On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 15:03:01 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 11 September 2004 06:12 am, R. Myles Green wrote:
>
> > > > Sorry, recent events have overtaken us. The Kerry operatives have
> > > > just hit an all-time logic deficit (not that the Bush campaign
> > > > won't catch up, politics being what it is): all who believe that a
> > > > document using current word processing techniques was typed in the
> > > > 1970's by a military officer who didn't know how to type (per his
> > > > wife) please go to the end of the line and try again.
> > >
> > > Where'd we'd find the bush campaign huxters with their 'official'
> > > documents of his military record that uses a font that didn't exist
> > > at the time.
> >
> > http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2004/09/10/bush_memo040910.html
> >
> > I think you'll find that the "font" question is in reference to the
> > same documents Collins was talking about, according to the article at
> > the above link. At least, that's what I got from article.
>
> You can see the same phenomenon in official Bush military records,
> released by Bush himself in February.. Go to
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm
>
> and open "Miscellaneous." On page three of that pdf (you'll have to
> rotate it), on the second line is a superscript "th." It's dated 4 Sep
> 68. On the ninth line is a non-superscript "th." So, go figure.
> --
That may well be. It would be interesting to see a comparison of the
superscript "th" in each of these documents.
The suspicious facts about the current series of documents as I see
them are these:
1. The wife of the man who purportedly produced these documents says
that her husband was not a typist. The likelihood that a non-typist
military person had access to what would have to have been an
extremely expensive proportional font superscript model of typewriter
at that time is at the very least extremely suspicious. I have also
heard reports (but cannot document) that proportional space
typewriters of that era did not maintain the extreme regularity of
proportional spacing that we associate with current word processing
output, most especially in the hands of a non-typist with no signs of
whiteout or corrections.
2. The son of this man says that his father was not a person who kept
personal notes of his military activities. He preferred to keep things
in his head.
3. Another person associated with the National Guard in those days has
stated that the very presence of these documents violates standard
National Guard procedures that require(d) personal memos related to an
officer leaving the service be (1) substantiated and entered into the
official record or (2) destroyed. Once again it appears highly
unlikely that an officer who expressed nothing but glowing comments
about George W. Bush in other contexts would squirrel away this sort
of document for use later in strict violation of the military code.
4. According to the wife and son, they expressed considerable doubt
that these documents were the work of their husband/father when
contacted by 60 minutes before publication of the presentation.
5. There are also irregularities in the presentation of the man's
military title that contrast with his use of tile in other documents.
I'll leave the rest to documentation verification experts.
Unlike the publication of the Swift Boat Veterans' documents (formally
attested by sworn statement of 200 veterans), the only people who can
attest to the veracity of this document are either MIA (known only to
CBS) or known to have doubts about the documents.
There is also the related matter of the book recently published
purporting to reflect the comments of Sharon Bush (Neal's ex-wife)
about George W.'s behavior while his father was President. Sharon has
refuted the content of the expose.
I'm not 100% in favor of George W. Bush, but I can't stand this type
of campaigning. It is inexcusable and also not likely to win converts
to the Democratic Party or to John Kerry. At least, the Republican
Party is not taking action to attempt to prevent publication of this
material as did the Democratic Party in the case of the Swift Boat
Veterans. I'll vote for an open exchange of ideas any time.
--
/\/\
(CR) Collins Richey
\/\/ "I hear you're single again." "Spouse 2.0 had fewer bugs than
Spouse 1.0, but the maintenance ... was too much for my OS."
- Glitch (tm)
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsub/Pause/Etc -> http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
