Something that seems to have been missed.

[Mr.Vicchio]

http://rathergate.com/
here ya go, have a read. Make sure you hit this link as well:

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze6vxcr/

Since I seem to not be able to find anything about... oh just about the hottest topic on the web, I thought I would get you peeps up to speed, you might like this one, its a Consperiacy Theory from the right. Only, it actually looks to have some real truth behind it.

1. LAST Wednesday, CBS's 60 Minutes, with Dan Rather brought forth "new" documents about Bush's TANG service. These were Memo's from his CO at the time, personal files. He also had on Ben Barnes, former Texas Lt.Governor who in 1999 UNDER OATH testified that he not once helped the Future President get into the Guard on behalf of the Bush Family. But on 60 Minutes, his story changed. Whats worse, his own flesh and blood daughter has come out calling her father a straight up liar. It doesn't help that he's one of Kerry's biggest financial backers AND good friend of the Canidate....

2. The memo's in question, within hours of the story being aired, have been proven as forgeries. CBS and Dan Rather refuse to admit, or accept this, and have been stonewalling and fighting these charges left and right. One can only wonder as to why. One theory is that the Source is the Kerry Camp. That looks more and more likely, but whats more, the they may be pandering to thier own core LeftWing Audience and refusing to admit they were duped/lied.

3. This has been big news on the web, TV and radio... what are ya'lls thoughts?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Oh, I forgot to mention the Lt.Col listed in the memos.. he died in '84. His wife, his son(who served with him)both say the memo's are BS, his father didn't keep such records.

Also one of the major sources for the story, a TANG General, said CBS lied to him, they claimed the memo's were handwritten and quoted him, over the phone, excerpts from the memo's... now that he has seen them, he says that they are Forgeries and garbage.

CBS's Expert? A HANDWRITTING ANAYLIST. They claim there were typewritters that could have produced the print in question in 72. They are correct, at an adjusted 16-24k a pop. Highly unlikely that a TANG Lt. Col. would have had a 16k Typewritter to write memo's to himself on....

Anyhoots catch up the story, since it seems to have passed people by....

[bishop]

3. This has been big news on the web, TV and radio... what are ya'lls thoughts?

i'm pretty much worn out from the bullshit from both sides on the general issue of vietnam.

the only thing that has been clear since day one was that kerry volunteered to fight and bush volunteered to campaign. aside from that, i could give a damn at this point.

how about talking about something relavent to the issues that most people are concerned about?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Ahhh Bishop, your as transparent as Dan Blather.

The story here isn't Bush's Guard Service. But you won't admit that.

The story here isn't the charges agaisnt the President. But you won't admit that.

The sotry here is the most blatent display of Bias by a MainStream News Organization. But you want to talk about issues right?

You don't want to discuss why CBS News, and Dan Blather refuse to even show anyone the ORIGINAL memo's because doing so would allow the 100% proof they are forgeries.

Well Bishop, hate to break it to you, but whose Keeping Vietnam in the Spotlight? JFK and the DNC. Did you hear about "Operation Fortunate Son"? DNC is launching a nationwide attack saying in '78 Bush put out fliers saying he served both in the AF and the TANG. They are using that as proof he lies about his serivice. Guess what? This massive attack just got derailed. Hard Core. Bush spent 120 days active duty AF.

JFK wasted his convention talking about what a war hero he was, and THAT is Veitnam is the topic and the issues of the day. go bitch at him, not me.

I am just playing by thier rules.

[bishop]

The story here isn't Bush's Guard Service. But you won't admit that. The story here isn't the charges agaisnt the President. But you won't admit that. The sotry here is the most blatent display of Bias by a MainStream News Organization. But you want to talk about issues right?

huh? since when was i the spokesperson for dan rather/cbs news/democrats/etc.?

for all the bias supposedly in the media, they all almost unanimously said bush gave a kickass speech during the convention even though he didn't really say anything either substantive or new. and even in cases like where the 9/11 commission says that iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, people like cheney are prancing around trying to persuade people that the opposite is true - and the media isn't saying anything about it. they also aren't saying much about the lines of bullshit we were fed about wmd, only to learn AFTER THE FACT that we got our disinformation from the right-wing israelis, chalabi and and informant named grapefruit or whatever his name was..

you allege that the media's always picking on your emporer, i'll allege that they haven't been picking on him enough - and on the topics that truly matter.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Yeah even Lionel (rdio lefty makesme sick listening to him) said Bush gave a great speech. Hated the content, but was well delivered.

Link proving your lie that Cheney is saying Iraq had anything to do with 9/11? Come on, I hear this one all the time, Bush, Cheney none of them EVER have or did claim Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. They HAVE said, and the 9/11 commission admitted it was beyond thier perview, that Al-Quada and Iraq did have connections and meetings.

What topics? Emporer? AHH thats why you see the media not biased, you look to the right to stalin. Anyway, when you can prove the above I will tear apart the rest of your post.

[harumscarum]

Click on the first video on this article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5233810/

I think I saw somewhere (probaly Daily Show) show one clip where Bush says there is no connection and then showed a snippet from that video.

I am not sure what the debate is here. Is it to point out that the CBS is lying?

[Mr.Vicchio]

No... its worse then lying.

CBS News pulled 4 memo's from a dead Officers "personal files" that the family says are BS, that claim Bush violated a direct order, among other things, and within hours of the show airing, the Bloggers refuted the memo's as forgeries.

After that.. it all goes down hill for CBS. The real kicker here is, that if the memo's are, as just about every one is saying aside CBS and maybe Terry McAullife, that the memos are fake, then CBS is going to be forced to provide the source of the memo's.

Here's the catch, its all most certain that the DNC/Kerry Camp provided the Memo's.....

Do you see the problem here? CBS was given Fake information from the DNC/Kerry Camp.... a serious personal attack, based on a lie.

What do you think that would do for Senator Kerry? Nothing good.

Oh and it further discredits CBS News.

That no one here has a freaking clue whats going on with this story is almost, but not quite, a shock to me.

[Scribbler1]

I've heard about it and it disturbs me, but maybe not for the same reasons.
First, how was this memo dismissed as a fraud so quickly, and even before a lot of the public even HEARD about it? To use Word to fabricate a 30 year old memo is just plain stupid, even for a politician. I hate to admit it, but not ALL campaign strategists and advisors are morons, and if this is a fake it would be beyond moronic to spring that on the public, especially when both sides are taking apart the other side's accusations and "proof" atom by atom. It's TOO easy, and that makes it suspect. And just because it was GIVEN to the Kerry people means little. It's WHO gave it to THEM we should be looking into.
There is a man in NYC who is an internationally recognized typewriter expert. He keeps samples of typewriters dating back 100 years or more and is SO good the FBI has used him on several occasions. This guy could look at a document and tell you which machine the document was made on right down to a microscopic bit of missing ink due to a worn letter or a design quirk.
Now, if *I* know about this, I hate to think it is not known to Kerry's handlers, and if they did know they wouldn't even ATTEMPT to try and fool anyone, especially with Bush fans just itching to get something on Kerry.

There are two schools of thought on this. One, it is a fake, cooked up by Kerry's people or a Kerry supporter (like the SBVFT are Bush supporters). The other is that it was the BUSH re election team or a Bush supporter who made this easily spotted fake just so they could pin it on Kerry.
I'm of two minds on this but I lean toward the latter theory. You have to admit this IS a little Segretti-ish, seeing it was supposedly "exposed" so quickly.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Are you saying that the DNC and CBS are so easily fooled that a simple RNC fake memo can make such fools of them?

[Zeebadee]

"Do you see the problem here? CBS was given Fake information from the DNC/Kerry Camp.... a serious personal attack, based on a lie."

That's odd. You don't seem to mind at all that Bush started a war based on false information and lies. Thousands are dead because of that, how many have died because of the false CBS info??

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, Are you saying that the DNC and CBS are so easily fooled that a simple RNC fake memo can make such fools of them?

Sure, they're fools already, so why not? But we don't really know the whole story and the memo may have been pretty well done. I can assume the DNC will do anything they can to get Kerry in the WH, and the RNC isn't above that stuff either. But I think CBS wouldn't toss their credibility into the wind so easily just for the sake of Kerry. CBS will be there regardless of WHO wins and they are looking out for the eye more then these two bums.

Oh, and BTW, your two links are garbage. That Rathergate site is a collection of blog posts with a lot of "ABC sent this in" crap. With all the right wing ads in it, I'm surprised you even bothered to post it. If that site was anti Bush you would have rightfully dismissed it as partisan gibberish. I am surprised.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Scribbler, rathergate was just a collection site. Guess who started the whole contraversy? Bloggers. The NET caught CBS in a lie. Fox, ABC NBC The Washington Post and the AP have ALL picked this story up. The fact that almost NO ONE on this forum has been following this story just proves I am right.

This thing is all over the news.... an gyou guys haven't even been debating the hottest topic out there on the rest of the web. Amazing.

Here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

By Michael Dobbs and Howard Kurtz Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, September 14, 2004; Page A08 The lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush's former squadron commander in the National Guard said yesterday that he examined only the late officer's signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves. "There's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them," Marcel Matley said in a telephone interview from San Francisco. The main reason, he said, is that they are "copies" that are "far removed" from the originals.

[bishop]

Anyway, when you can prove the above I will tear apart the rest of your post.

key word professor: persuade.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Bishop, you took the fact ABC CBS and NBC gave Bush good marks for giving a good speech, cause on a TECHNICAL basis alone, not content, but delivery, it was a good speech, as proof there is no bias in the media....

Your judgement is seriously in question.

Lionel, a New England based I do believe, late night LIBERAL talk show host on AM Radio, Gave Bush praise for his speech in terms of delivery.... really congradualated him for it. But then proceeded to explain the Bush message was crap and out of touch with America blah blah blah.. Does that mean he's pro-Bush? or just more honest then you?


I give Michael Moore credit for being able to tap into the Left wing hate, and to stoke in ways few people could.

By your own hosed logic, I am pro-moore. Which.. is about as far from the truth as you could get, the mans a menace, but that doesn't stop me from being able to give credit when its due.

Just admit it, unless a media source views every last thing Bush does as the worst thing in the world, you would consider it "unbiased".

"Oh, they said something good about Bush, they aren't biased!"

Your so hopelessly blinded by your own hate its not funny.

www.democraticunderground.com Go join them, thier your kinda people.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, Scribbler, rathergate was just a collection site.   Guess who started the whole contraversy?   Bloggers.   The NET caught CBS in a lie.  Fox, ABC NBC The Washington Post and the AP have ALL picked this story up.   The fact that almost NO ONE on this forum has been following this story just proves I am right. This thing is all over the news.... an gyou guys haven't even been debating the hottest topic out there on the rest of the web.  Amazing.  Here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer By Michael Dobbs and Howard Kurtz Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, September 14, 2004; Page A08 The lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush's former squadron commander in the National Guard said yesterday that he examined only the late officer's signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves. "There's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them," Marcel Matley said in a telephone interview from San Francisco. The main reason, he said, is that they are "copies" that are "far removed" from the originals.

And further down in the quote another expert says that an IBM Selectric could have made the documents. So what? It's just another example of two sides bringing out "experts" with different opinions. It's another "swift boat" kind of he said/she said and if that's the best you can find at this point, don't get excited just yet only because it's potentially damaging to Kerry.

The thing I find most amusing has nothing to do with this so-called controvrsy at all. It's incredible to me that the same guy who was dismissing critical stories about Bush from news sources and stating that ANYTHING from a site that ends in ".org" is not credible now is presenting a BLOG as a factual source.

I see nothing to debate at this point. I'm sure you will keep it going but I simply don't care until a little more credible evidence comes along, and since I'm sick of people making noises about ancient history to deflect attention away from what Bush is doing NOW I don't think I'll lose any sleep about it if and when it DOES become debateable.

[Mr.Vicchio]

You see nothing to debate?

What else is wrong with the memo's? Signature is in the wrong place, CBS won't divulge the source OR allow outside experts to see the originals.

The story is about CBS being CAUGHT by the web blogs in an obvious lie. If the memo's are real, why won't they release the orignals to the world? Why won't they allow non-partisan experts to examine the memos at length to prove the claims are BS?


And you see nothing to debate? I thought this was a "heated debate" forum... my bad, its a cheerleading board for the Hate Bush crowd.

No wonder the big controversy of the past 7 days has been ignored here...

[Mr.Vicchio]

http://www.flounder.com/bush

This is an analysis from an no kidding expert on the issue of fonts and forensics. The guys one of the top 3 people in the world for this sort of thing.

I am one of the pioneers of electronic typesetting. I was doing work with computer typesetting technology in 1972 (it actually started in late 1969), and I personally created one of the earliest typesetting programs for what later became laser printers, but in 1970 when this work was first done, lasers were not part of the electronic printer technology (my way of expressing this is “I was working with laser printers before they had lasers”, which is only a mild stretch of the truth). The probability that any technology in existence in 1972 would be capable of producing a document that is nearly pixel-compatible with Microsoft’s Times New Roman font and the formatting of Microsoft Word, and that such technology was in casual use at the Texas Air National Guard, is so vanishingly small as to be indistinguishable from zero.

And there is nothing to debate...

I guess Is hould start a athread about how Bush tried to kill some NASCAR driver somewhere... that gets Volconvo forums all in heavy debate.. but a no sh!t story about a mjor news organization pushing forged documents as real being debunked by the web is...

no big deal...

[RickSp]

I really couldn't give a rat's ass about young Georgie and Johnnie's adventures of 35 years ago.

What seems to have been missed here is that we have lost the war in Iraq, politically and militarilly, our soldiers are dying in ever greater numbers for absolutely nothing and we are sinking deeper and deeper into the quagmire. Iraq does remind me of Vietnam - both are wars we should never have gotten into and have/had no hope of winning.

Somehow today's war should be more important than the available fonts on an IMB Selectric 35 years ago.

[Technosoul]

Memo or no memo it is none-the-less a known reality that the Bush family pulled strings to keep Bush Jr. in Texas during the Nam war and everyone knows that he was a goof off during his stay in the National Guard and everyone knows that most of the reports kept by the military that were negative came up "missing in action".

If it can be honestly proven that CBS made a misstake during a news report they always correct that error on a future broadcast.

To think that Dan Rather is using his 60 min program to bash Bush with a false conspiracy theory is totally false.

Technosoul.