PDA

View Full Version : Former skeptics admit that CBS Documents could be legit


jAZ
09-11-2004, 03:11 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/09/11/MNGO68NEKR1.DTL&type=news

Further scrutiny lessens doubts on Bush memos
Some skeptics now say IBM typewriter could have been used

Francie Latour, Michael Rezendes, Boston Globe

After CBS News trumpeted newly discovered documents Wednesday that referred to a 1973 effort to "sugar coat" President Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard, the network almost immediately faced charges that the memos were forgeries with typography that was not available on typewriters used at that time.

But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant.

Philip Bouffard, a forensic document examiner in Ohio who has analyzed typewritten samples for 30 years, had expressed suspicions about the documents in an interview with the New York Times, one in a wave of similar media reports. But Bouffard told the Globe Friday that after further study, he now believed the documents could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter available at the time.

Analysts who have examined the documents focus on several facets of their typography, among them the use of a curved apostrophe, a raised, or superscript, "th," and the proportional spacing between the characters -- spacing that varies with the width of the letters. In older typewriters, each letter was allotted the same space.

Those who doubt the documents say those typographical elements would not have been commonly available at the time of Bush's service. But such characters were common features on electric typewriters of that era, the Globe determined through interviews with specialists and examination of documents from the period. In fact, one such raised "th," used to describe a Guard unit, the 187th, appears in a document in Bush's official record the White House made public this year.

Meanwhile, "CBS Evening News" Friday night explained how it had sought to authenticate the documents, focusing primarily on its examiner's conclusion that two of the records were signed by Bush's guard commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. CBS also said other sources -- among Killian's friends and colleagues -- verified that the content of the documents reflected Killian's views at the time.

One of them, Robert Strong, a Guard colleague, said the language in the documents was "compatible with the way business was done at that time. They are compatible with the man I remember Jerry Killian being."

But William Flynn, a Phoenix document examiner cited in a Washington Post report Friday, said he had not changed his mind because he did not believe that the proportional spacing between characters, and between lines, in the documents obtained by CBS was possible on typewriters used by the military at the time.

Flynn said his doubts were also based on his belief that the curved apostrophe was not available on electric typewriters at the time, although documents from the period reviewed by the Globe show it was. He acknowledged that the quality of the copies of the documents he examined was poor.

The controversy over the authenticity of the documents has all but blocked out discussion of their content. They say Killian was under pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's record, and Bush refused a direct order to take a required medical examination and discussed how he could skip drills.

Bouffard, the Ohio document specialist, said that he had first dismissed the Bush documents because the letters and formatting of the memos did not match any of the 4,000 samples in his database. But Friday, Bouffard said that he had not considered the IBM Selectric Composer. Once he compared the memos to Selectric Composer samples, Bouffard said, his view shifted.

In the Times interview, Bouffard had also questioned whether the military would have used the Composer, a large machine. But Friday he provided a document indicating that as early as April 1969 the Air Force had completed service testing for the Composer, possibly in preparation for purchasing the typewriters.

As for the raised "th" that appears in the Bush memos, Bouffard said that custom characters on the Composer's metal typehead ball were available in the 1970s.

"You can't just say that this is definitively the mark of a computer," Bouffard said.

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:19 PM
Try to stay up to speed...

HOT UPDATE: Dr. Bouffard Speaks About Boston Globe!

http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000859.php

"What the Boston Globe did now sort of pisses me off, because now I have people calling me and e-mailing me, and calling me names, saying that I changed my mind. I did not change my mind at all!"

"I would appreciate it if you could do whatever it takes to clear this up, through your internet site, or whatever."

"All I'd done is say, 'Hey I want to look into it.' Please correct that damn impression!"

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:20 PM
LOL. The guy is furious. Said the Boston Globe writer completely took his comments out of context.

