SwiftVets.com

republicanveteran · Commander Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 333 Location: Texas

Friday, September 10, 2004
MEMO'S FOR RECORD BY COMMANDER ARE RARELY TYPED
More on the CBS 60 Minutes fiasco.

First of all, let me disclose that I am a retired Master Sergeant, and a First Sergeant.

Commanders and First Sergeants make Memo for Record on anything they see suspicious or do not like. That is a standard procedure.

But, these memo's are RARELY EVER TYPED. To do so would violate a confidence on both sides of an issue, since we rarely ever did our own typing.

The Air Force has a form for these types of memo's that was designed to be handwritten. Indeed, they were cumbersome to fit into a typewriter.

Also, A Professional Officer or Senior NCO would never use the words (CYA) as a subject.

CBS has a lot to answer for!!! The first question has to be why they even produced this "hit piece" on the President? Second question is are they now going to give equal time to the Swiftvets for Truth people?

http://proudrepublican.blogspot.com/
REPUBLICANPUNDIT

air_vet · PO2 Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 374

RobD · Lt.Jg. Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Posts: 147 Location: Reno Nv

air_vet,
Thanks for expertise on this subject. Here is a question, other then the CYA point, could these be memo documents that were transcribed from the hand written memos you talked about? This would explane the use of MS Word. If CBS comes out and says that the originals were so hard to read that we transcribed them would they have a leg to stand on?
_________________
6 Year Navy

republicanveteran · Commander Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 333 Location: Texas

No, I don't think so. Whoever forged them went to a lot of trouble to make them look authentic.

They would never be addressed to anyone. The subject line would be about the memo, if used at all.

Interested · Seaman Recruit Joined: 29 Aug 2004 Posts: 37 Location: PA

in my opinion no

These are reported to be "the memos" and even look aged. It would be a huge blow to their credibility to say now "oops we meant these were transcripts" Rolling Eyes

MJB · LCDR Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 425

Yes, that was one of the things that bugged me yesterday when I read the memos!! I remember using the term "Memo for Record" when I was in during the late 80', early 90's. I thought maybe they used different terminology back then.

And, no unit commander I knew ever typed his own memos/documents. Every unit had a secretary. In the intel world, they needed clearances, too.

MJB
USAF '85-'92

Hondo · LCDR Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 423 Location: USA

Observation: transcripts would be identified as such, and in general would not have the signature of the same person who signed the original. If they were signed, the signature would be that of the transcriber/and or witnesses to the transcription. They would possibly also include the date/place of transcription and/or the location of the original document at the time of transcription.

At least, IMO that's how someone with integrity would prepare a transcript of a document for later use.

However, if - hypothetically speaking, of course - you were going to try to forge a document, that's a different case entirely. In this latter hypothetical case, you'd definitely NOT identify anything as being a transcript. What you'd likely do is create an original, then "age" it artificially (multiple scanning/photocopying, physical damage, digital image processing, etc. . . ) so you could produce a digital image or hardcopy that people would believe was a copy of a real, existing document. It would also be essential to have something that might pass for the signature of the person who purportedly signed the original, since unsigned documents don't carry all that much weight unless their authenticity can be established through independent means (legal chain of custody, witnesses, etc . . . ). Finally, it would be necessary that the person who allegedly signed the document is either a party to your scheme, can be bought/intimidated into silence, or is otherwise unavailable or discredited (e.g., missing, mentally unsound, dead, or otherwise unreachable for comment).

That's hypothetically speaking, of course. We all know that document forgery never happens in the real world - especially in business and/or politics.

And if yer buyin' that last bit, lad, I have a wee bridge I think I'll be sellin ye . . . . <grin>

neverforget · Vice Admiral Joined: 18 Jul 2004 Posts: 875

If CBS transcribed from a written document, then how did they get a signature on it? Oh, they forged it?
_________________
US Army Security Agency
1965-1971

You GottaBeKidding · Rear Admiral Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 692

I think the signature is forged. The signature on the CBS docs doesn't look at all like the ones on the released Bush docs.

Sonar5 · Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:49 pm Post subject:

Tacan70UDN · PO2 Joined: 05 Sep 2004 Posts: 392

In my experience in the AF (67-79), memos for record were not put on letterhead stationery, nor was the unit name and address typed in. Also, since they were normally temporary documents for the drafter's use only, a signature block wasn't necessary - - they were usually initialed, not signed. Those on CBS don't look right to me.