PDA

View Full Version : Uh oh, there may be several flies in the ointment...



Yonivore
09-09-2004, 03:53 PM
Drudge is running this teaser at the top of his page:

"'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake /// 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by CBSNEWS 60 MINS on Bush's guard service may have been forged using a current word processing program // typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program, Internet reports claim... Developing..."

Yonivore
09-09-2004, 03:58 PM
Here we go:

http://www.drudgereport.com/601.jpg


'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake (http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200409\POL 20040909d.html)

Tommy Duncan
09-09-2004, 04:52 PM
But it's CBS.

Yonivore
09-09-2004, 05:00 PM
I know, that's "shocking!"

Nbadan
09-09-2004, 05:06 PM
Republicant's claim that the documents are forgeries because they're set in a proportional font, which "did not exist" when Bush was in the National Guard.

That's bullshit.

There are two minor problems with this theory.

One, proportional fonts have been around for five hundred years. Bill Gates did NOT invent the proportional font. It's monospace type that's a recent invention.

And two, the highest-end IBM typewriter was the IBM Selectric Composer--and this general obviously had one. This is what IBM says about this machine:

The IBM SELECTRIC® Composer's escapement system employs rotating elements, rather than the conventional rack system, to provide the required displacement. This permits the basic unit of escapement to be varied, and allows the number of units per escapement cycle to vary in proportion to character width. In this paper the authors discuss the machine requirements that led to this approach and describe the elements that have evolved. The analysis used to evaluate the design (and modify it to some extent) is also recorded, in a separate section.

Translation: this typewriter was unique in that it could produce proportional text. A number of books were set on this device. The first six editions of "How To Keep Your Volkswagen Alive" were set on the Composer. It was very expensive, but if you were a real VIP, like a general, you had one because it made documents that couldn't be produced any other way.

According to this, it came out in 1966.

http://www.ibmcomposer.org/SelComposer/images/ComposerBrochureText.jpg

Tommy Duncan
09-09-2004, 05:08 PM
Holy shit, danny is a typewriter historian.

bigzak25
09-09-2004, 05:09 PM
i got an idea.....who give a shit what bush did in the national guard?

who gives a shit what kerry did in vietnam?


it just doesn't matter.....

Tommy Duncan
09-09-2004, 05:15 PM
Again, even if the documents are credible they prove that Bush missed a physical. BFD. Otherwise he met his service requirements (or exceeded them) and received an honorable discharge.

There's a reason why this story had no impact the first time it came around. People already assume that he's led a life of privilege due to his family.

There's a reason why the Demos love to bring it up and it's the same reason why the GOP loved to bring up all the shit about Clinton.

Frankly, I hope the media, DNC, and the Kerry campaign hammer away at Bush on this for the next 2 months.

Somewhere the junior senator from New York must be smiling.

Yonivore
09-09-2004, 05:17 PM
And the superscript, Nbadan?

Can't wait to hear this!

Ruby Ridge
09-09-2004, 06:41 PM
Drudge. It's gotta be true. Just like the mistress.:lol

Yonivore
09-09-2004, 06:50 PM
Wow, is that the only example of Drudge's mistakes you can pull out of your bag Ruby?

Besides, the DrudgeReport linked to a news article...he, himself, isn't making the claim.

The mistress...WOW! The New York Times should only hope to have just ONE bad mistake in it's history.

Tommy Duncan
09-09-2004, 07:01 PM
Frankly, too bad Drudge wasn't wrong about that other mistress.

Yonivore
09-09-2004, 07:08 PM
Hey Ruby! Have you even looked at the document (as shown on CBS) to which they are referring?

I mean, I'm really curious how that commander got an extremely rare IBM Selectric to type a superscript font.

Here's you a link to a .pdf of the memo:


FORGERY! (http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/BushGuardmay4.pdf)

While you're at it, take the time to read the article to which Drudge linked us.

This is merely a link to a news source...I don't even think Drudge characterized the story one way or the other, just said the document "may" be fake.

DeSPURado
09-09-2004, 11:31 PM
And the superscript, Nbadan?

Can't wait to hear this!
Having used a type writer three times in my life I already know this. Subscript and superscript are redundant functions on a typewriter. They are the exact same font just different page allignment.

Superscript= Subscript after feeding the page up a nudge.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-09-2004, 11:41 PM
Despurado,

Did you even look at the memo? The superscript "th" is not the same font size as the rest of the text.

Damn, if the "neocons" came up with something like this about Kerry, Dan and his clown of idiots would be on here screaming bloody murder that it's obviously a fake and yet another right wing conspiracy.

But it's about Bush, so it must be true.

DeSPURado
09-09-2004, 11:46 PM
Did you read Dan's article. Font size was adjustable on this machine. If you can adjust font size you can create subscript and superscript. The proof that this came from a typewriter is so obvious its not even funny. Look at the way the the "a" in examination (bottom line) is off set from the rest of the word. No computer would ever do that. In fact it would be a bitch and would require a little more than MS word to off set certain letters. And its impossible to get letters to type just a bit over lapping the way some of the letters are doing.

Spurminator
09-09-2004, 11:58 PM
Even if it was possible to create a superscript effect by adjusting font size and level, who the hell would do that when they can simply type "111th" like they did in the heading?

Also, the letters being offset is inconclusive, because this is clearly a scan or fax, and the entire document is at a slant.

And more importantly, WHO FUCKING CARES ABOUT THIS SHIT??

Spurminator
09-10-2004, 12:03 AM
Does anyone else's PDF of the document totally show the marked out address through the ink, or is it just me?

(Waits for goons to knock on door)

scott
09-10-2004, 12:10 AM
Bush's National Guard record is irrelevant to the fact he is a piss poor president.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 12:15 AM
AP is reporting the docs are fakes, among other media outlets.

I'd also like to echo Spurm's sentiment.


www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/9623049.htm (http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/9623049.htm)

Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software, which wasn't available when the documents were supposedly written in 1972 and 1973.

Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript - a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" - as evidence indicating forgery.

Microsoft Word automatically inserts superscripts in the same style as the two on the memos obtained by CBS, she said.

"I'm virtually certain these were computer-generated," Lines said after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.

The White House distributed the four memos after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.


Also: "I'm a Kerry supporter myself, but . . . I'm 99% sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s." (http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=4596&R=9FC)


Finally, it has been revealed for the 3rd time by the national media that Bush most likely got into the National Guard because his father was a rich politician. Shocking.

MsMcGillyCutty
09-10-2004, 12:15 AM
If you break out the ointment.....I'm out of there!!!

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 12:23 AM
So does Dan Rather have any credibility left as a "journalist"?

What did Dan know and when did he know it?

:baby :cat 8o :fro :shootme :drunk :shock

SpursWoman
09-10-2004, 12:50 AM
If you break out the ointment.....I'm out of there!!!


Depends on what, exactly, the ointment is for. :vomit :lol :lol

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 12:52 AM
In his own words, "I've got the credibility of a South Austin crack whore who hasn't had a hit in 3 days."

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 01:18 AM
http://pic5.picturetrail.com/VOL92/800445/1417170/66243943.jpg

Things that make you go hmmm

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 01:24 AM
I think Commander Killian's widow is gonna rip 'em all a new asshole on Koppel tonight.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 01:37 AM
Of course, you all realize the Guard issue is dead now. After widow Killian rakes Dan Ratherbiased over the coals, chews him up, and spits him out on Koppel tonight, the other Liberal Networks will probably be skiddish about putting out any more amateurish claims of Bush's misdeeds in the Guard.

Yeah, I know, McAuliffe said he'd be talking about this until election day...but, that was before the Barnes' testimony and the fake documents were discovered this afternoon and evening.

They'll have to bank on Kitty Kelly now...and, well, she doesn't have much of a track record either.

Watch for President Bush's numbers to go up over the next couple of days due to the unwarranted and bogus attack that will be perceived by all, but the looney left, to be a product of McAuliffe, Carville, Begala, et. al.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 01:40 AM
It will be interesting to see how much the other "mainstream" media outlets dump on CBS.

http://www.ratherbiased.com/photos/frequency.jpg

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 01:48 AM
And then start shedding the "Bash Bush" agenda...I think this has sealed the deal for the November 2 election.

I love that, "Kenneth, what is the frequency?" I had almost forgotten. :rollin

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 01:51 AM
Caught in the...

http://www.ratherbiased.com/photos/dan-computer.jpg

...act?

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 02:16 AM
Wait Dan and I have proven that it doesn't have to be a fake and yet you're still disregarding it as one? I want to hear the Lt Col who allegedly signed this clear this up.

And why the hell would Bush release a forgery?

Spurminator
09-10-2004, 02:17 AM
He died 20 years ago.

His widow and son both doubt its authenticity.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 02:21 AM
Now isn't that convenient?

http://patents.gusmanolaw.com/archive/church_lady.jpg




Even if true it proves Bush missed a visit with a doc. OMFG! Wait til everyone at ireallyhategeorgewbush.com hears this!

Spurminator
09-10-2004, 02:23 AM
A very simple solution to all of this would be to find other documents issued to other lieutenants by the same person and see if the format is consistent.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 02:23 AM
"Wait Dan and I have proven that it doesn't have to be a fake..."
I missed the explanation of how an IBM Selectric was able to produce a reduced pitch, superscript font. How'd that go?

Widow and son think the documents are a fake...the commander was proud to have Bush in his unit and was excited to meet the airman's family when he pinned the wings on him.

But, really, I still want to hear the superscript explanation.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 02:24 AM
And they obviously were there when he signed millitary documents?

This is bullshit. Give me any typewriter with a small font and a large font and I could make this. It would be far harder to duplicate the lack of straight lines, the mis-spacing of letters on a computer. If it was forged, it was forged on a typewriter. The forensic people are dead wrong to think that this would have been more easily forged on a computer (impossible with just MS word), that makes me question their intelligence in general.

The reason the blacked out name shows through is that it was scanned to be put online. The backlighting often allows the original words to be seen through permanent ink.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 02:26 AM
Yonivore if the typewriter can produce different fonts then you just use the smaller font and adjust the page with the feed wheel to create a superscript or a subscript.

Spurminator
09-10-2004, 02:26 AM
And the scanning also likely explains the lack of straight lines.

Spurminator
09-10-2004, 02:27 AM
Why would they bother to create a superscript in the body of the text when they didn't do so in the heading or the "MEMORANDUM" line?

