Posted on 09/11/2004 4:36:14 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
LAST WEDNESDAY, CBS News's 60 Minutes II aired a report that strongly challenged George W. Bush's service in the National Guard. It's a story that has been explored dozens of times in the past five years. Two things in the 60 Minutes II story made it fresh--or, in newsroom parlance, gave it a peg. Ben Barnes, who served as attorney general in Texas at the time of Bush's service, claimed that he had been pressured to help Bush avoid going to Vietnam. But there were problems with Barnes's story, not least that he had previously, and rather specifically, denied the account he gave on 60 MinutesII. (Republicans questioned Barnes's motive, too, pointing out that he is a lifelong Democrat who has raised significant money for John Kerry's presidential campaign.)
The second news peg was more important. 60 Minutes II had obtained "new documents" from the "personal files" of the late Jerry Killian, Bush's commanding officer. That the documents were unearthed some 32 years after the activities they describe must have greatly excited the CBS producers who worked on the story.
According to an Associated Press story, the Killian memos "say Mr. Bush ignored a direct order from a superior officer and lost his status as a Guard pilot because he failed to meet military performance standards and undergo a required physical exam."
If accurate, then, the memos would provide documentary evidence to support the long-circling rumors that Bush received preferential treatment to get out of serving in Vietnam.
But almost immediately, the authenticity of the typed memos was questioned. Although CBS claimed to have had them reviewed by document experts, numerous forensic document examiners interviewed last Thursday by THE WEEKLY STANDARD and several other media outlets concluded that the documents were likely forgeries.
"These sure look like forgeries," said 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. "I would say it looks very likely that these documents could not have existed" in the early 1970s, he says, when they were allegedly written.
Several other experts agreed. "They look mighty suspicious," said 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 the history of typewriters, said that while he is not an expert on typesetting, the documents "look like typical word-processed documents." He adds: "I'm a Kerry supporter myself, but I won't let that cloud my objective judgment: I'm 99 percent sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s."
Philip Bouffard, another document expert who plans to vote for Kerry, reviewed the documents at the request of Bill Ardolino, a weblogger who runs INDC Journal. Says Bouffard: "It is remotely possible there is some typewriter that has the capability to do all this . . . but it is more likely these documents were generated in the common Times New Roman font and printed out on a computer printer that did not exist at the time they were supposedly created."
Sandra Ramsey Lines, a document expert from Arizona, told the Associated Press: "I'm virtually certain these were computer-generated."
The experts pointed to numerous irregularities in the Killian memos that aroused their suspicions. 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 closer together than thick letters like "W" and "M". In monospace, all the letters are allotted the same space.)
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 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron--the "th" is a superscript in a smaller size than the other type. Again, this is typical (and often automatic) in modern word-processing programs.
There are also problems with the substance of the memos Killian allegedly authored. One of the memos, dated May 19, 1972, recounts a telephone conversation Killian is to have had with Bush. "I advised him of our investment in him and his commitment. I also told him I had to have written acceptance before he would be transferred, but think he's also talking to someone upstairs."
But as Byron York of National Review points out, Killian signed off on a "glowing report" about Bush on May 26, 1972, just one week later. Lt. Col. William D. Harris authored the memo praising Bush. "Lt. Bush is an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer," it read. "He eagerly participates in scheduled unit activities." Killian signed below a statement indicating he agreed with Harris. "I concur with the comments and ratings of the reporting official."
Killian's son and widow also claim that Bush's commanding officer liked Bush and would have been unlikely to have authored the memos. "It just wouldn't happen," Gary Killian told the AP.
Despite these questions, CBS News anchor Dan Rather strongly defended the reporting on Friday's Evening News, and lashed out at those who would question CBS's reporting. "Today, on the Internet and elsewhere, some people--including many who are partisan political operatives--concentrated not on the key questions the overall story raised but on the documents that were part of the support of the story." After a long but relatively thin attempt at refuting the charges against CBS, Rather ended this way: "If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it. So far, there is none."
There are several steps CBS could take to clarify the situation.
(1) Obtain the original memos. CBS based its reporting on photocopies. If CBS can produce the original memos, both the paper and the ink can be accurately dated. And the paper can be checked for the indentations made by a typewriter.
(2) Produce other documents written by Killian around the same time that have the same characteristics as the documents in question.
(3) Find any typewriter from the early 1970s capable of producing replicas of the Killian memos. Several experts have already recreated the memos using Microsoft Word. Surely if the documents are authentic, somewhere there is a typewriter that can reproduce them.
If CBS can't provide more definitive evidence of the authenticity of the memos, its anchor will live to regret these words posted late Friday by Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds:
"To err is human but to really foul up requires a computer."
Who said them? Dan Rather.
Signature would have also been block left.
Name, rank, service
duty position
Bump!
In spite of evidence to the contrary, Rather "stands by his sources." How can he? Or is he himself the source?
I think its pretty obvious that th e democrats now running Fox have shown themselves now that Carvile et al are running the show.
Of course, this "professor" is a commonground-type of guy who hangs around with the veteransforpeace people. You known, the typical Hah-vahd intellectual.
So why, if Dubya was such a loser, does he remember all of their conversations -- in exquisite detail -- and is able to recount them 30+ years later? It's not like 41 was 41 at the time or anything.
These liberals are sooooo pathetic!
And would a Lt Col type up his own memos instead of his secretary? What about all those official letter head papers/forms that come from the base print shop? Curious minds need to know.
Then we need to know much more about those Regs sited in the memo. Just exactly what do they instruct GW to go do. Every Reg tells exactly what you are supposed to do.
Sorry, I meant the Kerry Campaign along with the DNC and CBS were to blame for the fraud. It's hard to blame a senile man for his senility.
It was a royal pain to center a page and back space out to the start point. Much less to do it for 3 lines for a addy. It was a royal pain with 3 semesters under my belt, much less for a guy who at best was a hunt and peck typist.
This whole memogate reeks of FORGERY created by the RATS or off a internet hate Bush site. That the moveon.org gave to the kerry camp, and robin rather gave to daddy.
They need to pony up the originals for proper forensic testing, much as they would do to determine the authenicty of a Rembrandt painting if they are going to accuse a sitting President of such things.
I would want this testing even if it were slick willie.
Because the man's own daughter is calling him a liar. What could she possibly know about this or him? Just like the Swifties, she wasn't there when Branes got pressured from George HW Bush asked by a friend of a friend while he was Lt. Governor Speaker of the Texas House to get George W. Bush some folks from Texas favorable treatment. </sarcasm>
Rather and CBS are stating that it is not necessary for them to prove the authenticity of the documents - but that this is, instead, the obligation of anyone who thinks otherwise.
To attempt to place the burden of proof on the general public obviates the legal concepts of reasonableness and ultimate responsibility.
It also obviates the concept of a free and responsible press. And it is right out of George Orwell's "1984" - with CBS and its sycophants setting themselves up as the Ministry of Information.
May there be plaintiffs' action on this with attorneys utilizing the discovery process to completely ferret out the essentials.
Actually, It was probably Dan holding the tablets not moses....that's how he know to documents are real.......LOL.
I think they're well beyond that.
Yesterday ABC radio news led with the story and they didn't waste any time putting disclaimers or hedges around the "forgery" label. They just flat-out called them "forged documents".
ABC did? I hadn't seen that. Well, maybe ABC's coming to realize that whoever CBS allowed to do it to them could just as easily do it to another news org.
But they can't. Not because it would involve identifying the source. No, No! It's because the original letters NEVER EXISTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They can't produce them because they don't have them. They can't produce the originals because they were ERASED off a hard drive after having been concocted!!!!!!!!!
Win the election this afternoon. Present the originals that these incredibly lousy (25 generation) copies were made from and Bush loses (at least they would assume so,....I figure Kerry is going down in flames like Dukaukis!)
I think there are two things that could drive this story:
1. The OLD MEDIA, sensing blood in the water will actually investigate and hang CBS out to dry. However, being OLD MEDIA they may find it necessary to stick together because of one is outed they all are outed.
2. The family of Killian sues CBS for libal and slander. They would have to prove the documents are real in court.
ROFLMAO!
I still haven't broken that habit. lol
It's the blow-up pickup truck story all over again!
We'll make the story fit our POV no matter what.
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.