0.41 seconds

From: John Forrest Tomlinson

Using family influence to avoid dangerous service is understandable --
a lot of people would've done that if they could. But to do it, or
maybe even have been AWOL, and then have the gall to fly onto a
military ship, dressed up like a pilot, saying Mission Accomplished,
all while undercutting the professional leadership in our military,
screwing over people who joined the service now and are serving in a
hazardous situations, is appalling.

JT


Amen
Bill C

On 15 Sep 2004 16:05:40 -0700, (Benjamin Weiner)
wrote:

"Tom Kunich" wrote:

The ANG was highly unlikely to have a Selectric in 1972. For crying out
loud, I didn't even see one until the mid-80's in anything but huge
companies. Selectrics were extremely expensive for typewriters and were
generally only available for the bosses private secretary at large
companies.

You must mean a Selectric Composer. At least I hope you do, because
even my public middle school had a typing class in 1980 using plain old
type-ball Selectrics. Not that I think any of this **** matters.

Using family influence to avoid dangerous service is understandable --
a lot of people would've done that if they could. But to do it, or
maybe even have been AWOL, and then have the gall to fly onto a
military ship, dressed up like a pilot, saying Mission Accomplished,
all while undercutting the professional leadership in our military,
screwing over people who joined the service now and are serving in a
hazardous situations, is appalling.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
om...
"Tom Kunich" wrote in message
nk.net...
"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...

Dude, I work in desktop publishing a lot and am familiar with kerning,
tracking, leading, superscripts,etc, etc. As I said, could
typewriters produce text that looks like the text in the memo? And did
the unit in question use them?

A manual typewriter - no without any question whatsoever. A manual
typewriter spaces with a gear drive and hence can only step full spaces
with
nothing in between.

The ANG was highly unlikely to have a Selectric in 1972. For crying out
loud, I didn't even see one until the mid-80's in anything but huge
companies. Selectrics were extremely expensive for typewriters and were
generally only available for the bosses private secretary at large
companies.

I don't care about when you first saw one or when I got one or when
the CEO of General Motors's secretary got one. That's irrelevant and
focusing on that is perhaps an attempt to perpetuate doubt. The
question is, did the unit in question have one? Or perhaps did a
similar unit in the Guard have them? The way to answer this question
is to either see if there is evidence that that unit may have had it,
perhaps through purchasing records or diverse testimony of some kind.
Or else to look at other, less controversial documents produced by
that or similar units or offices to see if they had some of the
features that typical typewriters do not have.

According to Killian's secretary (Marian Carr Knox)the memos in question
were not typed by her, had to have been if they were real, and that the
terminology used wasn't Guard but Army terminology.
(http://www.drudgereport.com/bushtang.htm)

And one of See-BS's own handwriting experts told them that the signature
wasn't Killian's.
(http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/I...ocuments_04091
4.html)

Just how much proof do you need?

BTW, one year after these memos were sent Killian's secretary was still
writing on a manual typewriter.

"Robert Chung" wrote in message
...
Tom Kunich wrote:

And if that doesn't frighten the bejesus out of you, perhaps you should
remain permanently in France.

Yikes, *that's* the kind of stuff that frightens the bejesus out of you?
Oh, Tom, don't be such a girlie man.

Think about this Robert. It isn't funny.

"Curtis L. Russell" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 02:48:22 GMT, "Tom Kunich"
wrote:

Aside from typesetters, almost no one could do this. In fact it wasn't
even
considered by typists until the advent of the CRT screen on which the
typists result would show and be corrected BEFORE it went on paper.

Well, not exactly. The better Selectrics had a small display that
permitted composing over several lines before printing. From memory,
they came out in the late 1970s, which would precede large scale use
of word processing at the desk by several years.

NOT in 1972! The only displays available were extremely crude CRT displays
and Nixie Tubes which were only available in numbers or a few letters. You
have to remember that in 1970 I obtained the FIRST Sylvania solid state
memory ICs and tested them. They could store 16 bits and the die was
mis-wired so that half of the bits were high true and the other half were
low true. By 1972 the VERY first LED numeric displays were hitting the
market and were almost unobtainable unless you were a pocket calculator
manufacturer and were ordering them by the millions.

So there really wasn't anything available in 1972 that cold display an
entire line for a typewritten page.

Two people that are evidently even more interested in this sideline
than myself have identified the one 'typewriter' that would come
close. Evidently there was a 1972 $ 3,600 machine (1972 dollars)
called the Selectric Composer (mini-typesetter rather than a true
typewriter) that could come awfully darned close. Except it required
changing font sets to do the superscript as in the memo and when they
got closer to the actual memo it revealed that the Times Roman used by
the Selectric font ball - a rarity - did not come that close to
matching in certain areas.

I haven't seen a single reference to any Times Roman script balls and have
some real doubts because they would be of such extremely limited demand.
Making these balls was VERY expensive since the tooling had to be all hand
made.

I agree that this is a sideline, but its the type of thing that swings
elections if allowed (by the Democrats) to continue. It doesn't even
have to escalate and the eventual fraud (my opinion) doesn't have to
be tied directly to the Democrats or anyone associated with the DNC or
the Kerry election group.

It's my belief that this all stems from the Clinton group who intend to keep
Kerry out in order to have a plausible platform for Hillary in '08.

This is about swing voters. The Republican Convention created real
momentum and at the point that Kerry has to stop that momentum and
move it in his direction, you have this grabbing the headlines. Terry
Mcauliffe's remarks to the contrary, no one else is linking this to
the Republican side (although it does make interesting conspiracy
theory, all tied to a certainty that Rather and CBS couldn't resist
the bait). This is bad for the Democrats and it only has to live
another couple of weeks to make the difference. THE difference.

Electioneering has always been a dirty business but network news owes their
entire fortunes to the fact that they are licensed to send their commercials
ot over public airwaves. If that's the case they OWE us the very least of
presenting as neutral a news reporting as possible.

Over the years the networks have been moving further and further to the
left. Not as a purposeful shift but because they tend to hire journalists
who agree with the bosses and don't make waves and that sort of thing causes
those sorts of shifts.

But now it is so outrageous I believe that the FCC will have to step in with
some sort of "Fairness Doctrine" that all stations must abide by or lose
their licenses.

From: "Tom Kunich"

But now it is so outrageous I believe that the FCC will have to step in with
some sort of "Fairness Doctrine" that all stations must abide by or lose
their licenses.

Not going to happen and Rather has done this before.

You might not like the source but the information is easy enough to verify.

http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0409150552.asp

Bill C

What I don't get is the plays to the undecided voters. How
anyone could be undecided in this election escapes me.
I think that anyone who is undecided at this date has a
patriotic duty to stay the hell home on election day, since
they're obviously not paying attention.

The downside of the low number of undecideds is that the
only way to gain ground is to drive your opponents voters
away from the polls. A long time ago I expected this to
be one of the dirtiest elections ever and I don't think
the last weeks will prove me wrong.

Bob Schwartz

gwhite wrote:
Benjamin Weiner wrote:

I have enough evidence from the last four years to
make up my mind on the candidates.

Yeah, I'll probably vote for Badnarik too.

Damn, I didn't even realize Chuck Bednarik was running!
He was tough as nails, he might be a little old though.

"A linebacker is like an animal. He's like a lion or a tiger
and he goes after prey. He wants to eat him, he wants to kick"
the ---- out of him. That's a linebacker." - Bednarik

http://espn.go.com/classic/biography...rik_Chuck.html

It would be even cooler if he picked Chuck Palahniuk, the
guy who wrote Fight Club, as his VP. A Bednarik-Palahniuk
ticket would carry the Rust Belt from Pittsburgh to Chicago
on the names alone.

Although, hardly anybody lives in the Rust Belt anymore.

-Ben
Rust Belt expatriate

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
(Benjamin Weiner) wrote:

type-ball Selectrics. Not that I think any of this **** matters.

Using family influence to avoid dangerous service is understandable --
a lot of people would've done that if they could. But to do it, or
maybe even have been AWOL, and then have the gall to fly onto a
military ship, dressed up like a pilot, saying Mission Accomplished,
all while undercutting the professional leadership in our military,
screwing over people who joined the service now and are serving in a
hazardous situations, is appalling.

That's a fair statement. What I said was poorly worded. The truth or
falsity of this memo **** doesn't matter much to me. Because it's
arguing about whether GWB used influence or not and showed up or not,
while it's undisputed that he copped easy duty, whether through good
fortune or family influence or whatever. The rest of your argument
follows from that alone. The memo is a distraction, something for
bloggers and Beltway professionals to argue about and keep in the
headlines to avoid discussing any real issues. If it turns out to
be fake, is GWB exonerated of hubris? Not to me.

Tom Kunich wrote:

No. Fax yourself a memo and you'll see that it doesn't get pixelated, it
gets smeared.

And if they were Faxed, explain why See-BS has a set on their site that look
almost original.

Easy to check now. Go to Kinko's in Abilene and check out their fax
machine. Now famous for more than just the Nancy Griffith song...