PDA

View Full Version : CBS is going down!


FringeNC
09-09-2004, 01:21 PM
http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200409\POL20040909d.html

"That would not be possible on a typewriter or even a word processor at that time," said John Collins, vice president and chief technology officer at Bitstream Inc., the parent of MyFonts.com.

|Zach|
09-09-2004, 01:23 PM
I have been waiting for like 5 mins for your source page to load...jeez.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 01:24 PM
Can someone point to the TH button on the selectric typewriter? Or is there some evidence this wasn't done on a selectric?

http://www.selectric.org/selectric/

Cochise
09-09-2004, 01:25 PM
The text, for those having trouble with the site.


'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
By Robert B. Bluey
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
September 09, 2004

(CNSNews.com) - The 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by the CBS News program "60 Minutes," shedding a negative light on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard, may have been forged using a current word processing program, according to typography experts.

Three independent typography experts told CNSNews.com they were suspicious of the documents from 1972 and 1973 because they were typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program.

The "60 Minutes" segment included an interview with former Texas lieutenant governor Ben Barnes, who criticized Bush's service. The news program also produced a series of memos that claim Bush refused to follow an order to undertake a medical examination.

The documents came from the "personal office file" of Bush's former squadron commander Jerry B. Killian, according to Kelli Edwards, a spokeswoman for "60 Minutes," who was quoted in Thursday's Washington Post. Edwards declined to tell the Post how the news program obtained the documents.

But the experts interviewed by CNSNews.com honed in on several aspects of a May 4, 1972, memo, which was part of the "60 Minutes" segment and was posted on the CBS News website Thursday.

"It was highly out of the ordinary for an organization, even the Air Force, to have proportional-spaced fonts for someone to work with," said Allan Haley, director of words and letters at Agfa Monotype in Wilmington, Mass. "I'm suspect in that I did work for the U.S. Army as late as the late 1980s and early 1990s and the Army was still using [fixed-pitch typeface] Courier."

The typography experts couldn't pinpoint the exact font used in the documents. They also couldn't definitively conclude that the documents were either forged using a current computer program or were the work of a high-end typewriter or word processor in the early 1970s.

But the use of the superscript "th" in one document - "111th F.I.S" - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it's not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.

"That would not be possible on a typewriter or even a word processor at that time," said John Collins, vice president and chief technology officer at Bitstream Inc., the parent of MyFonts.com.

"It is a very surprising thing to see a letter with that date [May 4, 1972] on it," and featuring such typography, Collins added. "There's no question that that is surprising. Does that force you to conclude that it's a fake? No. But it certainly raises the eyebrows."

Fred Showker, who teaches typography and introduction to digital graphics at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Va., questioned the documents' letterhead.

"Let's assume for a minute that it's authentic," Showker said. "But would they not have used some form of letterhead? Or has this letterhead been intentionally cut off? Notice how close to the top of the page it is."

He also pointed to the signature of Killian, the purported author of the May 4, 1972, memo ordering Bush, who was at the time a first lieutenant in the Texas Air National Guard, to obtain a physical exam.

"Do you think he would have stopped that 'K' nice and cleanly, right there before it ran into the typewriter 'Jerry," Showker asked. "You can't stop a ballpoint pen with a nice square ending like that ... The end of that 'K' should be round ... it looks like you took a pair of snips and cut it off so you could see the 'Jerry.'"

The experts also raised questions about the military's typewriter technology three decades ago. Collins said word processors that could produce proportional-sized fonts cost upwards of $20,000 at the time.

"I'm not real sure that you would have that kind of sophistication in the office of a flight inspector in the United States government," Showker said.

"The only thing it could be, possibly, is an IBM golf ball typewriter, which came out around the early to middle 1970s," Haley said. "Those did have proportional fonts on them. But they weren't widely used."

But Haley added that the use of the superscript "th" cast doubt on the use of any typewriter.

"There weren't any typewriters that did that," Haley said. "That looks like it might be a function of something like Microsoft Word, which does that automatically."

According to an article on the CBS News website, the news program "consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

E-mail a news tip to Robert B. Bluey.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

Donger
09-09-2004, 01:26 PM
But Haley added that the use of the superscript "th" cast doubt on the use of any typewriter.

"There weren't any typewriters that did that," Haley said. "That looks like it might be a function of something like Microsoft Word, which does that automatically."

Here's the PDF: http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/BushGuardmay4.pdf

Notice the superscripted ( I think that's what it's called) "th" after 111.

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 01:27 PM
Suppose for a minute that there is definitive proof that these documents are fake. What is the impact on Kerry, and what is the impact on the media?

|Zach|
09-09-2004, 01:28 PM
This is an interesting article although after looking at it the "th" doesn't look that special to me.

It looks the same as if someone typed the lower case letters t and h together.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 01:30 PM
More evidence of forgery from an expert in fonts (who knew there was such a thing)...evidently the typewriters of the time were incapable of producing the number "4" as shown in the docs. At least that's what his database says.

http://www.indcjournal.com/

BTW, if this turns out to be a forgery I put my money on the Bush team being responsible for its release. It this is a forgery it just destroys the whole story AND it gets Kerry dirty in the process.

But I'm not ready to say its a forgery yet...and I don't think it really hurts Bush at the end of the day even if it is real.

Donger
09-09-2004, 01:31 PM
This is an interesting article although after looking at it the "th" doesn't look that special to me.

It looks the same as if someone typed the lower case letters t and h together.

Except for the fact that there weren't any typewriters that superscripted in 1972, at least according to this Haley guy:

But Haley added that the use of the superscript "th" cast doubt on the use of any typewriter.

"There weren't any typewriters that did that," Haley said. "That looks like it might be a function of something like Microsoft Word, which does that automatically."

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 01:32 PM
This is an interesting article although after looking at it the "th" doesn't look that special to me.

It looks the same as if someone typed the lower case letters t and h together.

Not the TH at the top of the document...the one contained in point number 2 that is obviously being created as a single character.

Donger
09-09-2004, 01:32 PM
Suppose for a minute that there is definitive proof that these documents are fake. What is the impact on Kerry, and what is the impact on the media?

No impact on Kerry, and CBS gets another black eye.

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 01:33 PM
More evidence of forgery from an expert in fonts (who knew there was such a thing)...evidently the typewriters of the time were incapable of producing the number "4" as shown in the docs. At least that's what his database says.

http://www.indcjournal.com/

BTW, if this turns out to be a forgery I put my money on the Bush team being responsible for its release. It this is a forgery it just destroys the whole story AND it gets Kerry dirty in the process.

But I'm not ready to say its a forgery yet...and I don't think it really hurts Bush at the end of the day even if it is real.

I like the theory, but would Rove really believe that CBS wouldn't check the authenticity of the documents? CBS obviously did not.

jeffrho68
09-09-2004, 01:33 PM
Didn't typewriters use monospaced fonts like courier? This document was done with a proportional font. And I don't ever recall using a typewriter that could do superscript. Both proportional fonts and superscripting would require the use of a typesetting machine.

|Zach|
09-09-2004, 01:35 PM
Except for the fact that there weren't any typewriters that superscripted in 1972, at least according to this Haley guy:

But Haley added that the use of the superscript "th" cast doubt on the use of any typewriter.

"There weren't any typewriters that did that," Haley said. "That looks like it might be a function of something like Microsoft Word, which does that automatically."
What I am saying is that it doesn't look like superscript to me.

It looks like t and h typed together. It doesn't look that different in my eyes. I will yeild to expert on this but I don't see it personally.

Duck Dog
09-09-2004, 01:35 PM
This is an interesting article although after looking at it the "th" doesn't look that special to me.

It looks the same as if someone typed the lower case letters t and h together.


Look at the 111th in paragraph two.

HC_Chief
09-09-2004, 01:36 PM
Interesting.

I'd like to see further analysis and discourse from more 'mainstream' sources (ie 'credible')

Donger
09-09-2004, 01:36 PM
What I am saying is that it doesn't look like superscript to me.

It looks like t and h typed together. It doesn't look that different in my eyes. I will yeild to expert on this but I don't see it personally.

