Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Typewriter Expert can't duplicate Guard memos using IBM Composer
The Shape of Days Blog ^ | 9-10-04 10:34 PM | J Harrell

Posted on 09/11/2004 7:39:33 AM PDT by handy

When I first heard back from Gerry, I felt a little bad for having bothered him. He'd been fielding calls and letters all day, he told me, including an inquiry from CNN. But he was a trouper, willing — enthusiastic even — to help out.

I asked Gerry, in a fit of hubris, if he wouldn't mind trying to reproduce a sample from one of the CBS memos on his Selectric Composer. Just over an hour later, he emailed me back a sample, typed up on his Composer using the 11-point Press Roman type ball and scanned into his computer.

At first glance, the sample Gerry provided looks pretty darned close. The type is proportionally spaced, just like the type in the CBS memos. Gerry was also able to reproduce the now-infamous superscripted "th," though he had a disclaimer about that.

snip

The most obvious discrepancy was that the line-spacing — what typographers call leading (rhymes with "shredding") — was off. I e-mailed Gerry about this, and he replied: "Yes, if I had really tried, I could have matched the spacing (leading). The leading on the composer can be finely adjusted. Don't know if it is down to the single point level, but it probably is since you can set the leading according to the font, and the leading dial goes from something like 6pt up to 14pt."

Much better … and pretty darned close to the original. But not close enough.

(Excerpt) Read more at shapeofdays.typepad.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; cbs; fakedocuments; forgery; killian; nationalguard; rathergate; selectricgate; tang
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last
Go to the link to see the graphic. A picture is worth a 1000 words and a CBS anchor scalp ;-)
1 posted on 09/11/2004 7:39:33 AM PDT by handy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: handy

I have a question. Knowing how anal retentive the government is about records and record keeping, wouldn't the GAO or the USAF procurement office have the records as to what exactly was used by the office staff of that era?

I mean somebody had to order the equipment and typewriters to stock the facility.


2 posted on 09/11/2004 7:44:58 AM PDT by OpusatFR (Let me repeat this: the web means never having to swallow leftist garbage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handy

The DUers were calling for someone to grab any old typewriter and go on CBS News and demonstrate typing up the letter. They thought they could have it settled in five minutes.

I agree, I'd love to see CBS trot out an 'expert' to type up this simple memo and compare it on live tv.


3 posted on 09/11/2004 7:46:12 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kenth
The DUers were calling for someone to grab any old typewriter and go on CBS News and demonstrate typing up the letter. They thought they could have it settled in five minutes.

It's impossible to type these memos on a typewriter. 30 minutes scanning the blogs proves it.

Check this link out that support the lead link in this thread.

You can however match the memos exacly using Microsoft word. This is so blatant!!!

4 posted on 09/11/2004 7:49:40 AM PDT by handy (Forgive me this day, my daily typos...The Truth is not a Smear!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: handy

It's just insane.

The left, from DUers, to Juan Williams, to Rather himself, have all been crying, "Stop worrying whether the memo is fake or not, look at what it says!"

That's just insane. Completely insane. I don't know how else to put it.


5 posted on 09/11/2004 7:52:00 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: handy
You can however match the memos exacly using Microsoft word. This is so blatant!!!

Not only can you match the memo, you don't have to play with the Word settings. Just start Word using the default settings, type the memo (double-space after each sentence) and "poof" the memo matches exactly.

"The memos are clumsy forgeries" - Occam

6 posted on 09/11/2004 7:52:31 AM PDT by PMCarey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kenth

Plus, a Selectric Composer is not exactly a "typewriter." Today, it would be like claiming you wrote a memo on a purpose-built page composition system costing a minimum of $40,000. Highly improbably from the get-go, and now proved impossible.


7 posted on 09/11/2004 7:53:41 AM PDT by eno_ (Freedom Lite, it's almost worth defending.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kenth

> The DUers were calling for someone to grab any old
> typewriter and go on CBS News and demonstrate typing
> up the letter.

When the SBVFT issue arose, some of them were also
suggesting that Kerry just sign an SF-180 and clear
it all up.

The naive get re-educated, or accused of being FR
trolls and then banned.

In any case, the site exposes the true soul of
progressive liberalism. Sort of a political chamber
of horrors. A necessary museum.


