Bushs War Record

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by ponybilt, Sep 9, 2004.

  1. ponybilt

    ponybilt Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    511
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chicago
    OK, all the new records were out this morning, so this is hardly new -- but what doesn't the 'liberal' media report?

    How about the actual memo ordering Bush's suspension from the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron "due to failure to perform to USAF/TexANG standards and failure to meet annual physical examination (flight) as ordered."

    How about the fact that Bush refused a direct order from a superior?

    While the Bush campaign insists it's released all of the records, things like this continue to be exposed to the public. But McClellen says "These are the same old recycled attacks.."

    Except that the proof is irrefutable.
     
  2. Pecker

    Pecker Retired Moderator
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2002
    Messages:
    83,922
    Likes Received:
    34
    That 'irrefutable proof' may very well be forgery. Let's see how we feel after it has been investigated.
     
  3. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you have evidence to back up this assertion? (Incidentally, the memos have already been investigated!)


    In order to be forgeries:

    (1) The White House would have to be a co-conspirator in forging evidence against its own occupant. After all, they released the same documents that CBS reported last night (and that are linked in Ponybilt's post.)

    (2) The forger would have had to have access to a 1969-ish Selectric Composer to produce that document.

    (3) The forger would have had to have access to Killian's signature and be able to reproduce it accurately.

    (4) Although Killian himself is deceased, other people mentioned in his memos are not. The forger would have had to secure their cooperation -- otherwise, they could come forth to say, "I never said that!"

    I have seen speculation posted on the Internet that the documents 'had to be' forged because the documents use a proportional-space font similar to what you'd find in a modern word processor. (Other nit-picks include the appearance of superscripts in the typed document.)

    That speculation is easily debunked: Typewriters capable of producing the typography shown in these documents have been around at least as early as 1941. By 1972, they were widely available -- too pricey still for the average user, but not too pricey for the $700-for-a-hammer armed forces of the time.
     
  4. ponybilt

    ponybilt Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    511
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chicago
    Yes, of course there are questions of the authenticity of these documents. And Mindseye points out significant factors that dispel this.

    Additionally, retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, a Republican and the immediate superior of the documents' author (Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian), told CBS that "these are the things that Killian had expressed to me at the time."

    "These documents represent what Killian not only was putting in memoranda, but was telling other people," Hodges said.

    Hodges is a Republican who acknowledged that he did not want to hurt Bush.

    Read it here
     
  5. LuckyLuke

    LuckyLuke New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    1
    Regarding the issue of forgeries based upon analysis of the fonts and kerning, some people are apparently unaware that IBM introduced proportional fonts in the mid 1940's on their electric typewriters - exactly the type of machines used by IBM's largest customer - the US military.

    On the shoddy basis of that particular analysis that I've seen some of the more fanatical rightwingers make, would make the majority of US Military documents of that era forgeries.

    I've certainly been following the issue of Bush and his TANG records for a couple of years now. What I find especially amusing (I'm jaded, I admit) is that during the 2000 campaign, the Bush people insisted that ALL relevant records had been released. Then four or six months ago, another batch of records was released to counter the growing controversy. Again it was asserted that ALL the relevant records had been released. Now we get some more records - I'm sure that Mr. Bush & company will AGAIN assert that ALL records have been released, despite the fact that there are still a whole lot of missing records here.

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why Bush skipped his physical at that time since that time frame matches up with the "alleged" era of Bush's cocaine usage.
     
  6. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    A separate news agency from CBS has verified the authenticity of the documents cited in CBS's report, but gives coverage to spokemen on both sides of the issue.
     
  7. MASSIVEPKGO_CHUCK

    MASSIVEPKGO_CHUCK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    28,037
    Likes Received:
    737
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    the pain behind your eyes
    Since I only recently heard about this tidbit of info, I'll have to wait for further developements on it, but it right off the top of my head, it seems right now to be very plausible.
     
  8. LuckyLuke

    LuckyLuke New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, giving "coverage to spokesmen [sic] on both sides of the issue" is how the largest mass media outfits in the USA appear to define "journalism" these days. Sounds more like providing a platform to me. Journalism requires active and critical judgement on the part of the journalist. Without it, they are merely typists or stenographers with pretty hair, nice teeth and fat salaries.

    One can only imagine the actions of the present US media practices if something like Watergate were to come to light in today's day and age. I'm certain the media would put up an even greater fight against covering that story than they did back in 1973/74. The very term "investigative journalism" sounds like a contradiction of terms nowadays.
     
  9. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    The problem is that they think covering spokesmen from both sides is balanced when it still requires a little skepticism. I mean, it's like how Republicans claim that global warming's junk science because there's debate about the timeline. Of course there's debate about the timeline; that's how science works! (Right now we're experiencing within our lifetimes things which should be in geologic time.)
     
  10. BobLeeSwagger

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    I'd like both sides to just stop talking about Vietnam altogether. I think both have been investigated to death about this. Why are we still fighting a war three decades later? While I think that in general Kerry has the high road on this, he made a big mistake in emphasizing his military service so much. That doesn't impress most of the population these days. Even those who greatly respect him for it know that it doesn't trump all other issues.

    Likewise, Bush is already the president. Voters have had more than four years to decide whether a rich boy's evasion of the draft is a negative for them. I find it hard to believe that Bush's voters in 2000 are now going to be dissuaded by the "shocking" revelation that he got special treatment. It's common knowledge at this point and all of the attention distracts from time when the Democrats could be concentrating on real issues, like why Kerry would be a better president. Bush doesn't need to convince people he's strong on the military because he's already conned people into that. He can afford to break even on this issue and concentrate on scare tactics instead. I really think that the longer this media obsession with Vietnam continues, the more it helps Bush.
     
  11. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
  12. ponybilt

    ponybilt Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    511
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chicago

    Yes, it's sad that "journalism" has degraded to this point. Ted Koppel pointed out last week that there's a difference between FACT and TRUTH: The fact that someone said something ("Ted Koppel is an alcoholic flight attendant") is reported as being said. Nothing more. Therefore, the public forms an opinion based on that statement, without benefit of the facts. He actually advocated that this was OK to do. The guest that evening was so shocked he couldn't even respond (which is what happens all too frequently when people make stupid, unsupported comments like, "Ted Koppel is an alcoholic flight attendant" making it even more likely that the facts disappear). I would've told him that yes, it's an accurate assessment of what happens, however it's irresponsible, lazy, and unethical.
     
  13. jdoe86

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,722
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    523
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunnyvale (CA, US)
    If it is a forgery.. who did it? I wouldn't put it past the Bush team to "plant" the document so that they could later "prove" it was false to make Kerry look bad. Just like you know they will capture Osama just days before the election..
     
  14. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    I see you've watched the Osama bin Lotto movie.
     
  15. SpeedoGuy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    4,229
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Planted or not, you've got a point there. Its likely that Kerry would take some fallout if the letter proves to be a forgery. It's exactly the kind of trick Karl Rove would pull. In either case, it would certainly make CBS look bad.

    One wonders whether a broadcast company as wealthy and influential as CBS had the foresight to thoroughly verify the authenticity of the memo before making it public. Maybe, mabye not. It could be CBS just rushed to print with it to scoop the competition. Who knows?

    SG
     
  16. LuckyLuke

    LuckyLuke New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    1
    One of the interesting and often overlooked points about this current dispute regarding the "CBS Memos" is that the Whitehouse initially acknowledged that they presumed that the memos were genuine.

    Regardless if these documents were forgeries, they apparently contain content that the Whitehouse was not confident in disputing. This is rather interesting.
     
  17. MASSIVEPKGO_CHUCK

    MASSIVEPKGO_CHUCK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    28,037
    Likes Received:
    737
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    the pain behind your eyes
    What's really amazing about this is that people were warned there would trouble if this was brought to light, yet it was ignored.
     
  18. Pappy

    Pappy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Outta Here

    I read somewhere on the net the other day that Pakistan is holding bin Laden and was going to release him to US officials 3 weeks before the election. Will be interesting to see how that plays out.
     
  19. jdoe86

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,722
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    523
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunnyvale (CA, US)
    Did you notice how Bush never came out and publicly renounced the memo? He was waiting for someone independent to prove it was a forgery. If he came out when the story broke, it would have made him look like he was a whiner. Also, if someone really wanted to forge this memo and make it look realistic, they would have used a typewriter from that era and spent more time making it look "real". The way it was done made you think that they wanted it to be found out as a forgery. (Am I making sense here?). As for Osama.. I don't care how good you are at hiding, why didn't he come out with a video on September 11th like his right hand man? That's because they already have him. I still feel that Bush and his administration knew more about what was happening on September 11th that they have stated. His approval rating soared right after.. Planned and just got out of control?
     
  20. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Actually, most of New York City agrees with you.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted