New Bush Service Documents: Forged or Authentic?

[esskreemr]

So what do you think? Are they real are they fake? Did the Pentagon just find them or did someone in the Kerry Campaign "leak" them to the press?

Feel free to include you opinion in a post.

[felicote]

They were forged, not necessarily a Kerry campaign leak.

[Army Fencer]

Either way, they're polically irrelevant. People aready know enough about Bush and his time in the Guard, and they've already made their decisions about it. I doubt any papers regarding that time period are going to do anything against his campaign.

[jeff]

Originally Posted by felicote

They were forged, not necessarily a Kerry campaign leak.

Maybe, maybe not. I got a note from one of my very techie friends who passed on somebody's research on this, which basically said 'anything can be forged, but there's no reason to believe this one is'. The similarity to Microsoft font goes away when you blow it up in magnification, which also shows small vertical and horizontal misalignments which wouldn't occur in a Word document but would with a mechanical typewriter. There were in fact IBM 'Executive' Selectric models that included the characters 'th' as a single superscripted keystroke. As the author of the forwarded piece says - "I leave as an exercise to the reader why the 118th would want a 'th' key" ;-)

So, maybe it's fake, maybe not. I agree with Army Fencer's take, that it's not going to matter since (a) it's a long time ago, and (b) people have already decided they trust Bush on this or not. I'm in the latter camp and thought he ducked out on military service; somebody in the other camp isn't going to change their opinion based on this. Nor on the unclaimed reward money offered to anybody remembering seeing Lt. Bush around the base during the time he is accused of having skipped (it wasn't a large unit - 25-30 people, IIRC - you would figure a famous man's son would be remembered).

[Army Fencer]

Originally Posted by jeff

So, maybe it's fake, maybe not. I agree with Army Fencer's take, that it's not going to matter since (a) it's a long time ago, and (b) people have already decided they trust Bush on this or not.

A lot of that is due to the fact that Bush already produced his service record to the public. We've essentially already debated how horrible the President is for skipping Vietnam through the Guard.

Given the present apathy toward the matter, what if this was all part of a grand, well-calculated scheme on the part of the Bush adminstration?

Hypothetically, if the documents that we're talking about are true, what if the Bush administration knew about them and decided that releasing the rest his service records extremely early on could ally some of the polical damage this document would have upset? Or, if it's a forgery, what if it was released by Bu****es, simply as a straw man, so the public can feel horrible about Kerryites slinging mud?

[mrbiggs]

*sarcasm* I like how the Republicans are subtly claiming that Kerry didn't win his purple hearts. *end sarcasm* These awards are given out by service, and nothing else, so if they WERE undeserved, they sure had nothing to do with Kerry's Daddy. (*ahem* how Bush got into Yale, for example, *ahem*)

Then the Republicans go and call the Democrats "wussies" and "girly men" when their candidate skipped out on service, THEN probably skipped out on THAT service! While the Democratic candidate was risking his life in Vietnam.

I really think that this is irrelevant to the election, I just don't understand why the REPUBLICANS are bringing it up.

[jeff]

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

A lot of that is due to the fact that Bush already produced his service record to the public. We've essentially already debated how horrible the President is for skipping Vietnam through the Guard.

Except that they previously said "we've released everything" and then recently "oops, here's more".

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

Given the present apathy toward the matter, what if this was all part of a grand, well-calculated scheme on the part of the Bush adminstration? &etc

Very devious - maybe it's true! I kind of go with mrbiggs point of view on this. The chickenhawk wing of the Republican party has done a great job of smearing opponents as wimps (when they made sure to protect their precious behinds), regardless of whether they were attacking Republicans like McCain or Democrats like Kerry or Cleland.

The relevance I see for this isn't whether or not somebody actually serve (you could have served honorably, or *not* served honorably), but as a test of character: willingness to pull strings or work the system to avoid personal risk back then, and willingness to smear others and pretend to be a butch here now/

[gojujay]

Originally Posted by jeff

Except that they previously said "we've released everything" and then recently "oops, here's more".

That's a time-honored Washington tradition. How dare you.

[damion18d]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

*sarcasm* I like how the Republicans are subtly claiming that Kerry didn't win his purple hearts. *end sarcasm* These awards are given out by service, and nothing else, so if they WERE undeserved, they sure had nothing to do with Kerry's Daddy. (*ahem* how Bush got into Yale, for example, *ahem*)

Then the Republicans go and call the Democrats "wussies" and "girly men" when their candidate skipped out on service, THEN probably skipped out on THAT service! While the Democratic candidate was risking his life in Vietnam.

I really think that this is irrelevant to the election, I just don't understand why the REPUBLICANS are bringing it up.

I'm not arguing with you I just want you to research about the prevelance of awards or purple hearts given to people in Kerri's possition. Then I want you to cross reference that with the amount of time those people were given their awards in. To anyone who has spent anytime in uniform getting those decorations in that period of time in that possition doesn't make a whole lotta sense. Then there is his behavior after returning from the war. Being a soldier that is what most angers me.

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by damion18d

I'm not arguing with you I just want you to research about the prevelance of awards or purple hearts given to people in Kerri's possition. Then I want you to cross reference that with the amount of time those people were given their awards in. To anyone who has spent anytime in uniform getting those decorations in that period of time in that possition doesn't make a whole lotta sense.

Do the research yourself and post the results. I'd be interested in the findings as well.

Originally Posted by damion18d

Then there is his behavior after returning from the war. Being a soldier that is what most angers me.

And as a Vietnam Vet you have a right to be angered. It was a tough war with a lot of tough calls. There are extremists who believe that any human death by another human could be deemed an atrocity. Tough war, tough actions, tough words. The same is starting because of the Iraqi action. Lives lost, both sides claiming atrocities.

[damion18d]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

Do the research yourself and post the results. I'd be interested in the findings as well.



And as a Vietnam Vet you have a right to be angered. It was a tough war with a lot of tough calls. There are extremists who believe that any human death by another human could be deemed an atrocity. Tough war, tough actions, tough words. The same is starting because of the Iraqi action. Lives lost, both sides claiming atrocities.

Hold on there I'm not a Vietnam Vet. That was my dad. I'm in Iraq right now. I was in Afghanistan and Kosovo and some other places. Been to Vietnam Laos and Cambodia on remains recovery mission but not in that war. I will take the time to do the research and get back to you but I can tell you right now he probably set a record.

[keith]

Originally Posted by damion18d

I'm not arguing with you I just want you to research about the prevelance of awards or purple hearts given to people in Kerri's possition. Then I want you to cross reference that with the amount of time those people were given their awards in. To anyone who has spent anytime in uniform getting those decorations in that period of time in that possition doesn't make a whole lotta sense. Then there is his behavior after returning from the war. Being a soldier that is what most angers me.

Kerry's behaviour on his return from the war was as a representative of a veterans group - his testimony was given as a representative of that group. So while you may dislike his behaviour bear in mind it wasn't only his opinion he was expressing but that of a substantial number of veterans (though not all).

As to the speed at which he accumulated his medals - so what? This must be one of the few occassions when an american politician has been criticised for 'success' .

[Soldier]

So because more people agreed with him, it wasn't wrong?

And the 'so what' that you so conveniently ignore is the old "if it seems to good to be true, it probably is."

[keith]

Originally Posted by Soldier

So because more people agreed with him, it wasn't wrong?

Absolutely not. We all know that the views he expressed after the war were not those of an insignificant minority of veterans or the population at large - why pretend otherwise?

Originally Posted by Soldier

And the 'so what' that you so conveniently ignore is the old "if it seems to good to be true, it probably is."

like the son of a politician/businessman getting into the national guard and dodging the draft, and then skipping a flight medical with no further consequences?

Two guys one takes the draft, one takes a ride in the national guard. Now Kerry may have made an effort to collect his hearts and get out early, so what. There is no evidence that he faked injuries or shot himself in the foot.

Frankly I don't see the point of the arguement; I'm with Cheney and Clinton on this one - not a pairing who often agree I imagine.

[Army Fencer]

Originally Posted by keith

like the son of a politician/businessman getting into the national guard and dodging the draft, and then skipping a flight medical with no further consequences?

It looks like CBS is backing off on the authenticity claims. You can knock "skipping a flight medical" off your list of autrocities.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Sep20.html

[jeff]

Yup, and it looks like more people are signing up with your theory that this was a "dirty tricks" campaign device - get something leaked that disses Bush, and then let it get discredited. It both defuses attacks on Bush for his performance 1972-73, discredits the people who attack him, and keeps the subject off all the problems the country is having now, on his watch. Neat trick, especially since the actual details in the story haven't been much challenged: he got his job via special favors, didn't complete his tour of duty, earned demerits for noncompliance &etc.

Atlanta Journal had a cartoon last week: an aide is saying to Bush something along the lines of "This National Guard story is keeping everybody's attention off the mess in Iraq", while Bush is holding up a paper labelled "Bush ate puppies while in the Guard" and saying into the phone "Hello, CBS? I have another story for you".

[Army Fencer]

Damn I'm good. Now where's the smiley with the horns and the pitchfork?

[jeff]

Heck with that - where's the royalty $$$ that Karl Rove owes you!

[keith]

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

It looks like CBS is backing off on the authenticity claims. You can knock "skipping a flight medical" off your list of autrocities.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Sep20.html

I didn't think the skipping of the flight medical has ever been in doubt - I thought the issue was whether or not the missing of the medical was an issue for the higher ups (which is what the memos claimed to address and why they were seized by a drooling CBS).

Not quite up there with the hitler diaries as fakes go though.

[mrbiggs]

I think the issue's pretty simple.

Kerry had the balls to fight in Vietnam. Bush didn't. Really, it doesn't matter who skipped or testified what. Kerry served, Bush didn't. And if Kerry's service wasn't good enough for you, then you had better have some VERY substantial evidence to back that up. And there's no reason to have "service documents" for Bush, he WASN'T THERE, which is pretty straightforward.