Are you looking at line #2?

"Report to 111th F.L.S...."

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 01:37 PM
Interesting.

I'd like to see further analysis and discourse from more 'mainstream' sources (ie 'credible')

Credible...like CBS and the New York Times?

Duck Dog
09-09-2004, 01:37 PM
Suppose for a minute that there is definitive proof that these documents are fake. What is the impact on Kerry, and what is the impact on the media?


Not much. CBS, libs and dems will spin it. The rest of the liberal media will ignore it. We get to call them all liars (and mean it).

And Bush still wins.

|Zach|
09-09-2004, 01:38 PM
Are you looking at line #2?

"Report to 111th F.L.S...."
Yes I am...it doesn't look smaller or further together to me.

HC_Chief
09-09-2004, 01:38 PM
Credible...like CBS and the New York Times?

I said <i>credible</i>, not crap :p

Duck Dog
09-09-2004, 01:39 PM
Interesting.

I'd like to see further analysis and discourse from more 'mainstream' sources (ie 'credible')


Me too. They should let CBS's analyists look at it again.

|Zach|
09-09-2004, 01:40 PM
Whoa sorry, nevermind...I was look at the wrong thing.

Duck Dog
09-09-2004, 01:41 PM
Yes I am...it doesn't look smaller or further together to me.


Are you blind? It is clearly smaller and located at the top right of 111. Like the power sign.

Donger
09-09-2004, 01:41 PM
Yes I am...it doesn't look smaller or further together to me.

Well, it is smaller and superscripted.

You must be looking at the wrong thing.

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 01:42 PM
Me too. They should let CBS's analyists look at it again.

Or maybe that infamous Florida recount guy..

|Zach|
09-09-2004, 01:43 PM
Whoa sorry, nevermind...I was look at the wrong thing.

Duck Dog
09-09-2004, 01:44 PM
Whoa sorry, nevermind...I was look at the wrong thing

:) I thought so.

Cochise
09-09-2004, 01:45 PM
You think the T in "to" and the t in "111th" look the same here?

jAZ
09-09-2004, 01:47 PM
I find it interesting that there are 2 different "th"'s on the document.

Donger
09-09-2004, 01:51 PM
I find it interesting that there are 2 different "th"'s on the document.

Yep, me too.

HC_Chief
09-09-2004, 01:52 PM
Someone is going to get hammered on this.

Donger
09-09-2004, 01:54 PM
Also, make note that the "st" (1st Lieutenant Bush) is not superscripted.

siberian khatru
09-09-2004, 01:56 PM
I find it interesting that there are 2 different "th"'s on the document.

That was the first thing I noticed. And reading around the net, there's a whole bunch of other ... "oddities" ... about it.

Still, I'm keeping my powder dry. Maybe there's a good explanation for all this. And if they're forgeries, the way this roller-coaster campaign has been, it's likely to boomerang against Bush -- it'll be revealed that Rove set CBS up, and the story won't be that CBS is sloppy and gullible, but that Rove is an evil dirty trickster and "HEY this is JUST like those forged yellowcake documents from Niger which REMINDS US that Bush is a LIAR and this proves he LIES about everything and ..." ROFL

jAZ
09-09-2004, 01:58 PM
Someone is going to get hammered on this.
I think RL has an interesting point. When it comes to campaign strategy, the smells a little like Rove.

Put out bogus documents to discredit the story and take the entire issue off the table. I don't know for sure, but I just read at DU that Freepers are speculating the same thing. Supposedly the same kinda thing happened in 2000.

"Rove CHOSE Hatfield (to disclose the Bush/Coke story) knowing that as a convicted murderer, Hatfield would be discredited, ALONG WITH the whole story."

Wouldn't be shocking either way.

Radar Chief
09-09-2004, 02:03 PM
That was the first thing I noticed. And reading around the net, there's a whole bunch of other ... "oddities" ... about it.

Still, I'm keeping my powder dry. Maybe there's a good explanation for all this. And if they're forgeries, the way this roller-coaster campaign has been, it's likely to boomerang against Bush -- it'll be revealed that Rove set CBS up, and the story won't be that CBS is sloppy and gullible, but that Rove is an evil dirty trickster and "HEY this is JUST like those forged yellowcake documents from Niger which REMINDS US that Bush is a LIAR and this proves he LIES about everything and ..." ROFL

And one post later.

I think RL has an interesting point. When it comes to campaign strategy, the smells a little like Rove.

Put out bogus documents to discredit the story and take the entire issue off the table. I don't know for sure, but I just read at DU that Freepers are speculating the same thing. Supposedly the same kinda thing happened in 2000.

"Rove CHOSE Hatfield (to disclose the Bush/Coke story) knowing that as a convicted murderer, Hatfield would be discredited, ALONG WITH the whole story."

Wouldn't be shocking either way.


ROFL

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 02:09 PM
I think RL has an interesting point. When it comes to campaign strategy, the smells a little like Rove.

Put out bogus documents to discredit the story and take the entire issue off the table. I don't know for sure, but I just read at DU that Freepers are speculating the same thing. Supposedly the same kinda thing happened in 2000.

"Rove CHOSE Hatfield (to disclose the Bush/Coke story) knowing that as a convicted murderer, Hatfield would be discredited, ALONG WITH the whole story."

Wouldn't be shocking either way.

But still, obviously CBS lied when they had the documents checked. I never want to hear another word from you about how biased Fox is after this crap.

siberian khatru
09-09-2004, 02:13 PM
http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000838.php

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 02:17 PM
http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000838.php

Was just going to post that. This is great. The blogs smashing through the attempted slime jobs of the leftist media.

jAZ
09-09-2004, 02:18 PM
But still, obviously CBS lied when they had the documents checked.
Really?

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 02:29 PM
Really?

If you read the link SK provided, the expert said they were false. Are you trying to tell me that CBS can't find a competent expert. Keep spinning, Jaz.

Donger
09-09-2004, 02:55 PM
But still, obviously CBS lied when they had the documents checked. I never want to hear another word from you about how biased Fox is after this crap.

If you read the CBS site, it says, "Killian died in 1984. 60 Minutes consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

So, the "expert" "BELIEVES the material is authentic.

Plenty of wiggle room.

Calcountry
09-09-2004, 03:03 PM
It was a CIA plot. One of H W's men produced what will be deduced as a "forged" document as a clandestine effort to smear Kerry for "dirty" politics, and clinch the victory for W.


Yep, thats the ticket. Its a conspiracy I tell ya.

FringeNC
09-09-2004, 03:07 PM
If you read the CBS site, it says, "Killian died in 1984. 60 Minutes consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

So, the "expert" "BELIEVES the material is authentic.

Plenty of wiggle room.

I dunno...if a bunch of experts claim it is an obvious fake, then there is no wiggle room.

Donger
09-09-2004, 03:10 PM
I dunno...if a bunch of experts claim it is an obvious fake, then there is no wiggle room.

"I asked him to put a percentage on the chances that this was a fake, and he said that was "hard to put a number on it." I then suggested "90%?" Again he said it's "hard to put an exact number, but I'd say it's at least that high, sure. I pretty much agree that that font is Times New Roman."

So, no one has for sure said whether the documents are fake or not, or real or not.

I'm not sure it can be proven either way. That, in and of itself, should have given CBS enough pause to not run their piece.

Baby Lee
09-09-2004, 03:12 PM
If '5000 Longmont #18" was intended to be kept secret, they did abad job. :thumb:

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 07:16 PM
Not much. CBS, libs and dems will spin it. The rest of the liberal media will ignore it. We get to call them all liars (and mean it).

And Bush still wins.


ABC News reported on it at the top of the hour...said they independently reviewed them and the conclusion of their experts are that they may be forgeries. Not definitive by any means, but the fact that they're talking about it in the MSM can't be good for the half-life of this story.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 07:19 PM
I think RL has an interesting point. When it comes to campaign strategy, the smells a little like Rove.

Put out bogus documents to discredit the story and take the entire issue off the table. I don't know for sure, but I just read at DU that Freepers are speculating the same thing. Supposedly the same kinda thing happened in 2000.

"Rove CHOSE Hatfield (to disclose the Bush/Coke story) knowing that as a convicted murderer, Hatfield would be discredited, ALONG WITH the whole story."

Wouldn't be shocking either way.


If this is a Rove plant then it is a politically brilliant move.

Good campaigns are great at this stuff (e.g. Clinton and Republican "leaks"). Kerry does not have a good campaign.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 07:23 PM
If this is a Rove plant then it is a politically brilliant move.

Good campaigns are great at this stuff (e.g. Clinton and Republican "leaks"). Kerry does not have a good campaign.


It is politically brilliant ONLY if you get a major media program to be so incompetent and/or willing to look beyond the facts...If this pans out - and the fact that General Staudt retired the year before the document saying he was applying pressure was written doesn't bode well for it beyond all the font, TH, 4 and other discussion - then 60 Minutes just did Bush a HUGE service.

Thig Lyfe
09-09-2004, 07:41 PM
Interesting article. Not really of any importance though.

yoswif
09-09-2004, 07:42 PM
I'm pretty sure that it's a felony to use forged military documents for personal gain. Using these forged documents as the basis of a news story which generates advertising revenue for his employer would seem to put Rather in a serious legal bind.

Joe Seahawk
09-09-2004, 07:43 PM
Whoa!! Check this out!

http://rope.wbap.com/audio/barnes.wma

alnorth
09-09-2004, 08:12 PM
New Details from the Weekly Standard

weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=4596&R=9FCD2F192

One major problem that was obvious to these professional forensic document experts that may not have been obvious to us: the letters were spaced proportionately, not monospace. In the 70's, typewriters would give thin letters like "i" and "l" the same amount of spacing as fat letters like "W" and "M". These memos werent like that. (They also bring up the Times New Roman problem. NO typewriter in any part of the 1970's could type that font)

Third, the apostrophes were curlicues like youd see on computers or word processors, but typewriters of that era had straight lines.

The experts did concede that the th superscript was possible in brand-new typewriters in the 70's, but the other 3 major problems remain.

So can we say with absolute certainty that the documents were forged? Not yet. Xavier University's Polt, in an email, offers two possible scenarios. "Either these are later transcriptions of earlier documents (which may have been handwritten or typed on a typewriter), or they are crude and amazingly foolish forgeries. I'm a Kerry supporter myself, but I won't let that cloud my objective judgment: I'm 99% sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s."

"These sure look like forgeries," says William Flynn, a forensic document expert widely considered the nation's top analyst of computer-generated documents. Flynn looked at copies of the documents posted on the CBS News website (here, here, here, and here). Flynn says, "I would say it looks very likely that these documents could not have existed" in the early 1970s, when they were allegedly written.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 08:17 PM
You beat me with your post Al...It also appears that Nightline was going to do a big story on these docs but have turned it into a story about how CBS has been had...

The Bush-National Guard story is officially DOA.

It doesn't matter what document Kerry's campaign produces from this point forward...Bush has answered his critics - now it's time for Kerry to answer the contradictions in his record.

RINGLEADER
09-09-2004, 08:19 PM
I wonder if Bush will hold a press conference and whine about how Kerry has forged documents to question his patriotism?

Nah...

I just don't see Bush doing it (but you know Kerry would be holding round-the-clock press conferences about how he's been victimized if the show was on the other foot)...

alnorth
09-09-2004, 08:43 PM
It's official! ABC News is now attacking the story!

abcnews.go.com/sections/Politics/Vote2004/bush_documents_040909-2.html (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Politics/Vote2004/bush_documents_040909-2.html)

On top of the problems I listed earlier, ABC News is reporting a new one: The verticle spacing of the memos was measured at 13 point, which was NOT available in any 1970's typewriters, untill the advent of computers.

Thig Lyfe
09-09-2004, 09:03 PM
I retract my previous statement...

What with all of the recent developments, this could change into a huge, huge story...

HC_Chief
09-10-2004, 08:24 AM
Solid! :D

I'm surprised, frankly, that the 'mainstream media' (see: ABC) is actually looking into this issue. I'm glad they are, just surprised :thumb: