Some thoughts on the alleged "forgery"

[brentspeak]

I know I shouldn't dwell on this matter. The Bush WH has successfully diverted the debate away from the issues over to a debate about alleged forgeries and 1970's typewriters. However, the Bush goon squad -- actually the White House itself -- has now formally accused the Kerry campaign and the DNC of forging documents to smear Bush. This needs to be addressed.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that these documents are indeed forged (and I'm NOT saying they are, just saying they are for argument's sake), then the following points are clear:

1) Whoever produced the forgeries did so with the deliberate intention
of having the forgery easily discovered. It was not simple carelessness that would lead a forger to overlook using typefont that would not have been available back in 1972; it was a flaw purposefully inserted into the document so that people could easily spot the document as a possible forgery. The memos were given to CBSNews in the hope that they would fall for them as authentic, and then have the memos blow up in their face, their credibility tarnished.

2) Whoever delivered the forged documents to CBSNews was NOT the person who produced them. Nor is the deliverer aware that they are a forgery -- not unless that person has a morbid desire to be exposed in front of the whole world as the one who attempted to impugn a President of the United States, as well as face federal charges pertaining to forging military documents.

3) Whoever produced the forgeries could only have done so using source material that was protected at the very, very highest levels of government. The CONTENT of the memos, the sentiments and events expressed in the forgeries is not in dispute from Maj.Hodges or the other colleagues of Killian's that CBSNews contacted for verification. Indeed, Hodges confirmed the events. Therefore, only someone who could easily get into and out of the Pentagon and the White House, and a few other places we probably don't know about, AND who would have the keys to wherever the source material was locked up could have produced the documents.

Needless to say, given the above, it would laughable to think anyone from the Kerry campaign could have or would have produced the alleged forgeries. It's clear that it could only be someone in the White House and/or the Pentagon who is responsible.

[shraby]

1. It's pretty well established

that they aren't forgeries.

[brentspeak]

I know

This is just my way of demonstrating of how, even if they were forgeries, they almost certainly would have originated from the White House.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

3. Well said. And we will have the last laugh on the fake forgery story

.

[brentspeak]

4. Stick your accusations firmly into the obvious place

My post is meant to COUNTER any and all Freeper-type conspiracy theories when they allege that such a "forgery" could only have originated from the Kerry camp.

Oh, and welcome to my Ignore list.

[madaboutharry]

8. I don't think it is necessary

to call people assholes. I thought we are all on the same page around here.

[Spinzonner]

5. Let's get this straight

The technical arguments that supposedly 'prove' they are forgeries have been debunked. The technical means to produce the documents in the stated time-frame clearly existed and were available to the military and probably the people in question.

However, Bush supporters and their fellow travelors have introduced the arguments into the infospace without the debunking and it will be difficult to stamp out. They will just keep repeating the claims because they achieve their political purpose.

That does not prove they are not forgeries. Even an expert analysis of the signatures is not proof, it's expert opinion.

It's questionable whether things can be 'proved' either way at this point without access to original documents or corroboration.

A trace of ownership would surely help.

[brentspeak]

9. Your point is well taken

I understand the need not to keep the issue going and going and going. I see all the other threads on these boards speaking about memos and the forgery theory, so I figured one more certainly is not going to make much difference.

I posted a similar argument in my post last night on Yahoo! to counter the Freepers, and it generated a lot of heated response from them. They could not adequetly refute my points, and tried to "shout me down" so that I could not turn any neutral observers against them.

[olddem43]

6. Dan Rather will answer all questions tonight on the CBS News.

He is certain that they are real. Besides, didn't CBS get them from the Defense Department under the Freedom of Information Act? So, who in the Defense Department could or would have gone to the trouble of faking them, and do such a good job that they could fool CBS's experts? Doesn't make any sense. The whole issue of authenticity is smoke from the White House to confuse the voters.

[IndianaGreen]

7. I will guarantee that no one will ever nominate a Vietnam-era vet again!

This year is the last time we will ever see a major political party nominate a veteran from the Vietnam era again because of the controversy from that period of our history. We are still debating who served and who didn't in a war that was a CRIMINAL WAR! Half the population of this country weren't alive or were too young when Vietnam was raging.

Our Governor Joe Kernan is a former POW, but he has not made an issue of his Vietnam service, it is only part of his bio, and has not made hay of his chicken hawk opponent.