PDA

View Full Version : NATIONAL GUARD SMOKING GUN?


jAZ
09-09-2004, 10:51 AM
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_09/004656.php

NATIONAL GUARD SMOKING GUN?....As you know, 60 Minutes is running a segment tonight that features Ben Barnes explaining how he pulled strings to get George Bush into the National Guard in 1968. But the segment also features something else: new documents from the personal files of Col. Jerry Killian, Bush's squadron commander. According to CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml), here's a summary of the four new documents they've uncovered:

A direct order to Bush to take a physical examination in 1972. Physical exams are an annual requirement for pilots.

A 1972 memo that refers to a phone call from Bush in which he and Killian "discussed options of how Bush can get out of coming to drill from now through November" because "he may not have time." This was presumably in preparation for Bush's departure for Alabama that year, but is nonetheless damning since there's no reason that working on a Senate campaign should have prevented him from showing up for drills one weekend per month.

A 1972 order grounding Bush. This order refers not just to Bush's failure to take a physical, but also to "failure to perform to (USAF/TexANG) standards."

A 1973 memo titled "CYA" in which Killian talks about being pressured to give Bush a favorable yearly evaluation. He refuses, saying, "I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job."

This story is a perfect demonstration of the difference between the Swift Boat controversy and the National Guard controversy. Both are tales from long ago and both are related to Vietnam, but the documentary evidence in the two cases is like night and day. In the Swift Boat case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence indicates that Kerry's accusers are lying. Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are true.

In fact, these four memos are pretty close to a smoking gun, since it's now clear that (a) Bush was directly ordered to take a physical in 1972 and refused, and (b) he plainly failed to perform up to National Guard standards, but that (c) he was nonetheless saved from a failing evaluation thanks to high-level pressure.

So why did Bush refuse to take a physical that year? And why did he blow off drills for at least the next five months and possibly for a lot longer than that?

And finally, why did he get an honorable discharge anyway?

Taco John
09-09-2004, 10:55 AM
I believe this is the part where I say "Devestating!"

Iowanian
09-09-2004, 10:57 AM
How about discussing something relevant.....like the past political records,and the future.

At this point, I don't really care if Bush Bombed the village of babies Kerry cut the ears off of, while High on Cocain....

Anton
09-09-2004, 10:57 AM
Maybe if you put it in CAPS, People will notice your pathetic little self?

This is one Log Cabin Republican who will be voting for GW.

Michael Michigan
09-09-2004, 10:59 AM
Yes!

This is it.

It's over for Bush.

Anton
09-09-2004, 11:04 AM
Yep, GW is HISTORY.... :rolleyes:

LVNHACK
09-09-2004, 11:06 AM
Maybe if you put it in CAPS, People will notice your pathetic little self?

This is one Log Cabin Republican who will be voting for GW.





Hey Anton........You and jAZ ever dated...?????

Anton
09-09-2004, 11:07 AM
Hey Anton........You and jAZ ever dated...?????

Once; but he said he was heterosexual. :shake:


He couldn't handle me....said he preferred being fisted by Duh-nese... :p

BCD
09-09-2004, 11:07 AM
Maybe this will help you're little problem.....

LVNHACK
09-09-2004, 11:08 AM
Once; but he couldn't handle me....said he preferred being fisted by Duh-nese...



ROFL

StcChief
09-09-2004, 11:08 AM
Dream on sKerry.

Graham got ripped on his book this morning,
sKerry is trying to use his Intelligence report book against Bush, when all the stuff was going on during Clinton admin.

America will see thru this as well.

BCD
09-09-2004, 11:08 AM
Once; but he couldn't handle me....said he preferred being fisted by Duh-nese...OMG!!!
ROFL

Mark M
09-09-2004, 11:09 AM
How about discussing something relevant.....like the past political records,and the future.

At this point, I don't really care if Bush Bombed the village of babies Kerry cut the ears off of, while High on Cocain....

No fuqqing shit.

Will there ever be a time in this campaign where the candidates actually discuss issues, rather than what happened 30+ years ago?

What will either one do to help stimulate job growth? Is it even their duty to do so?

What will they do to combat terrorism? Will those plans make the problem worse/better?

What will they do about the outrageous cost of health care? Is it even their duty to do so?

What will they do to cure colic so I can get some ****ing sleep?!!?

