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

Skip to comments.

USA Today acknowledges that it independently received the documents
USA Today | 9/13/04

Posted on 09/12/2004 10:18:12 PM PDT by ambrose

USA Today acknowledges that it indepedently received the documents


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cbsnews; forgery; john; kerny; killian; napalminthemorning; rather; rathergate; seebsnews; tang
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-211 next last
To: ambrose
TO: editor@usatoday.com

FROM: forger@moveon.org

SUBJECT: AWOL

Here are the Docs we spoke about at the fundraiser. By the way, thanks again for the generous donation. -F

51 posted on 09/12/2004 11:05:39 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

It is being reported that a possible source for the docs was a TANG member named Burkett. Apparently, he has had two nervous breakdowns and has applied, unsuccessfully for monetary damages from the Guard and is "disgruntled". Like I said before, even if the docs came from this guy, somebody helped push them. It will be interesting to see what happens this week!


52 posted on 09/12/2004 11:05:46 PM PDT by sixxiron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Carling

Watergate WAS amateur hour....


53 posted on 09/12/2004 11:08:02 PM PDT by jnarcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The Bandit

"You know, this is very odd because the USAToday memos I seen the other day on their site was such poor quality as though they been faxed around leading me to assume they came from the WH batch that CBS had faxed."

The USA Today reduced their quality. Yesterday the documents were 484K, today they are about 80K. I have posted the orignal higher quality docs on my website temporarily at challengerdisaster.info I apologize for the site it is under development.


54 posted on 09/12/2004 11:08:21 PM PDT by charleston1 (No prisoners.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: All

ROFLMAO the DUmmies are going crazy saying these two docs are the smoking gun going to do in Bush..they still don't realize they are forgeries..LOL...are people really that stupid and can vote?


55 posted on 09/12/2004 11:09:20 PM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: plushaye

I don't care what revelation they come out with next they have lost all credibility.


56 posted on 09/12/2004 11:09:40 PM PDT by tiki (Win one against the Flipper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Carling
Hmm, so three major news outlets received the same documents independently?

I say three because I believe the Boston Globe also received them as well.

And The Boston Globe and cBS says the timing is NOW beacuse they've been working on this for years.

57 posted on 09/12/2004 11:10:17 PM PDT by feedback doctor (GW Bush is home, and the lights are on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: charleston1

have you compared the CBS and USA Today sets to any extent?


58 posted on 09/12/2004 11:10:38 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

You are hired to do rewrite and fact checking....oh wait a moment...you are too qualified you actually understand the issue....BWAHAHAHHAHA well done excellent blue pencil work


59 posted on 09/12/2004 11:11:33 PM PDT by jnarcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Carling
Folks, the DNC is involved in this, and this makes Watergate look like amateur hour.

Or a 1st rate burglary.
60 posted on 09/12/2004 11:12:38 PM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

The two memos that CBS didn't show are so over the top that even CBS wouldn't put them on.


61 posted on 09/12/2004 11:13:04 PM PDT by Texasforever (Kerry's new slogan "IT'S NOT THE STUPID CANDIDATE SO STOP SAYING THAT")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Carling
Folks, the DNC is involved in this, and this makes Watergate look like amateur hour.

Watergate was amateur hour.

62 posted on 09/12/2004 11:13:24 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Also ... the first memo from USA Today .. only has Killian's name ... no mention of his rank


63 posted on 09/12/2004 11:13:31 PM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

It is remarkable to me that USA Today and CBS continue to protray this story as one where equally qualified experts are of different opinions on whether these documents are forgeries.

As far as I have been able to tell EVERY qualified expert has ruled them to be forgeries, albeit some with rather esoteric and unlikely caveats.

CBS seems to have validated ONE of the memos - but only the signature, by all reports, and they have muzzled their "expert" and told him not to talk to the press.

Time magazine seems to have turned to a typewriter repairman for their "authentication."

It looks to me like this debate is becoming more Clintonesque by the hour, rapidly descending to the level of "I did not inhale that woman, Arial Verdana".

First, isn't it obvious that a reputable news organization (and I'm not saying CBS or USA Today qualify as such) would verify the authenticity of these documents first, before slandering a sitting President of the United States? And if there were any doubt, wouldn't they sit on the story?

And next, when finally confronted with the reality of the situation, which is now incontrovertably conclusive on the side of fraud and forgery, would not one think that a reputable news organzation (and I'm not saying CBS or USA Today qualify as such) would come clean to protect their reputation?

And finally, when confronted with the fact that they have been used to perpetrate an undeniable fraud on the public by disseminating forged and fabricated documents purported to be the work of a military officer, would not one think that a reputable news organization would come forward with the name(s) of the criminals who have used and duped them so that law enforcement can do their job? Or at least to avoid making themselves into accessories after the fact?

Or is it simply that I am living in a country that is no longer what it once was?


64 posted on 09/12/2004 11:13:43 PM PDT by John Valentine ("The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
It could be that Burkett (if that is who it is) marked the docs he gave to CBS for emphasis, and CBS or Burkett lined out the address once they decided that the documents should be posted.

Burkett looks like a likely candidate. He has been described as a "straight shooter" by his contemporaries, but apparently has had breakdowns and a huge ax to grind regarding a lawsuit for medical treatment that he feels was lacking after he got sick on military business in Panama. He is currently a "vets against the war and Bush" type.

The animosity provides motive, the testimonials that he was a by the rules guy provides the CBS "unimpeachable" source comment, and he had access.

He has claimed to have witnessed the Bush file being sanitized in the past, but was dismissed as an unreliable source, IIRC.
65 posted on 09/12/2004 11:13:58 PM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1

Only problem is that he had an interview with Kevin Drum in Feb., and the only documents he claimed to see in the trash can pertained to payroll issues, and he didn't keep any.


66 posted on 09/12/2004 11:17:42 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: sissyjane
CBS, USA TODAY ,and what is the third media source that recieved the documents??

It would be my guess that the third is the Boston Globe as their articles that almost mimicked the CBS documentary came out first.

67 posted on 09/12/2004 11:18:17 PM PDT by Rightwing Conspiratr1 (Lock-n-load!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Yes I have compared them. There was some good discussion on them on the thread "Two More 'Killian' Documents" and another one with "USA Today" in the title yesterday. Beldar blog has some great info on the issue at:

http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2004/09/rasupthsupergat_1.html

The main differences seem to revolve around changes made by CBS like blacking out an old address of the POTUS and underlining here and there.

In fact, with regard to the address on 5000 Longmont, I think he (the President) had long since moved into an apartment at the time he was supposedly at the address in the memo so it just doesn't add up.


68 posted on 09/12/2004 11:18:42 PM PDT by charleston1 (No prisoners.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

More questions: What media did CBS/USA TODAY receive their copy in? Fax, printed, or digital? . . . and who's computer has the original Microsoft Word files?


69 posted on 09/12/2004 11:18:47 PM PDT by Quicksilver (I finally have a reason to really like Microsoft Word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: willyboyishere
If the documents are indeed forgeries (and it looks like they probably are)

Clue into reality, they ARE fakes. To be real, Killian had to "somehow" type memos in 1972 that "happened" to EXACTLY mimic the default settings of MS Word.... thirty years earlier. These are the same odds that a parrot could peck out the Gettysburg Address on a typewriter in one hour. Or a monkey could type a Shakespeare sonnet, perfectly. IOW, beyond astronomical. They ARE forgeries. Period.

70 posted on 09/12/2004 11:19:12 PM PDT by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

There are no originals.


71 posted on 09/12/2004 11:20:57 PM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

See my last. They ARE fake, and anybody with a three digit IQ who is honest will admit it.

(Unless one believes that a monkey COULD type out a Shakespeare sonnet as well as Killian typed out the MS Word default settings in 1972.)


72 posted on 09/12/2004 11:21:46 PM PDT by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: charleston1

Please let me know if you see the same thing I observed:


In addition to missing the underlines in the CBS documents, the USA Today and CBS documents seem to have different markings or scribbles (were these supposed to be initials?) in the bottom right-hand corner of the following documents:

the May 19th memo and the August 18th memo


73 posted on 09/12/2004 11:22:30 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1
It is encouraging to see that GoogleNews has taken the issue off the front of their site.

As I understand it, GoogleNews merely showcases what is being reported on, it does not decide on the credibility of the stories.

74 posted on 09/12/2004 11:22:45 PM PDT by Restorer (They have the microphone, but we have the remote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JasonC

The "originals" existed only on a computer monitor, prior to being printed out the first time.


75 posted on 09/12/2004 11:23:24 PM PDT by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
They ARE fake, and anybody with a three digit IQ who is honest will admit it.

I find it amazing that there continues to even be a debate about whether they're fake.

What's more amazing is that anyone would give a crap even if they're real. What the hell does it have to do with winning the war against the IslamoNazis who are trying to destroy our civilization?

They have to be laughing their asses off if they happen to be monitoring our news...

76 posted on 09/12/2004 11:25:50 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

bump for the end of RAThers career.


77 posted on 09/12/2004 11:26:14 PM PDT by ArmyBratproud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BoBToMatoE

The problem is.. the website disappeared and Bev Harris, one of the principals of the talon.com consulting website has moved on to an organization that called blackboxvoting.org.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org

Blackboxvoting.org is an alleged 501(c)(3) not for profit that is dedicated to make sure the new electronic voting machines in places like FLORIDA work. (As in work the way the DNC wants them to work or they will raise hell like in 2000 claiming that they are flawed machines).

Talon.com basically was made famous as the PR folks for the anti-Bush veteran groups in 2000. They promoted Beckett. Ran the 2000 Bush DUI smear and the PR for the "stolen" election in Florida.

While at the same time this woman had the gaul to claim that a "hacker attack" drove her to vote for Gore.

Their website has been taken down recently.

Fortunately, it has been archived at http://web.archive.org/web/20010331210012/http://www.talion.com/georgebush.html#News

But Ms. Harris didn't make a clean break.. the main telephone number for Talon rings now over to her new smear blackboxvoting.org group.

As an aside, Ms. Harris is now claiming to be an "investigative journalist" and has appeared on Air Amerikka to advance her voter fraud claims.


78 posted on 09/12/2004 11:26:36 PM PDT by GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: plushaye
This paragraph is the most important one for the Bush campaign. The DNC/CBS+Boston Globe/Kerry campaign/probably Burkett failed in ATTACK 1 of the FORTUNATE SON campaign. There will be more strikes this week but the first one was not only a dud but a major backfire.

I think that why CBS is not backing off... this was part of a coordinated DNC/ press offensive …. Think military if you just on a small local attack on you own and you have this big of SNAFU right of the bat.. you probably stop and regroup… but it you just part of the opening round of a major offensive you just have to gut it out… because the campaign has started and ther a overall game plan to meet… CBS is just part of a larger campaign… and too bad if they take casualties … that war and there sticking the course for DNC/ press offensive greater good

79 posted on 09/12/2004 11:27:46 PM PDT by tophat9000 ("Blackrock Bob" (aka DAN RATHER)....is in full denial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JasonC
There are no originals.

As I've said before to others, the originals are in the "My Documents" folder of a Hillary staffer.
80 posted on 09/12/2004 11:27:47 PM PDT by BJClinton (Donwload "The New Soldier" at http://freekerrybook.org/documents/NEWSOLDIER.pdf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

"I just don't understand why the GOP does not seem to be making a stink and investigating who made these memos."

-- Why get your hands dirty when they already have enough rope to hand themselves. ABC and USA Today are starting to "investigate" Rathergate.


