Got anything to back that up besides far-left op/ed? That carries no more weight than the far-right spin that Dan did it all himself and/or that CBS News ran the story because they are anti-Bush. It's not about that, it's about whether a major news organization flubbed a story.
You got anything besides far-right loony distraction attempts? It *IS* certainly about if they flubbed a story, but that doesn't suddenly mean that the issues themselves are suddenly moot. Regardless of if thats a repug/nazi wet-dream thought up by Karl Rove! Yeah - if somebody faked something. Take them to the mat. But we can't also take our eye off the ball regarding the chickenhawk-in-chiefs honesty and moral character (or lack of such).
("He's simple, he's dumb, he's the pilot") It's too easy an accusation to make, though. It would be a dangerous variant of a Karl Rove classic: This would be simply over the top, ambition beyond ambition, an artistic testament to the contempt in which Rove holds the American people. Nonetheless, the GOP's Jim Dyke only does the Kerry camp a favor when he accuses the Democrats of generating the scandalous pages; if he has proof and is withholding it, well, that would be a testament to the contempt in which the GOP holds the American people. When we get down to the line of, "The documents are forged but they say what they would say if they were real" .... The real bummer for the GOP's standing in history will come if 2008 is less bizarre than this, as it would demonstrate that electoral kinkiness is what Bush brought. Of course, since he's given to Rove, we shouldn't hold Dubya accountable. After all, the President is proud of being suspended from flight status. (Does nobody else notice the surreal perversity of this cycle? It's above and beyond, and unfortunately, since it's a season without integrity, favors Republicans.) ___________________ • MSNBC. "Countdown with Keith Olbermann". September 14, 2004. See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6010425/
The L.A. Times is far right? Come on. But that's fine, you agree with me that something was faked here. If you want to go on to express an opinion about what the "ball" is that we need to be focused on, I don't have a problem with that. I don't agree -- I think we can look at BOTH -- but I believe that everything in that report is truth, EXCEPT for the documents. The secretary's testimony that her boss did feel that way is convincing enough to me.
By the way, I was messing around in Word to see if I would get the same results as the animated GIF I posted above, and in doing so I realized something really amusing: The forger didn't even bother to change the default Word margins! It's 1.25" left/right! I've always thought it strange that Word does that, because I'd always been told to use a 1" margin, and I know they still teach that in a lot of places. Word used to BE 1" all around, but changed somewhere around version 5 or 6 as I dimly recall. Pretty funny.
The Wikipedia has an excellent page now outlining the case that the memos were forged. It's extremely thorough with tons of links. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_memos
Bush's military record has been under the microscope for a while now. these accusations of favouritism and AWOLing are nothing new this presentation of forgeries (at worst) and highly doubtful documents (at best) is what the story is so now CBS are repeating the old accusations that were out before they "broke" the "Killian memo" story... that's their defense? good one
A follower in spirit, if not in detail, of Joseph Goebbels - Karl Rove or his lacky's could indeed easily be behind this. Because Bush is a moron, people make the mistake of assuming the entire administration is inept. This is far from true - Rove is brilliant at what he does, completely lacking morals - but brilliant.
finally, after a 2-3 articles this week in which fuzzy warm gloves were used in handling this matter, even CNN decided that it was time to tell the truth. this article's title is still soft but a little more accurate: CBS News under fire on Guard memos
Hmmmm, from all I've been reading in the press -- its seeming even more likely now that Rove actually composed and released these things!
His history of doing exactly this. Here a friend wrote/Blogged this about a year ago - and there is a lot more evidence now. I'm about to walk out the door but I can hit you up with more stuff later if you so desire/require. -------------------------------------------------- Karl "The Snake" Rove is one name that has been coming up over and over again in the investigation of alleged White House leaks of a CIA operative to at least 6 reporters is Bush’s Senior Political Adviser Karl Rove(The president's pet name for him is "Turd Blossom"). However, there are many precedents for Rove playing these political games in the past. I have been surprised that more coverage hasn’t linked these past transgressions and paralleled them with this new information. There are several reasons that the public should suspect Rove of being behind these leaks, and all of these reasons would certainly warrant the investigation starting in his office. Why should you believe that Rove was behind the CIA leaks? Reason #1 In 1970, the New York Daily News reports that Rove campaigned for Alan Dixon, a Democratic candidate for state treasurer of Illinois. Of course, Rove was only there to infiltrate the campaign and to do everything he could to make sure that they would lose to the Republican candidate. He decided the best way to derail Dixon’s campaign was to use Dixon’s campaign letterhead to send out one thousand copies of an invitation to a fictional party that promised “free beer, free food, girls and a good time for nothing.” Rove’s stunt caught the attention of many Republican lawmakers, one of which was George H.W. Bush, who had at the time held a high position for the Republican National Committee. Needless to say, Bush must have been impressed because he later hired Rove. Reason #2 The Austin Chronicle reports that in 1986 Rove was working for Bill Clements, a republican running for Governor of Texas against the incumbent Democrat Mark White. A debate between the two candidates was only days away, and Rove decided to stick a listening device inside a needlepoint of an elephant that he had on his wall (at least we know he has good taste, who among us does not have a needlepoint on our wall). He called the FBI to report that his office had been bugged, and before the investigation was able to take its course, the debate took place under charges that the incumbent democrat had bugged the office of the republicans. Of course this wasn’t true. Rove had planted the device. Still, White was so busy trying to fend off questions about the bugging that he was really unable to focus on relevant policy issues. Reason #3 Guerilla News reports that in 1992, Rove was working for the senior Bush. However, he was fired after he leaked criticisms of George H.W. Bush's campaign fund raising chief, Robert Mosbacher. Do you know who Rove leaked this story to, that’s right, Robert Novak. For those of you that don’t know, Novak is the only reporter of the six that were leaked to that reported the CIA operatives name. This is probably the best reason to believe that Rove is behind these CIA leaks. We know that he has a history of dirty politics, and of leaks, specifically leaks to Robert Novak. Also, Wilson said on Nightline that he has talked to reporters that he trusts that say that Rove was telling reporters even after the leak that Wilson’s wife, the CIA operative that was outed by the leak, was “fair game”. Even Guardian Unlimited reporter Julian Borger says, "Several of the journalists are saying privately 'yes it was Karl Rove who I talked to.'" Reason #4 This is my personal reason, and it is the least credible. I really, really, really despise Karl Rove. I have had a habit over the last few years of not being able to utter his name without immediately uttering, “He’s a snake” ( My apologies to all snakes). I have always just had a gut feeling about this guy. He looks rotten and slimy, and even though Amb. Joseph Wilson has backed off his original statement that he would like to see Karl Rove marched out of the White House in handcuffs; I personally would love to see Rove led out of the White House in handcuffs. The only difference between Ambassador Wilson and me is that I would rather see him dragged out of the White House kicking and screaming. I am sure he will have plenty of time to practice his love for needlepoint in prison.
The original documents would show if they were typed or not. Typewriters leave a physical impression in the paper, while laser printers deposit ink on top of the surface. If the democrats were responsible for forging these documents, wouldn't they have done their best to make them credible by leaving out modern attributes like superscript? It wouldn't be too difficult to go to a yard sale and get an old typewriter. On the other hand, if the 'cons are responsible, it seems like they would deliberately forge them on a computer, include modern clues in them, sneak into wherever they were hidden, replace the originals, and accuse the 'dems of forgery. If the memos are typed, then they were real, if they weren't typed, then they are 'con forgeries of real documents. In both cases, the information in them is real.
the simplest solution is often the right one. Hokum's Razor ... is it..? it was an attempt by an anti-Bush person or group, and it failed because of stupidity and incompetence. the same stupidity and incompetence you want to keep OUT of the white house
There are many anti-bush people, few of them are connect to Kerry, I see no evidence that Kerry was in on this.
I see no evidence that Kerry OR Bush were involved in this. I don't have a problem with people wanting to *believe* one of the two parties was involved. By all means, whatever floats your boat. But it's pure tin-foil-hat territory until some kind of evidence emerges.
Yep, thats the real bottom line. If they were forged - then whoever did that, neo-con or Democrat -- are scumbags. So lets just write them off and focus on the information, which is real.
Yes. As I've said all along, these documents are obvious forgeries and are evidence of gross incompetence on the part of CBS for not detecting them. Anyone one who has ever used a typewritter can see that these memos are bogus, why couldn't the "experts" at CBS? See this link for a side by side comparison of a real vs forged document: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/daily/graphics/guard_091404.html There's nothing new in the "information". Who cares whether Bush was here or there on this or that day? He, apparently, accumulated enough points to fulfill his requirements to the satisfaction of the National Guard since he recieved an honorable discharge. Without the memos proving favortism, there's no story here. But a major news organization trying to bring down a president using forged documents, that's a story.
