
What would be difficuklt to reporoduce today, a lower case "L"...
Good gawd you are gullible...
Whats your email RPM I'll send you a MS word attcahment full of lower case "L"..
Honetly RPM are you really that hateful of Bush that you will belive a guy who tells you that its difficult to reproduces lower case "L" on a MS Word, just beacuse this mopron is trotted out as some computer expert in a bush basing story. Just try it yourself, open up MS word, times new roman font, and see you can tyupe lower case L all you want...
And BTW in times new roman font, the one used to fake theses documents, a lower case L looks very much like a thin 1..
Try it yourself..
-
Did he say he thought they were authentic? Yes. Are there more experts? Yes. Do you like what they say? No. Is that my problem? No.
-
Here is a summary of some of the major US news organizations that are questiong the memos:
The Dallas Morning News said in a report for its Saturday editions that the officer named in a memo as exerting pressure to "sugar coat" Mr. Bush's record had left the Texas Air National Guard 1½ years before the memo was dated.
The newspaper said it obtained an order showing that Walter B. Staudt, former commander of the Texas Guard, retired on March 1, 1972. The memo was dated Aug. 18, 1973. A telephone call to Staudt's home Friday night was not answered.
New York Times columnist William Safire wrote Monday that Newsweek magazine had apparently begun an external investigation: it names "a disgruntled former Guard officer" as a principal source for CBS, noting "he suffered two nervous breakdowns" and "unsuccessfully sued for medical expenses."
The L.A. Times reported that handwriting analyst, Marcel Matley, who CBS had claimed vouched for the authenticity of four memos, vouched for only one signature, and no scribbled initials. The Times reports he has no opinion about the typography of any of the supposed memos.
The Washington Post on Tuesday catalogued a number of doubts about the documents, including factual problems like an apparently outdated address for Mr. Bush on one document, differences in typing style between the newly broadcast documents and others from the Texas Air National Guard, and examples of incorrect military lingo.
The New York Times reported that some CBS News employees are growing increasingly worried over the questions about the documents.
Source is a FoxNews article..
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Did he say he thought they were authentic? Yes. Are there more experts? Yes. Do you like what they say? No. Is that my problem? No.
So you have faith in a computer expert who says that you cant type lower case L in MS word...
:rofl :rofl
-
He didn't say that. But keep twisting his words.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
He didn't say that. But keep twisting his words.
Well what do you think he said?
-
Richard Katz, a software designer, found some other indications in the documents. He noted that the letter "L" is used in those documents, instead of the numeral "one." That would be difficult to reproduce on a computer today.
But Katz, the software expert, pointed out that the documents have both the so-called "superscript" th (where the letters are slightly higher than the rest of the sentence, such as 6th ) and a regular-sized "th". That would be common on a typewriter, not a computer.
"There's one document from May 1972 that contains a normal "th" on the top. To produce that in Microsoft Word, you would have to go out of your way to type the letters and then turn the "th" setting off, or back up and then type it again," said Katz.
Did he say it was impossible to type a lower case l in ANY of that?
No, he did not. But remember, Katz is only one of the experts saying they look authentic.
Sooooo...Did HE say HE thought they were authentic? Yes. Are there more experts? Yes. Do YOU like what they say? No. Is that MY problem? No.
-
But it does seem tro be your problem that many legitimate news organizations are questiong them...
Did you read the article I posted above about all the other news sservices who are questioning the memos?
-
Compare the documents yourself..
http://img41.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img4...60minbusted.swf
And an excerpt from Neil Boortz
quote:The expert that CBS retained to examine the documents has now come out and said hey...wait a minute...I never really authenticated the documents. He says all he authenticated was the signature. He says he made no attempt to authenticate the documents. Now even the Washington Post has called them into question.
__________________
-
To produce that in Microsoft Word, you would have to go out of your way to type the letters and then turn the "th" setting off, or back up and then type it again," said Katz.
Devil's Advocate here:
If one were going to go to all the trouble to forge this stuff knowing that you were going to use it to attack Bush in the national media if you could.......
would that be such a difficult task?
Uh....NO. We're talking about a bloody WORD PROCESSOR here. It'd handle that chore as easily as a Cuisinart slices a carrot.
