POAC
Monday, 6 December 2004, 4:42 pm
BinaBecker
Monday, 6 December 2004, 4:58 pm
Innnnnnteresting.

'Bina.
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 7:39 pm
Count Jeronimo
Monday, 6 December 2004, 7:40 pm
TJ,
Is there any reason why you haven't provided any background on this document?
Where and how was it obtained?
What is the context; a lawsuit, criminal investigation, what?
There is some clue in the text, but otherwise not much. Is this from a site like Smoking Gun, for instance?
OK, here's the source, but it doesn't answer these questions either ...
http://www.bradfriedman.com/BradBlog/
Panda
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:00 pm
Thanks, Rev. I've saved those to my hard drive....mind if I spread it around?
My email is ringing off the hook!
Started this morning at work when I couldn't respond. Arrrrggghhh!
Buzzflash to Brad's blog....the buzz is HUUUUGE!
Breaking into song....
"This could be the start of something big....."
Count Jeronimo
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:08 pm
It could, if it can be verified. That should be easy enough, don't you think?
BinaBecker
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:10 pm
Gimme an I!
Gimme an M!
Gimme a P!
Gimme an E!
Gimme an A!
Gimme a C!
Gimme an H!
Gimme an M!
Gimme an E!
Gimme an N!
Gimme a T!
Put 'em together, and what do they spell?
'Bina.
Count Jeronimo
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:18 pm
Not so fast ... ?
Source, verification, context, chain of custody. Otherwise, this could be anything, including a hoax.
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:45 pm
Yeah, this is great news. They're goin'
DOWN!
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:48 pm
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:50 pm
Yoinks! Check out the full report at
Online Journal, including lots of new details, and several interesting images.
BinaBecker
Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:54 pm
If Wayne Madsen picked up this story, you KNOW it's smokin'!

'Bina.
POAC
Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:04 pm
Count, every source hosting it went off the net within the first hour of having it, that's why i had to take it upon myself to publish the .pdf that i had. you'll notice the seal at the bottom of the document verifying it's legality
Count Jeronimo
Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:08 pm
Gotcha, TJ. Was just being cautious.
I agree, this is great stuff. EXPLOSIVE. I just printed out the 10-page expose. Hopefully, the mainstream media won't try to suppress this one.
Suggest you link or reprint the Online Journal report. It's dynamite stuff. A lot of angles to pursue, in a SLAM-BANG developing story ...
POAC
Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:08 pm
also, this is why the GOP released the fake "brad Menfil" shit a day or so ago
BinaBecker
Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:27 pm
My first thought was that this guy IS "Brad Menfil".
'Bina.
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:30 pm
| QUOTE (POAC @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 7:08 pm) |
| also, this is why the GOP released the fake "brad Menfil" shit a day or so ago |
I completely missed that story. What was it about?
Panda
Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:31 pm
| QUOTE (POAC @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 7:04 pm) |
| Count, every source hosting it went off the net within the first hour of having it, that's why i had to take it upon myself to publish the .pdf that i had. you'll notice the seal at the bottom of the document verifying it's legality |
TJ, I'm linking to your page with the request to save to their own hard drive to save your bandwidth. I'm using the gifs that Rev posted so hopefully you won't feel the pinch. But this is going to get big and we might need a fundraiser or two.
Cutting edge POAC in the lead here.....with links galore...thanks to you and Rev.
Good point about the "Brad Menfil" red herring. Is it real or is it Memorex? And it lost legs immediately.
We've really got to go into Rove-think here and plow through the bullshit they'll toss in. Focus like laser beams on the facts.
Hope Curtis has bodyguards and stays off small planes.
BinaBecker
Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:44 pm
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 10:30 pm) |
| I completely missed that story. What was it about? |
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 10:15 pm
Ah, thanks.
So this Brad Menfil stuff turned out to be fake?
I get it: concoct a fake story that makes you look bad, release it, then prove it's untrue. Then when the real story breaks, unthinking people will assume it must be untrue, too.
Nice. (not.)
POAC
Monday, 6 December 2004, 11:17 pm
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:15 pm) |
| Ah, thanks.
So this Brad Menfil stuff turned out to be fake?
I get it: concoct a fake story that makes you look bad, release it, then prove it's untrue. Then when the real story breaks, unthinking people will assume it must be untrue, too.
Nice. (not.)
|
worked on Dan Rather
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 11:20 pm
| QUOTE (POAC @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:17 pm) |
| worked on Dan Rather |
Holy S#!&!! You're right!!
Jeezuz, I didn't even think of that.
POAC
Monday, 6 December 2004, 11:26 pm
Apparently, someone murdered Curtis' 3 year old German Shepherd today, as he spoke with litigators in DC. (not a joke)
Rev. Day-Bu
Monday, 6 December 2004, 11:29 pm
| QUOTE (POAC @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:26 pm) |
| Apparently, someone murdered Curtis' 3 year old German Shepherd today, as he spoke with litigators in DC. (not a joke) |
Jesus. C'mon, I've f'ing cried enough today already. Grrrrrr... This is a nasty, vicious world. Sometimes I wonder that people still want to bring new babies into it.
POAC
Monday, 6 December 2004, 11:35 pm
This (public) information taken from
http://www.sba8a.com/yr02/fl100582.htm:
----------------------------------------
Yang Enterprises Inc
1420 Alafaya Trail
Oviedo FL 32765
Contact: Mrs Li-Woan Yang 407-365-7374
Industry: SIC 7371
Custom computer programming services
SBA certified this company as of 10/12/93. The company's graduation date for the 8(a) program is 10/12/02. SBA case number: 100582.
---------------------------------------
Do a google search on this woman - she apparently has had her share of dealings with Mr. Feeney.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%...%22&btnG=Search
BinaBecker
Monday, 6 December 2004, 11:44 pm
Like I said, my first thought was that this guy WAS "Brad Menfil", which "Brad" himself said was a pseudonym.
Of course, Indymedia stories have a reputation, deserved or not, for being less than creditable in the first place. So it's highly UNlikely that this was just a Repug pre-emptive discreditation plant, at least from where I'm sitting...because if it WERE, don't you think they'd have picked a more mainstream venue to plant their "fake"?
(Gawd, what a chore it is to try to unravel their twisted thinking...

)
'Bina.
rexateyfor
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 7:47 am
Here you'll see 3 seperate campaing contributions to Feeney from people associated with Yang totalling $5,250 between 2003 & 2004
http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/cam.../tom_feeney.asp Heres another article about Yang & Feeney
http://www.sptimes.com/2002/10/07/State/Cl...or_new_se.shtml
Dr. Left
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 11:13 am
| QUOTE (POAC @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:17 pm) |
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 8:15 pm) | | Ah, thanks.
So this Brad Menfil stuff turned out to be fake?
I get it: concoct a fake story that makes you look bad, release it, then prove it's untrue. Then when the real story breaks, unthinking people will assume it must be untrue, too.
Nice. (not.)
|
worked on Dan Rather
|
I know that this is off topic but actually it has never been proven that Rather's documents were false, it was implied and the pliable media reenforced that view. I down loaded copies of those doucments from CNN. I've seen those documents and there is no way that they were produced via computer. I've worked with IBM selective typewriters, and yes people they have the upcase script on different typing balls. The documents looked like they were typed on a typewriter....
Anyway like I said I kinda got off track, sorry.
'Doc
Panda
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 11:26 am
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Monday, 6 December 2004, 9:44 pm) |
Like I said, my first thought was that this guy WAS "Brad Menfil", which "Brad" himself said was a pseudonym.
Of course, Indymedia stories have a reputation, deserved or not, for being less than creditable in the first place. So it's highly UNlikely that this was just a Repug pre-emptive discreditation plant, at least from where I'm sitting...because if it WERE, don't you think they'd have picked a more mainstream venue to plant their "fake"?
(Gawd, what a chore it is to try to unravel their twisted thinking... )
'Bina. |
Yeah, but I'm hoping it's not since aspersions have already been cast on the Menfil story. We don't want or need another Rather fiasco. The facts were totally obscured by the document verificaton bullshit. I don't want a re-run of that lying crap!
"Is he real; did he ever work for the DNC; how did he vote; is he being paid off by a secret left wing organization; did he sleep with Kerry's daughter? Let's check into his personal life and analyze the shit out of him then audit him to see if he's ever cheated on his taxes why, that's just unpatriotic!"
I can see the whores now.....IF he's the real goods and IF he's not a chicken and IF they don't "off" him or otherwise "get" to him.
Either way, the spin will be to take him "as a person" DOWN, DOWN DOWN!
It's the LOW and USUAL repuke way. Go for the jugular; squash like a bug.
Frighten and intimidate.
