Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/15/2004 5:44:51 PM PDT by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: John Jorsett

Sounds like the person who obtained the documents is being accused of stealing them. Read it again.


31 posted on 09/15/2004 5:59:42 PM PDT by mabelkitty (Watch for a CBS employee in a trench coat going by DeepWord.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett

Faked doc. STOP RIGHT THERE! Hand over your press cards now. The door slamming you in the butt is also "essentially true".


33 posted on 09/15/2004 6:00:09 PM PDT by kcar (theUNsucks.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
And, for See BS the dominoes have begun to fall!!!
35 posted on 09/15/2004 6:01:23 PM PDT by Bigun (IRSsucks@getridof it.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett

Need to make sure the experts cited in here get a copy of this quickly. At least two of them could take legal action against CBS for telling affiliates that they "misrepresented their conversations with CBS".


36 posted on 09/15/2004 6:01:35 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker (Donate to the Swift Vets -- www.swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett

"I think there is no sense in forming an opinion when there is no evidence
to form it on.
If you build a person without any bones in him he may look fair enough to the eye,
but he will be limber and cannot stand up; and I consider that evidence is the bones of an opinion."

- Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc, Mark Twain


37 posted on 09/15/2004 6:01:54 PM PDT by mrsmith ("Oyez, oyez! All rise for the Honorable Chief Justice... Hillary Rodham Clinton ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
Matley says the signatures are, indeed, Killian’s

Did he really say this?
I thought he said that all these signatures were from the same person.
That's a different statement.

40 posted on 09/15/2004 6:04:16 PM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett

They would not have done the story without the documents. The verbal accusations were already available.

So, now it's OK to use forged, falsified documents in a story if they back up the people you have lined up to tell the lies you want to tell.

Others are on record contradicting their witnesses, but they don't get a mention. And the notion that the split is 50-50 among experts concerning the documents is ludicrous. It's very lopsided in favor of them being fake. The longer CBS tries to maintain their position, the more credibility they lose.


41 posted on 09/15/2004 6:04:37 PM PDT by Rocky (Heinz Kerry: 57 positions on any issue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
"The editorial content of the report was not based solely on the physical documents, but also on numerous credible sources"

We know by now what CBS News considers a "credible source".

If they consider these obviously forged memos to be credible sources, why should we have any more faith in their other sources?

44 posted on 09/15/2004 6:05:47 PM PDT by dano1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett

48 posted on 09/15/2004 6:09:03 PM PDT by AmericanMade1776 ((John Kerry is now in full retreat))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
It is truly amazing to me. At the office--where people seldom agree on anything with respect to politics or the media--there is 100% agreement that the CBS story was based on obviously forged documents and was likely a send up for or set up by the Kerry people. I have never seen anything like this at work.

To a person, everyone believes Rather is without credibility. Even the liberals and Kerry supporters are shaking their heads in disbelief that CBS does not fall on its sword in the face of such obvious fraud.

CBS has no idea about the degree of damage it has inflicted on itself, and I suspect it will grow in intensity as the denial/stonewalling continues. This will be water cooler/lobby talk for a long time. It really is making people question everything about 60 Minutes and CBS News.

53 posted on 09/15/2004 6:14:59 PM PDT by Zebra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett

"Four independent individuals with expertise in the authentication of documents were consulted prior to the broadcast of the story regarding the documents 60 MINUTES Wednesday obtained: document examiners Marcel B. Matley, James J. Pierce, Emily Will and Linda James."

We already know that *both* Emily Will and Linda James are *off* the CBS bandwagon, having claimed they warned CBS that the documents had 'problems'. Marcel Matley has already said that he only verified the *signatures*.

That leaves one expert left.

Who is James J. Pierce?

Is he the man who is classified here as:

http://www.signascan.com/testimonials.htm

"Plaintiff's expert Pierce, a handwriting analyst, testified that plaintiff signed all of her physical therapy treatment logs on different occasions. He did not believe that the physical therapy signatures were fraudulent."

HANDWRITING ANALYST! And NOT A CONVINCING ONE! ...

"The jury was strongly persuaded by defendant's handwriting expert, John Cerlanek, and did not believe that plaintiff's handwriting expert refuted any of his testimony. "

Is this the man CBS picked?
What could a handwriting analyst tell us FROM COPIES?!?
CBS claims that not only didnt they give the experts copies,
they didnt have them either. If so, we now have
ZERO documentation experts to refute the 'MS Word' forgery case and typographic flaws in the documents. ZERO.

