SwiftVets.com

[Rdtf]

I left work yesterday elated about this, just knowing we made a difference. I clapped and screamed at home when I listened to both ABC National News and NBC National News speak of it. This is quite an accomplishment. A difference has been made.

[JimRobson]

We hit the New York Times!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/10/politics/campaign/10guard.html
_________________
ETN2 PTF2 (Littlecreek Underwater Demolition Unit 2 1963)

http://www.thewebplace.com/

[Dimsdale]

Yeah, the NYTimes has it, but only mentions that the son disputes the authenticity. No mention of the Word fonts etc.

The Boston Globe has nothing as far as I can tell. They will probably bury it in their Saturday edition (low readership).

Isn't it amazing that the mighty MSM, with all its resources etc., couldn't do in six weeks what we did here in ONE DAY?!?!!?

Rather is going to have this on his epitaph if I have anything to say about it!!

TIME FOR RATHER TO GO!! HE is responsible. He said it was authenticated. He made the decision to run with the story. The Boston Globe and the NYTimes share responsibility for running the story without verification.


How can anyone with a brain trust the MSM?
_________________
Everytime he had a choice, Kerry chose to side with communists rather than the United States.

[Rdtf]

[JimRobson]

You ned to read the whole article... except for the very last paragraph.

Also covered on CBSNEWS:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml
_________________
ETN2 PTF2 (Littlecreek Underwater Demolition Unit 2 1963)

http://www.thewebplace.com/

[Rdtf]

yep - it definately does mention it - it's almost the entire thing!

"...Still, throughout the afternoon and evening, questions arose about the authenticity of the memos as various forensics experts told news organizations, including The New York Times, that the fonts of the documents resembled those of modern-day word processors, specifically Microsoft Word.

Farrell C. Shiver, a forensic document examiner based in Georgia who said he was a Republican, said the superscript "th's" throughout the memos were "something you would expect to find being done with a computer" and were "not consistent with something that you would expect to find from someone typing a document; they used typewriters in that particular time."

Mr. Shiver also said he was suspicious of the spacing in the memos and the curves in their apostrophes.

But he said that while the font seemed unusual for the period, "that does not prove that the documents are not genuine."

Philip Bouffard, a forensic document specialist from Ohio who created a commonly used database of at least 3,000 old type fonts, said he had suspicions as well. "I found nothing like this in any of my typewriter specimens," said Dr. Bouffard, a Democrat. He also said the fonts were "certainly consistent with what I see in Times Roman," the commonly used Microsoft Word font.

However, Dr. Bouffard said, a colleague had called his attention to similarities between the font in the memos and that of the IBM Selectric Composer of the early 1970's.

But he said it would be unusual for Mr. Bush's commanding officer to have had the IBM machine because of its large size.

Dr. Bouffard said he would see if the fonts match more closely on Friday. "The problem I'm going to run into if this matches and Times Roman matches, to the extent of what we are able to see on these poor miserable copies that are passing around,'' he said, "then I don't think anybody's going to be able to say for sure.''

A senior executive at CBS said said, "We are convinced our source who got the documents had access to them and we trust the source.'' He added, "Can we produce the typewriter they came from in 1972 or 1973? Obviously not.''

The executive said the documents had been "vetted as thoroughly as possible.''

"We did have a number of experts,'' he said, adding that the producers also showed the documents to numerous people who worked with Colonel Killian and who said the memos were consistent with what he thought and representative of the sorts of documents he produced back then.

"It would be unbelievable for a forger to have written documents that could so closely reflect what the people closest to Killian said,'' he said, "that this is his tone of voice, what he thought back then, this is the situation back then. It would be a little odd to think that these things could have just surfaced.''

CBS News executives also produced a document released earlier by the White House about Mr. Bush's service that was clearly from a typewriter and had a superscript "th'' in it. CBS said it proved that some typewriters did indeed have superscript keys. But the characters were hard to make out after so much reproducing of the document, a problem, the CBS News official acknowledged, with the documents in the initial "60 Minutes'' program; those documents were not originals and have been copied repeatedly.

CBS News declined to say how it obtained the memos. "

[JimRobson]

I read somewhere else here that one of our members believes that the docs are from Ben Barnes.

I believe it. Now, our project for today is to prove that thesis...

I don't know if I can handle another day like yesterday. (My wife definitely can't )
_________________
ETN2 PTF2 (Littlecreek Underwater Demolition Unit 2 1963)

http://www.thewebplace.com/

[Rdtf]

This is part of the Washington Times.com article-
maybe the White house staff will prove us right -

"A spokesman said the White House obtained the documents from CBS before they were released on Wednesday night.
"The White House can't speak to authenticity," the spokesman said. The White House is comparing the CBS-acquired documents with known memos written by Col. Killian to see whether there are any inconsistencies. Matt Drudge's online news site raised questions yesterday about whether the documents released by CBS were authentic, saying the typeface on the memos appeared to be current-day fonts that were not used in 1972.
CBS issued a statement yesterday:
"As is standard practice at CBS News, each of the documents broadcast on '60 Minutes' was thoroughly investigated by independent experts, and we are convinced of their authenticity. In addition to analysis of the documents themselves, CBS verified the authenticity of the documents by talking to individuals who had seen the documents at the time they were written. These individuals were close associates of Col. Jerry Killian and confirm that the documents reflect his opinions at the time the documents were written."
The CBS broadcast the previous night did not say that it had a source who had seen the documents when written 32 years ago, and the network's statement did not identify how CBS obtained the documents or the name of the person who provided them.
Dan Rather, who anchored the program, said during the broadcast, " '60 Minutes' has now obtained a number of documents we are told were taken from Colonel Killian's personal file. ... We consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

[JCJR]

[Skypilot]

Just one man’s humble thoughts;

This whole document event just astounds me into believing that our “press” may have slid into an abyss. It may take the press awhile to recover from this lapse in objectivity. What happens, may God forbid, if there is a terrorist attack and we need reliable and believable information from the press to save our families and ourselves? How can we trust them?

