Posted on 09/10/2004 8:36:31 AM PDT by Rebelbase
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Questions are being raised about the authenticity of newly unearthed memos which asserted that George W. Bush ignored an order from a superior officer in the Texas Air National Guard and lost his status as a pilot because he failed to meet military performance standards and undergo a required physical exam. CBS, which reported on the memos on its "60 Minutes" program, said its experts who examined the documents concluded that they were authentic. They ostensibly were written by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, one of Bush's commanders in 1972 and 1973. But Killian's son, one of Killian's fellow officers and an independent document examiner questioned the memos. Gary Killian, who served in the Guard with his father and retired as a captain in 1991, said he doubted his father would have written an unsigned memo which said there was pressure to "sugar coat" Bush's performance review. "It just wouldn't happen," he said. "No officer in his right mind would write a memo like that." The personnel chief in Killian's unit at the time also said he believes the documents are fake. "They looked to me like forgeries," said Rufus Martin. "I don't think Killian would do that, and I knew him for 17 years." Killian died in 1984.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I completely agree and offer the observation that every MSM story I have seen so far starts with the personal testimony and burries the fact that the "memos" were written on a word processor at the end.
This maximizes the chances that the average Joe will read the intro and say "all they have is doubts by the guys widow and son". No bias here--move along now.
From the article: "The Defense Department released Bush's pilot logs this week under pressure from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Associated Press."
So will CBS blame the WH/Defense Department blame the Bush adm. for 'altering' the logs? I did not see 60 Minutes; did Dan Rather say exactly WHO had gotten the logs to CBS?
I smell the Clinton's
The DEM talking heads have been trying to conflate the documents obtained under the FOIA with the forgeries that "came from private files."
Always remember: Flush twice, CNN is a long way away.
when i was a kid in the '50's there was a program about communist propaganda called the "Big Lie." The bigger the whopper, the easier it is for weak-minded people to believe it's true.
The democrats are just talking to their base.
CBS: Where did you obtain these documents? The public deserves to know.
But it's amazing that while it's nice to have this Killian son on board, the CLINCHER is the typewritten evidence of the RETIRED GENERAL. But they don't want to do actual homework, and they keep it in a "he said, he said" by just featuring this guy's comments. Disgusting.
MSNBC has just done an advance notice of a story on the possible document forgeries. They haven't gotten to it as I post this. Will be interesting to see if they credit Free Republic.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column, "I'm Mad as Zell, and I'm Not Going to Take It Anymore."
If you haven't already joined the anti-CFR effort, please click here.
When was the phrase "sugar coated" coined?
Is there an etimology site for reference?
O3 after twenty years? Hmmmm, is that normal?
Doh...Answered my own question. It's valid.
sugar - c.1325, from O.Fr. sucre "sugar," from M.L. succarum, from Ar. sukkar, from Pers. shakar, from Skt. sharkara "ground or candied sugar," originally "grit, gravel." Its Old World home was India (Alexander the Great's companions marveled at the "honey without bees") and it remained exotic in Europe until the Arabs began to cultivate it in Sicily and Spain; not until after the Crusades did it begin to rival honey as the West's sweetener. The Spaniards in the West Indies began raising sugar cane in 1506; first grown in Cuba 1523; first cultivated in Brazil 1532. The -g- in the Eng. form cannot be accounted for. The pronunciation shift from s- to sh- is probably from the initial long vowel sound syu- (as in sure). Slang "euphemistic substitute for an imprecation" [O.E.D.] is attested from 1891. As a term of endearment, first recorded 1930. Sugar maple is from 1753; sugar-plum is from 1608; sugar-daddy first recorded 1926. Sugar coat (v.) "make more palatable" is from 1870.
Well thank goodness most of us are not weak-minded!! I sure hope the public is waking up from the brainwashing!
Kerry's political carrer is dead. He just hasn't fallen down yet.
If this story survives until Monday then it will grow legs.
BUMP
And that is QUITE a smell isn't. Those people deserve the emnity of every US citizen.
Are you listening to Rush on this?
Rather was interviewed a half hour ago and stands by his reporting and says he KNOWS the story is true. LOL
Rush is also reading from the American Spectator that the docs reached the DNC 6 weeks ago and were given to the Kerry camp who gave them to CBS.
Barnes is a huge fund raiser for the DNC and it is he who brought Rather to a DNC fund raiser years ago that created such a stir.
After listening to 10 minutes of Rush ,yeah Kerry is so out of here. and then i read the transcdript of Pat Caddel poor fellow,he even says that his party is involved up to thier eyeballs.
This is going to be messy on its way down. and all morning ive had to hear mcidiot saying that whats in doc's are not the point ,the point is that Bush lied,Bush lied. well excuse me whats in the doc's are the point! you babbling idiot terry.most important if they are forgeries. GAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH this guy is such a fooooool.
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.