8 posted on 09/11/2004 7:54:40 AM PDT by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kenth
The left, from DUers, to Juan Williams, to Rather himself, have all been crying, "Stop worrying whether the memo is fake or not, look at what it says!"

Are they really? (I'm TV-news-feeding-frenzy-limited...)

That is freakin' hilarious. I mean really...that is so funny!

9 posted on 09/11/2004 7:55:04 AM PDT by Allegra (Is what I'm living right now just going to be one big "mistaken recollection?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All

I think the work that the person did, lays it to rest. I don't think there is any doubt that those memos could not have possibly been produced in 1972-73. But apart from that consider this:

CBS Famous Dan Rather, for years the Gold Standard of TV journalism produces:

1. Memos from an un-named source.
2. That are written by a person who is deceased.
3. Which are photocopies and not originals.

Let's stop right here. Do we have to be like the people of WHOVILLE and shout at the top of our lungs? But people

SOMETHING IS REALLY WRONG HERE!!!

nick


10 posted on 09/11/2004 7:58:11 AM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

Yup, that's the tact the left is taking. Basically their response on TV has been "even if the memos are fakes, what they say is true."


11 posted on 09/11/2004 7:58:37 AM PDT by handy (Forgive me this day, my daily typos...The Truth is not a Smear!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nikos1121

Here's mabelkitty's list of problems with the memos. It may be longer today. ;-)

Here's the running, breathng, unedited document. I'm trying to keep up, but I haven't been able to edit the whole thing yet:

Some have already been clarified, but here are the running discrepancies:
1-- proportional spacing not generally available
2 -- superscripts not generally available
3 - small "th" single element not generally available (not common, but available. Highly unlikely the machines were available at TANG)
4 - Smart quotes. Curved apostrophes and quotation marks were not available
5-The blurriness of the copy indicates it was recopied dozens of times, tactic of forgers
6--Signature block. Typical authentic military signature block has name, then rank, then on the next line the person's position. This just has rank beneath the name.
7--Margins. These look like a computer's unjustified default, not the way a person typing would have done it.
8 -- Date usually with three letters, or in form as 110471.
9 - words run over consistent with word processor
10 - Times Roman has been available since 1931, but only in linotype printshops...until released with Apple MacIntosh in 1984 and Windows 3.1 in 1991.
11 - signature looks faked
12 - no errors and whiteout
13 - no letterhead
14 - exact match for Microsoft Word Processor
15 - Paper size problem, Air Force and Guard did not use 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper until the 1980s.
16 - Overlap analysis is an exact match
17 - absence of hyphens to split words between lines, c/w 1970's typewriter.
18 - 5000 Longmont #8 in Houston Tx. does not exist (actually does exist, but Mr. Bush had already moved TWICE from this address at the time the memo was written).
19 - Box 34567 is suspicious, at best. The current use of the po box 34567 is Ashland Chemical Company, A Division of Ashland Oil, Incorporated P. O. Box 34567 Houston (this has been confirmed by the Pentagon, per James Rosen on Fox News-However, many documents on John Kerry’s website show same)
20 - it would have been nearly impossible to center a letterhead with proportional spacing without a computer.
21 - Bush's grade would "normally" be abbreviated "1Lt" not "1st Lt"
22 - Subject matter bizarre
23 - Air Force did not use street addresses for their offices, rather HQ AFLC/CC, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433.
24 - kerning was not available
25 - In the August 18, 1973 memo, Jerry Killian purportedly writes: "Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush. I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job." but General Staudt, who thought very highly of Lt. Bush, retired in 1972.
26 - Language not generally used by military
27 - Not signed or initialed
28 - Not in any format that a military person would use, e.g. orders not given by Memo.
29 – Is the document original or a copy of an original? Why all the background noise such as black marks and a series of repeated dots (as if run through a Xerox).(Rather explained his document was a photocopy-brings up additional questions of how redacted black address was visible from a several generation copy)
31-The Killiam family rejected these documents as forgeries. Then where did the “personal files” come from if not the family?
32-Why no three hole punches evident at the top of the page?
33-Mr. Bush would have had automatic physical scheduled for his Birthday – in July! He would not have received correspondence.
34-Why is the redacted address of Longmont #8 visible beneath the black mark? This would have been impossible after one copy, but it would be visible if the document was scanned.
35-Why were these exact same documents available for sale on the Internet y Marty Heldt, of leftist web site Tom Paine, as early as January 2004? Is this where CBS obtained their copies?
36-Acronym should be ORT, not ORET.
37- Last line of document 4 "Austin will not be pleased with this" is not in the same font and has been added!
38-Handwriting experts are not document experts – apples and oranges.
39 - Lt Col Killian didn't type
40-The forged documents had no initials from a clerk
41-There was no CC list (needed for orders)
42-Subject line in memos was normally CAPITALIZED in the military
43-The forged documents used incorrect terminology ("physical examination" instead of "medical")
44-There was no "reciept confirmation box" (required for orders)
45-The superscript "th" in the forged documents was raised half-way above the typed line (consistent with MS Word, but inconsistent with military typewriters which kept everything in-line to avoid writing outside the pre-printed boxes of standard forms)
46-CBS admits that it does *not* have the originals, but only original documents can be proven to be real; copies can *never* be authenticated positively...repeat: only original documents can be proven real. CBS never had the originals, so CBS knew that it was publishing something that couldn't be assured of authenticity.