81 posted on 09/12/2004 11:28:27 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler
"Pit Bull of the New Media" -- I like it!
82 posted on 09/12/2004 11:29:28 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/02/13/doubts_raised_on_bush_accuser/
 
The Boston Globe take on Burkett. I am starting to think that he is our "source".
83 posted on 09/12/2004 11:29:29 PM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Folks have no idea of the military "culture" in 1973. The military was hyper-glutted with super-qualified jet jockeys. Pilots were being riffed by the thousands. A last-year ANG pilot, of a plane going out of commission, was not exactly needed around, LOL! The military was BEGGING pilots to take "early outs!" What was Bush supposed to do in Alabama in 73, sharpen pencils? Do crossword puzzles? Thousands of top-notch pilots were given the heave-ho, and they certainly didn't need an extra ANG pilot of an obsolete F-102!


84 posted on 09/12/2004 11:32:49 PM PDT by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1

Kevin Drum is a rabid rabid rabid Bush hater, and even HE had doubts about Burkett's credibility.


85 posted on 09/12/2004 11:32:51 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: rolling_stone

I just found out by a DU guy that the DU is banning ANYONE who questions the memos. Even hardcore members getting their posting privileges suspended for questioning the memo's or anything about Kerry. You either tow the hardline or they out you.


86 posted on 09/12/2004 11:35:10 PM PDT by The Bandit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: plushaye

> which has been a persistent irritant
> for Bush since he first campaigned
> for the White House

I don't know, it seems pretty worthless as an attack on Bush in 2004. Because, unlike Kerry, Bush is a PROVEN leader. WHO CARES what he did early on? he was proven under fire after 9/11.

Kerry, on the other hand, has had a completely empty "career" as a senator (zero accomplishments, barely showed up, initiated nothing), and back in those days when he did actually ACT in public life, his actions were completely suspicious. Go meet with North Vietnam during a war?

Pretty desperate they must be to go after Bush on anything other than what he's done while in office, as that is by far the best indication of what he'll be like the next four years.


87 posted on 09/12/2004 11:35:13 PM PDT by EaglesUpForever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1

November 2000 Burkett says he wasn't trying to point a fingure and makes no mention of having any docs...
http://www.onlinejournal.com/bush/110500Conover/110500conover.html

,,,,,Question: Did you allege that the governor’s staff “doctored” the records?

Burkette: No, instead I stated that the way this had been handled by the Bush staff, including knowledgeable military officials at the Texas National Guard, that it left the implication that the Bush staff had first incompetently provided an incomplete military file for the Governor which was consistent with his autobiography. I further observed that they probably did not anticipate that the file would be scrutinized to the level that it was. Whenever someone determined holes in service “big enough to drive a Mack truck through,” additional information—all of which was unofficial and some in pencil notations—were then submitted to the press to answer questions. I further observed the this “trust me, I’m the Governor” approach had worked throughout Texas for George W. Bush within his tenure and the media had given the Governor a free pass, without the same scrutiny as the vice president [was given], until the eleventh hour revelation of the DUI. But this still left the basic question: Why didn’t Governor Bush simply release his military pay files and retirement points accounting records, which are the only official records that will show that he satisfactorily and honorably completed his service commitment?,,,,,,,


88 posted on 09/12/2004 11:35:22 PM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

Burkett is the guy who said he overheard orders to "clean up" W's TANG records some 7-8 years ago.


89 posted on 09/12/2004 11:35:31 PM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: BoBToMatoE

"stone, if i were to use the logic that USA TODAY used (but they did NOT print it to their credit) - I could pretend to be a disgrunted Kerry campaigner and drop off some forged documents of my own explaining how Kerry is a closet communist.

I am not that bad with photoshop either. :)"


-- I'd be careful about making comments like that. Trollers are everywhere now, and your comments can and will be used against you. Recall how the co-Author of "Unfit For Command" saw his sarcastic comments on FreeRepublic picked up by Reuters and AP. It wasn't long before liberal pundits on CNN and FOX were calling him an anti-catholic bigot (even though he's catholic).

FreeRepublic is considered the originator of Rathergate (along with Powerlineblog), so there's even more spotlight on us now.

I'd utilize private message a lot more...


90 posted on 09/12/2004 11:36:28 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Or, as I put it on another thread...

They will also have to explain how Killian, when he went through all those typographic contortions back in 1972 and 1973, knew exactly what these documents would need to look like to perfectly duplicate a format and type in an unimaginable future on a computer system and software he coudn't possibly have dreamt of.

Was Killian the most accomplished clairvoyant of the age?


91 posted on 09/12/2004 11:36:48 PM PDT by John Valentine ("The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Then I HOPE that Burkett is our man.

Even if he isn't solely responsible, he still makes a good patsy from the DNC standpoint.

"The horrible treatment he got unhinged him, he wanted the truth to come out so badly he fudged the documents, etc."

I waver between gloating over this circus and dreading that the clowns won't be exposed.
92 posted on 09/12/2004 11:37:00 PM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1; SixIron

Correct me if I'm wrong but... Burkett had access to official Guard records. CBS claims these documents are from Killian's personal file. Personal files would not be kept with the official files and would most likely be kept at home. So Burkett did not have access to these and could not have been the source.

If these personal files were kept at home the docs HAD to come from Killian's family. But Killian's family says he wasn't the type of person that would take notes or keep personal files and claim these are forgeries. Which still leaves us with the question - where did these docs come from? CBS has got to tell us or their credibility is down the tubes.


93 posted on 09/12/2004 11:37:22 PM PDT by Sodbuster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Yup - and W. did hundreds of hours of service while the war was raging. The war was winding down to basically nothing during the disputed time period.

Of course, Kerry was giving aid and comfort to our enemies WHILE THE WAR STILL RAGED.

of course, this doesn't bother the media - in fact, they applaud it.


94 posted on 09/12/2004 11:39:07 PM PDT by ambrose (http://www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1
It could be Robert Strong, one of the "experts" on 60 minutes...
95 posted on 09/12/2004 11:40:55 PM PDT by igoramus987
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY

Heh I heard Bev Harris on Art Bell a few months ago.


96 posted on 09/12/2004 11:46:54 PM PDT by nonkultur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Another sign pointing to forgery... if these came from a file, there should be hole punches at the top or at the side.

All my military records were hole punched. And most if not all paperwork that was worth keeping in a file had the same.

97 posted on 09/12/2004 11:47:40 PM PDT by Terp (Retired living in Philippines were the Mountains meet the Sea in the Land of Smiles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Carling
The DNC is involved in this

Concur

It's DNCBS

98 posted on 09/12/2004 11:49:28 PM PDT by TeleStraightShooter (Sorry Kerry, you're 3 decimal places adrift: 3,000,000 not 3,000 "displaced"/murdered SE Asians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Actually a memo for record or memo to file is a personal, quasi-official memo that an officer writes for himself and keeps track of himself. The specific purpose is to CYA, when one's actions might later be questioned. They detail facts, conversations, and actions that one wants to be able to have precisely recorded, but where there is no reason to to file an official piece of paperwork.

They wouldn't be hole-punched, because they aren't part of any official military record.

Same point applies to the claims that these aren't authentic because they aren't on letterhead. The memos for record/file wouldn't necessarily be on letterhead. I never did any of mine on letterhead. The exception is the memo that was purportedly sent to Bush, ordering him to report for a physical. That one you would reasonably expect to be on letterhead (although I don't know what the Texas ANG did in that regard -- do we have other, official memos from that time period that are on letterhead?) Also, one would expect that one (since it is an order) to have been filed "officially." Again, though, I don't know how complete the Texas ANG record-keeping is.

99 posted on 09/12/2004 11:49:48 PM PDT by Agrarian (The second most important election of the year is the Senate race in South Dakota -- donate to Thune)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

I never did understand those underlines. Why would an officer underline things in his own memo for record? If they are absent in the USA Today versions, then this means there is proof that these (probably forged) documents or document copies were tampered with by someone.


100 posted on 09/12/2004 11:53:21 PM PDT by Agrarian (The second most important election of the year is the Senate race in South Dakota -- donate to Thune)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-211 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