Just heard him discuss the docs with an expert named ?Shriver? Great stuff. Shriver also vouched for the credibility of his colleague, the expert who has said that he is 90% sure the docs are fake. This keeps getting bigger and bigger.
HUGH IS DOING AN AWESOME JOB -- I'M LISTENING TO HIM ONLINE AS I TYPE!
KUDOS HUGH!!!
Compelling radio. Hugh and his staff are doing a terrific job. Hugh is fast becoming my new fav on the radio (Medved's also pretty damn good too).
The guy is qualified!!
http://www.documentlab.com/qualific.htm
Qualifications
The Shiver & Nelson Document Investigation Laboratory is owned by Farrell C. Shiver. His qualifications in the field of forensic document examination include:
Hey Hugh--
CBS has changed their story. Here's what Boundless posted on another thread:
Dunno if it's been reported here yet, but CBS has entered
stage 2, denial:
CBS News denies Bush docs forged
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40376
> "As is standard practice at CBS News, each of the
> documents broadcast on '60 Minutes' was thoroughly
> investigated by independent experts, and we are
> convinced of their authenticity," said Edwards.
Not - as it turns out:
> "Later, however, she sent an e-mail to WND, adding,
> "CBS verified the authenticity of the documents by
> talking to individuals who had seen the documents at
> the time they were written. These individuals were
> close associates of [Bush commander] Colonel Jerry
> Killian and confirm that the documents reflect his
> opinions at the time the documents were written."
Oops.
Prediction of DNC spin: "It was an RNC plant. They
took advantage of our hate and incompetence."
18 posted on 09/09/2004 3:07:07 PM PDT by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
I believe that if they ever can trace this thing back to its roots, we may well find that it all just adds more fuel to the fire regarding the theory that the Clinton's and their operatives are undermining Kerry so Hillary can be in position for 2008.
Either way...if this type of thing gets aired...put a fork into Kerry's campaign because he is done.
Just my two cents and opinion.
I think the idea to put up these documents started about the time Carvil and the other mud throwers, knew that for Kerry to have a chance had to pull out all the stops.
I bet the sources are Carvil underlings.
Doug, we need to find out where these fraudulent documents originated.
btt
I know I've seen the question asked, but I haven't been here for more than an hour.
What happens if you scan in a document and then convert it to a PDF?
Could it change the fonts? I only have the Adobe reader and can't check it myself by creating a document.
That still doesn't explain the superscript though. Nor does it explain the exact centering that you find on MS Word.
I love it HUGH!!!
Good on you DFU. Listening now.
Doug does anyone have the photo of so called interview of $oddom Hussein by Blather before the Iraqi war started.
Many of us believe that was another Blather lie. The person Blather interviewed did not look like $oddom. He didn't speak English and the interview was done via an interperter.
If we could recycle that picture and prove that Blather lied about his interview back then and these latest lies, Blather just might be finished.
Communists for John Kerry!
And since Hugh is lurking all I have to say is "I don't like John Kerry, John Kerry is going to get me killed"
The next 60 minutes is doing an undercover piece on some other documents. These documents claim that
A) Pearl Harbor was attacked on December 7th
2) The only other sneak attack was on sept 11th
When you take these two #'s and put them together ....7/11!
and look who runs the 7 11's?..... So it proves that George W Bush should have attacked INDIA! Wrong war W!
Don't even bother to check these facts freepers!
Pray for W and Our Troops
As of 2148 PTime, The New York Times has:
Army Says C.I.A. Hid More Iraqis Than It Claimed
as it's top story. Nothing on Page 1 about this fraud.
By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
WASHINGTON - New documents unearthed in the midst of the presidential campaign fill in some blanks but raise other questions about the sometimes mysterious and spotty story of President Bush (news - web sites)'s military service during Vietnam when he won a coveted spot in the Texas Air National Guard and avoided the war.
Reviving issues that have shadowed his political career, the documents show Bush ignored a direct order from a superior officer and lost his status as a Texas Air National Guard pilot more than three decades ago because he failed to meet military performance standards and undergo a required physical examination.
But the authenticity of the memos was questioned Thursday by the son of the late officer who reportedly wrote them. One of the writer's fellow officers and a document expert also said Thursday the documents appear to be forgeries.
Still, the documents marked the second time in days the White House had to backtrack from assertions that all of Bush's records had been released. They also raised the specter that Bush sought favors from higher-ups and that the commander of the Texas Air National Guard wanted to "sugar coat" Bush's record after he was suspended from flying.
Less than two months before the election, the documents turned the spotlight on Bush after weeks of political attacks questioning John Kerry (news - web sites)'s military service in Vietnam. Overshadowing issues such as jobs and the economy, that controversy raised doubts about Kerry and hurt him in the polls.
Kerry, campaigning in Iowa, refused to talk Thursday about the new Bush documents. "That's for the White House to answer," he said in an Associated Press interview.
bookmark
If this is a forgery, I'm sure it's another in a long line of Karl Rove's stunts. But it's not a forgery. Come on, CBS vetted it with experts, of which there must be many. On the other hand, the detractors are all right-wing bloggers. (Who you know will attack anything that knocks bush.)
My only question Is how thoroughly did CBS review these documents? How many experts did they show these documents to before going on with the story? What were their background and area of expertise?
CBS is a creditable news source. They didn't get that way by being stupid. These docs were probably gone over with a fine tooth comb until they were sure it didn't have any nits.
what document? it doesn't matter. the guy's a deserter who kills for fun he is doomed to failure I don't care if they say it was hand-typed by Rove and given to Rather by Andrew Card dressed as Huggy Bear.
So Rove gave them to CBS? Is CBS that gullible?
There are real docs that the Whitehouse had and they created forgery forms of these docs and passed them off to discredit the real ones if they ever surfaced. It mucks it up enough that if real versions surfaced, noone would ever believe it - the "forgery" meme is planted.
I agree - its a fraud Walt has showed two other era documents "as proof" that have the superscripted "th" and none of them even closely resemble the document 60 mins had - they fell for it hook line and sinker. They look completely different in the way it was done. If I knew how to PSP them side by side I would but I am looking at them now and this 60 mins thing was a fraud and Rove is ROFL at them.
Oh, please. Like a bunch of amateurs on the Internet would be able to figure out something that CBS News stuck its neck out over and never thought to investigate. Riiight.
Yikes. I started out thinking this was a Rove plant, after reading http://www.warblogging.com / - then I was convinced it wasn't. I've been crazy all day about this thing. Now I'm back where I started. I need to be sedated.
What's with all you paranoid people? Get a grip!!! This is exactly what goo defence attorneys do...CREATE DOUBT!!!! There's absolutely no reason to think these doxs are forgeries! NONE!!!
Document is forgery -- this can become the basis of an allegation that the whitehouse continues to deceive the public by lying to us, sometimes in very clever ways.
CBS has to have something to substantiate the authenticity of the memos. If it doesn't, it has cost itself any credibility it had. Obviously, this wouldn't be good for a it's news division. CBS' story had to be thoroughly vetted!
Oh good GOD! Stop and think for a moment...IF it were discovered that they were a forgery then the media would HOT after the story of who did it and why. The blowback from that would be bigger than the actual story.
What crap. The issue is are they believable? Hell yes. And what the f*ck does a wife or son for that matter really know about husband/dad. Well sh*t, let's ask Hillary. What's really Rovian is to suggest the documents are fake. Chimp has been an underachiever his whole goddamn life, much to our pain, so why would they NOT be authentic?
A KOGO caller thinks they fail in the same way.