Posted on 09/09/2004 1:39:31 PM PDT by Steven W.
Why would anyone who was doing what he was doing WRITE A MEMO TO THE FILE ABOUT IT?? Duh...
Good thing John O'Neill didn't have a girlie man like you telling him what to do.
If we can prove beyond doubt it is a forgery, then that is wonderful. If we cannot, however, we have just prolonged the amount of time the press will devote to this issue.
I really hope this forgery angle comes through.
I don't agree. Dan Rather used these documents and a know partisan fundraiser for the Kerry campaign to smear George Bush. Then Dan says "I believe these are genuine documents." He should have multiple sources for such inflamatory and damaging evidence, instead of relying soley on a partisan who used the alleged testimony of dead people to base his attack on Bush. In my opinion Dan is the one who should be ashamed and proving these documents are authentic and be prepared to answer all questions concerning their authenticity.
Crickets.
I agree... I live in Seattle so I've been able to listen to Medved for ten years. He's also a great guy. I've been lucky enough to meet him a few times on various GOP campaigns.
NO WAY! J'effin was in Vietnam? [/massive gushing sarcasm]
In my many years in the USAF I do not recall the military using dates like in the fake memo. Should be something like 110471.
Old Bism
HOWEVER - I have worked in this field for over 20 years and am employed by one of the world's largest text capture software application engineering firms so I am extremely familiar with all of the related technologies.
It's this simple - without the aid of a computer it is near impossible to generate anything close to reproductions and these documents not only bear no resemblance to something typewritten they feature advanced printing characteristics as have been noted elsewhere (font properties, superscript, etc.)
However - it is 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999% impossible to open Word, enter the text, directly, as has been done & depicted above, and reproduce - EXACTLY - that which has been submitted.
The burden of proof here has been met. It is now up to 60 Minutes & Dan Rather, Don Hewitt, etc., to justify these documents (which they'll likely be unable).
At this point, if they're LEGIT (highly doubtful) then (a) it's irrelevant because Bush served honorably and it doesn't make a difference + (b) there is enough of a question that - ala Gennifer Flowers' "doctored" tapes - enough smoke to generate fire in most people's minds. If they're FORGED (and I think odds are they're near certainly forged) then 60 Minutes & CBS + the Kerry campaign take a permanent bath on this one - IT IS OVER.
For a maddening look inside these smear-merchants, go rent "Shattered Glass," a relatively true story of an investigative journalist gone crazy when his bosses (at CBS, I believe) saw the glory and never bothered with standards.
Anyone who has served knows that the date format in the military is ddMONyr, ex. 09SEP04 or 09 SEP 04. Any formal letter would have the entire date spelled as such, September 09, 2004. This is a dead give-away.
I think we've proven that it's Times New Roman. Now all we have to do is figure out when Times New Roman was invented... if it's after the dates on the memo, this thing will be disproven for once and all.
I love Medved, but he does give entirely too much time to and has too much patience with insipid disagreeing (seminar) callers.
Apparently they were.
I, too, was skeptical this morning, but there seems little doubt now, especially with the testimony of three independent typographers who are familiar with the typewriters of the time.
What? He did? I hadn't heard that.
Great job, Steve..!
I am awed by all you people!
After reading stuff earlier this morning when it was first posted on Free Republic, I have been watching as the story developed. As someone old enough to have actually used an IBM Ball Selectric, I feel that some of the documents are likely fakes.
It is now be carried on Drudge and starting to get lots of play. Michael Medved picking it up should also expand the understanding by the public as to what has likely happened.
Just for fun, I went to the CBS news website to see what they had to say and if they were yet picking up this story and had any comments. As of about 1:35 Pm Pacific Time, they had no comment about the possiblity of the documents being fakes. I went to their links to view the documents they had on Bush's Texas service and only a few (i.e. not all) appear to have the obvious "th" and proportional font problems. This means that a few of the documents could be legitimate.
I used the contact us feature on the CBS website to submit a complaint to 60 minutes. My complaint pointed out that I had read a compelling discussion on how and why some of the documents were fakes and asked why CBS News and 60 Minutes would not immediately investigate, pull the stories and documents until a determination was made, and post a notice that questions had been raised. I then reminded them about some of the past 60 Minutes specials, one about a nuclear power plant utility executive interveiw, where the utility video taped the entire 60 minutes interview and proved that what 60 minutes aired was a distortion and the one where the ignighter flare was used to produce a nice fire in a truck crash so as to give dramatic footage, when the truck didn't catch fire in a crash. I then asked them if they were learning their craft from the New York Times.
I suggest that all Freepers go to the following URL to send CBS News a piece of their mind.
Link to CBS News 60 Minutes website
Then scroll down to the bottom of the page to the "Contact Us" Java link.
Look, these memos that they showed have no credibility at all. The only one who can confirm it is dead....and even he would seem bogus. Look how unprofessional he is in the documents. He makes unsubstantiated allegations. THey are not in standard form. And the only guy that RATher had look at them...works for him.
Look at the documents...they are on this cbs story
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml
First off...they say these documents are from personal files. THAT SHOWS THEY ARE BOGUS. IF they were military docs...they would not just be in some dead man's personal file. They would be in the AF Records. They would also be copied to Bush's files.
The documents showed last night....are bogus. ON TOP OF THAT....NOTHING IN THOSE DOCUMENTS SHOW THAT BUSH DID NOT MEET HIS REQUIRED DRILL POINTS.
"I'll backdate, but won't rate."
See, that phrase proves it. Jesse Jackson wrote the memo.
Your elucidation on the origination of this fabrication has caused great elation and wild gyrations on the foundation of my habitation and the disincorporation of my posterior location. [ROFLMAO]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.