Bush where was he?

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: bozack
my guess is that CBS gave them a quick one over and then jumped on it which really was a silly thing to do however somewhat understandable given all of the questions surrounding his service or lack thereof.

My guess is you're exactly right. I'm reminded of the NY Post front page announcing that Sen Kerry had picked Dick Gephardt as his running mate. All journalists live to be the first with a big story, and CBS was, in this case.

CBS is, to this point, standing by their story. It seems to me that if they had the memos authenticated by nearly any expert, they can still maintain they're genuine, no matter how many other experts draw the opposite conclusion.

CBS will presumably refuse to name the source of the memos, so unless someone comes forward to admit they crafted these documents, the public will likely never know for sure. If that's the case, the memos, even with their questionable provenance, will probably remain at least somewhat harmful to the Bush camp. The whole story is really bizarre, in any case, and I'd really like to know where these things came from.
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: bozack
my guess is that CBS gave them a quick one over and then jumped on it which really was a silly thing to do however somewhat understandable given all of the questions surrounding his service or lack thereof.

My guess is you're exactly right. I'm reminded of the NY Post front page announcing that Sen Kerry had picked Dick Gephardt as his running mate. All journalists live to be the first with a big story, and CBS was, in this case.

CBS is, to this point, standing by their story. It seems to me that if they had the memos authenticated by nearly any expert, they can still maintain they're genuine, no matter how many other experts draw the opposite conclusion.

CBS will presumably refuse to name the source of the memos, so unless someone comes forward to admit they crafted these documents, the public will likely never know for sure. If that's the case, the memos, even with their questionable provenance, will probably remain at least somewhat harmful to the Bush camp. The whole story is really bizarre, in any case, and I'd really like to know where these things came from.


That is exactly why GWB should just say that they can't possibly be true. He doesn't have to prove they are forgeries IMO, he just has to denounce them as false. Go on the record as they say.

Or as they say in Texas Hold 'em, "I'm all in".

That's all I have to say on this until more news hits the stand.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Beleive what you will. If GWB wou;d directly affress this and call the documents false I would believe him. He wouldn't have to call them forgeries, just call them false. He should know if they were false or not, shouldn't he?

I also think that the majority of the US citizens/voters would believe him. Sure, there are some who aren't going to accept any expalnation, they want to beleive his is guilty. Nothing is going to change their mind.

The US citizens believed GWB when he said that Iraq had WMD's, I know I did. When the POTUS speaks, people listen. I would have no choice but to take GWB at his word until someone could prove otherwise and I think that is the way most people would react.

You and I and everyone else for that matter can argue until we are blue in the face and we won't change each others mind. If GWB comes out and say the documents are false, then as far as I am concerned that is fact until proven otherwise. Anything disscusion after that would be nothing more then conjucture. His failure to respond to suich a direct attack on his version of this period in his life troubles me.

I dunno - I don't really agree that this would be wise, from his perspective. It seems to me he'd have little to gain and much to lose by publically stating the memos were false.

Only one of these memos was actually addressed to then-Lt Bush, the 4 May 72 memo ordering him to undergo a physical. It's quite likely he has no memory of whether he received this - I have received a number of similar orders to go for drug testing, or other routine appointments, but I wouldn't be able to say for sure whether any particular such memo was real, unless I had signed it to receipt for it.

The rest are memos for record that were, if they're real, privately maintained by Lt Col Killian. The 19 May and 1 Aug memos describe phone conversations with Lt Bush, but again he may not remember whether these happened, due to the intervening years. The 18 Aug memo does not contain any info he would know anything about.

I think commenting on these memos to refute them would just cast more attention on them, and could potentially make the President look foolish or dishonest if the memos were subsequently authenticated somehow.

I don't think they're real, but if I were the President I would avoid the whole subject. God knows he has enough campaign staffers and conservative pundits to make the argument for him that the memos somehow reflect negatively on Sen Kerry, if they're somehow proven to be fakes.
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: DonVito
I dunno - I don't really agree that this would be wise, from his perspective. It seems to me he'd have little to gain and much to lose by publically stating the memos were false.

Only one of these memos was actually addressed to then-Lt Bush, the 4 May 72 memo ordering him to undergo a physical. It's quite likely he has no memory of whether he received this - I have received a number of similar orders to go for drug testing, or other routine appointments, but I wouldn't be able to say for sure whether any particular such memo was real, unless I had signed it to receipt for it.

The rest are memos for record that were, if they're real, privately maintained by Lt Col Killian. The 19 May and 1 Aug memos describe phone conversations with Lt Bush, but again he may not remember whether these happened, due to the intervening years. The 18 Aug memo does not contain any info he would know anything about.

I think commenting on these memos to refute them would just cast more attention on them, and could potentially make the President look foolish or dishonest if the memos were subsequently authenticated somehow.

I don't think they're real, but if I were the President I would avoid the whole subject. God knows he has enough campaign staffers and conservative pundits to make the argument for him that the memos somehow reflect negatively on Sen Kerry, if they're somehow proven to be fakes.


Pretty nice response Don, I agree 100%.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: Chadder007
John Edwards is calling Bush out to address the Memo's now.
LOL, Edwards he needs to pull back from this one quickly or its going to look bad on their campaign if it turns out to be forged.

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com...10/ELECTIONS/209100325

In all fairness, his statement is pretty plain-vanilla:

?I think they are reasonable and legitimate questions the White House ought to answer,? Edwards said during an interview with The Telegraph.

My guess is this interview was conducted just after the story broke, but before anyone had started to question the authenticity of the documents.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: conjur
DailyKos addressing the document-overlay issue:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603

'Tis interesting. I must say, the sample he provides of text typed by the IBM Executive looks much more like a word-processed document than anything I had realized a typewriter could create. I also find his observations about the typeface interesting, and I am definitely less confident these were produced in Word than I was before (though I still tend to think they're fake).

As I said above, as long as some expert can be produced to "authenticate" these documents, and nobody steps forward to admit they made them, I think this story, on balance, plays more negatively than positively for the Bush campaign.

This is a strange campaign season indeed . . .
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
CBS News statement about the memos today:

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

"This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, interviews with former Texas National Guard officials and individuals who worked closely back in the early 1970s with Colonel Jerry Killian and were well acquainted with his procedures, his character and his thinking," the statement read.

"In addition, the documents are backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content," the statement continued. "Contrary to some rumors, no internal investigation is underway at CBS News nor is one planned."

Friday afternoon, CBS News addressed one of the authenticity issues raised, whether typewriters in the 1960s had the "th" superscript key. "CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement. The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET.

The White House distributed the four memos from 1972 and 1973 after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.

Robert Strong was a friend and colleague of Killian who ran the Texas Air National Guard administrative office in the Vietnam era. Strong, now a college professor, also believes the documents are genuine.

"They are compatible with the way business was done at the time. They are compatible with the man that I remember Jerry Killian being," says Strong. "I don't see anything in the documents that is discordant with what were the times, what was the situation and what were the people involved."
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: conjur
DailyKos addressing the document-overlay issue:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603

'Tis interesting. I must say, the sample he provides of text typed by the IBM Executive looks much more like a word-processed document than anything I had realized a typewriter could create. I also find his observations about the typeface interesting, and I am definitely less confident these were produced in Word than I was before (though I still tend to think they're fake).

As I said above, as long as some expert can be produced to "authenticate" these documents, and nobody steps forward to admit they made them, I think this story, on balance, plays more negatively than positively for the Bush campaign.

This is a strange campaign season indeed . . .


I may not be an expert, but I am not a liar either.
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
CBS News statement about the memos today:

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

Friday afternoon, CBS News addressed one of the authenticity issues raised, whether typewriters in the 1960s had the "th" superscript key. "CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement. The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET.

The White House distributed the four memos from 1972 and 1973 after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.

Some experts for the "defense", LOL. Who seems to be the ones in a hurry now?

CBS has put their reputation on the line, isn't it time for GWB to do the same??? I say it is!!!
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,513
580
126
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
CBS News statement about the memos today:

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

Friday afternoon, CBS News addressed one of the authenticity issues raised, whether typewriters in the 1960s had the "th" superscript key. "CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement. The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET.

The White House distributed the four memos from 1972 and 1973 after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.

Some experts for the "defense", LOL. Who seems to be the ones in a hurry now?

CBS has put their reputation on the line, isn't it time for GWB to do the same??? I say it is!!!

what about the signatures that dont match?

which magic typewriter in 1972 did all of these things?

where are the originals?

where did these come from?
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
CBS News statement about the memos today:

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

Friday afternoon, CBS News addressed one of the authenticity issues raised, whether typewriters in the 1960s had the "th" superscript key. "CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement. The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET.

The White House distributed the four memos from 1972 and 1973 after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.

Some experts for the "defense", LOL. Who seems to be the ones in a hurry now?

CBS has put their reputation on the line, isn't it time for GWB to do the same??? I say it is!!!

what about the signatures that dont match?

which magic typewriter in 1972 did all of these things?

where are the originals?

where did these come from?


uh, check out the threads in the post yourself, i already did.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: GoPackGo

what about the signatures that dont match?

which magic typewriter in 1972 did all of these things?

where are the originals?

where did these come from?

