SwiftVets.com

Mastour · Seaman Recruit Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 32

Ok. So he took some documents out of a trashcan belonging to GW when he was in the TANG. He holds on to them and later makes up some fake documents to send over to CBS.

Now why doesn't he just sent the originals he has in hand? Why make copies? Why fax them? Why not just give them to Dan's daughter, the originals mind you, and leave it at that.

This is crazy and scary all at the same time. People who I work with are pretty pumped about the latest polls, but I'm taking a more cautious approach. Look at what these people are trying to do. Do you guys truly believe they will allow Bush a win. If they are trying to influence a Presidential election with fraudulant documents, not forges, what else will they do.

We really need to act like we are behind by 10 and double our efforts. CBS is done. Everybody know this, so we need to focus on Kerry and his activities after 71.
_________________
Everybody has their own truth. The facts are what matter and you can't fudge the facts!

DaveL · Commander Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Posts: 300

Burkett's entire story seems totally implausible to me...I can't even get past the basis for his story...that anyone in his/her right mind would conspire to break the law by plowing through confidential government files while witnesses are present, and then leave all of the evidence, all of the files that they were allegedly trying to "cover-up", just sitting there in an easily accessible trash can! Only one of Michael Moore's "stupid Americans" would buy into any of this crap!

Anker-Klanker · Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:13 pm Post subject:

It's just wild conjecture on my part, but I think it's got to be close to the truth nonetheless.

As many have pointed out Burkett's story just seems so implausible. And then we have the thinking that appears in some of the threads about the problems with form, acronyms, terminology, etc. Since Burkett should have known better about these latter, it seems to me to be even more implausible that he was the originator of the fakes.

So what if his very well-known hatred(?) of GWB was taken advantage of by someone more devious? What if someone knew that if Burkett had the least shred of "evidence" to back up his wildly varying stories, he'd use them? (Read his many editorials/op-ed pieces; his emotion would make him pretty blind to "details.")

The $64,000 question in my mind is who could this very devious schemer be? Somebody in the DNC? Someone associated with MoveOn.org? or???

hammondb3 · Seaman Recruit Joined: 09 Sep 2004 Posts: 30

From the Houston Chronicle today:

"If Burkett is the source of the CBS documents he must have recently obtained them.

In earlier interviews, he described years of fruitless searching.

One month ago, in an essay posted on a progressive Web site, Burkett theorized that Killian would have been a likely person to know more about Bush's service. But, he conceded, "I have found no documentation from LTC Killian's hand or staff that indicate that this unit was involved in any complicit way to ... cover for the failures of 1Lt. Bush ... " Burkett went on to say, "On the contrary, LTC Killian's remarks are rare." "

++++++++++++++++++

If Burkett said a month ago that he had no documents then how did he fing them before Feb. '04?
_________________
Think!, Man... Think!

lrb111 · Captain Joined: 28 Jul 2004 Posts: 508

Debs · Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:46 pm Post subject:

This guy has changed his stories more than Kerry. And it always struck me as he originally said the docs were sitting face up in a trash can and he said he saw them, not that he took them, and he said he overheard some of Bush's people saying they were going to "cleanse" Bush's record. If the Bush people were soooooooooooooo worried about "cleansing" his Guard records, would they put them in a trash can face up so everyone could see them? Nothing about this loon's stories has ever added up and he was debunked long ago, even by some of his own friends, and he, like Rather, is just blinded by his obssessive hatred of Bush. Whether he typed the fake memos or not, he certainly was complicit in exposing them to the media.

Debbie
_________________
"No greater love..."

Anker-Klanker · Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:02 pm Post subject:

I don't know that I made myself really clear in my earlier posting (above).

I think it's highly probable that Burkett DID supply the fake documents to CBS.

I also think it is highly unlikely that he produced them. THE SOURCE goes deeper and further, in other words. Burkett was merely the conduit.

Debs · Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:08 pm Post subject:

Anker-Klanker,

I think you are exactly right.

Debbie
_________________
"No greater love..."

arymann · PO3 Joined: 24 Aug 2004 Posts: 269 Location: GA

Another interesting article from the Washington Post. Note the references to Max Cleland. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30043-2004Sep17.html