The MSM still will not put the document fraud story on a headline? The headline reads: “President never completed his commitment” then we have 4 paragraphs of explanation on why the headline is so true and a foot note that basically says this whole story could be bunk if these documents are forgeries. The MSM continues to be blind to the facts when they are a positive to the president, almost like the facts are an after thought? I wonder if Dan Rather will call our President and apologize for slandering him?

Unbelievable?

Sorry about that rant, We Must keep our eyes on the prize. MR. KERRY
_________________
Please Mr. Kerry Sign Form #180 Now!
Let the truth set you free? NOT!

[OsanFAC]

Just a liitle additional research/ammo. The documents regarding failing to take a physical reference AFM 35-13. The Air Force renumbered all their regulations within the last 15 years. AFM 35-13 was replaced by AFI 36-2605 around 1994. This AFI is titled Air Force Military Personnel System Testing System. It applies to testing procedures and has nothing to do with Flight Operations or Flight Evaluation Boards.

Also, signature blocks on military documents are always along the left margin, never on the right. Lillians rank would either be completely spelled out as "Lieutenant Colonel" or abbreviated as "Lt Col" in the signature block. The Air Force has only started to use "LTC' recently since they are integrated into Joint Units and is still interchangeable with "Lt Col" or "LT COL", but NEVER Lt Colonel. Hope this helps to those without an Air Force background.

OsanFAC
Lt Col USAFR
pilot
_________________
OsanFAC

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

[Rdtf]

[quote="Skypilot"] I wonder if Dan Rather will call our President and apologize for slandering him? /quote]

I am still waiting for him to apologize to Nick Berg's family and all subsequent others

[VAW11_Vet]

Amy Barnes, daughter of former Texas Lieutenant Gov. Ben Barnes, said Thursday that her father had fabricated claims that he used his influence to get President Bush into the Texas Air National Guard 36 years ago.

In a phone call to WBAP's Mark Davis radio show in Dallas, Texas, Ms. Barnes told guest host Monica Crowley that her father was an "opportunist" who had lied about Bush's Guard record during a "60 Minutes II" broadcast Tuesday night.

BARNES: I love my father very much but he's doing this for purely political reasons. He is a big Kerry fundraiser and he is writing a book also. And [the Bush story] is what he's leading the book off with . . . He denied this to me in 2000 that he did get Bush out [of Vietnam service]. Now he's saying he did.

CROWLEY: Did he tell you, Amy - and I'm glad I have you on the line with me - did your father tell you that he was prepared to do this on behalf of John Kerry - go after President Bush like this?

BARNES: He told me he was going to do it. In fact I talked to him a couple of months ago. He told me he was writing the book. He told me that he was going to be talking about this. And he knows that I - we have very diverse political opinions. He knows my opinions and we get into this debate every time I see him. But, you know, he said that he was going to be talking about it.

CROWLEY: Now you're saying, Amy, that he has had two separate stories on President Bush's Guard duty during the Vietnam era?

BARNES: Yes, yes. This came out in 2000 and I asked him then, at the time, if he [helped get Bush into the Guard]. He said, "No, absolutely not. I did not do that."

CROWLEY: So, I hate to put you in this position but I will ask you, do you think your father, Ben Barnes - who was on "60 Minutes II" with Dan Rather last night - do you believe that he lied on the air to the American people last night about President Bush?

BARNES; Yes, I do. I absolutely do. And I think he's doing he's doing it for purely political, opportunistic reasons - trying to get John Kerry elected and trying to make Bush look like the bad person. . . . Like I said, he's going to be trying to promote his book that he's got coming out. [End of Excerpt]

Crowley's colleague, WABC Radio's Mark Levin, aired a tape of the exchange in New York after confirming that Barnes' does indeed have a daughter named Amy.
_________________
VAW-11 NAS North Island 1961-1966

[Hondo]

OsanFAC:

Thanks for pointing us to AFM 35-13. I was pretty sure it was a legit ref for the time frame of the purported memos. It's nice to see that its existence is confirmed before someone made a big deal of it. Now what we need is a ref to the AFM 35-13 in effect in the 1970s. My gut feel is that it's legit, and that at the time it dealt with flight admin issues. Don't know for sure, though.

Afraid your statement about about "Lt Colonel" never being used is not correct - at least not in docs/orders from the period from the TexANG. See records released by Bush campaign earlier this year. A previous post of mine gives the link (somewhere around page 29 or 30 - but it could be earlier; this thread is LONG).

Signature block justification is service dependent. In Army (and most joint) organizations, the sig block is slightly to the right of center. (IMO, the perfect place - JUST RIGHT OF CENTER!)

On another note: it seems that most "objective" of all news sources, the Clintonista News Network (CNN), has finally owned up to the fact that the docs are highly questionable and currently placed that as one of their top stories on their website (though not, unfortunately, as the headline). See
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/10/bush.guard.ap/index.html

[air_vet]