Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tdadams
either cover for the failures of 1LT Bush

Would Burkett get the format of Bush's rank right on democrats.com, but wrong on the forgeries?

2 posted on 09/16/2004 6:27:44 AM PDT by Huck (What's the typography, Kenneth?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Huck

Ah- but he didn't get the rank "right" on the democrat
site. He wrote the rank in Army format... 1LT. In USAF it is 1Lt

In some of the official orders this got garbled to 1st Lt -which appears to have affected (Burkett's?) forgery effort.


22 posted on 09/16/2004 6:38:10 AM PDT by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Huck
Would Burkett get the format of Bush's rank right on democrats.com, but wrong on the forgeries?

...Also the signature block that Killian used was:

Lt. Jerry B. Killian
Commander
instead of "Commanding"...

27 posted on 09/16/2004 6:39:52 AM PDT by meandog ("Do unto others before they do unto you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Huck

I thought 1LT was right, too, but I noticed that an actual memo written by President Bush was signed "GEORGE W. BUSH, 1st Lt" so I wonder if 1st Lt was ok to use? I ought to probably look for more examples.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/daily/graphics/guard_091404.html

It's so interesting, though, that the dates like 5 Sep 73 on the above-linked memo are so different from the modern forgeries, which put a "0" in front of a single-digit date.


72 posted on 09/16/2004 7:29:20 AM PDT by agrarianlady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson