Bush AWOL documents fake?

CBS News and Rather are going to look like idiots. But their viewers are already so brainwashed to the left that it won't matter.

Most dems would have no problem forging documents if it meant defeating Bush. The end justifies the means if you are a liberal.

Remember the James Bird ads?

Brand

The CBS boys, bottom to top, would be very acutely aware of 1) the concerted effort by the Bush team to find problems with the documents and 2) the disastrous blow to their reputation that would follow from the documents being shown to be false.

So it follows that they would have gone to extreme levels of caution in verifying.

It may turn out that there has been a forgery, but I agree with you that the chances of that are very slim.

A Lone Voice opines:



Really? Can you site any stastics and/or polls suggesting that?

And really, you honestly believe that CBS and/or the Dems would release these documents without knowing with absolute certainty that they were authentic? And isn't it amazing how just DAYS after their release, these stories of forgery are out in the open.

Thanx to Rove, many Americans were convinced that John McCain was against breast cancer (which, of course, he is not). This is what Rove does, and has done, for years.

This is the most corrupt and secretive administration in modern American history, and it must be exposed. George Prescott Bush funded Hitler's war, George Herbert Walker Bush helped arm Saddam Hussein, and Dumbya is GREAT pals with Saudi Arabia, in which 17 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals.

The Bush's have an intrinsic history of coddling with murderous dictators.

These people are utter bastards. Which makes it amazingly easy to blame this on them.

CBS has high reporting standards and much to lose if they make a mistake.

Therefore everything CBS says is true.

A lovely syllogism, based on false premes yields only bullshit.

Poor old Dan was worn out and hoarse.

The issue is far from dead, still too many questions..... so let whoever can prove they are fake knock themselves out.

Old maybe, but not poor LOL. He's nothing more than a hard left hack for the democrats and if nothing else comes of this I hope it gets him fired.

Beyond that, this is old news and can't hurt President Bush, so I agree...let them knock themselves out proving they're fakes.

oh fooey, you old rightwing military/industrial-complex east-coast Irish fart.

There's no question CBC and 60 Minutes would have much to lose from this if the documents were to be proved forgeries. Your syllogism isn't mine. I said 'highly unlikely' but possible.

For those of you without the intellectual courage to watch Rather this evening, the issue of fake documents has been buried.

Here's what he said:

*Typewriters did have superscript in the '70s.
*Bush ANG records, provided by the White House, have superscript.
*Times New Roman font has been available since 1931.
*Expert Marcel Matley says Killian's signatures on the memos are authentic.
*Robert Strong: the memos reflect Killian's expressed sentiments; the NG admissions procedures were corrupt.
*James Moore: the memos accurately reflect events and questions surrounding Bush's service, based on other known authentic documents.
*James Moore: the White House has not uttered a single word about the authenticity of the memos; they are relying on the blogosphere to create doubt. The White House knows documents are real.
*The story is not solely based on the memos.
*There is no compelling evidence to show that the memos are forgeries.

Would anyone care to discuss the issues raised?

Because you're only beating a dead horse discussing anything else.

Adding that Dan is a bit of a buffoon and really ought to have passed on the frequency when asked.

I will. On the assumption the documents are legit, which is highly probable.

This speaks very clearly to Bush's CHARACTER. With Daddie's help, you get out of the war. With Daddie's help you get cushie instead. With Daddie's help you get to leave your minimal duties and obligations unfulfilled. Then, later, you lie through your teeth about it, and pretend honor. And then, you let your hired poop-throwers chuck their stuff at someone who did enter the war. And you slimely question his patriotism. And you start an unnecessary war, then lie about why you are, and you send kids out to die while standing up and saying "bring it on" when at no risk to self, except in showing the sort of shallow and deceitful and selfish fellow you really are.

There's character for you.

I agreed with you yesterday, bern.

And said a bit more here, also.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying:

Rather says these are the issues; we should disregard what experts are saying, and believe Rather, because he is, well, Dan Rather?

Thanks, but nope. Dan Rather is a Democratic Party hack; he also has invested his reputation in this story. If these documents are found to be forgeries, Rather is going to have his credibility destroyed.

So no, Puffy, these are not the issues. I think the big issue here is what John Kerry knew, and when did he know it!

HaHaHaHa, just kidding...

Actually, I think the issue is whether or not Rather knew these documents were faked, who he received them from, and how/if the DNC coordinated this story with the release of their "Operation Fortunate Son" campaign.

Hey, watch it ! I have a place on the West Coast too.

Will this do, Dookie?




Now, on to Rather's blather.

Lets start with Matley ... the "Expert" brought in by CBS ... OK, he's a handwritimg expert. His credentials in that discipline are eminently satisfactory. It is highly likely Matley could determine the authenticity of a signature, even if the image of that signature had been somewhat degraded by multiple copying. Nowhere in Matley's CV, however, is there any indication of accredidation or expertise in forensic document verification. A genuine signature affixed to an otherwise fraudulent document not only is not uncommon, it is an exceedingly common ploy, one quite often implimented by means of copying either the document or the signature to juxtapose the two appropriately.

Now, the superscript ... sure, certain typewriters of the time had the capability of typing superscripts. While they were not common, there is no reason to exclude the possibility Killian's office had one. However, the smart quotes, the proportional spacing, the kerning, and the line-to-line 13 pitch were not achievable by any contemporary typewriter, and there is no denying the documents at question reproduce perfectly when rendered in Word set to default. Not one independent investigator of whom I so far am aware has been able to duplicate that "coincidence" with any oroiginally typed passage, and there have been several attempts at such posted, no matter what typewriter was used. Along with this, there is the testimony of Killian's widow, son, and commanding officer, indicating Killian wasn't a typist (let alome one accomplished enough to consistently produce documents with no strikeovers or erasures, and with perfect centering, all the while using "special keys"), and wasn't known to keep a sensitive, essentially counter-to-regulations, personal file. This "Bombshell", a file which purportedly surfaced some 20 - plus years following Killian's demise, yet is a file the existence of which was heretofore unknown to Killian's family or to his commanding officer. While Killian was known to jot down handwritten notes on occasion, no one has brought forth any indication any transcriptionist transfered those notes into typed form, nor has anyone said "I took the dictation", nor does any of the documents at question display the initials of the typist, as would be and is common office practice, civilian or military. The date formating on the "Memos" does not conform to military practice, nor does the manner in which the ranks of mentioned individuals is indicated (or even not indicated - stranger yet), things which would be autonomic to the military mind. There's a bit of an eyebrow lifter in each one of those tidbits.

Then there is the paper size; the documents at question appear to have been on 8.5" X 11" standard stationery stock ... at the time, the military, by regulation, used 8.5" x 10" stationery, and, the military being what it is, reams and reams and reams of the stuff was readilly available for no more than the grabbing of some off the shelf in the stores closet. While my personal experience with the military includes shortages, or even running totally out of, some stuff, typing paper was never on the endangered list - you might be cold, tired, wet, or hungry, or even all at once, but nothing stood in the way of paperwork, least of all a shortage of paper. It is unlikely in the extreme anyone literally surrounded by free paper would even think to use privately purchased civilian paper, and 8.5" x 11" stationery was not an item to be found among the list of materiel available from the quartermaster ... the PX, yes, the quartermaster, no.

All Rather did was point out some typewriters of the period were capable of superscript, and that Times New Roman was an existant font at the time. As though that settled the issue of the documents' authenticity, he went on to return to the "Missing Service" meme, and attempt to refocus the question away from the questioned documents and their overall implication. What we have here is CBS saying their handwriting expert trumps legions of court-accreditted document verification specialists, who, wholly apart from the signatures, point out myriad inconsistencies present in the very form and structure of the documents at question.

