Skip to comments.Yet Another CBS Document Experiment (CBS file vs. Word document) [perfect match]
Posted on 09/10/2004 10:25:49 PM PDT by Cableguy
Here is the result if I print the Microsoft Word document I created to a PDF file:
Here is the CBS News original:
And here is the result if I overlay the CBS News original on my Word-created PDF file:
As you can see, its an even better match than the Word screenshots Ive been using previously.
The superscript th in 187th now lines up perfectly with the CBS News original.
The correspondence is so exact that in the center of the image (the focal point of the fax/copier machine that was probably used to age it) you cannot see any differences at all.
LGF has really gone to task
It's not about Dan Rather.
It's about 70 years of lies; the Berlin Wall of Information in this country.
The Emperors have no clothes.
Nice work, cableguy.
Charles at LGF did this, not cableguy ;)
Was that authentic frontier Jibberish?
CBS Said: "the documents in the 60 Minutes report were thoroughly examined and their authenticity vouched for by independent experts." This is clearly not the case. They lied. They found witnesses to vouch for what they wanted, not for the truth.
Conclusion: CBS has no credibility. They fail to report honestly. They accept faked documents without vetting them properly. They are not a serious news organization, just Careless Bush Smear-artists.
How can any objective observer trust the MSM after this?
I do notice that ABC and the WashCOMPOST are trying to move into the void by questioning Ratherbiased.
DOH! Can I get a hand writing expert to confirm this match???
It's about 70 years of lies; the Berlin Wall of Information in this country.
You are so right. The kind of crap Rather is pulling was pulled to whitewash Yalta in the 40s, to nail McCarthy in the 50s, to discredit the Vietnam generals and soldiers in the 60s, to crucify Richard Nixon in the 70s, to ridicule Reagain in the 80s (that didn't work too well), and to first elect and then save Bill Clinton's a** in the 90s.
The tide for the truth may finally be turning.
Did you click on the little "Convert to Adobe PDF" icon when the document was in Microsoft Word...
Or did you print it out, then scan and convert the PRINTED document to PDF format?
Not that it matters much...just curious...
Excellent work by the way. Converting a Word doc into a PDF does make the fonts look a bit funky.
I believe that CBS knew these were fakes all along, and if they didn't create them in house, probably got them from the DNC...
Very Nicely Done Cableguy!! Your technology and process was obviously too elaborate for CBS to attempt.
It's Scooby-Doo speak.
"Rut-ro" being an abreviated form of:
"Rime in reeeeeeeep roo-doo"
Look, no ink on my right hand, but you aint seein' my left hand! I plead the 5th, with a non superscript "th"
All the evidence is MOOT, except the overlay.
The matching of the memo and the Word printout overlay being so perfect is a simple, 100% perfect proof that the memo is a fraud. The fact that you have to print out the Word document to get the exact match -- the fact that the screen shots do not match, shows how unlikely it is to get a perfect match. My older version of Word does not come close. This, and this alone, is overwhelming proof of fraud.
Have all four of the memos have been overlaid with their Word printouts? Is there a link to them?
Thanks in advance
Fantastic! Liberate America from the occupation media! Viva La Revolucion!
I typed up the document in Word. If you want it, you can get it here.
It is notable that they used the default font (Times New Roman) and the default tab stops ("18" in "18 August" appears right above the "." after "Bush"). If they really wanted this to look old, they would have gone with a font like Courier, not the default. This is clearly an amateur hack job.
It depends on what the meaning of "th" th.
There are amateurs who could have done a better job than this. It's so bad, it's a masterpiece.
When are we going to see this for what it really is? A distraction from that which requires the focus and attention of every U.S. voter. Who has led us well in the last 4 years? Who has been a staunch advocate of freedom and liberty in the last 4 years? Who has a record as commander-in-chief that we can rely on in this war on terror, based on what we have witnessed and experienced in the last 4 years?
Now, who has spent 19 years in the Senate, but didn't show up for over 50% of Senate votes, yet when he actually did make it to the floor to vote, voted AGAINST vital defense and security issues?
This is a smokescreen, folks! The liberals and their media will be exposed (AGAIN), but don't let them take your attention off what really matters!
Has anyone looked at the data inside the PDF files that CBS posted? I don't have a copy of them, but I'd like to open them with a text editor. It might have more clues.
At first blush, the flaw here may be the term CYA, which as far as I know, wasn't commonly in use in 1973. Anyone have any etymological history on this?
by the way, am i the only one struck by the following sentence in what is purported to be a cover your ass memo to file?: "i'll backdate but won't rate."
think about it.
here's a guy who is trying to cover his ass, who creates a written, signed confession that he's complicit in falsifying documents (viz., the date thereof).
as an attorney, i can state categorically that the actual date that a document was created/signed is sometimes the most important fact appertaining thereto.
so ... yeah. right. this killian writes a memo memorializing his fraud to save him from future trouble?
i don't think so.
by the way, as one who has used every generation of word processing equipment since the ibm selectric, there is no question whatsoever in my mind that the documents were created by relatively modern technology, probably exactly as cableguy demonstrates hereinabove.
this is not, of course, to say that it is impossible that these documents were in fact created by michaelangelo using pen and ink or perhaps a paintbrush ... he was, after all, very talented.
probably created by some little punk ass cal poly computer grad too stupid and full of himself to understand that the output from typewriters and that from modern desktop publishing equipment patently differ.
you'd think his betters would have caught the error, though.
but ... maybe none of them ever worked in an office.
maybe none of them ever worked.
That one's a classic!
Quick question...on another thread someone was asking me what OETR stands for?
You'll get a better match if you matched the type on the first word... the forgery has it as 'Standt' instead of 'Staudt'.
Yea and the scary fact is if the moron that faked this has just done it on an old typewriter instead of in Word(just dumb)then CBS would have gotten away with it.... just scary how these press propaganda bastardies can lie and people buy
sorry sounded like gabby johnson from blazzing saddles I see the scooby in it now.
OETR = Military Acronym.. " Officer Education Training Record"..
Many thanks...I need it on another thread.
>>sorry sounded like gabby johnson from blazzing saddles I see the scooby in it now.
Ro Roblem :)
That would be because the typesetting algorithms were created in 1081 and used byeveryone. Not to mention that the Windows printer drivers control the output to the printer.
Another blogger noted yesterday that the "th" lined up perfectly when you printed to paper, but not when you used a screen capture. Such differences are to be expected.
I hate to say this, but one of the reasons magazines use Apple computers and Quark Express is their ability to exactly match screen images with final printout. Little things like the subtle misalignment of the "th" can drive graphic designers nuts.
make that year 1981.
So, even if Killian's typewriter had th, I'd like to hear how he knew when to to a carriage-return. Were these typewriters computerized/buffered? In 1972?
You are right to point that out. It had to do with some obscure agency that has nothing to do with the facts. Some educational agency or something like that. Fox News talked about it on the Brit Hume show. Another evidence that the document is a forgery.
Thanks. I just learned it should have been OER and not OETR.
I saw the Hume interview. That witness Compani (sp) was very credible.
I'm afraid that this little experiment was all for naught. The memos in question were typed up by Colonel Killian on an IBM Selectric Composer. I know this because that font of objective integrity, the Boston Globe, says so. Nice try, though.
Bet ol Blather has even bigger bags under them eyes tomorrow. His goose is cooked. I couldn't have happenned to a nicer guy! /sarcasm.
Liberal Cannuck Jennings better stay on his toes or he's next. And I see that NBC appears to be backing off the 3 days they planned to have Kitty Kelly on the Today show. IMAGINE THAT!!!
Wonder what they are afraid of?? They had originally planned to show her for 3 days, but now I can't find her on the schedule at all for the NBC today show website