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 02:27 AM
This is bullshit. Give me any typewriter with a small font and a large font and I could make this. It would be far harder to duplicate the lack of straight lines, the mis-spacing of letters on a computer. If it was forged, it was forged on a typewriter. The forensic people are dead wrong to think that this would have been more easily forged on a computer, that makes me question their intelligence in general.

:baby :baby :baby :baby :baby :baby :baby :baby

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 02:28 AM
Its a letter head? And on a typewriter you often think of doing something a little differently half through a letter, adjust accordingly and can't go back to redo the stuff you already did. Thats more evidence that this isn't a computer forgery. On a computer you could edit it all.

Spurminator
09-10-2004, 02:33 AM
Its a letter head?

Possibly, but that still doesn't explain the "MEMO" line, which has "1st" printed with no superscript.

Anything's possible. I'm certainly no typography expert, but what I know right now is that the Lt. Commander's family does not believe he typed the documents, several typography experts believe them to be false, a former Gore and Clinton Campaign Strategist is already suggesting (on NightLine) that these may have been forged by the Bush Campaign as some sort of reverse trickery, and that you and Dan believe they could be authentic.

No offense, but you'll forgive me if I'm skeptical right now.

This is the risk of spending so much time reporting on trivial issues. It's high risk, low reward. Sure, it makes for good sensationalism, but it doesn't have any real significance, and there's doubt in every corner.

SpursWoman
09-10-2004, 02:35 AM
a former Gore and Clinton Campaign Strategist is already suggesting (on NightLine) that these may have been forged by the Bush Campaign as some sort of reverse trickery


:lol

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 02:36 AM
Truly, Truly DeSPURate:

"This is bullshit. Give me any typewriter with a small font and a large font and I could make this."
Doesn't this raise the question of why he would stop, exchange the "golf" ball for a smaller font, realign the new ball with the old, just to get a superscript "th" when, he didn't bother to do the same in the Header?

Are you old enough to remember the IBM Selectrics? Which were the only typewriters, in existence at the time, capable of the scalable fonts that were described.

While they were in existence, they weren't widely used.

Plus, the widow says he didn't type.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 02:37 AM
It's quite clear what is going on. Here we have a short week after the Labor Day weekend and the GOP convention prior to that which by any stretch of even a crack induced liberal Democrat imagination was a success. This upcoming weekend will see the 3rd anniversary of 9/11. Someone needed to step into the breach and take a shot at Bush to knock him off message. Hence the coordinated reporting on Bush's national guard service between CBS, the NY Times and the Times' sister publication the Boston Globe (all noted right wing media outlets).

Now suddenly the font on an early 1970s IBM typewriter is making Kerry supporters sure that Bush missed a visit with a national guard doc. Meanwhile most normal Americans collectively don't give a ****.

Could Kerry finish worse than the Duk? If things don't change that seems Rather possible.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 02:43 AM
If it weren't for D.C., he might actually get 0 EV's.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 02:47 AM
On the last column of bullet points in the ad posted by Dan:

*Escapment Lever instantly adjusts spacing for various point sizes.
*Leading dial allows flexibility in vertical spacing...type can be set solid or leaded in increments from 5 to 20 points.

Leads me to believe the typewriter's single ball surface had multiple font sizes at the touch of a button or multiple balls with multiple font sizes on board. Just a guess. Also at the bottom of the left column theres some smaller print that says something like :

All type, 12pt. or less, was set on the IBM "selectric" Composer.

No idea what that really means.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 02:52 AM
So have eyewitnesses placed the IBM Selectawhatever on the grassy knoll?

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 02:53 AM
Well, it didn't. I learned to type on a Selectric II in 1976. If you wanted a different font or a different size; you stopped changed the ball and worked like the dickens to line up the print again.

That still doesn't answer the question of why would he fucking bother when he didn't bother elsewhere in the document?

But, I'm with TD, if we're reduced to discussing fonts and pitch, the Demoncrats have really stooped to desperate levels.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 02:55 AM
It would be far harder to duplicate the lack of straight lines, the mis-spacing of letters on a computer.

Gimme a break. Give me a couple of hours on Photoshop and I could come up with the same thing.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 02:56 AM
And why the hell would Bush release a forgery?

...to increase the onus on CBS. And of course to play down whatever the 20th version of the attacks about Bush's National Guard service might be.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 03:00 AM
Give me half an hour and I could fool the widow and typography experts.

These were rank amateurs. I suspect it will be of the same ilk as the lady that sent Bush's debate prep tape to the Gore Campaign (who, to his credit, returned the tape and called the police instead of turning it over to CBS).

A "well-meaning" partisan.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 03:15 AM
Warning: the following is from a crazy right wing publication.


www.spectator.org/dsp_art...rt_id=7096 (http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7096)

Anatomy of a Forgery

By The Prowler
The American Spectator
Published 9/10/2004 12:09:06 AM

More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian.

The oppo researcher claimed the source was "a retired military officer." According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign.

"More than a couple people heard about the papers," says the DNC staffer. "I've heard that they ended up with the Kerry campaign, for them to decide to how to proceed, and presumably they were handed over to 60 Minutes, which used them the other night. But I know this much. When there was discussion here, there were doubts raised about their authenticity."

The concerns arose from the sourcing. "It wasn't clear that our source for the documents would have had access to them. Our person couldn't confirm from what file, from what original source they came from."

The documents that CBS News used were not documents from any of Bush's personnel files from his time in the National Guard. Rather, CBS News stated that they were documents uncovered in the personnel files of Killian. That would explain why the White House or the Pentagon had never before released or even seen them.

According to a Kerry campaign source, there was little gossip about the supposedly hot documents inside the office of the campaign on McPherson Square. "Those documents were not something anyone was talking about or trying to generate buzz on," says the staffer. "It wasn't like there were small groups of people talking about this as a bombshell. I think people here weren't sure what to make of it, because provenance of these documents was uncertain."

A CBS producer, who initially tipped off The Prowler about the 60 Minutes story, says that despite seeking professional assurances that the documents were legitimate, there was uncertainty even among the group of producers and researchers working on the story.

"The problem was we had one set of documents from Bush's file that had Killian calling Bush 'an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot.' And someone who Killian said 'performed in an outstanding manner.' Then you have these new documents and the tone and content are so different."

The CBS producer said that some alarms bells went off last week when the signatures and initials of Killian on the documents in hand did not match up with other documents available on the public record, but producers chose to move ahead with the story. "This was too hot not to push. If there were doubts, those people didn't show it," says the producer, who works on a rival CBS News program.

Now, the producer says, there is growing concern inside the building on 57th Street that they may have been suckered by the Kerry campaign. "There is a school of thought here that the Kerry people dumped this in our laps, figuring we'd do the heavy lifting on the story. That maybe they had doubts about these documents but hoped we'd get more information," says the producer. "If that's the case, then we're bigger fools than we already appear to be judging by all the chatter about how these documents could be forgeries."

ABC News' political unit held a conference call at 7:00 p.m. Thursday evening to discuss the memo and its potential ramifications should the documents turn out to be a forgery. That meeting took place around the time that the deceased Killian's son made public statements questioning the documents' authenticity.

According to one ABC News employee, some reporters believe that the Kerry campaign as well as the DNC were parties in duping CBS, but a smaller segment believe that both the DNC and the Kerry campaign were duped by Karl Rove, who would have engineered the flap to embarrass the opposition.

afe7FATMAN
09-10-2004, 03:29 AM
I haven't had time to look into who may have done anything
wrong but the man's widow say's her Husband didn't type.

Nbadan
09-10-2004, 03:33 AM
I haven't had time to look into who may have done anything
wrong but the man's widow say's her Husband didn't type.


Now that's desperate. You do know that he more than likely he had this typed for him, right?

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 04:19 AM
That's desperate?

I'd say trying to carp on Bush's National Guard record for the THIRD time, not having any issues to talk about because you don't have a platform, and expecting some poor forgery to help put a dent in your opponent's momentum IS just the definition of desperate.

afe7FATMAN
09-10-2004, 04:37 AM
I'm talking about all the MFR's (See Drudge Report)
that the LTC has been creditied with
Sorry to confuse you Dan:rolleyes
BTW any idiot with any experience/knowledge is aware ot the fact LtCol's "Commander's" well at least back then didn't type.
Apoligize Cut & past doesn't work at the job.
DAN
I still have some letterhead from the 1881 Comm Sq,
Cam Rahn Bay Vietnam. Want me to type you a letter
thanking you for ......................?

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 04:40 AM
You guys act like this is an issue thats too old to be important, which is a crock. The lie that he made about this issue is only a couple of months old. It is a repeated lie (if this document isn't a forgery.) and is an ongoing charade.

This doesn't make any sense as a forgery. As this was not turned up by any democrat this was turned up under an official Pentagon freedom of information act suit. The Bush whitehouse released the documents immediately following the CBS story. They didn't deny them or claim they were forgeries. They released them after the story ran. To me that validates the story. Plus it fits in with everyother piece of evidence we have about Bush's guards service. It is completely consistent with the timeline of Bush's stint in Alabama.


After weeks of media scrutiny of Democrat John Kerry's record in Vietnam, Bush was broadsided by several challenges to his account of his six-year stint in the air guard in Texas and Alabama, including:

-- A CBS "60 Minutes" interview in which a former Texas speaker of the House said he helped secure a pilot's position for Bush in the Texas Air National Guard to keep him from being drafted.

-- New memos obtained by CBS News suggesting that Bush's squadron commander in Texas was under pressure from his superiors to give Bush a strong performance review, which he refused to do.

-- A Boston Globe investigation that concluded that Bush missed training assignments in Alabama and Massachusetts despite twice signing statements that warned that he could be put on active duty for two years for doing so.

...

The "60 Minutes" report also included newly obtained documents from Bush's Texas squadron leader, Col. Jerry Killian. Although Killian initially gave Bush stellar evaluations -- calling him an "exceptionally fine young officer and pilot" -- later memos suggested that Bush was failing to meet his requirements.

In a May 1972 memo, Killian said he talked to Bush about "options of how Bush can get out of coming to drill from now through November" because of campaign work Bush wanted to do. Killian said he also believed Bush was "talking to someone upstairs" to avoid some assignments.

When he later decided to suspend Bush's flight status -- after Bush failed to take a physical exam and meet other air guard requirements -- Killian suggested he was under pressure to give a favorable review.

"I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job," he wrote.

Late Wednesday night the White House released copies of the new memos to the Associated Press. Although the controversy over Bush's service has gone on for at least a decade, Pentagon officials said they found the memos only after performing an exhaustive search "out of an abundance of caution" in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by the AP.



SFGate (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/09/09/MNGKE8LUFG1.DTL)

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 05:28 AM
Red : Original
Blue : Typed in word
http://www.thetalentshow.org/images/screenshot-document.jpg

Another document in which superscript is used for one of the "11th"s note its not all of them, and it came from the same time period.

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 06:11 AM
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."

< snip >

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."

"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. Hodges, who declined to grant an on-camera interview to CBS, did not respond to messages left on his home answering machine in Texas.

WPost (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9967-2004Sep9.html)

Nbadan
09-10-2004, 06:37 AM
http://www.thetalentshow.org/images/screenshot-document.jpg
Here is a CBS 1972 document when compared to a modern Word document

Nice work Despurado. Good to see you back. I guess you should mention though that this should put to rest a obviously forged image that came out on Neocons sites on the internet yesterday that are supposed to show that the documents used by CBS are similar when overlayed onto a modern MS Word document. Although your image proves that this is simply not the case.

http://www.spacetownusa.com/bushdoc.gif
Here is a obvious fake floating around freeper sites on the internet

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 09:44 AM
Again, at worst the man got into the guard due to his family connections and missed an appointment with a physician after 4 or 5 years of doing what was required of him. Outside of your little left wing clusterfuck most people simply do not care.

And that's assuming the documents are even genuine, which has been doubted by a variety of experts, all of whom have been named. That's something CBS has yet to do with its "independent experts."

Lest we forget that CBS' support of the claim that Bush got into the guard thanks to political favoritism is based on the words of a Kerry 'adviser' and major fundraiser.

:sleepy

Still, it's fun to watch you girls get so excited about something this insignificant.

:wink

Hook Dem
09-10-2004, 10:30 AM
This is what happens when you throw Carville and Rather in the same mixing bowl. You might as well add a few roaches and bloodsuckers. The nation should be outraged at this kind of shit. I think the public is just a little smarter than Rather and Carville think they are. This will backfire on the Democrats and the end is near for them. Four more years for Bush.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 10:37 AM
If you want to know why these are forgeries you don't even have to point out that someone used Word and ran it through the copier 10 or 20 times or learn the intrincacies of early 1970s typewriter (some of you disturb me) fonts and subscripts.

The memo dated August 18th, 1973 (the "Memo to File") states that "Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush."

Small problem.

www.latimes.com/la-na-gua...0422.story (http://www.latimes.com/la-na-guard15feb15,1,6240422.story)



Bush's application, as well as his commission, were handled by then-Col. Walter B. "Buck" Staudt, who said, "Nobody did anything for him…. There was no … influence on his behalf. Neither his daddy nor anybody else got him into the Guard." Staudt, who retired in 1972 as a brigadier general, said Bush was enrolled quickly because there was a demand for pilot candidates.

Staudt retired in 1972.

Wow, I feel like a virtual Perry Mason now.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 11:09 AM
A quick search on Lexis for articles from 1996 containing "bill clinton" and "draft dodger" turned up this beaut:




Copyright 1996 The New York Times Company
The New York Times

June 23, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section 4; Page 1; Column 4; Week in Review Desk

LENGTH: 1293 words

HEADLINE: Why So Resilient?;
A President Who Can Absorb Body Blows

BYLINE: By RICHARD L. BERKEBy

-snip-

While the Summer Olympics in Atlanta may dominate news coverage before the August party conventions, ethics issues are not about to disappear: The House and Senate inquiries into the F.B.I. file transfers have only just begun; so has the second Whitewater trial in Little Rock, involving Mr. Lindsey; and the special prosecutor for Whitewater, Kenneth W. Starr, now has the F.B.I. file affair on his plate as well. The Republican Party is sure to keep the questions alive in other ways; already, it is running TV ads reminding voters of the sexual harassment suit against Mr. Clinton and portraying him as a draft dodger.

That was in 1996. Dole made the centerpiece of his campaign his war record and "honor", "integrity", etc...in a clear shot at Clinton. The problem is that if you are going to run a personal campaign then you should at least be more likable than your opponent, for starters. Kerry fails that test. So then you better have something good on your opponent. Well, the GOP had a fairly convincing case that Clinton did seek to dodge the draft and was successful, something which of course came up in the 1992 election. Republicans, blinded by their hate of Clinton, thought that surely voters would respond to if they brought it up again.

They didn't.

This election year, it was the DNC, the Kerry campaign, and their friends in the "unbiased" media who hit Bush for being "AWOL" starting back in February and March. Why? Again, just like Dole in '96, the rationale was that the way to beat the incumbent was to highlight their personal failings against someone with a more noble life story. What's more noble in American politics than military service?

In the current media cycle this psychadelic repeat trip into Bush's National Guard history is certainly being portrayed as being justified by the Swift Vets campaign against Kerry, but it was the DNC and Kerry who originally introduced the scrutinization of Bush's record into this campaign.

Kerry continued down this fool's gold lined path, highlighted by the orgy of Vietnam nostalgia that was the Democrat convention. He made that part of his life the central theme of his campaign. Why? Again, primarily to compare and contrast himself with Bush.

This didn't work in 1992, 1996, and 2000 and it's not going to work today. The current little tempest is akin to a Dole fundraiser and adviser coming forward with a 'true' story that he in fact helped Clinton join the ROTC or whatever at the Univ. of Arkansas back in the sixties and that recently discovered documents detail that Clinton missed some ROTC meeting. In short, outside of the media-politico-blog bubble most people could care less. They've made up their minds about the current president's character already and the recent allegations, if true, are simply what has been suggested again and again about Bush.

The Kerry campaign has thusfar in this campaign failed to significantly attack Bush on any matter of substance. Instead we have this muddied swamp of crap about what happened 35 years ago. Welcome to 1996 redux.

Advantage: incumbent.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 02:33 PM
Leave it to the Demoncrats to try to drag Bush's name through the mud on the eve of the worst terrorist attack in our nation's history.

But hey, all's fair in politics.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 02:48 PM
lol...

http://ratherbiased.com/images/clippy.png

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 04:07 PM
Its not possible that Saudt put pressure as a friend of the Bush family after he retired? No?

And nice of you to discount an Eye witness.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:14 PM
Some emoticons for your typewriter expertise...:dog :elephant :king :angel :smokin2 :cuss :kiss

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:16 PM
Staudt was retired. Gone. The memos clearly make it sound as if he is still a part of the organization. And of course every reputable documents expert who will actually attach their name to their opinion thinks the memo was not produced in the early 1970s.

What "eyewitness"? Kerry supporter Ben Barnes?

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 04:18 PM
You don't even bother to read do you Major General Hodges, a republican, reported seeing these signed and discussed them with the Lt Col.


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."

"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. Hodges, who declined to grant an on-camera interview to CBS, did not respond to messages left on his home answering machine in Texas.

I've already shown every claim that the experts say prove that it was forgery is wrong. Superscript was around in US equipment and used on other Bush documents. Etc.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:24 PM
John O'Neill was a John Edwards supporter in the primaries. Your point?

Sorry, but those memos are forgeries, as attested to by those who are experts at document authentication and willing to put their name on their expert opinion.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:25 PM
Oh great, CBS News is the source for your argument.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 04:26 PM
Has anyone interviewed this Hodges guy on camera yet?

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:28 PM
apnews.myway.com/article/...UGD82.html (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040910/D850UGD82.html)

Authenticity of Bush Memos Scrutinized

Sep 10, 1:45 PM (ET)

By MATT KELLEY

WASHINGTON (AP) - Questions are being raised about the authenticity of newly unearthed memos which asserted that George W. Bush ignored a direct order from a superior officer in the Texas Air National Guard and lost his status as a pilot because he failed to meet military performance standards and undergo a required physical exam.

CBS, which reported on the memos on its "60 Minutes" program, said its experts who examined the documents concluded that they were authentic. They ostensibly were written by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, one of Bush's commanders in 1972 and 1973.

A co-worker of Killian's quoted in the CBS broadcast told The Associated Press Friday he had no reason to doubt the memos, although he can't verify them.

But Killian's son, one of Killian's fellow officers and an independent document examiner questioned the memos. Gary Killian, who served in the Guard with his father and retired as a captain in 1991, said he doubted his father would have written an unsigned memo which said there was pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's performance review.

"It just wouldn't happen," he said. "No officer in his right mind would write a memo like that."

Bush spokesman Scott McClellan said Friday the White House, which distributed the memos after obtaining them from CBS, was not trying to verify their authenticity. "We don't know if the documents are fabricated or authentic," McClellan told reporters traveling with the president to West Virginia.

McClellan suggested the memos surfaced as part of "an orchestrated effort by Democrats and the Kerry campaign to tear down the president."

The personnel chief in Killian's unit at the time said he believes the documents are fake.

"They looked to me like forgeries," said Rufus Martin. "I don't think Killian would do that, and I knew him for 17 years." Killian died in 1984.

Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software. Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript - a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" - as evidence indicating forgery.

Microsoft Word automatically inserts superscripts in the same style as the two on the memos obtained by CBS, she said.

"I'm virtually certain these were computer generated," Lines said after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.

Robert Strong, who worked with Killian at the time the memos are dated, said he did not see anything in the memos that made him think they were forgeries. Strong noted he's not a forensic expert and isn't vouching for the documents.

"I didn't see anything that was inconsistent with how we did business," Strong said. "It looked like the sort of thing that Jerry Killian would have done or said. He was a very professional guy."

The Defense Department released Bush's pilot logs this week under pressure from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Associated Press.

Bush's Vietnam-era Air National Guard service became a focus of Democratic criticism this week amid a flurry of new reports about his activities. Democrats say Bush shirked his National Guard duties, a claim Bush denies.

Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard in 1968, serving more than a year on active Air Force duty while being trained to fly F-102A jets. He was honorably discharged from the Guard in October 1973 and left the Air Force Reserves in May 1974.

The first four months of 1972 are at the beginning of a controversial period in Bush's Guard service. After taking his last flight in April 1972, Bush went for six months without showing up for any training drills. In September 1972 he received permission to transfer to an Alabama Guard unit so he could work on a political campaign there.

That May, Bush also skipped a required yearly medical examination. In response, his commanders grounded Bush on Aug. 1, 1972.