I'm so sick of those assholes. I want the impeachment NOW!
| QUOTE |
| I know that this is off topic but actually it has never been proven that Rather's documents were false, it was implied and the pliable media reenforced that view. I down loaded copies of those doucments from CNN. I've seen those documents and there is no way that they were produced via computer. I've worked with IBM selective typewriters, and yes people they have the upcase script on different typing balls. The documents looked like they were typed on a typewriter.... |
It's not off topic at all. No, they never were proven to be false and certainly the content was not disputed. People are so stupid. There were several scenarios and the upshot was that those could be totally genuine documents but released by Rover on his terms and with his built-in spin. The whores obeyed each blastfax.
I wish Rather hadn't apologized and had said instead that the FACTS were true and why were they DODGING addressing those facts. Maybe they threatened his family. Who the hell knows? They know no limits.
Dr. Left
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 12:09 pm
Agreed Pander, Rather should have stuck to his guns and DARED the right to disprove them, what did he have to lose. There was a time when a journalist wouldn't back down, that is the trouble when you have TV models instead of real journalist reporting the "news".
'Doc
Panda
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 12:18 pm
Just got an email from a Viet Vet friend of mine who thinks the docs are fake....pumping him as to why...asking for links....Damn! I hope not.

Edit:
Okay, he says that the last page looks legit but he thinks that the first three were appended. Asked him why...he said the page size is different...was that in my puter...or is the 4th page really different?
Rev? TJ?
Dr. Left
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 12:32 pm
| QUOTE (Panda @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 10:18 am) |
Just got an email from a Viet Vet friend of mine who thinks the docs are fake....pumping him as to why...asking for links....Damn! I hope not. |
What docs, Rathers, or the ones about Affidavit?????
'Doc
Panda
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 12:36 pm
| QUOTE (Dr. Left @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 10:32 am) |
What docs, Rathers, or the ones about Affidavit?????
'Doc |
The Affidavit...sorry I wasn't clear. See above edit.
Dr. Left
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 12:38 pm
| QUOTE (Panda @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 10:36 am) |
| QUOTE (Dr. Left @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 10:32 am) | What docs, Rathers, or the ones about Affidavit?????
'Doc |
The Affidavit...sorry I wasn't clear. See above edit.
|
Okay, thanks....
'Doc
BinaBecker
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 12:41 pm
| QUOTE (Panda @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 1:18 pm) |
Just got an email from a Viet Vet friend of mine who thinks the docs are fake....pumping him as to why...asking for links....Damn! I hope not. 
Edit: Okay, he says that the last page looks legit but he thinks that the first three were appended. Asked him why...he said the page size is different...was that in my puter...or is the 4th page really different?
Rev? TJ? |
Might have something to do with the image-conversion software. But it looks like a real legal affidavit to me...
'Bina.
Dr. Left
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 12:43 pm
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 10:41 am) |
| QUOTE (Panda @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 1:18 pm) | Just got an email from a Viet Vet friend of mine who thinks the docs are fake....pumping him as to why...asking for links....Damn! I hope not. 
Edit: Okay, he says that the last page looks legit but he thinks that the first three were appended. Asked him why...he said the page size is different...was that in my puter...or is the 4th page really different?
Rev? TJ? |
Might have something to do with the image-conversion software. But it looks like a real legal affidavit to me...
'Bina.
|
I'm not a "legal beagle" but it looks real to me, wish Tamara was here, she could give us a better idea.
'Doc
POAC
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 1:28 pm
The only thing I have heard regarding the credibility of the docs is that they don't sound as if they were written by a programmer, whatever that means. i'm watching this one really closely...
Dr. Left
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 1:38 pm
| QUOTE (POAC @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 11:28 am) |
| The only thing I have heard regarding the credibility of the docs is that they don't sound as if they were written by a programmer, whatever that means. i'm watching this one really closely... |
Okay keep us posted will ya....
'Doc
POAC
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 7:23 pm
Listen to Unfiltered on Air America. Curtis will be interviewed in the first hour. starts at 9am eastern time. I'll try to make an .mp3 of it for thos of you who will be at work, but I have a limited amount of recording time in my trial version recording software and the POAC budget isn't sturdy enough to actually buy it yet. But I'll be able to snatch it from the AAR folks, if i have to. It just may take a while to get it from them.
POAC
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 7:38 pm
actually, scratch that. looks like i'll have to get it from the AAR radio archives. SONUVABITCH! This is so pissing me off. Without going in to boring details let me vent about a problem I had yesterday. After bradblog and rawstory broke the story I was next in line for the info. I immediately saved my copy of the pdf and began working with the POAC site to get it up. As I was working on the site I checked on bradblog and raw story and it had made its way to totalfark, so i was watching what people were saying, waiting for someone to debunk or verify before I could and all the sudden everyone who hosted the info went down. this baby exploded. Well, i was one of the few with the .pdf and a web site, so i went to work getting the pdf file uploaded and then intended to offer up our copy on the various places that were needing it (various blogs and forums). This was a big channce to bring thousands of new visitors to the POAC. Well, long story short, in between the time that I got the pdf uploaded to our server and the time when I WOULD HAVE offered it to the world via the POAC, adobe decided to offer me an update. i accepted and the result was boiut 25 minutes of rebooting and fixing the conflict that the update caused with my adobe elements. By the time I was able to read PDFs everyone and their brother had already hosted it and created mirrrors all over the net. So we lost a really big opportunity all because of a once in a blue monn update picked that specific moment to arrive.
*sigh
I was so angry that i could actually feel my blood pressure rising in every part of my body. Even my feet.
Now THAT's PISSED OFF
and now I can't even record a damn radio segment...
Panda
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 8:05 pm
Wait, there's more. Second Curtis dog mysteriously killed.
Brad has the ORIGINALS of the Affidavit. They appear legit.
~~~~~~~~
http://www.crooksandliars.com/A note from the Brad Blog!
As I'm unable to get to The BRAD BLOG due to the crush of traffic since reporting the "WHISTLEBLOWER AFFIDAVIT: Programmer Built Vote Rigging Prototype at Republican Congressman's Request!" story, I am also unable to report on a sad new related item just in.
I've just spoken with Clint Curtis, the "whistleblower" in this case, and he's reported that his previously healthy three-year old German Shepard has been found dead. Just a few hours after I published my story on Mr. Curtis.
I don't wish to give any other details for the moment, but the story should get out there. And I'm sorry to say that this is the second time this has occured to Mr. Curtis over the years since he began trying to tell his story.
I am angry, frustrated, hurt and feel somewhat responsible somehow. But I suppose it's a good reminder of the kind of folks that Mr. Curtis has been dealing with down in Florida for so many years.
As well, I'll have to take it as a good reminder of how important it is that we continue to fight for a government populated by people who we can trust. And to continue working towards a world where this sort of thing just doesn't happen to good honest individuals like Mr. Curtis who has put up with so much in order to tell his story.
I would also like to mention something to whoever decided it was a good idea to kill an innocent animal in order to threaten or warn or intimidate Mr. Curtis in some way. Clint's remarkable courage in reporting what he has seen over the years, has lead directly to charges being filed against people who were committing espionage against the United States of America.
If there were more folks like him, willing to stand up bravely rather than sink to the cowardly level of destroying an innocent animal to make a point, I'm quite certain everyone in this country would be much better off for it.
Since I am unable to post this story for the moment, until traffic dies down at my site, I hope that you will find this email notable enough to consider posting on your blog. Please feel free to post the entire note as is.
Regards,
Brad
THE BRAD BLOG - The uprising WILL continue...
http://www.BradBlog.com
Rev. Day-Bu
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 8:43 pm
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 10:41 am) |
| Okay, he says that the last page looks legit but he thinks that the first three were appended. Asked him why...he said the page size is different...was that in my puter...or is the 4th page really different? |
The different look of the pages is because of how the files were scanned and saved. Technically, it was done the "savvy" way. The guy who scanned the pages understood the differences between formats and used that well. I'm not sure, however, that the blogger who posted the pages is the person who scanned the pages.
The first three pages are just type. That means there's no need for shades of grey in the scan, as long as the resolution is high enough to make the letters easily readible. So the person who scanned the document using "bitmap" color mode. (Which is not to be confused with the P.C. "bitmap" or BMP file format) The "bitmap" color mode means each pixel is either black or white. There are no shades of grey. This can make the scan crisper and the file size smaller, if you know what you're doing and understand resolutions well. Since there's no color and no grey on pages 1, 2 and 3, the pages could be--and were--scanned or saved in bitmap color mode.
The fourth page, however, contails the legal seal--which requires greyscale to display--and the signatures--which require a few blue colors to display properly. So the last page, unlike the first three, was scanned in color and saved in an "indexed" color mode. An "indexed" color mode means that the document only contains the color information it needs: in this case, black, white, several different shades of grey, and a few different shades of blue for the signatures. Limiting the number of colors through "indexed" color mode is another way of getting a smaller file size.
That's why the pages look different. They were simply scanned differently to accomodate the different needs for the pages. The person who scanned the pages clearly had some experience in using scanners and saving images in the best, most efficient way.