CASE CLOSED.


54 posted on 09/15/2004 6:19:44 PM PDT by WOSG (George W Bush / Dick Cheney - Right for our Times!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
See BS is beyond hope. They take circular reasoning to new heights.

See BS says: See, these documents are proof, and not forged. How do we know they aren't forged, because we have interviewed other people who corroborate what the docuements say. That proves they are legitimate.

See BS says: What? You say that those who attest to the veracity of the content are proven liars and discredited or Bush-haters (which is true of every one that they have used to attest to the veracity of the forged memos)?

See BS says: But we have these memos which prove that what they say is true.

Infinite loop of leftist loony reasoning.

See BS has created this fraudulent loop and will die. They refuse to admit to the forgery because it runs so contrary to their worldview.

56 posted on 09/15/2004 6:21:08 PM PDT by twntaipan (CBS News: The News of Choice of Frauds and Forgers Everywhere!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
CBS is using lies to call the Commander in Chief in war on terror a liar, to diminish the respect our military has for the President. If Osoma had wanted to write the talking points for Dan Rather he could scarcely have done better. Aiding in abetting is the crime it once was before Kerry and Fonda.

Guess CBS thought this election reform thing left them with all the cards.

57 posted on 09/15/2004 6:21:30 PM PDT by kcar (theUNsucks.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
- Matley says the signatures are, indeed, Killian’s. (attachment 1)

I KNEW this was not true!
See this article, in particular, this part:
Matley has told CNN, The Washington Post and other media organizations that his work was limited to verifying that the signatures on the memos came from the same source. He did not, he says, claim that the documents themselves were authentic.

Matley says the signatures were MADE BY THE SAME PERSON.
He does NOT say that person was Killian.

58 posted on 09/15/2004 6:22:28 PM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
"Ms. Knox states that she does not believe the memos are genuine. However, she confirms that the content of the memos does reflect the feelings of Lt. Col. Killian at the time and accurately portrays events that were taking place in connection with then-Lt. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard service.

Col KIllian's son, who served with him, just said on Hannity and Colmes that Ms Knox was a pool typist who would in no way have been privy to such information.

There are so many holes in this whole thing it's silly...and that would be the unanimous opinion across the land if it were not CBS' Party involved in the conspiracy.

60 posted on 09/15/2004 6:24:08 PM PDT by intolerancewillNOTbetolerated (Throw The Obstructionists Out Of Congress Bush/Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
The editorial content of the report was not based solely on the physical documents, but also on numerous credible sources who supported what the documents said.

Forgery doesn't matter when you have useful idiots who are willing to perjure themselves.

68 posted on 09/15/2004 6:46:35 PM PDT by Willie Green (Go Alan Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett; Timeout
- Bump - & PINGALING

So, CBS is still asserting that the documents may be authentic, and have been "certified" to be authentic by named experts. Their affiliates are getting heat. A Houston radio station owner has pulled CBS news off his programming, and says he will rescind his contract with CBS if they don't fire Dan Rather by Monday, and come clean with the charade.

69 posted on 09/15/2004 6:47:56 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
"In the interview, Ms. Knox states that she does not believe the memos are genuine. However, she confirms that the content of the memos does reflect the feelings of Lt. Col. Killian at the time and accurately portrays events that were taking place in connection with then-Lt. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard service."

Oh my...... I don't have any facts to back it up, but this is how I feel. Good Grief! Is this the "evidence?" How she feels? God help us all.

It's low even for the Rats to use a man who's passed away and who cannot debunk their "feelings." DAN RATS, go straight to......(fill in the blanks that rhymes with) well......

71 posted on 09/15/2004 6:53:20 PM PDT by Chong (God Bless and Protect our Troops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett
It doesn't sound like SeeBS is admitting that the documents are fake to me.

"Katz believes the documents were written on a typewriter and not a computer. (attachment 3)"

72 posted on 09/15/2004 6:58:30 PM PDT by Paladin2 (Don't confuse disagreement with argumentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: John Jorsett

Uhh. Maybe I'm missing something. If they are fake, how can they be accurate?


75 posted on 09/15/2004 7:03:24 PM PDT by Maigrey (Member of the semi-naked blogger Political Operative Brigade. To H#ll with pajamas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson