Posted on 09/10/2004 11:40:47 PM PDT by ambrose
-snip-
Bouffard, the Ohio document specialist, said that he had dismissed the Bush documents in an interview with The New York Times because the letters and formatting of the Bush memos did not match any of the 4,000 samples in his database. But Bouffard yesterday said that he had not considered one of the machines whose type is not logged in his database: the IBM Selectric Composer. Once he compared the Bush memos to Selectric Composer samples obtained from Interpol, the international police agency, 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 Bouffard yesterday provided a document indicating that as early as April 1969 -- three years before the dates of the CBS memos -- 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 -- to refer, for example, to units such as the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron -- Bouffard said that custom characters on the Composer's metal typehead ball were available in the 1970s, and that the military could have ordered such custom balls from IBM.
''You can't just say that this is definitively the mark of a computer," Bouffard said.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Not even close.
To put it another way, there's a greater chance of OJ not killing Nicole Brown than of Jerry Killian causing these memos to be typed.
Right now all the news agencies that are interested in this thing are watching Free Republic. We have 50,000 amatuer investigators scouring the internet and testing out theories and looking for stuff like that.
If the news agencies are interested, they know about it. If they are afraid of the truth, then they will ignore it.
''You can't just say that this is definitively the mark of a computer," Bouffard said.
From these weasel words from a Kerry supporter, the Boston Globe produces this headline:
"Authenticity backed on Bush documents"
Well... I say, BULLSHIT!
Good reminder of BG lies.
Then let's see the originals. And see if they're printed on thiry year old paper with thirty year old ink.
http://www.boston.com/help/globe_info/
Register complaints to Boston Globe ombudsman:
Christine Chinlund
ombud@globe.com
617-929-3020 / 3022
Authors of the fraudulent Boston Globe story:
Francie Latour
flatour@globe.com
Michael Rezendes
rezendes@globe.com
In the authentic document, why arent' the other references to 111th superscripted? Why only the one?
I think you're right. Do you get the feeling this ANG forgery episode is a liberal temper tantrum in response to the devastating testimony about Kerry in the book Unfit for Command? That's what it looks like to me. The liberal candidate was demolished in this book and now the liberal establishment has gone insane trying to attack Bush's Guard service.
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.