12 posted on 09/11/2004 8:00:19 AM PDT by handy (Forgive me this day, my daily typos...The Truth is not a Smear!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: handy

Dan Rather's stand
By Wolf Blitzer
CNN

http://cnn.usnews.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=CNN.com+-+Dan+Rather%27s+stand+-+Sep+10%2C+2004&expire=-1&urlID=11603991&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2004%2FUS%2F09%2F10%2Frather%2Findex.html&partnerID=2004


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- This is not the first time Dan Rather has found himself in a serious dispute with a U.S. president.

There was this exchange in 1974 during the height of the Watergate scandal with then-President Richard Nixon:

Nixon: Are you running for something?

Rather: No sir, are you?

And there was this exchange with then-Vice President George Bush in 1988 over the Iran-Contra scandal.

Rather: I don't want to be argumentative, Mr. vice president.

Bush: You do, Dan.

Rather: No -- no, sir, I don't.

Bush: This is not a great night, because I want to talk about why I want to be president, why those 41 percent of the people are supporting me. And I don't think it's fair to judge my whole career by a rehash of Iran. How would you like it if I judged your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in New York?

Now, the 72-year-old CBS News anchor finds himself in yet another confrontation with a Republican president.

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

At issue is his report on "60 Minutes" that aired Wednesday -- a report that included documents purporting to show that the current President Bush, while serving in the Texas Air National Guard, did not meet all his military obligations.

"They [the White House] have not answered the question of did or did the president not obey or obey an order? Was he or was he not suspended for failure to meet performance standards of the Air Force? If he didn't take the physical, why didn't he take the physical?" Rather said.

But now, there are questions about the authenticity of the documents released by "60 Minutes."

The Washington Post says the "60 Minutes" documents are not consistent with other documents released by Bush's Air National Guard unit in the early '70's.

"If you compare the documents that CBS produced with the documents that we know to be authentic, that did come from Bush's National Guard unit, none of those documents use proportionate spacing. And that's only one of the anomalies," says the Post's Michael Dobbs.

Experts contacted by CNN say there are some inconsistencies in the type style and formatting -- noting those styles then existed on typewriters but were not common. They also say only a review of the original documents -- not copies -- can completely resolve the matter.

Beyond that, surviving relatives of Bush's then commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the author of the purported documents, insist they are fake. They say Killian always believed Bush was an excellent pilot and that he never wrote these documents. Killian died in 1984.

"The story is true. The story is true," Rather said. "The questions raised in the story are serious and legitimate questions."

Rather denies there is any internal CBS News investigation under way -- a statement backed by the network.

Rather also said the possibility of issuing any kind of recant or apology was "not even discussed. Nor should it be."


13 posted on 09/11/2004 8:01:04 AM PDT by stevek1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR

My understanding is that when the Military orders something... ANYTHING... it is ordered in bulk, it is the cheapest item that will perform the essential functions of the job, and it is purchased at the best price they can get.

That being said the odds that a $3000 typewriter is going to be purchased for common use at a National Guard Reserve base in Houston Texas is beyond unbelievable.

These typewriters were designed to make documents look "professional." Since when did the military ever concern itself about the asthetic value of anything, much less a "memo to file."

I say the burden is on CBS to produce other military documents from Col. Killian's office that were produced on this same machine.

I won't hold my breath.


