Skip to comments.Killian Memos Crumpled and Smoothed Out
Posted on 09/14/2004 8:00:51 PM PDT by finnman69
Several LGF readers emailed to say that if you open one of the CBS News Killian memos in Photoshop and adjust the levels, crumple marks show up on the paper. So I tried it, and heres the result:
This was probably done by the incredibly inept forger to increase the apparent age of the document, and to make the text appear more ragged.
Ill bet that if the real printed originals of these documents ever turn up (say, in a dumpster behind MoveOn.org headquarters), theyll find the idiots fingerprints on them.
Good work. Another piece in the puzzle.
I thought this was an intersting piece of forensic analysis that could come in handy.
All your forgeries are belong to us!
This might explain why the MS Word docs don't match the copied forgeries perfectly, although they already are extremely close to perfect matches.
Seems to me forging government documents is probably a crime. Isn't it time for the FBI to look into this?
That could be important.
If done with a "plug-in" filter for a Photoshop-type app (PS, PSP, for example), one can make any image appear as if it was printed on a crumpled piece of paper.
It's simple. It's quick.
It's yet another reason SeeBS is showing how out-of-touch they are, not only with the truth, but with the basics of the digital age in which we live.
It's all reminding me of the Magritte painting of a pipe that reads (in French), "This is not a pipe."
The next story fed the MSM from the dnc faux fax sheet is gonna get a loooonnnnnnnnnnggggggggggg look.
SO the original was crumpled up before it was smoothed out and photo copied? DId someone take it out of a trash can? Was it crumpled up to make it look like it was taken out of a trash can or just to make it look "used"?
CBS still hasn't said what media they received the forgeries in: printed, faxed, or digital; if digital, what format?
Im thinking those Freepers out there who are good with photo shop should start adjusting contrast on ALL of the documents.
If there is the same wrinkle pattern on all of the documents it could mean the documents were all wadded up together at the same time. And that could mean either nothing or that they were intentionally wadded up together at the same time.
Exactly as some on here predicted had occurred.
Can someone check the contrast on the other docs and see if they same pattern exists, or even better, if it does exist, it is a match?
Dan Rather is toast!
"There's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them," Marcel Matley said in a telephone interview from San Francisco. The main reason, he said, is that they are "copies" that are "far removed" from the originals.
Is it a hate crime?
It looks wrinkled :)
Ok. Now were talking 'Shroud of Turin'.
Quick - someone look at the negative image of this.
Please check the document for Sandy Berger DNA. Secretary says Army speak used in docs.
"But, but, but its the content. Its the content I tell you." </sarcasm> </Blathermouth>
I wonder if anyone has tried Photoshop filters with default settings to see if one can match the crumpled look. If that can be done . . .
Maybe Registered knows someone who could.
Sign your name, print, or type something, whatever, on a sheet of paper. Take a black magic marker and line through it. Then make a photocopy of that document, or, to be more true to form, go through fifteen generations of copying. Hold the two up to the light. On the original, it's VERY easy to see the original information you marked out. On the final copy, though, it's impossible, because the photocopier only picks up the black mark, not the underlying writing.
This to me is incredibly damning evidence against CBS. They can't produce original documents because there aren't any.
They did up a MS Word document, photocopied it fifteen or twenty times, crumpled it up, and THEN blacked out the pertinent information. Otherwise, the info would NOT be visible through the blackout. It's physically impossible.
Yep...and if you look in the right hand corner, it appears that someone wiped their posterior with it. That's about all it's worth.
Wouldn't that be a blast! Great idea, Finn . . .
If you read it backwards, is there a hidden satanic message?
I'm sure the original was shredded.
If it was in storage for 30 years in Texas I would expect some mould, dry rot and termite activity.
"If done with a "plug-in" filter for a Photoshop-type app (PS, PSP, for example), one can make any image appear as if it was printed on a crumpled piece of paper."
I've done that more than a few times, but these results are not the kind you would get from graphics editor IMHO. I think it really was crumpled and smoothed out.
the uneveness of the paper would alter how well the photocopy laser would focus on different parts of the page, the tools I use to get a crumple effect doesn't do that.
Do these crumple marks point towards Burkett as the source of the memos? He's the one that claimed he saw GW's recs go in the trash and there has already been some speculation about his possible involvement in this...
Shouldn't there be at least ONE vertical or horizontal crease? It seems unusual that there isn't.
Good point.....WIsh someone would take a good look at his hard drive!
How's this? The CBS document and awolbush.com document don't show any blacking out of the address for the same May 4 document, but the CNN/USA Today/Fox documents online show no such blacking out. You can read the blacked out address at:
Also the CBS document for May 19 "Memo to File" has underlining, and so does the awolbush.com but not the docs at CNN/Fox/UsaToday.
Coincidence that the 4 CBS documents and the same 4 awol.bush documents are named exactly the same? Maybe awolbush.com copied them from CBS or perhaps the other way??
Don't fall for this unless you are POSITIVE. Remember, Burkett said he got the memos out of the trash........this may be a diversion that leads to the blaming of Burkett to get CBS and Kerry off the hook.
I wonder if fingerprints leave markings that transfer to photocopies? I wonder if there are any filters that can be applied to pick up these markings?
Now I get it about the black mark.
To hell with the memos! I'd like to see the goddamned media focus on Bush's CURRENT record. (Which is only a continuation of his past record.)
Right. So CBS News presses ahead knowing that the documents... ...were forgeries? I don't think so. I bet for every one of the experts noted in the WP article, CBS has at least five stating that the documents are real.
There's nothing.. in the memos that is scandalous enough to warrant this level of hype over them being a possible forgery. So, what's all the fuss about?
If the documents are a forgery, only Karl Rove would have put those papers out there. It is consistent with his trickery. In the 2000 campaign, Rove put out braking news, the same day of the first debate, of a tape sent to him of Gore's debate strategy. No one ever saw the tape because it was all a lie placed by Karl Rove to steal news time away from the debate. Rove has played many of the same tricks in the past.
How do we know Karl Rove is not behind this ?
It's up to rove to prove he is not guilty of this Just like it's up to those that believe the docs are forged to prove they are forged.
There is NO evidence to collaborate forgery! That is why CBS is sticking to its story.
OK, didn't know that.
So much for my attempt to be like Buckhead. :)
Do you mean to say the same file names as digital files?
"is there a hidden satanic message?"
Yeah. It says, "Paul is dead."
Don't worry, it's all good.