I too noticed the signatures, but notice that the sig on the 1 Aug 72 memo, which is basically just initials, is on an internal memo for record, whereas the one on the 4 May 72 memo is on a memo for another person (Lt Bush). I could certainly imagine Lt Col Killian using an abbreviated sig on a memo for record, just as many people have an abbreviated signature for receipts that's different from the one they use on contracts, letters, or other more formal documents.

What I find more illuminating is the way the top of the sig on the 1 Aug 72 memo is chopped off on top, as though it was sloppily cut and pasted from another document.

The typewriter/word processor issue is open to debate - AFAIK nobody has found a single typewriter or computer font that looks exactly like this. As I said, I find several aspects of these VERY fishy for a "typewritten" document, especially the curvy apostrophes.

As for the latter two questions, I think all Americans share your curiosity. I hope we get the answers.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Apparently CBS News will address this tonight and provide more info as to the background of these documents:

NEW YORK, Sept. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- Later today, CBS News will address on
the air and in detail the issues surrounding the documents broadcast in the 60
MINUTES report on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. At
this time, however, CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability
to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did
exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's
official military records released by the White House. This and other issues
surrounding the authenticity of the documents and more on this developing
story will be reported on tonight on THE CBS EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER.
 

Todd33

Diamond Member
Oct 16, 2003
7,842
2
81
Why on Earth would anyone pick the default settings on Word to make a fake doc from 1971? Why?

How hard is it to find a 60's era typewriter if you want to make a fake?

I don't see a motivation to make a easy to spot fake, it does not add up yet.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
CBS Stands By Bush-Guard Memos
(CBS/AP) Questions have been raised about the authenticity of newly unearthed memos acquired by CBS News that say President Bush's National Guard commander believed Mr. Bush was shirking his duties.

The network is defending the authenticity of the memos, which were obtained by CBS News' "60 Minutes," saying experts who examined the memos concluded they were authentic documents produced by Mr. Bush's former commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian.

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

"This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, interviews with former Texas National Guard officials and individuals who worked closely back in the early 1970s with Colonel Jerry Killian and were well acquainted with his procedures, his character and his thinking," the statement read.

"In addition, the documents are backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content," the statement continued. "Contrary to some rumors, no internal investigation is underway at CBS News nor is one planned."

CBS News Anchor Dan Rather says many of those raising questions about the documents have focused on something called superscript, a key that automatically types a raised "th."

Critics claim typewriters didn't have that ability in the 1970s. But some models did. In fact, other Bush military records already released by the White House itself show the same superscript ? including one from 1968.

Some analysts outside CBS say they believe the typeface on these memos is New Times Roman, which they claim was not available in the 1970s.

But the owner of the company that distributes this typing style says it has been available since 1931.

Document and handwriting examiner Marcel Matley analyzed the documents for CBS News. He says he believes they are real. But he is concerned about exactly what is being examined by some of the people questioning the documents, because deterioration occurs each time a document is reproduced. And the documents being analyzed outside of CBS have been photocopied, faxed, scanned and downloaded, and are far removed from the documents CBS started with.

Matley did this interview with us prior to Wednesday's "60 Minutes" broadcast. He looked at the documents and the signatures of Col. Killian, comparing known documents with the colonel's signature on the newly discovered ones.

"We look basically at what's called significant or insignificant features to determine whether it's the same person or not," Matley said. "I have no problem identifying them. I would say based on our available handwriting evidence, yes, this is the same person."

Matley finds the signatures to be some of the most compelling evidence.

Reached Friday by satellite, Matley said, "Since it is represented that some of them are definitely his, then we can conclude they are his signatures."

Matley said he's not surprised that questions about the documents have come up.

"I knew going in that this was dynamite one way or the other. And I knew that potentially it could do far more potential damage to me professionally than benefit me," he said. "But we seek the truth. That's what we do. You're supposed to put yourself out, to seek the truth and take what comes from it."

Robert Strong was an administrative officer for the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam years. He knew Jerry Killian, the man credited with writing the documents. And paper work, like these documents, was Strong's specialty. He is standing by his judgment that the documents are real.

"They are compatible with the way business was done at that time," Strong said. "They are compatible with the man I remember Jerry Killian being. I don't see anything in the documents that's discordant with what were the times, the situation or the people involved."

Killian died in 1984.

Strong says the highly charged political atmosphere of the National Guard at the time was perfectly represented in the new documents.

"It verged on outright corruption in terms of the favors that were done, the power that was traded. And it was unconscionable from a moral and ethical standpoint. It was unconscionable," Strong said.

The president's service record emerged as an issue during the 2000 race and again this winter. The Killian documents revived the issue of Mr. Bush's time in uniform after weeks in which Democratic challenger John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, has faced questions over his record as a Navy officer and an anti-war protester.

The questions about Mr. Bush's service center on how Mr. Bush got into the Guard and whether he fulfilled his duties during a period from mid-1972 to mid-1973.

What the Killian memos purport to show is that Mr. Bush defied a direct order to appear for a physical exam, that his performance as an officer was lacking in other ways and that Mr. Bush used family connections to try to quash any inquiry into his lapses.

In a separate revelation, the Boston Globe this week reported that Mr. Bush promised to sign up with a Boston-area unit when he left his Texas unit in 1973 to attend Harvard Business School. Mr. Bush never signed up with a Boston unit.

©MMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
CBS News statement about the memos today:

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

Friday afternoon, CBS News addressed one of the authenticity issues raised, whether typewriters in the 1960s had the "th" superscript key. "CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement. The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET.

The White House distributed the four memos from 1972 and 1973 after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.

Some experts for the "defense", LOL. Who seems to be the ones in a hurry now?

CBS has put their reputation on the line, isn't it time for GWB to do the same??? I say it is!!!



which magic typewriter in 1972 did all of these things?

The same magic typewriter used one documents that Bush has produced to prove his service? Seems that the records the Bush team has produced have the same little problems with the type.

Shame you can't use that excuse anymore.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: Todd33
Why on Earth would anyone pick the default settings on Word to make a fake doc from 1971? Why?

How hard is it to find a 60's era typewriter if you want to make a fake?

I don't see a motivation to make a easy to spot fake, it does not add up yet.

Apparently it's not exactly Times New Roman, or any other font, which I find interesting. I still think they're fake, but that's less clear to me the more I read about this.
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
As a side note I find it rather interesting that so many news reports always refer to PRESIDENT Bush as "Mr."....other than that I am still waiting to hear more than just CBS' side of this, who would I trust the guy they have or this guys own son and wife?....
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: bozack
As a side note I find it rather interesting that so many news reports always refer to PRESIDENT Bush as "Mr."....other than that I am still waiting to hear more than just CBS' side of this, who would I trust the guy they have or this guys own son and wife?....

I know I always call him President Bush, but then I work for him - I don't know that civilians are required to call him President.

As I said above, I can't see anything even faintly persuasive about the feelings of Lt Col Killian's son and wife - these documents don't have any nexus to his relationship to his family. FWIW, Lt Col Killian's executive officer has said they do appear to be real, and are consistent with his professional interactions with Lt Col Killian, and the climate of the squadron at the time - to me this has to carry some weight.

I have to say I am coming around to the perspective that they may in fact be real, and at this point, CBS's questioned-documents expert (along with, arguably, Dan Rather himself) has pretty well staked his professional reputation on it.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: umbrella39
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
CBS News statement about the memos today:

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

Friday afternoon, CBS News addressed one of the authenticity issues raised, whether typewriters in the 1960s had the "th" superscript key. "CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement. The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET.

The White House distributed the four memos from 1972 and 1973 after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.

Some experts for the "defense", LOL. Who seems to be the ones in a hurry now?

CBS has put their reputation on the line, isn't it time for GWB to do the same??? I say it is!!!



which magic typewriter in 1972 did all of these things?

The same magic typewriter used one documents that Bush has produced to prove his service? Seems that the records the Bush team has produced have the same little problems with the type.

Shame you can't use that excuse anymore.

There was superscript th in one of the docs that the president released, however it was a monospace font as well. Appears to be a printhead with superscript th.

Rathers answer does not answer the question here, rather just obsfucates it.
 

wiin

Senior member
Oct 28, 1999
937
0
76
Posted by Darkhawk28:
Where did the documents originate?

I found this:
Anatomy of a Forgery

More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian.

The oppo researcher claimed the source was "a retired military officer." According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: wiin

The Daily Kos Strikes Out

The Daily Kos has tried to rebut our deconstruction of the 60 Minutes forgeries. Naturally, Kos addresses only the least significant points, while never mentioning the most damning features of the memos.

I'm not sure. I still tend to think the memos are fake, but I see no evidence (nor does my ruler) of the "kerning" he claims is present, and identifies as his "smoking-gun" proof. He makes some other interesting points, though none are, IMO, what we lawyers call "case-dispositive," hence his heavy reliance on the "kerning" issue, which I think is an optical illusion.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |