SwiftVets.com

[Paul R.]

Spudhorse,

Your points, esp. the 1st one, are well taken. But, how to combat the "he lied" attack?
_________________
Paul R.

[TEWSPilot]

Touching on a couple of points, Bush probably took and passed the Air Force Oficers Qualification/Apptitude Test or similar to see if he qualified for flight status. He would also have to pass a physical including visual acuity, etc., if he wanted to fly. The rest of the timeline for his not needing to qualify to fly when he left Texas to go to Alabama has been laid out all over the Internet, including Byron York's piece at (I think it was Wall Street Journal online), but Google Byron York, and you will find it. He was going to a unit in Alabama that had different aircraft, he was going there to work on the political campaign of another man, it was not cost effective to send him through training in the other plane, so he could let his flight physical slide with no serious problems. Guys often worked out ways to make their points when they had other committments (job, travel, etc.) that caused them to miss drill for several months. They either earned lots of points prior to the long time off or earned them afterwards or simply suffered the consequences of having a year that did not count for longevity. He wasn't planning to retire through the Air Guard, but he still accumulated enough points to meet his obligation and receive an Honorable Discharge.

...this poor dead nag must be glue by now with all the beating it has received in the past 10 years.
_________________
Find the perfect babysitter, petsitter, or tutor -- today!

[lrb111]

Here's York's artilce on the guard servcie.
http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx

Here's an artilce refuting the awol claims.
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/040216/bush.shtml
_________________
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.

[1AD]

Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 2:24 am Post subject: Spin

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is still one thing very seriously wrong with the spin anyone may try to put on it. The same thing that is wrong with the secretary's statement.
What? It would have been okay if Dan had said look, these memos have been re-typed so as to disguise their origin because by the font and perhaps other things (wording, syntax) you could tell where and who they really came from. Remember some were not signed.

So this begs the question? Why didn't Dan say that? Are the memos verbatim from another memo or memos? If they exist do the other documents say the EXACT same thing? Same words, verbiage, etc?

Is the real author still around? And we could then locate him/her and ask questions? I am not saying the author is telling the truth!

Or is the wording different enough so that there is an entirely different connotation on the "original" memos? Did the forger, to use a British phras "Sex up" the forgeries?

Something here that doesn't quite fit! And if it doesn't fit, you must
throw the whole thing in the trash.

[spudhorse]

As others have demonstrated -- there's plenty of evidence to 'refute' the claims. The problem with the entire attack (which others have noted as well) is that it's of the form "have you stopped beating your wife?" Not even "I never beat my wife!" works since the rebuttal is "Prove it!" Which is where we are. And it's where we're going to be up through the election (if they've been at this for 4 years already, they're not going to stop now.)

It's also one thing to take on Dan Rather -- it's entirely something else to be seen taking on a nice 86 year old lady who 'just wants to tell the truth.'

It also occurs to me that CBS can, if it wants, simply continue to stand by their story that the memos are genuine. That way they're not seen as attacking Mrs. Knox either. After all they got what they wanted -- the statement that 'the contents are more or less correct.'

The fly in the ointment for CBS is that there is someone out there who created fake documents and CBS knows who it is. It's also likely that Mrs. Knox has a pretty good idea as well.

[spudhorse]

One last thought -- my guess is that Killian's personal files were destroyed many years ago. The CBS documents were literally made by someone sitting down with Microsoft Word and trying to piece together inuendo, maybe some things they personally knew although I doubt it, some stuff others might have said, things they hoped people had said and then casting all of it in the worst possible light for the President. Given the revelations of the military terminology mistakes, it's probably someone who wasn't in the military although they must have contact with military people enough to have gotten it 'close.' This person is probably also not very detail oriented. However, aging the document seems to have been done fairly well suggesting, perhaps, two or more people. OK -- I'm way out on a limb here but, heck, what are limbs for?

[TEWSPilot]

It now appears that CBS and the Democrats are trying to counter the statement today by Laura Bush that she believes the memos are forgeries. They can't attack her, so they have now found a "lady" on their side to try to even out the team. Pathetic that they would use an old woman this way, but we all know how despicable and unprincipled they are.
_________________
Find the perfect babysitter, petsitter, or tutor -- today!

[Skypilot]

lrb111

[azpatriot]

here's are 2 articles from powerline on the CBS forged TANG documents

Last Nail in the Coffin

Actual Malice
_________________
Proud to be an American! and member of the PAJAMAHADEEN
FedEx Kinko's: When it absolutely, positively has to be forged overnight

[a6502]

I'm not sure if everybody has reached the point of burnout on this yet but here is something 'new'... I'm sorry that this is so far down the thread but I think that all of the spelling is now correct and I have eliminated the 'really scary technical details' from what I had first written. So here goes my first post.

I have read through all of the posts (so far) posted here, at Powerline, and LGF. I even found the Freeper post that is credited with starting the whole thing.

I think that everybody has missed the 'Big Problem' with any position defending these documents as being 'real'. Definitive PROOF (yes, all caps) that this is a forgery created using MSWord and the Times New Roman font.

The font used is not only proportionally spaced, it is also (and more importantly) a 'TrueType' font. The character spacing (as well as the width of each character) is measured in a unit called 'twips', not 'picas' or 'points'. This is a measurement that was created to factor the 'screen to printer' size of fonts. It did not exist until Adobe needed a scale factor, and chose one based on the 'least common denominator' of the two scales - the 'twip'. Way after '73.

A twip is 1/1440th of an inch, a distinctly unique length, and far more accurate than even the best manufacturing equipment available in '73, which would have been used to make the 'magic typewriter'. Typical 'tight' machining tolerances of the day were +.003/-.001, although I specified some parts at +-.001, and suffered the cost burden of this because the scrap rate was very high. Even today, tolerances of this order are only possible using CNC equipment of the highest quality (if you wanted to make the 'magic typewriter'), or a laser/inkjet printer (if you just wanted to make the document). No 'manual' typewriter ever produced, nor any 'physical' typesetting system ever made could have created the documents in question. Not even today. Period. The physical print world knows inches, picas, points, mils, and metric. They know not 1/1440th of an inch, to them this is 1/20th of a point, or 'too small to matter'. (For comparison, this is 1/3 the thickness of a plastic garbage bag.) They don't need to think in this scale because their equipment does not have 'screens'. Duh. Of course, 'real' print shops are as rare today as buggy whips in the 40's.

Another point that is germane - measurement errors are cumulative, and they hardly ever cancel out. Impact from a typewriter key (or ball) would deform the paper, changing the width of the paper with each keystroke a small amount, the cumulative effect of this would be small variances in character spacing, all skewed the same direction. This effect would vary from line to line, and the velocity of the impact, as well as the physical environment, would affect the magnitude of the error. Two documents typed on the same machine would not line up as well if they were overlaid. Don't believe me? Try it on your old typewriter - type a memo twice, then hold the pages up to the light, and line up the left side of your text. The right side will not line up, there will be some 'drift' and this drift will be different each time that you perform this experiment. Of course, your pages will not even be close to the released documents, no matter what 'manual' equipment you use.

The fact is, back in '73 the technology to create this document did not exist. Period. The best typesetting equipment available could not come close to the accuracy shown on the released documents, and used an entirely different unit of measurement, not even conceived of until much later. It would be possible to create this (back in '73) using an offset press or an equivalent, but the problem is the original artwork could not be created by any method available on Planet Earth at the time, other than engraving (like our currency), and probably not even then.

Consider that the documents are made up of a rather large number of alpha characters of varying width (which are then precisely spaced by the TrueType/PostScript 'engine'), either four or six pages total (depending on where you get the 'original' PDF files) of rather random characters. This is more 'variance' than the most complex DNA type test available today by several orders of magnitude. (A rough approximation can be had by raising 2 to the power of the total character count - 1, including spaces and tabs, of all of the documents in question - this is a Very Large Number, like the stars in the sky type of Large Number.) If these documents were actually written on a typewriter, or any other mechanical device, it would be very easy to pinpoint the actual machine responsible using 'standard' forensic technology. I am sure that there are actual cases of people being executed based on evidence such as 'typewriter forensics'.

