his article is a forgery!There is no technology available to you to produce that big red W.
Posted on 09/13/2004 8:31:00 PM PDT by ambrose
Perhaps. But the DNC or Kerry campaign could have received the documents and passed them on. This, in fact, is what the Prowler reported several days ago and it may be true. In that case, the Republican ads, instead of saying "forged documents," would say "provided forged documents." Nearly as damaging.
On top of that, there's the possibility that the DNC not only passed through the docs but was fully complicit in their creation. It would probably not be done in-house as they would probably have the sense to preserve at least a semblance of plausible deniability. They would just arrange to have the bogus docs tossed over the transom to an opposition research type and then claim they passed them on in good faith without vouching for them.
The DNC and Kerry campaigns are definitely NOT off the hook.
Yes, they tried it at Shape of Days. It's a little ways down. You could search for Composer on the page (hit control-f).
They found some similarities between these memos and what the Selectric Composer could do, but some glaring imperfections, such as the perfect line up of the headers on two of the memos (impossible to do at that time), the differences in spacing between the memo and the typewriter, and the difficulty in creating a superscript with the Composer (you'd have to remove the 11 pt ball, replace it with an 8 pt ball, and lift the type up half a step). Their conclusion is that they weren't written on a Selectric Composer.
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml
WANT TO SEE A TRAIN WRECK?????
CBS is probably using the same "experts" that got on the stand and said that OJ's DNA evidence is bunk.
Precisely. The Cbs legal team have found people to support their position, as is always the case with legal activity. Do they think we were born yesterday? Brit Hume hasn't softened his stance and even has his All Stars on board...well, Juan Williams wasn't there yesterday, so I will wait to see where he stands (as if I didn't know). Presstitutes think they can get the public to believe anything.
Help me out here .. I what am I suppose to be looking at with that link?
We still haven't seen the rest of the MSM sharpen its fangs on this. We're getting the cursory, "it looks fake, Jim", but no one is really going out of their way to get to the nitty gritty -- the real story here -- the counterfeiting of government documents by someone who is quite probably of a high rank in the Kerry campaign, and pimped to the public by a corrupt and disgraced national news reader who, by professional standard, is required to maintain a neutral position.
Until that happens -- until someone in the realm of the New York Times or Washington Post begins digging below the surface -- I'm afraid this will be an eternal conversation about superscript typeset...
At this point, I won't settle for Rather. We need to find out who, in the DNC, perpetrated this felony. All roads lead to John Kerry, I assure you.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ... sorry for being so slow
I need lots of coffee
At one time I was of the school that a Presidential campaign could not be this stupid to pass off lamely forged documents to discredit its opponent. Then again, I observe the meltdown of Kerry and say maybe it's possible?
It is not merely coincidental IMHO that the injection of the Clintonistas into the Kerry campaign and the revelation of these docs occurred in close proximity to one another. Remember, the Clintonista's interest may not be in promoting Kerry. Kerry probably needs to watch his back. Daschle i.e. is in trouble. If you see democrat money moving to SD to preserve Daschle, it's sayonaro Kerry.
his article is a forgery!Gee, that's real definitive, isn't it? What a crock.
The guys not even a typewriter repairman, he's a guy that supervised typewriter repairmen.
Thanks
1. CBS claims the Killian documents were found in his personal file; Killian's wife and son dispute this vehemently. If so, who came into possession of the supposedly "authentic" documents and how? If Killian's family wasn't in possession of his personal files, who was? Was a theft involved? Would the next-of-kin be required to permit access to such documents? If they didn't even know they existed, who would give such permission?
2. The documents in question are photocopies. That much is agreed upon by all parties. Where were the photocopies made? When were they made? Why do the photocopies exhibit the illusion of "age"? With so many copies floating around, how did CBS manage to keep a lid on this story for six weeks? Did CBS make the copies? Why did they make copies of copies, which would cause the "noise" that implies age? Or did they receive them in that condition from their "impeccable" source?
3. By virtue of the documents being provably false, the journalistic ethic of protecting sources does not apply. Given that, what possible rationale does Dan Rather have for protecting this person or persons, who may have fatally damaged Mr. Rather's professional integrity by deliberately misleading him into passing along falsified information against a sitting president of the United States? By refusing to reveal his source, Mr. Rather is accessory to a felony, impeding a criminal investigation, and placing every Viacom shareholder at risk of a growing scandal to which he is directly connected.
4. DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe stated to reporters that perhaps they should "ask Karl Rove" about the memos. Why should they ask Karl Rove about the memos if they're "authentic", as claimed by Dan Rather? If the DNC Chairman has tacitly implied that the memos are indeed falsified, how does this reconcile with the CBS insistence that they're authentic? What rationale would Mr. McAuliffe have for deflecting comment about supposedly authentic documents which had the potential for devastating negative publicity against his party's presidential opponent? Why has Mr. McAuliffe not echoed his previous statment in proceeding days?
5. The potential exposure to lawsuit against CBS, on behalf of Mr. Killian's family and other cited military personnel who now maintain that they were willfully "misled" by the network, and whose reputations have been impugned by Mr. Rather's contradictory assurances to the contrary, is immense. What rationale does parent Viacom have in allowing this scenario to exist, with regard to its fiduciary responsibility to Viacom shareholders? Without commissioning an independent investigation, this gambit could erupt into further charges of complicity with the source and/or DNC in the defrauding of public opinion regarding President George W. Bush and his honorable military service.
Summary: It's time to move away from keystrokes and kerning. This needs to go to the next level, beginning with CBS advertisers, and ending with a criminal investigation.
You get that when the fake has been run through a copier several times.
"It doesn't look like you can do this very easily," he said. "If you use something like Photoshop you could come close to faking it, but why not just go out and buy a Selectric for $75?"
Good question. Too bad the forger was both stupid AND cheap.
Next question - what level of expertise would one need to create the memos? How much time would it take over typing with a normal Selectric? And why would a colonel who didn't type go to that much trouble for mundane personnel memos, and go to all the trouble to type two centered headings when he could have just grabbed some TANG letterhead?
CBS is trying to deflect one or two points and then call the whole thing off, when the preponderance of the evidence and simple common sense screams that these memos are fakes.
Dan Rather, left, interviewed Marcel B. Matley, a handwriting expert [and Spirituality adviser],
who said he believed the signature on Guard documents was genuine.
-- as reported by the New York Times, former Newspaper of Record
Great. More nails for the CBS and Times coffins. Gentlemen (and ladies), start your hammers!
Given that anyone with a brain is now getting their news from Fox or the internet, I don't think there is much viewer intelligence left to insult.
are we keeping this alive or is the common wisdom to move on ?
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.