14 posted on 09/11/2004 8:01:17 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nikos1121

You make a good point......this from so-called professional journalists who look down their nose at Drudge and web-bloggers for not meeting "basic journalistic standards", blah-blah-blah.


15 posted on 09/11/2004 8:01:36 AM PDT by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kenth

I know, it's funny. They are actually saying don't look at the man behind the curtain. It's really so sad.


16 posted on 09/11/2004 8:03:00 AM PDT by WHBates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

They are basically saying that the content of the memos proves that they are not fake.

I expect little in the way of logic from the left. I don't expect much at all. But, this is crazy. I can't do anything but shake my head in disbelief at this line of 'reasoning'.


17 posted on 09/11/2004 8:03:17 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: handy

47 - Terry McAuliffe has admitted that the documents are fake (blaming Bush).


18 posted on 09/11/2004 8:04:29 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: eno_

Not to mention that someone who didn't "type" was going to take the time to learn this complicated piece of equipment. Take the time to reset font sizes and line spacing, etc so his memo would look "perfect?"


19 posted on 09/11/2004 8:04:30 AM PDT by ican'tbelieveit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: handy
One point that needs to be made is that he was able to make the superscript only by changing the type ball to a smaller font and then changing it back again for the rest of the line.
20 posted on 09/11/2004 8:04:43 AM PDT by ScottFromSpokane (Re-elect President Bush: http://spokanegop.org/bush.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PMCarey
I think what is MORE obvious is the interview on H&C where Killian's son said he and his step-mom were interveiwed by CBS and they told CBS they thought Killian would NOT have written these memo's and also Killian praised Bush extensively! Killian's son further stated he thought those docs most likely were forgeries.

Funny, I don't recall any of what Killian or his step-mom stated being in the BOGUS CBS report?

Also Killian's son stated the name of the CBS producer: I believe he said, Mary Merce (sp). I saw that name here in one of the threads previously...

21 posted on 09/11/2004 8:04:44 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Do you just think I fell off a turnip truck?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PMCarey
Check this out ... The dreaded (by CBS) post 13.
22 posted on 09/11/2004 8:04:55 AM PDT by tang-soo (Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks - Read Daniel Chapter 9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kenth
"The left, from DUers, to Juan Williams, to Rather himself, have all been crying, "Stop worrying whether the memo is fake or not, look at what it says!" That's just insane. Completely insane. I don't know how else to put it"

Yes, insane...and so classically exemplary of the modern Democratic Party.

23 posted on 09/11/2004 8:05:11 AM PDT by intolerancewillNOTbetolerated (Throw The Obstructionists Out Of Congress Bush/Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: handy
I did a lot of investigation into high end typewriters/photo-compositors in the early '70s for catalog production.
The IBM composer has far more capabilities than anything else available that would fit on even a large desk.
Since the IBM can't match the documents exactly, they are without doubt fraudulent.

So9

24 posted on 09/11/2004 8:05:50 AM PDT by Servant of the 9 (We are the Hegemon. We can do anything we damned well please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handy

I didnt see this in your list. The adobe.pdf file I've seen is supposed to be a nth generation copy. If these are from someone's personal files and not meant to be seen, why would it look like an nth generation. If these are personal files, why would he keep xeroxes of them - if they weren't meant to be seen by anyone?


25 posted on 09/11/2004 8:06:49 AM PDT by merry10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR
I have a question. Knowing how anal retentive the government is about records and record keeping, wouldn't the GAO or the USAF procurement office have the records as to what exactly was used by the office staff of that era?

I have been saying the same thing. I also question the possiblity that the ANG was using the top of the line, newest techonolgy available equipment in the office. I suspect they were using surplus junkers.

There is a thread around here someone form last night that has a 100% authentic, indisputable memo from Killian, typed by his secretary (because he didn't type) and it is not even close to what the CBS memos look like.

26 posted on 09/11/2004 8:07:19 AM PDT by Phantom Lord (Advantages are taken, not handed out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stevek1

Anyone who was in the Military in a flying unit during that time period knows these doc's are fakes. Pure and simple. All this expert witness BS is like picking fly feces out of pepper..utter nonsense.

The documents are fakes.


27 posted on 09/11/2004 8:09:38 AM PDT by RVN Airplane Driver (www.RealHeroesVoices.com....see the real John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
Since the IBM can't match the documents exactly, they are without doubt fraudulent.

That's what I'm thinking. The composer is supposed to be the state of the art. Better than an IBM Selectric or executive. If an enthusiastic fanatical Composer collector can't match the memos, no way these memos are real. Remember, Killian could nit type says his wife. Then there are all the other problems with the memos... Bogus Bogus Bogus

28 posted on 09/11/2004 8:09:56 AM PDT by handy (Forgive me this day, my daily typos...The Truth is not a Smear!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: handy

This memo is phonier than a Michael Moore movie!


29 posted on 09/11/2004 8:16:41 AM PDT by reg45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

What base was this in Texas? My husband was discharged (regular AF) in Texas at the same time and I still have all his official correspondence. It isn't the same type that CBS shows.


30 posted on 09/11/2004 8:17:48 AM PDT by OpusatFR (Let me repeat this: the web means never having to swallow leftist garbage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR
Here is that thread I was talking about...

May 24th Memo from Killian Office Not Similar to CBS Memo

31 posted on 09/11/2004 8:19:18 AM PDT by Phantom Lord (Advantages are taken, not handed out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: handy

Dan Rather is not fit to be a successor to Edward R. Murrow.


32 posted on 09/11/2004 8:21:06 AM PDT by reg45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handy

Hi... Did you read the article in total that is posted here. I think the most compelling proof is that the memos could not possibly have been centered on any typewriter at that time, that consistently.

Good job.

Clearly, the other MSM stations have to carry the ball on this. If they don't Rather gets away with it. IF they do, they will demand more answers.

We've done our job.

nick


33 posted on 09/11/2004 8:21:24 AM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub; Radix; Kathy in Alaska; MoJo2001; LaDivaLoca; Fawnn; Bethbg79; ...
I found 1970s era typewriter with a 10 character per inch ball. See this post. Here
34 posted on 09/11/2004 8:21:33 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (Charter member of the VRWC - and proud of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord

What you posted looks the way my husband's files look.

He even has some private memos, but they are hand written. My husband didn't type either.


35 posted on 09/11/2004 8:23:25 AM PDT by OpusatFR (Let me repeat this: the web means never having to swallow leftist garbage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: handy

Here’s something that bothers me and I have not seen it pointed out before. Look closely at the CBS documents and you will see any numbers and their corresponding th or st are separated by a space, are superscripted, or follow the character l (which could be a the letter vs. a number)

Microsoft word automatically superscripts “th” and “st” following numbers.

If I was trying to prevent superscripts on Microsoft word I would skip a space or use the letter l for the number one.

It’s clear to me someone was trying to prevent superscripts and forgot to leave a space on those superscripted numbers.


36 posted on 09/11/2004 8:24:24 AM PDT by not too stupid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kenth
The left, from DUers, to Juan Williams, to Rather himself, have all been crying, "Stop worrying whether the memo is fake or not, look at what it says!"

That's exactly what Al Sharpton and his fellow defamers argued when it turned out that Tawana Brawley had faked her attack. "It doesn't matter, racism is the important issue, it could have happened.".

37 posted on 09/11/2004 8:24:49 AM PDT by SupplySider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: handy

With all the significance of this issue, it's important to eliminate all possibilities. This analysis focused a. lot on the heading. It was common elsewhere (I did it in my business) during this era to use pre-printed stationary for many things. It was also common to have a typeset master on a metal sheet, then the master was run through offset printers to create the useable stationary to be typed on. Is it conceivable that pre-printed, typeset letterhead stock was used?


38 posted on 09/11/2004 8:26:42 AM PDT by Real Cynic No More
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stevek1


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


What exactly are you trying to say here Mr. Rather? If you support the president, what in God's name are you trying to accomplish here? I mean, is your point simply to try and discredit George Bush's military record? What is the point? Are there not more legitimate arguments that you can raise as a journalist?

You obtain a memo, that is not an original, written by someone who is deceased. You also produce a person who claimed years ago that he did not help George Bush get in to the guard, but who now says he did, and the man is a major fundraisor for Kerry and his own daughter discredits his story.

I mean this is yellow journalism, and you sir are no longer a journalist that has my respect.

I havn't seen your newcast in years. When I saw you last night it was pathetic. You are the National Enquire of TV Journalism.

Enough said.

nick

nick


39 posted on 09/11/2004 8:27:27 AM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kenth

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain...

Just the magic on the screen....Dan Blather the Woderfull Wizard of Ooze


40 posted on 09/11/2004 8:27:34 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Two Heads Are Better Than One...Unless They're On The Same Person -Andy Sipowicz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: handy

The whole problem with this will be the Sandy Berger Effect. The SBE means that a damning story erupts and simply gets ignored. That's what will happen here. It will be denied and soon ignored. Independent voters won't have a clue what went on, and all Rather has to say is that the challenges to his credibility are "partisan internet and talk radio" people, and the independent voter will understand that this is nothing.
So we must figure a way at FR not just to uncover this kind of thing, but to also carry it through to completion.


41 posted on 09/11/2004 8:29:28 AM PDT by Vinomori
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kenth

The left, from DUers, to Juan Williams, to Rather himself, have all been crying, "Stop worrying whether the memo is fake or not, look at what it says!"

yea...must be why Hitler and Howard Hughes diaries are consulted so often by historians...

/sarcasm


42 posted on 09/11/2004 8:29:59 AM PDT by Keith (JOHN KERRY...IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE III SECTION 3 OF THE US CONSTITUTION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: handy
One thing that bothers me is this: Even if it was possible to produce these documents so perfectly with a manual typewriter, it makes no sense that someone would deliberately go through that much effort for what were supposed to be just memos in a personal file. Especially by someone who didn't type.
43 posted on 09/11/2004 8:30:35 AM PDT by Dave Olson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kenth
They are allowed to lie about their opponents. They say their opponents lie about them, so it must be so. And if they can be lied about, then they can lie about their opponents too. It is only "fair".

Swiftees drew blood. They had no rebuttal. So they (1) called them lies then (2) lied themselves and then (3) planned to hide in moral equivalence and call for both sides to stop. After they got in their smear.

44 posted on 09/11/2004 8:30:44 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Maceman; Howlin

Ping (and gather the clans).


45 posted on 09/11/2004 8:31:04 AM PDT by steveegg (C-BS, w/Dan Blather - the official network and anchor of the Clintonistas and Ketchup/Breck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vinomori

fear not...the internet and email will continue on a micro level to effect a "drip, drip, drip" effect.

Kerry is toast. Uncover the DNC ties to this to seal a filibuster-proof Senate...


46 posted on 09/11/2004 8:31:30 AM PDT by Keith (JOHN KERRY...IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE III SECTION 3 OF THE US CONSTITUTION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR
After audits to confirm proper procurement and disposal at a disposal, reclaimation center called DRMO (?) the records would have been kept till the next audit. Supply and Equipment NCO's and OIC's at individual squadrons would have kept records IAW directives for record keeping which I believe was two years. Active and inactive files for NF1 and NF2 items which related to accountable hard property like typewriters, desks, chairs and expendable office supplies like bond paper and pencils etc...

Just how I remember it....:o).

Stay safe !

47 posted on 09/11/2004 8:31:48 AM PDT by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dave Olson
Everyone within the orbit of Jupiter knows by now that these are forgeries types in Microsoft Word within the last year or so. Some people just don't like this obvious fact, and deliberately choose to lie about it.
48 posted on 09/11/2004 8:32:03 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Vinomori

"The whole problem with this will be the Sandy Berger Effect. The SBE means that a damning story erupts and simply gets ignored. That's what will happen here. It will be denied and soon ignored. Independent voters won't have a clue what went on, and all Rather has to say is that the challenges to his credibility are "partisan internet and talk radio" people, and the independent voter will understand that this is nothing.
So we must figure a way at FR not just to uncover this kind of thing, but to also carry it through to completion."


Let's not be ignorant here. This smells of James Carville. The objective here was to simply lay some doubt as to the president's military record. No one will give a rats @ss about anything pertaining to whether or not it is true or not. This is to rally their base. Problem is, it's rallying us too.

I live in Illinois and of course, I will still vote, but it is disheartening to know that my vote won't count. Those of you who are in swing states must work as hard as possible to get people to vote for the president.

That's how we win this.

nick

nick


49 posted on 09/11/2004 8:32:40 AM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR; All
Is it possible the the documents were 'cut and pasted' with some info being original, while other important sentences replaced?
50 posted on 09/11/2004 8:34:33 AM PDT by tmp02
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson