** CBS Bombshell - PROOF of foregery OR authenticity IS POSSIBLE - NG-FOIA REQUEST COMING

9-11 Commemoration | September 11, 2004 | Me

[grey_whiskers]

You wrote:

"While you are at it....ask for of a copy of AFM 35-13 that was cited in the alleged forgery dated 04 May 1972 and allegiddly signed by Jerry B. Killian, Lt Commander.
the one that orders GWB to report for annual physical exam"

Here's a lefty site which is discussing this AFM 35-13
and which is dated AUGUST 11, 2004. One month ago.
So the lefties have known of these documents for some time?

http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=8564&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported

[weegee]

Thanks for your effort/action. I have included a list of the possible charges and a link to this thread on my profile page.

The media cannot be permitted to "drop" this story. We need to expose how high up in the DNC/Kerry Campaign this plan went.

Also Dan Rather and other journalists need to be tossed out of their jobs. There have been other victories in the War On Error (media fraud), see my profile page for some examples.

Prosecution and termination are necessities in this case. Termination before election day. Prosecution will be slower. Heck, Sgt. Akbar, the muslim American serviceman who killed two officers and wounded another dozen last year, has successfully postponed his trial until next February (where he will now try an insanity defense).

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, here's another such site.
Again, dating from August 10, 2004.

The lefties have been shopping this one around
awhile. . . ?

http://cf.rrstar.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=32&threadid=3535

[weegee]

I think that the woman was eventually prosecuted. She did appear to be a mole even if she was acting as a "lone nut".

[GrandmaPatriot]

How about John Stossel?

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, lookie here:

Another democrat site. From APRIL. That quotes
the same documents.

http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2004/04/21/who-da-man/

Jeepers sh*t.

No wonder people at CBS were Nervous.


PS. Anyone know how to grab copies of those sites in case they suddenly disappear down the memory hole?

[grey_whiskers]

And look. I just Googled another site, quoting this,
from FEBRUARY 2004.

http://billhobbs.com/hobbsonline/003279.html

What is going on here?

[faithincowboys]

Yeah, that would be wonderful. But do you think Eisner's Disney and Jennings would be party to that? I DON"T. Not this close to an election.

[grey_whiskers]

And another site from
Feb 13, 2004.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=3261

This one has the following text:
Chris,

Yeah, this aspect of the story may die. But the media has a sense right now that there's stuff in the records that Bush doesn't want people to see, and they'll continue to follow that thread.

This document got posted over at Atrios's site, and it has a couple of interesting things. First of all, there was another guy (James Bath) who got suspended the month after Bush for refusing to take his physical. He's been linked to Bush before, but what interested me was this bit:

"Off[icer] will comply with para 2-1, AFM 35-13. Authority: Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13."

Anyone know what this means? I assume it has something to do with the regulations they violated, but googling on the reference (and I also tried assuming that it means Air Force Manual) turned up nothing.

Posted by: Kevin Brennan on February 13, 2004 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

Notice the following:

1) they had the same questions about the manual
2) Atrios's is a hypertext link-I'll look there
3) linked to Bush is a hypertext link;

I believe I saw in one of the other sites whose URL
I just posted, that JAMES BATH [see above] was supposedly suspended at the same time as Bush.

Will look a bit deeper and send in more info. . .

[Kaslin]

Bump

[grey_whiskers]

This is one of the hypertext links from my last post.

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/grounded.gif

It apparently makes reference to the mysterious
AFM 35-13 (about 1/3 of the way down).

The other link in the previous article takes you to
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Hatfield-R-091901/hatfield-r-091901.html

dating from July, 2001, apparently trying to link
Bush to BCCI and Osama bin Laden. (tin foil hats,
or just axes to grind?) Note the following quote:

(Interestingly, both Dubya and Bath were both suspended from flying in August and September 1972, respectively, for "failure to accomplish annual medical examination.")


THIS WAS PRE 9-11 and on a lefty site. Could this be why
Rather is so insistent the facts are accurate, and
the forgeries don't matter?

[woodb01]

It looks like all of this "memo planning" has been in the works for a long time. And rather than forging a real AFM 35-13, they just made up the memo instead.

They certainly wouldn't have wanted a real military form popping up at some time in the future that they hadn't anticipated.

Fact is, it looks like half the DNC were discussing all of these strategies for MONTHS before there was a coordinated Main Stream Media attack, complete with falsified documents.

[woodb01]

The inner workings of the DNC and the Media Wing of the DNC.

Note to DNC, next time don't pick Rather to be your water boy, and do a better job falsifying and forging your documents. Oh, and choose a real candidate next time. Your might have done better with Fidel Castro, the Main Stream Media loves him so much they'd sell their souls to make him president.

[supercat]

The problem with this statement is that Rather fails to list any such typewriters which might have the capability or how an Air National Guard office would be able to afford such expensive machines. Simply showing a photocopy of a letter in Bush's official file which originated from the Army's national office is no proof at all.

I wouldn't expect that typewriters with a "th" key would necessarily be more expensive than one without; my guess would be that ordinal suffix ligatures would probably replace fractions or some other symbols.

The smoking gun is the fact that Microsoft Word will produce the document, exactly as it appears (aside from copier-induced distortions), using entirely default settings. There are a number of typographical features which would be produced easily (or even unintentionally) in Microsoft Word but which nobody would have any reason to try to produce in 1972 even if they could.

Unlike some people here, I do not think it physically impossible that somebody with 1972 technology could produce a document that looks like these. What is absolutely inconceivable is that anyone--especially someone merely interested in creating a reminder for himself--would produce such a document.

[faithincowboys]

Cadell is right. This has a Watergate quality, in a way it's worse. Two institutions, the MSM and the DNC have gotten so corrupt and so in bed with one another that they seem to not be accountable at all. What can we do? Hit the sponsors? Well maybe that'll work, but not likely.

We really need to send a message and deliver a lesson they won't forget. Kerry and Rather need to both go DOWN in a BUG way.

[faithincowboys]

I meant BIG

LOL

[SteveH]

Item #7 on the bottom of page 5 has a minor typo:

(read the rest here.

Should be:

(read the rest here).

Otherwise nice. Also it might be useful to quote Carl Sagan-- "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

[BJungNan]

Maybe I have missed it with the numerous posting on this subject, but can't someone just research the PO Box number and where and who it was assigned to at that time? Sorry if this has been asked but seems like another angle to look at.

If you got an answer to that one, let me know please. Thanks.

[Lunkhead_01]

I think the claim that Tongue and Quill was not published until about 1975 is not accurate. I remember as a second lieutenant (1971 to 1973) being given a copy of Tongue and Quill. I doubt they wanted me to proofread and edit it.

[Lunkhead_01]

The signature block in the 1970s should have been left justified not under the date. The change to placing the signature block under the date did not occur until the late 1980s or early 1990s.

Do we have any Freepers at Maxwell AFB? I seem to remember Air University keeps old regulations and manuals for research purposes. AU should have old copies of the indexes (I think the index was something like AFR 0-1.) I think there was a regulation in the 10 series (AFR 10-1) with a title something like "Preparation of Official Correspondence" that absolutely drove the less experienced secretaries batty. Tongue and Quill was also in the AFR 10 series. We should be able to fix a date for those documents based upon the index even if AU doesn't have a copy of the documents themselves.

A Freeper at AU might get lucky and discover an archived copy of AFR 35-13 to see what that document has to do with flight physicals (if anything.) Another thought I just had is that whenever we made reference to an Air Force publication as authority, we were required to list the paragraph. Any vague reference to a manual without a paragraph number would result in the return of the document -- particularly if it was as important as an order!