Written by Dr. James M. Newcomer.<br><br>Bio<br>Dr. Newcomer received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from Carnegie-Mellon University, and spent several years on the CMU CS faculty. He was a founding scientist of the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at CMU. He has over 40 years of experience in developing commercial, industrial, and research applications.<br><br><blockquote>First off, before I start getting a lot of the wrong kind of mail: I am not a fan of George Bush. But I am even less a fan of attempts to commit fraud, and particularly by a complete and utter failure of those we entrust to ensure that if the news is at least accurate. I know it is asking far too much to expect the news to be unbiased. But the people involved should not actually lie to us, or promulgate lies created by hoaxers, through their own incompetence.<br><br>There has been a lot of activity on the Internet recently concerning the forged CBS documents. I do not even dignify this statement with the traditional weasel-word “alleged”, because it takes approximately 30 seconds for anyone who is knowledgeable in the history of electronic document production to recognize this whole collection is certainly a forgery, and approximately five minutes to prove to anyone technically competent that the documents are a forgery. I was able to replicate two of the documents within a few minutes. At time I a writing this, CBS is stonewalling. They were hoaxed, pure and simple. CBS failed to exercise anything even approximately like due diligence. I am not sure what sort of "expert" they called in to authenticate the document, but anything I say about his qualifications to judge digital typography is likely to be considered libelous (no matter how true they are) and I would not say them in print in a public forum.<br><br>I am one of the pioneers of electronic typesetting. I was doing work with computer typesetting technology in 1972 (it actually started in late 1969), and I personally created one of the earliest typesetting programs for what later became laser printers, but in 1970 when this work was first done, lasers were not part of the electronic printer technology (my way of expressing this is “I was working with laser printers before they had lasers”, which is only a mild stretch of the truth). We published a paper about our work (graphics, printer hardware, printer software, and typesetting) in one of the important professional journals of the time (D.R. Reddy, W. Broadley, L.D. Erman, R. Johnsson, J. Newcomer, G. Robertson, and J. Wright, "XCRIBL: A Hardcopy Scan Line Graphics System for Document Generation," Information Processing Letters (1972, pp.246-251)). I have been involved in many aspects of computer typography, including computer music typesetting (1987-1990). I have personally created computer fonts, and helped create programs that created computer fonts. At one time in my life, I was a certified Adobe PostScript developer, and could make laser printers practically stand up and tap dance. I have written about Microsoft Windows font technology in a book I co-authored, and taught courses in it. I therefore assert that I am a qualified expert in computer typography.</blockquote><br><br>more<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
***************<br><br>This space left intentionally blank
okay . . . i posted a link to an expert yesterday who came to a different conclusion.<br><br>what about the new USA Today memos released today? they appear to be more detailed and damning of dubya than the CBS memos. <br><br><br>--<br>one of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Plato
Sean . . . This tired, regurgitated for the 28th time George Bush ANG "controversy" means nothing. I know you liberal Democrats are having wet dreams on how this will take down President Bush, but it won't. George Bush served his time in the Air National Guard and served his country. <br><br><blockquote>Before you fall for Dems’ spin, here are the facts <br>Byron York<br>The Hill<br><br>What do you really know about George W. Bush’s time in the Air National Guard?<br> That he didn’t show up for duty in Alabama? That he missed a physical? That his daddy got him in?<br><br> News coverage of the president’s years in the Guard has tended to focus on one brief portion of that time — to the exclusion of virtually everything else. So just for the record, here, in full, is what Bush did:<br><br> The future president joined the Guard in May 1968. Almost immediately, he began an extended period of training. Six weeks of basic training. Fifty-three weeks of flight training. Twenty-one weeks of fighter-interceptor training. <br><br> That was 80 weeks to begin with, and there were other training periods thrown in as well. It was full-time work. By the time it was over, Bush had served nearly two years. <br><br> Not two years of weekends. Two years.<br><br> After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50 points to meet their yearly obligation.<br><br> According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis).<br><br> Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. Did you know that?