Okay .. it's not their job to do the last one, but it'd be nice.

MM
~~:banghead:

jAZ
09-09-2004, 11:17 AM
How about discussing something relevant.....like the past political records,and the future.

At this point, I don't really care if Bush Bombed the village of babies Kerry cut the ears off of, while High on Cocain....
I LOVE IT!

Only when Bush's actions are being scrutinized.... only when the documentation shows the Not-So-Swifties are liars... only when the documentation shows Bush was a liar...

... do the Bush supporters come out wanting to talk about the issues.

ROFL

Not a peep out of Iowanian trashing the Not-So-Swifties over the last month... but the day after documents come out showing the Bush campaign has lied about his service in the guard do RWers start desperately hoping to talk about the issues.


... either the issues or more Swift Boat allegations. No matter.

Mark M
09-09-2004, 11:25 AM
I LOVE IT!

Only when Bush's actions are being scrutinized.... only when the documentation shows the Not-So-Swifties are liars... only when the documentation shows Bush was a liar...

... do the Bush supporters come out wanting to talk about the issues.



Actually, I can't stand Bush.

I'm just sick and ****ing tired of the trash talking and would enjoy hearing them discuss issues, not who did what when and why.

Not sure why I'm surprised ... welcome to politics in modern America.

MM
~~:sulk:

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 11:35 AM
BOMBSHELL!

headsnap
09-09-2004, 11:39 AM
when did Bush make his service in the NG a major plank of his campaign?

Mr. Kotter
09-09-2004, 11:40 AM
BOMBSHELL!

Hmmm....not much of a bombshell if you ask me? :hmmm:

Mr. Kotter
09-09-2004, 11:41 AM
when did Bush make his service in the NG a major plank of his campaign?

Never, as I recall.

jAZ
09-09-2004, 11:43 AM
when did Bush make his service in the NG a major plank of his campaign?
He didn't make his honesty about his past actions a plank in his campaign either, but these documents and his actions over the last 3 years fit a pattern of lying to obtain favorable actions on his behalf.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 11:47 AM
He didn't make his honesty about his past actions a plank in his campaign either, but these documents and his actions over the last 3 years fit a pattern of lying to obtain favorable actions on his behalf.


BOMBSHELL!

That's sure to shave 2-3 points off his 30-point lead on who is best to handle terrorism.

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 11:49 AM
Too bad the documents are forgeries. This is absolutely going to devastate the credibility of DNC/CBS smear machine. Un****ingbelievable.

Donger
09-09-2004, 11:50 AM
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_09/004656.php

NATIONAL GUARD SMOKING GUN?....As you know, 60 Minutes is running a segment tonight that features Ben Barnes explaining how he pulled strings to get George Bush into the National Guard in 1968. But the segment also features something else: new documents from the personal files of Col. Jerry Killian, Bush's squadron commander. According to CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml), here's a summary of the four new documents they've uncovered:

A direct order to Bush to take a physical examination in 1972. Physical exams are an annual requirement for pilots.

A 1972 memo that refers to a phone call from Bush in which he and Killian "discussed options of how Bush can get out of coming to drill from now through November" because "he may not have time." This was presumably in preparation for Bush's departure for Alabama that year, but is nonetheless damning since there's no reason that working on a Senate campaign should have prevented him from showing up for drills one weekend per month.

A 1972 order grounding Bush. This order refers not just to Bush's failure to take a physical, but also to "failure to perform to (USAF/TexANG) standards."

A 1973 memo titled "CYA" in which Killian talks about being pressured to give Bush a favorable yearly evaluation. He refuses, saying, "I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job."

This story is a perfect demonstration of the difference between the Swift Boat controversy and the National Guard controversy. Both are tales from long ago and both are related to Vietnam, but the documentary evidence in the two cases is like night and day. In the Swift Boat case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence indicates that Kerry's accusers are lying. Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are true.

In fact, these four memos are pretty close to a smoking gun, since it's now clear that (a) Bush was directly ordered to take a physical in 1972 and refused, and (b) he plainly failed to perform up to National Guard standards, but that (c) he was nonetheless saved from a failing evaluation thanks to high-level pressure.

So why did Bush refuse to take a physical that year? And why did he blow off drills for at least the next five months and possibly for a lot longer than that?

And finally, why did he get an honorable discharge anyway?

Personally, I'm skeptical of these memos, as I'm sure you are too, jAZ.

Didn't Lt. Colonel Killian die in 1984? If so, how did CBS come into possession of these memos?

headsnap
09-09-2004, 11:50 AM
He didn't make his honesty about his past actions a plank in his campaign either, but these documents and his actions over the last 3 years fit a pattern of lying to obtain favorable actions on his behalf.
only the ABB vote believes that he lied about WMD, that line doesn't play with the swingers(voters.)

Mr. Kotter
09-09-2004, 11:50 AM
Too bad the documents are forgeries...

I wouldn't be surprised, but Link? :hmmm:

Patriot 21
09-09-2004, 11:50 AM
As you know, 60 Minutes is running a segment tonight

Is that show actually still on TV? If so, it's relevent because? :shrug:

Might as well spend your time reading the "Enquirer." :rolleyes:

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 11:53 AM
I wouldn't be surprised, but Link? :hmmm:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php

Mr. Kotter
09-09-2004, 11:58 AM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php

SOOOOO jAZZZZ (or should we call you Frankie?)

That link provides info at least as plausible as what CBS and you are saying, what say YOU??? :hmmm:


The Globe story is itself based on last night's 60 Minutes report: "New questions on Bush Guard duty." The online version of the 60 Minutes story has links to the memos. Killian died in 1984; CBS states that it "consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic." Readers Tom Mortensen and Liz MacDougald direct us to a FreeRepublic thread post no. 47 to this effect:

Every single one of the memos to file regarding Bush's failure to attend a physical and meet other requirements is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing (especially in the military), and typewriters used mono-spaced fonts.

The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction high-end word processing systems from Xerox and Wang, and later of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's.

Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang and other systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used mono-spaced fonts. I doubt the TANG had typesetting or high-end 1st generation word processing systems.

I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.

UPDATE: Thanks to all the readers who have written regarding this post. Several have pointed out that the Executive line of IBM typewriters did have proportionally spaced fonts, although no reader has found the font used in the memos to be a familiar one or thought that the an IBM Executive was likely to have been used by the National Guard in the early 1970's. Reader Monty Walls has also cited the IBM Selectric Composer. However, reader Eric Courtney adds this wrinkle:
The "Memo To File" of August 18, 1973 also used specialized typesetting characters not used on typewriters. These include the superscript "th" in 187th, and consistent (right single quote) used instead of a typewriter's generic ' (apostrophe). These are the sorts of things that typesetters did manually until the advent of
smart correction in things like Microsoft Word.
UPDATE 2: Reader John Risko adds:
I was a clerk/typist for the US Navy at the Naval Underwater Systems Center (NUSC) in Newport RI for my summer job in 1971 when I was in college. I note the following with regard to the Killian memos:

1) Tom Mortensen is absolutely correct. Variable type was used only for special printing jobs, like official pamphlets. These documents are forgeries, and not even good ones. Someone could have at least found an old pre-Selectric IBM (introduced around 1962). Actually, I believe we were using IBM Model C's at the time, which was the precursor to the Selectric.

2) I also used a Variype machine in 1971. I fooled around with it in my spare time. It was incredibly difficult to set up and use. It was also extremely hard to correct mistakes on the machine. Most small letters used two spaces. Capital letters generally used three spaces. I think letters like "i" may have used one space. Anyway, you can see that this type of machine was piloted by an expert, and it would NEVER be used for a routine memo. A Lt. Colonel would not be able to identify a Varitype machine, let alone use it.

3) US Navy paper at the time was not 8 1/2 x 11. It was 8 x 10 1/2. I believe this was the same throughout the military, but someone will have to check on that. This should show up in the Xeroxing, which should have lines running along the sides of the Xerox copy.

4) I am amused by the way "147 th Ftr.Intrcp Gp." appears in the August 1, 1972 document. It may have been written that way in non-forged documents, but as somone who worked for ComCruDesLant, I know the military liked to bunch things together. I find "147 th" suspicious looking. 147th looks better to me, but the problem with Microsoft Word is that it keeps turning the "th" tiny if it is connected to a number like 147. And finally......

5) MORE DEFINITIVE PROOF OF FORGERY: I had neglected even to look at the August 18, 1973 memo to file. This forger was a fool. This fake document actually does have the tiny "th" in "187th" and there is simply no way this could have occurred in 1973. There are no keys on any typewriter in common use in 1973 which could produce a tiny "th." The forger got careless after creating the August 1, 1972 document and slipped up big-time.

In summary, the variable type reveals the Killian memos to be crude forgeries, the tiny "th" confirms it in the 8/18/73 memo, and I offer my other points as icing on the cake.

UPDATE 3: We have received so much information from readers that it's hard to keep up. Reader Fred Godel points us to Kevin Drum's Washington Monthly "Smoking gun update" stating that the White House has released copies of two of the memos and left their authenticity undisputed. Reader John Burgess adds:
I'm afraid the Post 47 at Free Republic is not compelling. By 1969, I was using an IBM Selectric typewriter, with proportional type balls. They were widely available in the public sector-and thus readily available to the military. I do not recall having used a Palatine typeface, but Times Roman was certainly common. While I do think the entire argument about "Bush/AWOL" is bull, the raising of type faces is not useful. In fact, it's counterproductive because it's demonstrably false.
Reader Chris Rohlfs points to another "document in Bush's record (http://www.cis.net/~coldfeet/doc27.gif) which, if real (I got that link from here) appears to have some typing from the same typewriter. Look at the word 'Recommend.'" Reader Larry Nichols adds:
What a freakin' joke! I served in the Air Force for 21 years -- 1968 to 1989 -- the first 7 as a Personnel Specialist and the remainder as a PSM (Personnel Systems Manager). I also spent 2 years as an inspector at Hq SAC, Offutt AFB, NE in Omaha, inspecting Personnel Offices at all 26 SAC bases. As a PSM I had to know every job in Personnel, including the proper filing of documents in individual military records. Memos were NOT used for orders, as the one ordering 1LT Bush to take a physical. This would have done as a letter, of which a copy should have been sent to the CBPO (Consolidated Base Personnel Office) to be filed in 1LT Bush's military record. Memos DID NOT get filed in personnel records.

I first used a computer in the Air Force in 1971 while stationed at Albrook AFB, Canal Zone. The computers were used only for updating records data. The Air Force was the first branch of the military to use a mainframe (Burroughs B-3500) computer for updating military records. Punch cards were used up until then. There were no Word Processors used until the late 1970's or early 1980's. Typewriters were still used extensively until the mid-1980s. These memos appear to be bogus.

As far as an Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) on Bush, unless he was under a supervisor for X number of days during a reporting period, no report could be written. Under special circumstances, a report could be written with only 60 days of supervision. The period may cover an extended period. Example: FROM 1 JUN 1970 THRU 15 DEC 1971 (more than 1 year) DAYS SUPERVISED: 60. The "vanilla civilian" Liberals and Journalists should quit trying to talk and write about things they know nothing about. In Sen. Kerry's case, that includes almost everything!

Finally -- finally for the moment -- reader Joshua Persons writes:
I've written a post regarding the forgery post on my weblog (click here). Mostly a rehash, but I googled and found a comparable, unrelated government memo from 1972 for visual comparison. Check it out at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/72e30.pdf .
UPDATE 4: Charles Johnson has written to let us know that he has resolved the issue: "Bush Guard documents: Forged."

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 12:02 PM
I wouldn't be surprised, but Link? :hmmm:

Check this out, too:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12526_Bush_Guard_Documents-_Forged

Iowanian
09-09-2004, 12:09 PM
I LOVE IT!

Only when Bush's actions are being scrutinized.... only when the documentation shows the Not-So-Swifties are liars... only when the documentation shows Bush was a liar...

... do the Bush supporters come out wanting to talk about the issues.

ROFL

Not a peep out of Iowanian trashing the Not-So-Swifties over the last month... but the day after documents come out showing the Bush campaign has lied about his service in the guard do RWers start desperately hoping to talk about the issues.


... either the issues or more Swift Boat allegations. No matter.


Hey Jiz......Suk mah baows you whining, sniveling douchebag.

YOu know why I'm sick of all of this stuff, besides the Moveon ads, swifts............yep....dipshits like you, polluting my world with pissy bullshit like this on a daily basis, where there are legitimate material and discussions that are actually relevant to what will happen the next 4 years.

I'm starting to wonder if the chute opened......or just jammed your head THAT far up your pigeon toed walking cavernous arse.

I'm tired of all of this crap on all sides.............discuss whats relevant TODAY.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 12:10 PM
BOMBSHELL!

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 12:11 PM
Has Kerry cleared up the contradictions in his various stories about Vietnam? Kerry refuses to talk to the press...day 39...

Donger
09-09-2004, 12:14 PM
"60 Minutes consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

Oops. Hope your skepticism is working today, jAZ.

jAZ
09-09-2004, 12:18 PM
SOOOOO jAZZZZ (or should we call you Frankie?)

That link provides info at least as plausible as what CBS and you are saying, what say YOU??? :hmmm:
It's possible that they are forged, but according to CBS they were reviewed and confirmed authentic.

DU is dissecting the details as well... I'll let you read, but so far, from what I read, most of the Freeper claims are bogus (ie, proportional font on a 1966 IBM Selectric machine... superscript "th" possible, etc).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x776003#776057

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x774305

jAZ
09-09-2004, 12:20 PM
I'm tired of all of this crap on all sides.............discuss whats relevant TODAY.
You should have been bitching like you are today months ago.

Donger
09-09-2004, 12:20 PM
but according to CBS they were reviewed and confirmed authentic.

Wrong.

jAZ
09-09-2004, 12:21 PM
Check this out, too:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12526_Bush_Guard_Documents-_Forged
Dead link for me.

jAZ
09-09-2004, 12:21 PM
Wrong.
"60 Minutes consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

Donger
09-09-2004, 12:26 PM
Sorry, I should have assumed that you don't make a distinction between "confirmed authentic" and "believes" it to be authentic.

You know, you being so skeptical and all...

Calcountry
09-09-2004, 12:31 PM
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_09/004656.php

NATIONAL GUARD SMOKING GUN?....As you know, 60 Minutes is running a segment tonight that features Ben Barnes explaining how he pulled strings to get George Bush into the National Guard in 1968. But the segment also features something else: new documents from the personal files of Col. Jerry Killian, Bush's squadron commander. According to CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml), here's a summary of the four new documents they've uncovered:

A direct order to Bush to take a physical examination in 1972. Physical exams are an annual requirement for pilots.

A 1972 memo that refers to a phone call from Bush in which he and Killian "discussed options of how Bush can get out of coming to drill from now through November" because "he may not have time." This was presumably in preparation for Bush's departure for Alabama that year, but is nonetheless damning since there's no reason that working on a Senate campaign should have prevented him from showing up for drills one weekend per month.

A 1972 order grounding Bush. This order refers not just to Bush's failure to take a physical, but also to "failure to perform to (USAF/TexANG) standards."

A 1973 memo titled "CYA" in which Killian talks about being pressured to give Bush a favorable yearly evaluation. He refuses, saying, "I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job."

This story is a perfect demonstration of the difference between the Swift Boat controversy and the National Guard controversy. Both are tales from long ago and both are related to Vietnam, but the documentary evidence in the two cases is like night and day. In the Swift Boat case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence indicates that Kerry's accusers are lying. Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are true.

In fact, these four memos are pretty close to a smoking gun, since it's now clear that (a) Bush was directly ordered to take a physical in 1972 and refused, and (b) he plainly failed to perform up to National Guard standards, but that (c) he was nonetheless saved from a failing evaluation thanks to high-level pressure.

So why did Bush refuse to take a physical that year? And why did he blow off drills for at least the next five months and possibly for a lot longer than that?

And finally, why did he get an honorable discharge anyway?
ROFL

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 12:31 PM
BOMBSHELL!

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 12:32 PM
The documents are not that damaging to Bush, but if indeed they are forgeries, which I think they are, CBS would end up with less credibility than Jayson Blair.

jAZ
09-09-2004, 12:32 PM
Sorry, I should have assumed that you don't make a distinction between "confirmed authentic" and "believes" it to be authentic.

You know, you being so skeptical and all...
Seriously, when did you start acting like a 14 year old?

Calcountry
09-09-2004, 12:33 PM
Maybe if you put it in CAPS, People will notice your pathetic little self?

This is one Log Cabin Republican who will be voting for GW.
May I ask, what was it about the term "log cabin" that caused Republicans of your stripe, to feel like it exemplified your group?

Is it the syrup, or is it what you do in that Log Cabin? :shrug:


:p

Calcountry
09-09-2004, 12:33 PM
Yes!

