A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dan Rather forges ahead



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 12th 04, 01:53 AM
Jarg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...


Nothing to know. These were the real thing. The rest is just the usual
Neocon
spin.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


Keeping the faith, eh Kramer? You really have your head in the sand.

And I'm in the mood for a laugh so would you tell us again what a Necon is?

Jarg


  #12  
Old September 12th 04, 01:53 AM
Jack G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Nothing to know. These were the real thing. The rest is just the usual

Neocon
spin.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


And there you have it: The definitive word on document authentication from
the man who says if you were not a bomb toggeler in a B-26 in WW II ETO you
don't know anything or have the right to comment on military avation...

Jack G.


  #14  
Old September 12th 04, 02:10 AM
Steve Hix
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article %JM0d.23965$ni.13950@okepread01,
"Bob Coe" wrote:

I just don't see how a person like Dan Rather could be so easily duped by
these forgeries.


They're something that he desperately *wants* to believe, reasonable or
not.
  #15  
Old September 12th 04, 09:31 AM
John Keeney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tom Cervo" wrote in message
...
Flynn said it's "very unlikely" that the memos are legit, adding that
he knows of no typewriter fonts using proportionally spaced Roman type
with a raised "th" available in the 1970s.


Come off it, Dan, anyone who used a typewriter knew the trick of lifting

the
roller a smidge (or lowering it) for sub (or super) script. You must not

have
ever typed footnotes.


Haven't seen a copy of the "memo", hu?
The superscripted "th" is in a much smaller font size than the rest of
the document; the "th" used aprox the same horizontal space as each
digit in the number before it. *If* it was produced by a typewriter of
any vintage that used impact transfers of fixed characters, the
superscript "th" was a single character.


  #16  
Old September 12th 04, 11:01 AM
David Lentz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bob Coe" wrote in message
news:%JM0d.23965$ni.13950@okepread01...
"Ed Rasimus" wrote

But, the more important questions relate to why the commander is
writing memos about pressure from a superior who retired 18 months
earlier and hence was no longer above him.

Or, why is the commander ordering Bush for a physical just two weeks
into his 90 period of eligibility? Or, since when does a squadron
commander issue orders for flight physicals (they don't!)

Or why does the commander identify a CYA memo as a CYA? If you're
really trying to cover your ass you don't point it out in the subject
line.

Or, why is the commander writing orders to a subordinate that he has
already approved for temporary posting to another state in a unit
which at the time had no airplanes to fly and over which he had no
authority?

Or, why does the commander's wife and son deny that he could type,
that he was a memo writer or that he had any problem with Lt. Bush who
he had commended very publicly on the record the year before?


All of your points are right on the mark!

I just don't see how a person like Dan Rather could be so easily duped by
these forgeries. They weren't even originals! Hell even I can cut out

someone's
signature and put it on any letter I want with just a Xerox machine.

Today
I would just use my scanner and add it to my MS Word document.

No, I think Dan Rather was putting his reputation behind a known
forgery, to give it credence, and to hurt the Republican party. I hope
it now results in his finally being put out to pasture (which should have
happened 10 years ago anyway). Same with the other scum-bags on
60 minutes, who are always making a mountain out of a mole hill.


I see only two reasons Dan Rather would have swalllowed the Rathergate
memos. One Rather is stupid, or two Rather wanted to believe them. I opt
for the the latter. Rather is a paristan democrat and is shows.

David



  #19  
Old September 12th 04, 12:20 PM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


One of the obvious forgeries is posted at www.vivabush.org with a link
to another site with more of the same, plus a $10,500 reward for Tom
Cervo if he can re-create those documents with a 1972 typewriter.

Enjoy the site. I established it four months ago after reading some of
the slime posted on this newsgroup about Bush, whom I was then
inclined to support. Over the months, I have become ever more partisan
in this respect.

Thus do anonymous trolls defeat their own cause.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
Expedition sailboat charters www.expeditionsail.com
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tips on Getting Your Instrument Rating Sooner and at Lower Cost Fred Instrument Flight Rules 21 October 19th 04 07:31 AM
U.S. Air Force Moves Ahead With Studies On Air-Breathing Engines Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 October 29th 03 04:31 AM
Air Force Battlelabs working to keep service ahead of the curve Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 July 31st 03 09:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.