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

Skip to comments.

Slicing and Dicing Formatting Fraud with Occam's Razor
longleggedfly ^ | Sep 11, 2004 | JCEccles

Posted on 09/11/2004 9:43:06 AM PDT by JCEccles

In my first Air Force assignment in the 1970s I served as administrative communications officer and assistant chief of central base administration for the 92d Combat Support Group at Fairchild Air Force Base, Washington. For two years I was directly responsible for ensuring that all units at Fairchild, including an attached Washington Air National Guard wing, complied with Air Force regulations and policies governing the preparation and filing of official correspondence including letters and memoranda. My review of the CBS Texas Air National Guard documents convinces me they are fraudulent for reasons that other critics have not yet discussed in any great detail.

Bowing to the virtue of brevity, I will resist the temptation to discuss all the failings of the memoranda and will instead concentrate on the unsigned memorandum dated 18 August 1973 (which I will call the “Staudt memorandum”), and in particular its page formatting.

As has been pointed out by many observers, twelve pitch Times Roman font in Microsoft Word automatically and precisely generates the superscript, line breaks, and letter spacing (including kerning) of the Staudt memorandum if the left and right page margins are set at one-inch on 8.5 x 11 paper (Word’s default settings). That’s a problem.

The Air Force and Guard did not adopt 8.5 x 11 paper until the early 1980s. The standard paper width in 1973 was only 8.0 inches. The half-inch difference is critical.

If page formatting is resized to one-inch margins on 8.0 inch paper, Microsoft Word breaks the sentences at entirely different points in the text, after “trouble,” from,” “wasn’t,” and “I” versus “running,” “regarding,” “rating,” “is,” and “either” in the CBS memo.

The line breaks themselves are powerful circumstantial evidence that Microsoft Word generated the Staudt memorandum using Word’s default settings of one-inch margins on 8.5 x 11 paper. There are two possible rebuttals to this common sense conclusion.

First, it might be argued that the Texas Air National Guard—or at least Lt Col Killian, the purported preparer of the memo—used nonstandard 8.5 x 11 paper in 1973. That is unlikely. Paper stocks at Air Force and Guard units in the 1970s were ordered and maintained by the office of central base administration, a headquarters-level staff office, to be distributed to individual units and squadrons as needed. Units and squadrons got their stocks of paper exclusively from central base administration for two very good reasons: first, official regulations required it, and second, the cost of paper came out of a headquarters budget—not the individual unit or squadron’s budget. It would make no sense at all for a squadron commander to use nonstandard paper for an official memorandum in 1973.

Second, it might be argued that Lt Col Killian used by intention or pure accident nonstandard three-quarter inch margins for the Staudt memorandum. Again, this is highly unlikely. The mechanical IBM typewriters used by the Air Force and Guard in 1973 were by regulation and routine set at one-inch margins for 8.0 inch paper. It defies common sense to believe that in 1973 Lt Col Killian used nonstandard three-quarter inch margins on 8.0 inch paper that by astounding coincidence would produce the exact line breaks generated by Microsoft Word 31 years later using Word’s default one-inch margins on 8.5 x 11 paper.

While CBS blithely continues to defend the Staudt memorandum, common sense and Occam’s razor (the simpler explanation is to be preferred over the more complex) are slicing and dicing CBS’s credibility like an onion in a cuisinart.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 60minutes; forgery; fraud; kerryrathergate; killian; occams; rathergate; razor; tang
I've posted this up front instead of in the blog area because I believe the observations I am making shed new and helpful light on the Rathergate forgeries. I will be away for awhile, but I'll check back later.
1 posted on 09/11/2004 9:43:07 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

bump


2 posted on 09/11/2004 9:49:30 AM PDT by need_a_screen_name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

If the Air Force used 8 inch paper at that time, then I'm not sure why we're even bothering to analyze fonts and such(?)


3 posted on 09/11/2004 9:51:29 AM PDT by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

Thank you for this clearly stated information. Your credentials are impeccable.


4 posted on 09/11/2004 9:52:17 AM PDT by Carolinamom (Dan Rather's GOTCHA got him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

One more nail in the coffin.


5 posted on 09/11/2004 9:55:38 AM PDT by Arkie2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

http://carolan.org/MustBelieve.htm


6 posted on 09/11/2004 9:59:29 AM PDT by lunatic12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
The fonts are questionable for related but different reasons.

The point is, to make CBS's authenticity claims work you have to suspend common sense on not just one but dozens of matters.

By far the cleanest, clearest, and most sensible explanation is that the documents (or at least in this case, the Staudt memorandum) were prepared recently using Microsoft Word at its default settings. That is the ONLY explanation that doesn't have to be forced.

7 posted on 09/11/2004 10:00:20 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: need_a_screen_name
I don't have anything staggering to add other than the observation that this;

This has Kerry's paw prints all over it.

1)Kerry by his after action reports and inflation of his role in minor skirmishes demonstrated both a willingness and lack of aversion to falsifying official government documents.

2)Kerry though his seminal position in V V AW in the formation of the group and his instrumental position in putting together the fraudulent group of vets to provide the basis for his first book and his congressional testimony demonstrates an affinity to falsify documents both in print and audio.

3) Kerry's repeated versions of the Cambodia story and his attribution through suggestion that his Cambodia came from a president ( Nixon) who had not been inaugurated at the time of the incident demonstrates he is comfortable being a liar.

4)Kerry has implicit trust that the liberal mainstream press will cover-up for his miserable butt.


I am inaugurating a new tag line.
8 posted on 09/11/2004 10:00:24 AM PDT by TASMANIANRED (What did Kerry know and when did he know it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

Excellent. Thank you.


9 posted on 09/11/2004 10:01:31 AM PDT by Lazamataz ("Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown" -- harpseal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

This story is dying already. Fox is only giving it cursory notice and their story now sounds like they agree with See BS. Rupert has pulled the plug.


10 posted on 09/11/2004 10:04:45 AM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
Thanks! Bump for later reference.
11 posted on 09/11/2004 10:05:00 AM PDT by Aracelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mercy

unbelievable how the prison story keeps going and the mainstream media (who are all culpable in the guard story) dies in days. i personally hope someone gets prosecuted on this one! i guess i don't see why this is different from the seriousness of watergate?

somedays i wonder if algore regrets inventing the internet?


12 posted on 09/11/2004 10:07:37 AM PDT by applpie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mercy

Really. That's sad, maybe they're doing that becausew it's the third Anniversarry of 9-11. I suspect it will continue on Sunday and Monday.


13 posted on 09/11/2004 10:08:27 AM PDT by faithincowboys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
The line breaks themselves are powerful circumstantial evidence that Microsoft Word generated the Staudt memorandum using Word’s default settings of one-inch margins on 8.5 x 11 paper.

Good post. Thanks.

14 posted on 09/11/2004 10:08:42 AM PDT by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
Others in the past have argued the paper size question and said that while the standard size in the 1970's might be different from today's 81/2 X 11 inch, the fact that it is the newer size could be accounted for by the fact that the document was recently faxed, thus making it 81/2 x 11 even when it was a smaller size when transmitted. I think your argument that a different size paper would produce a different spacing/word line count puts that argument to rest. Good work.
15 posted on 09/11/2004 10:09:50 AM PDT by finnigan2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faithincowboys

Nope. It's obvious the fix is in.


16 posted on 09/11/2004 10:10:26 AM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

Not to pick nits... but the standard default margins in Word are as follows:

Top = 1", Bottom = 1", Left = 1.25", Right = 1.25"

The default left / right margins are not 1". Has been this way in every version of Word that I've ever used.


17 posted on 09/11/2004 10:15:51 AM PDT by bootyist-monk (<--------------------- Republican Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lunatic12
More proof of CBS & Dan Rather's fraud

This is great. It takes a minute to load. You need some volume for the end.
18 posted on 09/11/2004 10:16:35 AM PDT by demkicker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: finnigan2

Faxing or copying a document based on smaller than current sizes onto a lager size medium would leave a wider area of white space on the right than on the left. The centering would be thrown off.

The only way to avoid this is to carefully place the source on the scanner to recenter. Placing the source along the normal guide lines would align the document to the left.


19 posted on 09/11/2004 10:17:42 AM PDT by dglang
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mercy

No, this story won't die. Today is 911 and they're taking a break. Sunday morning shows will have to cover this and it won't all flatter dncDan. Dan and John are going to get cold feet and start pointing fingers each at the other very soon.


20 posted on 09/11/2004 10:18:07 AM PDT by Wardawg (Hanoi John Forgery Kerry was here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

GREAT article - I love this article; it's not speculative in any sense, it states the facts in a clear and devastating manner. Dan Rather brought back a dead man to destroy President Bush, but this article drives a steak into the heart of Dan Rather's ghoulish hoax.


21 posted on 09/11/2004 10:20:05 AM PDT by TheCrusader ("the frenzy of the Mohammedans has devastated the churches of God" Pope Urban II (c 1097 a.d.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wardawg

Hope you are right but history doesn't argue for you. The only scandals that have legs are scandals involving conservatives. The tone of FOX's coverae is now dismissive.


22 posted on 09/11/2004 10:31:03 AM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bootyist-monk

Not to pick nits... but the standard default margins in Word are as follows:

Top = 1", Bottom = 1", Left = 1.25", Right = 1.25"

The default left / right margins are not 1". Has been this way in every version of Word that I've ever used.



You are totally right about this. BUT, a too clever by half forgerer might have reset the Word margins to 1" if he/she knew that standard military margin would have been 1". In that case, NOT knowing that standard military paper stock of that epoch was 8", and not 8 1/2" becomes the fatal flaw in the attempted fraud!


23 posted on 09/11/2004 10:34:15 AM PDT by bastantebueno55 (Viva Jorge W Arbusto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

jean phouqin keri's @zz belongs to the Swifty's...

Dan RATher's @zz belongs to FreeRepublic!!!

