On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 16:35:04 -0700, "Gregory Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > um... > > > > bush guard national guard forgery...? > > Ok, just did a very quick googling about this and unless I'm reading > wrong, all of the forgery accusations were based on the "fact" that no > typewriter available at the time could have written the documents. But > that "fact" was debunked by many people citing IBM typewriter models > that could easily have been used to create the documents (and they were > typewriters sold primarily to government). Am I missing something? Was > there ever definitive evidence that the document were forged? As I > said, it was a very quick googling.
http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm -Jonathan -- C++ is history repeated as tragedy. Java is history repeated as farce. --Scott McKay /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
