Letter to the Washington Post

[featherman]

Dear Sir:
Maybe it is just me but I find there seems to be the common assumption throughout your publication that the notorious Bush Guard documents have already been proven as forgeries. I know of no such proof. On the contrary, the documents seem to be as represented, i.e., copies of signed and dated memos by Col. Killian apparently created with mechanical means available to him at that time and with content that matches witness accounts of his opinions on these matters.
That CBS was careless in presenting these copies without more meticulous vetting and a clearer provenance is obvious to all. It is equally obvious that they cannot be proven as either genuine or as forgeries without expert study of the originals. I sincerely hope your publication has not relied on the inexpert and clearly erroneous "analyses" emanating from various right wing blog sites on the internet. Mr. Kurtz, for one, seems to have been both taken with and taken in by these blogs.
Perhaps it is best that your publication refrain from impugning forgery for the time being. In the meantime, I am certain the following link has been forwarded to you already. Perhaps an actual jounalist on your staff should attempt the research to refute this apparently expert forensic analysis.
http://imrl.usu.edu/bush_memo_study/index.htm

Cordially,

[A_Possum]

1. Well put! n/t

[KT2000]

2. Good letter!

thanks for writing it.