SwiftVets.com Forum Index SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

TANG Memo on Bush
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 21, 22, 23 ... 65, 66, 67  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Geedunk & Scuttlebutt
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Debs
Lieutenant


Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 228
Location: Lubbock, Texas

PostPosted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why can I not stop laughing - I think, just my uneducated opinion, Bush has just pulled the biggest sting ever as I think he knew the documents were fakes and gave CBS just enough rope to hang themselves. Never "misunderestimate" your opponent, especially when he is an expert poker player - seems this "dumb Texas cowboy" sure knows how to handle a rope. Laughing Laughing Laughing
_________________
"No greater love..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nomorelies
Vice Admiral


Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 977
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hoax???? This is not merely a little bitty hoax. It is FRAUD. Let's don't let CBS get away with playing the role of victim. They were a willing participant. Hoax my a**.
_________________
Nomorelies Make a donation HERE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
arymann
PO3


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 269
Location: GA

PostPosted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Debs wrote:
Why can I not stop laughing - I think, just my uneducated opinion, Bush has just pulled the biggest sting ever as I think he knew the documents were fakes and gave CBS just enough rope to hang themselves. Never "misunderestimate" your opponent, especially when he is an expert poker player - seems this "dumb Texas cowboy" sure knows how to handle a rope. Laughing Laughing Laughing


Let's see, what did JFK say the other night at the Midnight Rally--
all hat and no cattle? Hmmmmm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom Poole
Vice Admiral


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 914
Location: America

PostPosted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:53 pm    Post subject: TANG... Reply with quote

I agree this is no simple HOAX. The RNC should immediately file charges against CBS, Barnes and Rather for libel and elections fraud.
_________________
'58 Airedale HMR(L)-261 VMO-2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skypilot
Seaman Apprentice


Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 82
Location: Eastern PA

PostPosted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The next spin from the Kerry / MSM side will be that these
fake docs were some sort of RNC ruse. I can hear McAwful
now: "They took advantage of our incompetence and lust
for power. It's so unfair."


This is exactly what I was thinking most of the day as the story started to get legs. Of course I’m always looking for the dark cloud in the sky, but it has kept me safe through the years. So why complain? Anyway, I think we should all think about how it may be possible for Kerry and the MSM to spin this against the SBVTs and Kerry’s rival (W). If these documents are truly fakes, everybody better hunker down for the bombardment. (I guess the same should be said if they are real?)

I salute ASPB for bring this to everybody’s attention! You deserve a medal! I will never forget reading this post with my blurry eyes in the wee hours, Hmmm, now wouldn’t that be something? Then finding it in the geedunk in the morning. Who would have ever thought?


BTW …ASPD, you did post this last night or was I seeing things?
BTW2 … Will you still be posting here now that you have become a Star?


GO SBVTS, THE TRUTH SHALL BE YOURS!!!


_________________
Please Mr. Kerry Sign Form #180 Now!
Let the truth set you free? NOT!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hondo
LCDR


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 423
Location: USA

PostPosted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would a summary of the documents' problems be helpful? Here's what I've come up with so far:

    a. Superscript "th" in 4 May and 18 Aug ("CYA") memos - extremely
    uncommon to technically impossible using 1972/73 office document technology.

    b. Single quote vice apostrophe - same as above.

    c. Font is proportional - same as above.

    d. Font appears to be Times New Roman - not available in 1972/73.
    (Possible it was earlier version of Times font, but need original docs
    or better samples to ascertain with certainty.)

    e. At least one document lines up exactly with retyped version
    using MS Word default settings - highly improbable if done on typewriter.

    f. Possible use of kerning as well as proportional font - not
    consistent with 1972/73 office document technology.

    g. Signatures on documents (4 May and 1 Aug "memos") do not appear to
    match a known authentic sample of Killian's signature (from his 5 Sep 73
    endorsement to Bush's request for discharge).

    h. Poor typing (missing/extra spaces, inconsistent use of superscripts)
    in both memos to Bush - not consistent with offical documents.

    i. Signature block on purported 1 Aug MFR incomplete - not consistent
    with official documents.

    j. The common acronym NLT spelled out - in common military usage and
    would not likely have been spelled out.

    k. "Speckled" background of all documents appears questionable.

    l. Use of "CYA" as subject for 18 Aug - difficult to believe a Squadron
    CO would actually use this as subject vice something like "Bush OETR Conversations".

    m. Gen Staudt (referenced in 18 Aug 1973 memo) appears to have retired in 1972. While not definitive - retired GOs do continue to wield influence with their former subordinates and peers - it does raise questions about the authenticity of this memo.

    n. Standard Govt paper size of that era was 8.5 x 10 vice 8.5 x 11. Not definitive (TxANG may have used commercial sources for paper), but raises questions. An 8.5 x 10 original copied onto 8.5 x 11 paper via Xerox or scanning would likely leave visible lines corresponding to bottom and/or top edges of original.

What have I missed?


To me, it looks like CBS may just be about to get scrod - and I'm not talking about the fish they serve baked in Boston.


Last edited by Hondo on Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:36 am; edited 7 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ccr
Commander


Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 325

PostPosted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For a historical point of reference, read this article on The Hitler Diaries from the Museum of Hoaxes.

The comparisons to the Bush Tang Memos are amazing.

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/day/04_25_2001.html

Quote:
The Hitler Diaries

The fall of the Third Reich created a thriving market in Nazi memorabilia. On April 22, 1983 the German magazine Der Stern announced that it had made the greatest Nazi memorabilia find of all time: a diary kept by Adolf Hitler himself. And this was not just one thin journal. It was a 62-volume mother lode, covering the crucial years of 1932-1945.

The diaries caused a buzz of excitement to sweep through the media. Magazines and news agencies bid for the right to serialize them. Journalists, historians, and World War II buffs eagerly anticipated what insights they would reveal into the mind of the twentieth century's most infamous ruler. Of course, voices of skepticism were raised. Many historians pointed out that Hitler was notorious for not liking to take notes himself, but Der Stern insisted that it was not possible that the diaries were a fraud.

The explanation of where the diaries had come from was plausible enough to be credible, while also being appropriately unverifiable. Apparently during the last days of the Third Reich an airplane carrying many of Hitler's personal effects had crashed near Dresden. The diaries were pulled out of the wreckage of the crash and preserved for the next three decades by an East German general. In the early eighties they were smuggled out of East Germany, one at a time, by the brother of a West German memorabilia dealer named Konrad Kujau. They were then sold to Der Stern through the efforts of their reporter Gerd Heidemann for the astronomical price of 9.9 million marks.

Anticipation continued to build about what the diaries would reveal until experts had a chance to examine them and delivered their unanimous verdict: the diaries were clumsy, almost amateurish forgeries. Physically it was clear that the diaries were fake. The whitener and fibers in their paper were of postwar manufacture. The content of the journals was also a dead giveaway. The entries were stupefyingly dull and trivial, not revealing anything novel about Hitler's state of mind. Moreover, most of the entries had simply been plagiarized from a book called Hitler's Speeches and Proclamations written by Max Domarus, a former Nazi federal archivist. Even historical errors that Domarus had made were sedulously repeated in the Hitler diaries.

Faced with this evidence, Der Stern grudgingly admitted that it had been duped. The source of the forgery was soon traced to Konrad Kujau, the West German memorabilia dealer. He had written the diaries himself, after having perfected the art of imitating Hitler's handwriting. Heidemann was also accused of having skimmed off over 1.7 million of the marks that had been paid for the diaries. Together this pair, Kujau and Heidemann, were convicted of fraud and sentenced to over four years in prison each.


_________________
Whose side is John Kerry really on? Take this quiz and decide for yourself.

http://www.learnthat.com/quiz/


Last edited by ccr on Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:00 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom Poole
Vice Admiral


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 914
Location: America

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:00 am    Post subject: TANG... Reply with quote

Hondo wrote:
...What have I missed?

In case anyone can make anything out of it, the paper size used government-wide in 1973 and later was 8.5 X 10.
_________________
'58 Airedale HMR(L)-261 VMO-2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
June
Seaman Recruit


Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is sooooooo cool! I just joined SwiftVets.com today and it was because of this thread. I used to work for a newspaper (Dem, family owned, boss a liberal dem from the NYT -- peon job I edited the Letters to the Editor column). I lasted six months before I couldn't take it and quit. But when I interviewed for the job I told the Editor 'I like to be where the action is.' Well, there wasn't any action there.

But there sure is HERE!

WAY TO GO, YOU GUYS!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Debs
Lieutenant


Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 228
Location: Lubbock, Texas

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think CBS is up to their eyeballs in this and conspired with someone to fake these documents - I do NOT think they are innocent victims in this as I believe they are willing participants, co-conspirators. I think Bush knew they were fakes, probably by the content, and let CBS run with it, knowing the documents would be exposed as fakes, and CBS would end up with egg on its face, totally discredited.

Debbie
_________________
"No greater love..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dimsdale
Captain


Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 527
Location: Massachusetts: the belly of the beast

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If this pans out, it will be so beautiful in so many ways:

1) Rather and CBS are discredited for the forseeable future

2) Tom Harkin is made to look like an even bigger ass than usual, and his admonition to Bush ("this is about him, and he has to deal with it") can be directly applied to Kerry and the SBVT controversy.

3) The worn out Bush-ANG story will have been dealt it's death blow.

4) Kerry will be reeling, as his prime supporters, the media, will be shown to be bigger fakes than him, hard as that is, and the SBVT and VVAK etc will again be in the forefront of the news.

5) We get to see the likes of Andrea Mitchell, AP, the editorial staff of the NYTimes etc., etc., etc., wipe egg off their faces.

6) The SBVT and all of us here once again show the power of the little guy, and the power of the internet to overcome the liberal MSM. This went from zero to sixty in the space of a day, no thanks to the MSM!

7) We have another excuse to ask Kerry to sign the 180.

I am sure there is more, but I am smiling so hard, I look like I have lockjaw or something!! I haven't smiled so much since I came back from Hedonism II in Jamaica (a loooooong time ago)!!
_________________
Everytime he had a choice, Kerry chose to side with communists rather than the United States.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nomorelies
Vice Admiral


Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 977
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The intellectual elite has once again misunderestimated the Texan.
_________________
Nomorelies Make a donation HERE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hondo
LCDR


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 423
Location: USA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom Poole:

Thanks - forgot that one while typing. Original post updated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grandforker
Seaman Recruit


Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:14 am    Post subject: More fuel for the fire Reply with quote

I read "Unfit for Command," loved it and made my contribution to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. This is my first post on this board.

I called this issue to the attention of my brother, who retired as a lieutenant colonel from the Air Force after 22 years. He holds the Distinguished Flying Cross earned in combat during the first Persian Gulf War.

For what it's worth, this is what he said:

Quote:
It is suspicious, I agree, and here's why: It's all the wrong format. I've done things like this myself and it's called an "MFR" or "Memo for Record." That should be the first line at the far left. Across from that on the far right should be the date. Right below that line should be a "Subject:" line and below that the letters paragraphs (numbered). At the bottom on the far right should be a signature block (name and title/position at least) with the author's signature. This format hasn't changed in forever and a day. I'd bet a paycheck that it was the exact same format in 1972.

As in any other document, it isn't worth a damn (in court or otherwise)unless its dated and signed. This could never be used to prove or disprove anything in the Air Force. A field grade officer (yes, even in the Texas ANG) would know this. I can't vouch for the font stuff (I'm no expert), but it sounds right to me. We (the active Air Force) weren't even using many IBM PCs with WordStar (the first word processing software I saw in the Air Force) until the mid-eighties and they didn't begin to be used for official documents (OERs, etc.) until a little after that. Squadrons didn't have many computers until the very late 80s or early 90s. Until that time, most everything was done on electric typewriters: mostly IBM Selectrics.

That's my input. It's fishy, but I suppose there's an outside chance it's not a fraud. (Although, it seems very remote to me.) My money is on an "after the fact" forgery, but why? It's not really anything that is damning to Bush that I can see, so what's the fuss?


Last edited by grandforker on Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:25 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
ccr
Commander


Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 325

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hondo, the following is from the PowerLine blog via the Kerryspot blog....

Quote:
In the August 18, 1973 memo "discovered" by 60 Minutes, Jerry Killian purportedly writes:
Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush. I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job.
But wait! Reader Amar Sarwal points out that General Staudt, who thought very highly of Lt. Bush, retired in 1972.


_________________
Whose side is John Kerry really on? Take this quiz and decide for yourself.

http://www.learnthat.com/quiz/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Geedunk & Scuttlebutt All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 21, 22, 23 ... 65, 66, 67  Next
Page 22 of 67

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group