the DEFINITIVE word on the CBS/DNC forged ANG documents

[Exile_In_SJ]

from the belmont club blog. this tells it all. The Documents are forged and the everyone knows it.

Belmont Club
History and history in the making



Sunday, September 12, 2004

Modern Times
With the New York Times reporting that a key 60 Minutes source has turned on CBS, their earlier decision to "stand by their story" has doubled a bet on a losing hand. Retired General Bobby Hodges of the Texas Air National Guard repudiated the documents which CBS said he would corroborate.

Sept. 11 - A former National Guard commander who CBS News said had helped convince it of the authenticity of documents raising new questions about President Bush's military service said on Saturday that he did not believe they were genuine. The commander, Bobby Hodges, said in a telephone interview that network producers had never showed him the documents but had only read them to him over the phone days before they were featured Wednesday in a "60 Minutes" broadcast. After seeing the documents on Friday, Mr. Hodges said, he concluded that they were falsified.

Worse, Hodges virtually accused the network of deceptive journalism. Commenting on the process through which he was interviewed, "Mr. Hodges, 74, who was group commander of Mr. Bush's squadron in the 147th Fighter Group at Ellington Field in Houston in the early 1970's, said that when someone from CBS called him on Monday night and read him documents, 'I thought they were handwritten notes.'" They were not; they were supposedly typewritten notes which may now turn out to be forgeries prepared on Word for Windows.

CBS's last hope had been to show that Colonel Killian -- whose wife maintains did not type -- prepared the documents on an IBM Selectric or Composer. Those probabilities took a dive now that experimental attempts to reproduce the document on such equipment have failed. Worse, Computer Science Professor Robert Cartwright of Rice University (hat tip: Hugh Hewitt) shows that the variable letter spacing based on the adjacency of letters found in CBS's documents was computationally impossible on any mechanical device available in 1973. Modern word processing processing programs, like Microsoft Word, contain information in the font definition which, for example, tuck a small "i" under the overhang of a capital "T". No mechanical typewriter then available could do this.

... in 1971, even the most powerful available computer systems were not equipped to produce documents like the Killian documents. In Fall 1971, I entered graduate school in Computer Science at Stanford. I soon gravitated to the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, which had the most powerful time-sharing system (a PDP-10) on campus. In either 1972 or 1973, Xerox gave the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory a prototype xerographic printer called a "Xerox Graphics Printer (XGP)". Two similar prototypes were given to the MIT Computer Science Department and the Carnegie-Mellon Computer Science Department. The programming staff at the Stanford AI Laboratory was thrilled with the gift because it was the first opportunity that computer science research community had to develop software to support printer quality type-setting. The three Computer Science Departments cooperated in developing the word processing programs to support the XGP. I wrote my first published research paper and my doctoral disseration using the XGP in Spring 1976. It would take another decade before comparable word processing systems were available to most computer science researchers on minicomputers running Unix. It would take nearly another decade before they were widely used on personal computers.

The typed text in the "Killian memos" is kerned (check out letter combinations like "fo" and "fe"), but the (IBM) Composer text is clearly not. Kerning is a computationally complex task beyond the capacity of any mechanical typewriter--even one as expensive and elaborate as the IBM Selectric Composer.

The CBS attempt to escape the kill zone and regain the offensive on the Bush National Guard story appears to have failed. By clutching the faked documents closer to the center of their story they may have effectively destroyed their own expose. But the true magnitude of the catastrophe is hinted at by the Los Angeles Times. In an article entitled No Disputing It: Blogs Are Major Players, Peter Wallsten says:

These days, CBS News anchor Dan Rather and his colleagues at the network's magazine program "60 Minutes II" are enduring an unusual wave of second-guessing by some of the public and fellow journalists. For that, they can thank "Buckhead." It was a late-night blog posting by this mystery Net-izen that first questioned the validity of documents Rather cited Wednesday as proof that George W. Bush did not fulfill his National Guard duty more than 30 years ago.

Although the article half-humorously suggests "Buckhead" is actually Karl Rove, "Buckhead" maintains he acted alone. "But once I posted the comment to Free Republic I was no longer working alone, and that is the real point of the story about the story about the story." The real catastrophe for CBS is that Killian incident is probably not an isolated setback so much as proof that maneuvers which worked in the past can no longer be attempted with impunity. The equivalent of the longbow had arrived on the media scene. When the longbow was first deployed on the European battlefield, it was obviously a formidable weapon.

Such was the power of the Longbow, that contemporary accounts claim that at short range, an arrow fired from it could penetrate 4 inches of seasoned oak. The armored knight, considered at one time to be the leviathan of the battlefield, could now be felled at ranges up to 200 yards by a single arrow. One account recalls a knight being pinned to his horse by an arrow that passed through both armored thighs, with the horse and saddle between!

But it was long years before it was taken seriously. After all, mounted cavalry was the aristocratic weapon and the longbow that of the despised yeomen, the medieval equivalent of bloggers in their pajamas. It took Crecy, Poitiers and finally Agincourt to bring home the fact that the longbow threat was real. As the Christian Science Monitor remarked:

The English longbow plied by yeomen ended the military power and social reign of knights. "Shining" armor fell to a taut string, a cured piece of wood, and a tipped arrow. The military dynamic of the Middle Ages - knight, squire, and armorer - ceased.

It did not bring an end to history: a new dynamic replaced the old, but an era had passed.

[Exile_In_SJ]

furthermore, here is an expert in typography....saying the documents are fake..
Computer typography guru Joseph M. Newcomer (posted on little green footballs)

http://www.flounder.com/bush.htm
The Bush "Guard memos" are forgeries! Home
Resume


First off, before I start getting a lot of the wrong kind of mail: I am not a fan of George Bush. But I am even less a fan of attempts to commit fraud, and particularly by a complete and utter failure of those we entrust to ensure that if the news is at least accurate. I know it is asking far too much to expect the news to be unbiased. But the people involved should not actually lie to us, or promulgate lies created by hoaxers, through their own incompetence.

There has been a lot of activity on the Internet recently concerning the forged CBS documents. I do not even dignify this statement with the traditional weasel-word “alleged”, because it takes approximately 30 seconds for anyone who is knowledgeable in the history of electronic document production to recognize this whole collection is certainly a forgery, and approximately five minutes to prove to anyone technically competent that the documents are a forgery. I was able to replicate two of the documents within a few minutes. At time I a writing this, CBS is stonewalling. They were hoaxed, pure and simple. CBS failed to exercise anything even approximately like due diligence. I am not sure what sort of "expert" they called in to authenticate the document, but anything I say about his qualifications to judge digital typography is likely to be considered libelous (no matter how true they are) and I would not say them in print in a public forum.


This letter concentrates only on the raw technology of the fonts and printing. It does not address many of the issues others on the Internet have raised, such as the incorrect usage of military titles and abbreviations, incorrect formatting relative to prevailing 1972 military standards, etc. I am not qualified to comment on these. All I can say is that the technology that produced this document was not possible in 1972 in the sort of equipment that would have been available outside publishing houses, and which required substantial training and expertise to use, and it replicates exactly the technologies of Microsoft Word and Microsoft TrueType Fonts.

It is therefore my expert opinion that these documents are modern forgeries.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Hilarious!

"Definitive?"

All you've proven here is that Hodges (an old Bush family friend) is a major flip-flopper.

[watermock]

Good God.

What part of impossible is beyond your comprehension?

[patteeu]

LABF would have been a good boat captain. He isn't afraid to go down with his ship.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LABF would have been a good boat captain. He isn't afraid to go down with his ship.

Hilarious!

Can't stop LMAO at the fact that Patty and the rest of the right-wing brain trust actually regard the foregoing cut 'n' paste from right-wing blogs as "definitive proof" of the alleged forgery of the Bush AWOL documents.

Too funny.

Hate to rain on your parade, but all you really have are a few "experts" who disagree with those experts who support the authenticity of the documents.

(And, wouldn't you know it--these 'experts' are linked w/ the Swift Boat Goons for Bush.)

CBS and its experts are standing by their reporting.

Forgery of government documents is a crime.

Wake us up when you actually have a perp and/or proof of guilt.

In the meantime, nice effort to deflect from the subject of Smirk's Guard service (or lack thereof.)

[Raider Bill]

Dan rather is widely known as a Democratic supporter.

His daughter is a fund raiser for the Kerry camapign.


Barnes, the guy in the story who claims he helped Bush get into the National Guard is also a Kerry campaign fund raiser.

There are claims being made that the Kerry campaign had these documents and possibly handed them over to CBS.

CBS interviewed Killian family members and other people who were suspicious of the authenticity of the documents, yet CBS did not air ANY opposing viewpoints in their story. CBS did not inform the viewer that Barnes was a Kerry campaign fund raiser either.

CBS also did not bring forth the source of the documents, nor did they bring forth anybody who can cooberate the story told in the documents.

The release of these documents, if authentic, would be considered illegal.

At the very least this is extremely shoddy journalism, at worst they do not have any witnesses(National Guard officials) and this story was a blantant and intentional character assisination attempt and hatchet job by an "news" organization acting on behalf of a political campaign.

[Elevation 5280']

**BREAKING NEWS**

It has been discovered that Carl Rove has masterminded the 3 hurricanes into hitting Florida so that President Bush can be looked upon more favorably by potential voters by expediting disaster relief!

There ya go labf....jump on it....got a printer? CBS' e-mail address?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

**BREAKING NEWS**

It has been discovered that Carl Rove has masterminded the 3 hurricanes into hitting Florida so that President Bush can be looked upon more favorably by potential voters by expediting disaster relief!

There ya go labf....jump on it....got a printer? CBS' e-mail address?

I think you have the wrong number Bubba.

It's the wingnuts on your side who are off in conspiracy theory la-la land these days (see Smear Boat Vets and the proponents of the CBS/DNC link.)

If you're going to join the discussion then you really should try to keep up.

[Elevation 5280']

I think you have the wrong number Bubba.

It's the wingnuts on your side who are off in conspiracy theory la-la land these days (see Smear Boat Vets and the proponents of the CBS/DNC link.)

If you're going to join the discussion then you really should try to keep up.

LOL

Yeahhhhhhh, right..... maybe I should make like you and stick my fingers in my ears and make noise so I can't hear when someone is bringing an opposing view or making a valid point.

Why don't you try actually discussing issues as opposed to name calling, pasting cartoons and repeating the DNC talking points?

Actually I know the reason....nevermind....

[watermock]

I think you have the wrong number Bubba.

It's the wingnuts on your side who are off in conspiracy theory la-la land these days (see Smear Boat Vets and the proponents of the CBS/DNC link.)

If you're going to join the discussion then you really should try to keep up.

This is so damn funny. His name isn't Bubba. There is no conspiracy la-la land. That's your territory you dimwit. The CBS fiasco wasn't the Bush campaign you moron. Neither was the Swift Boat accusations.

We are certainly "keeping up". Bubba isn't the President, Wingnuts are not even real, conspiracy La-La land is your turf. Remind me to "keep up".

How Amusing. It's blowing up in your idiotic face. Go check the Gallup Poll.

[RaiderH8r]

This is hilarious. The wheels are falling off the cart and the whole election is slipping away from Mr. Heinz-Kerry. 49 days to come up with a plan and a message Johnny boy, whatchya gonna do? HA HA HA. Let's talk more about the Swift Boat and Guard Service. HA HA HA. Playing right into the GOP political machine's hands. HA HA HA. Even "Bubba" told Johnny boy to give it a rest and did he listen? No, he's Johnny boy and his wife told him not to. Maybe he's still trying to make up his mind on this one. HA HA HA

[Rohirrim]

I am pleased to see the major media in the U.S. vigorously investigating and debating the provenance of the CBS documents alleging that President Bush did not deserve an honorable discharge from the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam era. Just look at the firestorm! Newsweek, Time, The New York Times, The Washington Post and every other major paper and media outlet (not to mention the talk shows!) are aflame with the arguments, pro and con, regarding the authenticity of these documents.


Just imagine if the press had exercised this kind of diligent fervor when Bush and Cheney were hawking the connection between Saddam and 9/11, or when Condoleeza Rice was warning us of “mushroom clouds” in “forty five minutes,” or even when Colin Powell was presenting his slide show of “mobile, biological weapons labs” to the UN? Would we still be tuning into our nightly news for the latest body count from Iraq?

What does this current document flap represent for the media – a make-up test?

[freak6]

The typewriters used on the memos were in the TANG offices........

[catcalls]

Pointing out the possibility of Rove or RNC involvement in creating or planting the forged documents, if that's what they are, is no more the work of a "conspiracy nut" than blaming the DNC. If the documents are forgeries, then there was a conspiracy of some sort, somewhere. While the knee-jerk simplicity of blaming the DNC is understandable, you don't have to be "unhinged" to wonder (a) why Democrats would feel the need to forge documents that merely amplify truths about Bush's record that are ascertainable from authentic sources, and (b) whether Karl Rove, who bugged his own office during the 1986 Texas gubernatorial campaign, might have planned exactly what we are witnessing: a complete diversion from legitimate questions about Bush's military record.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Uhm, why would the DNC do this? They are losing the election and needed something quick to bash Bush with. It's become obvious that they miscalculated and this is blowing up in their faces.

Rohirrim, the major media isn't looking at Bush and his record, they are looking to see how far this goes from Rathers nose and into the DNC. They are investigating whether CBS did this on purpose and if there is a connection between Kerry and Rather

This is now being called Rathergate (with the th superscripted)

[Rohirrim]

Uhm, why would the DNC do this? They are losing the election and needed something quick to bash Bush with. It's become obvious that they miscalculated and this is blowing up in their faces.

Rohirrim, the major media isn't looking at Bush and his record, they are looking to see how far this goes from Rathers nose and into the DNC. They are investigating whether CBS did this on purpose and if there is a connection between Kerry and Rather

This is now being called Rathergate (with the th superscripted)

Yeah, I know. Now this story has the whiff of scandal, so the press is going hog wild over it. They showed very little interest into whether or not the allegations against Bush were true. My point is, I just wish they'd invest as much investigative zeal when our President is proposing to take the country to war as they do on this insipid little "Rathergate." It might be a fun scandal and dismantle Rather's career (not to mention the rep of CBS) but nobody is going to die over it.

That's my whole point. The scandal sells, the war is ho-hum. As far as where the documents came from? Given that nobody seems to know, it's all speculation at this point. But of course, speculation is almost as much fun as scandal.

[Exile_In_SJ]

damn this is funny, from the washington post via powerline blog....

The Post says that CBS is now putting its principal reliance on one Bill Glennon, an "information technology consultant." This is the same Bill Glennon, as Little Green Footballs points out, whom Time magazine described yesterday as a former typewriter repairman.

But what's really funny, as Tim Blair points out, is that Glennon first entered the fray as a commenter on the far-left Daily Kos web site! So, after sneering at bloggers non-stop for four days, CBS was finally reduced to tracking down a former typewriter repairman who posted a comment on Kos and putting him forward as their chief defender. Wonderful.

[Exile_In_SJ]

that's why this is so funny, I'm sure Kerry and Rather thought this would have the same effect on Bush as the swift boat vets did on Kerry (namely fall precipitously in the polls). Instead of refelecting badly on Bush (as they hoped) it backfired and has exploded in Rathers face. It may even, if it is tied to the Kerry camp, explode in his face.
Now most people with even a modicum of intelligence know these 'documents' are fake and are waiting to see what happens.

[Rohirrim]

that's why this is so funny, I'm sure Kerry and Rather thought this would have the same effect on Bush as the swift boat vets did on Kerry (namely fall precipitously in the polls). Instead of refelecting badly on Bush (as they hoped) it backfired and has exploded in Rathers face. It may even, if it is tied to the Kerry camp, explode in his face.
Now most people with even a modicum of intelligence know these 'documents' are fake and are waiting to see what happens.

I haven't heard a single, reputable news organization link this to Kerry. Do you have a scoop, or is it just your desires overcoming your ethics?

[Exile_In_SJ]

there are some inside sources saying this came from the Kerry camp. when I have time, I'll dig them up for ya..

[catcalls]

"Uhm, why would the DNC do this? They are losing the election and needed something quick to bash Bush with."

Dems don't need forged documents to "bash" Bush on his National Guard record. Even that great bastion of liberalism, ahem, none other than U.S. News & World Report, drew the undeniable conclusions about Bush's Guard service, without reference to the so-called forgeries, in a <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/roane040908.htm">recent story that has received scant attention amidst the feeding frenzy over the CBS story.

[RaiderH8r]

"Uhm, why would the DNC do this? They are losing the election and needed something quick to bash Bush with."

Dems don't need forged documents to "bash" Bush on his National Guard record. Even that great bastion of liberalism, ahem, none other than U.S. News & World Report, drew the undeniable conclusions about Bush's Guard service, without reference to the so-called forgeries, in a <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/roane040908.htm">recent story that has received scant attention amidst the feeding frenzy over the CBS story.
Oh the humanity!! Still doesn't change the fact that with 49 days to go Mr. Heinz-Kerry still has no discernable agenda or policy that is widely known to the American public. All they know is that he likes to bash bush. Hell, under that criteria I should be president...I've bashed a bush or two myself :wiggle: :pimp:

[bendog]

Agreed that Kerry has failed to put forth an agenda ... or I'd say differentiate himself from BushII. What's the real diffference between these two rich guys from Yale? Kerry will put people on the scrotus like Breyer as compared to Scalia? Ok, I see that, but it isn't exactly a burning issue for most. Taxes will go up, the econ will limp along, we're stuck in Iraq, Iran and NK are dangerous and bin laden's still loose. I'm never voting for a Bush again, but that's based on the past election and Iraq, not on some belief Kerry's "da man."

The one thing that concerns me though is that if you've watched JR's three-four presidential campaigns so far, the one thing he will do is take the absolutely worst things he has done (race card, drug abuse/infidelity, avoiding the military) and accuse the other side of it. IF you want to see the picture JR thinks the facts might show of him, look to his negative ads. Not pretty. And scary for four more years.

But, I doubt Kerry put up the docs. There's no doubt Jr took a pass and daddy got him out early to go to Yale. But, a lot of rich kids got that treatment back then.

[catcalls]

Oh the humanity!! Still doesn't change the fact that with 49 days to go Mr. Heinz-Kerry still has no discernable agenda or policy that is widely known to the American public. All they know is that he likes to bash bush. Hell, under that criteria I should be president...I've bashed a bush or two myself :wiggle: :pimp:

And therein lies the beauty of the RNC's MO. At this point, with a seemingly comfortable lead in the polls, it's unnecessary to confront criticism. You just mock it.

For months, Kerry was lampooned by pundits and late-night comics for his deathly dull speeches about health-care reform and the economy. He ignored the blistering criticism -- some of it fair, much of it underserved (the supposed $87 billion "flip-flop" being a prime example of the latter) -- and tried to stay on his policy message.

Finally, after the swift-boat smear and the Republican convention skewering, Kerry came out swinging. He now spends about seven minutes of his 30-minute stump speech fighting back. Of course, the media ignores the other 23 minutes, and the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly and Mort Kondracke sit there in the Fair and Balanced Network's studio shaking their heads at this "desperate" candidate who "refuses to talk about the issues, and just slams President Bush." And viewers sit there and believe it.

Kerry is far from the perfect candidate. But the Dems' bigger problem is that the Republicans are much better at playing dirty.

[bendog]

But the presidential candidate doesn't do the personal attacks. The VP typically does, and now with 527's. Kerry's only chance is to stick to the issues.

[Exile_In_SJ]

I haven't heard a single, reputable news organization link this to Kerry. Do you have a scoop, or is it just your desires overcoming your ethics?


here it is,

Anatomy of a Forgery
By The Prowler

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.

[TexanBob]

When the story first broke, the American Prowler cited a CBS News producer (not working on the Bush ANG story) who said the documents were given to the DNC who decided they couldn't be validated but passed them onto the Kerry campaign as background in case it might come in handy. Now, how the producer knows this or if this is where the memos came from is sheer specualtion but from the beginning, CBS indicated there was a DNC-Kerry connection in their back-channel communications.

It is also the only logical reason why CBS won't say who the source is - that it would lead back to the DNC or Kerry and it would destroy any hope they (all three of them) had of still winning the election.

I'm betting you will know the source by November 10th but not before November 2nd.

[TexanBob]

Exile, this was the story I was referring to which broke the day after the story was aired, long before this turned into the major debacle it is today.

[Exile_In_SJ]

And therein lies the beauty of the RNC's MO. At this point, with a seemingly comfortable lead in the polls, it's unnecessary to confront criticism. You just mock it.

For months, Kerry was lampooned by pundits and late-night comics for his deathly dull speeches about health-care reform and the economy. He ignored the blistering criticism -- some of it fair, much of it underserved (the supposed $87 billion "flip-flop" being a prime example of the latter) -- and tried to stay on his policy message.

Finally, after the swift-boat smear and the Republican convention skewering, Kerry came out swinging. He now spends about seven minutes of his 30-minute stump speech fighting back. Of course, the media ignores the other 23 minutes, and the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly and Mort Kondracke sit there in the Fair and Balanced Network's studio shaking their heads at this "desperate" candidate who "refuses to talk about the issues, and just slams President Bush." And viewers sit there and believe it.

Kerry is far from the perfect candidate. But the Dems' bigger problem is that the Republicans are much better at playing dirty.


Again that's a matter of opinion. Earlier in the year, one of the ubiquitous polls had a question far down on the list that asled who was running a dirtier campaign, the democrats or the republicans. By a margin of 67% to 33% people responded that the democrats were running the dirtier campaign.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Exile, this was the story I was referring to which broke the day after the story was aired, long before this turned into the major debacle it is today.


I know, I was just showing Rohirrim that I wan't just pulling it out of my head...

[Rohirrim]

I imagine when all is said and done, it's going to turn out to be one of these explanations. I wouldn't put option #2 past Karl Rove.

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.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LOL

I just had to look to see if Exile had found any further "definitive proof" of a conspiracy involving CBS and the DNC.

Gosh, I guess if "The Prowler" and "powerline blog" both confirm it then there must be something to it.

Hilarious!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yeahhhhhhh, right..... maybe I should make like you and stick my fingers in my ears and make noise so I can't hear when someone is bringing an opposing view or making a valid point.

Um, you're already doing these things, Bubba. Sticking their fingers in their ears and covering their eyes is a way of life for the bush sheeple (e.g., non-stop coverage of Swift Boat Goons/alleged forgery to divert attention from AWOL Boy's record, Iraq, 9/11, Plamegate, the economy, jobs, healthcare, etc.)

Why don't you try actually discussing issues as opposed to name calling, pasting cartoons and repeating the DNC talking points?

I do plenty of discussing, Bubba. It's just that the average Bubba is more likely to notice cartoons first (since 'toons are easier for him to grasp than tough stuff like facts, logic, etc.)

[patteeu]

Yeah, I know. Now this story has the whiff of scandal, so the press is going hog wild over it. They showed very little interest into whether or not the allegations against Bush were true. My point is, I just wish they'd invest as much investigative zeal when our President is proposing to take the country to war as they do on this insipid little "Rathergate." It might be a fun scandal and dismantle Rather's career (not to mention the rep of CBS) but nobody is going to die over it.

That's my whole point. The scandal sells, the war is ho-hum. As far as where the documents came from? Given that nobody seems to know, it's all speculation at this point. But of course, speculation is almost as much fun as scandal.

No one is going to die over it, but that doesn't mean it isn't incredibly important. No one was going to die over the 3rd rate burglary at the Watergate back in 1972 either, but I doubt if you would have poo pooed that one.

Somebody does know where the forgeries came from. Dan Rather and his CBS cronies know. Journalistic ethics don't prevent you from revealing your sources when they are feeding you bad information. At this point, CBS' refusal to even have their documents examined by independent 3rd parties makes it look like they are protecting someone. Either they are protecting their own reputations thinking that this whole thing will eventually blow over and be forgotten as long as they refuse to admit guilt and as long as they don't let anyone review the evidence, or they are protecting their source whoever that is.

Anyone who ever claimed to be against sleazy smearjob tactics in campaigns should be calling on CBS to invite an investigation. Where are the swiftvet detractors now?

[watermock]

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=8795&stc=1

Can someone photoshop Dan Rather with John Elway for me?

[watermock]

Damn it won't stop raining here. It's rained 10 inches.

[patteeu]

I haven't heard a single, reputable news organization link this to Kerry. Do you have a scoop, or is it just your desires overcoming your ethics?

What do his ethics have to do with this. Is there some kind of OrangeMane code of conduct that requires you to have ironclad proof of wrongdoing before casting aspersions on the JFKerry campaign? Even if there were, he didn't make any allegation, he just said it could be bad for Kerry IF a connection were discovered.

My suspect is Terry McAuliffe and his crew at the DNC. At this point it is just wishful thinking though. Dan Rather should resign in disgrace, but instead he will probably go on David Letterman and joke about it as though it was much ado over nothing.

[watermock]

Where are the swiftvet detractors now?

That is what is so damn funny. That fell on the floor as legit.

This is hysterical. To watch LABF posture with cut and paste at this point is literally...I don't even have a word for it.

Maybe pathetic.

CBS just elected Bush.

Damn it won't stop raining. Even Beezlebub won't go out. He got soaked 3 times. I don't have a clue what I did to piss off Thor but it won't stop raining.

[patteeu]

"Uhm, why would the DNC do this? They are losing the election and needed something quick to bash Bush with."

Dems don't need forged documents to "bash" Bush on his National Guard record. Even that great bastion of liberalism, ahem, none other than U.S. News & World Report, drew the undeniable conclusions about Bush's Guard service, without reference to the so-called forgeries, in a <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/roane040908.htm">recent story that has received scant attention amidst the feeding frenzy over the CBS story.

The forgeries are a much more important story than anything having to do with Bush's service/lack-of-service in the ANG.

My personal belief is that Bush pulled strings to get into the ANG and that he got away with less than perfect performance because he had connections. That's the way the system worked and he probably worked the system as many others did. In the end, he did what he needed to do to get an honorable discharge. It doesn't bother me one bit. I'm more concerned with Bush's performance as commander-in-chief over the past 4 years than I am about his performance in the ANG 30+ years ago. Based on that, I'll be casting my first vote for any member of the Bush family this November.

[patteeu]

Agreed that Kerry has failed to put forth an agenda ... or I'd say differentiate himself from BushII. What's the real diffference between these two rich guys from Yale? Kerry will put people on the scrotus like Breyer as compared to Scalia? Ok, I see that, but it isn't exactly a burning issue for most. Taxes will go up, the econ will limp along, we're stuck in Iraq, Iran and NK are dangerous and bin laden's still loose. I'm never voting for a Bush again, but that's based on the past election and Iraq, not on some belief Kerry's "da man."

The one thing that concerns me though is that if you've watched JR's three-four presidential campaigns so far, the one thing he will do is take the absolutely worst things he has done (race card, drug abuse/infidelity, avoiding the military) and accuse the other side of it. IF you want to see the picture JR thinks the facts might show of him, look to his negative ads. Not pretty. And scary for four more years.

But, I doubt Kerry put up the docs. There's no doubt Jr took a pass and daddy got him out early to go to Yale. But, a lot of rich kids got that treatment back then.

I can respect your position for the most part. But I don't get your paragraph about negative ads. I've never seen a Bush ad that had anything to do with the race card, drug abuse, infidelity, or avoiding the military.

[watermock]

The classic "anyone but Bush" argument.

How Amusing.

the one thing he will do is take the absolutely worst things he has done (race card, drug abuse/infidelity, avoiding the military) and accuse the other side of it.

WTF are you talking about. 1. He is popular with Hispanics and will get a bigger Black vote this year. If he's pulling a race card I would like even a hint of it other than an accusation. How is a white methodist going to pull a race card? Ureal.

As far as abusing drugs/alcohol, he allready said he had a problem TWENTY YEARS AGO. Has Kerry had to address any of these issues? You don't think Kerry smoked some pot or snorted a few lines? We all have. Well I have I guess. My bet is Kerry isn't innocent. So why is Bush chastised?

Infidelity? When has Laura Bush EVER accused him of Infidelity? Kerry is the one chasing cash cows. WTF are you on? Laura Bush loves her husband. Crazy Portugese Woman is a loose cannon. WTF are you on? Kerry married two rich women. Bush just loves Laura.

Bush didn't "avoid" the military. Clinton did. He might of had some problems with his service, but if he would of been sent into Hanoi, I have no doubt he would go. The plane he had was a piece of crap F-102, one of the worst planes ever made. They were deathtraps. They were abandoned for the F-4 which was a good plane but not really suited for Vietnam. But the F-102 was totall junk and retired for the 105, and eventually the 111.

His service might of not been admirable, but he didn't "avoid" it. Why not explain how he was in the National Guard and "avoided" service you Dimwit.

[Elevation 5280']

And therein lies the beauty of the RNC's MO. At this point, with a seemingly comfortable lead in the polls, it's unnecessary to confront criticism. You just mock it.

For months, Kerry was lampooned by pundits and late-night comics for his deathly dull speeches about health-care reform and the economy. He ignored the blistering criticism -- some of it fair, much of it underserved (the supposed $87 billion "flip-flop" being a prime example of the latter) -- and tried to stay on his policy message.

Finally, after the swift-boat smear and the Republican convention skewering, Kerry came out swinging. He now spends about seven minutes of his 30-minute stump speech fighting back. Of course, the media ignores the other 23 minutes, and the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly and Mort Kondracke sit there in the Fair and Balanced Network's studio shaking their heads at this "desperate" candidate who "refuses to talk about the issues, and just slams President Bush." And viewers sit there and believe it.

Kerry is far from the perfect candidate. But the Dems' bigger problem is that the Republicans are much better at playing dirty.


You've got to be kidding right? Where do I begin.....looks like a lost cause to me.

Why don't you give us a little snippit of these detailed speeches? IT'S ALL FREAKIN' TALK....NO SUBSTANCE, NO DETAILS, JUST EMPTY PROMISES!

As far as playing dirty......the democrats are the sleaziest of all life forms when it comes to dirty pool! GET A CLUE!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The forgeries are a much more important story than anything having to do with Bush's service/lack-of-service in the ANG.


Is that why the WH has decided not to investigate the so-called "forgeries," Bubba?

The OM conservative brain trust is in good hands w/ you.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

As far as playing dirty......the democrats are the sleaziest of all life forms when it comes to dirty pool! GET A CLUE!

Yeah, everybody knows Lee Atwater and KKKarl Rove are on our side.

Just ask John McCain, Max Cleland, and John Kerry.

Did you come up with this gem all by yourself or did you have help, Bubba?

[Elevation 5280']

You're gay aren't you labf?

Seriously......that comes across. Not that there's anything wrong with that....

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You're gay aren't you labf?

Seriously......that comes across. Not that there's anything wrong with that....

Um, no Bubba, I'm not.

But I think I understand why folks from the Bubbaverse you inhabit regard anyone with a large (i.e., higher than fifth-grade) vocabulary with suspicion.

It's all part and parcel of the new anti-intellectualism of today's GOP.

[catcalls]

You've got to be kidding right? Where do I begin.....looks like a lost cause to me.

Why don't you give us a little snippit of these detailed speeches? IT'S ALL FREAKIN' TALK....NO SUBSTANCE, NO DETAILS, JUST EMPTY PROMISES!

As far as playing dirty......the democrats are the sleaziest of all life forms when it comes to dirty pool! GET A CLUE!

Actually I'm not kidding, and if you think I'm a lost cause then don't bother arguing with me or calling me names. The fact that you disagree with me does not mean I don't have a clue.

If I thought you were genuinely interested in the details of Kerry's proposals I suppose we could start with "hardening targets" -- securing ports and nuclear power plants that are as vulnerable today as they were on 9/11/01. But I'm surmising based on your hostility that you don't really care, that you will defend Bush on each and every issue, and that you will criticize Kerry on each and every issue. The world isn't that simple through my eyes.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The fact that you disagree with me does not mean I don't have a clue.

Sure it does, dude. It also means you can't be an American. ;)

[Denver Crush]

IMO this is a waste of time issue. Who gives a shiat what these guys did over 30 years ago. I did some pretty dumbass things as a kid that Im ashamed of but I can look back now and realize it and improve myself as a person. Id be willing to bet that most if not all Americans including the two Pres nominees have done the same thing.
I want to hear what the plans are for the future. The past is done and over, and the old cliche of spilled milk applies.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

IMO this is a waste of time issue. Who gives a shiat what these guys did over 30 years ago.

Rove and the repukes are trying to make this election a referendum on character (sound familiar?) because they know they can't win on issues or on Dim Son's record.

[Bronco Yoda]

Thanks for the entertainment. Some people will believe anything.... LOL

~peace

[watermock]

The definitive word is that CBS is directly involved with the DNC and is terrified it will be further exposed.

It's absolutely hysterical. The font is fake. It's Word Microsoft.

Anyone see CBS doing an investigation?

They have a senile typewriter repairman backing them up.

It's incredibly funny. CBS has been trying to replicate the font for a week. It's absolutely hysterical.

[watermock]

Rove and the repukes are trying to make this election a referendum on character (sound familiar?)

Sounds really familiar. Listen to you. Rove, Repukes, throw in some NeoCon trash for good measure. LABF made this an election in his own sick mind about character, and it's bitten him in the ass.

It's hysterical. Now he is crying about it. Kerry was shown to be a liar, and so was CBS.

Now your crying about running a campaign run on ethics? LABF is all upset now. All he has left is Bartcop.com

[patteeu]

Actually I'm not kidding, and if you think I'm a lost cause then don't bother arguing with me or calling me names. The fact that you disagree with me does not mean I don't have a clue.

If I thought you were genuinely interested in the details of Kerry's proposals I suppose we could start with "hardening targets" -- securing ports and nuclear power plants that are as vulnerable today as they were on 9/11/01. But I'm surmising based on your hostility that you don't really care, that you will defend Bush on each and every issue, and that you will criticize Kerry on each and every issue. The world isn't that simple through my eyes.

What are your criticisms of Kerry's plan and what do you think Bush is doing better than Kerry would?

[Blueflame]

Where are the swiftvet detractors now?

As one of the primary swifliar detractors, I'll assume this just might be pointed at me. :P

Last weekend was a busy one and I have had some catching up to do regarding the "forgery" allegations. At this point in time, I have not yet formed a solid opinion regarding the validity of the memos... nor do I really think they matter much in the grand scheme of things. The undisputed fact is that the Air Force viewed Lt. Bush as AWOL in late 1972. And his flight privileges were suspended due to his failure to undergo a required physical exam that included drug testing. The memos, forged or not, merely are a small piece of supporting evidence to these facts.

If it's all the same to you, I'm waiting to see the whole scenario play itself out. If it turns out that the memos can be definitively proven to be forged, then I'll want to know who forged them and why... and would not exempt Karl Rove from the list of likely suspects. :P

[catcalls]

What are your criticisms of Kerry's plan and what do you think Bush is doing better than Kerry would?

I don't like Kerry's stance on Iraq. It's status quo. I don't believe that a change of presidents will suddenly cause our allies to jump into the mess we've made over there. I also lament Kerry's reluctance -- or downright refusal, more accurately -- to challenge Israel's activities in the West Bank and Gaza. And as a fiscal conservative, I don't care much for Kerry's health-care plan, either.

I'm hard-pressed to identify any area in which I believe Bush is doing better than Kerry, but I will freely admit that my distrust of this president taints my thinking. Although I have some reservations about NCLB -- particularly when it isn't being fully funded -- I applaud Bush for pursuing educational reform based on the fundamental principle of accountability rather than educators' entitlement.

[watermock]

I have not had a belly laugh that hard in 20 years.

Carl Rove did it.

[Blueflame]

I have not had a belly laugh that hard in 20 years.

Carl Rove did it.

Saying he'd be on the list of likely suspects is not the same thing as asserting that he is the guilty party, Mock. Please stop reaching.

However, if one looks at the news coverage from the last few days, everyone is talking about fonts and microsoft word and secretaries... "experts" from both sides of the political aisle are offering conflicting opinions on the authenticity of the memos. And lost amongst the inconsequential yammering is the basic, uncontested message contained in the memos. Bush failed to take a physical, was grounded from flying, and then went AWOL. Yeah, the diversion... if that's indeed what it was intended to be... appears to have worked.

[watermock]

It's a joke that was disclamied yesterday by CBS.

Your still clinging onto it.

This was done a week ago.

"experts" from both sides of the political aisle are offering conflicting opinions on the authenticity of the memos.

How amusing. now it's "conflicting opinions".

How about total crap. Do you watch CBS? They are TOTALLY DISCREDITED.

What part don't you understand?

Go play with it. It's beyond amusing.

This was done a week ago people.

CBS finally fell apart on wednesday.

What do you want me to do, spit in Dan Rathers face?

He's a lying prick that was caught. Prove me wrong.

What part of falsified documents is beyond you.

[Blueflame]

It's a joke that was disclamied yesterday by CBS.

Your still clinging onto it.

This was done a week ago.



How amusing. now it's "conflicting opinions".

How about total crap. Do you watch CBS? They are TOTALLY DISCREDITED.

What part don't you understand?

Go play with it. It's beyond amusing.

This was done a week ago people.

CBS finally fell apart on wednesday.

What do you want me to do, spit in Dan Rathers face?

He's a lying prick that was caught. Prove me wrong.

What part of falsified documents is beyond you.

Not one thing has yet been proven regarding authenticity, Mock. And again, if the forgery claims are eventually proven, so what? Does that change history so that Bush showed up and took that flight physical? No. The diversion worked and benefitted the GOP by deflecting Americans' attention from the fact that Dubya's records prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Air Force perceived him as AWOL in 1972.

[patteeu]

... the fact that Dubya's records prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Air Force perceived him as AWOL in 1972.

Link?

How about you start posting links with each of your incredible claims instead of making me ask all the time.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Blueflame, if you believe that, you should ask the air force why they didn't prosecute GWB.

They didn't, so Bush wasn't AWOL. simple as that.

[patteeu]

Blueflame, if you believe that, you should ask the air force why they didn't prosecute GWB.

They didn't, so Bush wasn't AWOL. simple as that.

I suspect it is just a poor understanding of what AWOL means. She probably just thinks it means absent.

[bendog]

Rich kids skated in the early 70's. Kerry's an idiot from bringing it up. He just should have said, "i have shrapnel, JR doesn't. Now lets talk issues."

[Exile_In_SJ]

it's funny how a major shill for the Democratic party has gotten major blowback from this. CBS and Dan Blather tried to smear Bush and now Blather is fighting for and losing his credibility life.

Instead of hurting Bush, his popularity is rising and kerry's is falling. People are tired of the unsubstantiated attacks.

The difference between Swift Boats and Rathergate is that with Swiftboats, there were direct eyewitnesses to question Kerrys behavior and at least there is a substantial basis for opinion on either side. You can either believe Kerry or Believe the swift Boat Guys.

With the Rather Forgeries, the whole basis of the story is a preconceived idea of Bush's being AWOL, and someone forging some documents to support that feeling.

The Swift Boat Vets have produced many men disputing what Kerry says. A much stronger basis for deciding who is right. You can listen to what Kerry said, or what these Decorated vets say and make your decision based on that. As for Bush Being AWOL, all you have is forged documents.

[bendog]

I think you are mistaken if you think Kerry's falling in the polls is because of Rather or the documents, which personally I doubt are forgeries. Rather (pun intended) Kerry has not expressed how he differs from Bush, except he'd hike taxes on the rich, and some bs about job exports. People don't care about 35 years ago. Even if bushII was awol or if Kerry is a hero. Kerry let his campaign be hijacked by a slick PR trick. Duckass had the same thing with willie horton. Neither guy could get back on track.

If Kerry had a chance he'd have had to say that Iraq was unwinnable and we should pull out as quick as possible and leave the Iraqis to their fate. Taht would have required a 4-5 mo campign of education, and even then be a loser. The Dems just have to let Iraq play out, and hope for Hillary in 08.

[RaiderH8r]

Not one thing has yet been proven regarding authenticity, Mock. And again, if the forgery claims are eventually proven, so what? Does that change history so that Bush showed up and took that flight physical? No. The diversion worked and benefitted the GOP by deflecting Americans' attention from the fact that Dubya's records prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Air Force perceived him as AWOL in 1972.
Hearsay and innuendo as to his AWOL status is certainly not proof either. The only documentation to support such a claim is being disputed, and with each passing day it seems, rightfully so. Simply stating that he was AWOL without so much as a shred of tangible evidence to support such a claim is not going to cut it.

[RaiderH8r]

Rich kids skated in the early 70's. Kerry's an idiot from bringing it up. He just should have said, "i have shrapnel, JR doesn't. Now lets talk issues."
Indeed. That would have been a good idea. But he's still thumping his chest over it, he made it the theme in his campaign and Rove, it seems, is happy to oblige in that regard. Yes Johnny boy, let's talk about the 70's, ha ha ha. It is now 48 days and counting and Kerry still hasn't gotten it through his head that this "30 yrs. ago" stuff is not winning people over. Sure it was good to grab their attention, but now you have to keep it and this is not doing the trick. Even Bill Jeff railed him on it and he still won't listen. Now he's got disputing camps within his campaign and the wheels are falling off. Dan Rather isn't doing him any favors with this stuff either.

[bendog]

Yet that worked to impune Kerry's war record, and there's no doubt he was there in a boat.

[Blueflame]

Link?

How about you start posting links with each of your incredible claims instead of making me ask all the time.

First off, this link was already posted yesterday. I guess I'm expected to re-post it in 15 threads if I make more references to the information, however, eh? :P

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040927&s=baker

[Blueflame]

Blueflame, if you believe that, you should ask the air force why they didn't prosecute GWB.

They didn't, so Bush wasn't AWOL. simple as that.

If I'm not mistaken, the usual procedure in 1972 was for an AWOL guardsman to be put at the top of the active-duty induction list. This might have happened to Lt. Bush had his influential father not intervened yet again.

[Blueflame]

I suspect it is just a poor understanding of what AWOL means. She probably just thinks it means absent.

It means "absent without official leave"... a term which would, indeed have applied if a guardsman simply blew off his obligations.

[catcalls]

Rich kids skated in the early 70's. Kerry's an idiot from bringing it up. He just should have said, "i have shrapnel, JR doesn't. Now lets talk issues."

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/opinion/15kris.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=">As Nicholas Kristof writes,</a> the issue isn't what Bush did 30 years ago, but whether he has told the truth.

[bendog]

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/opinion/15kris.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=">As Nicholas Kristof writes,</a> the issue isn't what Bush did 30 years ago, but whether he has told the truth.

I think you've got a maj of kids who skated in the guard 30 years ago who have lied to one degree or another. No one really cares. We've always ahd a sort of natl amnesia over vietnam.

But, now, right now today, it's impossible to say Kerry is telling the truth over Iraq. He says he'll stick it out till democracy, but he'll be out in under 4 years. That's BS. The US army published docs post somalia that it's possible for an army to go in and restroe order in some society, but the time frame for putting in a civil govt is short, and the only alternative is to do a massive occupation with mass detnetions. Civil war is the only foreseeable outcome for Iraq, and what was once a contained society that didn't pose a threat to us will be uncontained. That should have been the issue of this campaign

[catcalls]

You're dead-on about Kerry's position on Iraq, which is why I won't be heartbroken if Bush is reelected. I just have a hard time believing that the administration responsible for this mess appears poised to win another four years.

[bendog]

I won't be happy with BushII for another four, but I don't see Kerry as much better. Argualby, he could get Nato into afghan, which would help, but who knows. His campaign has been so inept. However, how a guy can get "re"elected when his own party knows he's full of **** is just beyond me.

But Hagel said the shift in funds "does not add up in my opinion to a pretty picture, to a picture that shows that we're winning. But it does add up to this: an acknowledgment that we are in deep trouble."

Hagel, Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and other committee members have long argued — even before the war — that administration plans for rebuilding Iraq were inadequate and based on overly optimistic assumptions that Americans would be greeted as liberators.

But the criticism from the panel's top Republicans had an extra sting coming less than seven weeks before the presidential election in which President Bush (news - web sites)'s handling of the war is a top issue
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&e=1&u=/ap/20040915/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq_4

And even Hagel and Lugar are fooling themselves if they think we're going to have some kind of natl referencum in Iraq and all will be democracy and peace.

[patteeu]

First off, this link was already posted yesterday. I guess I'm expected to re-post it in 15 threads if I make more references to the information, however, eh? :P

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040927&s=baker

You must have posted the wrong link. I'm looking for the support for your contention that "Dubya's records prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Air Force perceived him as AWOL in 1972." Instead, you provide a piece of analysis presenting a plausible, but speculative, theory.

It's kind of ridiculous that this passes for proof beyond a resonable doubt in your mind, but the incredible number of unexplained inconsistencies in the Rather memos and the overwhelming weight of expert opinion don't rise to the same level of proof for you. I'm a partisan, but you take partisanship to an irrational extreme. If you haven't noticed yet, I don't trust any of your assertions without independent support because you've shown that you aren't an honest broker of information, despite your measured, non-hysterical tone.

[Exile_In_SJ]

If I'm not mistaken, the usual procedure in 1972 was for an AWOL guardsman to be put at the top of the active-duty induction list. This might have happened to Lt. Bush had his influential father not intervened yet again.


from things I've read, GWB asked twice to go active duty. His commander denied him.

[Exile_In_SJ]

http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/3-nov-70-bush-praise.pdf

read this to see what Killian thought of Bush.

'Lt. Bush's skills far exceed his contemporaries. He is a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership.'

[alkemical]

i haven't commented on the manner of both jackasses using time-served and who had better connections to get their records shined up the most.

but to me this is a smoke & mirrors issue to polarize the public to deflect focus as to the real issues

[errand]

CBS and its experts are standing by their reporting.

Forgery of government documents is a crime.

Wake us up when you actually have a perp and/or proof of guilt.



What about an admission by one of their new star witnesses?

On 60 minutes tonight they interviewed a woman who allegedly was Killian's right hand woman, and she says that those documents are forgeries.....of course the main reason they interviewed her was because she claims that the info in the forged documents are true.....

so now, CBS has changed their story to "OK, their fakes, but what they contained is true...and we havea Democrat voter who worked as Killian's secretary to prove this!"

[errand]

The undisputed fact is that the Air Force viewed Lt. Bush as AWOL in late 1972.. :P


...was he charged with the crime of being AWOL? If he wasn't then the Air Force did not view him as AWOL. AWOL is a serious thing in the military....especially with our nation at war.

Bush has an authentic Honorable Discharge hanging on his wall in Crawford TX...while Kerry has two forged documents

[Hogan11]

i haven't commented on the manner of both jackasses using time-served and who had better connections to get their records shined up the most.

but to me this is a smoke & mirrors issue to polarize the public to deflect focus as to the real issues

Absolutely...it's a deflective non-issue and a 30 yr.old one nonetheless...

Gotta have some scandal and excitement for the ADD afflicted public,
discussion about topics that really matter is just too boring, I suppose.......

Keep sleeping America.

[Blueflame]

...was he charged with the crime of being AWOL? If he wasn't then the Air Force did not view him as AWOL. AWOL is a serious thing in the military....especially with our nation at war.

Bush has an authentic Honorable Discharge hanging on his wall in Crawford TX...while Kerry has two forged documents

You bet he'd have been charged... and most likely activated and sent to Vietnam... if his name had not been "Bush" (or some similarly-powerful surname).

I'd really like to see some proof of both that "authentic Honorable Discharge" and that the documents (CBS has; not Kerry) were, in fact, forged.

1) the payroll stubs and other paperwork that was released by the WH show that Bush did not show up between May and October 1972. And do you notice they're not contesting the content of the memos, but the authenticity? Why is that?

2) Re: the memos, all we've seen are "expert opinions"... some saying the memos are fake; others saying some circa-1972 typewriters could have produced them.

[patteeu]

You bet he'd have been charged... and most likely activated and sent to Vietnam... if his name had not been "Bush" (or some similarly-powerful surname).

I'd really like to see some proof of both that "authentic Honorable Discharge" and that the documents (CBS has; not Kerry) were, in fact, forged.

1) the payroll stubs and other paperwork that was released by the WH show that Bush did not show up between May and October 1972. And do you notice they're not contesting the content of the memos, but the authenticity? Why is that?

2) Re: the memos, all we've seen are "expert opinions"... some saying the memos are fake; others saying some circa-1972 typewriters could have produced them.

I don't know if you are old enough to be familiar with the OJ Simpson case, but if you are, would it have bothered you if you had found out that Mark Furhman carried the bloody glove from the crime scene to plant in OJ's driveway in order to sweeten the evidence against the person he was convinced was guilty?

That's the equivalent of what is being done here with these forged documents (that even Dan Rather has doubts about now). Even if you believe that Bush got away with pulling strings (which I do by the way), the production of falsified evidence is a far worse sin IMO. If this was done by some individual unassociated with the DNC or JFKerry, then that's bad enough and it reflects badly on CBS. But if the fabricator was an operative of the DNC or the Kerry campaign, I think this is as bad as the Watergate break-in.

[Blueflame]

I don't know if you are old enough to be familiar with the OJ Simpson case, but if you are, would it have bothered you if you had found out that Mark Furhman carried the bloody glove from the crime scene to plant in OJ's driveway in order to sweeten the evidence against the person he was convinced was guilty?

It's my opinion that police cannot allow themselves to descend to the level of the criminals... under any circumstances.

That's the equivalent of what is being done here with these forged documents (that even Dan Rather has doubts about now). Even if you believe that Bush got away with pulling strings (which I do by the way), the production of falsified evidence is a far worse sin IMO. If this was done by some individual unassociated with the DNC or JFKerry, then that's bad enough and it reflects badly on CBS. But if the fabricator was an operative of the DNC or the Kerry campaign, I think this is as bad as the Watergate break-in.

Again, the memos saga is not yet over. Nor has any solid evidence yet been produced to unequivocally prove that they're forged.

Conversely, how would you feel about the memos if it is eventually proven that they are, indeed forgeries... and the work of Karl Rove? Of course conservatives would still consider it as bad as Watergate, right?

[Blueflame]

You must have posted the wrong link. I'm looking for the support for your contention that "Dubya's records prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Air Force perceived him as AWOL in 1972." Instead, you provide a piece of analysis presenting a plausible, but speculative, theory.

It's kind of ridiculous that this passes for proof beyond a resonable doubt in your mind, but the incredible number of unexplained inconsistencies in the Rather memos and the overwhelming weight of expert opinion don't rise to the same level of proof for you. I'm a partisan, but you take partisanship to an irrational extreme. If you haven't noticed yet, I don't trust any of your assertions without independent support because you've shown that you aren't an honest broker of information, despite your measured, non-hysterical tone.

That's not the only article I read to form my opinion, Patteeu... but if you expect me to post links to every article I read, I'm gonna be one busy lady. Ha!

I don't mind being asked to provide links; in fact, many times it's obvious that they must be pre-emptively posted 'cause the request is easily foreseeable.

Did I miss it or has the WH yet addressed the substance of the memos?

[Blueflame]

from things I've read, GWB asked twice to go active duty. His commander denied him.

I'd really like to see a link to that story.

[patteeu]

It's my opinion that police cannot allow themselves to descend to the level of the criminals... under any circumstances.



Again, the memos saga is not yet over. Nor has any solid evidence yet been produced to unequivocally prove that they're forged.

Conversely, how would you feel about the memos if it is eventually proven that they are, indeed forgeries... and the work of Karl Rove? Of course conservatives would still consider it as bad as Watergate, right?

Yes, IMO, it would be on the same level as Watergate. But if Karl Rove is smart enought to pass a forgery to the Democrats who then pass it to CBS who then overlooks the obvious problems with the document and airs it on 60 minutes anyway, then Rove would deserve credit for being an incredible genius and slick operator. I'd still find it reprehensible, but I'd have to at least tip my hat to him for pulling that triple bank shot off.

Why do you have such a hard time giving a straight answer? Now that I've done it, what do you think?

[patteeu]

That's not the only article I read to form my opinion, Patteeu... but if you expect me to post links to every article I read, I'm gonna be one busy lady. Ha!

I don't mind being asked to provide links; in fact, many times it's obvious that they must be pre-emptively posted 'cause the request is easily foreseeable.

Did I miss it or has the WH yet addressed the substance of the memos?

You miss the whole point of providing links. Links are supposed to support your assertions of fact with some level of proof that you aren't just pulling things out of thin air. Providing links that allude to the possibility that something may be the case is little better than providing no link at all.

[Blueflame]

Yes, IMO, it would be on the same level as Watergate. But if Karl Rove is smart enought to pass a forgery to the Democrats who then pass it to CBS who then overlooks the obvious problems with the document and airs it on 60 minutes anyway, then Rove would deserve credit for being an incredible genius and slick operator. I'd still find it reprehensible, but I'd have to at least tip my hat to him for pulling that triple bank shot off.

Why do you have such a hard time giving a straight answer? Now that I've done it, what do you think?

Given that reports allege Karl Rove has bugged his own office in the past and then blamed others for it, I don't put much past him in the way of chicanery. Call me a cynic, I suppose.

Didn't you see my answer to this question earlier? If the docs are proven to be forged, I definitely want to find out who was responsible for it and their reasons.
However, even in the event that the memos themselves are discredited, unless the substance (information they disclose) is shown to be inaccurate, libelous and flat-out fabricated, I don't see what difference the authenticity of the paperwork makes. Original, Xerox, transcription, who cares as long as it's the truth?

Enough questions have been raised that, imo, Bush needs to address the memos' content or the issue isn't going to go away; it'll just keep coming back up again and again until satisfactory answers are provided.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What about an admission by one of their new star witnesses?

On 60 minutes tonight they interviewed a woman who allegedly was Killian's right hand woman, and she says that those documents are forgeries.....

This is what's known as "hearsay evidence."

Here is another expert who disputes the forgery charges:

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/special_packages/election2004/9656605.htm

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/mo-white.jpg

[watermock]

Dan Rather is using the Kerry Flopper.

They might not be authentic, but they are authentic.

Give me a break. This is classic Liberal GraySpeak.

They are either authentic or they are not. There is no gray area to even discuss.

Why doesn't CBS and USA Today reveal their "credible" source? Could it be it would even deliver even MORE embarassment? They need to supeona his ass.

[patteeu]

...
Enough questions have been raised that, imo, Bush needs to address the memos' content or the issue isn't going to go away; it'll just keep coming back up again and again until satisfactory answers are provided.

There could be nothing better for Bush than to have this issue not go away. It's a big time loser for Kerry regardless of the facts of the Bush ANG matter. The fact that this has become more about CBS's dishonor and a mystery about who forged the documents is just icing on the cake. Nobody cares about Bush's ANG service except the people who are already solidly against voting for him.

[watermock]

Beezlebub leaked the so called documents. How did I wind up with a Democratic Cat?

Oh that's right...free Chef's Blend, kitty litter and a a can of tuna. He was bought.

[patteeu]

What about an admission by one of their new star witnesses?

On 60 minutes tonight they interviewed a woman who allegedly was Killian's right hand woman, and she says that those documents are forgeries.....

This is what's known as "hearsay evidence."

Here is another expert who disputes the forgery charges:

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/special_packages/election2004/9656605.htm

You are way behind the times, LABF. Today is Thursday and you post an article from Monday about a story that is changing by the hour?

Even Dan Rather is beginning to back off on his claims that the memos are authentic. Here is an excerpt from Howard Kurtz' media watch column from the Washington Post's Thursday edition:

CBS Anchor Urges Media to Focus On Bush Service

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 16, 2004; Page A01

CBS anchor Dan Rather acknowledged for the first time yesterday that there are serious questions about the authenticity of the documents he used to question President Bush's National Guard record last week on "60 Minutes."

"If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story," Rather said in an interview last night. "Any time I'm wrong, I want to be right out front and say, 'Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.' "

Rather spoke after interviewing the secretary to Bush's former squadron commander, who told him that the memos attributed to her late boss are fake -- but that they reflect the commander's belief that Bush was receiving preferential treatment to escape some of his Guard commitments....

Keep up with us LA. You can't hold this story back by ignoring it.

[patteeu]

Dan Rather is using the Kerry Flopper.

They might not be authentic, but they are authentic.

Give me a break. This is classic Liberal GraySpeak.

They are either authentic or they are not. There is no gray area to even discuss.

Why doesn't CBS and USA Today reveal their "credible" source? Could it be it would even deliver even MORE embarassment? They need to supeona his ass.

The current suspect in the forged memos incident is a guy named Bill Burkett. There are some indications that the memo's were faxed from a Kinkos in Texas where Burkett, a longtime critic of the president, has an account.

Here is a brief excerpt from a blogger on the subject:

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/045912.php


It has been my contention since Sunday that the identity of at least one of Dan Rather's primary sources -- and perhaps the very source who provided him with the forgeries -- is being concealed not at the source's insistence, but at Rather's contrivance.

This source's identity is withheld not to protect the source, but to protect Rather-- because exposure of this source to scrutiny would prove embarassing to Rather and CBS News. The source in question has a strong political animus against George Bush -- he is a member of what might be charitably called "the florid left" -- and a personal animus against Bush as well. The source in question blames Bush personally for (as Governor) denying him medical treatment he needed due to illness resulting in subsequent nervous breakdowns (the latter according to Newsweek).

This man is Bill Burkett. Although he has an obvious motive to lie about Bush, Burkett was nevertheless used as a principal source for Dan Rather's now-infamous 60 Minutes II attack on George Bush's TANG service, and, indeed, is one of the sources called "unimpeachable" by Rather in defense of that report.

The New York Times has asked his lawyer whether Burkett was responsible for providing Dan Rather with the forgeries, a question the lawyer refused to answer. But it is not necessary to assume he had anything at all to do with the actual forgeries to question Rather's objectivity and ethics in using Mr. Burkett as a source at all -- and an anonymous one at that.

Because even if Burkett only provided background information and confirmations for other parts of the story, his credibility is extremely questionable -- and certainly not "unimpeachable" credibility in any event.

Burkett was a guy who, during the 2000 campaign, came up with a story that he had witnessed an improper effort to sanitize Bush's ANG record. He has had an axe to grind with Bush since he was denied some sort of medical treatment while Bush was Governor of Texas. Burkett's account was disputed by several other key players. You can read about it <a href="http://ace.mu.nu/archives/045912.php">here</a>

[watermock]

N.B. Burkett and Heldt have both written for TomPaine.com, which is run by Bill Moyers's son. We are never more than one or two degrees of separation from Rather with either one of them.

[patteeu]

Check out this comment posted on DGCI.nett:

http://www.dgci.net/archives/001452.html

Mary Mapes the producer of the CBS 60 minutes report was formerly a producer at a Seattle television station, she is known for being a ultra liberal with an agenda.

John Carlson is a talk show commentator for Seattle Radio Station KVI 570, http://www.kvi.com/:
Sept. 10, 2004
KVI's John Carlson said Mary Mapes use to be a News producer at KIRO TV in Seattle until moving on to CBS 60 Minutes about 10-12 years ago. He worked with her and said she was the most liberal person at KIRO and had a very leftist view when producing the news program. John said when he heard the story break at CBS, that he bet Mary Mapes is behind it. It has been announced that Mary was the one to go out and obtain the bogus documents.

Mary's father just called the John Carlson show. I was expecting him to give John He$# for talking about his daughter, but he said he is ashamed of her. He knows of her leftist views.

Posted by: Jack at September 12, 2004 09:55 AM

ROFL!

[Exile_In_SJ]

N.B. Burkett and Heldt have both written for TomPaine.com, which is run by Bill Moyers's son. We are never more than one or two degrees of separation from Rather with either one of them.

Burkett is a charter member of the BDS (BushDerangementSyndrome) He's already been caught in one lie about Bush and anything more he says is most likely another lie.

And Bill Moyers son is as far left as Bill Moyer. Too funny.

[Blueflame]

There could be nothing better for Bush than to have this issue not go away. It's a big time loser for Kerry regardless of the facts of the Bush ANG matter. The fact that this has become more about CBS's dishonor and a mystery about who forged the documents is just icing on the cake. Nobody cares about Bush's ANG service except the people who are already solidly against voting for him.

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

[Rohirrim]

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

From what I've read, there were two individuals in the Texas Guard (Burkett and another guy named - I think - Coon, or something) who testified that while Bush was governor, his aides instructed commanders in the Guard to destroy any documents regarding the "bad side" of Bush's service. They saw these shredded documents in the trash. That's why my hypothesis is that Burkett tried to recreate these memos (which he had read) from memory. The fact that Killian's secretary says that such memos did exist, and did relate the same info found in the CBS docs, backs up this theory.

Interesting, isn't it? The Right is willing to tear into Kerry's record to try and prove that he didn't "earn" his Purple Hearts, but the same type of inquiry to determine whether or not Bush "earned" an honorable discharge, they consider "dirty tricks." ;D

[Exile_In_SJ]

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

Actually it's now a no lose situation for Bush. People know these memos were fake. If some other memos surface purporting to be the original REAL memos, how can anyone now trust them? Fake documents were made to smear Bush, how can anything similar now be believed? If the left and Rather would lie and do this, then anything related to this particular subject is also tainted.

You see Rather by interviewing the old lady tacitly admits the documents are fake. It's over. They were either complicit or duped. Now if they show up with the 'originals' and now say, trust us, these are the real ones.... no one, except the far far left will believe them. This avenue for smearing Bush is now closed.

[Rohirrim]

Actually it's now a no lose situation for Bush. People know these memos were fake. If some other memos surface purporting to be the original REAL memos, how can anyone now trust them? Fake documents were made to smear Bush, how can anything similar now be believed? If the left and Rather would lie and do this, then anything related to this particular subject is also tainted.

You see Rather by interviewing the old lady tacitly admits the documents are fake. It's over. They were either complicit or duped. Now if they show up with the 'originals' and now say, trust us, these are the real ones.... no one, except the far far left will believe them. This avenue for smearing Bush is now closed.

"Smearing Bush?" I notice you slyly ignore the content of the documents, which Killian's secretary has no problem with. She distinctly remembers the conversations about Bush because they were so out of the ordinary. Face it, Bush did not "earn" an honorable discharge.

[Exile_In_SJ]

By lying about this and using the obvious forgeries, the Democrats, and make no mistake, it was the democrats, have innoculated Bush on this subject.

[Blueflame]

Actually it's now a no lose situation for Bush. People know these memos were fake.

Do they? What definitive proof has been presented that they're fake? I'd like to see the evidence.

All we've seen are "expert opinions" that they're forged. And you know what opinions are like....

If some other memos surface purporting to be the original REAL memos, how can anyone now trust them? Fake documents were made to smear Bush, how can anything similar now be believed? If the left and Rather would lie and do this, then anything related to this particular subject is also tainted.

If any other memos surface, those will have to be judged on their own merit. For your argument to hold water, concrete proof that the memos were forged would have to be established, as well as a solid connection between Dan Rather and the DNC. Neither has occurred.

You see Rather by interviewing the old lady tacitly admits the documents are fake. It's over. They were either complicit or duped. Now if they show up with the 'originals' and now say, trust us, these are the real ones.... no one, except the far far left will believe them. This avenue for smearing Bush is now closed.

Wrong. The old lady asserts that she did not type those particular memos. That's all she "admitted"....

[Exile_In_SJ]

Sure he did earn the honorable discharge. Has anyone proven otherwise?

It may be your opinion, that he didn't, but that's all it is, your opinion. According to the US Government and history, he served perfectly honorably.

[patteeu]

I beg to differ. This issue is equally risky for Bush and Rather, imo. It's my opinion that even if the released memos are copies, the originals in all likelihood exist. If the original documents and/or substantiation of the content of those memos does, in fact, exist, it's going to vindicate Rather and CBS.... and devastate the Bush campaign. Not because of what happened 30+ years ago, but because it would indicate that he has covered it up and lied about it to this day. For a guy who's running on personal integrity and "strength of character", that would not be a welcome disclosure, I think.

It will be interesting to see how things play out.

Dream on. ROFL!

[Exile_In_SJ]

the definitive proof that the documents are forged are the overlays created by several sources using ms word. The new ms word documents are exact matches for the cya document, supposedly made in 1972. That document is false.

Mrs. knox on cbs last night said the documents were fake, and she was the secretary for the officer in question. The documents are false.

Next question.

[Blueflame]

Sure he did earn the honorable discharge. Has anyone proven otherwise?

It may be your opinion, that he didn't, but that's all it is, your opinion. According to the US Government and history, he served perfectly honorably.

It's my opinion that the American people deserve a satisfactory answer to the question of why he blew off his required flight physical. He hasn't denied doing that, nor has he given anything more than a lame excuse for it.

If such a question were posed regarding Kerry's service, you'd want it answered.

[Exile_In_SJ]

she was his secretary. His family asserts he did not type. No one has come forth to claim they typed them. No single machine has been identified that 1. could produce them, 2. that would commonly be used in an ANG outfit.

all other documents attributed to mr. Killian are effusive in his praise for Bush.

anyone who is npot an anti-Bush partisan would conclude that they are fake. And as one survey shows only 27% believe they are real, which closely alignes with the far left in this country.

The documents are fake. Most people recognize that.

[Blueflame]

she was his secretary. His family asserts he did not type. No one has come forth to claim they typed them. No single machine has been identified that 1. could produce them, 2. that would commonly be used in an ANG outfit.

all other documents attributed to mr. Killian are effusive in his praise for Bush.

anyone who is npot an anti-Bush partisan would conclude that they are fake. And as one survey shows only 27% believe they are real, which closely alignes with the far left in this country.

The documents are fake. Most people recognize that.

Speculation, conjecture and opinion.

[patteeu]

Do they? What definitive proof has been presented that they're fake? I'd like to see the evidence.

All we've seen are "expert opinions" that they're forged. And you know what opinions are like....

Wrong, as usual. The woman who says she typed memos containing similar content for Killian says the ones presented by CBS News are fake. Add this testimony from a supportive witness (promoted by Dan Rather himself) on top of all the expert testimony and you have about as much proof as you can have, absent Killian rising from the dead and denying their authenticity to you in person.

If any other memos surface, those will have to be judged on their own merit. For your argument to hold water, concrete proof that the memos were forged would have to be established, as well as a solid connection between Dan Rather and the DNC. Neither has occurred.

Being as open-minded as you are (sarcasm intended), you will be free to judge future memos on their own merit. However, the public at large will be understandably skeptical. The Bush ANG issue is a loser for JFKerry. By all means, let's keep it alive. Karl Rove couldn't have designed a better situation for his candidate.



Wrong. The old lady asserts that she did not type those particular memos. That's all she "admitted"....

That's not what Rather thinks she said:

Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. But he said, "I take very seriously her belief that the documents are not authentic.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24633-2004Sep15.html

[Exile_In_SJ]

It's my opinion that the American people deserve a satisfactory answer to the question of why he blew off his required flight physical. He hasn't denied doing that, nor has he given anything more than a lame excuse for it.

If such a question were posed regarding Kerry's service, you'd want it answered.


Why should he? the American public as a whole could care less if he did or didn't. Again, only the far left cares. This is what, GWB's 4th major election and no one has given a hoot. This whole ANG forgery flap has only helped GWB, not hurt him. It shows how shrill and hateful his opponents can be and how low they will go.

[Rohirrim]

By lying about this and using the obvious forgeries, the Democrats, and make no mistake, it was the democrats, have innoculated Bush on this subject.

You make this sound like some kind of victory. Bush used connections to get into the Guard, then does not fulfill the service requirement, but through connections again, gets the honorable discharge anyway - and because CBS screwed up with these documents - Bush wins. And that's a good thing? Interesting set of ethics you've got working there.

[azbronco]

It's my opinion that the American people deserve a satisfactory answer to the question of why he blew off his required flight physical. He hasn't denied doing that, nor has he given anything more than a lame excuse for it.

If such a question were posed regarding Kerry's service, you'd want it answered.
There are numerous issues regarding kerry's service that have been asked, but he won't sign the form to have his records released. The American people deserve satisfactory answers to: Was he really in cambodia, did he commit war crimes, did he commit treason by coming to the aid and comfort of the enemy, etc.?

[patteeu]

You make this sound like some kind of victory. Bush used connections to get into the Guard, then does not fulfill the service requirement, but through connections again, gets the honorable discharge anyway - and because CBS screwed up with these documents - Bush wins. And that's a good thing? Interesting set of ethics you've got working there.

Yes, I guess I can see your point. But what I find real interesting is how eager you are to get Bush to admit to something most of us already think happened (i.e. getting favorable treatment regarding his Vietnam-era service) but you show absolutely no interest in getting to the bottom of a brazen attempt to defraud the voting public. At best, this scandal includes a major news organization that didn't do their due diligence when they allowed a renegade partisan to perform this hoax and at worst it represents collusion between that news organization and the dirty tricks branch of one of our major political parties. Talk about an interesting set of ethics.

[Rohirrim]

Yes, I guess I can see your point. But what I find real interesting is how eager you are to get Bush to admit to something most of us already think happened (i.e. getting favorable treatment regarding his Vietnam-era service) but you show absolutely no interest in getting to the bottom of a brazen attempt to defraud the voting public. At best, this scandal includes a major news organization that didn't do their due diligence when they allowed a renegade partisan to perform this hoax and at worst it represents collusion between that news organization and the dirty tricks branch of one of our major political parties. Talk about an interesting set of ethics.

Like I've said a couple of times already, I have yet to see any connection whatsover to this doc flap and the DNC. From what I've seen, this is between Burkett and CBS. I imagine they're both going to pay for it, depending on how it all washes out. If the docs are proved to be false, Rather is history at CBS. I don't know what happens to Burkett. Fraud charges?

Now, on the other hand, if Bush didn't actually "earn" an honorable discharge by fulfilling the service requirements - and this, after receiving preferential treatment to get in the Guard - what happens to him? Shouldn't the discharge be rescinded - at least?

I don't really care about the preferential treatment. That's a moot point -
proven beyond all doubt. Now the question is, "Did Bush earn an honorable discharge?" The media were willing to rip Kerry apart over the question of whether or not he earned his Purple Hearts based upon the testimony of men, some of whom - O'Neill, for instance - were not even there. Are they willing to exercise the same diligence toward Bush's fulfillment of the service requirement?

[watermock]

They just don't get it.

Over 250 veterans willing to sign Name, Rank and Serial Number.

Dan Blather drags some 86 year old woman out.

Oh man, it's just so damn funny.

[Blueflame]

Wrong, as usual. The woman who says she typed memos containing similar content for Killian says the ones presented by CBS News are fake. Add this testimony from a supportive witness (promoted by Dan Rather himself) on top of all the expert testimony and you have about as much proof as you can have, absent Killian rising from the dead and denying their authenticity to you in person.

Excuse me, but that is the secretary's opinion, is it not?

Being as open-minded as you are (sarcasm intended), you will be free to judge future memos on their own merit. However, the public at large will be understandably skeptical. The Bush ANG issue is a loser for JFKerry. By all means, let's keep it alive. Karl Rove couldn't have designed a better situation for his candidate.

Perhaps that's precisely what Rove did... and perhaps it's provable, too. :P


That's not what Rather thinks she said:

Rather said he was "relieved and pleased" by Knox's comments that the disputed memos reflected Killian's view of the favorable treatment that Bush received in the military unit. But he said, "I take very seriously her belief that the documents are not authentic.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24633-2004Sep15.html

OK, so now you've presented Rather's opinion of the secretary's opinion.

Again, the focus is on the diversion and not the substance of the memos. It's not the authenticity or lack thereof that is key here; it's the newly-disclosed information that Bush allegedly defied a direct order to report for that flight physical, requiring a CYA memo to be written. And this new info has not been addressed, much less contested.

[watermock]

Excuse me, but that is the secretary's opinion, is it not?

That is Dan Blather's credible source. Noone threw this 86 year old woman into the fray noone other than Dan Rather.

[watermock]

OK, so now you've presented Rather's opinion of the secretary's opinion.

Unbelievable. At this point, Rather hasn't even declared this womans story. Rather is the one presenting a story of "opinion"

so we have an opinion of a opinion in your own words.

[Rohirrim]

I saw the "old woman" on 60 Minutes the other night. She looked pretty sharp, and extremely credible to me. She said she doesn't believe in the authenticity of the documents, but does believe in their content.

The Texans for Truth, Gary Trudeau, and various others have now contributed to a reward equaling (by now) somewhere around $75,000 for anyone who can come forward and testify that Bush showed up in Alabama. So far, no takers. He was supposed to sign up for duty in Boston also. Records show he did not do that. Records also show he did not take the flight physical. So, who gave him the honorable discharge?

[watermock]

You have Gary Trudau and an 86 year old woman covering your ass?

Why not think about this there Genius.

Why doesn't Dan Blather reveal his source?

How about that?

Do we need a cartoonist and an 86 year old woman to validate Dan Rather?

What are you smoking?

I allready posted the discharge, and you said my cat marched on it.

Jesus Christ.

Hey listen to this my smartass, I produced an actual photocopy.

What part of this don't you understand?

[Rohirrim]

How do I know where that photocopy came from? For all I know, you put that together at Kinkos. :pfbbt:

[Blueflame]

You have Gary Trudau and an 86 year old woman covering your ass?

Why not think about this there Genius.

Why doesn't Dan Blather reveal his source?

How about that?

Why doesn't Novak reveal the source that identified Valerie Plame to him so that he could expose her as a CIA agent?

Do we need a cartoonist and an 86 year old woman to validate Dan Rather?

What are you smoking?

I allready posted the discharge, and you said my cat marched on it.

Jesus Christ.

Hey listen to this my smartass, I produced an actual photocopy.

What part of this don't you understand?

We have unclaimed rewards for anyone who can provide even a simple snapshot of Bush in Alabama... and these are significant monetary amounts... yet no one has come forward with any evidence.

[watermock]

Records show he was released approximately 6 months early.

What part of this don't you understand? I allready posted an ACTUAL photocopy of his discharge.

Look what you have:

You have an 86 year old woman you call "credible". You have a Microsoft Word Document LABF thinks was made my some Selectric typewriter when it has a Kinkos Stamp from Texas. You have a liberal CARTOONIST offering money.

And your still buying it. Dan Rather has backed off, you want me to believe a Cartoonist and an 86 year old secretary that can't even produce a decent urine sample yet alone a document other than heresay, and your trying to pass it off.

It's hysterical.

[Exile_In_SJ]

here is some stuff from guys who served with Bush in the TANG.....
(from betsys blog)

Jed Babbin actually talked to some men who were in Bush's squadron in the TANG. That is something that Dan didn't do, because he apparently thought the secretary would know more about what the men thought than the men themselves. Here is Babbin's report.
Mrs. Knox said that though the CBS documents weren't real, what is stated in the forgeries is. She talked and talked about how Killian was upset with Mr. Bush, how the rest of the pilots resented him for being a child of privilege, and said that Killian's son -- who disputes the validity of the CBS case against Mr. Bush -- "...has no way of knowing whether it's true or not." And she does? Not according to the members of the squadron I spoke to this morning.

Col. Bill Campenni (USAF, Ret.) wondered just how Mrs. Knox would have more knowledge than Killian's son. He told me that not only was young Killian the son of the squadron commander, he was a member of the squadron on duty with the rest of the guys. Mrs. Knox -- the squadron secretary -- only knew paper. Not people. Killian's son was in a very good position to know, and she wasn't.

Mrs. Knox said she remembered that Killian was upset because Mr. Bush didn't take his flight physical. And she transforms Killian's supposed frustration into a statement that the other pilots werer resentful of Mr. Bush be cause of his attitude. That's flatly false according to both Campenni and Joe Glavin, another pilot who flew with Dubya. I asked Glavin if there was any such resentment of Bush. He said, "Absolutely not," and added that you'd have a really hard time finding anyone who would agree with that.

(Bill Campenni reminds me that though Mr. Bush missed the physical, it made no sense for him to have taken one. He wasn't going to continue flying. His skill with the F-102 was obsolete, and he wasn't going to retrain for another aircraft. He was about to leave the Guard to go to Harvard. Which makes it pretty unlikely that Killian actually ordered Mr. Bush to take the physical.)

So why is Mrs. Knox saying all this? Glavin says nobody should care what she said. "She had nothing to do with the unit. She didn't fly, she didn't hang out with us." According to Glavin, she was out of the mainstream of the squadron, in an office that the pilots only visited occasionally. According to Bill Campenni, Knox is a "yellow dog" democrat, and her biases were noticeable even in 1972. Leave it to CBS to find the one yellow dog Dem in the 1972 Texas Air National Guard. Her statement is as valid as the CBS memos.


Remember that Knox said that Killian's son wouldn't know what his father thought or about the situation with Bush. Apparently, she didn't know that the son was part of the unit and so would know more than she does.

How lame is that. Would 60 Minutes have ever constructed this story if all they had was the secretary and Ben Barnes, Kerry's 3rd biggest contributor? Not if they were fairly looking at this as a real story rather than a chance to do a hatchet job on Bush.

[Blueflame]

Records show he was released approximately 6 months early.

No, records show that he was absent... with no one knowing where he was or what he was doing... during a 5-month timeframe between May and October of 1972, when he was supposed to be reporting to the TANG. Noteworthy is the fact that he did not request transfer to Alabama until September 1972.

What part of this don't you understand? I allready posted an ACTUAL photocopy of his discharge.

Look what you have:

You have an 86 year old woman you call "credible". You have a Microsoft Word Document LABF thinks was made my some Selectric typewriter when it has a Kinkos Stamp from Texas. You have a liberal CARTOONIST offering money.

And your still buying it. Dan Rather has backed off, you want me to believe a Cartoonist and an 86 year old secretary that can't even produce a decent urine sample yet alone a document other than heresay, and your trying to pass it off.

Methinks it just might have been Bush who wasn't able to "produce a decent urine sample"... and that could be the true reason he blew off that flight physical....

It's hysterical.

You bet it is... and some conservatives think its a good thing for the issue to remain in the spotlight. Ha!

[patteeu]

Excuse me, but that is the secretary's opinion, is it not?

Weren't you complaining that we only had a battle of expert opinion. Now you want to say that all opinion is irrelevant. You are comical.

Perhaps that's precisely what Rove did... and perhaps it's provable, too. :P

I know you aren't serious.

OK, so now you've presented Rather's opinion of the secretary's opinion.

Not convinced huh? You are hopeless.

[watermock]

Why doesn't Novak reveal the source that identified Valerie Plame to him so that he could expose her as a CIA agent?



We have unclaimed rewards for anyone who can provide even a simple snapshot of Bush in Alabama... and these are significant monetary amounts... yet no one has come forward with any evidence.

Look at the discharge papers. He was released to work for a political campaign.

I'm not blind. The document shows he was about 6 months short of 6 years. What part don't you understand?

He was released 6 months early and given an honorable discharge. What part of this is beyond your comprehension?

You can put up a million dollars. Fact is he was discharged, bottom line. This is so amusing.

HE WAS GIVEN A RELEASE WITH 5 YEARS 4 MONTHS 28 DAYS.

What part of this don't you understand?

There was never any AWOL charge, yet alone a conviction.

He was released to work on a political campaign, and probabably got preferential treatment. That has never been the issue. The issue has been forgery.

Let me explain this just one last time. Bush was released from duty but liable to be pulled up again at will.

His plane the F-102 was a widowmaker and retired.

He could of retrained for the F-105 which was another deathtrap. Only the F-111 finally had the computers to run the ground radar to deliver nuclear weapons under the Soviet Radar.

You people are a bunch of fools that don't have a clue.

[patteeu]

I saw the "old woman" on 60 Minutes the other night. She looked pretty sharp, and extremely credible to me. She said she doesn't believe in the authenticity of the documents, but does believe in their content.

That's just your opinion of her opinion. I won't believe it until I see proof. Hey, this BlueFlame argument style is really cool.

Sorry for the flippant response Rohirrim, but I couldn't help it.

[Blueflame]

Weren't you complaining that we only had a battle of expert opinion. Now you want to say that all opinion is irrelevant. You are comical.



I know you aren't serious.



Not convinced huh? You are hopeless.

Yeah, I've been saying this whole debate will end up as "these experts' opinion is that they could be authentic" and "these experts' opinion is that they're probably forged".

Seriously, I think this saga has not yet run its course.

How about addressing the content of the memos? That's the real story; not whether they're copies or originals...

[watermock]

I don't know how many times I have to explain that he was released aproximately 6 months early to work on a political campaign.

What part of Honorable Discharge don't you understand?

He served 5 years, 4 months, 28 days.

He was Dismissed, I allready posted a photocopy, a HELL OF ALOT MORE THAN DAN BLATHER HAS PRODUCED.

I suggest you provide a single piece of evidence that Dan Rather isn't a criminal liar.

[Blueflame]

Look at the discharge papers. He was released to work for a political campaign.

I'm not blind. The document shows he was about 6 months short of 6 years. What part don't you understand?

Before that, he was AWOL for five months. His pay records prove this.

He was released 6 months early and given an honorable discharge. What part of this is beyond your comprehension?

You can put up a million dollars. Fact is he was discharged, bottom line. This is so amusing.

HE WAS GIVEN A RELEASE WITH 5 YEARS 4 MONTHS 28 DAYS.

What part of this don't you understand?

There was never any AWOL charge, yet alone a conviction.

He was released to work on a political campaign, and probabably got preferential treatment. That has never been the issue. The issue has been forgery.

No, the issue is him allegedly disregarding a direct order to show up for the flight physical and skipping town instead.

Let me explain this just one last time. Bush was released from duty but liable to be pulled up again at will.

His plane the F-102 was a widowmaker and retired.

He could of retrained for the F-105 which was another deathtrap. Only the F-111 finally had the computers to run the ground radar to deliver nuclear weapons under the Soviet Radar.

You people are a bunch of fools that don't have a clue.

The "retired airplane" excuse is just that. A lame excuse. The F-102 was still in use when he blew off the physical.

[watermock]

Yeah, I've been saying this whole debate will end up as "these experts' opinion is that they could be authentic" and "these experts' opinion is that they're probably forged".

What part of "could be authentic" and "these esperts opinion is that they are probably forged dont you understand?"

This is so amusing.

There isn't an expert opinion other than to say the documents are outright fakes.

What part of this is escaping your comprehension?

[RaiderH8r]

Excuse me, but that is the secretary's opinion, is it not?



Perhaps that's precisely what Rove did... and perhaps it's provable, too. :P




OK, so now you've presented Rather's opinion of the secretary's opinion.

Again, the focus is on the diversion and not the substance of the memos. It's not the authenticity or lack thereof that is key here; it's the newly-disclosed information that Bush allegedly defied a direct order to report for that flight physical, requiring a CYA memo to be written. And this new info has not been addressed, much less contested.

Focus is on the diversion not the substance of the memos? Are you f@cking kidding? This is a joke right? Forget that the "proof" was fabricated. Forget that the whole impetus for this discussion is false. What is really important is the newly-disclosed information, stemming from the fabricated BS, is what is NOW important. Who is diverting attention now? Come off of it. The documents are BS therefor anything IN the documents is BS, no matter how many people come forward and SAY that it is fact. Until someone provides ACTUAL proof of documentation it is all speculation and hear say. Good God, the honus is not on the President to proove he was in the guard, that point has been conceded. The honus is on his accusers proving their allegations.

[watermock]

Totally False.

He was delivered an Honarable Discharge which I have allready posted.

What part of an actual documented release form is confusing you?

I suggest you worry about Dan Blathers crap.

I can give you Bush's Honorable Discharge. I allready have three times. You people just look at it like blind Mules.

It's a signed document photocopy of release. Take it for you want, it's a hell of alot more genuine that this CrapHole Dan Rather has created.

It's genuine, and substantiated. So screw yourselves, your all done. He was relieved 6 months early.

I have the proof. Want to play I am an idiot LABF?

[watermock]

I will poke a Terminator right thru your head.

You go play the game about Bush not having an Honorable Discharge and watch me just play with you like a mouse. Go play with it.

[Blueflame]

Focus is on the diversion not the substance of the memos? Are you f@cking kidding? This is a joke right? Forget that the "proof" was fabricated. Forget that the whole impetus for this discussion is false. What is really important is the newly-disclosed information, stemming from the fabricated BS, is what is NOW important. Who is diverting attention now? Come off of it. The documents are BS therefor anything IN the documents is BS, no matter how many people come forward and SAY that it is fact. Until someone provides ACTUAL proof of documentation it is all speculation and hear say. Good God, the honus is not on the President to proove he was in the guard, that point has been conceded. The honus is on his accusers proving their allegations.

Even if the memos were not original copies, what difference does that make if the content is true? No one has said it's not. We do know that Bush blew off his physical and was subsequently grounded. Did he defy a direct order to report for that physical? In the absence of any evidence to the contrary (or even a denial) I'm guessing he did. We know from his payroll records that he didn't show up at the TANG in May, June, July, August, or September of 1972 when he was supposed to.

[Rohirrim]

I'm sending my dogs out to go cat hunting - in Iowa. thwack

[RaiderH8r]

Even if the memos were not original copies, what difference does that make if the content is true? No one has said it's not. We do know that Bush blew off his physical and was subsequently grounded. Did he defy a direct order to report for that physical? In the absence of any evidence to the contrary (or even a denial) I'm guessing he did. We know from his payroll records that he didn't show up at the TANG in May, June, July, August, or September of 1972 when he was supposed to.
And you can speculate and theorize until the sun sets in the east, still does not PROVE anything. The fact that the whole discussion was prompted by falsified documents discredits the position. You expect a reasonable person to buy into an argument based on false pretenses?

Furthermore, why would the President address it? Why give this BS the weight of the White House recognizing it as anything close to legitimate? Kerry screwed up, he didn't bash the Swift vote vets back early and then got in the game late and lent credibility to their story by trying to refute it piece by piece. He's still doing it. If you were Kerry's opponent would you want to wade into the same sh!tstorm Johnny boy is in now? 47 days left and he's going to spend it trying to recover from this "30 years ago" shtick. HA HA.

[patteeu]

Yeah, I've been saying this whole debate will end up as "these experts' opinion is that they could be authentic" and "these experts' opinion is that they're probably forged".

Seriously, I think this saga has not yet run its course.

How about addressing the content of the memos? That's the real story; not whether they're copies or originals...

As I've said before, I believe GWBush probably got preferential treatment regarding his ANG duty. I also believe he earned his honorable discharge (even if his preferential treatment allowed him to earn it more easily than the average Joe) and that his actions didn't amount to being AWOL (even if he didn't attend any ANG events for long periods of time). To be AWOL, you have to be absent without permission. If he was absent without permission he would have been charged. If it was only because of preferential treatment that he was granted permission then it would have bothered me at the time, but not 30+ years later. It wouldn't be Bush that I'd be so upset with though, it would be those granting him the special treatment. Nothing that has been revealed regarding his service is of any interest to me at all.

[patteeu]

Before that, he was AWOL for five months. His pay records prove this.

Do his pay records indicate that he was absent without permission and that his commanding officer charged him with being AWOL? If not, then they don't prove anything.

[patteeu]

What part of "could be authentic" and "these esperts opinion is that they are probably forged dont you understand?"

This is so amusing.

There isn't an expert opinion other than to say the documents are outright fakes.

What part of this is escaping your comprehension?

Every part?

[watermock]

maybe you misunderstood me.

Look, Dubya isn't making himself out as some war Hero, Kerry did!

Was Clinton a war hero?

What is wrong with you people?

It's incredibly amusing when 270 Veterans hate Kerry and Dan Blather can't produce a single person.

[watermock]

There are 270 people that think Kerry is a POS.

Dan Blather has yet to produce ONE.

[Rohirrim]

As I've said before, I believe GWBush probably got preferential treatment regarding his ANG duty. I also believe he earned his honorable discharge (even if his preferential treatment allowed him to earn it more easily than the average Joe) and that his actions didn't amount to being AWOL (even if he didn't attend any ANG events for long periods of time). To be AWOL, you have to be absent without permission. If he was absent without permission he would have been charged. If it was only because of preferential treatment that he was granted permission then it would have bothered me at the time, but not 30+ years later. It wouldn't be Bush that I'd be so upset with though, it would be those granting him the special treatment. Nothing that has been revealed regarding his service is of any interest to me at all.

The tricky part of that stance is that there are a couple of witnesses who testify that "Governor" Bush sent his aides out to the local commanders of the Texas Guard and had them destroy documents pertaining to his service. They claim that they saw the shredded documents. This isn't too hard to believe. If the Guard commanders were willing to grease his service when he was the son of a congressman, why wouldn't they be willing to do more when he's governor of the state? So, we can't know if was AWOL or not. We can't know if his commander intended to write him up, but was stopped by higher ups.

A secretary of Bush's commander says that he kept a CYA file and that she had seen it, and added documents to it. She says she read the documents and they pertained to Bush. She remembers discussing it with him. She further states that the "content" of the CBS documents is the same as Killian's CYA file, but the documents are not authentic. The original documents no longer exist. But CBS says they do, and that these are them. What's the logical answer? Think, Muldar. Think!

[Blueflame]

Do his pay records indicate that he was absent without permission and that his commanding officer charged him with being AWOL? If not, then they don't prove anything.

They show that he wasn't paid for those months.

[watermock]

An 86 year old woman is a "couple witnesses" It's literally hysterical.

[watermock]

Listen to the LABF Conspiracy. They claim that they saw the shredded documents. This isn't too hard to believe. If the Guard commanders were willing to grease his service when he was the son of a congressman, why wouldn't they be willing to do more when he's governor of the state? So, we can't know if was AWOL or not. We can't know if his commander intended to write him up, but was stopped by higher ups.

PRODUCE A WITNESS YOU DIMWIT.

"The tricky part of that stance is that there are a couple of witnesses who testify that "Governor" Bush sent his aides out to the local commanders of the Texas Guard and had them destroy documents pertaining to his service."

Got anything to support than than Dan Blather?

Who are the "witnesses" there Genius?

[broncogary]

Listen to the LABF Conspiracy. "The tricky part of that stance is that there are a couple of witnesses who testify that "Governor" Bush sent his aides out to the local commanders of the Texas Guard and had them destroy documents pertaining to his service. They claim that they saw the shredded documents. This isn't too hard to believe. If the Guard commanders were willing to grease his service when he was the son of a congressman, why wouldn't they be willing to do more when he's governor of the state? So, we can't know if was AWOL or not. We can't know if his commander intended to write him up, but was stopped by higher ups.

I thought is was DoubleSpeak and then I found out I was wrong. :hitself:

[Rohirrim]

Yeah. Something like that could never happen in Texas.

[watermock]

Got alot of "coulds" don't we.

I just baited you Dimwits.

Name one credible witness. They say they have a "couple witnesses". Well Gee Wiz they shouldn't be to hard to find should they?

"They claim that they saw the shredded documents.

Shouldn't these people be easy to find?

Dan Blather should be able to find them.

[watermock]

So where are the "couple of witnesses".

[watermock]

They claim that they saw the shredded documents. This isn't too hard to believe.

Oohh...this isn't too hard to believe?

This is hillarious.

"They" saw the shredded documents.

And who are they again?

[patteeu]

The tricky part of that stance is that there are a couple of witnesses who testify that "Governor" Bush sent his aides out to the local commanders of the Texas Guard and had them destroy documents pertaining to his service. They claim that they saw the shredded documents. This isn't too hard to believe. If the Guard commanders were willing to grease his service when he was the son of a congressman, why wouldn't they be willing to do more when he's governor of the state? So, we can't know if was AWOL or not. We can't know if his commander intended to write him up, but was stopped by higher ups.

The only tricky part of that would be a discovery of proof that Bush ordered the destruction of files while Governor. That would bother me, and I think it would be a relevant development, although I have to admit that I'd probably still give him a pass at this point because I think he is the better choice for POTUS for the next 4 years.

The second part seems beside the point to me. If higher ups prevented him from being charged with AWOL, then that sounds like permission to me. The military is responsible for making those decisions not one specific commanding officer. If the commanding officer was overruled by his superiors, then he did the right thing by obeying his orders.

A secretary of Bush's commander says that he kept a CYA file and that she had seen it, and added documents to it. She says she read the documents and they pertained to Bush. She remembers discussing it with him. She further states that the "content" of the CBS documents is the same as Killian's CYA file, but the documents are not authentic. The original documents no longer exist. But CBS says they do, and that these are them. What's the logical answer? Think, Muldar. Think!

The logical answer is that they don't exist. Whether that's because they never existed or because Killian destroyed them when he no longer had use for them, or because Bush ordered them destroyed, I don't know. But it isn't plausible that they've existed for the past 5 or 6 years (when the story of document destruction began) but that whoever had them waited until now to retype them and hand the copied version over to CBS.

[patteeu]

They show that he wasn't paid for those months.

Then (assuming you are telling the truth) that's all they prove. Once again, you are guilty of over-reaching with your original assertion. I think I just made that point about you in another thread.

[Blueflame]

Then (assuming you are telling the truth) that's all they prove. Once again, you are guilty of over-reaching with your original assertion. I think I just made that point about you in another thread.

If the records show he wasn't paid (ie. was absent from his scheduled drills;or wouldn't he have been paid?)... yet no records show that he had permission to be absent... then he was absent without official leave, or AWOL. Call it overreaching if you like, but by definition, that's what it is.

[patteeu]

If the records show he wasn't paid (ie. was absent from his scheduled drills;or wouldn't he have been paid?)... yet no records show that he had permission to be absent... then he was absent without official leave, or AWOL. Call it overreaching if you like, but by definition, that's what it is.

The definition of AWOL is that you must be absent without permission. Pay records don't even prove absence (although they are pretty good indicators) and they certainly don't tell us anything about whether or not the absence had been excused. But there is another document that does clear this mystery up. Mock posted it earlier. It's called an Honerable Discharge. You don't get them if you are AWOL.

[Blueflame]

The definition of AWOL is that you must be absent without permission. Pay records don't even prove absence (although they are pretty good indicators) and they certainly don't tell us anything about whether or not the absence had been excused. But there is another document that does clear this mystery up. Mock posted it earlier. It's called an Honerable Discharge. You don't get them if you are AWOL.

An interesting article on the subject matter.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20040916/ap_on_el_pr/bush_guard_records

[Mile High Shack]

the real question is

why does anyone care?

and does this effect his ability to lead the country?

man I'm so sick of this.

[alkemical]

it does depending whichever side you cheer for.

that's why i shake with the belief this country is firmly on a permanent slide.

too many sheep allowed the wolves to shepherd

[Exile_In_SJ]

Before that, he was AWOL for five months. His pay records prove this.


from betsys blog....
http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/

Lorie Byrd has a real scoop at Polipundit. She put up a post by an experienced officer in the reserve calling himself Oak Leaf. Oak Leaf explains why there are no pay stubs for Bush when he was in Alabama. Bush was serving without pay.
Civilians would be astonished to discover that many reservists perform duties without pay. In reviewing my own records, 13% of my reserve man days in my first six years were without pay and surprisingly while a college student, 21% of my reserve man days were performed without pay. A search of the web led me to AF Form 1288 (front/back) in which 1LT Bush requests duty in Alabama on May 24, 1972. Block 17 shows that the request is "no pay, training category G." In the approval section, it is clearly disclosed that this is "pay group none." Why is this important? Regardless, of the ultimate unit he ended up training with, it shows that 1LT Bush was willing to train without pay. The old media remains focused on pay records!! In regards to pay records, USA Today states, "They show he was paid for 82 days in 1972 and 1973, but show no service for five months between April and October 1972." Pay records would show no service during this time period because he was not paid! 1LT Bush served his country without pay. That is why there is no pay record.
Lorie points out that most in the media haven't served in the military so don't know how to interpret the military records.

[alkemical]

arent blogs editorials?

argument from authority = spoonfed

[watermock]

Betsy's Blog is brutal. What a site. It TOTALLY blows up Dan Rather and his "elastic truth".

[alkemical]

and glory thought i was wrong when i told him perception is reality

[patteeu]

arent blogs editorials?

argument from authority = spoonfed

You don't have to believe the blogger's word, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a JAG officer to understand that a lack of payroll records doesn't prove AWOL.

[alkemical]

yeah but you have to be stupid to argue on this issue, or on kerry's service record to think it has any relevance.

[Blueflame]

from betsys blog....
http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/

Lorie Byrd has a real scoop at Polipundit. She put up a post by an experienced officer in the reserve calling himself Oak Leaf. Oak Leaf explains why there are no pay stubs for Bush when he was in Alabama. Bush was serving without pay.
Civilians would be astonished to discover that many reservists perform duties without pay. In reviewing my own records, 13% of my reserve man days in my first six years were without pay and surprisingly while a college student, 21% of my reserve man days were performed without pay. A search of the web led me to AF Form 1288 (front/back) in which 1LT Bush requests duty in Alabama on May 24, 1972. Block 17 shows that the request is "no pay, training category G." In the approval section, it is clearly disclosed that this is "pay group none." Why is this important? Regardless, of the ultimate unit he ended up training with, it shows that 1LT Bush was willing to train without pay. The old media remains focused on pay records!! In regards to pay records, USA Today states, "They show he was paid for 82 days in 1972 and 1973, but show no service for five months between April and October 1972." Pay records would show no service during this time period because he was not paid! 1LT Bush served his country without pay. That is why there is no pay record.
Lorie points out that most in the media haven't served in the military so don't know how to interpret the military records.

The five months in question were not while Bush was supposed to be in Alabama. He was still supposed to report to the TANG in May, June, July, August, and September of 1972. His request to transfer to Alabama while he worked on the political campaign was dated September 1972.

[Exile_In_SJ]

well much to the lefts chagrin, the polling number give little support to the digging into Bushes ANG service, it appears that the vast majority of people could care less and the more the left and the media dwell on the suubject, the worse it is for them.

The dilemma for the left is that the more people see John Heinz-Kerry the less they like of him, so they can't expose him too much and it seems that trying to smear Bush over his ANG service is counterproductive.. What to do.

I guess Zogby was wrong this isn't Kerry's race to lose.

[Exile_In_SJ]

The fine thing about the internet and Blogs in particular is that we don't have to take CBS's word on anything anymore. Things can be checked out. 10 years ago, CBS could have passed the memos off as real and no one would have been the wiser. Who could have checked the documents?. CBS would have been successful in it's smear campaign against GWB. Instead, today, there are people out there who don't have to take CBS's word on anything to get the truth. This is what scares the media to death
No longer can the spoon feed the ignorant masses and acheive the results they desire.
Pandora's box has been opened and CBS is left wondering what the hell happened.

[Blueflame]

well much to the lefts chagrin, the polling number give little support to the digging into Bushes ANG service, it appears that the vast majority of people could care less and the more the left and the media dwell on the suubject, the worse it is for them.

The dilemma for the left is that the more people see John Heinz-Kerry the less they like of him, so they can't expose him too much and it seems that trying to smear Bush over his ANG service is counterproductive.. What to do.

I guess Zogby was wrong this isn't Kerry's race to lose.

The fine thing about the internet and Blogs in particular is that we don't have to take CBS's word on anything anymore. Things can be checked out. 10 years ago, CBS could have passed the memos off as real and no one would have been the wiser. Who could have checked the documents?. CBS would have been successful in it's smear campaign against GWB. Instead, today, there are people out there who don't have to take CBS's word on anything to get the truth. This is what scares the media to death
No longer can the spoon feed the ignorant masses and acheive the results they desire.
Pandora's box has been opened and CBS is left wondering what the hell happened.

Strange that you'd mention polls and the CBS memos in these two posts... a CNN poll yesterday (it was on their main webpage... don't know if the results are still there, though) showed significantly more people believe CBS than believe Bush on this subject. Yeah, I was kinda surprised by the numbers, too.

Poll results can be manipulated in so many ways it's not funny. From oversampling some demographics to slanted questions, attaining a desired "result" is not difficult. Need I remind you that just before election day 2000, Gallup showed Bush leading Gore by double digits... and that election didn't turn out to the the predicted landslide, did it?

I find polls mildly entertaining but hardly something to inspire "chagrin". The only poll that really means anything will be the one in November. I rather suspect the pollsters who have the numbers "too close to call" will be validated by the actual ballots.

[TomServo]

This is so funny its unbelievable. the CBS docs. are fake. get over it.
have you clinton fans learned Nothing? the general public doesnt care. they dont care that WJC dodged the draft or lied to our faces or lied under oath anymore than they care than GWB flew century jets in the national guard. even if its true he slacked off his last 6 months after putting in so many hours in the what? 104 jet? the public just doesnt care.
as to the polls just take an average and its bush up by maybe 6 points

[Bronco Yoda]

From everything I've seen I'd say these docs were fakes. People should be more worried about who and why these fakes were given so much crediblity. Partisan blindness seems to be growing more and more these days.

Kerry would be smart to take the higher road stance on this one. IMO, he would do much better to denounce the docs as a fraud publicly (as what smear damage has already been done anyway). If Bush really did served his time without pay and finished his service then he would have beat Bush to the in-your-face rebuttal and still gained from smear. If bush did do what is alleged then Kerry would score points for taking the higher road and the smear would take root. Either way it would play as a win win... in a matter that doesn't really matter as it is now to most voters anyway.

.... just my observation and opinion.

[patteeu]

Strange that you'd mention polls and the CBS memos in these two posts... a CNN poll yesterday (it was on their main webpage... don't know if the results are still there, though) showed significantly more people believe CBS than believe Bush on this subject. Yeah, I was kinda surprised by the numbers, too.

As Exile correctly pointed out, the vast majority of people just don't care about whether GWBush made it to every ANG meeting 30+ years ago. It was a losing issue for JFKerry/CBS even before they fabricated the memos (or knowingly/recklessly ran with someone else's fabrication).

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It was a losing issue for JFKerry/CBS even before they fabricated the memos (or knowingly/recklessly ran with someone else's fabrication).

LOL @ the conspiracy nut.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

This is so funny its unbelievable. the CBS docs. are fake.

You have proof then, I take it?

I know we'd all love to see it.

I suppose just like everything else, the wingnuts will accept as "fact" any statement that is repeated often enough on Faux News and MSGOP.

[watermock]

The forgeries were bought and sent a long time bush hater from a Kinko's fax maching by a guy name Burkett. Only Dan Rather and LABF are even trying to bother at this point.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LOS ANGELES - An Internet writer considered the first to accuse CBS of using fake documents in its report on President Bush's National Guard service is an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to Republican causes, a newspaper said Saturday.

Harry W. MacDougald, 46, is affiliated with two prominent conservative legal groups and helped draft a petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton for giving misleading testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, the Los Angeles Times said.

He confirmed his identify as the writer behind the posting but declined to answer questions about his political background or explain how he knew so much about the documents so quickly, the newspaper said. His posting, published on the conservative Web site www.freerepublic.com hours after CBS' broadcast on Sept. 8, concluded the records were forged based on a technical analysis of spacing and font styles.

The revelation could fuel speculation among Democrats that Republicans have orchestrated efforts to debunk the CBS story. Republican officials have denied any involvement.

According to the newspaper, MacDougald works in the Atlanta office of the Winston-Salem, N.C.-based firm Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice and is connected to the conservative Federalist Society and Southeastern Legal Foundation, where he serves on its legal advisory board.

In 1998, he helped draft the foundation's petition that led to the five-year suspension of Clinton's Arkansas law license. He also assisted in the group's legal challenge to a federal campaign finance law funded in conjunction with a Republican senator and handled by former Clinton investigator Kenneth W. Starr.

.... continues

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/9698611.htm?1c

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Blogger Who Faulted CBS Documents Is Conservative Activist

http://www.latimes.com/media/thumbnails/photo/2004-09/14293527.jpg


WASHINGTON — It was the first public allegation that CBS News used forged memos in its report questioning President Bush's National Guard service — a highly technical explanation posted within hours of airtime citing proportional spacing and font styles.

But it did not come from an expert in typography or typewriter history as some first thought. Instead, it was the work of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes who helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the Times has found.

The identity of "Buckhead," a blogger known previously only by his screen name on the site freerepublic.com and lifted to folk hero status in the conservative blogosphere since last week's posting, is likely to fuel speculation among Democrats that the efforts to discredit the CBS memos were engineered by Republicans eager to undermine reports that Bush received preferential treatment in the National Guard more than 30 years ago.

Republican officials have denied any involvement among those debunking the CBS story.

Reached by telephone today, MacDougald, 46, confirmed that he is Buckhead, but declined to answer questions about his political background or how he knew so much about the CBS documents so fast.

"You can ask the questions but I'm not going to answer them," he told The Times. "I'm just going to stick to doing no interviews."

...continues...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-091704buckhead_lat,1,494535.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

DC right-wing PR firm was instrumental in “driving” the CBS Killian memos

Here’s a story at PRWeek claiming that a DC right-wing PR firm was instrumental in “driving” the CBS Killian memo story, and that they were “in touch with bloggers:” Two DC firms ramp up efforts over latest presidential controversies.

"Creative Response Concepts (CRC), the VA-based agency promoting the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, used right-wing blogs and news sites to turn a CBS report casting doubt on President George W. Bush’s National Guard service into a potential black eye for both the network and the Democrats.

A CRC client, the Cybercast News Service (CNS), was among the first to voice suspicion that documents suggesting Bush had received preferential treatment in the Guard were forgeries.

“After the CBS story aired, called typographical experts, got them on the record that these papers were fishy, and posted a story by 3pm Thursday,” said CRC SVP Keith Appell. “We were immediately in contact with Drudge, who loved the story.”

CRC worked with CNS and the Media Research Center, another media watchdog client, to push the story into the mainstream press.

“We’ve been communicating with bloggers and news websites to make sure they know it isn’t just Rush Limbaugh and Matt Drudge who are raising questions,” added CRC president Greg Mueller."

http://www.prweek.com/news/news_story_free.cfm?ID=222586&site=3

[patteeu]

The forgeries were bought and sent a long time bush hater from a Kinko's fax maching by a guy name Burkett. Only Dan Rather and LABF are even trying to bother at this point.

Even Dan Rather has admitted that there are "serious questions" about the memos' authenticity. I think LABF and Blueflame are the only two holdouts (although I haven't heard what Cito thinks about them yet). And I'm pretty sure that Mountainman thinks the zionists in our nations capital are behind it all. ROFL!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Even Dan Rather has admitted that there are "serious questions" about the memos' authenticity.

The "serious questions" are all coming from the right-wing noise machine. Dan Rather has merely acknowledged and responded to these questions. He has not declared the documents inauthentic (probably because there is no actual proof that such is the case.)

Do wake us up when you have actual proof.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

How funny is it that the Bush Davidians believe that constant repetition of charges of forgery = proof of forgery?

I hope for their sake that none of these guys make their living as lawyers.

[watermock]

This is so funny. Don't you know that Rove is behind all this LABF?

Never mind the Kinkos Fax was sent from Abeline Texas and paid for by Burkett, a long time Bush hater and nearby resident.

If Rove pulled this one off, it would be the biggest scam since Hitler and Crystal Night. Oh that's right, Rethugs are all nazis anyway.

This just keeps getting funnier all the time.

[TomServo]

the cbs docs. were supposed to be the pillars the- proof of the allegations of bush not meeting his guard obligations. cbs was warned @ the docs. and still ran with them. w/out those docs all they had were the same old storys that had been around since what?'94?
how do i know they are fake? just one of those things, like just knowing the raiders and chiefs suck.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

the cbs docs. were supposed to be the pillars the- proof of the allegations of bush not meeting his guard obligations

Another patently false statement.

The CBS documents represent a mere fraction of the body of evidence that AWOL Boy didn't meet his obligations.

Bush has claimed throughout his political life that he fulfilled his obligations to the ANG.

So far he has yet to provide proof.

There are still several periods he has not been able to account for, i.e., Alabama and Boston.

No one has come forward to acknowledge that he/she ever saw bush in Alabama (in spite of a lot of offers of reward money.)

[watermock]

Rather wouldn't even show his face on 69 minutes.

It was hillarious!

He wouldnt even show his face, and noone would even make a statement for him. He came on late for "next weeks show".

It was sad actually.

This puke of a supposed "Anchorman" can't even stand up for himself.

I don't mind stark truth.

I don't respect a stone cold liar.

[Rohirrim]

A "stone cold liar?" Whether or not the documents prove to be true, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that their "content" is true. Of course, the Repugs want you to stay as far away from that realization as they possibly can.

[Mile High Shack]

le'ts try this on for example

ok, so I've heard your cross dresser who has to have a drool cup and I've got all your records from the schools you attended. Someone faxed them to me.

oh wait...maybe they were forged documents...but the heresay tells me the content is true, so I won't back down on the story.

See what kind of logic that is?

how does that sound?

[Rohirrim]

Right now, combined , there are $100,000 in rewards out there to anyone who can prove that W showed up in Alabama. And now we know he didn't show up in Boston either. He didn't take his flight physical. He gave up his flying privileges. The U.S. spent one million dollars to teach him to fly, and he couldn't bother to do the mission for more than two years.

If you want to ask, "How does that sound?", why not try this one? The Texas ANG has complete records for every Texan who has ever served going back to the forties. One fire in Colorado destroyed some records. Another batch of records was "inadvertently destroyed" according to ANG commanders. The Pentagon found some more records that "had been misplaced" and therefore were not produced to the original court order stemming from a Freedom of Information lawsuit. All of these records - destroyed by fire, "inadvertently destroyed", "misplaced" by the Pentagon - had something to do with Bush. How does that sound?

[Mile High Shack]

sounds like Republicans in the 90's with their conspiracy theories about Clinton

[Exile_In_SJ]

and still LABS is drinking the koolaid faithfully. rofl.

go over to DemocraticUnderground LABS some of them are actually swearing off the koolaid. Only some. The least whacky of the whacked out left. Those with some small semblance of humanity left. Very vew actually, but there are some. maybe the koolaid has grown bitter. How is the koolaid LABS?

[Rohirrim]

sounds like Republicans in the 90's with their conspiracy theories about Clinton

Who's drinking the Kool-Aid now? rofl

[Mile High Shack]

Who's drinking the Kool-Aid now? rofl


huh? I was making that analogy to show you, conspiracy theories abound depnding on who is in office.

[Kaylore]

sounds like Republicans in the 90's with their conspiracy theories about Clinton
I made a point about this erlier. What the Dems are trying to do to Bush is the mistake the Republicans made against Clinton. Clinton did have sex and lie under oath about it. They went after him for it, and it resulted in almost losing the house and the Senate.

People want substance over politics. I mean is debating what happened years ago in Alabama giving us answers to health care? Is it more prudent to endlessly persue why Bush stopped flying aircraft or to investigate the effects of a global economy in the twenty-first century?

The American people want the President left alone. If he needs to go, then they'll take care of that, but If congress goes after him, they attack congress. The left-wing antics are handing the election to Bush.

[TexanBob]

sounds like Republicans in the 90's with their conspiracy theories about Clinton

Exactly! The one thing that should have been learned from the 90s is that the more shrill and wacky the charges were about Clinton, the more average Americans tuned it all out. So when the kernel of truth that Clinton perjured himself and subborned perjury comes forward, most of America doesn't care because they'd heard all about his supposed love child with a black prostitute, his "plot" to kill Vince Foster, etc. The accusers had been discredited so the public didn't care to sort out truth from fiction after awhile.

This is what Michael Moore, George Soros and the other extreme Bush-haters have done. They've moved a lot of the fence-sitters over to Bush because their non-stop attacks have become so shrill and wacky as to be laughed at by most reasonable people. Sure, you'll convince the 30% of partisans on your side that want badly for all the hate charges to be true (such as Dan Rather), but you turn off the middle with non-stop personal attacks of the sitting president, whether that president is Bill Clinton or George W. Bush. There's a certain percentage of swing voters that just see the attacks and tune out whether there is any factual basis to them.

Welcome, Democrats, to our 1990s. How does it feel?

[Rohirrim]

huh? I was making that analogy to show you, conspiracy theories abound depnding on who is in office.

My bad. I misread that one. hmmm...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Whether or not the documents prove to be true, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that their "content" is true. Of course, the Repugs want you to stay as far away from that realization as they possibly can.

Bingo.

The Rove attack machine and its surrogates have been successful on that account.

Instead of addressing the truth about Smirk's ANG service, Rove and Co. have the lapdog media chattering 24/7 about typewriter fonts.
http://www.bartcop.com/pressdog.jpg

[watermock]

Now it's Carl Rove that persuaded Burkett to Fax 6 forged documents from Texas to an assistant to Dan Rather. Fact is, 2 of the docs were so ludicrous they were not even presented.

[Exile_In_SJ]

heres an interesting peice on the Rather forgery scam...




Who knew?
September 23rd, 2004


An examination of the timeline of publicly-reported events leading up to the Rathergate scandal raises some interesting questions about possible as-yet unrevealed collusion among Bill Burkett, members of the national press corps, and the Kerry campaign. Someone other than CBS and Burkett appears to have known about the phony documents, and spread the word quietly, in preparation for a massive coordinated campaign to discredit President Bush.

On April 27, Kerry campaign literature suddenly claimed that there were "verbal orders" from Killian to suspend Bush for failing to take his medical exam. Shortly afterward (in "May" according to Burkett's ex-lawyer, Van Os) Burkett began getting calls from "national newspapers and TV." How did these reporters suddenly and mysteriously find their way to Baird, Texas within days of the Kerry campaign piece?

Unless you believe that a number of journalists saw a lodestar leading them, like Magi, to the doorstep of Bill Burkett in search of memos (which seem to have been created shortly before), the more reasonable conclusion is that someone pointed them in that direction.

CBS indicates Mary Mapes, the segment producer, had been in communication with Burkett for 18 months prior to the Sixty Minutes show, which puts her in this pack of reporters. But who else was in on the scam? We are told that Mapes and the CBS team were obsessed with their “scoop,” so they certainly didn’t tip-off the competition.

Members of the national press corps know something critical about the story – who was peddling the documents. Yet none have yet revealed themselves. In the midst of biggest journalistic scandal in decades, they are holding their tongues. Who directed them to Burkett? And when?

The public wants to know. And, given the fact that this scandal bears directly on the forthcoming presidential election, we have a right to know. The press corps, the schools of journalism, and all those nonprofit organizations which never tire of giving awards to journalists for “outstanding public service,” are almost completely silent on the obligation of the “profession” of journalism to purge itself of what looks like corrupt collusion to spread forgeries.

From the press reports the timeline is fairly clear, though, unlike CBS, I am not vouching for anybody's credibility.

We don't know when all of these memos were created. But based on technical evidence, one appears to have been created on February 6, 2004.

On February 12, less than a week later, USA Today reported that there had been efforts to cleanse Bush's record. The source for this story was Burkett. The next day the Boston Globe contacted George O. Conn, former Chief Warrant Officer in TANG ,who flatly denied Burkett's claim, saying he never saw anyone combing through the Bush records or discarding any of them.

Shortly afterward according to Van Os (Burkett's ex-lawyer) Burkett received a call from a man (Burkett says a woman, Lucy Ramirez) telling him he had documents confirming Burkett's story that Bush was ordered to take his medical exam and refused to do so. Burkett says he was busy but agreed to pick them up at Houston on March 3, and says did so.

So how did these reporters, so close in time to the Kerry communication on this same point, suddenly get the idea, in late April/early May, that Burkett had documents on Bush's TANG service? And why would they seek documents which probably could not have existed, if they gave credence to Conn, who said the story was false?

Was someone spreading the word? How would the person who gave the cue to the press know there was something there, unless he were involved in creating the documents and passing them to Burkett? And, if that's so, reporters other than Mapes who contacted Burkett are in the best position to crack this mystery.

There must have been others also in the know. How else to explain that on August 11 the Chairman of the Tennessee State Vets for Kerry hinted on a radio interview that there was new evidence regarding Bush's failure to take his medical exam and loss of flight status? This is particularly curious because on August 13 Burkett posted an internet article indicating that he had not yet seen documentary evidence of the claim.

But it is approximately this time (mid-August is the best date CBS has given) when Burkett gave CBS the first 2 of the 6 memos. On August 21, Burkett posted on the web that he had spoken to Max Cleland, who said he did want to mount a "counterattack" to the Swift Boats campaign.

Four days later, Burkett posted on the web that "we have reassembled" the Bush files. No explanation is given for whom the “we” refers to. Nor is the meaning of “reassamebled” clear. And a time frame is notably absent. But according to Burkett and Van Os (if you choose the believe them), the phony memos had been in his hands since March 3. The only new development is that by August 21 he had turned 2 of them over to CBS.

By September, it is clear that someone either within CBS or Kerry's camp (or both) was leaking the details of the story. On September 1, liberal blogger Josh Marshall reported that Sixty Minutes was working on a story about Bush's service, and on September 2 , Salon reported that there were "unanswered questions" respecting the President's service in TANG.

Two days later, Lockhart called Burkett. Lockhart says he's 99.9% sure he didn't discuss the memos. This is not terribly believable, because by this time Texans for Truth was about to launch its ad campaign, Operation Fortunate Son, in which these documents would be certain to play a big supporting role. The scent of collusion is obvious to me. But then I was the first kid in my class to figure out there was no Santa Claus.

The next day, September 5, Burkett gave the remaining 4 memos to CBS. And the very next day, Terry McAuliffe issued a release raising questions about Bush's service. The DNC followed this up with yet another presser on the same topic on September 7.

On September 8 the CBS story runs.

The DNC must have worked very hard that evening because it gave three more pressers on the topic on September 9.

The next day the Boston Globe got a TANG document dump; Nicholas Kristoff of the New York Times wrote a TANG piece; Texans for Truth began running its Operation Fortunate Son ads; and McAuliffe held a press conference alleging the President was AWOL.

+++++++++++++++++

To maximize a campaign story, one must plant seeds in the public mind about it beforehand and get the troops in line to capitalize on it after it breaks. It is hard for me to look at this timeline and (assuming the parties have told the truth) not see judicious leaks ahead of time, and a well-planned campaign to maximize its impact once the story broke.

And it is even harder to imagine all this without believing that whoever gave the documents to Burkett also told the press that Burkett had them. That person may also have been the one contacting the Tennesee State Vets for Kerry, Texans for Truth and the DNC.

Just who do you suppose would do all of that?



Clarice Feldman

[Exile_In_SJ]

[QUOTE=L.A. BRONCOS FAN]Bingo.

The Rove attack machine and its surrogates have been successful on that account.

Instead of addressing the truth about Smirk's ANG service, Rove and Co. have the lapdog media chattering 24/7 about typewriter fonts.



Because there was no truth there to be addressed. It was all made up by the left. Why address blatant forgeries?

Lessee...We (The rabid left) made up these documents...but you should stll answer the questions they raise, even though these documents are fake.


riiiighhhhttt.....

[Blueflame]

[QUOTE=L.A. BRONCOS FAN]Bingo.

The Rove attack machine and its surrogates have been successful on that account.

Instead of addressing the truth about Smirk's ANG service, Rove and Co. have the lapdog media chattering 24/7 about typewriter fonts.



Because there was no truth there to be addressed. It was all made up by the left. Why address blatant forgeries?

Lessee...We (The rabid left) made up these documents...but you should stll answer the questions they raise, even though these documents are fake.


riiiighhhhttt.....

Please enlighten us to how that is different from the swiftliars seeking to emend historical records and accounts and then demanding that Kerry address their already-debunked claims?

[Exile_In_SJ]

It's different because these are actual eyewitnesses to Kerry's behaviour in Viet Nam. Now you can disagree with what they say, but they are witnesses.

With the forgeries, they are forgeries, whatever they purport to say is tainted. Why? it's simple. because they are forgeries. Pretty simple concept. Anyhting they say cannot be believed. Why? Because they are forgeries. Is anyone here getting the concept of 'forgeries' or 'fake'?

Worse yet, they are forgeries attributed to a dead man.

With the swift boat vets, they were there serving with Kerry. You may disagree with what they say, but they have credibility because they were there. ultimately in the swift boat vets case, it'll be who you choose to believe.

With Bush and the ANG, the questions are based on forged/false/fake documents. You can believe the documents if you want, but all that proves is that you chose to believe false/fake/forged papers.

[Exile_In_SJ]

pretty interesting bit about Terry McAwful and the cBS forgeries...

from the kerryspot

WHY WAS TERRY USING TERMS FROM THE CBS MEMO 9 HOURS BEFORE BROADCAST? [09/23 03:16 PM]

Man, those guys at the RNC are a regular Bloodhound Gang or Mod Squad. Take a look at this little observation:

9 HOURS BEFORE THE CBS REPORT: "Democratic Party chairman Terry McAuliffe said, 'George W. Bush's cover story on his National Guard service is rapidly unraveling. ... George W. Bush needs to answer why he regularly misled the American people about his time in the Guard and who applied political pressure on his behalf to have his performance reviews 'sugarcoated.'" (Terence Hunt, "Questions Raised About Bush Guard Service," The Associated Press, 9/9/04)
(I checked with the RNC how they knew it was nine hours ahead of CBS report - it turns out McAuliffe made this statement during a press event held at 11 am Sept. 8.)

The CBS memo, revealed on 60 Minutes that night: "Harris gave me a message today from Grp regarding Bush's OETR and Staudt is pushing to sugar coat it."

"Sugarcoated." What an interesting word. McAuliffe could have said that Bush's performance reviews were covered up, spun, masked, smoothed over, soft-pedaled, glossed over, prettified, veiled, whitewashed, hushed up, concealed, varnished, suppressed, or distorted. But he just happened to pick a word that appeared in the memos that were supposedly unveiled to the world hours later.

Even beyond McAuliffe's direct quote of the memos, he's specifically referring to the central allegation of the Burkett-to-Mapes memo, that Staudt wanted Bush’s records “sugarcoated.”

If this were a game of Clue, we would collectively be jumping up and down and shouting, "the attempted character assassination was committed by Burkett, Mapes, Rather, Lockhart, and McAuliffe, with the fake memo, in the observatory, er, in CBS offices and DNC headquarters!"

Or maybe this, along with the entire "Operation Fortunate Son," is all just a coincidence

[Exile_In_SJ]

makes you wonder where McAwful got the information 9 hours before they were publicized? Was he in the loop? Did his office supply the forgeries to cBS?

Why would he use the word 'sugarcoat' if he didn't know about the memo?

hmmmmmm very interesting

[Blueflame]

It's different because these are actual eyewitnesses to Kerry's behaviour in Viet Nam. Now you can disagree with what they say, but they are witnesses.

With the forgeries, they are forgeries, whatever they purport to say is tainted. Why? it's simple. because they are forgeries. Pretty simple concept. Anyhting they say cannot be believed. Why? Because they are forgeries. Is anyone here getting the concept of 'forgeries' or 'fake'?

Worse yet, they are forgeries attributed to a dead man.

With the swift boat vets, they were there serving with Kerry. You may disagree with what they say, but they have credibility because they were there. ultimately in the swift boat vets case, it'll be who you choose to believe.

With Bush and the ANG, the questions are based on forged/false/fake documents. You can believe the documents if you want, but all that proves is that you chose to believe false/fake/forged papers.

Don't you mean some of the swiftliars served with Kerry? Most of them have no more personal knowledge of Kerry than you or I, however.

Yet, why should Kerry have been asked to address Thurlow's claim that the swiftboats were not under fire when Thurlow's own medal citation affirmed that they were under fire? And why should he have to address any of Al French's third-hand claims? Al French now acknowledges that he, personally, witnessed nothing.

As to the memos, "unable to authenticate" does not necessarily automatically translate into "forged"; nonetheless, the origin and motivation for the release of the papers may never be clear. Politics is a dirty business and with the stakes so high, risky machinations are a part of the territory. CBS should have known better than to run with the story, imo and it's a shame they didn't exercise better judgment.

[alkemical]

so lets get this straight -

you guys only support forgeries on your side(s)?

forgeries for making war or to fill in someone's preferential treatment for missing time.... wow no wonder our country turned to **** - we condone their actions

[Exile_In_SJ]

I sit corrected, some of the swit boats veterans. Still, that's a heck of alot more witnesses than the lefties against Bush on the ANG. So far no witnesss have come forward to say Bush didn't complete his guard duty honorably.

[Exile_In_SJ]

from little green footballs.

RNC Communications Director Jim Dyke:

“The original Kerry campaign categorical denials of knowledge of the documents prior to the CBS report gave way to admission of numerous conversations with the source.

“Now a Kerry campaign advisor conversation where ‘the documents never came up’ gives way to a conversation where ‘he tried to convince me as to why I should give them the documents.’

“Someone engaged in illegal activity, which became part of an effort to influence the outcome of a Presidential election and Senator Kerry’s campaign should take their involvement seriously. They should immediately disclose what other ‘seniors’ in the Kerry campaign and whom at the Democrat National Committee Bill Burkett spoke to in August and make clear what Senator Kerry knew and when he knew it.”


it gets curiouser and curiouser

[watermock]

Thre is still some contention about that issue since Kerry wrote the report himself. It would be rather odd for a veteran to say that he didn't deserve their medal.

That is, of course except for Kerry, who threw his medals away before he didn't, just like he voted for the supplemantal bill before he voted against it.

[patteeu]

JFKerry has to get up each morning and wonder why he got into this race in the first place. I almost feel sorry for him.

[azbronco]

Don't you mean some of the swiftliars served with Kerry? Most of them have no more personal knowledge of Kerry than you or I, however.



They do know that kerry accused all of them of war crimes, I guess all of us do know that.

[alkemical]

you guys only support forgeries on your side(s)?

forgeries for making war or to fill in someone's preferential treatment for missing time.... wow no wonder our country turned to **** - we condone their actions

[Exile_In_SJ]

just read over at another site that Bush served 5 yrs 4 months of his required time of 6 years in the ANG before getting the honorable discharge, and Kerry sered over 3 years of his 6 year obligation to te navy. What happened to the remaining almost 3 years of his required service? We don't hear of it

[alkemical]

the silence has spoken

[Exile_In_SJ]

the silence has spoken


uhm, show us the forgeries.

[patteeu]

you guys only support forgeries on your side(s)?

forgeries for making war or to fill in someone's preferential treatment for missing time.... wow no wonder our country turned to **** - we condone their actions

Who forged a document for making war?

[Mile High Shack]

Who forged a document for making war?


what he said

[watermock]

Fact of the matter is Kerry didn't even know he could go home after 3 Purples.

The CO had him sent home. He was totally sick of his arrogance and bad decisions and they shipped him stateside. Hey Johhny, here are your papers, your a ****ing hero, now get out of here.

Look it up. It's pretty funny how universally he was hated for self promotion.

[watermock]

John Kerry is a liar and a fraud, unfit to be the Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. That's not just the opinion of American conservatives: As this astonishing new book shows, most of the men who served with Kerry in Vietnam think this way. Now, in Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, John O'Neill and Jerry Corsi explain why.

O'Neill (who succeeded Kerry as commander of Swift boat PCF 94 in Vietnam and soundly defeated him in a 1971 debate about the war on the Dick Cavett Show) and Corsi lay bare in this book the hypocrisy and paradoxes of Kerry. They explain how someone who until recently claimed he was a war criminal, who threw away his medals and supported the North Vietnamese with his words, and who even met with enemy delegations in Paris while our soldiers were fighting and dying in the field, can now switch sides to run as a hero of those he condemned as criminal in that war.

This book gives you the whole story: the truth (from trustworthy eyewitnesses) about the service in Vietnam that Kerry has consistently distorted for his own political gain; Kerry's notorious, un-American activities as head of the peacenik group Vietnam Veterans Against the War; his cynical practice of trying to appeal to both sides of the American voting public by playing up both his Vietnam service and his antiwar activities; and much, much more that establishes beyond all doubt that Kerry is truly unfit to be President, or to hold any public office.


Meet the real John Kerry -- as self-obsessed and ruthlessly calculating as Slick Willie:

"If there is anything I can do to unmask this charlatan please let me know. He brings disgrace to all who served" -- and similar assessments of Kerry from his fellow soldiers

John Kerry: the only Swift Boat commander who received a Purple Heart for a self-inflicted wound -- plus the facts about all his Purple Hearts, none of which was awarded for serious injuries

How accompanying crewmen told the examining doctor that Kerry was running for President and had wounded himself when Kerry presented his "first wartime injury" for treatment

A close examination of Kerry's genuine war record: how it reveals, contrary to his own exaggerated version, Kerry's duplicity and complete lack of fitness to be Commander-in-Chief

The gunner's mate who sat behind and above Kerry for most of his Vietnam stay: why he came to regard Kerry as incompetent and dishonest

Why fed-up Swift Boat personnel asked Kerry to go home after he had served just four months in Vietnam

How Kerry spent much of his time in Vietnam filming himself in scenarios carefully designed to look dangerous

The deafening silence that greeted Kerry's introduction as the man "who may be the next President of the United States" before a gathering of his Vietnam comrades-in-arms

Kerry's accusations of war crimes by Americans in Vietnam: how they relied on fake impersonator veterans who concocted incidents that were established decades ago as exaggerations or pure fabrications

"I will tell you in all candor that the only baby killer I knew in Vietnam was John F. Kerry": the startling assessment of one of Kerry's fellow Swift Boat commanders

The Swift Boat Kerry commanded: how it drew the ire of officers by opening fire without prior clearance and without apparent reason, sometimes even though it had not been fired at by the enemy

How Kerry has actually admitted causing unnecessary civilian casualties in Vietnam

Kerry's stories of how he confronted superiors with anti-war sentiments and objections to military policies that he felt were inappropriate: proof that these conversations never took place

War hero? Yes, to the Communists: How Kerry's photo was found in the "Heroes of the Vietnamese Resistance" section of a war museum in Communist Vietnam!

The impossibility of finding any Kerry position on the Vietnam War that isn't also held by Vietnam's Communist masters

The full truth about the medals that Kerry doesn't want you to think he threw away -- and has lied about repeatedly

Kerry's strange reticence about revealing what he discussed at his meeting with Vietnamese Communists in Paris in 1970

Proof that, despite his denials, Kerry really did attend the 1971 Vietnam Veterans Against the War meeting in which they discussed a plan to assassinate Senators

How Kerry helped disseminate KGB-generated anti-American propaganda during his antiwar activities

William F. Buckley's 1971 critique of Kerry's antiwar testimony: "the indictment of an ignorant young man" who was willing to level baseless charges

Revealed: FBI records that show that Kerry referred to the Communist thug Ho Chi Minh as "the George Washington of Vietnam" in a speech in Philadelphia in 1971

The carefully orchestrated piece of political theater that was Kerry's shameful appearance before the Fulbright Committee (plus evidence that the Committee refused to allow pro-war soldiers to testify)

How Kerry's testimony painted all those who served honorably in Vietnam as criminals - and caused more deaths and prolonged the war by undermining support at home and contributing directly to a Communist victory

Photographs from the War Remnants Museum in Saigon, proving that the Vietnamese Reds consider Kerry a hero of their struggle against democracy and freedom

How Kerry staged a self-promotion video while ignoring a memorial service for dead Vietnam comrades

How Kerry lied about his Vietnam experiences -- in a $50 million ad campaign

Unfit for Command presents crucial information that the American people should consider carefully as they decide Kerry's fitness to be Commander-in-Chief. If patriotic Americans heed the facts that O'Neill and Corsi present here, they will return this untrustworthy, self-serving political animal to private life this November. Nothing less than our survival as a nation could hang in the balance.

[Rohirrim]

Jon Stewart: ...These are powerful indictments or rather they would be had any of those guys served on Kerry's boat. ... By saying 'with him,' they mean they were in Vietnam at the same time. Kind of the same way Snoopy served with the Red Baron.

[alkemical]

yeah, you guys have been asleep for a while

[watermock]

Jon Stewart is the definitive source.

You people are amazing.

[Exile_In_SJ]

What's funny is Kerry's arrogance. That is totally unexplainable. He's not terribly bright, he's pretty homely, he's highly boring. His only discernable skill of which I'm very admiring of is his ability to marry rich women..2 times.
Why he's just a gigolo...(channeling david roth)

He's arrogance not backed up by anything. Too funny.

[watermock]

Jon Stewart is like having Comedy Central endorse your candidate.

[alkemical]

yeah why are we in iraq again?

1yr 170 or so days... no wmd's except for what remained that we sold him.

faked docs on niger yellow cakes...


what is arrogant is lying period. whether its about time served or lies for war. using fear mongering about the draft, to us getting attacked
you condone these actions. we get the ****ty government we deserve

[Exile_In_SJ]

we're in Iraq to piss you off. plain and simple....rofl

[patteeu]

yeah why are we in iraq again?

1yr 170 or so days... no wmd's except for what remained that we sold him.

faked docs on niger yellow cakes...


what is arrogant is lying period. whether its about time served or lies for war. using fear mongering about the draft, to us getting attacked
you condone these actions. we get the ****ty government we deserve

We didn't go to war on the basis of forged documents. There is a big difference between finding forgeries among documents you've gathered (through intelligence sources) on the one hand, and creating a fake document to further your agenda on the other.

[watermock]

yeah why are we in iraq again?

1yr 170 or so days... no wmd's except for what remained that we sold him.

faked docs on niger yellow cakes...

Actually, we were finding tons of russian weapons stored in schools and hospitals, or weren't you there when we took them out of them? Oh and BTW, we found a few curious things from the French and a few tidbits from N. Korea, and I still want a peek into that Syrian bunker.


what is arrogant is lying period. whether its about time served or lies for war. using fear mongering about the draft, to us getting attacked
you condone these actions. we get the ****ty government we deserve

That is just a rant and a series of assertions not worth adressing.

[alkemical]

yeah you guys just keep lying for your agenda and keep proving yourself to be hypocrits.

you are no different than those you chastize.

[alkemical]

nothing is more feared By an erred man than the truth.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

yeah why are we in iraq again?

U.S. oil companies drowning in billions of profit
"They are all sitting on the largest piles of cash in their history"

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1095545411401&call_pageid=968332188854&col=9683500607

But to stay rich they have to keep finding new reserves, and that's getting tougher. Increasingly it means cutting through permafrost or drilling deep underwater, at tremendous cost. "The cheap oil has already been found and developed and produced and consumed," says Gheit. "The low-hanging fruit has already been picked."

Well, not all the low-hanging fruit has been picked.

Nestled into the heart of the area of heaviest oil concentration in the world is Iraq, overflowing with low-hanging fruit. No permafrost, no deep water. Just giant pools of oil, right beneath the warm ground. This is fruit sagging so low, as it were, that it practically touches the ground under the weight of its ripeness.

Not only does Iraq have vast quantities of easily accessible oil, but its oil is almost untouched.
"Think of Iraq as virgin territory .... This is bigger than anything Exxon is involved in currently ....It is the superstar of the future," says Gheit, "That's why Iraq becomes the most sought-after real estate on the face of the earth."

Put honestly, that's why your neighbor died in Iraq - because Bush wanted that oil and it was cheaper to have the taxpayers and soldiers pay for it than the oil companies.

Why do you think the oil companies are paying the Swift Boat Liars so much?

[watermock]

When I checked yesterday, it was burning like a bad barbeque.

Second, these funds have been given to Iraq, and only LABF would bring up the War for Oil card, while the UN is still crying about how it can't continue to skim off billions with it's Buddy Saddam and France.

Tell me how far the UN has gotten investigating the Food for Terrorism scandal. Have they even made a "Preliminary Panel"?

You have to be kidding me.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Pay no attention to the drunk imbecile in the preceding post...

So Smirk and Sneer figured it would be cheaper to just invade Iraq and take the oil rather than come by it honestly, i.e. pay for it?

Talk about having a plan blow up in your face!

Think about the cost of invading, indefinitely occupying, and waging a never-ending war in a country vs. the cost of establishing diplomatic relations with that country and buying its oil.

Anticipated response from the rightards:

"And negotiate with a brutal dictator?"

It was OK for St. Reagan and Poppy when they were arming Saddam w/ chemical and biological weapons and using him to fight a proxy war against Iran in the 80s.

[alkemical]

Actually, we were finding tons of russian weapons stored in schools and hospitals, or weren't you there when we took them out of them? Oh and BTW, we found a few curious things from the French and a few tidbits from N. Korea, and I still want a peek into that Syrian bunker.




That is just a rant and a series of assertions not worth adressing.


What weapons mock? Were you there to watch them do this personally?

Everything you say is a rant and assertation that is just uhm, smoke out of your ass....

Keep spinning... no WMD"s found, a president lied to get us into war. We are destabilizing the region even more, and if bush wins another term, mark my words, he will be the one to bring the apocolypse.

[alkemical]

Besides you dumbass Republicans who just march lock step, want to keep spinning that there was no forged document to get us into war. The niger doc was forged by blair's office. The admin new it, and left it in their anyway. No different than what the D's did with bush's service record, oh except thousands of people didn't die because of it.

A Vote for Republican is a vote for Blood!

[alkemical]

We didn't go to war on the basis of forged documents. There is a big difference between finding forgeries among documents you've gathered (through intelligence sources) on the one hand, and creating a fake document to further your agenda on the other.


So the blair admin creates the forgeries, and puts them into an intelligence report and that's NOT the same and creating documents to further an agenda.

You are one dumb mutha!

No wonder you are a republican. Keep grazing you sheep. You further proved my point. It's only ok to lie, cheat and steal, when it's for your own isn't it.

[patteeu]

So the blair admin creates the forgeries, and puts them into an intelligence report and that's NOT the same and creating documents to further an agenda.

You are one dumb mutha!

No wonder you are a republican. Keep grazing you sheep. You further proved my point. It's only ok to lie, cheat and steal, when it's for your own isn't it.

Link?

[alkemical]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=forged+blair+documents&btnG=Search
(take your time, there's alot here to do some research on: Results 1 - 10 of about 28,800 for forged blair documents. )

And since i know you repuglikans like to just ignore things:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=412558

The Niger connection: Tony Blair, forged documents and the case for war
By Andrew Grice Political Editor and David Usborne in New York

05 June 2003

Tony Blair was under mounting pressure yesterday after he refused to withdraw discredited claims by the secret intelligence service MI6 that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium to make nuclear weapons.

[errand]

Don't you mean some of the swiftliars served with Kerry? Most of them have no more personal knowledge of Kerry than you or I, however.

Yet, why should Kerry have been asked to address Thurlow's claim that the swiftboats were not under fire when Thurlow's own medal citation affirmed that they were under fire? And why should he have to address any of Al French's third-hand claims? Al French now acknowledges that he, personally, witnessed nothing.

As to the memos, "unable to authenticate" does not necessarily automatically translate into "forged"; nonetheless, the origin and motivation for the release of the papers may never be clear. Politics is a dirty business and with the stakes so high, risky machinations are a part of the territory. CBS should have known better than to run with the story, imo and it's a shame they didn't exercise better judgment.

The difference Blueflame is that, the Swiftboat vets existed prior to their questioning Kerry's heroics...these documents on the other hand didn't exist at all....until you guys printed them that is.

[alkemical]

like the magic iraqi documents, i gotchya errand!

It's ok to fake documents when it's for your own....

[patteeu]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=forged+blair+documents&btnG=Search
(take your time, there's alot here to do some research on: Results 1 - 10 of about 28,800 for forged blair documents. )

And since i know you repuglikans like to just ignore things:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=412558

The Niger connection: Tony Blair, forged documents and the case for war
By Andrew Grice Political Editor and David Usborne in New York

05 June 2003

Tony Blair was under mounting pressure yesterday after he refused to withdraw discredited claims by the secret intelligence service MI6 that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium to make nuclear weapons.


I checked out your specific link and several of the hits from your googles search. None of them back your story.

Here is a quote from one of your sources:

DeadBrain has learned that an independent inquiry by a crack team of forensic scientists, archaeologists, archivists and dermatologists that has been engaged by the government to examine at arm's length the allegedly forged documents will announce that the forgeries may not be genuine.

...

"It would appear," he said, "that the documents may only have been made to look as if they are forgeries. In other words, they may not be real forgeries, but forged forgeries."



I also tried a google of my own using your "blair creates forgeries" claim and found this:

Your search - "blair creates forgeries" - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

- Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
- Try different keywords.
- Try more general keywords.

Also, you can try Google Answers for expert help with your search.

So have you got anything to back up what you are saying, amesj523? Right now it looks like you are just spinning and fabricating. To borrow from LABF, maybe Dan Rather has an internship for you.

[alkemical]

lol, keep lying for your cause. now you sound like labf trying to spin...

[patteeu]

lol, keep lying for your cause. now you sound like labf trying to spin...

The silence has spoken?

Nothing to back up your statement that the Blair administration forged the Niger docs? I can't say I'm surprised.

[alkemical]

i did give you links...



PA


Posts: 8,819
vCash: 500












http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...nts&btnG=Search
(take your time, there's alot here to do some research on: Results 1 - 10 of about 28,800 for forged blair documents. )

And since i know you repuglikans like to just ignore things:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/po...sp?story=412558

The Niger connection: Tony Blair, forged documents and the case for war
By Andrew Grice Political Editor and David Usborne in New York

05 June 2003

Tony Blair was under mounting pressure yesterday after he refused to withdraw discredited claims by the secret intelligence service MI6 that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium to make nuclear weapons.




you picked out one thing, out of 10k links?

again, more lying from an ideologue to support their beliefs....

[Exile_In_SJ]

what's a repuglikan? is that similar to a demoncrap? or a dummycrat? or even a dhimmicrat? a DemoRAT? lol. hey, it's fun thinking up cool names for the other side.