Slashdot Mirror
Bush Service Memos Questioned
Twirlip of the Mists writes "Last night, CBS News released a set of memos dated 1972 and 1973 that are purported to raise questions about President Bush's National Guard service. Some are saying those memos might have been produced with a computer. Blogger Scott Johnson ran with the story first this morning, raising questions about the typography of the memos. Blogger Charles Johnson (no relation) went one step further, actually reproducing one of the memos in its entirety using Microsoft Word's default settings.
Matt Drudge is running the story now with a link to a CNS News article that includes quotes from typography experts at font foundries Afga Monotype and Bitstream.
There's a round-up of key facts about the story on this blogger's web site." The experts in the CNS News story and others could come to no conclusion, and even if the documents are not originals or photocopies of originals, that doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't faithfully retyped copies of originals. CBS continues to assert the documents are authentic.
I find it hard to believe I just read that. Technically that is true, but it sounds like "if it turns out the documents are forged, let's still give them the benefit of the doubt that the documents really existed." By the same reasoning, if a reporter makes up a quote and is found out, that still doesn't mean the person didn't say it, so don't reject the quote!
In any investigation, if the documents are fake there is no reason to assume real ones existed.
This seems to be what US politics is all about.
Democrats:"Here are some documents relating to dubious military service 30 years ago!"
Republicans:"Liars they are forged! Here are some potential reasons to prove it!"
Which is to say, there are two parties, that are essentially identical (yes, yes, they have their differences, but compared to the differences in other countries, they are trivial), that find pleasantly obscure and largely irrelevant issues to have long and involved debates over, which the media (of course) buys into heavily. Don't let them waste your time! Don't get caught up in senseless hype chanting mantras about being AWOL, or faked documents - it mostly doesn't matter!
Take a step back, ignore "the other side" for a moment, and actually consider what is important.
Do you believe in larger government or smaller government? Good, now realise that it doesn't matter whether you vote Republican or Democrat because, regardless of rhetoric, if you look at the records they do an equally good job of growing government and government spending.
Do you believe conservative or liberal social policy? Good, now realise that it doesn't matter whether you vote Republican or Democrat because, regardless of rhetoric, if you look at the records neither side has actually implemented any significant social policy change in the last 20 years.
Stop getting distracted by soap operas over trivialities designed to distract you from the fact that neither side ever gets around to doing much of anything with regard to all their rhetoric. Stop letting yourself get dragged in to caring about petty debates over non issues. Take a look at what you actually believe in from a purely political philosophy point of view, and spend some time looking at what is going to work the best to see those ideas actually get implemented!
Jedidiah
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
Well, thus endeth the accusations that politics.slashdot is left-wing only.
"You might as well get your son a ticket to hell as give him a five string banjo." -unknown minister
Wow, so anything not denied is automatically true... What a creative way of blending logic and innuendo! A fresh new take on guilty until proven innocent.
Kudos on your succint statement of a principle worthy of any of the more heinous repressive regimes of our age.
CBS did consult documents experts
CBS News claims that they consulted one document expert, who remains unidentified. While Dr. Philip Bouffard, widely recognized expert in the field of forensic document identification, is quoted on INDC Journal as saying that he's "90% sure" these documents are forgeries.
Your main point is correct: If these documents are outside forgeries, then CBS News deserves merely to be tortured for their negligence, not burned at the stake.
But the possibility exists that these forgeries were manufactured by CBS News. And that possibility is way too scary to dismiss out of hand.
I write in my journal
CBS has nothing to gain from such a forgery
You don't know the value of an exclusive. The ad revenues for last night's "60 Minutes II" were over the top.
for them to make up documents like this would be profoundly stupid
It was profoundly stupid for Dan Rather to get into a shouting match with the sitting vice president of the United States on live television, too. But he did it, in 1988.
especially since the documents themselves do not really add a whole lot to the case already made in the Ben Barnes interview
Ah, but that's where you have to have been paying attention. Ben Barnes made these exact same claims in 1999, when then-Governor Bush was running for president. His claim was widely debunked. It never even really broke as a story because it never held water to begin with. He alleged that he pulled strings while he was Lt. Gov. of Texas, for instance, but when Bush was trying to get into the TANG Barnes was in Switzerland as UN general envoy to Geneva. That kind of thing.
The reason Barnes is in the news today is because he's got this shit-hot new documentary evidence. Except the evidence turns out to be forged.
the interview itself, which seems to have settled the question about whether Bush pulled strings to avoid military service
Except that Barnes has nothing at all to back up his claims except a set of forged memos with a dead lieutenant colonel's name on them.
Barnes was outed as a liar by both the pundits and the press in 1999. He's back with forged documents. What do you think?
Anyway, as I've said elsewhere, I think this is all a distraction
Agreed. Blame the Democrats who decided to spam the press with the National Guard story again when their candidate took a nosedive in the polls.
I write in my journal
Having plenty of documentation available from my own military records - allow me to point out that the standard appearance of "TH" is not superscript even in today's word processor age, but capitals - if this were "real" it should have been typed "187TH" something I used to hate dealing with before I learned my way around Word's autocorrect features.
And another thing while I'm on it, gettting out some of the older paperwork while previewing my post - I notice that rarely is "TH" added, I do see it in a few memoranda I have still, but it is always capitalized, or assumed.
For instance I served in the 35th Maintenance Squadron, 35th Logistics Group, 35th Fighter Wing, MIsawa, Airbase, Japan - almost every document from there is formally typed:
35 MXS, 35 LG, 35 FW, MISAWA, AB, JAPAN.
Looks fishy as hell to me considering it's a lot easier to tack on "th" in a Word Processor compared to an old gov't issue Typewriter.
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence in society - M. Twain
A lot has been made of the fact that the text is proportionally spaced. Some have pointed out that a few typewriters has this ability.
Fine.
But what about kerning?
"In typography, kerning refers to adjusting the space between characters, especially by placing two characters closer together than normal. Kerning makes certain combinations of letters, such as WA, MW, TA, and VA, look better. "
There is kerning in the memo with SUBJECT: CYA. It happens between the 'f' and 'e' characters of "interference" and "feedback".
The trouble is that kerning requires remembering the previous character.
As advanced as typewriters might have been in 1973, I doubt any had memory.
At this point, CNN is reporting that the documents are very likely forged, including the opinion of a guy who is specifically an expert on IBM Composers.
a rd.ap/index.html
6 7-2004Sep9.html
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/10/bush.gu
Dr Phil Bouffard, one of the top experts in the field, is nearly conclusively certain that they're forged.
http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000851.php
MSNBC is reporting experts in several areas who say they're forged.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5963843/
The Washington Post has a number of experts who strongly believe the documents were forged.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A99
And you've got Kos.
Read the stories. Think for yourself.
And for crying out loud learn to post a link. There's even a little crib in the edit window on Slashdot, for God's sake.