Actually, most of the bloggers I've had the misfortune of inquiring too deeply have told me they all "blog commando".

'Cept Jeff G. I bet he blogs in a French Maid outfit.

Can a line of digital brownshirt pajamas be far behind?

The only fraud is what is being done by you far right wackos trying to smear hardworking reporters and spread fear (AS USUAL!) -- soo fascist.

see here to be DEBUNKED wingnuts:

http://www.mahablog.com/2004.09.05_arch.html#1094852190259

You kooks are going down.

Sorry I can't understand you ... I only noticed the word "kooks."

"Bush lies therefore anything faxed to Dan Rather is authentic".

Masters of logic.

Ah. Appears I was misinformed.

Aight, OG. Tuning into Cam's show. Amaze me.

does mahablog qualify as a linkwhore? can we expect a book out soon, perhaps some kiss-and-tell, maybe some naming names? I hope s/he cleans up better than that last DC barfly/intern ho.

I originally posted this over at Wizbang last week, and somehow Jeff Goldstein got it from some other third source, but I still stick by it.

-----------

Old AF Admin Wheenie with 20 years in service here. One thing I haven't heard a lot about, only a little, is the format of some of the documents. They're just wrong. The headers are wrong. The signature blocks are wrong. They're just WRONG.

There's no such thing as a Memo for file. There's a Memorandum for Record, but no Memo for file. NO SUCH THING.

Addressing an official document with

MEMORANDUM FOR:

didn't occur until the 1990s. The AF didn't move their signature blocks over to the right of the documents until the same time, before then they were anchored four clear lines down the left margin.

An official signature block looks like this.

JOHN S. SUPERTROOP, Rank, USAF
Duty Title

Three line signature blocks are reserved for flag officers (Generals) and Colonels sitting in a General's billet. But they look like

JOHN S. SUPERTROOP
General, USAF
Duty Title

Now civilians may scoff and say so what? Who cares about admin details like that? Ummmmm, the military does...quite a bit too much actually. I've seen inspection teams tear entire careers apart over the admin details being mucked up.

There isn't an admin guy in any branch of the service who wouldn't have taken one look at these documents and waved the bullshit flag. You could show those documents to any airman coming fresh out of school down at Keesler and they'd have a blast tearing them apart.

Those documents aren't just fakes...they're really really bad fakes. And all it would have taken was someone with some sense of how these things are done. The more I look at them...the more I get the feeling that someone sort of scanned through AFM 33-326 and shoved all this together. Before that we had AFR 10-1 and it had the formats I mentioned above.

Remember though, before anyone goes, "Hey, that looks right." We didn't use that manual until 1996 and it's been updated since then.

Bottom line, wrong fonts, wrong headers, wrong formats. It's bullshit, you can't hide from it.

Yeah Chris... but the blogettes will demand Blass designer chic Mauve...nag nag nag....

Mahablog has a couple of really good points.

Sadly, they're attached to the ends of the sharp sticks he jammed into his ears to keep Karl Rove's secret radio waves from compelling him to murder nuns and puppies.

Timmer ... At this piont there is such a pile of pin-pointed errors you'd be hard put to find any serious expert or Military people such as yourself who any longer harbor doubt. The game now is to see how much longer see BS can withstand the ridicule and shredding of its already eroded reputation before they decide to label Rather "a renegade former employee" who acted in his own interests against the non-partisan policies of CBS" .. (cough cough)...

Hunter, in fact, I think one of the telling questions for CBS is 'How _MANY_ people have you had examine the documents?'

One of the key pieces of this story is Mare Mapes, producer, who Killian's son and wife allege discounted their cries of 'fraud' before the whole story aired.

So... eventually they'll find an 'expert' who will whore for them. Think 'Michael Moore'. The real question then is... how many experts told them to get stuffed along the way?

Dan Rather will explain this away in the only possible way he can now.

He'll say the memos given to him are modern recreations of memos known to have existed. And he will apologize for not being clear about that.

He will reiterate how the questions raised by the documents are more important than their authenticity.

Al...Yes its true that CBS can go on stonewalling, just letting the whole issue fade. But if the reaction of the audience to Caddels comments regarding this fraudulent mess is any indication, they have to be worried about their ratings, already going south faster than a prom dress in the back seat of a chevy... Bottom line... Money talks ... BS walks.....

Yeah, and talk about chauvinistic! HELLO! There are us of the FEMALE gender out here! And no pajamas either..hmmph!
www.Rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com

60 Minutes and Dan Rather are either the victims of or the perpetrators of a hoax. There is no way the Killian memos were produced on equipment that could have been found or would have been used in an ordinary office environment. You could do them yourself in MS Word in 10 minutes, Beyond all doubt the documents are forgeries.
You are required by your FCC license to provide "honest" news reporting. Providing air time for forged documents prvoided by political operatives to slander a sitting president and influence an election should clearly be an issue in your next license renewal.

In the meantime, I am refusing to watch your station and encouraging all of my friends to do the same. ABC has provided some honest coverage of this issue and will get our business until your license review.

You can turn this situation around by:

1. Providing honest local news coverage on the Fraud presented on your airwaves by 60 minutes without your consent.

2. Urging CBS Network to reire Dan Rather and fire Mary Mapes

In 70 hours your network has managed to flush 70 years of hard-won credibility. Only the most extreme effort will save this sinking ship.

Hey, the new link on Drudge to CBS's web site, after his Monday night broadcast, includes a lot of the damning evidence questioning Rather's fake docs. Is CBS distancing themselves from their "star"?

Hunter,

You're right...I was just so dumbfounded to see my comment quoted somewhere other than where I originally posted that I got a bit full of myself and had to throw it out there one more time.