Posted on 09/08/2004 9:16:02 PM PDT by Howlin
These are the NEW documents "discovered" by CBS with conjunction with their Ben Barnes expose/confessional tonight regarding George Bush's National Guard service.
They've gotten some interesting comments on the Live Thread, so I thought I'd give them their own thread so you people out there with the knowledge can dissect them for their accuracy/truth/existence.
bumpmark
The thing I find suspicious, is that ANY AND ALL memos similar to those, are purged from a military member's 201 file, and given to the service member.
If anyone would have had those memos, it would have been President Bush. I have 40 or 50 similar memos in my personal files AT HOME, not unit personnel files, from as far back as the early 70s.
That is true.
It is the property of the US Government.
Also, his suggestion/belief that Mr. Bush was speaking to higher ups suggests a paranoia that would have kept him in the mailroom. He makes a statement without any facts whatsover, but just what he thinks.
Interesting....
OK. Riddle me this: The PDF formatted "documents" are riddled with hundreds of "black dots" - that come ONLY from being copied dozens and dozens of times on a poorly cleaned copier, from an original that is a white sheet of paper.
OK. Fine.
But, why .... IF these "documents" were only just received (from his widow, supposedly - since CBS itself claims they were NOT among those released from the White House..... Why would they have been copied (run through a dirty copier) over and over and over and over again?
WHY make so many repeats of a private document that nobody knew about until yesterday?
"Side by side signature"
Wow, Look at the hooks on the "K"!!!! One goes the wrong direction!!!
I broke my neck many years ago, and as a result had to switch from writing right handed to left handed. Even under such a drastic switch, my writing never made such a basic change as that!!!
Jim Geraghty's Kerry Spot on NR Online has now picked up the story. I know Rush reads that particular weblog and I expect to hear something today on his show.
It has a #8 after it on the memo.
Too bad we can't do a deed search.
I love detective work!
bttt
Yeeehaah!!! This is going to be a laugh riot!
I don't have any clear recollection of IBMs from the early 70s, but I do remember that the high end typewriters used by executives had mylar ribbons that produced a page that looked printed. I'm pretty sure, based on intuition, that any typewriter capable of using a proportional font would have used such a ribbon.
The first document appears to have been scanned from the original rather than from a copy, because you can see through the magic marker and read the text that is supposed to have been blocked.
UPDATE 2: Reader John Risko adds:
I was a clerk/typist for the US Navy at the Naval Underwater Systems Center (NUSC) in Newport RI for my summer job in 1971 when I was in college. I note the following with regard to the Killian memos:
1) Tom Mortensen is absolutely correct. Variable type was used only for special printing jobs, like official pamphlets. These documents are forgeries, and not even good ones. Someone could have at least found an old pre-Selectric IBM (introduced around 1962). Actually, I believe we were using IBM Model C's at the time, which was the precursor to the Selectric.
2) I also used a Variype machine in 1971. I fooled around with it in my spare time. It was incredibly difficult to set up and use. It was also extremely hard to correct mistakes on the machine. Most small letters used two spaces. Capital letters generally used three spaces. I think letters like "i" may have used one space. Anyway, you can see that this type of machine was piloted by an expert, and it would NEVER be used for a routine memo. A Lt. Colonel would not be able to identify a Varitype machine, let alone use it.
3) US Navy paper at the time was not 8 1/2 x 11. It was 8 x 10 1/2. I believe this was the same throughout the military, but someone will have to check on that. This should show up in the Xeroxing, which should have lines running along the sides of the Xerox copy.
4) I am amused by the way "147 th Ftr.Intrcp Gp." appears in the August 1, 1972 document. It may have been written that way in non-forged documents, but as somone who worked for ComCruDesLant, I know the military liked to bunch things together. I find "147 th" suspicious looking. 147th looks better to me, but the problem with Microsoft Word is that it keeps turning the "th" tiny if it is connected to a number like 147. And finally......
5) MORE DEFINITIVE PROOF OF FORGERY: I had neglected even to look at the August 18, 1973 memo to file. This forger was a fool. This fake document actually does have the tiny "th" in "187th" and there is simply no way this could have occurred in 1973. There are no keys on any typewriter in common use in 1973 which could produce a tiny "th." The forger got careless after creating the August 1, 1972 document and slipped up big-time.
In summary, the variable type reveals the Killian memos to be crude forgeries, the tiny "th" confirms it in the 8/18/73 memo, and I offer my other points as icing on the cake.
This is major news....spread the word!!! Posted by The Big Trunk at 07:51 AM | Permalink | TrackBack (26)
You are incorrect.
The dem talking points are now, the Iraq war was wrong because Bush and everyone in his administration tried to avoid Vietnam and got endless deferments, and they are waging war in Iraq.
This is to take the war on terrorism off the table.
Feinswine mouthed this garbage. It's to shut us up.
That needs to be in a stand alone thread Howlin....do the honors....and put it breaking news.
Posted on 09/09/2004 7:55:59 AM PDT by pabianice
On a previous thread the author makes excellent points about the anachronism error in the "memos" the Liberals have recently "discovered" regarding George Bush's alleged "desertion" and "dereliction of duty" while in the Texas ANG.
A look at these memos shows another problem. A big problem. To understand it, you have to understand a bit about the military. In official documents of any kind, proper rank abbreviations are strictly enforced, to the point that, if they are incorrect, the document has to be destroyed and rewritten. A document forwarded with incorrect acronyms is returned for resubmittal.
The "memos" the Liberal Gang has "discovered," showing Bush to have been a shirker, all carry a consistent incorrect abbreviation for his rank. The only acceptable abbreviation for a USAF or ANG first lieutenant is "1LT." I have also seen, rarely, it written "1/LT," although this is the exception. All the "recently discovered" memos about Bush say "1stLt." While I am Navy and not Air Force, to the best of my knowledge, this is not allowed, let alone a mispunctuated memo addressed to Bush as "1stLt.3244754FG."
I am willing to bet a week's pay that these memos are forgeries.
The only thing that bothers me about this whole "forgery" thing is that the White House has not denied that these memos are authentic. In fact, Bartlett has as much as admitted they're genuine.
Not so to my knowledge. He has simply said he doesn't know why they were not in the official file and were in Killian's personal files.
Later on today they will probably come out stronger on this, or at least endorse the questions concerning the authenticity.
No initial denial means they're authentic. But, I still don't see what's so incriminating in them. We've known about all of this.
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.