For the FSP Flat Earth Society/(aka Lefty nutjob meltdown)

[travis2]

Oh please... Cousin of a friend of the best man of a stepbrother of a...

Is that the best you can do?

Game, set, match.

[DeSPURado]

You don't refute it?

this is backed up in the USnews report by the way:

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 ac ulated 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."

Some experts say they remain mystified as to how Bush obtained an honorable discharge. Lawrence Korb, a former top Defense Department official in the Reagan administration, says the military records clearly show that Bush "had not fulfilled his obligation" and "should have been called to active duty."

USnews

[travis2]

I already have with my original post. You're just making things up as you go along...I have legitimate sources.

As much as I enjoy knocking down your strawmen...I actually have a job to do. And I must go to it.

[DeSPURado]

US news isn't legit?

Again you're source wasn't sited. No link. It only reffered to people retiring. I don't know how you consider that to be proof. I can site a friend just as legitimately as you can an unreferenced quote.

[travis2]

a) You didn't have your article posted when I replied. I don't have time to read it now, have to go...I'll read it later.

b) my source: www.ngbpdc.ngb.army.mil/p...362001.pdf

[DeSPURado]

Your source specifically says for retirement purposes only. Thats not the same as an early discharge. It also talks about a 1 year limitation on that requirement as well, and a maximum of four make ups per year. I think I am right about this, and both of which were not what Bush did.

6.6. Equivalent Training (EQT). A member may be allowed to make up a UTA that was missed even if the UTA was
missed without prior approval. EQTs can be performed in a pay status for excused absences and in a non pay status
(retirement points only) for unexcused absences.

6.6.1. Commanders may allow individuals to make up a maximum of four missed UTA periods in a paid EQT status per
fiscal year [U.S.C. le 37, Section 206(e)]. An EQT in a pay status must be performed within 30 calendar days of the
missed scheduled UTA period and within the same fiscal year.

6.6.2. An EQT period without pay (for retirement points only) may be performed outside of 30 calendar days of the
missed scheduled UTA period but within the member's anniversary year. UTAs performed in a non-pay status will
be do ented on NGB Form 105m/s or a locally subs uted form, held separately from attendance records for UTAs
in a pay status, and forwarded directly to MPF.

6.6.3. The training received during an EQT must be of similar nature and quality to that which was missed. EQT will
be appropriate to and enhance ability of the individual to accomplish the duties of the position to which he or she is
assigned. In the case of staff or support personnel, this may include actions to enhance the training, management, or
readiness of the unit.

[Tommy Duncan]

news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=...ure_deaths

Trial Begins for Farmer in Manure Deaths

Tue Sep 14,12:17 AM ET

By JULIANA BARBASSA, Associated Press Writer

MERCED, Calif. - The deaths of two dairy workers who were asphyxiated by gases rising from a fetid stew of cow manure could have been prevented if the farmer responsible for their safety had given them the proper training and equipment, prosecutors said Monday during opening statements in a case against the farmer.


Patrick Joseph Faria, from the small farming town of Gustine, has been charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the 2001 deaths of Enrique Araisa and Jose Alatorre.


Prosecutors said Faria failed his workers in a number of ways, including failing to warn the employees of the manure pit's danger and to train them on how to enter. They also said he gave them no equipment, no protection, and no way to test the air.


In a brief response to the prosecution, defense attorney Kirk McCallister said that the incident was clearly a tragedy, but the question jurors were being asked to answer was whether a crime was committed.


McCallister said that when the two men fell into the pit, "Mr. Faria was about 90 miles away, driving to San Francisco airport."


Alatorre, 24, was the first to squeeze through a narrow opening of the 40-foot pit to unclog a pipe. From the pitch-black bottom, he yelled up to two other worker, saying the air wasn't good. He tried to climb out, but was overcome by the toxic gases, fell into the liquid waste and drowned.


The wastewater "was inside his nose. He gulped it. It was inside his lungs," said prosecutor Gloria Mas.


Araisa, 29, scrambled down to help Alatorre, but as he neared the bottom, he lost consciousness and fell.


"They both died of asphyxiation," said Mas, quickly flashing the gruesome images of the men's bodies on a large screen before the jurors.


Mas argued that Faria, who as a volunteer firefighter had been trained in the particular dangers posed by confined areas, knew that hydrogen sulfide, a gas frequently found in underground spaces, could be deadly.


The farm's Injury and Illness Prevention Plan specifically mentioned the manure pit as an area of concern and Faria as the safety manager on site, Mas said.


"Mr. Faria was supposed to protect these individuals, and he didn't," said Mas.

[Tommy Duncan]

CBS represented Matley as an expert who authenticated those do ents originally. So my point still stands. And again, as the Kurtz article pointed out, the CBS memos did not come from the Pentagon. If they did CBS most certainly at this point would have stated that in order to cover their ass.

You missed the point. Again.

The Kurtz article explains that the CBS do ents were not the ones which were released by the Pentagon this week through the FOIA request. Instead it says that CBS had the docs for a month and obtained them from an "individual." Probably Moore or Burkett, though Kurtz doesn't name them. If CBS obtained them through a Pentagon release then they would have stated that. Doing so would have lent a greater credibility to the story. Instead CBS continues to refuse to name the source for the docs. If they were really obtained through a FOIA request then there is really nothing to hide. If you believe in ed up conspiracy theories well then the Bush administration can find out who obtained them regardless if CBS actually says they "came from the Pentagon" or not. More than likely it is Burkett. He is the one with an axe to grind and he is certainly one who 'is familiar with TANG operations' or whatever.

So there you have it. You were wrong.

As for your quote thanks for providing no link. The problem you have is that virtually every other expert who has examined those docs believes they are fakes and now you even have the CBS expert changing their story and saying he can't authenticate them.

Mad? Nah. Just tired of your lame arguments. I'm sure I am not the only one with that sentiment in this forum.

[Tommy Duncan]

www.splendoroftruth.com/c...005093.php

MS Forger



Introducing a new product in our Office line called Microsoft Forger. We have been copying other peoples software ideas for years, so who is better to provide you with a product that imitates other peoples style and signature. Microsoft Forger is the ultimate product for pundit-proof forgery.



Even if you are just getting into forgery or are an old hand, this product will deliver all the power that you need to turn out credible do ents with little or no effort.

Just look at some of the incredible features included.

Output machine selection - Select from a variety of emulators for everything from manual typewriters, IBM Selectrics, early model word processors such as Wang and many others.

Font selection - Once you have selected the machine type, font selection is limited to only those fonts actually available for that machine. No longer will you make stupid mistakes like selecting Times New Roman for memorandum that were suppose to be typed on a IBM Selectric.

Proportional fonts and kerning - Again options are limited by machine type

Key emulation - Only those keys actually on the selected machine type are activated. Special features such as subscript and superscript will appear only as that machine would have outputted it. Some extremely amateur forgers have actually used features such as reduced font sized superscript "th" in do ents that were suppose to have been from a normal typewriter. Our product will prevent such simple mistakes.

Copy machine emulation - Before you print out your do ent you can have it automatically appear to have been run through a copy or fax machine multiple times. Lettering will look aged and blurred with random specks according to our specialized algorithm.

Margins and do ent centering - Each do ent created is slightly different to account for the non-exact centering of manual machines and the variance of paper feeds. Nobody will be able to overlay your forgery with his own created forgery and have them exactly line up.

Correction emulation - If your output type is for a device such as a typewriter you also need proper correction emulation since these do ents were rarely perfect. Special effects such as type over, white out smudges, or coffee stains can be selectively applied.

Signature scanning - Scan in a signature from a record in the pubic domain and MS Forger will automatically store it in a vector signature file for use in adding to your do ent. The signature scanner will remove artifacts such as lettering found underneath the signature scan.

Add-Ons - There are many specialized add-ons that can be used depending on your do ent forgery needs. For a limited time only when you buy Microsoft Forger we will include the Texas National Guard Memorandum (TNGM) add-on for free.

Here are just some of the features of the TNGM add-on.

Military style dates. Date headers are automatically formatted to day - capitalized three letter month - two digit year.
Subject lines. Automatically uppercased as this is the standard for military memorandums.

Rank selector. Select from the service and the rank for the individual who you are forging. This is especially helpful for those who the closes they have been to the military is when they protested outside the gate. Prevents mistakes in the abbreviations used in military rank.

Unit selector. Select from a list of guard units with the option to use their letterhead.

Command database. Our command database includes all officers and the times they served in the Texas National

Guard. The selections are limited to the date used at the top of the memorandum. This ensures you won't have the do ent addressed to someone that had retired a year and a half before your do ent date.

Accreditation - Our do ents have been accredited as undetectable by the National Organization of Forensic Do ent Examiners. And we are just not talking CBS's hired experts, but ones that can actually detect forged do ents.

So if you are a Kerry campaign operative or a CBS intern then this is the program for you.

[Yonivore]

"The technology clearly existed."

Actually, DeSPURate, they've tried to reproduce the memos with the technology that "clearly" existed at the time. Guess what, nothing comes close to the reproduction quality of Microsoft Word 2002. Not even close.

Not the IBM Selectric Composer. Not the IBM Executive.

What I want to know is this; when Dan Rather confesses to the ruse and resigns, will you still be maintaining these are authentic do ents? That's the real question.

[Tommy Duncan]

Indeed


Kurtz puts this to rest

"I am personally 100 percent sure that they are fake," said Joseph M. Newcomer, author of several books on Windows programming, who worked on electronic typesetting techniques in the early 1970s. Newcomer said he had produced virtually exact replicas of the CBS do ents using Microsoft Word formatting and the Times New Roman font.

Thomas Phinney, program manager for fonts for the Adobe company in Seattle, which helped to develop the modern Times New Roman font, disputed Glennon's statement to CBS. He said "fairly extensive testing" had convinced him that the fonts and formatting used in the CBS do ents could not have been produced by the most sophisticated IBM typewriters in use in 1972, including the Selectric and the Executive. He said the two systems used fonts of different widths.

But...but...but...put together a thousand monkeys and a thousand Selectrics at Ellington AFB back in 1972 and you could potentially end up with those memos.

Game over. (For those of us in reality).

[Joe Chalupa]

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

What do typographic experts at Adobe, etc. know?

Some liberal flunky on an internet bulletin board sez it's legit, so it must be.

[Nbadan]

match ya expert for expert...

Richard Katz, a computer software expert in Los Angeles who was featured on the "Evening News" segment, said in an interview that he had called his local affiliate, KCBS, after looking at the memos on the CBS Web site after the initial broadcast, when some experts were saying that the memos looked as if they had been composed using the Times New Roman font in Microsoft Word.

Comparing the CBS memos with a replication produced on Microsoft Word, he noticed a slight variation in the boldness of the letters, as there is on many typewritten do ents. "It doesn't look like you can do this very easily," he said. "If you use something like Photoshop you could come close to faking it, but why not just go out and buy a Selectric for $75?"

Bill Glennon, a technology consultant and I.B.M. typewriter specialist who had posted his thoughts on the memos on a blog and was quoted over the weekend in publications including The New York Times, said CBS called him Monday morning. The producer asked him to come in and look at the memorandums and say whether he thought that an I.B.M. typewriter could have produced the do ents. He said he was initially leery of talking. "Because quite honestly there's some people out there, they're scary," he said. "You don't agree with them, you offer opinions that don't jibe with theirs and you get a target on your back."

Mr. Glennon was in charge of service for 1,000 contracts for I.B.M. typewriters for 15 years, starting in late 1972, around the time the memorandums were produced. He spent 15 minutes with the CBS do ents, he said, and believes that they could have been created using the kind of typewriters he worked with at I.B.M.

n.y. times

Target on your back, gez, no wonder so many experts are coming out agreeing with the Bush Junta.

[Tommy Duncan]

Oh good, the typewriter repairman. Glennon was addressed in Kurtz's article:

www.washingtonpost.com/wp...p13_2.html

In its broadcast last night, CBS News produced a new expert, Bill Glennon, an information technology consultant. He said that IBM electric typewriters in use in 1972 could produce superscripts and proportional spacing similar to those used in the disputed do ents.

Any argument to the contrary is "an out-and-out lie," Glennon said in a telephone interview. But Glennon said he is not a do ent expert, could not vouch for the memos' authenticity and only examined them online because CBS did not give him copies when asked to visit the network's offices.

Thomas Phinney, program manager for fonts for the Adobe company in Seattle, which helped to develop the modern Times New Roman font, disputed Glennon's statement to CBS. He said "fairly extensive testing" had convinced him that the fonts and formatting used in the CBS do ents could not have been produced by the most sophisticated IBM typewriters in use in 1972, including the Selectric and the Executive. He said the two systems used fonts of different widths.

The "experts" who are vouching for the authenticity of the do ents are few and far between and have Rather dubious credentials. It takes a bit more than that to prove those do ents are authentic. All CBS and Rather can claim that it is possible that such do ents could have been created which of course is a very weak position to argue from.

Rather and CBS have not "matched" the experts who have stated that the do ents are or are highly likely forgeries.

But go ahead and continue to argue. This thread is destined to be a classic...at your expense.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

So a guy who looks at a do ent, and says he believes it could be legit trumps countless people who have actually physically tried to reproduce the do ent with the same technology?

He also trumps the fact that a MS Word do ent superimposed on the do ent matches up identically?

Ooooooooookay.

[Spurminator]

I would tend to question the objectivity of someone who claims that there could be goons out to get him if he vouches for the authenticity of the do ents... But maybe that's just me.

[Tommy Duncan]

It shouldn't be too hard for CBS to procure some old IBM typewriters and have Glennon prove it could be done.

Actually, it has already been attempted:

shapeofdays.typepad.com/t...lectr.html

[Yonivore]

[DeSPURado]

So there you have it. You were wrong.

As for your quote thanks for providing no link. The problem you have is that virtually every other expert who has examined those docs believes they are fakes and now you even have the CBS expert changing their story and saying he can't authenticate them.

Mad? Nah. Just tired of your lame arguments. I'm sure I am not the only one with that sentiment in this forum.

It was from your own damn article Tommy. The quote with no link was your article you posted it. So much for you ever reading what you yourself post.

[Tommy Duncan]

Oh good, the gift that keeps on giving.

[DeSPURado]

So you acknowledge that you are wrong?

[Yonivore]

Okay, I've missed it if you answered.

DeSPURate, do you believe the CBS memos are forged or not? Yes or no?

I gotta know, it's gnawing at me.

[Tommy Duncan]

I'm not wrong. When will you ever ing admit that you were?

Never, no doubt.

[DeSPURado]

Yoinvore- I don't know whether they are authentic or not. No one has shown me any evidence to think they couldn't have been written in the 70s. If the order to report for a medical exam didn't exist, Why not? He missed it?

Tommy you've been screaming at me for not reading the Kurtz article which specifically said exactly like the CBS original press release that they used Matley to verify only the signature. I am not saying you were wrong about everything. But you were wrong about the nature of how Matley was used. A guy named Strong who knew Killian was used to verify everything else.