Saturday, September 11, 2004

Game over, over!

From the Kerry Spot:
The only expert cited by CBS in this case, Marcel Matley, wrote in the September 27, 2002 issue of the journal, "The Practical Litigator":

In fact, modern copiers and computer printers are so good that they permit easy fabrication of quality forgeries. From a copy, the document examiner cannot authenticate the unseen original but may well be able to determine that the unseen original is false. Further, a definite finding of authenticity for a signature is not possible from a photocopy, while a definite finding of falsity is possible.

Attempting to authenticate a signature from a photocopy is exactly what Matley did for CBS.

Game over.

CBS Sources on Memo Back Down reports:
The unraveling continues. Two of the three people cited on-camera by CBS News as vouching for its conclusion that Jerry Killian--the former Air National Guard commanding officer of George W. Bush--authored incriminating memoranda about the future president have, in subsequent interviews with other media organizations, tempered their support for CBS.

More on Ben Barnes

According to the Captain's Quarters, CBS is already quite familiar with Ben Barnes, who was interviewed for 60 Minutes on Wednesday:
Dan Rather interviewed former Texas legislator and Lieutenant Governor Ben Barnes in order to establish that Barnes used undue influence to get George Bush into the Texas Air National Guard. Rather didn't mention the fact that Barnes has been a major contributor to the Democrats and to the Kerry campaign; over the past five years, he has generated almost a half-million dollars for the DNC and John Kerry, as I reported earlier. Rather treated Barnes as a reluctant witness instead of the partisan he is.
However, CBS News did not always treat Barnes with such kid gloves. New Jersey blogger Just Dan notes that as late as June, CBS looked at Barnes more critically as a potential beneficiary of a John Kerry victory:

Boston Globe misquotes forensic expert regarding CBS memos

INDCJOURNAL is reporting that that the Boston Globe has misquoted a forensic expert regarding the CBS memos. The guy was already interviewed by this website and sounded ticked off at his treatment by the Globe. Link via Instapundit.
I just interviewed Dr. Bouffard again, and he's angry that the Globe has misrepresented him. He's been getting hate mail and nasty phone calls since last night's story was posted, and he wants me to correct the record. He did not change his mind, and he and his colleagues are becoming more certain that these documents are forgeries.

For the record

Here's a neat little flash animation that shows just some of the points made about those fake memos.


Got this one via the Corner. Warning about the language, but well worth it to show you how some are losing their minds over the fact that Bush is winning.

They were copies...

From the Corner:
The New York Times interviewed CBS documents expert Marcel Matley, who confirmed that the documents the network gave him were photocopies -- and poor ones at that. According to the paper: "Mr. Matley said the documents the network sent him were so deteriorated from copying that it was impossible to identify the typeface." '''It's sheer speculation to say that you couldn't have done that until a computer came along,'' he said.""As a result, he said, he focused on the signatures. CBS sent him the four newfound documents, as well as others that have been verified as signed by Colonel Killian. 'There were significant similarities and the differences were insignificant,' he said in the configuration of letters and the angle of the writing." Meanwhile, the Washington Post reported that, "Matley said last night that a '60 Minutes' executive had asked him not to give interviews."

You GOT to be kidding me...'s all a conspiracy:

Patterico shoots down a promising pro-Kerry Web conspiracy theory--namely that the potential forgery of the CBS Bush guard documents was spotted so quickly on the Web that the person who spotted it ("Buckhead," poster #47 at Free Republic) must have been tipped off in advance. That would suggest that any forgery was planted, presumably by pro-Bush forces. But it seems this whole theory, promoted in this morning's ABC News Note, was based on a misreading of time stamps by ABC. In reality, Buckhead had a couple of hours to come up with his post--something he confirms in an email to Patterico. ... ABC has corrected its mistake (withoutwithdrawing the now seemingly groundless insinuation). NPR hasn't corrected the error, according to Patterico, and David Brock's Media Matters still posts it. ... P.S.: Media Matters might want to decide if a) the documents are authentic, as argued at the top of their Web page or b) the documents are forgeries planted by Republicans, as argued at the bottom of their Web page. Lawyers are allowed to plead in the alternative, but a) and b) can't both be true, and the evidence for each of those propositions is also evidence against the other one. 1:10 A.M. Pacific Time (that's 4:10 to you, Ambinder)

Friday, September 10, 2004

Dan Rather, call your office

AUSTIN, Texas - (KRT) - The man named in a disputed memo as exerting pressure to "sugar coat" President Bush's military record left the Texas Air National Guard a year and a half before the memo was supposedly written, his own service record shows.
An order obtained by The Dallas Morning News shows that Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt was honorably discharged on March 1, 1972. CBS News reported this week that a memo in which Staudt was described as interfering with officers' negative evaluations of Bush's service, was dated Aug. 18, 1973.
That added to mounting questions about the authenticity of documents that seem to suggest Bush sought special favors and did not fulfill his service.

Double oops.
HODGES SAID HE WAS MISLED BY CBS: Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Grd, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were "handwritten" and after CBS read him excerpts he said, "well if he wrote them that's what he felt."
Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been "computer generated" and are a "fraud".

That's it?

So Dan Rather doesn't address the 30 or so discrepancies noted about the memos, but instead focuses on the content. CBS's "expert" only addressed the authentication of the signature and nothing else period. Does not address kerning, perfect centering, or proportional spacing, does not talk to the family, who said that the memos are frauds. Rather also claims that the documents displayed on the Internet were corrupted by being downloaded so many times. (???) Also, according to several posters on Free Republic, Times Roman has been available since 1931, but only in linotype printshops...until released with Apple Macintosh in 1984 and Windows 3.1 in 1991. From Instapundit:

JUST WATCHED DAN RATHER ON CBS: The thing that struck me most was his voice -- as in the CNN interview linked below, he sounded as nervous and uncomfortable as any news anchor I've heard. Compared to the voluminous material about these documents on the Internet and in the Washington Post and on ABC, his story didn't offer much. And nothing about the widow and the son, who dispute the authenticity of the story: They say that writing memos like this would have been out of character for Killian; Rather instead produced an author of anti-Bush books who said it was in character, but ignored the comments of people much closer to the facts. All told, it was consistent with Power Line's prediction.

On Blogs for Bush, their rundown points out:
CBS again asked its lone expert to reaffirm his initial claim of authenticity and, because he did, the documents are, therefore, real.
CBS did not attempt, at all, to air the opinions of the many handwriting, typographic and forensic experts who disagree.
CBS claimed that typewriters existed when the letter was purportedly written and that Times New Roman font existed as well and that, therefore, the documents are real.
CBS did not defend the claim that the Times New Roman font was not offered on the typwriters used at that time or that such a low-level function as National Guard clerical work would have had what was then a highly sophisticated and expensive word processing system.
CBS ignored the issue of fixed-pitch versus proportional pitch.
CBS ignored the fact that, using Microsoft Word's default settings, today one could write an EXACT replica of the supposed letter.
CBS dismissed the statements of the purported author's family that such a letter was out of character.
CBS interviewed one contemporary of the purported author to support the legitimacy of the documents, but not others who dispute his account.

Also, it would appear that he told the Blogsphere in a roundabout way to go f@#* themselves.

Bad move, Dan. Real bad move.

Recap on Ben Barnes, other attacks

Just so we can keep this in context, aside from the memo flap, Blogs for Bush breaks down the recent attacks on Bush and the fallout:

Attack: Ben Barnes was interviewed by CBS's Dan Rather on Wednesday, September 8 and claimed that he engineered George W. Bush's National Guard entry.
Fallout: The credibility of this "witness" is of no apparent concern to Dan Rather and CBS. Recall that Barnes:

- testified under oath in 1999 that the Bush family did not ask for any special treatment

- is Vice Chair of the Kerry campaign and a top fundraiser

- is a major Democratic fundraiser (type Barnes, Ben in the search field)

- was called the "51st Democratic Senator" by Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle (free registration required)

- was charged by his own daughter with making his recent comments for "purely political reasons"

- was chased from office for his involvement in the Sharpstown stock fRaud scandal
Actual news organizations might have questioned whether such a serious charge made by a man with severe conflicts-of-interest would warrant an entire segment managed by its top on-air talent. CBS did not. Additionally, the LA Times investigated this story 5 years ago and found no evidence of any wrongdoing.

Read the whole thing.

The Party's Over?

Pat Caddell, one of the few democrats left with any sense of honesty and honor, seems to be the only voice of sanity in his party:
"[Democratic officials are] so involved in this," the former Carter pollster worried. "They have gotten themselves so involved in this issue [in] the last 24 hours that somebody's going to, if they're not authentic, they're going to be blamed for it. It's incredible to me that they've gotten in this." Caddell said..."I'm trying to save my party, you know, by telling the truth."
Full transcript is here. He sounds worried. Pat is one of the few dems I listen to, because he's usually dead on target. Just remember this quote:
"I'm a liberal Democrat. I started in Florida politics. I worked for George McGovern. I worked for Jimmy Carter. I've worked for Ted Kennedy, Mario Cuomo. Nobody can question, I think, my credentials and my convictions. But I have to tell you, at this point it's hard to believe, but my party, the party that [my family has] belonged to since my great-great-grandfather, ... has become no longer a party of principles, but has been hijacked by a CONFEDERACY OF GANGSTERS who need to take power by whatever means and whatever canards they can."
-- Patrick Caddell on "Hardball" Nov. 27, 2000

Rather not backing down

This could get real interesting. Dan Rather is standing by his story on the memo thing and will attempt to explain it on the CBS Evening News tonight. Will he get out of it or dig himself into a deeper hole? Stay tuned.

Does this sound familiar to you?

I was looking over Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe denials over this hoaxed memo flap and noticed something:
"I can unequivocally say that no one involved here at the Democratic National Committee had anything at all to do with any of those documents. If I were an aspiring young journalist, I think I would ask Karl Rove that question," Mr. McAuliffe said.
Now this sounds so familiar...where did I...oh yeah!
"Look at the very people who are involved in this. They have popped up in other settings. The great story here for anybody willing to find it, write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president," Mrs. Clinton said.

Some things never change...and we all know how that situation turned out, don't we?

Good question

This article is linked up on the Blogger home page when you sign in and is a good example why blogs and forums like Free Republic are changing the face of media coverage:
The more basic question is how could a rabble of bloggers, in one day, provide hard core proof of forgery when major news organizations took those documents at face value? Most fundamental of all, why did the New York Times, the Boston Globe and CBS allow themselves to be used for such a transparent attempt to slander President Bush? Out in the blogosphere there are a swarm of people rooting for the answers.

What Did Kerry Know, and When Did He Know It?

From Blogs for Bush:
Where did the forgeries come from? They didn't appear out of thin air; someone made them. Reports indicate that CBS had them for at least a couple weeks before they aired their story on 60 Minutes II (Motto: Twice the BS of Regular CBS Broadcasts). One pundit claims to have been been told by an un-named DNC staffer that an opposition researcher passed to the documents to the Kerry campaign which then turned them over to CBS (which would make sense as CBS has proven itself the most reliably anti-Bush in its reporting; if you were part of the Kerry campaign, CBS would be the place to leak oppo research to).

Memo Hoax Recap

This is what I get for having a day job and the sleep that's required to go with it.

Because if it wasn't for that, I would have been able to watch the folks at Free Republic completely destroy the credibility of CBS, 60 Minutes and Dan Rather.

As many of you know by now, CBS apparently has based a report attempting to smear President Bush with "documents" that "prove" that Kerry operative Ben Barnes tried to get the then young George W. into the National Guard to avoid service in Vietnam.

As usual, a "live thread" was started on the board for readers to comment on Wednesday night's 60 Minutes airing of the so-called Killian memos. At reply #107 on the thread titled "Live Thread: Ben Barnes and CBS Attempt Another Bush Smear (60 Minutes), Freeper TankerKC posted the following:

They are not in the style that we used when I came in to the USAF. They looked like the style and format we started using about 12 years ago (1992). Our signature blocks were left justified, now they are rigth of the ones they just showed.
Can we get a copy of those memos?
107 posted on 09/08/2004 7:19:00 PM CDT by TankerKC

Then, on a follow up post called Documents Suggest Special Treatment for Bush in Guard where Freepers were commenting on the New York Times story about the memos, another person noted:

Howlin, every single one of these memos to file is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing, and typewriters used monospaced fonts. The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's. Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used monospaced fonts.
I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.
47 posted on 09/08/2004 10:59:43 PM CDT by Buckhead
And it was pursued aggressively.

Enormous research was done overnight (Freepers never sleep) and by the next morning, there was enough evidence to take the theory out of the realm of Internet conspiracy theory and turn it into serious questions about the accuracy of the 60 Minutes report. Power Line picked it up here, and the rest is now history.

The report spread through the Blogsphere from there, with other experts weighing in. What was CBS thinking? Did they not realize that in this age of citizen journalism and the Internet, everything that the Old Media reports is going to be gone over with a fine tooth comb and any foul up is going to be spotted and taken apart?

The New Media nailed the Old Media. Again.

As soon as Drudge posted it on his site, it was all over for CBS. At this time, this story is no longer just another Internet rumor. He is reporting that CBS is launching an internal investigation into this. Heads may roll.

ABC Nightline did a piece on it.

The Washington Post, yes folks, The Washington Post is reporting on it.

AP, of recent non-existent boo fame, has chipped in with this.

The New York Post is calling it a "blunder."

The American Spectator is calling it a forgery.

The DNC is backing away from this as if they've suddenly encountered a rabid dog. But it may be too late for that, as this graph from the Spectator article says:

Now, the producer says, there is growing concern inside the building on 57th Street that they may have been suckered by the Kerry campaign. "There is a school of thought here that the Kerry people dumped this in our laps, figuring we'd do the heavy lifting on the story. That maybe they had doubts about these documents but hoped we'd get more information," says the producer. "If that's the case, then we're bigger fools than we already appear to be judging by all the chatter about how these documents could be forgeries."

Thursday, September 09, 2004

Developing Brief Partial Summary of the Forgery Elements of the CBS/Rather Faked letter

From Free Republic, where the exposing of the CBS hoaxed memos began:

Developing Brief Partial Summary of the Forgery Elements of the CBS/Rather Faked letter
Insightful Comments Made by FReepers

1-- proportional spacing not generally available
2 -- superscripts not generally available
3 - small "th" single element not generally available
4 - Smart quotes. Curved apostrophes and quotation marks were not available
5-The blurriness of the copy indicates it was recopied dozens of times, tactic of forgers
6--Signature block. Typical authentic military signature block has name, then rank, then on the next line the person's position. This just has rank beneath the name.
7--Margins. These look like a computer's unjustified default, not the way a person typing would have done it.
8 -- Date usually with three letters, or in form as 110471.
9 - words run over consistent with word processor
10 - may be a Times Roman or similar font not generally available then (per Haas Atlas)
11 - signature looks faked
12 - no errors and whiteout
13 - no letterhead
14 - exact match for Microsoft Word Processor
15 - Paper size problem, Air Force and Guard did not use 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper until the 1980s.
16 - Overlap analysis is an exact match
17 - absence of hyphens to split words between lines, c/w 1970's typewriter.
18 - 5000 Longmont #8 in Houston Tx. does not exist
19 - Box 34567 is suspicious, at best. The current use of the po box 34567 is Ashland Chemical Company, A Division of Ashland Oil, Incorporated P. O. Box 34567 Houston
20 - it would have been nearly impossible to center a letterhead with proportional spacing without a computer.
21 - Bush's grade would "normally" be abbreviated "1Lt" not "1st Lt"
22 - Subject matter bizarre
23 - Air Force did not use street addresses for their offices, rather HQ AFLC/CC, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433.
24 - kerning was not available
25 - In the August 18, 1973 memo, Jerry Killian purportedly writes: "Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush. I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job." but General Staudt, who thought very highly of Lt. Bush, retired in 1972.
26 - Language not generally used by military
27 - Not signed or initialed
28 - Not in any format that a military person would use, e.g. orders not given by Memo.

Freepers do it again: Expose CBS Bush memos as fakes!

You just can't stop those Freepers.

In just a space of eight hours, while away at the job, it would appear that the collective efforts of the members of Free Republic, along with the Blogsphere, has totally exposed the memos (extreme, lengthy dissection here) shown on CBS about Bush's National Guard service to be a complete fraud.

Powerline, which has been at the forefront of not only the AP Boo thing, (which got it's kick off here after posters from Free Republic spotted the lie) but other media frauds as well, breaks it down:

Today's big Boston Globe story on President Bush's Air National Guard service is based on memos to file from the personal records of the late Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian: "Bid cited to boost Bush in Guard."
The Globe story is itself based on last night's 60 Minutes report: "New questions on Bush Guard duty." The online version of the 60 Minutes story has links to the memos. Killian died in 1984; CBS states that it "consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic." Readers Tom Mortensen and Liz MacDougald direct us to the Free Republic post and thread (see post no. 47) to this effect:

Every single one of the memos to file regarding Bush's failure to attend a physical and meet other requirements is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing (especially in the military), and typewriters used mono-spaced fonts.
The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction high-end word processing systems from Xerox and Wang, and later of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's.
Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang and other systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used mono-spaced fonts. I doubt the TANG had typesetting or high-end 1st generation word processing systems.
I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.

UPDATE: There's more details from an expert here.

UPDATE#2: WorldNetDaily is reporting that CBS is backing off the "expert" claim.

UPDATE#3: Fox News just ran something on Special Report with Brit Hume...spreading like wildfire...

UPDATE#4: This just getting better and better...ABC News is questioning the memos, the son of the late officer who supposed wrote them is questioning it and now the Weekly Standard is asking questions:
"These sure look like forgeries," says William Flynn, a forensic document expert widely considered the nation's top analyst of computer-generated documents. Flynn looked at copies of the documents posted on the CBS News website (here, here, here,and here). Flynn says, "I would say it looks very likely that these documents could not have existed" in the early 1970s, when they were allegedly written.
Several other experts agree. "They look mighty suspicious," says a veteran forensic document expert who asked not to be quoted by name. Richard Polt, a Xavier University philosophy professor who operates a website dedicated to typewriters, says that while he is not an expert on typesetting, the documents "look like typical word-processed documents."

UPDATE#5: The post over at Power Line is getting longer and longer with more updates. The latest one is a loo loo:
UPDATE 12: In the August 18, 1973 memo "discovered" by 60 Minutes, Jerry Killian purportedly writes:
Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush. I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job.
But wait! Reader Amar Sarwal points out that General Staudt, who thought very highly of Lt. Bush, retired in 1972.

How long does CBS think they can stand by their story?

More distortions from the AP

Why are we not surprised?
The Associated Press is at it again. In a story covering a town hall meeting with Dick Cheney yesterday, the AP accuses Cheney of saying that a Kerry presidency would result in a major terrorist attack on the United States. The AP bolsters this conclusion by chopping off the end of one of Cheney's sentences, thus causing Cheney's statement to sound inflammatory and even extremist, when it actually was neither.

More Bias

In today's American Spectator:

But the facts remain that several news organizations continue to sit on stories that are more recent than the events of 1971, and would prove extremely damaging to the Kerry campaign.

"I don't know why they aren't running the stories," says an editor at one of the news organizations. "The stories are in the can and have been combed through by our lawyers. It's frustrating."

NO! Don't read THAT book!

Way back when I started this blog...three weeks ago, I had a link to one of the sites that are offering John Kerry's 1971 book, "The New Soldier." Well, it would appear that the Kerry campaign is trying to make sure that you don't read this:
Mr. Davis' first website at was temporarily shut-down by Yahoo following a complaint filed by an attorney representing George Butler. Mr. Butler is a co-editor of the book and has been a close personal friend of John Kerry since 1964. Mr. Davis has filed a sworn counter-notification with Yahoo, demanding that the website be reactivated. George Butler is directing a film titled 'Going Up River' ( purported to be a documentary about John Kerry's Vietnam service and his anti-war activities.

So, if he is trying to ban books unfavorable to him during his campaign, even though he wrote it, what do you think he would do as president with the vast powers of the federal government at his beck and call?

Be afraid...very afraid.

Not a good way to attract votes, Teresa...

"What? You don't agree with my husband? You're an idiot!!!"

Wednesday, September 08, 2004

P.O.W.'s get time at bat

I've been talking about these guys for a couple of weeks now...well, tomorrow morning these forgotten heroes will be joined by Bob Dole for a press conference:
The 45-minute documentary includes testimony from highly decorated POWs and their wives revealing the truth about North Vietnamese prison camps and the ongoing negative portrayal and treatment of Vietnam veterans resulting directly from John Kerry's testimony and anti-war activities more than 30 years ago.
It remains to be seen whether the MSM will see fit to give them any coverage.

Who does he think he is fooling?

The flip-flops just never end:
Reuters reports that Kerry called the War in Iraq "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time" today, and insisted that Bush's middle initial, W, stands for "wrong."
However, the Congressional Record shows that on March 20 2003, Kerry voted for S.95 which is titled "Commending the President and the Armed Forces of the United States of America" which "commends and supports the efforts and leadership of the President, as Commander in Chief, in the conflict against Iraq."

