Posted on 09/09/2004 4:42:30 PM PDT by dep
DOCUMENTS CITED Wednesday by 60 Minutes in a widely-publicized expose of George W. Bush's National Guard Service are very likely forgeries, according to several experts on document authenticity and typography. The documents--four memos from Killian to himself or his files written in 1972 and 1973--appear to indicate that Bush refused or ignored orders to have a physical exam required to continue flying. CBS News anchor Dan Rather reported the segment and sourced the documents this way: "60 Minutes has obtained a number of documents we are told were taken from Col. Killian's personal file," he said. The 60 Minutes story served as the basis for follow-up news reports for dozens of news organizations across the country. The memos were almost immediately questioned in the blog world, with blog Power Line leading the charge.
And according to several forensic document experts contacted by THE WEEKLY STANDARD say the Killian memos appear to be forgeries. Although it is nearly impossible to establish with certainty the authenticity of documents without a careful examination of the originals, several irregularities in the Killian memos suggest that CBS may have been the victim of a hoax.
"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.
Several other experts agree. "They look mighty suspicious," says a veteran forensic document expert who asked not to be quoted by name. Richard Polt, a Xavier University philosophy professor who operates a website dedicated to typewriters, says that while he is not an expert on typesetting, the documents "look like typical word-processed documents."
There are several reasons these experts are skeptical of the authenticity of the Killian memos. First the typographic spacing is proportional, as is routine with professional typesetting and computer typography, not monospace, as was common in typewriters in the 1970s. (In proportional type, thin letters like "i" and "l" are spaced closer together than thick letters like "W" and "M". In monospace, all the letter widths are the same.)
Second, the font appears to be identical to the Times New Roman font that is the default typeface in Microsoft Word and other modern word processing programs. According to Flynn, the font is not listed in the Haas Atlas--the definitive encyclopedia of typewriter type fonts.
Third, the apostrophes are curlicues of the sort produced by word processors on personal computers, not the straight vertical hashmarks typical of typewriters. Finally, in some references to Bush's unit--the 111thFighter Interceptor Squadron--the "th" is a superscript in a smaller size than the other type. Again, this is typical (and often done automatically) in modern word processing programs. Although several experts allow that such a rendering might have been theoretically possible in the early 1970s, it would have been highly unlikely. Superscripts produced on typewriters--the numbers preceding footnotes in term papers, for example--were almost always in the same size as the regular type.
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."
Says Flynn: "This looks pretty much like a hoax at this point in time."
CBS, in a statement Thursday afternoon, said it stands by the story. The network claims that its own document expert concluded the memos were authentic. There are several things CBS could do to clear up any confusion:
(1) Provide the name of the expert who authenticated the documents for Sixty Minutes.
(2) Provide the original documents to outside experts--William Flynn, Gerald Reynolds, and Peter Tytell seem to be the consensus top three in the United States--for further analysis.
(3) Provide more information on the source of the documents.
(A spokeswoman for CBS, Kelly Edwards, said she was overwhelmed with phone calls and did not respond to specific requests for comment.)
Stephen F. Hayes is a staff writer at The Weekly Standard.
CBS has very few options available.
They can stonewall. However, it is now up to CBS to PROVE the authenticity of the documents. There are just too many questions about these documents to enable CBS to get by with the generic "we stand by our story".
They can fess up and admit that they were fooled by these fakes. They must then identify their "source". I doubt the docs lead back to Kerry, but it wouldn't surprise me if they can be traced back to Terry McAwful.
They can admit someone at CBS forged the documents.
If this turns out as badly as it looks now, CBS is in deep trouble. This is serious business. As a side effect, Rather has probably given Bush another few points in the election.
Oh, sweet irony.
I'd say yes. And with no offense to you intended I would add, so?
I predict stonewall with a medium hang out.
Yes, follow the trail of sleaze and it likely will lead to the snakehead and the forehead.
TankerKC
CBS is in a lose lose situation. There best option is to neither admit guilt or push the issue. Simply come on one night and say there previous story with the documents have proven themselves to be suspicious and they until further notice retract it.
I don't know if that is important, but I'm sure someone here does.
Yes, but I think they never had the original. We'll see.
The fact that you can take MS Word and type the documents verbatim in the default setting and they do auto line wraps, font spacing, plus the centering to EXACTLY match the "1972" document is just too impossible to consider.
This story definitely has legs...LOL!
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.
It has been a good week for our side.
AP seriously wounds itself with the boos/lies and coverup of their rabid GW/Hetersexual hater, Tom Hays.
Now Constant Bull Ship or CBS does this.
Also, a conservative told me this afternoon that the Today show had 3 interviews with the drugged out pyscho liar Kitty Kelly. If that is true, the Today show and its network is as unreliable as AP, the Boston Globus Hystericus and CBS.
212-975-3691
Number found on this thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1133594/posts
Ask just what "investigation" went into authenticating the memos and whether they will offer an on-air retraction.
Demand they apologize for this EXTREME lapse of journalistic practice and basic skills.
Also, contact the president of CBS News, Andrew Heyward:
Phone: (212) 975-4321
Fax: (212) 975-1893
No. But whoever it was, they better stay away from Fort Marcy Park!
He's the sleeze who claimed to be a fighter pilot in Vietnam. He was called on it and changed to a "Vietnam era fighter pilot". He was then called on that, and backed off to a ferry pilot between Japan and Malaysia ( I'm not too sure as to the latter but it most definitely was not Vietnam!)
Another "stolen valor" wannabe, bravo sierra artist.
Regards,
GtG
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.