---

Associated Press Correspondent Kelley Shannon contributed to this report from Austin, Texas.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:39 PM
All of this to prove that Bush got into the Guard because he was the son of a wealthy congressman and that he missed a doctor's appointment once in the Guard.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:49 PM
How convenient! The DNC starts slamming Bush with a "Fortunate Son" theme this week, just as Kerry fundraiser Ben Barnes appears in an interview with CBS News claiming that he got Bush into the Guard at the behest of the Bush family. CBS also bases their report on documents with questionable authenticity about Bush's service record. Documents for which CBS has yet to name the "experts" who authenticated those documents. From whence did those documents come?

AP: Dems take chance with 'Fortunate Son' slam (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/09/10/dems_take_chance_with_fortunate_son_slam/)

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 04:49 PM
Tell me what the "experts" based their claim of forgery on?

xrayzebra
09-10-2004, 04:53 PM
"memo to file" back in my days, I retired in 1970, the
phrase used was "memo for record". And it was used
to record something you wanted to retain for record
purposes. Never in my 20 odd years have I seen the
phrase "memo to file". Doesn't really prove anything
except it was as commonly used phrase.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 04:55 PM
Give Ms. Lines a call and ask her:


Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software. Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript - a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" - as evidence indicating forgery.

Microsoft Word automatically inserts superscripts in the same style as the two on the memos obtained by CBS, she said.

"I'm virtually certain these were computer generated," Lines said after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.


At this time I would like to revisit Spurm's statement from page 1 of this thread:



Even if it was possible to create a superscript effect by adjusting font size and level, who the hell would do that when they can simply type "111th" like they did in the heading?

Also, the letters being offset is inconclusive, because this is clearly a scan or fax, and the entire document is at a slant.

And more importantly, WHO FUCKING CARES ABOUT THIS SHIT??

Indeed.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 05:11 PM
http://www.registeredmedia.com/parodies/ratherreplaced.jpg

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 05:14 PM
Oh, it's starting now. It's Rove's fault now. The Kerry campaign/CBS News/DNC have been had...or perhaps they would like for you to think that.

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20040910/capt.sge.inc04.100904190358.photo00.default-286x352.jpg


Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe today said neither his organization nor John Kerry´s campaign leaked to CBS documents questioning President Bush´s service record, which may have been forged.

He suggested White House adviser Karl Rove could be behind the documents.

"I can unequivocally say that no one involved here at the Democratic National Committee had anything at all to do with any of those documents. If I were an aspiring young journalist, I think I would ask Karl Rove that question," Mr. McAuliffe said.

Not my favorite source, but it will do for now (http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040910-011417-2610r.htm)

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 05:18 PM
...the Washington Times.


McAuliffe denies involvement in memos flap (http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040910-011417-2610r.htm)
Excerpts:

"Asked later if he believed Mr. Rove or Republican operatives were involved, he said: 'I am telling you that nobody — Democratic National Committee or groups associate with us — were involved in any way with these documents. I am just saying I would ask Karl Rove the same question.'"

"He did not explain how the White House would benefit by providing forged documents trying to undermine Mr. Bush´s service record, but emphasized that he 'can unequivocally speak for the Kerry campaign' in saying they had nothing to do with the documents either."
. . .
"The Prowler, an Internet political column, is reporting that the documents attributed to Col. Killian were given to a DNC staffer 'more than six weeks ago.' It says the documents were handed over to the campaign of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry."
First, I believe that if the memos are verified as forgeries, the Kerry Campaign for the Presidency may well hinge on which of the above statements is true.

Second, if Terry McAuliffe is, himself, in doubt about the origin, purpose, and objective of the memos -- as is suggested by him deflecting this to Karl Rove -- why did he, this morning, send this e-mail blast (heavily relying on the authenticity of those memos and Ben Barnes' lies) just this morning?


Democratic National Committee 'Action Alert' E-mail (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200409%5 CNAT20040910c.html)

It gets curiouser and curiouser.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 05:21 PM
lol, well I guess McAuliffe is thinking all the conspiracy nut jobs like Dan will buy his BS excuse hook, line, and sinker. Not a bad idea with criminally insane folks, but middle America is rolling their eyes at this one.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 05:28 PM
So you are all discounting an Eye witness and the fact that this image from a different Bush Doc clearly shows a rasied smaller font superscript? And I think I need to point out that even though the main document is dated in 73 the part with the superscript is dated in 68.

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 05:34 PM
Yes, we are.

Besides, that's not the document nor was it produced by the same author as the others.

No one ever said that superscripting wasn't done...just that the devices readily available to Lt. Commander Killian wouldn't have been capable.

This appears to be a central file of some kind. They may have had better equipment or some government spec. typewriter or printer that did it. Nonetheless, this document isn't in question, I don't believe.

Also, that's not Times New Roman -- the font used on the forged memo were in Times New Roman, unavailable on the Selectric typewriter (or any other) for that matter, at the time.

You're really going for broke on this. What are you, Dan Rather's nephew?

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 05:37 PM
A Major General is lying to smear Bush?

Times new roman was based upon the selectric font which was based upon times new roman print font....You do realize that don't you?

The doc doesn't look like a central doc at all. It looks like a 3 by 5 card which accompanied his personel file.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 05:39 PM
There are other witnesses who have stated they believe these to be fakes, including a co-worker, Killian's wife, and Killian's son.

And apparently every expert who is willing to put their name with their opinion.

Here's a random thought: perhaps Hodges created the documents his own damn self?

INDC Blog: Are the CBS National Guard Documents Fake? (http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000838.php)

Right now the only thing that matters is whether the Kerry campaign/CBS News/DNC knew these were fakes and when they found out they were. The one argument in their favor is: who would be so stupid to risk so much over so little?

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 05:41 PM
Fine. They're real DeSPURate. Feel better?

Because, of course, as everyone realizes -- the world is waiting for someone in this forum to resolve this issue.

LOL

Nevermind the bank of forensic scientists who have gone on record as saying they believe the documents to be forged.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 05:42 PM
Basically you have to believe that Killian was the only one at the TANG who had access to a typewriter capable of producing such a document and that this was basically the only time it was used there.

So who's trying to wag the dog here? Is it the Kerry camp/CBS/DNC or is it the omnipresent Rove?

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 05:42 PM
Why then did the White house pass on them with no comment?

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 05:44 PM
Again, because it puts the onus on CBS and perhaps, just perhaps, because no one gives a **** about Bush's Guard service except for rabid Demo partisans.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 05:45 PM
What's to say?

The President has repeatedly stated that he completed his obligation to the Guard. And, they actually did comment to the effect of, they are unable to characterize the words or get inside the head of a dead man.

Although, they said so a little more diplomatically.

Releasing the Memos were in keeping with the President's pledge to release all documents related to his Guard service. It was a perfunctory gesture for which they owed the Press no comment.

Really, I think the President wants to talk about 2004, not 1972 or 1968.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 05:47 PM
This isn't about 1973 this is about 2004 and his continued lie about why he didn't take the medical exam.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 05:49 PM
He's already said he didn't take the exam because he wasn't going to be flying anymore. He was allowed to transfer to an Alabama unit so he could work on a campaign while completing his duty.

There's nothing in the record to contradict that.

Spurminator
09-10-2004, 05:51 PM
Who cares? Are you trying to get an impeachment?

If the Swift Boat Vets fiasco is irrelevant then this is ten times moreso.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 05:51 PM
Again, nobody cares. Most people assume the worst when they hear accusations. It didn't matter in 2000 and it doesn't matter today.

I think most people believe that Bush got into the NG due to his dad and that he probably skipped a physical. BFD.

This is such a non-issue but frankly I hope the Demos and the compliant media keep harping on this for some time.

The Kerry campaign is rapidly becoming the worst presidential campaign I've ever seen, and I've seen some horrible ones on both sides.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 05:56 PM
He's already said he didn't take the exam because he wasn't going to be flying anymore.

The memo directly contradicts this...Ordering him to report for a failed appearance for the medical exam is not the same as being told he didn't have to take the exam because his plane was being phased out.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 06:02 PM
In my expert opinion George W. Bush probably intentionally missed that physical. Also in my expert opinion most Americans don't care.

'Questions' about Bush's NG service didn't help Gore the first time around. It didn't help Queen Ann back in '94. It's not that the right documents were not cited or unavailable. It's not in how it was presented. This is just like Clinton and the draft dodger label. Most people already assume the worst. Bringing it up again and again is a waste of time for the opposition.

You don't attack a sitting president for what he did 35 years ago. The GOP learned that lesson back in '96 and it looks like the Demos will have to learn that themselves.

Of course, perhaps someone in the Democrat party would love to see Kerry fail. McAuliffe is a Clinton pick. Supposedly BClinton is giving Kerry "advice" from the hospital bed. Yeah.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 06:04 PM
"The memo directly contradicts this"
Doesn't the memo have to be real? Consider the following:


When in Doubt, Blame Karl Rove (http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/)

"The widow and son of the late Lt. Col Jerry Killian both say they don't believe the documents CBS News used to claim George W. Bush failed to meet performance standards during his Vietnam-era service in the Texas Air National Guard are genuine."

"For now, CBS is standing by its claim that the documents are from Lt. Col. Killian's files and that it consulted 'a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic.' But CBS won't reveal the name of the expert and the network's claims are challenged by several other experts who say it is almost certain the documents were generated by a computer that wouldn't have been in use in 1972."

"But CBS has begun an internal investigation after reports surfaced from inside CBS that the documents may have been brought to the network's attention by Democratic National Committee opposition researchers. Today, the network also trimmed back its statements to rival news organizations about how 'convinced' CBS is of the documents' authenticity. If the documents indeed turn out to be fakes, it won't be the first time CBS has been snookered by partisans in a presidential race."

"In 1992, Bill Clinton's presidential campaign was nearly ended when tapes between the Arkansas governor and cabaret singer Gennifer Flowers were released. At the time, KCBS, the network's owned-and-operated affiliate in Los Angeles, took the tape and submitted it to private detective and forensic tape expert Anthony Pellicano for analysis. Mr. Pellicano's conclusions that the tapes were 'misleading' and 'not credible' played a role in Mr. Clinton surviving the controversy."

"Only later was it learned that Mr. Pellicano had no formal training in evaluating tapes and was at the time being paid by Democratic sources to squelch 'bimbo eruptions' surrounding Mr. Clinton. In other words, Mr. Clinton's own private eye was able to discredit one of the most damaging eruptions that preceded Monica Lewinsky. In his own memoirs published this year, Mr. Clinton confessed to the Flowers affair, contradicting his fierce denials at the time."

