Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Debating with someone with no common sense is futile.
When yo can actually figure out why Laura Bush and every other expert out there claims the memos are "probably" forgeries, get back to me. Until you stop ignoring the obvious you are acting the part of the bore.
Published on Wednesday, September 8, 2004 by the Boston Globe
Although the records of Bush's service in 1973 are contradictory, some of them suggest that he did a flurry of drills in 1973 in Houston -- a weekend in April and then 38 days of training crammed into May, June, and July. But Lechliter, the retired colonel, concluded after reviewing National Guard regulations that Bush should not have received credit -- or pay -- for many of those days either. The regulations, Lechliter and others said, required that any scheduled drills that Bush missed be made up either within 15 days before or 30 days after the date of the drill.
Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr., who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National Guard.
© Copyright 2004 Boston Globe
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Laura Bush has gone public and stated the documents "are probably forgeries". Is probably the best they can do? I "probably" don't believe her, LOL. Why doesn't our ChickenHawk President address the issue directly? Is it because he has something to hide? The excuse of not justifying the charges no longer applies since his wife has made a public statement. Now it is King George's turn to profess his innocence.
Originally posted by: Dimsdale
I have been following the Swiftboat Vet/Kerry thread for several months,
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Laura Bush has gone public and stated the documents "are probably forgeries". Is probably the best they can do? I "probably" don't believe her, LOL. Why doesn't our ChickenHawk President address the issue directly? Is it because he has something to hide? The excuse of not justifying the charges no longer applies since his wife has made a public statement. Now it is King George's turn to profess his innocence.
One, until the original documents, one can not state a complete fact. She believes that they are false. If the originals are produced and validated, then a different tune can be sung by everybody.
With respect to denying the docs, it makes excellent political sense to let the opposition have plenty of rope to hang themselves. Talking about it can actually detract from the discussed credability.
The media itself has generated enough uncertainity that anything else that may be provided will be tainted to some point. CBS refusal to anwers to the peers is not acceptable. If it was the Republicans that were challenging the docs, then protection of the sources might be understood. As it stands now, CBS seems to have got caught with their pants down and are unwilling to pull them up.
The former secretary for the Texas Air National Guard colonel who supposedly authored memos critical of President Bush?s Guard service said Tuesday that the documents are fake, but that they reflect real documents that once existed.
Marian Carr Knox, who worked from 1956 to 1979 at Ellington Air Force Base in Houston, said she prided herself on meticulous typing, and the memos first disclosed by CBS News last week were not her work.
?These are not real,? she told The Dallas Morning News after examining copies of the disputed memos for the first time. ?They?re not what I typed, and I would have typed them for him.?
...
She said the typeface on the documents did not match either of the two typewriters that she used during her time at the Guard. She identified those machines as a mechanical Olympia, which was replaced by an IBM Selectric in the early 1970s.
Originally posted by: charrison
Killian's secretary did the ty...and did not type these
The former secretary for the Texas Air National Guard colonel who supposedly authored memos critical of President Bush?s Guard service said Tuesday that the documents are fake, but that they reflect real documents that once existed.
Marian Carr Knox, who worked from 1956 to 1979 at Ellington Air Force Base in Houston, said she prided herself on meticulous typing, and the memos first disclosed by CBS News last week were not her work.
?These are not real,? she told The Dallas Morning News after examining copies of the disputed memos for the first time. ?They?re not what I typed, and I would have typed them for him.?
...
She said the typeface on the documents did not match either of the two typewriters that she used during her time at the Guard. She identified those machines as a mechanical Olympia, which was replaced by an IBM Selectric in the early 1970s.
This gets more interesting...
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Ozoned
This 'issue' will remain the #1 headline until cbs changes their position. Cbs will cave by Wednesday....
Bill Glennon, a technology consultant and I.B.M. typewriter specialist who had posted his thoughts on the memos on a blog and was quoted over the weekend in publications including The New York Times, said CBS called him Monday morning. The producer asked him to come in and look at the memorandums and say whether he thought that an I.B.M. typewriter could have produced the documents. He said he was initially leery of talking. "Because quite honestly there's some people out there, they're scary," he said. "You don't agree with them, you offer opinions that don't jibe with theirs and you get a target on your back."
Mr. Glennon was in charge of service for 1,000 contracts for I.B.M. typewriters for 15 years, starting in late 1972, around the time the memorandums were produced. He spent 15 minutes with the CBS documents, he said, and believes that they could have been created using the kind of typewriters he worked with at I.B.M.
Protesters gather in Las Vegas, where president will speak today to National Guardsmen.
When President Bush arrives in Las Vegas today to address a convention of National Guardsmen, a group of families will be there as well, intent on protesting the Iraq war and a president who they say used his Guard service to avoid combat.
The protest comes a week after a controversial report on "60 Minutes II" that renewed questions about Bush's National Guard record during the Vietnam era.
The demonstrators said they were not supporters of Sen. John F. Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate, but were trying to look after the interests of the country's guardsmen.
"We think the real issue now is the Iraq war, it's not the Vietnam War," said Charley Richardson, co-founder of Military Families Speak Out, which organized the protest. "But we can't help notice the irony that a person who managed to avoid going to combat by joining the National Guard is now sending the National Guard into combat in a war based on lies."
Dante Zappala, 28, traveled to Las Vegas from Venice, Calif., because his 30-year-old brother, Sherwood Baker, was killed in an explosion in Baghdad on April 26.