However the questioned documents line up EXACTLY with the MS version of the Times New Roman (TrueType - Printer definition) font, on thousands of different computer/printer combinations from around the world.

A small historical note here, I write from memory, so forgive the little errors - my memory is not what it was when I was smarter than my elders. TrueType fonts consist of TWO type definitions, one for the 'screen', and one for the 'printer'. They are scaled so that they look the same on the screen as they do when printed (remember that the 'twip' is based on the least common denominator of the screen resolution - 96DPI, and the print worlds 'point' scale of 72 points/inch). This principle is known as WYSIWYG, 'What You See Is What You Get', a concept that did not even exist in '73. Except in the minds of those folks at the Palo Alto Research Center. This is the reason for the difference in the superscripted 'th' between the screen and the printed version of the MS Word document. With the Times New Roman font licensed by Microsoft for Windows the screen font table had to be modified to account for the pixels on the screen not being square, this dual table concept became TrueType. This did not happen until the release of Windows 3.0 - the Mac screen had square pixels, and the Times New Roman (I believe that the Mac used Adobes 'Typestream' technology, the beginnings of PostScript) font for the Mac used a single type definition table for both the screen and print font faces. Apple actually made the pixels square on their screen for this very reason, and until the advent of TrueType the Macintosh was, arguably, the 'best' (most intuitive) layout system available to the masses. The Mac actually introduced the 'masses' to several ideas, including WYSIWYG and 'real' word processing (both thanks to MS Word!), and of course, incredibly steep software developer license fees.

This is not possible using ANY OTHER UNIT OF MEASUREMENT, or even any other technology. The character spacing IS in 'twips', and that unit of measure did NOT exist in 1973. The font MUST be a TrueType font. The documents ARE forgeries.

An easy way to explain it - 1/2" does NOT equal 12mm, no matter how much you want to believe otherwise. As Bill Cosby said (quoting Noah, after receiving directions on building the Ark) - "Ok... What's a cubit?" The little marks on the ruler are very important, but not nearly as important as having the right ruler to start with. It is like finding 1,000 containers that each hold EXACTLY 5 gallons inside of a tomb in Egypt, and the containers are made of plastic - anybody who defended this find as 'historically significant' would (rightly) be ridiculed.

This brings up the burning question - why has nobody submitted the 180 for Mr. Kerry? I am sure that he signed one, sometime in the past...


I think that last round of BoTox was injected a bit too deeply.

[lrb111]

[shadowy]

It's all so nuanced I can hardly stand it. It's beginning to look like DNC/MSM smoke and mirrors. We never came here to defend Bush, so let's just give them the physical and work on the treason angle. New bumper sticker---

Bush won't fly
Vote for the Traitor
_________________
It's downright brilliant the way he's reserving his devastating intellect to spring it on us at exactly the right moment.

[flagreen]

[a6502]

Shadowy -

It IS all 'smoke and mirrors'. That is what 'they' want.

The quote that I found the most hilarious (and I will try to get it EXACTLY right) came from the NPR wonk on Brit Hume's show -

"It is not relevant that the documents are forgeries, what is important is the content of them."

WHAT?

Yes, she really said that. The point that I was trying to make is that 'they' can obfuscate even the most obvious of lies by pointing to the CONTENT of the forged documents and saying - "But what about that?"

Does this sound kind of familiar?

Anyway, I love an arena where a man can be proven a liar before his lips quit moving.

BRING ON THE DEBATES! Air SwiftVet ads during EVERY commercial break! Twice if the funds permit, because the real voters will be watching for a bloodbath. Blog it all, and call Guiness because I sense a record coming on.


Does BoTox grow hair?

[ASPB]

If you want the definitive answer to the Bush AWOL Question including links to the actual records here's where you find it.

http://flyunderthebridge.blogspot.com/

Print out a copy including the referenced documents and you'll never lose this argument again....unless you waste your time talking to moonbats.

_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB