 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
swiftyvetfan4ever
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 9
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
debewley
Ensign
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 69
Location: Florida Panhandle
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 12:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Today's editorial in the Cincy Post. Idiocy has reached a new level.
http://www.cincypost.com/2004/09/13/editb091304.html
Bush's past is catching up
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not entirely fresh information that President Bush skipped a 1972 medical exam needed if he was to keep flying fighter jets for the Texas Air National Guard, but CBS' "60 Minutes" has turned the heat up on this skillet.
The White House had previously acknowledged that Bush had his flight credentials stripped because of failure to take the exam. What's new in the documents CBS has obtained is information that he had a direct order to show up -- and just plain did not.
Other documents make it sound as if there were efforts from on high to have Bush's superiors do unearned favors for the young man.
None of this reflects well on Bush, and those opposed to his re-election say the evidence is mounting about his character flaws.
It doesn't help Bush's re-election effort that his Democratic opponent in the presidential election actually saw combat in Vietnam.
Those supporting Bush are bristling as if it's just politics at work here. They argue that he did after all serve and that what's important is the leadership of the Bush who now sits in the Oval Office.
One can credibly enough argue that the Bush of today is a far more disciplined, responsible soul than the Bush of yesterday. But there is another truth with which he is condemned to live: No matter how deeply people try to bury them, former selves have a habit of rising into view again, determined to play havoc with reputations.
Kerry got in trouble for trying to have it both ways with Vietnam: war hero and protester. Bush is in trouble for ducking his duties. Having established that, let's get on with the campaign.
_________________
Served with US Army in Americal Division 2/69 to 9/70. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grandforker
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 12:48 pm Post subject: Another editorial |
|
|
I guess they're a little too slow or too liberal at the Cincinnati Post.  Contrast that editorial with the one in our Sunday Grand Forks (ND) Herald.
| Quote: | Sunday, Sep. 12, 2004
Grand Forks Herald
EDITORIAL: New century finds a new journalism
If you're a media buff - and who isn't, in America in 2004? - then circle Thursday, Sept. 9, on your mental calendar. Because that's the day weblogs came into their own.
And politics and journalism never will be the same.
What happened Thursday is that webloggers or "bloggers" latched on to a controversial "60 Minutes"/CBS News story - and then worked the thing, with a stubbornness and tenacity that would have done credit to a pack of bulldogs or a turn of snapping turtles - or, yes, an army of investigative reporters.
As a result, CBS was forced to respond within a single news cycle. And although the network eventually stood by its story, more holes are showing up in the thing almost by the hour, and there's a fair chance the network will have to retract.
This may have been the first time a TV network was forced to respond so quickly to an Internet critique. But it won't be the last time for America's networks, newspapers or other institutions, because bloggers now are responding to events not as opinion writers but as fact-checkers and skilled reporters.
Here's the short form of what happened. Wednesday night: CBS's "60 Minutes" program broadcast a powerful and damaging report about President Bush. A young George W. Bush pulled strings not only to get into the Texas Air National Guard but also to be eased out without fulfilling his obligations, the report claimed.
And among other things, it cited a handful of newly uncovered documents as proof.
That's when the bloggers - especially conservative bloggers - chomped down. CBS posted copies of the incriminating documents online. But within hours, a poster named Buckhead at www.freerepublic.com saw that the documents looked more like the product of 2004 word processing than a 1972 typewriter.
Power Line, a Twin Cities-based weblog - it's at www.powerlineblog.com and is well worth reading, especially if you're new to the weblog phenomenon - posted Buckhead's comments. Then, in a clattering crescendo of keystrokes, the issue exploded in cyberspace. Soon www.indcjournal.com had interviewed a "forensic document" specialist who agreed the documents likely were fakes. Then www.littlegreenfootballs.com retyped the memos using Microsoft Word and showed them to be a perfect typographic match. Then retired Air National Guard officers and enlisted clerks weighed in, noting that the memos broke many 1970s-era rules of military style.
And that was only a hundredth of it.
The most amazing thing is that these developments could be followed in real time by anyone owning a computer. CBS issued periodic statements throughout the day Thursday, but by Friday, the cyberweight of the bloggers' (and, by then, talk-radio, TV and newspaper) reports couldn't be ignored. So Dan Rather on "CBS Evening News" defended the original report.
But a Saturday cybertour found more experts frowning at the documents, more newspapers publishing their own critical reports and even a CBS source or two walking away from the original story.
If CBS winds up retracting, the credit will have to go to the "blogosphere," a new and powerful force in journalism. Twin Cities blogger James Lileks of www.lileks.com said it best: "The Internet smells blood and leaps, and that has turned the game around, for better or worse."
-------------------------------
Tom Dennis for the Herald |
_________________
Hard pounding, gentlemen. Let's see who pounds the longest. -- Wellington at Waterloo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rdtf
CNO
Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 2209
Location: BUSHville
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Re: Grandforker:
You must be so proud to read that in your hometown. I love it! And the communists thought nuclear weapons were powerful - amazing how love of country and desire to support your President can prevail. Kudos to us all! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diane in IL
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 102
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So that's it... the worst that will happen is a RETRACTION! Bull crap! Dan Rathers ass should go directly to jail. I have never been so livid. How do they think they can get away with this? Furthermore, the today show featured two more Bush bashing books but didn't say a THING about 60 minutes fraudelent reporting. In fact, later in the broadcast, Tim Russert even REPEATED the Rather charges making no mention of the fact that the documents have been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt to be forged.
When is our US government going to weigh in on this? Are they just going to let CBS get away with this? I thought there were laws in place to protect the citizenry (and individuals) from slander. Crap better hit the fan over this this week or I'm gonna go ballistic.
diane in IL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grandforker
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I listened to Matt Drudge for a while last night. His take on this is (based on his sources inside CBS) that Dan Rather won't be gone until he decides to retire. He says that Rather has too much power at CBS for it to happen any other way.
Maybe the forgery incident will speed up his retirement plans, but Drudge thinks there's no way Rather will retire before Tom Brokaw. I think he's right. Rather will be gone sooner or later. But when it happens, the CBS spin will be that Rather decided to retire, not that he was forced to.
_________________
Hard pounding, gentlemen. Let's see who pounds the longest. -- Wellington at Waterloo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nomorelies
Vice Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 977
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you go to this article posted in archives of tompaine.com you will find something very interesting:
http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/3671
| Quote: | | Bush's long absence from the records comes to an end one week after he failed to comply with an order to attend "Annual Active Duty Training" starting at the end of May 1973. He then began serving irregularly with his unit. Nothing indicates in the records that he ever made up the time he missed. |
Notice the reference to the failure to comply with an order to attend...
This pdf reference has conveniently been disabled from a post on May 7, 2004. The other 3 references to these documents have also been disabled.
I smell a rat.
_________________
Nomorelies Make a donation HERE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nomorelies
Vice Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 977
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forgers ARE a federal offense:
http://www.dddnews.com/story/1040353.html
more googling to come
Here is the federal statute:
CITE
18 USC Sec. 912 01/03/95
EXPCITE
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 43 - FALSE PERSONATION
HEAD
Sec. 912. Officer or employee of the United States
STATUTE
Whoever falsely assumes or pretends to be an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States or any department, agency or officer thereof, and acts as such, or in such pretended character demands or obtains any money, paper, document, or thing of value, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
_________________
Nomorelies Make a donation HERE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arymann
PO3
Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 269
Location: GA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Prchrmn2
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 7
Location: San Diego
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:55 pm Post subject: In reference to Arymann posting |
|
|
Sent to scams@cbsnews.com
Last week Dan Rather of CBS news perpetrated one of the greatest frauds in American History.
See evidence of the crime at the web-site below.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/08/01/eveningnews/main15218.shtml
The original story concerning George Bush's Gaurd Service was doctored with since "Proven" to be FAKE documents. The refutation of the genuineness of the documents being "personal memos of J. Killian from 1972 and 1973" can be found at the Following Weblogs: Little Green Footballs, Instapundant, INDC, and
http://www2.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8487&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=tang&start=855
Therefore, we the people seek:
Redress of wrongs: The out right fabrication of slander against the President of the United States to be Investigated and fines and prison penalties applied in a federal court of law.
Revocation of License: For CBS for its collusion with Dan Rather in the perpetration of a crime.
Severe Sentencing: For all personnel at CBS who involved themselves with voter fraud and election tampering in a Presidential election compounded by the fact that the country is in a war-time posture.
Please, come clean and mitigate the damage to your own reputation, and the safety of the United States (including free speech) which is not what you have exercised, which in fact could be construed as a minimum sedition and a maximum of treason. Come clean now and I am sure the people of the United States will not unduly punish you for your offenses.
_________________
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 |
|
|
1AD
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 138
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 11:01 pm Post subject: Dan |
|
|
| Just heard Dan on T.V. What was he saying and how did he attempt to prove the documents are true? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debewley
Ensign
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 69
Location: Florida Panhandle
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 11:07 pm Post subject: Re: Dan |
|
|
| 1AD wrote: | | Just heard Dan on T.V. What was he saying and how did he attempt to prove the documents are true? |
Just more of the same. I think Blather is contemplating committing a major crime and is laying the ground work for an insanity defense!
_________________
Served with US Army in Americal Division 2/69 to 9/70. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thrawn21
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Posts: 33
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Has anybody heard of the blogging thing known as "Livejournal"? I'm on it because one of my friends implored me to be on it. I took a break from doing my lab report and ran into this post. It really made me mad, although I can't look into it right now as I'm working on my lab report. If anybody wants to give to try to debunk this, please give it a go. What really made me suspicious is the claim that "After CBS ran the story, the White House released the same memos to the rest of the media". I've never heard of this, is somebody pulling something out of their butt?
Anyhow, here's the post. Enjoy:
"After looking at all of the "proof" that the document is fake, and watching 60 Minutes' Dan Rather defend the documents (requires REAL or WMP), I have decided the following:
FReepers say that the font in the documents are the same as Times New Roman in MS Office 2004. They claim that they must be fake, because the font didn't exist back then. However, this is simply not true, as Times New Roman was first used in 1932 in The Times of London newspaper and was available on several type writers.
The other most used argument by the FReepers is that the character th didn't exist on type-writers back then. However, this is also a load of crap, as several of the other official documents in Bush's record use that character, as well as many other documents in existence from that time.
These documents were released by the Pentagon. According to sources, they were brought to their attention by the Democratic National Committee. This has, of course, been mentioned in most sources that say the documents are fake, because it does look pretty bad that they were the first to drop notice of them. However, it is also said that they could have been brought to the public's attention through the media as being from the DNC because it makes democrats look bad if they were in fact false documents.
What the documents say are not the only evidence. Many people were interviewed and all of what they said fit together to spell out exactly what the documents say. Read here for more info (plus downloadable copies of the memos in question).
LET ME SPELL THIS OUT: After CBS ran the story, the White House released the same memos to the rest of the media. If they were fake, the White House would not have done so! These ARE real documents. They're just saying what we already knew.
When you're done with that, be sure to watch Dan Rather's response to the claims that the documents are fake.
It's obvious that such a scandal story only exists because this is quite a story and really spells out that Bush is a liar. Of COURSE they would say the documents are fake... they've already brainwashed all these people into thinking Bush is a great man and they can't give them a chance to question that. That would be unpatriotic."
_________________
"Anyone can make an error. But that error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it" - Grand Admiral Thrawn, from the book Heir to the Empire by Timothy Zahn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | LET ME SPELL THIS OUT: After CBS ran the story, the White House released the same memos to the rest of the media. If they were fake, the White House would not have done so! These ARE real documents. They're just saying what we already knew. |
LOLOL! Okay, I am well-known for my convoluted thinking and my ability to see all sides of any given argument or proposal at the same time.
And this just completely LOST me!
Despite unassailable PROOF that the documents are fake, this guy says they're real? (What, is he an understudy to Dan RAthER or something?)
And if they were fake, the White House wouldn't release them?????
I'm curious, now - supposing they were genuine - does he think the White House would have held them back? This White House has released every single scrap of paper it's come across, right down to freakin' dental records!
Oh, I love this board! Thanks, thrawn21!
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wally626
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 85
Location: Yorktown
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cipher wrote: | Welcome aboard, craig!
Different typists, different machines, different locations, different dates, different commands. I think the only place you see superscripted characters are from entries made at Lackland AFB.
Superscripts were not unheard of, just not often encountered. And it could have been a specialty machine in the personnel office where that sort of stuff was needed a few hundred times a day. The advantage of superscripts is that more infor could be typed on the limited space.
It would NOT be farfetched for a personnel office to have a superscripting machine. But for a local command at the squadron level, it WOULD be unusual. |
The raised TH in the records sheet is not a superscript it is just a special character. Some Selectrics could be ordered with custom balls with special characters, most typewriters had the 1/2, 1/4 symbols as special but apparently at least one had the raised TH as a special character. Note, these balls (from what I've read on the web) were only availble for the regular Selectrics not the Executive or Composer models that could do proportional fonts. I think it has also been proven now that even the famed IBM Selectric Composer could not have made the memos. Note, the TH in the memos is a true superscript and not a special character. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