<br><br> That brings the story to May 1972 — the time that has been the focus of so many news reports — when Bush “deserted” (according to anti-Bush filmmaker Michael Moore) or went “AWOL” (according to Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee).<br><br> Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK. Requests like that weren’t unusual, says retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971.<br><br> “In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots,” Campenni says. “The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In ’72 or ’73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem.”<br><br> So Bush stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points — not much, but enough to meet his requirement.<br><br> Then, in 1973, as Bush made plans to leave the Guard and go to Harvard Business School, he again started showing up frequently.<br><br> In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year.<br><br> Then, at his request, he was given permission to go. Bush received an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months and five days of his original six-year commitment. By that time, however, he had accumulated enough points in each year to cover six years of service.<br><br> During his service, Bush received high marks as a pilot.<br><br> A 1970 evaluation said Bush “clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot” and was “a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership.” <br><br> A 1971 evaluation called Bush “an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot” who “continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his proficiency even further.” And a 1972 evaluation called Bush “an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer.”<br><br> Now, it is only natural that news reports questioning Bush’s service — in The Boston Globe and The New York Times, on CBS and in other outlets — would come out now. Democrats are spitting mad over attacks on John Kerry’s record by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. <br><br> And, as it is with Kerry, it’s reasonable to look at a candidate’s entire record, including his military service — or lack of it. Voters are perfectly able to decide whether it’s important or not in November.<br><br> The Kerry camp blames Bush for the Swift boat veterans’ attack, but anyone who has spent much time talking to the Swifties gets the sense that they are doing it entirely for their own reasons.<br><br> And it should be noted in passing that Kerry has personally questioned Bush’s service, while Bush has not personally questioned Kerry’s.<br><br> In April — before the Swift boat veterans had said a word — Kerry said Bush “has yet to explain to America whether or not, and tell the truth, about whether he showed up for duty.” Earlier, Kerry said, “Just because you get an honorable discharge does not, in fact, answer that question.”<br><br> Now, after the Swift boat episode, the spotlight has returned to Bush. <br><br> That’s fine. We should know as much as we can.<br><br> And perhaps someday Kerry will release more of his military records as well.</blockquote><br><br><br>There is no controversy, aside from the faked CBS memos. <br><br>My interest is more from the media bias angle. <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
***************<br><br>This space left intentionally blank
I believe the story is going way further than accounting for GW's time in the TANG. Dan Rather is going for a much bigger picture.<br><br>Many issues may develop from CBS's story. Here's what I think is coming:<br><br>-Bush Family influence over GW's official records.<br>-Bush relationship with James Bath, their corresponding dismissal from flight status and disobeyed orders for physicals.<br>-Bush records indicating civil service time ordered, along with James Bath, for some type of crime, drug use being the most talked about.<br>-Bush Family relationship with James Bath for decades, Poppy as CIA director and VP, specially as the go-between in Saudi money deals spanning from GW's oil business to the Iraq war.<br>-Bath/bin Laden family/Bush connections.<br><br>Today's USATODAY memo release:<br>"2 February 1972 Update me as soon as possile on flight certifications. Specifically - Bath and Bush. ---- Killian"<br><br><br>Why Bath's name was blotted out in the records of Bush's military service is an entirely different question.<br><br><br>< /tin foil hat ><br><br> <br><br>
Well, it certainly sounds like the backstory for Michael Moore's second installment in his trilogy . . . <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
***************<br><br>This space left intentionally blank
Actually it was all covered in F911, except for the military records portion which CBS is dealing with now.<br><br>I'm pretty sure the James Bath and Saudi money connections are well documented. ( There's an excellent Salon article on it) The Bush and Bath financial connections are well documented. Michael Moore put these in his film so people could understand that there is a relationship. <br><br>I thought you mentioned you had seen it? If not, it'll be out on DVD soon for you to see and enjoy.<br><br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.