24 posted on 09/11/2004 10:40:43 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
The 'Key' to this forgery lies in the fact that Rather was 'given' COPIES. Allow me to digress.

Of course, by now, we have all figured out why Rather was 'given' and used copies in smearing President Bush.

There were NO originals. There never were unless you consider the "Masters" the forgers ran off on their HP printer and later shredded and disposed of.

But one has to 'delve' a bit deeper in deductive reasoning to see the purpose of 'giving' Rather 25th (excuse my lack of Superscript here) generation copies to purport as real.

Why has no one asked Rather to produce the originals?? It's a simple question. Original documents would quickly and clearly either substantiate his smear or repudiate it.

Surely the criminals who 'stole' the documents from the estate of Lt. Col. Killian would possess the originals. I should think they would be awarded high paying government or DNC jobs in a Kerry administration for their efforts in defeating President Bush if they would only bring them forth.

Using copies provides Rather with the obvious defense that the copies were made from the 'originals' and so we should rest assurred that if Dan wanted to bring forth the originals he would only have to wave his magic wand and poof, they would appear. But of course he can't since there are no originals.

Imagine for a moment the conversation with "Deep Font" and Rather as they discuss Deep Font turning over these stolen documents:

Dan: So you have the documents?

DF: Copies. I have copies.

Dan: OK. Copies are good. I can smear Bush with Copies. But what if they start asking where I got these and why I don't have originals. What do I say??

DF: You tell'em what Teresa Kerry said, Shove it!

25 posted on 09/11/2004 10:42:46 AM PDT by Doc Savage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

Information on the CBS fraud should always be front page news IMHO.

If you're ever in doubt, check with Admin. and ask for exception to keep on front page.


26 posted on 09/11/2004 10:44:27 AM PDT by NavySEAL F-16 (Proud to be a Reagan Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NavySEAL F-16

the same people that think those docs are legit
think oj was innocent


27 posted on 09/11/2004 10:47:44 AM PDT by genghis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bastantebueno55

I completely agree that the documents are frauds. I think the issue is that the documents were typed with the default Word margins. Just tried it myself, and at 1.25 left and right, using Times New Roman, the document formats exactly as the forged memos.


28 posted on 09/11/2004 10:56:15 AM PDT by bootyist-monk (<--------------------- Republican Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

I've posted the last couple of days to alert folks that the copies I have were done on regulation 8 x 10.5 paper. I can't remember where I got the PDF copy but it clearly shows the originals as 8 x 10.5 although the copy is on 8.5 x 11 paper. The orginal has a grey tinge to it with a quarter inch whiter margin around the outside with the exception of the 8/1/72 memo which has a grey area 9.5 in length for some reason (width is 8). It appears from my copies that the various items were done on standard military size paper for that era.


29 posted on 09/11/2004 11:03:59 AM PDT by SageofRugby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles; jmstein7
Ping for reference. I have not been around at FR lately, but I am proud of the work done by fellow FReepers!

Lando

30 posted on 09/11/2004 11:05:59 AM PDT by Lando Lincoln (A Fair and Balanced Decision - GWB in 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bootyist-monk; Admin Moderator
You're right. I had forgotten about the .25 inch buffer on the Word default (by force of long habit I always reset my margins to one inch right out of the box).

In sum, the cleanest, clearest, and most elegant explanation--the only explanation that fits all the evidence without being forced unnaturally--is that the document(s) were prepared with Microsoft Word at either its default 1.25" margin setting on 8.5 x 11 paper or one-inch margin setting on 8 x 10.5 paper.

Admin moderator, you might want to pull this until I can rewrite it to bring its accuracy up to speed.

31 posted on 09/11/2004 11:32:57 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

BTTT


32 posted on 09/11/2004 11:34:28 AM PDT by Fiddlstix (This Tagline for sale. (Presented by TagLines R US))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
If the Air Force used 8 inch paper at that time, then I'm not sure why we're even bothering to analyze fonts and such(?)

Because today's FAX machines and copiers use 8 1/2 inch paper. Thus one could copy an 8 inch sheet onto an 8 1/2 inch one. It could be centered, more or less, or it could be offset to one side. Either way, the paper would still be 8 1/2 inches wide. The Margins would then be seen to be 1 1/4 inches rather than 1 inch. They are 1 inch. More properly the text is contained in 6 1/2 inches, not 6 inches as it would be if the original was done on 8 inch paper with 1 inch margins.

33 posted on 09/11/2004 1:40:03 PM PDT by El Gato (Federal Judges can twist the Constitution into anything.. Or so they think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

Argument still holds if one allows for the extra width margins, except that now the Word version's text would be contained in 5 1/2 inchs while a standard AF memo would be 6 inches. In any event, no matter what then available machine, paper or margin settings were used, it would not be identical to something produced by Microsoft Word. It is, to within the limit of being faxed, therefore it's a modern fake.


34 posted on 09/11/2004 1:52:45 PM PDT by El Gato (Federal Judges can twist the Constitution into anything.. Or so they think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
My own invocation of O's Razor in this conversation with a one-day troll.
35 posted on 09/11/2004 2:18:50 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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