What he's saying is that MS Word could do this about as easily as it does a spellcheck or gives you a grammar suggestion.
I think you'd better find a more supportive example.
-
Originally posted by Toad
I think you'd better find a more supportive example.
Allow me to answer for RPM:
http://www.google.com
-
-
umm... toad... ol buddy..
I think rpm is correct. no way would a liberal go to any extra effort when forging a document... we have lots of evidence of sloppy forging and lazy mud slinging by liberals...
I give you f 9/11 and "the arming of America" as proof as to how lazy liberals are in their research and lying.
lazs
-
(http://www.gopguys.com/EagleSign-BS-2.jpg)
-
Anyone check ABC's World News Tonight? (Jennings)
It seems they interviewed 3 of the experts hired by 60 minutes to examine the memos and all three said they did not authenticate them. 1 was so concerned she sent emails the night before 60 Minutes aired the story expressing her concerns.
Of course CBS says that they relied on and were confident in what the other experts they hired said. They did not release the names of those other experts.
I will check the WNT webpage for a transcript tomorrow.
-
what's really great about the entire thing is that it has the other liberal news orgs trying to slam CBS/60minutes/Rather on this thing and by doing so they have to side with Bush :)
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Did he say it was impossible to type a lower case l in ANY of that?
No, he did not. But remember, Katz is only one of the experts saying they look authentic.
Sooooo...Did HE say HE thought they were authentic? Yes. Are there more experts? Yes. Do YOU like what they say? No. Is that MY problem? No.
You do realise that both points you quoted were quite wrong, right RPM?
Surely you have MS Word... give this a try:
[list=1]- Select "Times New Roman" as a font
- Type a "1" and then an "l" (lower case L)
- observe the difference
- type "11th"
- press cntrl-z
- observe what happens
Talk about blindly believing an "expert" who is clearly wrong even in the limited context you quoted him in. Stop digging man.
-
Dogpile CBS, not me. You asked for a name and I gave you one. You want me to break down his opinion? No. It's not my opinion to defend. Check the other guy listed in the story. So far those are the names CBS has released. They claim to have more, but I don't have my CBS News access code laying around to tell you who they are.:)
-
RPM do you think it can be proven that the memos are fake?
-
Hey... you're the one still quoting the guy in arguments with Grunherz RPM. Quit pretending otherwise.
The guy is wrong, but it's the best you can do so you'll stick by it. It's not even remotely difficult to either replace an 1 with an l or to undo autoformatting... yet you quoted him on it. The one guy that you can find who says the documents are authentic.
Like I said... stop digging. Find something else to argue about because you're coming off as obtuse in this one.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Hey... you're the one still quoting the guy in arguments with Grunherz RPM. Quit pretending otherwise.
The guy is wrong, but it's the best you can do so you'll stick by it. It's not even remotely difficult to either replace an 1 with an l or to undo autoformatting... yet you quoted him on it. The one guy that you can find who says the documents are authentic.
Like I said... stop digging. Find something else to argue about because you're coming off as obtuse in this one.
What am I suppossed to do when Grun kept misquoting the guy? Like I said, not my opinion just answering your question of name a guy.
-
Here is what a real computer and text expert, Joseph Newcomer, has to say about these forged documents..
His analysis:
http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm
His resume:
http://www.flounder.com/resume.htm
His business website:
http://www.flounder.com/index.htm
He even debunks tis whole idea of using lower case L as a 1 in these memos.
RPM if you have even tinyest pretense of an open mind you will consider this evidence and just accept the truth, that these documents are bad forgeries.
-
I'll believe it when CBS issues a retraction.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
I'll believe it when CBS issues a retraction.
And then what? What abut all your ranting here? What about all your experts..
Read the detailed analyis I posted above and decide for yourself... Its a clear case that the memos are forged..
-
You do realize you were actually wrong with that one... right?
Grun used the word "impossible", he used the words "very difficult". Grun exagerated, the person you quoted was simply wrong. Grun was stating he was wrong, you insisted he wasn't, he was only being misquoted.
I basically expect you to try to stop arguing in this thread. Really... you've lost and are coming off like an idiot right now.