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:26 PM
Bill Ardolino, 28, marketing manager, Washington, D.C. INDC Journal. Describe your blog briefly. A mix of ad hoc humor, political analysis, serious photojournalism and wildly unserious photojournalism ... with the occasional cartoon. How do you plan to cover the convention? My readers can expect limited live-blogging coverage; I tend to take volumes of pictures and hunt down stories, which I then edit and release at a later date. My blog is a bit like the electronic equivalent of a monthly, in that much of the really good coverage may be released AFTER the convention. Why should people read your coverage? Because I'd like to think that my photoblogging is among the best in the blogosphere. Here are some samples (there is much more, and most of these examples have multiple installments): INDC Presents: National World War II Memorial Dedication Weekend; Part One and INDC Journal Interviews Michael Berg What's the biggest gap in convention coverage by mainstream media in prior election years? The "wakefulness gap." Moment/speaker/event you're most looking forward to covering. Tie: John McCain and Rudy. What did you learn from the Boston coverage? Don't talk to the mainstream media. Oops. Which presidential candidate do you plan to vote for in November? W.

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:27 PM
LOL. The guy is furious. Said the Boston Globe writer completely took his comments out of context.

At some point you would think an adult at The Globe and CBS would step up and say enough.

These guys are getting their asses kicked by the new media minutes after they report.

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:28 PM
Bill Ardolino, 28, marketing manager, Washington, D.C. INDC Journal. Describe your blog briefly. A mix of ad hoc humor, political analysis, serious photojournalism and wildly unserious photojournalism ... with the occasional cartoon. How do you plan to cover the convention? My readers can expect limited live-blogging coverage; I tend to take volumes of pictures and hunt down stories, which I then edit and release at a later date. My blog is a bit like the electronic equivalent of a monthly, in that much of the really good coverage may be released AFTER the convention. Why should people read your coverage? Because I'd like to think that my photoblogging is among the best in the blogosphere. Here are some samples (there is much more, and most of these examples have multiple installments): INDC Presents: National World War II Memorial Dedication Weekend; Part One and INDC Journal Interviews Michael Berg What's the biggest gap in convention coverage by mainstream media in prior election years? The "wakefulness gap." Moment/speaker/event you're most looking forward to covering. Tie: John McCain and Rudy. What did you learn from the Boston coverage? Don't talk to the mainstream media. Oops. Which presidential candidate do you plan to vote for in November? W.


Point?

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:28 PM
just that the journal is blog... that's all.

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:31 PM
just that the journal is blog... that's all.

The blogosphere broke this open.


This guy was one of the key players.

Without him, Power Line and the rest, the story would have never shifted.

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:33 PM
just that the journal is blog... that's all.

Blogs have far more credibility that the NY Times or CBS. Are you calling him a liar? He had e-mail exchanges with the expert. By the way, Dan Rather is a lying piece of shit.

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:34 PM
The blogosphere broke this open.


This guy was one of the key players.

Without him, Power Line and the rest, the story would have never shifted.


great. I hear the guy at Aint It Cool News has some insight into it also...

jAZ
09-11-2004, 03:35 PM
Blogs have far more credibility that the NY Times or CBS.
Can I use that in the future so I can post quotes from blogs too?

Mr. Kotter
09-11-2004, 03:36 PM
Try to stay up to speed...

HOT UPDATE: Dr. Bouffard Speaks About Boston Globe!

http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000859.php

"What the Boston Globe did now sort of pisses me off, because now I have people calling me and e-mailing me, and calling me names, saying that I changed my mind. I did not change my mind at all!"

"I would appreciate it if you could do whatever it takes to clear this up, through your internet site, or whatever."

"All I'd done is say, 'Hey I want to look into it.' Please correct that damn impression!"

ROFL ROFL ROFL

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:37 PM
At some point you would think an adult at The Globe and CBS would step up and say enough.

These guys are getting their asses kicked by the new media minutes after they report.

Journalists think they are special because they have "credentials". It takes no specialized skill to be a journalist. The whole profession is being exposed. They are unintelligent, lazy, elitist liberal hacks.

Mr. Kotter
09-11-2004, 03:38 PM
Journalists think they are special because they have "credentials". It takes no specialized skill to be a journalist. The whole profession is being exposed. They are unintelligent, lazy, elitist liberal hacks.

Sadly, and unfortunately, what you say is all too often the case... :shake:

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:38 PM
Blogs have far more credibility that the NY Times or CBS. Are you calling him a liar? He had e-mail exchanges with the expert. By the way, Dan Rather is a lying piece of shit.


are you serious? do you have a "get the U.S. out of the U.N" bumper sticker? Are you waiting for the race war?

Has this whole board taken crazy pills?

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:40 PM
Can I use that in the future so I can post quotes from blogs too?

The average quality of blogs is higher than the NY Times or CBS. KOS or Drum is probably no less credible than the NY Times or CBS. As partisan as the guys are, I don't even know if they'd perpetrate such a hoax as Dan Rather did. It's despicable. Far worse than the coverup of a 3rd rate burglary.

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:41 PM
great. I hear the guy at Aint It Cool News has some insight into it also...


I'm not sure I understand.

If they are such idiots, why would an elite like Rather even bother?

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:43 PM
are you serious? do you have a "get the U.S. out of the U.N" bumper sticker? Are you waiting for the race war?

Has this whole board taken crazy pills?

Nice smear attempt. I suppose you have a poster of Jayson Blair and Dan Rather in your house.

Joe Seahawk
09-11-2004, 03:44 PM
If anyone still believes they were done on a typewriter, please read this and use common sense.. you can test for yourselves.

If you truly want to know the truth you will be able to admit they are phony.

http://peterduncan.net/CBS_Documents.html

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:44 PM
I'm not sure I understand.

If they are such idiots, why would an elite like Rather even bother?

they have their place.

when was the last time the Klansmen from NC read the NY Times?

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:44 PM
Can I use that in the future so I can post quotes from blogs too?

I'd use it in the future before you post an already debunked aticle as if it's news.

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:45 PM
they have their place.

when was the last time the Klansmen from NC read the NY Times?

The Klansmen is in your party Dickhead. **** you, asshole. Can the left do anything except engage in ad hominem attacks. You're pathetic.

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:46 PM
Nice smear attempt. I suppose you have a poster of Jayson Blair and Dan Rather in your house.

smear? Your freaking screen name is FringeNC! You wear you skepticism on your sleve which is fine, but don't expect the rest of the world to follow suit.

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:46 PM
they have their place.

when was the last time the Klansmen from NC read the NY Times?

I don't know.

:spock:

Does the KKK read blogs?

Get me Robert Byrd on the phone and I'll try to find out iof the KKK has the Internet in this year's budget.

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:47 PM
smear? Your freaking screen name is FringeNC! You wear you skepticism on your sleve which is fine, but don't expect the rest of the world to follow suit.

So you are saying Fringe is in the KKK?

:shake:

Proof?

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:48 PM
The Klansmen is in your party Dickhead. **** you, asshole. Can the left do anything except engage in ad hominem attacks. You're pathetic.


do i really need to say anything?

Mr. Kotter
09-11-2004, 03:48 PM
...If you truly want to know the truth .

http://peterduncan.net/CBS_Documents.html

THAT'S where you lose these guys; they don't WANT to know the truth....they WANT to believe these documents are real. What a joke.... :shake:

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:49 PM
do i really need to say anything?

With an accusation like that I'd say you need some proof.

Call Dan Rather and maybe he can forge a document or two for you for being such a loyal soldier.

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:50 PM
So you are saying Fringe is in the KKK?

:shake:

Proof?

Upon further reflection, I'll cut the guy a little break. I'm sure he's just ignorant of the fact that the picture is a spoof of Roberty Byrd, who is a Democratic Senator, and was in the KKK.

Joe Seahawk
09-11-2004, 03:50 PM
THAT'S where you lose these guys; they don't WANT to know the truth....they WANT to believe these documents are real. What a joke.... :shake:


I know.. It's freaky man.. I hope I'm not like that without even knowing it. :eek:

Mr. Kotter
09-11-2004, 03:52 PM
Upon further reflection, I'll cut the guy a little break. I'm sure he's just ignorant of the fact that the picture is a spoof of Roberty Byrd, who is a Democratic Senator, and was in the KKK.

I don't think nychief caught that; he actually tries to be one of the more reasonable libs on here, generally....

If there IS such a thing... :p

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 03:53 PM
Upon further reflection, I'll cut the guy a little break. I'm sure he's just ignorant of the fact that the picture is a spoof of Roberty Byrd, who is a Democratic Senator, and was in the KKK.


Ha! I didn't even think about your av.

With research skills like that he should apply at the Boston Globe or CBS.

They would hire him in a new york minute.

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:55 PM
Upon further reflection, I'll cut the guy a little break. I'm sure he's just ignorant of the fact that the picture is a spoof of Roberty Byrd, who is a Democratic Senator, and was in the KKK.

I just fail to see the significance of west virgina's senior senator in a klan outfit. color me dumb.

But my original point is that you can't totally write off main stream media.

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:55 PM
Ha! I didn't even think about your av.

With research skills like that he should apply at the Boston Globe or CBS.

They would hire him in a new york minute.

ROFL

nychief
09-11-2004, 03:55 PM
I just found a story where leonard maltin says the docs are real.... link to follow.

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 03:56 PM
I just fail to see the significance of west virgina's senior senator in a klan outfit. color me dumb.

But my original point is that you can't totally write off main stream media.

Well, you attempted to smear me by calling me a racist. The ironic thing is that a sitting Democratic senator was in fact in the KKK.

Frazod
09-11-2004, 03:57 PM
I know.. It's freaky man.. I hope I'm not like that without even knowing it. :eek:

It's kind of like the black community professing O.J.'s innocence. We know that they know he's guilty, but they'll never admit that they know the truth.

Mr. Kotter
09-11-2004, 04:00 PM
...But my original point is that you can't totally write off main stream media.

I'd agree; but I'd also point out the average American takes the main stream media much too seriously some times....and gives them credibility they don't deserve.

We should all be skeptical, of blogs, yes; but also the main stream press.... :)

nychief
09-11-2004, 04:06 PM
Well, you attempted to smear me by calling me a racist. The ironic thing is that a sitting Democratic senator was in fact in the KKK.


I am just busting your balls.... my point is that you obviously have a extreme political bend...not the klan - sorry for that.... ''

anyway I gotta go...

TOMORROW UNITE! GO CHIEFS!
l

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 04:08 PM
I'd agree; but I'd also point out the average American takes the main stream media much too seriously some times....and gives them credibility they don't deserve.

We should all be skeptical, of blogs, yes; but also the main stream press.... :)

Well stated.


A healthy skepticism is needed at all times for this stuff.

Dan Rather just learned that lesson the hard way.

Frazod
09-11-2004, 04:12 PM
I am just busting your balls.... my point is that you obviously have a extreme political bend...

Takes one to know one, I guess.

Pitt Gorilla
09-11-2004, 04:13 PM
One side accusing the other of smear tactics... ROFL
Pot meet kettle...

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 04:35 PM
CBS document verifier FOUND!


http://photos1.blogger.com/img/181/1232/1024/Bob_verifies_%20memo.jpg

Valiant
09-11-2004, 04:46 PM
I just found a story where leonard maltin says the docs are real.... link to follow.


if you are reading the link..wouldn't it take like ten seconds to copy/paste it over here...

Donger
09-11-2004, 04:47 PM
Former skeptics admit that CBS Documents could be legit

What about you, jAZ? IIRC, you were skeptical. Has this information changed your mind? Where do you stand now?

Valiant
09-11-2004, 04:47 PM
CBS document verifier FOUND!


http://photos1.blogger.com/img/181/1232/1024/Bob_verifies_%20memo.jpg


that little red x gets blamed for everything...

Michael Michigan
09-11-2004, 04:57 PM
What about you, jAZ? IIRC, you were skeptical. Has this information changed your mind? Where do you stand now?

I think he's over at DU.

;)


http://politicalities.typepad.com/photos/politicalities/clippy.PNG

Donger
09-11-2004, 05:02 PM
I think he's over at DU.

;)


http://politicalities.typepad.com/photos/politicalities/clippy.PNG

jAZ, seems to be pretty skeptical of Freerepublic. I can only assume that he's as skeptical of DU.

Joe Seahawk
09-11-2004, 05:14 PM
Here's a good one..

http://img41.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img41&image=60minbusted.swf

Joe Seahawk
09-11-2004, 05:15 PM
I predict that by Tuesday at the latest, this will be considered a forgery and CBS will have to admit it..