About tonight's 60 Minutes...

Well, the MSM is trying everything they have against Bush, which includes this AP piece on Former Texas House Speaker Ben Barnes' recollections over how he helped President Bush get into the Texas Air National Guard, which strangely enough, gets sharper as time goes by...

And for some reason, the well known fact that Barnes is listed as a "co-Chairman" of the Kerry campaign or that he is listed as a $100k fundraiser for Kerry is not even mentioned here.

Not once.

I guess the AP were too busy trying to pick out one boo from a crowd 17,000 people cheering or something.

Kelly Book Too Hot for Time or Newsweek

The Captain's Quarters has a lengthy piece on Kitty Kelly's book, which contains stories that are so wild that even Time and Newsweek wouldn't touch it:
I know that lefty bloggers like Oliver Willis are drooling over the blockbuster allegations and promoting them as Bush's doom. I find it enlightening that they readily accept the word of a disgruntled and unstable ex-wife of Bush's brother and possibly one or more unnamed sources, while they completely disregard over 250 combat veterans who put their names to their testimony in Unfit For Command and backed it up with evidence. The Left has very flexible standards when it comes to credibility these days.

Aren't you glad he isn't President?

The talk from the left is getting wilder and more intolerant every day. Could you imagine Al Gore saying this four years ago during the campaign against Bush?

And yet the Bush ideology is tinged with religious belief, I said. Not everything comes with a price tag attached.

Gore's mouth tightened. A Southern Baptist, he, too, had declared himself born again, but he clearly had disdain for Bush's public kind of faith. "It's a particular kind of religiosity," he said. "It's the American version of the same fundamentalist impulse that we see in Saudi Arabia, in Kashmir, in religions around the world: Hindu, Jewish, Christian, Muslim."

I'm glad the article lets me know where Gore hangs I can avoid these places like the plague...

H is for "Huh?"

The Country Store takes a look at John Kerry's confusing MTV interview.

Tuesday, September 07, 2004

Now for that other Lawsuit...

The AP is reporting that they finally won their lawsuit to uncover flight records that were "belatedly uncovered Tuesday under the Freedom of Information Act."

They found nothing new or earthshattering either.

Good going, AP. By the way, how's that FOIA request coming along on Kerry's records? Oh wait, you mean you haven't sued for those? I was wondering if Kerry missed any of his Navy reserve training during all that time in the 70's.

From Dec 1969 to Dec 1971 Kerry was officially a commissioned officer in the U.S. Navy Ready Reserve.

From Dec 1971 to Feb 1978 Kerry was officially a commissioned officer in the U.S. Navy Standby Reserve.

Where is Kerry's documentation from the Reserve Manpower Center, Naval Training Center, Bainbridge, Maryland to which he was attached beginning Dec 1969? It is not on his Web site.

Why was a commissioned U.S. Navy Ready Reserve officer meeting with North Vietnamese government officials in Paris in 1970 and 1971?

We're waiting, AP.

Posttraumatic Stress, my a**...

A report out of Memphis details the arrest of Lewellyn Muhammad, who tried to board a flight carrying a book, in which a Transportation Security Administration screener found razor blades and a note containing a date, and the name "Osama Bin Laden." The accused is on leave from work at FedEx....and this excuse really takes the cake:
His employer advised that approximately two weeks ago, Mr. Muhammad requested leave to deal with posttraumatic stress. Muhammad asked to leave because he needed to deal with severe anger issues. Mr. Muhammad told investigators that his posttraumatic stress condition has recently been aggravated by the Iraq prison scandal.

and these are Americans...

Instapundit shows how low some are willing to go to defeat Bush.

The rewriting of history continues

Say, remember that press release from the Kerry campaign, the one that slammed John McCain? Well, according to Blogs for Bush, it keeps disappearing and then popping back up on their site!

Hell hath no fury like a Democrat scorned

"Booing Fallout" Continues

Much of the buzz over the AP booing story may have begun here, but the folks over at Power Line are doing excellent follow up work on this latest media scandal. First, here's an e-mail sent out to Tom Hays, who has been identified as the source of the one paragraph that launched a million retractions:
So, I want to know what you have to say for yourself. Were you actually at the West Allis rally? If not, from whom did you get the false information that the crowd booed? If you were at the rally, what was your basis for reporting that the crowd booed and President Bush did nothing to stop it? And what relationship, formal or informal, do you have with the Kerry campaign?