Oh... wait... you didn't "lose", you just quoted someone who happened to be so wrong that anyone with 5 seconds and MS Word could prove it for themselves. That's not really your fault. And trying to argue technicalities on a misquote while completely ignoring the context is so... ummmmm.... exactly what you're accusing the republicans of doing?
-
There's blood in the water. The sharks are circling the wounded shark.
From the ABC News website:
BUSH IN THE NATIONAL GUARD
ABC's Brian Ross interviewed the two experts who CBS hired to validate the National Guard documents and reports they ignored concerns they raised prior to the CBS News broadcast. "I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Emily Will told Ross. "I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," Linda James told Ross. Ross reports 2 experts told ABC News today that even the most advanced typewriter available in 1972 could not have produced the documents. Ross also reported that Lt. Col. Jerry Killian's secretary says she believes the documents are fake but that they express thoughts Killian believed.
In the "Inside Story" on the CBS "Evening News," John Roberts said that CBS "continues to stand by its reporting" on Bush's National Guard records. Roberts derisively said Bush "barely mentioned his service" today while appearing before the Guard association. Roberts closed by saying that Bush's goal is to turn the focus of the debate away from the questions to "those asking them."
-
Roberts closed by saying that Bush's goal is to turn the focus of the debate away from the questions to "those asking them."
So all these questions about these documents are coming from the Bush campaign? Does this journalist have any documents to prove that? Or is his PC down?
-
So, all this controversy over the reportedly fraudulent documents is somehow Bush's fault? Democrats spin so much it's amazing they don't fall flat on their faces, oh wait, they have.
-
Hey, don't you guys know that this story is "dead" ?
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain"
-
This election is disgusting....Must everyone involved get dragged through the mud? Where do the canidates stand on the issues? No one knows because they are too busy trying to do damage control...It makes me sick...If I didn't have a commitment to my current job I truly think I would leave the USA..As much as I love this country..I can't sit here and watch it go down in flames over internal BS...That is why we are vunerable to terrorists...too much he-said-she-said going on amongst ourselves that we can't see past our own boarders. Every country has it's time of power and then a big downfall into obscurity...The last few elections have proved we are close to our own collapse..except this time "we the people" are the conquering army...not a horde of Barbarians. America is sick and there is no cure. Alot of the problem lies with people like those on this BBS who drag up anything just to defame someones character even when it really has nothing to do with someones job performance. May God (or whoever each individual here believes in) Have mercy on our souls.
-
I'm waiting to hear from Nash. Nash seemed to Know best about all of this.
-
I think Nash bailed out of a sinking ship and won't be back.
-
it is so embarassing to be a liberal... sitting in the front row of a theatre cheering at the priemere of 'f 9/11" thinking it is the truth finnaly out and that it will be the end of the evil Bush.... or... sitting around the water cooler in your tinfoil hat and regaling anyone who can't escape with your new "proof" (right from 60 minutes by gawd!) that Bush is evil and a slaker and this will shrely prove to be the end for him and.... "where is everyone going?"
lazs
-
my opinion is that they knew the documents were fake... probly had a hand in em...
every decade or so these arrogant pretend 20/20 or 60 minutes "investigative" shows with their talking head morons fake a story big time...
The last really good one where they put flares in the gas tanks of chevy trucks and wreked em for the camera to "prove" that the trucks were unsafe and would ignite if they were in the slightest wreck... they denied putting in the flares for the longest time.
just like this story.
lazs
-
The most recent one I can recall Laz was when CNN had some anti gun florida sheriff help them show how deadly "assault Rifles" were.
They showed this guy shooting a post ban AK and what it did to watermelons(not much just small holes in them), and then they brought out the preban AK and shot the same watermellons and they exploded.
What they didn't tell us it the video of the watermellons exploding was was from a guy shooting them with a 30-06 hunting rifle. Not an AK with its weak 7.62by 39 round.
Yeah Cnn is oh so much better and more objective then fox though. (I do not watch either)
-
Rather Concedes Papers Are Suspect (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24633-2004Sep15.html)
CBS anchor Dan Rather acknowledged for the first time yesterday that there are serious questions about the authenticity of the documents he used to question President Bush's National Guard record last week on "60 Minutes."
"If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story," Rather said in an interview last night. "Any time I'm wrong, I want to be right out front and say, 'Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.' "
Rather spoke after interviewing the secretary to Bush's former squadron commander, who told him that the memos attributed to her late boss are fake -- but that they reflect the commander's belief that Bush was receiving preferential treatment to escape some of his Guard commitments.
The former secretary, Marian Carr Knox, is the latest person to raise questions about the "60 Minutes" story, which Rather and top CBS officials still defend while vowing to investigate mounting questions about whether the 30-year-old documents used in the story were part of a hoax. Their shift in tone yesterday came as GOP critics as well as some media commentators demanded that the story be retracted and suggested that Rather should step down.
"This is not about me," Rather said before anchoring last night's newscast. "I recognize that those who didn't want the information out and tried to discredit the story are trying to make it about me, and I accept that."
For Rather, 72, it is an all-too-familiar role. In his CBS career, he has survived an impertinent exchange with President Richard M. Nixon during Watergate, a clandestine trek through the mountains of Afghanistan, an on-air confrontation with George H.W. Bush over Iran-contra and a much-debated sitdown with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad.
Now, on the final leg of a career launched by a Texas hurricane, Rather is trying to weather his biggest storm. And some of his closest friends and associates are concerned.
"I think this is very, very serious," said Bob Schieffer, CBS's chief Washington correspondent. "When Dan tells me these documents are not forgeries, I believe him. But somehow we've got to find a way to show people these documents are not forgeries." Some friends of Rather, whose contract runs until the end of 2006, are discussing whether he might be forced to make an early exit from CBS.
In her interview with Rather yesterday, Knox repeated her contention that the documents used by "60 Minutes" were bogus. Knox, 86, worked for Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian while he supervised Bush's unit in the early 1970s.
"I know that I didn't type them," Knox said of the Killian memos. "However, the information in there is correct," she said, adding that Killian and the other officers would "snicker about what [Bush] was getting away with."
Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. But he said, "I take very seriously her belief that the documents are not authentic." If Knox is right, Rather said, the public "won't hear about it from a spokesman. They'll learn it from me."
But he also delivered a message to "our journalistic competitors," including The Washington Post and rival networks: "Instead of asking President Bush and his staff questions about what is true and not true about the president's military service, they ask me questions: 'How do you know this and that about the documents?' "
CBS News President Andrew Heyward defended the work that went into the Guard story. "I feel that we did a tremendous amount of reporting before the story went on the air or we wouldn't have put it on the air," Heyward said last night. "But we want to get to the bottom of these unresolved issues," including questions about the memos' typography, signatures and format. "There's such a ferocious debate about these documents."
Heyward said the account by Knox is "significant, which is why we're putting it on our prime-time program," "60 Minutes."
As a former Houston reporter, White House correspondent and "60 Minutes" regular, Rather has always taken pride in unchaining himself from the anchor desk to cover wars, political campaigns and various other crises. Determined not to be just a multimillion-dollar news reader like some younger-generation stars, he continued to anchor "48 Hours" before finally giving it up and to contribute pieces to "60 Minutes," even at the cost of being stretched thin. So it was not unusual for Rather to be crashing an investigative piece, as he did last week.
The most controversial of the three broadcast network anchors who took the reins in the early 1980s -- the others are ABC's Peter Jennings, 66, and NBC's Tom Brokaw, 64, who is retiring after the election -- Rather has long drawn the most headlines and the sharpest criticism from conservatives who view him as biased.
"Dan is a lightning rod, compared to Brokaw and Jennings, because of his personality," said Lawrence Grossman, a former president of PBS and NBC News. "He's had some very strange incidents. His colorful use of language makes him a little quirky in many people's eyes. So he's a little vulnerable."
But ABC News executive Tom Bettag, who once produced Rather's evening news, said his friend has been "quite extraordinary" in shouldering the burden. "He is the sort of person who could easily say 'this is a team effort,' but he's one of those anchors who puts it all on his shoulders and doesn't pass it down the line to anyone else," Bettag said.
Bernard Goldberg, a longtime CBS correspondent who has turned sharply critical of his former employer, said he believes that Rather was duped and will survive. But, he said, "CBS News is acting the way the Nixon administration did during Watergate. I'm really sad to say that Dan Rather is acting like Richard Nixon. It's the coverup, it's the stonewalling."
Nicholas Lemann, dean of Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism, said that "if it turns out CBS got this wrong, it's very damaging." He added that Rather "has a 'hot' personality that provokes strong reactions."
That may be an understatement. Rather has a penchant for down-home Texas truisms, the sort of globe-trotting that earned him the nickname "Gunga Dan" for his Afghan foray, and plain old strange behavior -- such as signing off his broadcasts for a time with the word "courage."
In 1986, he was mugged on Park Avenue with one of his attackers shouting, "Kenneth, what is the frequency?" In 1987, the network went to black because Rather had angrily walked off the set in the belief that a U.S. Open tennis match would bump his broadcast. In 1988, he got into an emotional shouting match with then-Vice President Bush, who accused Rather of being unfair. In 2001, he apologized for speaking at a Democratic fundraiser in Texas in which his daughter was involved.
His career has seemed revitalized in the past year and a half. He landed an interview with then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein shortly before the U.S. invaded Iraq and the first sitdown with Bill Clinton about his autobiography. And with producer Mary Mapes, who also spearheaded the National Guard story, Rather broke the news of Iraqi prisoners being abused at Abu Ghraib -- after agreeing to a two-week delay at the Bush administration's request.
Once the most watched of the three anchors' broadcasts, Rather's show has been ranked third for several years. Now he is even the target of a new Web site, Rathergate.com.
Some media analysts are already comparing the Guard controversy to the 1993 fiasco in which NBC's "Dateline" apologized for staging the fiery crash of a truck, and the 1998 debacle in which CNN apologized for the "Tailwind" story that accused U.S. troops of using nerve gas during the Vietnam War.
"Dan knows that trying to do a story about a Republican president is immediately going to stir up a hornet's nest from the conservatives who have jumped on him since the Nixon days," Bettag said. "He could have been excused for saying 'I don't need this kind of grief.' But he didn't."
As Rather signed off to rush back into the studio last night, he sounded a defiant note.
"I try to look people in the eye and tell them the truth," Rather said. "I don't back up. I don't back down. I don't cave when the pressure gets too great from these partisan political ideological forces." <- BS LOL
LOL LOL LOL
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
The most recent one I can recall Laz was when CNN had some anti gun florida sheriff help them show how deadly "assault Rifles" were.
They showed this guy shooting a post ban AK and what it did to watermelons(not much just small holes in them), and then they brought out the preban AK and shot the same watermellons and they exploded.
What they didn't tell us it the video of the watermellons exploding was was from a guy shooting them with a 30-06 hunting rifle. Not an AK with its weak 7.62by 39 round.
Yeah Cnn is oh so much better and more objective then fox though. (I do not watch either)
I believe this was a story that involved cynderblocks, not watermellons. They fired a "banned" AK-47 at a cynderblock in semi-auto 4 times and destroyed it. They fired an un-banned AK-47 at a cynderblock 6 times and didn't put a scratch in it. The conclusion was that banned AKs were more powerfull than the un-banned ones.
They've since ran a story stating that both banned and unbanned are exactly as powerfull, though I don't know that they actually ran a retraction.
-
the best part is saying that if you attack a republican you are "brave" because... because what? they catch you if you are sloppy or lie?
seems that no one in the talking head socialist clan is "brave" enough to attack democrats tho... no "exposse" on kerrie I mean... bet you could find lots of fictures and books and speaches and people who would tell you that he was prettyu much a commie liar after serving in vietnam.... Why not fake a few memmos to go along with it too?
Blather is a punk... allways has been... spoiled commie and talking head... blatant socialist. He "interviewed" the sadman and did everything but blow him.
cbs has nothing except one woman..... woman (who she vote for ya think?) who says that it was common knowledge that Bush got preferential treatment but even she admits the memo was a lie.
I bet blather hired someone to make the memo with CBS expense account.... I bet everyone in power at CBS knows it was a fake.
lazs