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 ... 52, 53, 54 ... 65, 66, 67  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Geedunk & Scuttlebutt
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ondryland
Seaman Recruit


Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 35
Location: Arizona

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Has anyone had an opportunity to check out the P.O. Box 34567 number?

I believe this was mentioned on another thread and I agree it looks a bit strange to me. Maybe this whole thing was a sting.

On the bright side - Everytime they discuss President Bush's National Guard Service on television, we see photo's of a very handsome young man, in his flight suit, in the cockpit of an aircraft, getting his lieutenant bars pinned on and an official photo in his uniform.

All looking very good.

ondryland

Thanks to all of you for all you have done
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cipher
Vice Admiral


Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 902

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

First of all, a PO box wouldn't have been used as an address. A *physical* address would have been used. And the POB may be valid, but that doesn't MEAN anything, even if it was.

The use of periods in 111 F.I.S. is wrong. It would be 111 FIS or 111th FS, or abbreviated, but not the way it is. The date format is all wrong. For one thing NO one used four digit years back then. 14 MAY 72 would be proper. the month is ALL CAPS and no comma. I could go on, but others have already thread this ground better than I can.
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prchrmn2
Seaman Recruit


Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 7
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:34 am    Post subject: the Big Picture and what to do with it. Reply with quote

Hey all,

First I'dlike to thank skypilot for beating me to posting the AP article he did at 2:19am SUN SEP 12 24 by the way this is the link and can someone write these guys and ask them how they can credible refer todocuments that are apocrypha??!!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040912/ap_on_re_us/bush_guard_reax&cid=519&ncid=716

I am a 20 year Navy veteran and thanks to Ltjg Batey I finally looked at the big picture so here is my take of where we are at.

1. It must be stressed with every contact (media, friends, etc) that:
a. these are NOT "official Tang Documents
b. these are the personnal documents of a dead man
c. Neither are they W's official documents
d. CBS gave them to the administration!!!!

The following items need to be pursued aggressively (divide and conquer) in the military we assign details to small groups and then the entire project gets complete..each group has a leader that works a a particular segemnt of the problem (quest in this case). This blog can always be refrred to along the way to see if other groups need to be manned up.

2. Do these Memo's go back to the kerry campaign, if not how cloase do they come?

3.All documents and links need to be cached...hackers are pretty good and I'm too old to try and stop them.

4. Continue to call for the original documents.

Also CBS has posted "trancsripts of the memo's in an effort to deflect and hide...this way you can't see the "th" that everyone is talking about. By the way for all the people who posted about the "Selectric" being able to superscript the "th" WHY DOES IT APPEAR ONLY ONCE ON ONE MEMO AND ON THE SAME MEMO IT IS NOT SUPERSCRIPTED....WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD CHANGE BALLS, OR SOME OTHER METHOD OF PRODUCING IT ...JUST FOR ONE INSTANCE...NO...this is a mistake by a person using MS WORD!!!!!

5. CBS says the larger issue are their unanswered questions about Bushes recrd (Which it now appears they will "answer for themselves" (hey that was punny)NO..THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS FORGERIES OF SLANDEROUS DCOUMENTS (USING A DEAD MANS CHARACTER) THAT SEEK VOTER TAMPERING AND ACHIVE ELECTION FRAUD!!!!! At least that is the issue for anyone seeking the TRUTH and not one who is SLAVE to a diabolical agenda (anybody but Bush). Sorry had to get it out

PS I wopnder if after all this is opened up whether it could be shown that Marcel Malley's ineptitude kept the populace from finding out more about Vince Foster?
Also, at least in the modern military..it is illegal to keep notes or memos on an individual which can be constued as being of a derogatory nature. I entered in 82 and retired 02 so someone from further back will have to comment. Evil or Very Mad


(fixed your "20" years for you - EJ)
_________________
USN-RETIRED (FIXED and ROTORY WING)

"To murder character is as truly a crime as to murder the body: the tongue of the slanderer is brother to the dagger of the assassin." -- Tryon Edwards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
cipher
Vice Admiral


Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 902

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
b. these are the personnal documents of a dead man


Actually, no. These are FORGERIES purported to be the personal documents of a dead man. Except there are some that are "ORDERS", which means that they are -- by definition -- official, and NOT personal.
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
air_vet
PO2


Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Posts: 374

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cipher wrote:
First of all, a PO box wouldn't have been used as an address. A *physical* address would have been used. And the POB may be valid, but that doesn't MEAN anything, even if it was.


I'm not sure the use of a PO Box number is a problem. The unit probably only ran a 5 day a week administrative operation leaving the Post Office no place to deliver the mail on Saturdays. I seem to remember an Air Reserve unit I worked with in the early '80s using a PO Box for some mail.

...but for an internal memo - why include ANY mailing address?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cipher
Vice Admiral


Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 902

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I'm not sure the use of a PO Box number is a problem. The unit probably only ran a 5 day a week administrative operation leaving the Post Office no place to deliver the mail on Saturdays. I seem to remember an Air Reserve unit I worked with in the early '80s using a PO Box for some mail.


Maybe for an armory in the boonies, yes. However, Ellington was a FULL-TIME military installation, it was THE training site for the F-102 nationwide. I'm virtually certain that they had a Post Office with a full-time regular Air Force staff.
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prchrmn2
Seaman Recruit


Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 7
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:46 am    Post subject: Cipher, Reply with quote

Thank you for correcting my statement. Too easily do I err in not remaining focused on FORGERIES purported...I will also correct my 2 years to the 20 they are.
_________________
USN-RETIRED (FIXED and ROTORY WING)

"To murder character is as truly a crime as to murder the body: the tongue of the slanderer is brother to the dagger of the assassin." -- Tryon Edwards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
MJB
LCDR


Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 425

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great comment on another blog I was just reading (italics are mine) -

http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/004892.html

Re fake documents -- as one of the world's top notorious 'UFO debunkers', I've seen decades of faked 'Top Secret Gummint UFO Files' leaked out to the world, for various obscure reasons -- fun, profit, ego, malice, misguided gambit to tease 'real' documents loose, whatever. Few were ever traced to their originators, but all were readily exposed as hoaxes -- some clumsy, some clever.

See www.debunker.com, www.csicop.org, www.jamesoberg.com (the 'space folklore' section), and Tim Printy's home page (do 'google' -- can't access URL) for examples.

The Killian ersatz-memos fail the 'chain of custody' test as well as 'only originals can be authenticated' test, and since we have no provable theory where they came from, they're useless to support a hypothesis.

OTHER such fakes, however, might show up if a clever hoaxer pulls some UFO-type hoaxes and (as UFO promoters have done) visit the National Archives to inspect boxes of original documents, and then DEPOSIT pre-created false documents INTO the folders, and leave them there for a LATER investigator to find.
The ersatz-document won't be on the folder's inventory list, but it can then be touted as 'coming from official gummint archives' anyway.
So be prepared -- creative forgers have made good livings for all of human history, and the stakes are higher than usual this year.

Jim O
Houston, Texas
www.jamesoberg.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cipher
Vice Admiral


Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 902

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your 20. Lemme guess. A senior chief, right?

I was done after almost 11 in uniform. I got bummed out during the Carter Admin, no parts, no support, lousy retention, etc., etc.

Besides, the Navy was willing to pay me four times what I was making in the Army as an SSG over 10 to design new weapons. How could I say "No"?
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lrb111
Captain


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 508

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Navy_Navy_Navy wrote:

The only similarities to Vietnam is that the leftist press is pushing a nihilistic, negative view of the war on terror onto the viewing public and they are beginning to work on remaking today's soldier in the same image they so successfully propagated for Vietnam veterans.

Instead of pinning an ugly and undeserved reputation on the members of our Armed Forces, let's expose the media for who they truly are.

It isn't that they're anti-WAR - they are full-out anti-MILITARY.


The part that makes this interesting, challenging, and soon to be rewarding, is that they are the same people that did it the first time. But this time we know who they are, and we certainly know how high the stakes are.
Especially, today..
_________________
said Democratic Chairman Terry McAuliffe. "It is inexcusable to mock service and sacrifice."
well, when even the DNC can see it,,,,, then kerry is toast.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chuck Z Ombie AC2000
LCDR


Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 426
Location: Northern New Jersey

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whats funny is that not even the MSM is carrying 60 minutes water for them. This is going to nosedive and perhaps the only thing that will delay it will be Hurricane Ivan
_________________
John Kerry, R.I.P. (Rot In Paris)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grandforker
Seaman Recruit


Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Below is a comment posted in the discussion below the blog posted here at Asymmetrical Information. I don't think that I'd want to challenge Bruce F. Webster's professional opinion in court.

Quote:
To Bones and all the others fighting a hopeless battle:

Give it up.

A few salient prefaces: (1) I'm a lifelong registered Democrat and (2) I have qualified in US Federal Court as an expert on computer document forensics. Also, unlike Jane, I actually used IBM Selectrics back when they represented the state of the art in typewriting (I learned to type in 1968 on a _manual_ typewriter and still managed 55 wpm).

These documents are forgeries, and bad ones at that. End of story.

(And if you _really_ want to challenge my qualifications, recognize that I spent five years as chief software architect for a firm that developed and sold a design-oriented desktop publishing package; in so doing, I worked closely for five years with Mike Parker, a world-class typographer; and that I did most of the actualy writing for a patent that Mike filed for--and was awarded--on automatic scaling of font size and leading in order to maintain text layout while changing fonts.)

Now, were I asked to offer an expert opinion in court, I would do just what most of the other experts have done: I would ask to see the 'originals' such as they are. But we have yet to see a single expert in typography and/or word processing who has said that these were produced on an IBM Selectric (or Composer) circa 1972-73, and you won't.

They are fakes, pure and simple. That was obvious to me within a few minutes of pulling up the first PDF file. The 'net has pulled together lots of proof, from both a technology point of view and timeline/content/provenance point of view. I am staggered that CBS continues to insist these are genuine; frankly, they're amateurish, and as Mickey Kaus allegedly said on TV yesterday, CBS is going to be throwing folks out of windows by the time this is all over. ..bruce..

Posted by: Bruce F. Webster on September 11, 2004 03:52 PM

_________________
Hard pounding, gentlemen. Let's see who pounds the longest. -- Wellington at Waterloo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Skypilot
Seaman Apprentice


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

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

.


Dan Rather foresaw his future?

Pittsburgh Post Gazette
The Networks
Sunday, December 17, 2000

Election Night was a journalistic disaster for the major television networks. The anchors first awarded Florida to Gore and then to Bush, calling him president-elect, and then took it back, saying Florida was too close to call. Summing up, one TV critic compared the anchors to "lemmings cascading over the cliffs together."

While the experience was humbling for the anchors, the roller-coaster night made great television and resulted in a huge ratings spike for the networks.


Best Election Night anchor quote: Tom Brokaw, who observed, "We don't just have egg on our face. We have omelet all over our suits."

Most colorful expressions -- by far: Dan Rather, who called the race "jar lid tight" and "hot enough to peel house paint." He also stated: "To err is human, but to really foul up requires a computer."

Most apologetic: Judy Woodruff, who said, "We've been saying all night that we didn't know what was going to happen, and we've proved it. Could you pass the crow?"

Most stable anchor in the storm: Peter Jennings, who remained composed in the face of election chaos and a small fire sparked by a studio light.

Best prop: The erasable grease board and marker used by NBC talking head Tim Russert to vividly illustrate the ups and downs of Election Night 2000.

King of the Hill: Jim Lehrer of public television staged a coup by moderating all the presidential debates. He was praised for his even-handed questioning, but drew some criticism for handling Gore and Bush too gently.

http://www.post-gazette.com/election/20001217pznetworks.asp

Rolling Eyes How ironic? Rolling Eyes


.
_________________
Please Mr. Kerry Sign Form #180 Now!
Let the truth set you free? NOT!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
noc
PO1


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 492
Location: Dublin, CA

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

noc wrote:
This may be the machine they will say produced the documents:

http://www.ibmcomposer.org/docs/Selectric%20Composer%20Operations%20Manual.pdf

The Selectric Composer was release in 1966 and is more of a typesetting machine in terms of trying to create the documents in question.

It has the ability to center, change font sizes, and has proportional spacing.

The whole manual is created with the composer and the Press Roman font looks similiar.

Can any of you help me look at this and see if we can rule out that it was used?


http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/11/authenticity_backed_on_bush_documents?pg=2

They are now saying that the documents could have been produced by the IBM Selectric Composer as I had thought they would. Just wanted to let you guys know that I had a type setter look at the Press Roman font and it does not match Times New Roman. Times New Roman is narrower than the Press Roman.

Here is some more info on the Composer:

http://www.ibmcomposer.org/SelComposer/description.htm

Putting aside the lack of a font match, in order for these documents to be produced with this typesetting machine you would of had to type the document at least twice. We know that Jerry Killian's wife had already stated he was not a typist.

They are also stating that you could get custom font balls for the Selectrics that had the 'th','nd','rd', and 'st'. Not exactly. The custom font balls that the Selectric II used (which was fairly popular) used different font balls. I can find no evidence that IBM ever produced custom font balls for the Composer other than the standard fonts and special character ball for scientific work. But even if they did I wanted to point out something that I think people are missing. If they had replaced the standard font ball with a custom one, how would Col. Killian have known which key to hit? The keys on the typewriter would not have changed.

Futher I wanted to point out that it is being reported by CBS that the 'th' superscripting was possible in systems starting in 1968 and was in other documents in Bushes record. The documents in the record have the 'th' but it is not superscripted.

The Composer did not do superscripting as a feature as has already been mentioned. You would of have to manually roll the platten down and then back up. So he would of had to know what the custom key was and also be able to perform this procedure. I won't even go into what it takes to do the centering. The system is very complex to say the least and it is no wonder that it cost over $20,000 plus a IBM service contract.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cipher
Vice Admiral


Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 902

PostPosted: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than to print any one of those documents on ANY machine available in 1972. Period.

This fan-dance by CBS would require MORE contortions than Ms. Woods explanation of the erasure of the 17 minutes of missing tape during the Nixon administration.

Which, as I recall, Dan Rather didn't buy into. However, he may have learned something about the art of contorted and tortured explanations that simply do not pass the smell test.
_________________
USMC 69-72, 7th Comm, 3rd MarDiv, FMFPAC
US Army 75-79, 97th Sig, SHAPE, NATO
Arkansas National Guard 79
Defense contractor for US Navy, SSPO, SP-20, SP-24, OP-12 84-92
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 ... 52, 53, 54 ... 65, 66, 67  Next
Page 53 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