This is it.

It's over for Bush.
Like I know, I am so depressed about this, I mean I found out about it 4 years ago.

Donger
09-09-2004, 12:34 PM
Seriously, when did you start acting like a 14 year old?

It's not my fault your reading comprehension is faulty.

Besides, I'm just following your lead on the skepticism thing. You seem to have somewhat selective skepticism.

Calcountry
09-09-2004, 12:36 PM
I LOVE IT!

Only when Bush's actions are being scrutinized.... only when the documentation shows the Not-So-Swifties are liars... only when the documentation shows Bush was a liar...

... do the Bush supporters come out wanting to talk about the issues.

ROFL

Not a peep out of Iowanian trashing the Not-So-Swifties over the last month... but the day after documents come out showing the Bush campaign has lied about his service in the guard do RWers start desperately hoping to talk about the issues.


... either the issues or more Swift Boat allegations. No matter.
Who was it that stood up and gave a faggot ass salute and said "reporting for duty"? Then proceeded to showcase his 4 MONTHS of service, 3 purple hearts, 2 silver stars, and a partridge in a pear tree?

I don't remember Bush ever running on his National Guard service being a qualification for him being President? :shrug:

Calcountry
09-09-2004, 12:39 PM
Who was it that stood up and gave a f aggot ass salute and said "reporting for duty"? Then proceeded to showcase his 4 MONTHS of service, 3 purple hearts, 2 silver stars, and a partridge in a pear tree?

I don't remember Bush ever running on his National Guard service being a qualification for him being President? :shrug:

Calcountry
09-09-2004, 12:40 PM
f aggot, you will see this word because, the word Honkey, cracker, whitey, is not subbed out. Equal time now.

jAZ
09-09-2004, 12:42 PM
Besides, I'm just following your lead on the skepticism thing. You seem to have somewhat selective skepticism.
No, you are acting like a kid. I've outlined exactly how I am selectively skeptical (as you put it).

You pretend that you don't understand so that you can play games like everyone else around here. I'm not sure why. You didn't always act like a mindless teenager.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 12:43 PM
No, you are acting like a kid. I've outlined exactly how I am selectively skeptical (as you put it).

You pretend that you don't understand so that you can play games like everyone else around here. I'm not sure why. You didn't always act like a mindless teenager.


BOMBSHELL!

headsnap
09-09-2004, 12:46 PM
f aggot, you will see this word because, the word Honkey, cracker, whitey, is not subbed out. Equal time now.
:spock:

Donger
09-09-2004, 12:50 PM
No, you are acting like a kid. I've outlined exactly how I am selectively skeptical (as you put it).

You pretend that you don't understand so that you can play games like everyone else around here. I'm not sure why. You didn't always act like a mindless teenager.

Okay.

So, do you acknowledge the fact that there is a distinct difference between "confirmed authentic" and "believes" it to be authentic?

So distinct, in fact, that they are not the same whatsoever?

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 12:55 PM
It's made DRUDGE. (forgery allegations).

KCTitus
09-09-2004, 12:56 PM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php

Iowanian
09-09-2004, 01:12 PM
You should have been bitching like you are today months ago.


1. My last post was probably a little harsh.....a little.


2. Get back to me about my political banter, when I've created my own website for Stewart Smalley's talk show, post multiple daily threads dealing with anything remotely negative about the country, war or president. Drop me a line when I'm scouring such mind enhancing websites as the DU and moveondotorg for material to post here. Send a letter, when I'm whining daily like a 50's era fire siren, with a broken off switch......

Please locate the last post made by You Jaz, that said anything remotely positive about the nation, military or sitting, and soon to be re-elected President.

The Multiple threads from the other side are becoming just as annoying...more like a rock in my shoe, while the past 6 months, you've been like the 6 year old, breastfeeding under mama's tube top at Walmart, and squealing like a boar being castrated because George Bush has your woobie.......

Ugly Duck
09-09-2004, 01:16 PM
In the Swift Boat case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence indicates that Kerry's accusers are lying. Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are true.Well, yah. Why do you think they're called the SwiftLiars?

jAZ
09-09-2004, 01:16 PM
1. My last post was probably a little harsh.....a little.


2. Get back to me about my political banter, when I've created my own website for Stewart Smalley's talk show, post multiple daily threads dealing with anything remotely negative about the country, war or president. Drop me a line when I'm scouring such mind enhancing websites as the DU and moveondotorg for material to post here. Send a letter, when I'm whining daily like a 50's era fire siren, with a broken off switch......

Please locate the last post made by You Jaz, that said anything remotely positive about the nation, military or sitting, and soon to be re-elected President.

The Multiple threads from the other side are becoming just as annoying...more like a rock in my shoe, while the past 6 months, you've been like the 6 year old, breastfeeding under mama's tube top at Walmart, and squealing like a boar being castrated because George Bush has your woobie.......
You seem to be only watching 1/2 of the action around here. Or only annoyed by 1/2 of it. Or only willing to undertake hatefilled personal attacks at 1/2 of it.

stevieray
09-09-2004, 01:17 PM
Seriously, when did you start acting like a 14 year old?

oh the irony.

By all means Jaz, continue. Watching your meltdown is highly amusing.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 01:18 PM
Maybe Jaz or one of the other TRUTH-SEEKERS on here can point me to the font available to the typewriters of the time that has the TH together as a single character as is visible on the documents that CBS claims is their evidence.

Or maybe they can see the TH character on the keyboard of the typewriter in use at the time.

Because I sure can't at this website that supposedly has all the available characters...nor is it visible on the keyboards.

http://www.selectric.org/selectric/

I guess we should ask if we know for sure that the letter was written on a selectric typewriter? Has someone found evidence that is the case? Because if these letters were supposedly written on the selectric typewriter I don't think they're going to be able to explain why there's a TH character being used.

Maybe someone can find the answer...

stevieray
09-09-2004, 01:18 PM
You seem to be only watching 1/2 of the action around here. Or only annoyed by 1/2 of it. Or only willing to undertake hatefilled personal attacks at 1/2 of it.

stop.... ROFL

Ultra Peanut
09-09-2004, 01:19 PM
I believe this is the part where I say "Choad."

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 01:21 PM
You seem to be only watching 1/2 of the action around here. Or only annoyed by 1/2 of it. Or only willing to undertake hatefilled personal attacks at 1/2 of it.

SHOCKING!

DEVASTATING!

BOMBSHELL!

Iowanian
09-09-2004, 01:25 PM
No Jaz.......
While I find one side annoying....like a rock in my shoe.......you can re-read what I'm thinking of the Jaz/Dense/Frankie approach.

Oh yeah...That wasn't "hate filled"...that was mildly annoyed...I'll send you a note, letting you know when its time, if you don't figure it out at the time.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 01:27 PM
More evidence from an expert in fonts who leans toward the forgery notion (evidently there was no typewriter at the time that produced a "4" in the manner shown on the documents).

Read up and have fun: http://www.indcjournal.com/

RINGLEADER
09-21-2004, 10:47 AM
This story is a perfect demonstration of the difference between the Swift Boat controversy and the National Guard controversy. Both are tales from long ago and both are related to Vietnam, but the documentary evidence in the two cases is like night and day. In the Swift Boat case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence indicates that Kerry's accusers are lying. Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are true.

ROFL ROFL ROFL

Let me do Jaz a favor with an edit:

Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are lies made up by disgruntled Democrats with forged documents.

RINGLEADER
09-21-2004, 10:48 AM
I believe this is the part where I say "Devestating!"


ROFL ROFL ROFL

FringeNC
09-21-2004, 10:53 AM
This story is a perfect demonstration of the difference between the Swift Boat controversy and the National Guard controversy. Both are tales from long ago and both are related to Vietnam, but the documentary evidence in the two cases is like night and day. In the Swift Boat case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence indicates that Kerry's accusers are lying. Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are true.

ROFL ROFL ROFL

Let me do Jaz a favor with an edit:

Conversely, in the National Guard case, practically every new piece of documentary evidence provides additional confirmation that the charges against Bush are lies made up by disgruntled Democrats with forged documents.

And the official documents coming out support the swifties' claims....A bad month to be an unhinged DU hack.

KCWolfman
09-21-2004, 11:19 AM
You seem to be only watching 1/2 of the action around here. Or only annoyed by 1/2 of it. Or only willing to undertake hatefilled personal attacks at 1/2 of it.
translation - "They started it!"


What was that about acting like a teenager again?