Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: upanddown who wrote (55592)	9/13/2004 1:21:05 AM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Are the forms conceded to be correct and consistent with the version of the forms used in the applicable period? No. The formatting does not conform to USAF Regs at the time. Anyone who has worked in a large organization knows that forms are modified frequently and new versions are constantly appearing and the old versions disappearing. Not true in the military. Forms are mandated by each service with many similarities...no doubt coordinated at the Pentagon. Each unit uses the exact same format. They are written in books and distributed to every unit. Military Services hate to change forms. It becomes a monster task. Are these the forms used as of the date on the documents? No. The formatting does not match. See my earlier post on that. If the forms are authentic, then the forgery charge is bogus since the BLANK EARLY-70's VERSION of the forms has unquestionably disappeared into the dustbin of history. Plenty of 70's versions are around. I have copies of every order, award, letter and efficiency report written on me in the 60s, 70s and 80s. And the official record repository has everybody's records...LOL except those destroyed in the fire years ago or otherwise misplaced or lost. I know lots of officers and NCOs who kept a copy of every record. Also, the military did not use blank, fill-in forms then for orders or letters. Each was typed individually and copies were made using carbon paper. If they are not authentic, how was the boilerplate created? I hope that is a rhetorical question. Another question is if these documents are bogus, why isn't the Bush campaign going ballistic? I can think of two reasons. The issue is only 2 business days old. And the Pentagon has them under review.