"My brother was the first National Guard from Pennsylvania to die since 1945," Zappala said. "He reminded us of it before he left - that members of the National Guard don't die in combat. But it's a different world, according to our president. Our National Guard are on the front lines."
Zappala said he believed his brother's death exemplified the missteps in the administration's handling of the war.
Baker spent seven years in the National Guard training stateside as a forward observer, someone who goes ahead of tank and troop lines to scope out missile strikes and help realign troop movements, Zappala said. But when he was deployed to Iraq, he was sent as convoy security - "nothing he was familiar with," his brother said - after being retrained for two months at Ft. Dix, N.J.
"Before my brother left, they suggested he buy his own flak jacket," Zappala said. "Many were wearing Vietnam-era flak jackets."
The George W Bush the Presiden... Want the World To SeeRetired army colonel Gerald A Lechliter, who has studied Bush?s military records, says: ?He broke his contract with the United States government ? without any adverse consequences. And the Texas Air National Guard was complicit in allowing this to happen. He was a pilot. It cost the government a million dollars to train him to fly. So he should have been held to an even higher standard.?
Lawrence J Korb, an assistant secretary of defence in the Reagan White House, said Bush ?gamed the system?, adding: ?If I cheat on my income tax and don?t get caught, I?m still cheating on my income tax.?
Two of the document experts hired by CBS News now say the network ignored concerns they raised prior to the broadcast of 60 Minutes II about the disputed National Guard records attributed to Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.
"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday if they ran that story," Will said.
But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.
"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told ABC News.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Try to justify Bush's shirking of his ANG commitment all you want by trying to creat a "conspiracy" on CBS's part. It just makes your side look more desperate. It doesn't matter about the documents authenicity. That is not the issue and for all we know at this point the documents may turn out to be genuine. Who will look silly then?
No one as yet has even attempted to answer my question regarding the "champange unit". How did GWB along with Bentson's son, Conalley son , Adger's two sons and several members of the Dallas Cowboys all end up in the same chamgane unit? Do you expect us to believe it was mere coincidence?? LOL
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE is the key. AWOL is the question. GUILTY is the verdict.
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Dimsdale
I have been following the Swiftboat Vet/Kerry thread for several months,
Just fyi, The 1st post on the swift boat/ Kerry thread was 8/25/2004
Originally posted by: jetaime
Let's ask ourself something, who cares about what he did 30 plus years ago? Do you know how long 30 years is? Why are liberals still fighting the vietnam war when the war on terrorism is whats important? Why don't you liberals get your heads out of the gutter and set your priorities straight.
Quite well. In fact, it's my field of expertise and it's how I make my living.Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Don't you understand plain English?
Bush was discharged honorably from the ANG. All the hyperbole in the world is not going to change that.It is you who are ignoring the obvious. Whether the documents are proved to be false or not has no bearing on the issue of whether or not GWB met his ANG obligation in an honorable way. The same questions remain and have been just bushed aside for his whole public career. Let's get to the truth on this matter for once. GWB needs to uit ducking the isuue, it makes him look like he is hiding something.
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Try to justify Bush's shirking of his ANG commitment all you want by trying to creat a "conspiracy" on CBS's part. It just makes your side look more desperate. It doesn't matter about the documents authenicity. That is not the issue and for all we know at this point the documents may turn out to be genuine. Who will look silly then?
No one as yet has even attempted to answer my question regarding the "champange unit". How did GWB along with Bentson's son, Conalley son , Adger's two sons and several members of the Dallas Cowboys all end up in the same chamgane unit? Do you expect us to believe it was mere coincidence?? LOL
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE is the key. AWOL is the question. GUILTY is the verdict.
What part of the 60 minute story is still intact?
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Quite well. In fact, it's my field of expertise and it's how I make my living.Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Don't you understand plain English?
If you want to pretend that you don't understand why Laura Bush pronounced the documents as "probably" fake then it's not my grasp of English that's the problem here.
Bush was discharged honorably from the ANG. All the hyperbole in the world is not going to change that.It is you who are ignoring the obvious. Whether the documents are proved to be false or not has no bearing on the issue of whether or not GWB met his ANG obligation in an honorable way. The same questions remain and have been just bushed aside for his whole public career. Let's get to the truth on this matter for once. GWB needs to uit ducking the isuue, it makes him look like he is hiding something.
Whether the documents are forgeries or not DOES have a bearing on the issue as well. It also brings up the question, since they do seem to be forgeries, of where these documents originated. If they came from the Kerry campaign, as has been speculated, that's a problem and it will mean sure defeat for Kerry in November, if it's not too late already.
No one as yet has even attempted to answer my question regarding the "champange unit". How did GWB along with Bentson's son, Conalley son , Adger's two sons and several members of the Dallas Cowboys all end up in the same chamgane unit? Do you expect us to believe it was mere coincidence?? LOL
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE is the key. AWOL is the question. GUILTY is the verdict.
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
LOL indeed. Maybe when you stop ducking questions from, and points made by, others you'll get answers to your own?
No one as yet has even attempted to answer my question regarding the "champange unit". How did GWB along with Bentson's son, Conalley son , Adger's two sons and several members of the Dallas Cowboys all end up in the same chamgane unit? Do you expect us to believe it was mere coincidence?? LOL
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE is the key. AWOL is the question. GUILTY is the verdict.