Rev. Day-Bu
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 8:46 pm
| QUOTE (POAC @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 11:28 am) |
| The only thing I have heard regarding the credibility of the docs is that they don't sound as if they were written by a programmer, whatever that means. i'm watching this one really closely... |
A sworn affadavit almost certainly have been written with assistance from a lawyer.
Also, there's not one particular "voice" programmers write with. It's kind of silly for somebody to argue "they don't sound as if they were written by a programmer" any more than arguing that a cookbook "doesn't sound like it was written by a chef." That means nothing.
POAC
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 9:11 pm
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 6:46 pm) |
A sworn affadavit almost certainly have been written with assistance from a lawyer.
Also, there's not one particular "voice" programmers write with. It's kind of silly for somebody to argue "they don't sound as if they were written by a programmer" any more than arguing that a cookbook "doesn't sound like it was written by a chef." That means nothing. |
exactly. that chef talks like his food must taste like crap!
BinaBecker
Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 9:35 pm
Meanwhile, looky here:
http://bradblogtoo.blogspot.com/Looks like an ethics group is now working with this guy. Which lends LOTS more credence to what he's trying to say!
'Bina.
Panda
Wednesday, 8 December 2004, 12:28 am
| QUOTE (Rev. Day-Bu @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 6:43 pm) |
The different look of the pages is because of how the files were scanned and saved. Technically, it was done the "savvy" way. The guy who scanned the pages understood the differences between formats and used that well. I'm not sure, however, that the blogger who posted the pages is the person who scanned the pages.
The first three pages are just type. That means there's no need for shades of grey in the scan, as long as the resolution is high enough to make the letters easily readible. So the person who scanned the document using "bitmap" color mode. (Which is not to be confused with the P.C. "bitmap" or BMP file format) The "bitmap" color mode means each pixel is either black or white. There are no shades of grey. This can make the scan crisper and the file size smaller, if you know what you're doing and understand resolutions well. Since there's no color and no grey on pages 1, 2 and 3, the pages could be--and were--scanned or saved in bitmap color mode.
The fourth page, however, contails the legal seal--which requires greyscale to display--and the signatures--which require a few blue colors to display properly. So the last page, unlike the first three, was scanned in color and saved in an "indexed" color mode. An "indexed" color mode means that the document only contains the color information it needs: in this case, black, white, several different shades of grey, and a few different shades of blue for the signatures. Limiting the number of colors through "indexed" color mode is another way of getting a smaller file size.
That's why the pages look different. They were simply scanned differently to accomodate the different needs for the pages. The person who scanned the pages clearly had some experience in using scanners and saving images in the best, most efficient way. |
Thanks for 'splainin' that bit. I appreciate it since I'm a techno-twit.
Panda
Wednesday, 8 December 2004, 12:33 am
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 7:35 pm) |
Meanwhile, looky here:
http://bradblogtoo.blogspot.com/
Looks like an ethics group is now working with this guy. Which lends LOTS more credence to what he's trying to say!
'Bina. |
Thanks 'Bina. That link helps too. A LOT more credence.
I feel better with this bit:
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), www.citizensforethics.org is a legal watchdog group dedicated to ensuring integrity in public officials through the legal system. Recently, CREW wrote the complaint filed by Congressman Chris Bell against Leader Tom DeLay, for which DeLay was later admonished by the House Ethics Committee. I've got my fingers crossed.
Dr. Left
Wednesday, 8 December 2004, 7:52 am
| QUOTE (Panda @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 10:33 pm) |
| QUOTE (BinaBecker @ Tuesday, 7 December 2004, 7:35 pm) | Meanwhile, looky here:
http://bradblogtoo.blogspot.com/
Looks like an ethics group is now working with this guy. Which lends LOTS more credence to what he's trying to say!
'Bina. |
Thanks 'Bina. That link helps too. A LOT more credence. I feel better with this bit: Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), www.citizensforethics.org is a legal watchdog group dedicated to ensuring integrity in public officials through the legal system. Recently, CREW wrote the complaint filed by Congressman Chris Bell against Leader Tom DeLay, for which DeLay was later admonished by the House Ethics Committee. I've got my fingers crossed. |
Holy crap...the plot thinkens...
'Doc
POAC
Wednesday, 8 December 2004, 8:28 am
And suddenly AAR goes off the air.
Dr. Left
Wednesday, 8 December 2004, 9:00 am
| QUOTE (POAC @ Wednesday, 8 December 2004, 6:28 am) |
| And suddenly AAR goes off the air. |
What????
May God we are in 1984, we are the old Soviet Russia, this is too damn scary...
'Doc
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.