That's followed up by a response from Seth Borenstein of Knight-Ridder, who took the AP lie and passed on to countless other outlets. He admits that to a reader that the error came from the AP story:
This was not a case of me being a liar, but a simple fallable human who makes a mistake.

Yes, Scott, you simply took the AP report at it's word and made no attempt to confirm it.
Unfortunately in this politically charged atmosphere, people would rather accuse someone of being a liar than understanding that we are all humans, make mistakes and as the Bible says, deserve forgiveness.

That's a first....given how secular most in my profession seem to be.
As a science correspondent, I was writing, from Washington, a story on the Clinton surgery and heart problem. I was sent an insert about Kerry mentioning the Clinton surgery and I tried to balance it with something taken from AP on Bush mentioning it. Since much of the e-mail I am getting seems generated by some web site that vilifies reporters...
Powerline puts in an editor's note at this point saying, that's us, I guess, but given that their original post on this referred to Swimming Through the Spin, he could have meant this site, or even the Freepers, which was my source.
...I recommend you read the entire story instead of someone's edited version of it. When you do you will see this hardly a case of the media bashing Bush supporters. It is a case of a rushed reporter stupidly - and in error - using an AP story in half a sentence and not crediting AP.
He admits plagiarism?
I was in error not mentioning AP's contribution and in using what was later retracted by AP. When Knight Ridder learned of AP's retraction, we sent out similar correction Saturday at 3: 16 pm.
Too little too late, especially on a holiday weekend, when no one is likely to see such a retraction...

Now Jessie is Mad

The trouble never seems to end for the Kerry campaign. A freeper reports that Jessie Jackson is not pleased with the direction they have been taking:
In a just-completed interview with Judy Woodruff of CNN's Inside Politics, Jackson took the bark off the Kerry campaign. He accused it of failing to reach out to its base, specifically claiming that the Kerry people had failed to reach out to blacks. Donna Brazile had been on earlier to discuss the issue, and it seems clear the Reverend is angry that he has not been given a more prominent role in the campaign.
Adding insult to injury, not only did Jackson call the Kerry campaign "not smart," he went out of his way to praise Karl Rove and the Bush campaign. He said that the Bush campaign is smart to begin by solidifying its base and then reaching out to other groups, whereas the Kerry campaign is ignoring his base.
Jackson was also furious that Kerry had refused to participate in some kind of Appalachian events that Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH had organized. Jesse's been dissed, and he's ticked.

Not funny

John Kerry cracked a joke yesterday:
In West Virginia, Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America, gave Kerry a rifle as a gift. Kerry, a self-described gun-owner and hunter, quipped: "I thank you for the gift, but I can't take it to the debate with me."

That's not funny, John.

At all.

Monday, September 06, 2004

A war unlike any other

More Bias on the Swift Boat Issue

The Captain's Quarters examines more evidence of liberal media bias in regards to the Swift Boat Vets. Read the whole thing.

Labor Day Linkage

Power Line says that the AP is at it again. While a professor of journalism ethics at Washington and Lee University complains about Cowardice in the Newsroom.

Meanwhile, in other media bias news, according to an article in today's New York Times, former Clinton aide and CNN commentator Paul Begala is expected to play an increasingly prominent role in the Kerry campaign, while remaining a CNN commentator!!!

On the other side of the pond, the Mirror is pimping Kitty Kelly's trash with the headline, "BUSH 'TOOK COCAINE AT CAMP DAVID.' "

John Kerry is using Bob Graham's new book to plead for an investigation into the latest wild-eyed conspiracy theory.

After the horrific school massacre in Russia, you know...the one that The New York Times says wasn't committed by terrorists, Islam Online claims that the world is shocked and furious over Russian tactics. Also, Russia and Israel will start sharing experience and intel on terrorists. And American Muslims are demanding justice.

It has now been one month and five days since John Kerry last answered questions from a real reporter. For those of you keeping track, here's the latest campaign shake-up scorecard.

This will turn your stomach and let you see what we are up against. Have a fun Labor Day.

Sunday, September 05, 2004

Did Hillary pick the Hospital?

Bill Clinton goes under the knife tomorrow. I wonder if he was aware of this:
The hospital where former President Bill Clinton awaits bypass surgery in the next few days has the highest death rate for the operation in New York State, according to the state's Health Department. While the death rate is quite low - fewer than 4 percent of all bypass operations - it is still nearly double the average for hospitals in the state that perform bypasses.

