Skip to comments.Difference in Documents: A Comparison of documents obtained by CBS News and Washington Post
Posted on 09/18/2004 3:50:15 PM PDT by Cableguy
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Bump for later read...
I guess they overlooked the perfectly centered, typed, header, which is far more solid proof than of the other items they cite. Totally impossible with technology available at the time.
Here are the signatures, side by side. That, alone, says it all.
This proves nothing. Bush authored the one on the left; he did not use WORD 73. The LTC authored the right; he used WORD 73.
Apparently, Killian developed a new signature and lost a state-of-the-art typewriter/word processor within the space of a year...
Hey Dan, go put some ice on it and buy some Vaseline.
Plus all the other mistakes as captured on FR - e.g. use of "0" in front of date on the fakes - signature block on the wrong side of the memo, etc, etc, etc...!!!
I wonder what the Dems are going to counter these with?
Does anyone know what ARPC (NARS) means?
I ask the question because of the RATs' charge that he was supposed to report to some organization or other in Boston.
And last, but certainly not least, NO ONE is questioning the information contained in the FAKE document. I mean just because the evidenciary document is an obvious forgery by a self-admitted Bush hater with a history of false claims against Lt. Bush, there's NO REASON AT ALL that we shouldn't believe the information contained therein. - Dan Rather.
We should quit panicking about the forgeries and delusions of this mental case and immediately call for a full scale CONGRESSIONAL investigation of George W. Bush's TANG service. Where is the OUTRAGE? Where is JUSTICE!?
How long is this stupidity going to last? Same old stuff over and over. The blame game goes on. Does anyone have any idea who is and who can finalize this?
It means Denver, period.
Which, of course, is exactly what Bush has said all along.
(And, no, I didn't know; I had to ask, too.)
When old media gets tired of beating a dead horse!
It has been a while, but I believe that it's:
ARPC- Air Reserve Personnel Center, and
NARS- Non-active reserve status.
I'm sure about ARPC but not the later.
There's another interesting formatting quirk/inconsistency. If the letter in question (on the right side) was indeed typed, why would the typist superscript the "th" in some parts of the letter and not in others? More specifically, the "111th" in the centered letterhead does not have a superscripted "th", whereas in the body of the letter, the "th" is superscripted. This can be accounted for how Microsoft Word decides to do superscripting. Some "paragraph styles" will automatically cause a "th" after a number to be superscripted, while some other styles do not. In general, paragraph styles for normal text (as in the body of a letter) will do it, and those for headers (as in a letterhead) will not. Just a bit more evidence that a word processor was used here.
USA Today has a set of 6 documents, the same 4 that CBS showed, and 2 others. One of the two others has a header with a "superscript th," and THAT header is also perfectly centered.
Yeah. They're forgeries alright. Hey, how did that monospace get in there?? ;-)