Posted on 09/09/2004 2:09:48 PM PDT by ctdonath2
Proof the CBS document BushGuardaugust1.pdf is a FAKE:
Original text, slightly adjusted for rectangular fit:
Same text, screen capture of document written in MS Word 2002 with no effort to match original aside from document width:
Overlapping images, with original as B/W negative:
Aside from slight warping presumably due to distortion introduced by a low-quality photocopier, the two texts line up exactly. The "30+ year old proof" against Bush is a fraud.
One of the other total dead giveaways is that in some cases the "th" is not superscripted but has an extra space between it and the number. If it is next to it it jumps to superscript.
I can almost hear Dan Rather's colon puckering.
Excellent work! I suspect the MSM knows or suspects by now it's a fake, but they are hoping to throw it against the wall and see if it sticks on some undecided voter anyway. Facts don't matter, laws don't matter, leaving voters with uncertainty matters.
You are the champ. I did an overlay myself in Photoshop but the animation is the ticket.
Great work! I am concerned though that this story is getting repeated over and over on the news and as of yet I am not hearing any mention of the fact the documents authenticity is being questioned. If anyone sees a news station mention the articles we have seen by document experts questioning the validity of the 'newly found' guard documents please let me know. You should send your proof overwriting the typing to some news organizations because it gives a great visual to what experts are questioning. Really good job!!!!
Good work. This alone will put prove the SeeBS documents to be sloppy forgeries. I wonder if Gunga Dan will be curious as to who set him up to look like the partisan idiot he is.
"I can almost hear Dan Rather's colon puckering."
LOL
Excellent work!.....
The dems must think we are as stupid as they are.
God, I love this! Note to Kerry's handlers:
Keep up the good work,you idiots!
Bush wins handily in Nov!
Did anyone notice that the "i" in "received" (last sentence of memo) is lower than the other letters? Why? To make it look more like a typewriter had been used? If so, then look at every other "i" in the memo. None of them, not a single other one, is lower than the others.
The subtle but real differences in spacing between the period following each number and the first letter of the first word in the opening sentence of each paragraph are damning, particularly if--as I suspect--the guard unit was using IBM Selectrics in 1971-1973. If the letters had been prepared on Selectrics, the double-space would be precisely the same in each paragraph. The spaces in this document are proportional,
1. How does a typewriter merge the "f" and "l" characters as observed in "flight"?
2. How can a typewriter cause the "i" character to tuck itself under the "f" character in "fill" and "Officer"?
great work
Well, all of freeper repeaterville has it now Though I saw it first on powerlineblog.com Yes, there were other fonts available for insert into the ball-type typewriters. The issue here (as I understand it) is that the documents are not produced in a unispace font (like courier), but a font with different spacing for different letters (the little "i" is narrower than the capital "O", etc) like the popular Times Roman fonts. It was theoretically possible (something called a varitype machine), but highly difficult to produce something like this document - and would never be done on a personal memo. The memos are also on 8.5x11" stock when the military standard was 8x10.5 And the memo actually has the smaller font-size "th" in a couple places ("187th") - which was not possible on ANY typewriter in 1973. In short, they conclude it was produced on a modern word processor, not a 1970's typewriter. And the author is not around to verify them (dead). Now, I have NOT seen the documents yet and don't know how much (or any) of this is true. Merely the accusation.... But it does concern me. If they are forgeries - the election is likely over.
Col. Killian died a long time ago. There is no conceivable reason he would have been keeping a unique file on fairly trivial personnel issues concerning a junior officer about to leave the service. If there are NOT hundreds of comparable Killian memos on assorted routine business matters, something is wrong.
FWIW, I don't believe these documents are forged, mainly because it would be incredibly reckless to pull a stunt like that on what is, at bottom, still a triviality.
The blog says it is smaller. So to accomplish it you would have to roll the platten up and replace the ball - then type two letters and replace the ball again and roll it back down. I've found a source that says proportional fonts were possible, but hasn't found THE font involved yet (I've seen it now, it sure looks like a member of the Times Roman family) as being available for the Selectric. None of the other documents from that command (of those that were released) indicate anything like this was in use though. I now begin to worry a tad.
This just shows me how stupid democrats are. They used a computer to compose a fake 1973 memo? How dumb can you get? They could have at least bought an old typewriter at a flea market to make it look authentic.
Dude, your memo is, uh, throbbing. I'm stuned.
incredible!
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake /// 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by CBSNEWS 60 MINS on Bush's guard service may have been forged using a current word processing program // typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program, Internet reports claim... Developing...
Wow. Outstanding work. What's really difficult to believe is that anyone would try to pass this off without even a half-assed attempt at making it look authentic. If you're going to try a forgery, at least don't insult our intelligence. At a minimum, go on eBay and buy a vintage IBM Selectric, for God's sake.
One thing is clear, 60 Minutes didn't have even a minimally-competent document examiner look at this thing.
Slam dunk! I never cease to be amazed out how brillant many of the posters are on Free Republic. Absolutely brillant. If the MSM doesn't recant....it's clobbering time!
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.