Joe Seahawk
09-11-2004, 05:17 PM
I mean how obvious can it be?

From Powerline
Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs has posted an animated GIF alternating between the PDF version of the Microsoft Word document he created, and the CBS News "original." (Click here (http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/) for the link to the Little Green Footballs post.) I think it's fair to say that this is a striking illustration of the forgery case to which CBS refuses to respond.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/cya.jpg

jAZ
09-11-2004, 05:27 PM
What about you, jAZ? IIRC, you were skeptical. Has this information changed your mind? Where do you stand now?
Point by point the "criticisms" have been refuted. I was pretty confident that they are real, and nothings changed for the worse today.

Joe Seahawk
09-11-2004, 05:29 PM
You're out of your mind!! ROFL

yoswif
09-11-2004, 05:43 PM
Point by point the "criticisms" have been refuted. I was pretty confident that they are real, and nothings changed for the worse today.

What does OETR stand for and why would Killian use it in the 18 AUG 73 memo?

Donger
09-11-2004, 05:46 PM
Point by point the "criticisms" have been refuted. I was pretty confident that they are real, and nothings changed for the worse today.

And the fact that a guy mentioned wasn't even in the NG at the time doesn't bother you, eh?

Forgive me, but if the situation were reversed, you'd probably call that "conclusive evidence."

jAZ
09-11-2004, 05:48 PM
And the fact that a guy mentioned wasn't even in the NG at the time doesn't bother you, eh?

Forgive me, but if the situation were reversed, you'd probably call that "conclusive evidence."
Not at all... nothing in the document indicated he was.

RINGLEADER
09-11-2004, 05:53 PM
Has anyone produced any other documents written by Killian at the time that were created with proportional space, kerning, centering and used single superscript characters?

FringeNC
09-11-2004, 05:56 PM
Jaz:

Ever heard of probability theory? It has not been completely ruled out 100% that this would have been technologically feasible back then, but the joint probability of all the necessary events occurring simultaneously, even if feasible, has to approach zero. Familiar with Occam's Razor?

RINGLEADER
09-11-2004, 05:58 PM
Point by point the "criticisms" have been refuted. I was pretty confident that they are real, and nothings changed for the worse today.


ROFL ROFL ROFL

Just like you were pretty confident that the Kerry bunny suit photos were probably fake?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

jAZ
09-11-2004, 06:04 PM
Jaz:

Ever heard of probability theory? It has not been completely ruled out 100% that this would have been technologically feasible back then, but the joint probability of all the necessary events occurring simultaneously, even if feasible, has to approach zero. Familiar with Occam's Razor?
Where do you get the "zero" figure? The military has records indicating they used the typewritiers in question up to 4 years before the dated documents.

Suggesting that the probablity is zero (or even close) doesn't make any sense at all, unless you don't want it to be true.

RINGLEADER
09-11-2004, 06:17 PM
Where do you get the "zero" figure? The military has records indicating they used the typewritiers in question up to 4 years before the dated documents.

Suggesting that the probablity is zero (or even close) doesn't make any sense at all, unless you don't want it to be true.


Then point me to one other document written in 1973 by this guy that uses proportional spacing, kerning, centering and single-character superscript. I'm sure your friends over at DU have posted dozens of the documents by now...

BTW, did you read <a href="http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=98251">this</a>:

RINGLEADER
09-11-2004, 06:23 PM
Jaz, since you say all these things have been refuted, can you go to <a href="http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=98216">this thread</a> and provide the answers that CBS is unwilling to provide? You seem to think that there are no outstanding questions and I'd really appreciate your answers (since you claim to have them all).

jAZ
09-12-2004, 01:35 AM
Jaz, since you say all these things have been refuted, can you go to <a href="http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=98216">this thread</a> and provide the answers that CBS is unwilling to provide? You seem to think that there are no outstanding questions and I'd really appreciate your answers (since you claim to have them all).
Where did I say I had all the answers? I said that point by point the criticisms have been answered.

proportional spacing didn't exist... oh wait it did...
well, superscript didn't exist... oh wait, it did...
well, the "th" didn't exist... oh wait, it did...
well, the font didn't exist... oh wait it did...
well, the the lines were too straight... oh wait, their too crooked...
well, "my father didn't type"... oh wait, they had typists...
well, "he retired from the guard"... oh wait, so what... influence is influence.
well, The typewriters were too expensive for gov't workers... oh wait, the military records show they had them since the late sixties...