"Years later, Mr. Pellicano did demonstrate facility with tapes when police investigating threats made against Los Angeles Times reporter Anita Busch uncovered evidence that Mr. Pellicano had been involved and had also illegally wiretapped her conversations. Mr. Pellicano is now serving a 2 1/2 year federal prison term for possessing firearms and explosives. A federal grand jury is still investigating allegations that he wiretapped Hollywood celebrities. CBS would be wise to conclude its internal investigation quickly. If it results in bad news, it should cut its losses immediately."

"Meanwhile, former Clinton and Gore operative Chris Lehane, an acknowledged master of the black arts of opposition research, is already making the rounds on television hinting that Karl Rove could have planted fake National Guard documents to embarrass Democrats. If CBS is offered that scoop, my advice is simple: Don't take it, no matter how many documents with Karl Rove's signature you are shown."
I'm beyond worrying about whether or not this has any affect on the Bush campaign...I think that's been settled. I'm into the realm of hoping this is a career ender for Rather. Judging by the fact he's maintaining his position while refusing to share who his "experts" are, tells me that he's concerned about this. Well, he's gonna hold forth on the matter this evening during the "CBS EVENING KERRYFEST WITH DAN RATHER BIASED."

It'd make my day if he acknowledged the deceit and resigned. That'd make my month. After that, Dan who?

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 06:24 PM
biz.yahoo.com/prnews/0409...100_2.html (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040910/nyf100_2.html)

Press Release Source: CBS

Statement From CBS News

Friday September 10, 3:53 pm ET

NEW YORK, Sept. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- Later today, CBS News will address on the air and in detail the issues surrounding the documents broadcast in the 60 MINUTES report on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. At this time, however, CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House. This and other issues surrounding the authenticity of the documents and more on this developing story will be reported on tonight on THE CBS EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 06:34 PM
For something a little lighter until the CBS followup story try this link

www.fakeconstitution.50megs.com/ (http://www.fakeconstitution.50megs.com/)

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 06:36 PM
This isn't about 1973 this is about 2004 and his continued lie about why he didn't take the medical exam.

Who gives a shit? I thought this election was about who can best lead our country the next four years.

All I see out of Democrats is that apparently Bush is unfit because of something that happened in 1973, while coming out of the other side of their mouths is screaming that what Kerry did or didn't do in 'Nam 30 years ago is a non-issue.

Which is it? Make up your damn minds.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 06:37 PM
One direction the DNC might have been headed in is that Bush missed that physical because he had coke in his system.

With Kitty Kelley's book coming out and her slated to make various network appearances (I believe Katie Couric is slated to have multiple interviews with her) then you have the 'Bush is a cokehead' allegation hitting the media cycle right after you have the NG documents coming out showing that Bush missed the all important physical.

Of course, now that the authenticity of the documents has become the major issue and Kelley's source for the cokehead story has recanted, the best laid plans of mice and girlie men will go poof.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 06:38 PM
I thought Ben Barnes's daughter coming out and calling her dad a liar, today, was a nice touch. Don't you?

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 06:39 PM
Aggie calm down man. I clearly explained why this is an issue today. He didn't lie about why he didn't take the medical exam in in 1972. He did that in the last few months, and in the 2000 election.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-10-2004, 06:40 PM
So what?

Kerry lied about Cambodia what, two weeks ago?

You need to calm down, and realize that this has absolutely ZERO to do with his ability to lead the next four years.

I know Demos have to reach, because Kerry's campaign has nothing to do with a platform or initiatives and everything to do with hating Bush, but that doesn't mean you have to cling to this insignificant crap to trash Bush.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 06:43 PM
Kerry didn't lie about Cambodia. His story has been corroborated multiple times by commanders of the boat that served along side of him.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 06:45 PM
You're in denial man. Catch a cruise to the Carribean and relax.

Now would be a good time to see the Florida Keys from a Carnival Cruise ship.

Nbadan
09-10-2004, 06:46 PM
"Here's what we in America ought to hate: ungrateful motherfuckers. George Bush is one ungrateful motherfucker. Here he is, our goddamned President, who every time he has stumbled in his life, every time he has faced adversity or failure, has had a goose down pillow waiting for his ass when he hit the ground. What's so frustrating about the whole Air National Guard debacle is not that he weaseled out of his commitment. It's that he's not grateful for every break he's ever gotten. We who hate Bush hate him because he acts as if his stupid-ass luck of being born into one of the most powerful families in the world entitles him to be a complete motherfucker."

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 06:47 PM
Kerry didn't lie about Cambodia.

Um yes he did if he claimed that he was in Cambodia on Xmas Day 1968 and Nixon was president.

Yonivore
09-10-2004, 06:47 PM
Who are you quoting Nbadan? Yourself?

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 06:51 PM
And Al Gore was not an ungrateful mofo? Was he not a "senator's son"?

Kerry friggin joined the Naval Reserves in order to get out of being drafted into the Army and only by a twist of fate did he end up in combat. Kerry wasn't born a pauper and certainly isn't one now.

Reagan and Clinton. Now those were a couple of self-made individuals.

NeoConIV
09-10-2004, 07:06 PM
Drudge has hilarious lead story about The Dan right now...different typesets...good stuff

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 07:14 PM
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

Here's the transcript of Rather's "on the street" interview with CNN:

Rather: The story is true. And the questions raised in the story are serious and legitimate questions.

The questions are: Did Lt. Bush refuse a direct order from a military superior in time of war? That's Question One. Question Two: was he suspended for failure to perform up tothe standards of the U.S. Air Force and the Texas National Guard? That's Number Two.

Three. Did he ever take the physical he was ordered to take by his military superior? Or if he didn't take that physical, why didn't he take that physical?

I want to emphasize that I stand behind my president. We're in a time of war and I stand behind my president. There's no joy in reporting such a story, but my job as a journalist is not to be afraid and when we come up with facts and legitimate questions that are supported by witnesses and documents which we believe to be authentic, to raise those questions no matter how unpleasant they are.

I do want to underscore with you that the White House took their shots at us today. The Bush Cheney campaign took their shots at us. They have not answered the question: did or did not the president obey a direct order from his military superior while he was a lieutenant, was he or was he not suspended for failure to meet performance standard of the Air Force and TANG, if he didn't take the physical, why didn't he take the physical? Also, one of the questions that's out there, where is the efficiency report every officer, particularly a flying officer, is supposed to have a yearly efficiency report. There is no such report for the last year. I emphasize again that there is no joy in asking these questions, but I think these are legitimate questions and I stand by the story.

Q. I wonder how you feel about the whole investigation

Rather: What investigation?

Q. We read that CBS is doing an internal invest

Rather: Where did you read that?

Q. Unintelligible

Rather: You should stay away from rumor mills. Where did you read that?

Q. The Washington Post article

Rather: No. They didn't say that in the Washington Post article. I don't want to argue with you. You were asking about a rumor. You know the internet is filled with all kinds of rumors. I like a rumor as much as the next fella. But it's umportant to recognize what's a rumor and what's a fact. Sometimes the rumors are true. In this case they're not. There's no internal investigation. I'm happy in my work, as you can see. I'm proud of our story. I'm proud of CBS News I'm proud of the team I work with and stand with them completely. I appreciate the sources who took risks to authenticate our story. One - there's no internal invest. Two - someone may be shellshocked but it is not I and not anybody at CBS news. And you can tell who's shellshocked by the ferocity of people who are spreading these rumors.

Q. When there's significant evidence that those documents may have been forged or created at a later date, do you think there's any requirement or are you considering any kind of apology or retraction"?

Rather: Number One. I know that this story is true. I believe the witnesses and documents are authentic. We wouldn't have gone to air if they had not been. There isn't going to be an apology . . . hasn't even been discussed, nor should there be.

I want to make clear to you this story is true. And more important questions than how we got the story which is where those who don't like the story would like to put the emphasis. The more important question is what are the answers to the questions raised in the story.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 07:50 PM
Basically Strong's view is that the documents are "compatible" with his view of the Guard and Killian. I really wonder what his view of George W. Bush might be. Also, from whom did Rather obtain the documents? (Probably the DNC). Didn't catch if Rather had any expert on authenticating documents on. Caught the tail end of the handwriting expert. Someone could have easily copied his signature.

Did CBS interview Rufus Martin?

apnews.myway.com/article/...UGD82.html (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040910/D850UGD82.html)


The personnel chief in Killian's unit at the time said he believes the documents are fake.

"They looked to me like forgeries," said Rufus Martin. "I don't think Killian would do that, and I knew him for 17 years." Killian died in 1984.

Did CBS interview Killian's widow and son? They believe the documents are fake.


But Killian's son, one of Killian's fellow officers and an independent document examiner questioned the memos. Gary Killian, who served in the Guard with his father and retired as a captain in 1991, said he doubted his father would have written an unsigned memo which said there was pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's performance review.


And of course Rather interviews "an author who has written two books critical of President Bush" to give his view on what this means.

Again, this is clearly a Demo setup and Rather is the mouthpiece for it. The real question is what is this designed to do. Personally I think they are headed towards suggesting that Bush missed the physical because he was a cokehead just like Kitty Kelley claims. Of course Kerry needed something to hit Bush on after the convention and with the 9/11 anniversary tomorrow.

Again, if all this is about is that Bush got into the guard due to the influence of his dad and that he missed a physical, well, this tempest in a teapot is over.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 08:01 PM
Sounds like its legit. CBS did its homework. The critics apparently did not.


CBS Stands By Bush-Guard Memos

NEW YORK, Sept. 10, 2004



Rather: It’s Real




"The documents are backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content."
CBS News statement

A decorated Vietnam combat veteran, John Kerry recently has faced questions over his record as a Navy officer and an anti-war protester. (Photo: AP)


Dig Deeper
MORE INFORMATION
View the following documents obtained by 60 Minutes:

• Memorandum, May 4, 1972

• Memo to File, May 19, 1972

• Memorandum For Record,
Aug. 1, 1972

• Memo to File, Aug. 18, 1973

Read a transcript of Dan Rather's interview with Ben Barnes:

Also view documents released by the White House reflecting President Bush's National Guard service:

• Memo from retired Lt. Col. Albert C. Lloyd on whether Mr. Bush satisfied Guard requirements

• Personnel Card listing points Mr. Bush earned from May 1972 to May 1973

• Service Record showing days Mr. Bush was credited with service from October 1972 to May 1973

• Service Record showing days Mr. Bush was credited with service from May 1973 to July 1973

• Pay Record listing days of service in 1972 and 1973, along with computer printouts of each quarter

• Dental Record showing the results of a dental examination Mr. Bush had on Jan. 6, 1973.



