Interesting information at Scylla & Charybdis that notes the similarities between the Michael Smith, reporter of the DSM’s and Michael Smith, reporter of the Killian Memo’s:
HEY ! A reporter hired by Mary Mapes as a CBS assistant producer, “Michael Smith,” was the guy that BummerDietz fingered as the true culprit of MemoGate.
Can there be two “Michael Smiths” who are leftish military stringers?
Rawstory indicates that Michael Smith admits that he “destroyed the original copies” before September 17, 2004. So, this timeline would be that Smith is destroying memos, around September 2004….The faked Killian memos appear to have been forged in mid-August, 2004, and a story was told by Burkett that he had “destroyed the originals.”
Now we have Michael Smith (again, same Mapes team guy?) admitting that he was typing up old memo copies the same 30-day period?Is that the same Michael Smith – the one emailed Mapes in Memogate, trying to arrange a publishing advance/bribe for Burkett, asking if it could be arranged: “What if there was a person who might have some information that could possibly change
the momentum of an election?”One or more Michael Smiths were very busy in August and September 2004 with not one, but TWO SETS of faked memos that were highly critical of George Bush…..
Very curious. A commenter on the page found out some more interesting info:
What I have found so far on Michael Smith. He is listed as a Defense Correspondent at the Daily Telegraph. A Bio on him from Penguin Books-Served for nine years in the British Army Intelligence Corps as a latter day codebreaker before going to work for the BBC monitoring service. He has written for a number of newspapers, including the Financial Times, the Sunday Times, and most recently the Daily Telegraph where he is Defense Correspondent.
One story in the Daily Telegraph on a man named Frank Foley, a Brit who helped save Jews during WWII, notes that Mr. Smith was given the information on what Mr. Foley did by one of his MI6 contacts.
Michael Smith is also an associate of Oxford Research Group. Associates are participants in one of more of ORG’s meetings or roundtables and have expressed their willingness to personally and publicly endorse our committment to seek to develop effective methods whereby people can bring about positive change on issues of national and international security by non-violent means. (Directly from their website where Michael Smith is noted as a Defense correspondent for the Daily Telegraph)
Please note that the Michael Smith of Rathergate was noted by the investigating committee as being a Freelance Journalist IN Texas, not from Texas. I know that may be simply a change in words meaning the same thing but why did the committee not give more information on Michael Smith? I have difficulty thinking they didn’t have it. Perhaps because he was not an American Reporter?
The information is out there, we just need to look further.
The only thing that leads me to believe the memo’s are not fakes is that the information in the memo’s is just not damaging to Bush. It say’s Bush believed Saddam wouldn’t comply with the UN so war was inevitable basically….wow, big news there.
The fact this reporter went to such great lengths to hide the fact the memo’s were fake is quite suspicious tho.
Via Strata Sphere:
I guess the other questions are why hold these since Sep 2004, when they were scanned? Is there any coincidence that Sep 2004 is the time of Dan Rather?s forgeries as fact story? Hmmmm.
Check out these blown up snaps from the documents and realize these were supposedly newly typed documents (per Smith?s claim) scanned in Sept 2004, and then ask yourself why do they look like they have been copied a few times over:
Why all the extra effort on the typewriter instead of transcribing them into his PC? Why not scan the typewritten pages into PDF instead of copies that look like they have been copied numerous times? Why all this extra effort when transcribed PC files provide no path back to his source – which he claims is his motive.