(Thank you, Registered)
Posted on 09/11/2004 6:25:50 AM PDT by Safety
Wasn't that the best belly laugh you've had in a while?
This thread is a duplicate:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1212961/posts
The Globe has a proud tradition of backing losers, most often Kennedys.
I sent an e-mail to the Globe asking a reporter why he had quoted President Bush's former CO in Alabama as saying "I don't remember seeing Bush there." when he failed to mention that the same CO had come forward and admitted that he was suffering from Alzheimers and that he had spoken to others in the unit he trusted and that he now believed LT Bush was there.
He replied, that he had read the same quote and tried to call the CO to confirm but couldn't reach him, so he left it out.
I then replied, did you personally confirm the first quote that was damaging to President Bush? He didn't reply.
We didn't have type writers that fancy when I came in 10 years later.
Threads spaced four hours apart or more get a pass. Thanks.
(Thank you, Registered)
I used IBM Selectrics all theough the 70's and 80's. Then we got Lanier and Wang word processors at Work. I continued to use my Selectric at home for years, till I got a good Daisy wheel printer, at which point I donated the Selectric to the Salvation Army. I _thought_ I had every popular font ball I could buy. If only I had bought a surplus Government one! I could have had kerning, center justification, and superscripts!
Yeah..If only you had known/S
the Boston Herald isn't so cozy with the dems:
http://news.bostonherald.com/election/view.bg?articleid=43746
CBS: Guard memos are authentic: Dems rip Bush's service
By Noelle Straub
Saturday, September 11, 2004
WASHINGTON - Democrats continued to hammer at President Bush's military record yesterday despite growing controversy over the authenticity of newly surfaced memos critical of his Texas Air National Guard service.
CBS News, which unveiled the documents on its ``60 Minutes'' program, stood by its story.
``I know that this story is true,'' news anchor Dan Rather said. ``I believe that the witnesses and the documents are authentic.''
The memos in question, supposedly written by late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who was Bush's squadron commander in Texas, state that Bush failed to meet the standards of the Texas Air National Guard and to carry out a direct order to undergo a required medical exam.
Killian's widow and son and one of his colleagues have questioned the document's validity. Various font experts also have said the type does not look like it came from a 1970s typewriter.
CBS last night aired comments from Robert Strong, who ran the Texas Air National Guard administrative office during the Vietnam era, saying the documents were compatible with ``the way business was done at that time.''
The network also aired an interview with handwriting expert Marcel Matley showing how he compared signatures on the memos with Killian's.
Meanwhile, Democratic Party Chairman Terry McAuliffe charged, ``It has come crystal clear that the president has lied to the American public about his military service.'' But McAuliffe also suggested that Republicans could have put out false documents to embarrass Democrats.
``I can tell you that nobody at the Democratic National Committee or groups associated with us were involved in any way with these documents,'' he said. ``I'm just saying that I would ask Karl Rove the same question.''
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the White House is not analyzing the documents. ``We don't know whether the documents were fabricated or are authentic,'' he said.
The White House distributed the memos to reporters after receiving them from CBS.
``The documents do not change the facts,'' McClellan said. ``The president met his obligations and was honorably discharged. And the one thing that is clear is the timing and the coordination going on here. There is an orchestrated effort by Democrats and the Kerry campaign to tear down the president because of the direction the polls are moving.''
here's from the NYPost, which we can support with our money:
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/28387.htm
RATHER FORGES AHEAD
By DEBORAH ORIN and VINCENT MORRIS
September 11, 2004 -- CBS anchor Dan Rather hung tough last night and insisted there's no "definitive evidence" to refute the authenticity of documents about President Bush's National Guard service — but a growing number of document experts smell a hoax.
"If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it. So far there is none," Rather insisted.
He produced a man named Marcel Matley as the document vetter.
But Matley is primarily a handwriting expert whose expertise in document evaluation has been challenged by the head of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners.
Matley spoke only about a signature and initials purported to be those of the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian — "they are his signatures" — though two of the four memos are unsigned.
Rather also acknowledged CBS has no originals, only photocopies.
Allan Haley — a typeface expert at Agfa Monotype — said anyone who claims to definitively authenticate a photocopy "is either guessing or is a fool."
In another challenge to CBS, Killian's boss, retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, told ABC News that he regards the documents as a computer "fraud," never saw them in the 1970s and didn't validate them for CBS.
A senior CBS official had claimed to the Washington Post that Hodges had validated the documents.
During his national news broadcast, Rather claimed "partisan political operatives" are challenging the memos but omitted the fact that Killian's widow and son dispute them.
The memos cast doubt on whether Bush fulfilled his Guard requirements.
Marjorie Connell — widow of Lt. Col. Killian, who died in 1984 — has told ABC the documents are "very suspect" because her late husband didn't type and was a big fan of the young Bush.
A key issue is whether the documents were made on a 1970s-era typewriter or are forgeries done by computer because of their proportional spacing and raised superscripts on ordinal numbers like "111th."
Rather last night pointed to an undisputed document from Bush's National Guard files and claimed it has a superscript, so they were available by 1968.
But that document is in a different typeface and experts say it was made on a different type of machine without proportional spacing so it proves nothing.
"It could be a superscript, it could be a correction with a letter showing through white-out, but in any case it's absolutely irrelevant . . . It doesn't prove a thing," said document expert Bill Flynn.
"It's a completely different technology," added the Phoenix-based Flynn.
Flynn said it's "very unlikely" that the memos are legit, adding that he knows of no typewriter fonts using proportionally spaced Roman type with a raised "th" available in the 1970s.
Rather didn't identify any machine capable of produc^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ing the documents
As the old adage goes, "One lies, the other swears to it."
Either you are with us, or you are with the forging liars. The Globe quickly declares its intentions.
Bump.
Show me something ... A N Y T H I N G ! ... from official DoD records with Killian's signature on it that has the same characteristics as these fakes! Under FOIA, there must be literally thousands of documents he signed. I guaran-dam*-tee you that there is no other document he signed that has this font, this proporational spacing, this super-scripting, this kerning, this paper size, this magic header-centering, etc., etc.
Killian's family has said he had no personal typewriter, and didn't type. For these to have been real docs, it would have to have been a TANG typewriter. Show me any other TANG document with these characteristics ... with ANY signature!
If there are thousands of documents that look nothing like these, and 4 that look like these, what's that tell you?
FAKE, FRAUD, FELONY!
|
Kerry-Edwards: Forging Ahead
|
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.