I know it is all deadly serious whether the CBS memos about Bush are fake or not but I think it is hilarious when any major news item attracts this kind of reporting:
Some former engineers who worked in the typewriter division said they were not aware of a standard typewriter that could have produced the Killian documents because the superscript letters in question were so rare. Robert A. Rahenkamp, a former I.B.M. manager who wrote a scholarly history on its typewriters for a company journal in 1981, said, "I'm not aware that we had any superscript technologies back in those days'' on standard proportional space typewriters. Bill Glennon, a technology consultant in New York who worked for I.B.M. in Midtown Manhattan for 14 years and repaired typewriters throughout that time, said that the Executive had proportional spacing and that its typebar could be fitted with superscript characters. Documents from the period show the Air Force tested the Selectric Composer as early as April 1969. But spokesmen for the National Guard and Texas Air National Guard said it was impossible to trace the machines that Colonel Killian's unit, the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron, or any unit, used so long ago. Mark Allen, chief of the external media division of the National Guard Bureau public affairs office, said there was no way to reconstruct the equipment or whether Colonel Killian typed the memos or had a clerk type them."...the Air Force tested the Selectric Composer as early as April 1969" - Classic. I am so glad that the US general election, the vote for who gets the nuclear bomb codes, is going to turn on the fact of whether the IBM Selectric Compostor model was in the Texas Air National Guard's secretarial pool or not. War, deficit, character of the candidates - nah, who needs to consider that stuff.
Comments
Ben - September 11, 2004 11:07 AM
It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know how dedicated people are to finding out the truth about what really matters. If only the government officials looking into abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay were as dedicated as those hard-working typewriter historians.
Flea - September 11, 2004 1:42 PM
I quote the Commissar:
"Somebody is trying to bring down the Bush administration with forged documents, and they have found plenty of allies in the media. Yes, that frightens me."
I share his opinion.
http://acepilots.com/mt/archives/001222.html
yoquiero - September 14, 2004 8:04 AM
just check it out--seems like proof to me. and anyone else with a semblance of a brain. http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/expert.htm
Alan - September 14, 2004 9:48 AM
Just to be clear - it is forged and badly forged. However, it will and would never have brought down the Bush administration. Brain semblances appear to be missing that fact.
SayNay? - September 14, 2004 4:25 PM
Believing it to be real, the Demos relied upon it to discredit Bush, and now it's a fake, then the Mooreist conspiracy theorists believe it must somehow have been produced by the Bush campaign as a "plant" to "set up" the Demos. Yeah, that's it!
I heard some crazy theory on MSNBC last evening that this forgery might have been produced by the Bush camp (!), in order to discredit the Demos, and expose CBS etc. Wouldn't this forgery then, be part of the "Michael Moore conspiracy theory" about Bush and his allies: they're so stupid, they're smart.
Alan - September 14, 2004 5:15 PM
I have not seen where the Democrats relied on it. Can you provide evidence of that? I saw where CBS and other media reported on it but where did it appear in a Kerry campaign statement? I understand that he has remained silent given its almost immediate impugning. I see many more "so called rightists" alleging all sorts or reliance on it as the above as a basis for saying "the left" are stooopid or "the left" are like Nixon (except that he was one of the right...). <p>You may ad links as that would kinda, you know, illustrate something...
SayNay? - September 14, 2004 6:59 PM
See, for instance: http://www.detnews.com/2004/politics/0409/13/politics-270377.htm
It is true that Kerry has not officially "commented" on the documents, but he has Cleland and party chair McAuliffe to try to "drown the kittens" for him.
Alan - September 14, 2004 7:05 PM
This passage is hardly supportive of what you are saying:<blockquote class="smalltext">Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe insisted in a meeting with reporters that Bush’s service as a 26-year-old lieutenant three decades ago remained relevant. “What I’ve continually said this is not about something that took place in Texas, Alabama, Boston over 30 years ago,” McAuliffe said. “This is about character, this is about credibility, the character and credibility of the president of the United States of America today.” </blockquote>The quoted also go to say this is a bit of evidence...which it is. It is bad evidence or forged evidence but they are not saying it is not forged. <p>In any event, it is a sideshow. Useless. The US Dems must have hired the Prairie Conservatives to plan their election run.