On 16 Sep 2004 11:12:05 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 14:57:29 GMT, felton said:

On the one hand, no one disputes the
information contained in the memos, all the while focusing on the
authenticity and the source.

That's a very carefully crafted argument that CBS and the Dems are making.
The question is just what the "information contained in the memos" is. If
the information is that Killian thought somebody was pulling strings, that
information is impossible to dispute, since it deals with what was in a dead
man's head, and nobody knows. If the "information contained in the memos" is
that somebody was pulling strings, that information has been disputed
frequently (though also in carefully crafted language by the
Republicans--"no one in the family.....").

You might have found it interesting to watch 60 Minutes last night
(Wed), when the secretary of Col Killian was interviewed. She did say
that Killian kept a "cover your back" file regarding Bush. She
recalled Lt Bush as a very nice young man with an attitude that the
rules didn't apply to him. It was her belief that all the information
in the memos was accurate, but she questioned their authenticity and
didn't know their source. General Bobby Hughes, the Commanding
Officer at the time, also confirms the substance of the memos, but
also doubt their authenticity. Very interesting and mysterious



This isn't to say I think no one pulled strings. I suspect someone did. But
one has to look at arguments one way or the other with a careful view to the
games people play with words.

That said, the only part of the story that isn't old news is the documents
themselves, and I think it's appropriate to focus on whether they are
evidence of someone's tampering inappropriately with the electoral process,
whoever that someone may be.

I agree with your last conclusion. If I were a betting man, I would
say that, as in the case of the Swift Boat group, all roads lead to
Rove.