Point by point, they have been addressed.

That sorta indicates to me that there is a series of failed attempts to discredit these documents.

Where have we seen that pattern before????

they have nukes... oh wait, they don't...
well, they have chem and bio weapson... oh wait, they don't...
well, they are helping al qaeda... oh wait, they aren't
well, they were an imminant threat... oh wait, they weren't

But if you can find where I said "I have all the answers" about these documents... let me know.

Joe Seahawk
09-12-2004, 01:48 AM
Jaz, read this and tell me what you think.. http://peterduncan.net/CBS_Documents.html

Have you tried to type it out yourself in word default and hold it up against the doc CBS presented?

Here, I'll save you the typing.. http://peterduncan.net/18-August-1973.doc

BigMeatballDave
09-12-2004, 01:51 AM
Jaz, read this and tell me what you think..

Have you tried to type it out yourself in word default and hold it up against the doc CBS presented?

Here, I'll save you the typing.. http://peterduncan.net/18-August-1973.doc
Good luck with all that.....

Joe Seahawk
09-12-2004, 01:54 AM
Good luck with all that.....

I know... It's just that I know Jaz is smart enough to see that these documents are poor attempts at forgery... I guess you could say I'm doing an experiment.

jAZ
09-12-2004, 02:10 AM
Jaz, read this and tell me what you think.. http://peterduncan.net/CBS_Documents.html

Have you tried to type it out yourself in word default and hold it up against the doc CBS presented?

Here, I'll save you the typing.. http://peterduncan.net/18-August-1973.doc
I absolutely believe you can recreate the document in Word... I don't need to do it myself to believe it. The problem is that all that proves is that someone using Word can create documents similar to those typed on a typewriter 20 years ago. That doesn't in anyway "prove" that this document was created in word.

Do I know these documents aren't forged? No.
Do I suspect that they aren't forged? Yes.
Am I still skeptical? A little, but far less than 2 days ago.

Joe Seahawk
09-12-2004, 02:19 AM
I absolutely believe you can recreate the document in Word...

Well of course you can re-create it in word, the spacing and font already match perfectly..

Now lets see you try to bang out a quick memo to file, err wait, have your secretary bang out a quick memo to file (since you don't type) on a standard military issue typewriter from 1973 that matches perfectly.

Oh yeah, better make a whole bunch of copies too, and lose the original...

C'mon Jaz, you are not using your brain here..

But I'll leave you alone now.. I know 60 Minutes will pay a heavy price for this.. I must admit though that I'm amazed how anybody can defend these documents as being original..

It's going to be a hard landing.

jAZ
09-12-2004, 02:28 AM
It's going to be a hard landing.
My guess is that BushCo is going to let this one (or hope it) fades away... and rely on the hope that they muddied the water with sufficient doubt among the "base" that they won't take the hit that they feared over this.

Joe Seahawk
09-12-2004, 02:29 AM
My guess is that BushCo is going to let this one fade away... and rely on the hope that they muddied the water with sufficient doubt among the "base" that they won't take the hit that they feared over this.


ROFL ROFL

Joe Seahawk
09-12-2004, 02:32 AM
Well, time for bed for me.. Seahawks play at 10:00 AM tomorrow..

I'll leave you with this Jaz..


http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/.Pictures/aug1873-pdf-animate.gif

yoswif
09-12-2004, 08:18 AM
Where did I say I had all the answers? I said that point by point the criticisms have been answered.

proportional spacing didn't exist... oh wait it did...
well, superscript didn't exist... oh wait, it did...
well, the "th" didn't exist... oh wait, it did...
well, the font didn't exist... oh wait it did...
well, the the lines were too straight... oh wait, their too crooked...
well, "my father didn't type"... oh wait, they had typists...
well, "he retired from the guard"... oh wait, so what... influence is influence.
well, The typewriters were too expensive for gov't workers... oh wait, the military records show they had them since the late sixties...

Point by point, they have been addressed.