"Some of this was possible" is not a vindication by any stretch of the imagination; it is but smoke-and-mirror stuff, and it ain't gonna fly. I believe it was PDiddie who said "There is no compelling evidence to show that the memos are forgeries", to which I respond there is little reason to suspect they are anything other than forgeries, and clumsy ones at that.

This is going to get a whole lot worse for Rather, for CBS, for the DNC, The Democratic party in general, with McAuliffe and Harkin right up in front, and for Kerry before it even begins to go away. By comparison to this firefight, the Swiftboat flap was barely more than spitballs.

All the while, there's still Kerry's legislative record (or, more pointedly, two-plus-decade lack thereof), and his anti-war activities, all impeccably documented, yet to be hammered.

What experts? I have only seen hacks and right-wing bloggers refuting the veracity of the memos.

You have indicated -- that like most conservatives I know -- nothing will dissuade you from your conclusions, no matter how deluded they happen to be.

Calling Dan Rather a hack is just ignorant.

People who quote Newsmax, FreeRepublic and even the Washington Times as a relaible source (don't know and don't care whether you have or not; plenty here have) don't have an ounce of sense criticising a 60 Minutes report.

Back to the unanswered questions, now.

Why do you think Lt. Bush disobeyed a direct order from his superior officer and failed to show up for his physical?

And please don't parrot that BS about the plane he was flying was obsolete; Guard records indicate the F-102A was flown as late as 1975.

Do you think it might have been because the ANG had recently instituted drug testing?

Yep. Dey real. Not fakes.

The WH released copies of the same docs, and does not question them.



Neener, neener. Let's move on.



You have that bass-ackwards.

This is already the worst news Bush could have faced this week.

It's why his poll numbers went down every day.

And next week Kitty Kelley starts making the rounds of the talk shows.

No, pal, I think it's more than likely that your boy Bush gets knocked further down by these accusations.

If we learned anything from Smear Boat it was that **** sticks.



You need to go read about how Kerry dismantled BCCI, the bank Bush got a loan from.

I'm sorry, what again are Bush's plans for the next four years? :wink:

PDiddie, can you link to a copy of the "Direct Order" you reference? I ask because the "recently uncovered document" many rely upon to forward the claim in fact is no such thing. A Direct Order has a specific, prescribed, inviolable, per-regulation format.

Then there is the matter that flight medicals are scheduled to occur during the subject's birth month, while standard military medicals are scheduled to occur during the aniversary month of the subject's enlistment (I've had many of both) ... neither of which date-span the "Newly Discovered Document" mentions.

The Whitehouse released to the press the copies of those documents it had received from CBS, offering no comment on them either way.

Apart from Bush the Younger's plans for the next four years, mine include quietly and graciously observing the continued meltdown of The Democratic Party as its dazed and bewildered activists try to figure out what went wrong.

I'm starting to see how you guys operate:



Salon

So all Rove and his lickspittles have to do, basically, is get the beginnings of something out onto the Net -- and then sit back and let the freepers run with it, faxing, phoning, emailing, etc., What I find even more hilarious is the freeps begin to believe that they themselves were responsible for some battle waged in the war, or some new discovery that will ultimately win the election.

What a sad bunch.

And boy, does this PR firm saves a lot of money by getting the online goons to propagate and repeat their lies, and most people (read: those watching FOX) are too ignorant to know the difference.

The same lawyer for the Smear Boaters has now popped up to speak for the "lack of authenticity" of the memos?

"Bush's Brain" detailed how Rove has operated, going back to school board elections in East Texas.

Did you know that George H.W. Bush actually fired Karl Rove for leaking information to Bob Novak?

Rove has always preferred to get others to do the smears, so that he can leave absolutely no fingerprints. These last two events would seem to bear that out, no?

The trouble is that this time, those doing the smearing are popping up a little too frequently.

It's in one of the memos you think is a fake.

No I will not; you can easily find it for yourself.



That dodges the question of why he refused to show up and take it.

But you knew that.