&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp
(CBS/AP) Questions have been raised about the authenticity of newly unearthed memos acquired by CBS News that say President Bush's National Guard commander believed Mr. Bush was shirking his duties.

The network is defending the authenticity of the memos, which were obtained by CBS News' "60 Minutes," saying experts who examined the memos concluded they were authentic documents produced by Mr. Bush's former commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian.

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

"This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, interviews with former Texas National Guard officials and individuals who worked closely back in the early 1970s with Colonel Jerry Killian and were well acquainted with his procedures, his character and his thinking," the statement read.

"In addition, the documents are backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content," the statement continued. "Contrary to some rumors, no internal investigation is underway at CBS News nor is one planned."

CBS News Anchor Dan Rather says many of those raising questions about the documents have focused on something called superscript, a key that automatically types a raised "th."

Critics claim typewriters didn't have that ability in the 1970s. But some models did. In fact, other Bush military records already released by the White House itself show the same superscript – including one from 1968.

Some analysts outside CBS say they believe the typeface on these memos is New Times Roman, which they claim was not available in the 1970s.

But the owner of the company that distributes this typing style says it has been available since 1931.

Document and handwriting examiner Marcel Matley analyzed the documents for CBS News. He says he believes they are real. But he is concerned about exactly what is being examined by some of the people questioning the documents, because deterioration occurs each time a document is reproduced. And the documents being analyzed outside of CBS have been photocopied, faxed, scanned and downloaded, and are far removed from the documents CBS started with.

Matley did this interview with us prior to Wednesday's "60 Minutes" broadcast. He looked at the documents and the signatures of Col. Killian, comparing known documents with the colonel's signature on the newly discovered ones.

"We look basically at what's called significant or insignificant features to determine whether it's the same person or not," Matley said. "I have no problem identifying them. I would say based on our available handwriting evidence, yes, this is the same person."

Matley finds the signatures to be some of the most compelling evidence.

Reached Friday by satellite, Matley said, "Since it is represented that some of them are definitely his, then we can conclude they are his signatures."


Matley said he's not surprised that questions about the documents have come up.

"I knew going in that this was dynamite one way or the other. And I knew that potentially it could do far more potential damage to me professionally than benefit me," he said. "But we seek the truth. That's what we do. You're supposed to put yourself out, to seek the truth and take what comes from it."

Robert Strong was an administrative officer for the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam years. He knew Jerry Killian, the man credited with writing the documents. And paper work, like these documents, was Strong's specialty. He is standing by his judgment that the documents are real.

"They are compatible with the way business was done at that time," Strong said. "They are compatible with the man I remember Jerry Killian being. I don't see anything in the documents that's discordant with what were the times, the situation or the people involved."

Killian died in 1984.

Strong says the highly charged political atmosphere of the National Guard at the time was perfectly represented in the new documents.

"It verged on outright corruption in terms of the favors that were done, the power that was traded. And it was unconscionable from a moral and ethical standpoint. It was unconscionable," Strong said.

The president's service record emerged as an issue during the 2000 race and again this winter. The Killian documents revived the issue of Mr. Bush's time in uniform after weeks in which Democratic challenger John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, has faced questions over his record as a Navy officer and an anti-war protester.

The questions about Mr. Bush's service center on how Mr. Bush got into the Guard and whether he fulfilled his duties during a period from mid-1972 to mid-1973.

What the Killian memos purport to show is that Mr. Bush defied a direct order to appear for a physical exam, that his performance as an officer was lacking in other ways and that Mr. Bush used family connections to try to quash any inquiry into his lapses.

In a separate revelation, the Boston Globe this week reported that Mr. Bush promised to sign up with a Boston-area unit when he left his Texas unit in 1973 to attend Harvard Business School. Mr. Bush never signed up with a Boston unit.

©MMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

CBSnews (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml)

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 08:11 PM
Sounds like its legit. CBS did its homework. The critics apparently did not.


Oh get fucking real. CBS claims they got these documents out of the blue and of course they are sitting on the "originals" which of course the "critics" don't have access to. CBS offered very little in the way of an honest and fair assessment of those documents.

Lest we forget they had Kerry fundraiser Ben Barnes making an accusation against Bush with only himself as the source.



Reached Friday by satellite, Matley said, "Since it is represented that some of them are definitely his, then we can conclude they are his signatures."

Oh of course. Since these are supposed to be his documents and well, because I think the signature looks like his it must be his.

And again, this means very little if true. But the bias exhibited by CBS News in this report (why won't they offer to have other experts authenticate the original documents? where was the interview of Killian's son? Killian's wife? Mr. Martin?) clearly shows that it is little more than a mouthpiece of the DNC and the Kerry campaign.

DeSPURado
09-10-2004, 08:15 PM
CBS claims they got these documents out of the blue and of course they are sitting on the "originals"

Wrong they got them from the pentagon.

If they have only one original how are they supposed to distribute it? Some Bush supporter would gladly destroy the documents. Besides its only a matter of time before they distribute them. They probably needed to reverify them in the last 24 hours.

Keep trying.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 08:17 PM
So what do the "critics" have to say? How dare they question the mighty Dan Rather and his one sided view of the news!

qando.net/archives/004070.htm (http://qando.net/archives/004070.htm)




A compendium of the Evidence
Posted by Dale Franks

The blogosphere has been all over the CBS documents, but all the information is parceled out in penny packets all over the place. At the request of a reader, I thought I'd try to consolidate them into a single post. This is not canonical, of course, just the stuff I know about.

Typographical Arguments

The use of superscripted "th" in unit names, e.g. 187th. This was a highly unusual feature, available only on extremely expensive typewriters at the time.

The use of proportional fonts was, similarly, restricted to a small number of high-end typewriters.

The text of the memos appear to use letter kerning, a physical impossibility for any typewriter at the time.

Apostrophes in the documents use curled serifs. Typewriters used straight hash marks for both quotation marks and apostrophes.

The font appears indistinguishable from the Times New Roman computer font. While the Times Roman and Times fonts were rare, but available, in some typewriters at the time, the letters in Times Roman and Times took up more horizontal space than Times New Roman does. Times New Roman is exclusively a computer font.

Reproductions of the memos in Microsoft Word using 12pt TNR and the default Word page setup are indistinguishable from the memos when superimposed.

The typed squadron letterhead is centered on the page, an extremely difficult operation to perform manually.

Several highly reputable forensic document specialists have publicly stated their opinions that the documents were most likely computer generated, and hence, are forgeries.

The numeral 4 has no "foot" serif and a closed top. This is indicative of the Times New Roman Font, used exclusively by computers.


Stylistic Arguments

The memos do not use the proper USAF letterhead, in required use since 1948. Instead they are typed. In general, typed letterhead is restricted to computer-generated orders, which were usually printed by teletype, chain printer or daisy-wheel printer, the latter looking like a typed letter. Manually typed correspondence is supposed to use official USAF letterhead. However, even special orders, which used a typed letterhead, were required to use ALL CAPS in the letterhead.

The typed Letterhead gives the address as "Houston, Texas". The standard formulation for addresses at USAF installations should require the address to read "Ellington AFB, Texas".

Killian's signature block should read:

RICHARD B. KILLIAN, Lt Col, TexANG
Commander

This is the required USAF formulation for a signature block.

Lt Col Killian's signature should be aligned to the left side of the page. Indented signature blocks are not a USAF standard.

The rank abbreviations are applied inconsistently and incorrectly, for example the use of periods in USAF rank abbreviations is incorrect. The modern formulation for rank abbreviations for the lieutenant grades in the USAF is 2Lt and 1Lt. In 1973, it may well have been 2nd Lt and 1st Lt, but that certainly wasn't correct in 1984, when I entered active duty, so I find the rank abbreviation questionable, and, in any event, they would not have included periods. Lt Col Killian's abbreviations are pretty much universally incorrect in the memos.

The unit name abbreviations use periods. This is incorrect. USAF unit abbreviations use only capital letters with no periods. For example, 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron would be abbreviated as 111th FIS, not 111th F.I.S.
The Formulation used in the memos, i.e., "MEMORANDOM FOR 1st Lt. Bush..." is incorrect. A memo would be written on plain (non-letterhead) paper, with the top line reading "MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD".

An order from a superior, directing a junior to perform a specific task would not be in the memorandum format as presented. Instead, it would use the USAF standard internal memo format, as follows:

FROM: Lt Col Killian, Richard B.

SUBJECT: Annual Physical Examination (Flight)

TO: 1Lt Bush, George W.

Documents that are titled as MEMORANDUM are used only for file purposes, and not for communications.

The memos use the formulation "...in accordance with (IAW)..." The abbreviation IAW is a universal abbreviation in the USAF, hence it is not spelled out, rather it is used for no other reason than to eliminate the word "in accordance with" from official communications. There are several such universal abbreviation, such as NLT for "no later than".

The title of one of the memos is CYA, a popular euphemism for covering one's...ahem...posterior. It is doubtful that any serving officer would use such a colloquialism in any document that might come under official scrutiny.


Personal Arguments

The records purport to be from Lt Col Killian's "personal files", yet, they were not obtained from his family, but through some unknown 3rd party. It is an odd kind of "personal file" when the family of a deceased person is unaware of the file's existence and it is not in their possession.

Both Lt Col Killian's wife and son, as well as the EAFB personnel officer do not find the memos credible.

Keeping such derogatory personal memos , while at the same time, writing glowing OERs for Mr. Bush would be unwise for any officer. At best, it would raise serious questions about why his private judgments differed so radically from his official ones, should they ever come to light. At worst, they would raise questions about whether Lt Col Killian falsified official documents. As Lt Col Killian's son, himself a retired USAF officer, has said, nothing good can come of keeping such files.

The reasons above constitute a very reasonable basis for serious questions about the legitimacy of the memos distributed by CBS. In light oif them, it seems to me that CBS has a positive duty to disclose as much information about the provenance and authenticity of the memos as possible. So far, their response has been, "We think they're true, so do not question us!" That is an understandable reaction, and, indeed, it's much the same as that of the German magazine Stern, when it claimed to have found Adolph Hitler's diaries in the 1980s.

It is not a helpful response, however, and it indicates that CBS is, at this point, far more interested in performing CYA operations than it is in getting to the bottom of these questions.

Tommy Duncan
09-10-2004, 08:22 PM
Wrong they got them from the pentagon.

Wrong. They got them from his "personal file." Funny the family doesn't recall such a thing.




If they have only one original how are they supposed to distribute it? Some Bush supporter would gladly destroy the documents.

Oh get real there are ways to get a second and third opinon without risking damage to the originals. After all this is so important!




Besides its only a matter of time before they distribute them. They probably needed to reverify them in the last 24 hours.

THEY DIDN'T. Who provided the second opinions?




Keep trying.

If anyone is trying to argue against reality 'tis you. I mean if you really believe CBS' one sided bullshit reporting you need some help.

Tommy Duncan
09-11-2004, 01:02 AM
So much for Hodges...

abcnews.go.com/sections/p...d_Now.html (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/NotedNow/Noted_Now.html)


HODGES SAID HE WAS MISLED BY CBS: Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Grd, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were "handwritten" and after CBS read him excerpts he said, "well if he wrote them that's what he felt."

Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been "computer generated" and are a "fraud".


But...but...but...

DeSPURado
09-11-2004, 01:04 AM
Wrong. They got them from his "personal file." Funny the family doesn't recall such a thing.

You are misinformed they got it from the Lt Cols files in millitary possesion, not some personal files he kept at home. They were in a file of records. Exactly where you would expect to find such a thing.

Still going on about the "th" thing? Really?

And you're still ignoring the fact that there is a major general who was an eyewitness to these docs.

Tommy Duncan
09-11-2004, 01:06 AM
Keep wishing. This thing is so over and you got your dick hard over nothing.

L8rs.

DeSPURado
09-11-2004, 01:09 AM
Right. I thought you said the last 5 times AWOL came up?

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 01:11 AM
I think Dan Rather is senile and that DeSPURate is his nephew.

DeSPURado
09-11-2004, 01:14 AM
Why is this the only multi-word quote from Hodges?

"well if he wrote them that's what he felt."

Still no denial from the WH either? Their silence is deafening.

DeSPURado
09-11-2004, 01:28 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/rush22/memosfaked_final_short.gif

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-11-2004, 01:57 AM
Why would the WH have to issue a denial?

This thing is blowing up in the face of CBS and the Demoncrats, and all they have to do is sit back and watch it.

The public backlash is going to give Bush an even bigger boost. Hell, it might put the nail in Kerry's coffin if it is determined that CBS forged documents to attack Bush, especially if it can in anyway be traced back to the Democratic party (which seems to already be happening).

In short, the WH is smart for keeping its collective mouth shut on this, CBS might drop the election right in Bush's lap without the WH even commenting on it.

Spurminator
09-11-2004, 02:04 AM
These are cute little GIFs you're showing us, DeSPURado, but i wonder if you've ever seen the deterioration caused by copy and fax machines. It's often more drastic that the difference shown in your pictures.

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 11:02 AM
Nice GIF DeSPURate...what's it show?

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 12:38 PM
...uncle?


More challenges about whether Bush documents are authentic (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationalpolitics/2002032742_bushguard11.html)

By Pete Slover
The Dallas Morning News

AUSTIN, Texas — The man named in a disputed memo as exerting pressure to "sugarcoat" George W. Bush's military record left the Texas Air National Guard a year and a half before the memo supposedly was written, his service record shows.

An order obtained by The Dallas Morning News shows that Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt was honorably discharged March 1, 1972. CBS News reported this week that a memo in which Staudt was described as interfering with officers' negative evaluations of the future president's service was dated Aug. 18, 1973.

<There's More>

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 12:57 PM
Then there's this. No only is Ratherbiased's "expert," and expert in handwriting -- not typography -- he's apparently a rather unethical one:


The Expert Ambush (http://expertpages.com/news/expert_ambush.htm)
How to hold off your opponent until the cavalry arrives.
RATHERBIASED'S EXPERT>>By: Marcel Matley<<RATHERBIASED'S EXPERT
Excerpt:

"The expert ambush need not be a handwriting expert [<< or a typography expert -Y.]; it could be any kind of expert. Since I know about handwriting, I will use it to illustrate how to hold out until you can call in your own expert trooper, of whatever brand expert. Not being an attorney, I cannot tell you about laws and rules, only about techniques for taking the upper hand over the expert who knows it all, while you know nothing at all about that expertise."

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 01:00 PM
And this:



HODGES SAID HE WAS MISLED BY CBS (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/NotedNow/Noted_Now.html)

"Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Grd, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were 'handwritten' and after CBS read him excerpts he said, 'well if he wrote them that's what he felt.'"

"Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been 'computer generated' and are a 'fraud'."
Oooops, messy journalism there, Dan.

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 01:05 PM
And, let's not forget Amy Barnes calling her dad a liar on the radio:


AUDIO - Daughter of Ben Barnes Disputes Father's Claims as Political (http://www.wbap.com/listingsentryheadline.asp?ID=239369&PT=wbaptopstories)

CROWLEY: "So, I hate to put you in this position, but I will ask you, do you think your father, Ben Barnes who was on '60 Minutes II' with Dan Rather last night – do you believe that he lied on the air to the American people last night about President Bush?"

BARNES: "Yes, I do. I absolutely do. And I think he's doing he's doing it for purely political, opportunistic reasons – trying to get John Kerry elected and trying to make Bush look like the bad person. ... Like I said, he's going to be trying to promote his book that he's got coming out."

So, Dan, you keep talking about fonts and superscripts and such. We'll just watch Dan Rather's career and John Kerry's Presidential campaign go down in flames.

Mind if I call you Nero from here out?

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 02:29 PM
Wait! There's more.

Apparently, Dan nixed airing an interview with the President's roommate at the time because, it didn't fit the "template." He was too "Pro-Bush."

No, there's no agenda here...



'60 Minutes': Witness Who Contradicted Forged Docs Was Too 'Pro-Bush' (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/11/100726.shtml)

In addition to challenging the central premise of the CBS report - that his father felt pressured to cover up Bush's allegedly sub par Guard performance - Gary Killian urged ['60 Minutes producer Mary] Mapes to interview Dean Roome, who roomed with Bush during his time in the Guard.

Ms. Mapes explained that "60 Minutes" had already conducted the interview, but was unlikely to include Roome's account in their report, telling Killian Jr.: "We think he is pretty pro-Bush."

Killian detailed his interview with Mapes to ABC radio host Sean Hannity on Friday, explaining that both he and his stepmother had been contacted by "60 Minutes."

But like Roome, their comments wound up on the cutting room floor.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-11-2004, 04:00 PM
How can this be, I thought there was a conservative slant in the media.

Or at least that's what Nbadunce tells me.

:rollin

Yonivore
09-11-2004, 11:56 PM
Killian Memo Has Wrong Deadline, Cites Wrong Regulation (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3833)

Still waiting to hear from DeSPURate or Nbadan on these issues.

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-12-2004, 02:20 AM
Well, like a typical liberal, when the going gets tough they change the topic.

I can't figure out what it's gonna be though...

1. Bush invaded Iraq for oil.
2. It wasn't AQ on 9/11, it was a WH conspiracy
3. Bush smoked weed when he was young.
4. [insert new Michael Moore film here]

Nbadan
09-12-2004, 08:01 AM
So, Dan, you keep talking about fonts and superscripts and such. We'll just watch Dan Rather's career and John Kerry's Presidential campaign go down in flames.

The truth is always the best cleanser of scoundrels and weasels, and eventually the truth will be told...

Looks like Bouffard now knows the truth...


After CBS News on Wednesday trumpeted newly discovered documents that referred to a 1973 effort to ''sugar coat" President Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard, the network almost immediately faced charges that the documents were forgeries, with typography that was not available on typewriters used at that time.

But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant.

(SNIP)

Bouffard, the Ohio document specialist, said that he had dismissed the Bush documents in an interview with The New York Times because the letters and formatting of the Bush memos did not match any of the 4,000 samples in his database. But Bouffard yesterday said that he had not considered one of the machines whose type is not logged in his database: the IBM Selectric Composer. Once he compared the Bush memos to Selectric Composer samples obtained from Interpol, the international police agency, Bouffard said his view shifted.

Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/11/authenticity_backed_on_bush_documents)

Nbadan
09-12-2004, 08:09 AM
And, let's not forget Amy Barnes calling her dad a liar on the radio:

Let's consider other quotes by Ms. Barnes. on the Sean Insannity show, not surpringly, less than 48 hours after Ben Barnes made his allegations against W on 60 minutes

"I am a avid Bush Supporter"

"I love Bush so much, I can't hardly see straight, always have always will"

"I was only 6 years old when my dad first mentioned George Bush"

"I voted for Bush in 2000"

and on and on and on...

:rolleyes

yeah, no bias there from Ms. Barnes

Nbadan
09-12-2004, 08:18 AM
Apparently, Dan nixed airing an interview with the President's roommate at the time because, it didn't fit the "template." He was too "Pro-Bush."

:lol

Yeah, and Killian's fast turnaround on the Sean Insanity show did nothing to dispel the speculation that he, and most likely Roome were busy planning to play partisan politics with this whole issue about already vetted documents. I'm telling you, there's no better way to shoot your credibility down the crapper than to appear on that show, not surprisingly, the only national show he and Ms. Barnes have appear on (and on the same day), after all, we all know how Sean throws softballs to his 'Great American' guests.

Yonivore
09-12-2004, 09:50 AM
Nice.

I thought you'd stay with fonts and superscripts.

And Amy Barnes never told a contradictory story under oath.

You're speculating about Roome.

What about the handwriting expert?

Nbadan
09-12-2004, 06:12 PM
HERE’S “INSIDE SKINNY” ON THE RATHER-BUSH/GOP SMACKDOWN!

Dan Rather is a Texas native. He was born and raised outside Houston and then after completing college, cut his television journalist teeth at a National network station in Houston.

He took on the Bush Family "Texas Mafia"(BFTM) several times in the early 70's, and this current situation is more of the "blood feud" between he and H.W. Bush. Dan Rather is very solid, a real pro, first-class credibility (unlike those flake GOP-ops reporters at Fox), and will NOT back down from a deal that he knows he is right. I/we have never seen Dan do it once in 35 years!

The Bush Family Texas Mafia (BFTM) tries to destroy anyone that takes them on, hell just look at their damn track record. You all know this!

More importantly, we will make some phone calls on this deal, and in particular if CBS “60 Minutes” has something cooking to bag the BFTM on several matters we are aware. We keep hearing "little things" on this subject, plus the Washington Post has been digging on this next deal for over a year.

It has to do with the Bush Family corruption, documents the Fed accidentally discovered at Enron (which was a Bush Family business "front operation"), and Bush's "War Dog" House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (Houston) being under a massive Texas criminal grand jury investigation, for fraud, bribery, extortion, money laundering, and criminal abuse of his political office.

The big kicker is Bob “$200,000 donor to O’Neill’s SBVT” Perry (Houston) is involved with DeLay in his criminal enterprise and we mean BIG TIME! Also eleven (11) other BFTM members are involved, in varying degree, including the Texas Governor and other ranking elected State officials, and many of them could go to jail over this deal.

The BFTM is doing everything possible to keep the lid on it, and also get W elected. BFTM needs W elected so he can do Presidential Pardons for BFTM Enron buddies, (Ken Lay), DeLay, Perry, and others that get convicted and sent to prison over this massive criminal enterprise.

That in a nutshell is what’s going on with all the Bush-Cheney-GOP totally outright fraud in their campaign. They don’t have a platform to run on, so the con and fraud game is all they got!

They are going nuts because Rather stuck his nose in it. If you recall Dan Rather has stayed pretty neutral in his reporting on the O’Neill-SBVT fraud scam. We know, what I just delineated, because we are well connected Republicans, have several influential Houstonians in our “Beat Bush” cartel, along with two Houston criminal attorney’s – NKR

PS: It should be noted that CBS is owned by Viacom. 70-75% of campaign donations by Viacom (VIA) executives and its political action committee, have gone to the Democratic Party and its candidates. Just some interest info, nothing else!


Email Special Thank You to Dan Rather: [email protected] ([email protected])
CBS Evening News with Dan Rather
524 West 57th St.
New York, NY

Yonivore
09-12-2004, 06:20 PM
So, it's nice to know we have a vendetta-seeking asshole masquerading as an objective journalist.

Surely, his zeal for a negative story wouldn't cause him to fudge the facts or jump to conclusions or supress exculpatory information...nah.

I noticed they talked about Perry and his $200,000 donation to the Swiftees who, spent about $500,000 punching holes in the U.S.S. Lying Kerry.

But, has anyone said anything, in the mainstream media, about this Soros character giving over $5,000,000 to MoveOn.org, and organization that has spent about $10,000,000 bashing Bush, without affect?

Nbadan
09-12-2004, 06:25 PM
New Killian memos have also surfaced that support CBS's story..

New CBS Documents (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-09-09bushdocs.pdf)

Document 5 is the kicker.

Yonivore
09-12-2004, 06:27 PM
I'm betting they've hired a new forger with a better product.

Yonivore
09-12-2004, 06:37 PM
CBS Won't Deny Kerry Link to Forged Docs (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/12/102130.shtml)

Ruh Roh, Rastro!

Yonivore
09-12-2004, 06:40 PM
Texas Guard Director: '60 Minutes' Doc 'Forged as Hell' (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/12/113209.shtml)

They should have, maybe, consulted with some document experts before they created them, huh?

Yonivore
09-12-2004, 06:44 PM
Only One Expert Sided With '60 Minutes' (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/12/73008.shtml)

Well, make that three 'experts', with DeSPURate and Nbadan.

Tommy Duncan
09-12-2004, 08:56 PM
:lol

The fucking morons are still arguing that the memos are not fakes?

Everything will be ok kiddies :baby

Hook Dem
09-12-2004, 11:17 PM
It paints the picture of Demoncrats swimming in shit screaming..."we're ahead. we're ahead":rollin

Aggie Hoopsfan
09-13-2004, 12:01 AM
Dan, the guy was freakin' retired when they say this was written.

Give it up already.

Yonivore
09-13-2004, 12:24 PM
...for this fire.

http://boortz.com/images/funny/091304_rather_memo.gif

From Neal Boortz, this morning:

"All CBS had to do to make the case that these documents were real was to come up with a typewriter capable of producing these documents in 1973. Oh ... and it has to be a typewriter that one could reasonably expect a National Guard Lt. Colonel who doesn't type might have available for his use. So, Saturday night CBS did just that. They came out with a report that the IBM Selectric Composer could produce the type and the effects that were found on Killian's memos. The Boston Globe also reported Saturday that their document expert said that the documents could have been composed on an IBM Selectric Composer which was available at the time the documents were written. U.S. News & World Report is getting in on the action by referring to an 'IBM Selectric Composer typewriter which [was] commonly used in 1972.z'"

"Not so fast. Even though CBS referred to the IBM Selectric Composer as a 'typewriter,' that's like referring to a Mont Blanc as a 'ballpoint.' Just do a little Googling with the words 'IBM Selectric Composer' and you'll find that it isn't just a 'typewriter,' it's a typesetting machine. It was used to produce justified camera-ready copy for publications. The price for this machine in the early 1970's was from $3,500 to $4,500 dollars. In 2004 dollars that would be from $16,000 to $22,000. If you want to believe that a National Guard Lt. Col. typed memos in 1973 on a 'typewriter' with an equivalent cost of $20,000, you go ahead. You should know, however, that the Air National Guard, then and now, generally receives much of its equipment as hand-me-downs from the Air Force."

"CBS, the Boston Globe and other media outlets have a problem. They are institutionally dedicated to the idea of doing everything they can get away with to make sure that George Bush is defeated in November and that John Kerry becomes the 44th president of the United States. 60 Minutes, which, by the way, has quite a history of using false and forged documents in its stories, apparently has done so again. Dan Rather and his associates know that if CBS steps forward and admits that it was duped, that they used faked and forged documents in a story designed to attack the credibility of George Bush, the assumption is going to be that those documents came from the Kerry campaign. Now I know of no evidence whatsoever that Kerry or his campaign staff was behind these forged documents, but millions of Americans, Americans who may now be on the electoral fence, are going to think that's the case. How, then, does CBS come forward and admit that they were duped without creating a backlash against Kerry?

"I suspect that they're working on that problem at this very moment."
Okay, I think that'll burn through the night...

What do you think Nbadanallah? How 'bout you DeSPURate?
http://www.ibmcomposer.org/SelComposer/images/ComposerBrochurePic.jpg
About $20,000 in today's dollars.

Tommy Duncan
09-13-2004, 01:33 PM
Does that price include MS Office 2003?

Yonivore
09-13-2004, 01:42 PM
Well, what do you know, there's an IBM Selectric Composer expert with a website:

Have fun guys!


The IBM Selectric Composer (http://ibmcomposer.org/)

Too bad Dan didn't consult with him first.

Nbadan
09-13-2004, 05:41 PM
We live in a world of $600 dollar per toilet seats and you think two lietenant colonels can't invoice the purchase of a $2,000 typesetter? I don't know if the CBS documents are forged or not, I suspect we will never truely know, however the point that the documents make is very clear, Hodges even agreed that 'this was the feeling expressed to him by Killian to him at the time'. W. skirted his duty in the Alabama national guard in 1973.

The key to this whole fiasco is Albert c. Lloyd Jr.. He is former personal director for the Texas Air National guard who certified W. as having accumalated 56 sevice points between May 1972 and May 1973. W. got those 56 points by accumalating 41 points appearing for duty for for only 25 days and received 15 "gratuitous" points for being in the military.


The document shows he satisfactorily completed his military obligation for that year," Lloyd said

Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/02/10/bush_credited_for_guard_drills/)

However, the documents also show that W's commanders were concerned that no one had seen W. in Alabama, most pilots accumalated well over 56 yearly points and the U.S. government did spend $1 million dollars teaching W. how to fly, so they called him to duty in May, June, and July. W. never showed in June and July.


Other records, which were disclosed four years ago, show that Bush was ordered to appear for a flurry of duty days in May, June, and July 1973 -- orders that Lloyd said in 2000 may have been issued because Bush's commanders realized he had not been fulfilling his requirements. The records obtained yesterday indicate that Bush would not have made his minimum for that year but for seven days of duty in May 1973.

His final duty day was on July 30, 1973, even though he signed a commitment to fly for the unit until November 1974.

Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/02/10/bush_credited_for_guard_drills/)

According to military rules, W. could have been activated for duty in Vietnam, but knowing that the war was winding down, and many other pilots where doing the same thing W. probably didn't think much about skirting the rest of his Air Guard commitment.

Tommy Duncan
09-13-2004, 05:48 PM
Nbadan chooses to go down with the ship.

Yonivore
09-13-2004, 06:43 PM
Gotta give 'im credit for loyalty.

Nbadan
09-13-2004, 07:06 PM
The W. ship is springing leaks all over the place, and Rove and G.H.W.Bush are having trouble holding the boat together...


A review of President Bush's Guard years raises issues about the time he served
By Kit R. Roane

Last February, White House spokesman Scott McClellan held aloft sections of President Bush's military record, declaring to the waiting press that the files "clearly document the president fulfilling his duties in the National Guard." Case closed, he said.

But last week the controversy reared up once again, as several news outlets, including U.S. News, disclosed new information casting doubt on White House claims.

A review of the regulations governing Bush's Guard service during the Vietnam War shows that the White House used an inappropriate--and less stringent--Air Force standard in determining that he had fulfilled his duty. Because Bush signed a six-year "military service obligation," he was required to attend at least 44 inactive-duty training drills each fiscal year beginning July 1. But Bush's own records show that he fell short of that requirement, attending only 36 drills in the 1972-73 period, and only 12 in the 1973-74 period. The White House has said that Bush's service should be calculated using 12-month periods beginning on his induction date in May 1968. Using this time frame, however, Bush still fails the Air Force obligation standard.

Moreover, White House officials say, Bush should be judged on whether he attended enough drills to count toward retirement. They say he accumulated sufficient points under this grading system. Yet, even using their method, which some military experts say is incorrect, U.S. News 's analysis shows that Bush once again fell short. His military records reveal that he failed to attend enough active-duty training and weekend drills to gain the 50 points necessary to count his final year toward retirement.

The U.S. News analysis also showed that during the final two years of his obligation, Bush did not comply with Air Force regulations that impose a time limit on making up missed drills. What's more, he apparently never made up five months of drills he missed in 1972, contrary to assertions by the administration. White House officials did not respond to the analysis last week but emphasized that Bush had "served honorably."

U.S. News (http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/040920/usnews/20guard.htm)

Yonivore
09-13-2004, 07:13 PM
But, you see Nbadanallah, people (other than extreme partisans) have to care...and, quite frankly, they don't.

Nbadan
09-14-2004, 06:38 AM
http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040910/nick.jpg