That sorta indicates to me that there is a series of failed attempts to discredit these documents.

Where have we seen that pattern before????

they have nukes... oh wait, they don't...
well, they have chem and bio weapson... oh wait, they don't...
well, they are helping al qaeda... oh wait, they aren't
well, they were an imminant threat... oh wait, they weren't

But if you can find where I said "I have all the answers" about these documents... let me know.

OETR. The memo dated 18 August 1973 contains the abbreviation OETR. I can't find that abbreviation listed in indexes of military abbreviations used in the early '70's. A google search shows that, other than a national guard program related to foreign language training started in '97', the only time that the abbreviation OETR has been used on the net is in connection with these memos. To me, use of the abbreviation OETR is like a blood trail linking those involved in this fraud.

Baby Lee
09-12-2004, 08:55 AM
One side accusing the other of smear tactics... ROFL
Pot meet kettle...
Pitt, why don't you just work up a boilerplate post;

"Geez you righties sure are hypocrites, . . . and you're mean too."

I'm seriously trying to remember the last time I've seen anything different from you.

5,300 posts, and I'd figure 4,000 of them carry that message in some iteration, and nothing more.

RINGLEADER
09-12-2004, 10:17 AM
Where did I say I had all the answers? I said that point by point the criticisms have been answered.

proportional spacing didn't exist... oh wait it did...
well, superscript didn't exist... oh wait, it did...
well, the "th" didn't exist... oh wait, it did...
well, the font didn't exist... oh wait it did...
well, the the lines were too straight... oh wait, their too crooked...
well, "my father didn't type"... oh wait, they had typists...
well, "he retired from the guard"... oh wait, so what... influence is influence.
well, The typewriters were too expensive for gov't workers... oh wait, the military records show they had them since the late sixties...

Point by point, they have been addressed.

That sorta indicates to me that there is a series of failed attempts to discredit these documents.

Where have we seen that pattern before????

they have nukes... oh wait, they don't...
well, they have chem and bio weapson... oh wait, they don't...
well, they are helping al qaeda... oh wait, they aren't
well, they were an imminant threat... oh wait, they weren't

But if you can find where I said "I have all the answers" about these documents... let me know.


You were the one talking about all the issues being "refuted". So refute them with facts. You didn't address one question about the documents above. Saying that proportional spacing or superscript or the font existed at the time is like claiming you drive a McLaren F-1 because they exist.

Neither you, nor CBS, has produced the typewriter capable of producing the letter in question. Many news organizations and forensic experts, however, have produced the word processing software that creates an exact match in tab spacing, font spacing, kerning and returns.

If these documents are real, don't you imagine they would have produced ONE OTHER DOCUMENT that is written on this magical computer you claim some dude in the National Guard was using in the early 70s?

If these documents are real, don't you imagine that 60 Minutes wouldn't be lying to people to get them to say things that they are now recanting based on the evidence?

If these documents are real, don't you imagine CBS would produce all their experts or allow the one expert they've named to talk to the media?

If these documents are real, don't you imagine that CBS would be actively sticking these papers in front of other experts and letting the other media outlets have access to them to support their claims of authenticity instead of stone-walling any further investigation into their legitimacy?

If you truly believe that these papers are authentic you're willing to look past so many experts, so many media outlets and so many inconsistencies as to render your opinions on pretty much anything worthless. It's hardly becoming of you, but, then again, CBS has no problem following your pathetic path.

RINGLEADER
09-12-2004, 10:19 AM
I absolutely believe you can recreate the document in Word... I don't need to do it myself to believe it. The problem is that all that proves is that someone using Word can create documents similar to those typed on a typewriter 20 years ago. That doesn't in anyway "prove" that this document was created in word.

Do I know these documents aren't forged? No.
Do I suspect that they aren't forged? Yes.
Am I still skeptical? A little, but far less than 2 days ago.


Give me the name of the typewriter from the 70s that you KNOW can reproduce this letter as conclusively as Microsoft Word does. If you have this typewriter and have reproduced it I'd love to see your proof.

Cochise
09-15-2004, 06:44 PM
Bumpity :fire:

Chief Henry
09-15-2004, 06:53 PM
Bumpity :fire:


Your brutal and nasty

LVNHACK
09-15-2004, 07:40 PM
Your brutal and nasty




Both fine qualities..........

KCWolfman
09-15-2004, 10:06 PM
My guess is that BushCo is going to let this one (or hope it) fades away... and rely on the hope that they muddied the water with sufficient doubt among the "base" that they won't take the hit that they feared over this.
AHhahahaaa. Ahahaahahaaa.

Wahaahahaa
Buwaahahaaahaa

Heheheee

Hooo hoo hooo

Heheheeee

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 06:57 AM
Your brutal and nasty

Yeah....so???? :)

KCTitus
09-16-2004, 07:06 AM
My guess is that BushCo is going to let this one (or hope it) fades away... and rely on the hope that they muddied the water with sufficient doubt among the "base" that they won't take the hit that they feared over this.

You know, you could switch one single word in this post and would actually be an accurate statement in reality...

Anyone want to take a guess at which word needs to be corrected?

Velvet_Jones
09-16-2004, 07:36 AM
You know, you could switch one single word in this post and would actually be an accurate statement in reality...

Anyone want to take a guess at which word needs to be corrected?
I'll take BushCo for $1000 Alex.

Cochise
09-16-2004, 07:41 AM
ROFL

the silence is deafening :)

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 07:59 AM
The conspicuous absence of Kerry's supporters of late, here, speaks volumes for the despair in that campaign, right now...

They must be consoling themselves and organizing for one last gasp Hail Mary to try and turn this thing around. That, or they are simply crying in each other's beer on more "Kerry friendly" sites...

And it's not even over yet; this thing will get closer....and they'll come back with same irrational ferver as before. Mark my word. :rolleyes:

Cochise
09-16-2004, 08:06 AM
The conspicuous absence of Kerry's supporters of late, here, speaks volumes for the despair in that campaign, right now...


They come back as soon as they find a link of some bad news... then disappear just as quickly.

Duck Dog
09-16-2004, 08:09 AM
They come back as soon as they find a link of some bad news... then disappear just as quickly.


Yep thats their MO.

Cochise
09-20-2004, 02:05 PM
My guess is that BushCo is going to let this one (or hope it) fades away... and rely on the hope that they muddied the water with sufficient doubt among the "base" that they won't take the hit that they feared over this.

ROFL

8 days and counting... he must be busy on ebay searching for used 1970s typewriters so he can make the next one look even more authentic :clap:

Duck Dog
09-20-2004, 02:09 PM
This is Hall of Classics worthy.

KCWolfman
09-20-2004, 02:12 PM
This is Hall of Classics worthy.
I see jAZ has spent time updating his sig. I wonder why he hasn't retracted his earlier posts about this?

Can he do a Kerry face saying "The documents are real, just ask Dan Rather"?

Cochise
09-20-2004, 02:12 PM
Point by point the "criticisms" have been refuted.

This is one of my favorites :D

Sig material.

Duck Dog
09-20-2004, 02:15 PM
I see jAZ has spent time updating his sig. I wonder why he hasn't retracted his earlier posts about this?

Can he do a Kerry face saying "The documents are real, just ask Dan Rather"?


LOL, yet he demands Bush admit when he is wrong.

Those pesky Hypocrats sure are funny.

KCWolfman
09-20-2004, 02:15 PM
This is one of my favorites :D

Sig material.
Yeah, but will your sig have a beret?

Duck Dog
09-20-2004, 02:23 PM
Yeah, but will your sig have a beret?

It is what they have been reduced to.

Cochise
09-20-2004, 02:27 PM
Yeah, but will your sig have a beret?

ROFL but of course :shake:

You know, the last thread that jAZ started other than this one is down on page 6.

I thought that a lot of libs would jump ship and disappear, but not this early, and not jAZ. :hmmm:

Saulbadguy
09-20-2004, 02:33 PM
Blogs have far more credibility that the NY Times or CBS.
That is signature worthy. ROFL ROFL

Cochise
09-21-2004, 09:20 AM
That is signature worthy. ROFL ROFL

I would put them on about an even keel.

Cochise
10-09-2004, 10:11 AM
Your brutal and nasty

Still brutal and nasty :fire: