TypicalFish 0 #26 September 11, 2004 QuoteIf you all think back, NBC's "DATELINE" deliberately falsified tests in an "investigative report" about the dangers of gas-tank explosions in various models of pickup trucks, in the mid-'90s. The reality did not fit their fantasy desires, and the trucks did not explode spectacularly like they had hoped, so rather than spike the story, they GOOSED THE TRUCKS WITH INCENDIARY DEVICES TO [I]MAKE[/I] THE EXPLOSIONS HAPPEN, and then "reported" on it! Didn't someone also do something similar (I can't remember which news show) with the rollover dangers of Suzuki Samurais? I seem to remember they weighted one side of the vehicle... Suzuki had to completely redesign their product line."I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #27 September 11, 2004 These seem to be pretty obvious fakes. What if the Bush camp made them/leaked them to some gullable Dems and ...........? The superscript is an unforgiveable error.....maybe a little too obvious.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #28 September 11, 2004 ROFLMFAO. Yes, I did get this bit of information. It seems the CBS flunkies are going to defend themselves with rhetoric vice come clean. Expect to see this spun by the left in major ways. CBS using forged documents. The TODAY show planning a nice 3 day extravaganza for Kitty Kelly's new anti-Bush book. How many days did they devote to the BEST SELLING authors of UNFIT FOR COMMAND? Oh. Just wondering. The left-media is just enraged that their candidate isn't leading in the polls. They are showing their true colors far more clearly - and costing themselves more and more viewers. Brings a tear to the eye, it does. Long live FOX NEWS - Fair and Balanced. Of course, because it's news without the left-leaning-bias, the libbies CLAIM it's biased towards the right..... LMFAO. Let Rather keep shooting himself in the foot. He'll soon lose what few viewers he has left. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #29 September 11, 2004 QuoteThese seem to be pretty obvious fakes. What if the Bush camp made them/leaked them to some gullable Dems and ...........? The superscript is an unforgiveable error.....maybe a little too obvious.... If I make up a document to fraudulently incriminate myself or indict my own character, and it's all lies that I concocted, and I leave it accessible on the table, and you discover it and publicize it, never checking or verifying it to find out the FACT that it was a fraud -- you just are so very happy that it puts me in a bad light -- and then I expose the fact that it's all fake, you should rightly be discredited, because no matter what the actual source, your responsibility is to verify facts before publicizing them. I think they call this a "sting" operation -- and I'm not saying that the Republicans in fact did this -- but it would be awful funny to have caused Democrats, through their leftist accomplices in the media, to screw themselves with their own hyper-eagerness to make Republicans look bad. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #30 September 11, 2004 QuoteLong live FOX NEWS - Fair and Balanced. Of course, because it's news without the left-leaning-bias, the libbies CLAIM it's biased towards the right.... Reminds me of what happens to spatial orientation when flying in clouds. If you gradually enter a bank, notice that you're turning, and correct to straight-and-level, you feel like you're in an opposite turn! The lefties are so used to thinking that leftist-slanted news is centrist, when they see centrist, they think it's right-leaning! --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InflightSupv 0 #31 September 11, 2004 AMEN!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdhill 0 #32 September 11, 2004 QuoteI hope they have something more than the fonts are similar and they used a good typewriter What the "experts" who are refuting the authenticity are saying is that there was not a typewriter available at the time that used the font in question, and that the word processers of the time were so costly that they would not have been available to the proported author, and even those may not have been able to produce certain features of the memo... The "experts" used by CBS have not commented on the discrepency... the font of a non-existant typewriter is better than a godd one, don't you think? I don't know if the document is real or not... but is seems suspect given what has been presented, and given CBS's unwillingness to disclose its verication methods... what they have revealed is simply hearsay, and nothing more. If this were a trial, it would not go very far... JAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
newsstand 0 #33 September 11, 2004 I have no opinion on th edocuments one way or the other but I find it interesting that the only statemnet I have heard from the Bush camp so far is "He was honorable discharged." No dispute of the documents, just the final dispostion of his term. "Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening." -- Oliver Wendell Holmes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #34 September 11, 2004 not weighing in on politics, but CBS has released another updateMy advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #35 September 11, 2004 Some days I wish we had internet cameras hooked up. I'd like to see Tuna's expression after reading the update.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #36 September 11, 2004 And? They're reiterating that they stand by the documents... of course, their handwriting "expert" is the same one that said Vince Foster's suicide note was authentic... Funny how they talk about their witnesses to how the Colonel acted and thought, when the Colonel's own widow and son say that he never kept notes like that... What officer is going to make a personal memo that shows that he is, basically, falsifying an official document?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #37 September 11, 2004 Quote I hope they have something more than the fonts are similar and they used a good typewriter! I know you read more of the story than that - you're just playing dumb for the right wingers here, right? It's been a long time since I briefly used an electric typewriter in high school to fill in some forms. Most do not have the ability to do sub or superscripts in a smaller font SIZE. Some may. I never saw one with a small TH key. The evidence doesn't look 100% as the stated experts claim, but it's pretty fishy stuff and they do know the subject better than I do. Rather's defense of it was rather circumspective as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #38 September 11, 2004 Found some more interesting info... clicky The sniff test on this whole thing is starting to smell worse and worse. Also consider the fact that the IBM Selectric was pretty new in the early 70's. I doubt that the military was going to be issuing them to ANG units willy-nilly. As a matter of fact, I can recall my squadron's orderly room still using some lever strike (like the old manual typewriters, but electric) in the late 80's.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #39 September 11, 2004 Quote"This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, interviews with former Texas National Guard officials and individuals who worked closely back in the early 1970s with Colonel Jerry Killian and were well acquainted with his procedures, his character and his thinking," the statement read. CBS needs to make their sources known before they can be considered unimpeachable. I don't see that much has changed. CBS is still standing by their story but seems to have offered no new evidence. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
boudy 0 #40 September 11, 2004 From CBS "Critics claim typewriters didn't have that ability in the 1970s. But some models did, Rather reported. In fact, other Bush military records already released by the White House itself show the same superscript – including one from as far back as 1968. Some analysts outside CBS say they believe the typeface on these memos is New Times Roman, which they claim was not available in the 1970s. But the owner of the company that distributes this typing style told CBS News that it has been available since 1931. " I'd like to see is the documents that the White House released with "th" subscript, as well as military documents produced circa 1973 which resemble the questioned font & spacing. Should be readily available. A side by side comparison between Bush's released docs & the memos CBS dug up would add traction to CBS's claim that the subscript was available & used by military personnel at the time. Likewise, producing uncontested military documents from that era with the same spacing & font characteristics as the memos would allow CBS to straight face their defense. Just saying the font was available doesn't quite cut it in my book. I guess we'll soon see if they can really back up their defense of the appearance of the docs. Other questions will remain given the conflicting testimony of those who knew alleged author. BTW - This is hardly a broad unified lib media conspiracy to fraudulently smear Bush CNN & NPR(heard them myself) & ABC (Drudge link) have been questioning the legitimacy of the docs - using their own experts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #41 September 11, 2004 Quote Also consider the fact that the IBM Selectric was pretty new in the early 70's. This is simply incorrect. The IBM Selectric first came to market in 1961. By 1970 they were as ubiquitous in offices around the world, including the military, as desk top computers are now. For instance, I learned to type on one when I was in the 8th grade and that would have been 1971 and no, this wasn't some "rich" school either. THE advantage of the IBM Selectric was that you could change the font as often as you liked. All you needed to do was flip a little lever on the ball, remove it and place a different one in its place. http://www.etypewriters.com/history.htm http://www.fact-index.com/i/ib/ibm_selectric_typewriter.htmlquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #42 September 11, 2004 You guys crack me up. You're all screaming about journalistic sensationalism and the media reporting things without checking it first. Then, you all repeat what you're hearing in the media about the typewriter that could do this not existing at the time, etc. Do any of you have any personal knowledge about this? If not, you're all just repeating something you heard from the media that you're busy blasting away at. I don't disagree that the media is poorly lacking in any fact checking standards but that cuts both ways. You all seem to blindly believe the media when they dispute this story from the media that you say is biased. I know for a fact that there were typewriters in the 1930's that were capable of dynamic spacing and superscript. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #43 September 11, 2004 Now I'm jealous! I learned (in 9th grade-1978) on THIS lovely gem! Seriously. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #44 September 11, 2004 Really? Sounds like GOP spin to me. Pot calling colors? Why wasn't the race over for GW when it was proven that SBVFT were connected to the White House? Whatever. Spin, more BS, yet again avoiding the issues._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #45 September 11, 2004 QuoteI am all excited about this just got this email. anybody else heard about it. Longtime Democratic strategist Pat Caddell said Friday that if documents aired by CBS newsman Dan Rather Wednesday night turn out to be forged, as alleged by experts, the presidential race "is over." clicky "Bouffard, the Ohio document specialist, said that he had first dismissed the Bush documents because the letters and formatting of the memos did not match any of the 4,000 samples in his database. But Friday, Bouffard said that he had not considered the IBM Selectric Composer. Once he compared the memos to Selectric Composer samples, Bouffard said, his view shifted." Strange that an "expert" could forget the IBM Selectric!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #46 September 12, 2004 QuoteTHE advantage of the IBM Selectric was that you could chan do was flip a little lever on the ball, remove it and place a different one in its place. And this is why you think the documents are authentic? Because you believe that the military clerks who typed them up flipped a lever, switched a ball, typed a superscripted "th," then flipped a lever, put back the original ball, and continued typing? Over and over? Some of you people seem ready to go to the death defending the claims of Rather, who is in all likelihood wrong about all of this, and shoveling horseshit to try to keep from having to admit it and look really stupid. But the excuses and rationalizations look even stupider. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #47 September 12, 2004 QuoteReally? Sounds like GOP spin to me. Pot calling colors? Why wasn't the race over for GW when it was proven that SBVFT were connected to the White House? Same reason Kerry's campaign's connections to MoveOn.org didn't end his run for president. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #48 September 12, 2004 Quote"Bouffard, the Ohio document specialist, said that he had first dismissed the Bush documents because the letters and formatting of the memos did not match any of the 4,000 samples in his database. But Friday, Bouffard said that he had not considered the IBM Selectric Composer. Once he compared the memos to Selectric Composer samples, Bouffard said, his view shifted." Strange that an "expert" could forget the IBM Selectric! There are experts on the left who forget that cops are equipped with "assault weapons" when they claim that "assault weapons" have no legitimate purpose but "to kill as many people as possible in as little time as possible." These experts forget that the police NEVER have a duty or authority to do just that. What I'd really like to find out is, regardless of whether this "record" could have been made by an IBM Selectric at the time, would it have been? i.e. surely there were other such records typed by the same people in the same office where Bush was serving: are their documents formatted the same? That would be about the most telling evidence we've seen so far. Why does it seem that no one is digging up the records of other servicemen who were in the same outfit as Bush and checking if they have superscripted "th" in their stuff as well? --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #49 September 12, 2004 Don't worry, bro. All of this will be over come November. Then we get to hear 4 years of bitching/griping/complaining/whining/moaning about how Bush is the second coming of Satan and how he's driving this country into the ground blah blah blah. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #50 September 12, 2004 QuoteQuote Also consider the fact that the IBM Selectric was pretty new in the early 70's. This is simply incorrect. The IBM Selectric first came to market in 1961. By 1970 they were as ubiquitous in offices around the world, including the military, as desk top computers are now. For instance, I learned to type on one when I was in the 8th grade and that would have been 1971 and no, this wasn't some "rich" school either. THE advantage of the IBM Selectric was that you could change the font as often as you liked. All you needed to do was flip a little lever on the ball, remove it and place a different one in its place. http://www.etypewriters.com/history.htm http://www.fact-index.com/i/ib/ibm_selectric_typewriter.html And again, *I* recall *MY* military unit still having some lever strike typewriters in our orderly room ca. 1985-1988, and that was an active duty AF unit. Do you REALLY believe that a GUARD unit 15 years prior is going to be issued what was, at the time, one of the newest and most advanced (for lack of a better word) typewriters on the market? I could see the Pentagon getting them, maybe, but not some small Texas ANG unit. Again, the smell test on this keeps getting fishier and fishier...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