Committing Political Seppuku

Kerry Attacks McCain. Nothing more needs to be said.

WANTED: Factchecker for New York Times

The Religion of Peace at Work

And John Kerry wants to fight a "more sensitive war" with these "people." I can't conceive of a punishment that is fit for these filthy animals...vile beasts that the New York Times refuses to call terrorists.

Video of the Week

For those who really hate the democrats and much as the democrats hate Bush, this will be like porn to some of you. Footage of Al Gore getting his recent speeding ticket.

An endorsement Kerry doesn't need

This ringing endorsement from a fellow that also served in Vietnam isn't really going to help Kerry very much...mainly because he fought for the other side.

Sinh and John F. Kerry, the U.S. Democratic presidential nominee, were fighting along the Dong Cung canal about the same time 35 years ago in early 1969, experiencing the intensity of war along these muddy waters, but from opposite sides.

Although Sinh had never heard of Kerry, he had a strong opinion about the debate surrounding the candidate's Vietnam War record as a U.S. Navy Swift boat commander: Kerry must have had guts to troll the Mekong Delta's spider web of rivers and narrow canals knowing that Viet Cong like himself were waiting to pick him off.

"Kerry served in Vietnam and he was awarded the medal for his
bravery," Sinh said. "He deserves the medal."

About that trip to Paris

We've been talking about it for a while, and now some others are finally taking a look at what could be a major problem for John Kerry:
According to publicly available records, Mr. Kerry was released from active duty and transferred to the Naval Reserve (inactive) in January 1970. In January 1972, he was transferred to the standby Reserve (inactive). While a commissioned officer in the inactive Naval Reserve, Mr. Kerry traveled to Paris, France, and met with official delegations from the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam) and the Provisional Revolutionary Government (the Viet Cong). The Vietnamese Communists eagerly met Mr. Kerry and benefited directly from the obvious propaganda victory.
These acts are clear violations of the legal prohibitions on individual citizens negotiating with foreign powers and the constitutional prohibition against giving support to our nation's enemies in wartime. Additionally, as a commissioned officer of the Naval Reserve, Mr. Kerry was subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and likely violated it ("aiding the enemy") through his actions with the North Vietnamese/Viet Cong delegation.

Can't the AP get anything right?

I've been sunning myself today, while I still I missed the latest snafu from the Associated Press. Powerline has the details.

I'm really getting concerned about this. Many papers and news services rely on the AP for copy and background on local items or editorials. These distortions or outright lies are mostly going unchallenged except by those of us in the Blogsphere. Either the editors are asleep at the switch, in which case they should be sacked or these blunders are on purpose...and the editors should be sacked.

Another "conspiracy" book is out

Newsweek is promoting Florida Sen. Bob Graham's new book, 'Intelligence Matters.' He's the former co-chair of the joint House-Senate panel investigating 9/11 and he claiming that the Bush administration was engaged in a "cover-up" to protect a key ally, Saudi Arabia.
Investigative Correspondent Michael Isikoff reports in the September 13 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, September 6), that Graham was furious when the White House blacked out 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission's final report that dealt with purported Saudi links to the 9/11 plot. Graham says much of the deleted evidence centered around the activities of a mysterious Saudi then living in San Diego named Omar al-Bayoumi, whom Graham calls a Saudi government "spy." Al-Bayoumi befriended two of the key 9/11 hijackers, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, when they first arrived in the country.
The press release goes on to state that the 9/11 panel had access to more than Graham did and even talked to al-Bayoumi.
They concluded that he had no connection to 9/11. "We've spent hours and hours with Bob on this," says Zelikow, who believes Graham doesn't seem open to new evidence. "He's got all these details. But it's like they're frozen in amber."
Nope. No politics here, no sir. The full Newsweek story can be read here.

I have one question

More swill from the NYT, Guardian

Why do they even try to admit they are objective anymore? Here the latest from the New York Times and Frank Rich:
ONLY in an election year ruled by fiction could a sissy who used Daddy's connections to escape Vietnam turn an actual war hero into a girlie-man.
And that's only the first graph. I can't go on. Meanwhile, the Guardian has posted an even wilder tale called "George Jr sent out of Texas by father as a 'drunken liability' " When they said they were going to fight dirty, they meant it.