Skip to comments.Free Republic CBS Forgery Project Report w Recommendations for Desired CBS Actions
Posted on 09/20/2004 2:15:12 PM PDT by dickmc
CBS 60MINUTES DOCUMENT FORGERY FACTS
FOR EASY IDENTIFICATION IN THIS PROJECT, WE REFER TO THE CBS DOCUMENTS PURPORTEDLY WRITTEN BY KILLIAN IN THE 60 MINUTES BROADCAST OF SEPTEMBER 8 AS THE CBS MEMOS.
A. ERRORS IN THE FONT, TYPE, TYPOGRAPHY, EQUIPMENT, ETC IN THE CBS MEMOS
Characteristics of the CBS Memos establish that they could not have been written in the decade of the 1970s. To understand the conclusion that these documents are forgeries, it is important to understand some fundamental typography features that represent the CBS Memos "fingerprints":
Ordinary typewriters give a fixed space to each letter. Thus, a group of ten characters like "iiiiiiiiii" versus "WWWWWWWWWW" both take up the same width on a typewritten page. This made for unattractive text lines but had a great advantage for typewriters. Each letter was always in the same place so that corrections could be made with whiteout and typed over. As those of us who produced documents in the 70's vividly remember, typewriters have no delete or insert key and fixing a typo was a big aggravation! However, typewriter text was not very attractive, particularly for document use.
As you can see from this paragraph, the spacing between letters here is different. It has a type of spacing known as proportional. Typewriters used by everyone in the 1970s, particularly the military, had an easily recognizable fixed uniform spacing. While there was an IBM Executive typewriter that had a kind of limited proportional spacing where letters were sorted into four widths, they were expensively uncommon and their text does not match the CBS Memos anyway. With the advent of computer TrueType for Microsoft Word in 1992, documents could finally produce attractive text lines for monitor display and for desktop laser printing. TrueType actually uses a lookup table to find the previous letter and to set the point where the next letter begins. For example, with "TRTRTRTR" versus "fifififi". This gives a computer produced document a distinct spacing "fingerprint" that is as distinctive as a signature. All of the CBS Memos have the "fingerprint" of computer generation.
But the analogy does not stop with the letter spacing. The second "fingerprint" fact is that computer word processors have the capability to produce true superscripts like the "th" in the line of the CBS Memo 04 May that reads "2. Report to the 111th F.I.S. administrative officer ". Note how the "th" extends above the top of the 111 on that line. The width of the "th" superscript and how high it extends above the "111" in the CBS Memo 04 May is the "fingerprint" of a computer word processor and modern desktop printer. The only other typewriter device that even comes close to this is a Selectric Composer that cost more than a car in 1972. The TANG (Texas Air National Guard) did not have such a device. Even if they had one, Lt Col Killian--who barely knew how to type--would never have been able to operate it. This is further discussed in the bullets below.
The third fact that you need to know about in order to deal with a document's "fingerprint" is something called a type face. There are some 4,000 different fonts. A type face is a coordinated design for each element of a set of type, for example "A .Za....z1234567890-=*/ ". A type design has to do with the looks of the font such as thickness, roundness, feet if any, style, etc. For example, each type font is distinctive in many ways like whether or not the top of a "4" is closed. A type font has a distinctive signature and even Times New Roman has characters that look different from Times Roman. This is the third aspect of a document's "signature".
The fourth fact of a document's "fingerprint" is unique. Unlike your fingerprint, a document's "fingerprint" can be reproduced. If you reprint a letter, it is identical with the old document. For Microsoft Word, typing and printing a document at its default settings, for all intent and purposes always produces an identical document. If you print a document twice, overlay the copies, and hold them up to the window, the two copies will be exactly identical.
Having said all this and if you don't want to read more technology, the only thing you need to know is:
BASED ON THESE "FINGERPRINTS", IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE CBS DOCUMENTS ARE FORGERIES. USING ALL THE ABOVE "FINGERPRINTS" THE CBS MEMOS WERE GENERATED ON A COMPUTER PROCESSOR! Obviously, there were no computer word processors and laser printers around in 1972 and 1973 when Lt Col Killian supposedly wrote the CBS Memos.
As you can appreciate, there are experts in Microsoft Word computer printing technology, just like everything else:
Dr Joseph Newcomer, who virtually invented most of this computer type and printing, has examined the CBS Memos and says the following:
"There has been a lot of activity on the Internet recently concerning the forged CBS documents. I do not even dignify this statement with the traditional weasel-word 'alleged', because it takes approximately 30 seconds for anyone who is knowledgeable in the history of electronic document production to recognize this whole collection is certainly a forgery, and approximately five minutes to prove to anyone technically competent that the documents are a forgery. I was able to replicate two of the documents within a few minutes. At the time I am writing this, CBS is stonewalling. They were hoaxed, pure and simple."
"I am not sure what sort of 'expert' they called in to authenticate the document, but anything I say about his qualifications to judge digital typography is likely to be considered libelous. CBS failed to exercise anything even approximately like due diligence. I am not sure what sort of 'expert' they called in to authenticate the document, but anything I say about his qualifications to judge digital typography is likely to be considered libelous (no matter how true they are) and I would not say them in print in a public forum."
"The probability that any technology in existence in 1972 would be capable of producing a document that is nearly pixel-compatible with Microsoft's Times New Roman font and the formatting of Microsoft Word, and that such technology was in casual use at the Texas Air National Guard, is so vanishingly small as to be indistinguishable from zero."
By the way, if you are looking at the CBS Memos on a 17-inch computer monitor, you are seeing some 750,000 pixels. That's a lot of comparison points and why a comparison using Microsoft Word reproduction of the CBS Memos is so telling. For more information on this analysis go to Dr Newcomer's analysis and comparison at http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm Further sources are detailed below if you want even more information.
To replicate the CBS Memos, simply retype a them in Microsoft Word using its default Times New Roman font and margins, print out the result, overlay the CBS Memo, and hold it them up to a window. An example of the forgery confirmation is shown below for the CBS Memo of 04 May 1972. The CBS Memo is shown in black. The overlay in red, which matches exactly, is by Microsoft Word97 from a computer and desktop printer.
More details of the CBS Memos' forgery "fingerprints" are shown in the bullets below:
1. Typewriter proportional spacing was not available in 1972 with the Times Roman font, the timeframe and font style of the CBS Memos. The IBM Executive had a pseudo proportional spacing but not the typeface used in the CBS Memos. There is no confirmation that even this expensive typewriter was available at TANG, see below for a discussion of the Selectric Composer which was an extremely expensive and very complex printing shop device that couldn't produce the CBS Memos at the font detail level.
2. The true superscripts in the forged CBS Memos were not available in 1972-3 except in specialized printing shops. True superscripts like the "th" in the forged CBS Memos are individual characters in smaller case that extend well above the printed line. (The underlined "th" cited by CBS in it's defense in the TANG Chronological Listing of Service document, does NOT extend above the characters. It is technically a single key element known as a monospaced ligature. It is observedly not a true superscript like in the CBS Memos.) Moreover, the true superscript "th" in the CBS Memos versus the single key element ligature even further indicates that the CBS Memos are a forgery. See http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm and many other web references.
3. Apostrophes in the CBS Memos are curved. Typewriters used straight hash marks for both quotation marks and apostrophes.
4. The number "4" produced by typewriters in the genuine TANG documents are open at the top. Moreover, all of the letters are uniformly spaced. The 4's in the CBS Memos have a closed top and all of the letters in the CBS Memos are proportionally spaced. D. Bouffard, a forensic document examiner who has analyzed typewritten samples for 30 years, collects and maintains a computerized database of typewriter fonts. He ran the CBS Memos' number and text shapes through his entire database of over 4,000 typewriter fonts and could not find any match. However, the font in the CBS Memos is indicative of Times New Roman, a font that is only available to document writers using computer word processing programs. For further information see http://www.indcjournal.com/
5. The vertical spacing between typed lines in the memos, measured at 13 points, was not available in typewriters, and only became possible with the advent of computer driven word processors and printers.
6. The words stop on each line in the CBS Memos in a way identical with the default settings for Microsoft Word and there are no hyphenated words. This is exactly the way Microsoft Word ends lines unless the user intervenes. This is not the way a person using a typewriter would have done it. Typewriters had fixed margins that "rang" and froze the carriage. At that point the typist would hit MarRel to keep going, often to a hyphenated word, and then manually returned the carriage. Numerous examples of typewritten hyphenation appear in the real TANG memos done on typewriters but not in the CBS Memos.
7. While CBS says Times Roman has been available since 1931, that statement is disingenuous and reveals no understanding of type faces and their history. Times Roman was only available in printing shops. The Selectric typewriters did not have a Times Roman type face and did not do proportional spacing. It was not until 1991 that Apple developed the TrueType font, known as Times New Roman, which is used in the CBS Memos. The actual application of Microsoft TrueType Times New Roman for Windows occurred in 1992. The overlay of the CBS Memos is an EXACT match for Microsoft Word Processor printed text at the "fingerprint" level and confirms the 60Minutes CBS Memos are forgeries. See http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm for further information.
8. In the CBS Memos it would have been nearly impossible to center a proportionately typed letterhead with proportional spacing without a computer (not impossible, but for Killian, who did not type, highly improbable). Further, doing such centering identically in memos two months apart, CBS May 04 and CBS August 01, absent a word processor is extremely unlikely.
9. The only device that could have come close to producing superscripted "th" in the CBS Memo timeline and with proportional type would have been a Selectric Composer. This is not an ordinary typewriter; rather it was used for special publication composing. It cost some $4,000 then ($23,000 today) and was incredibly difficult to operate. The machine basically consisted of an IBM Selectric typewriter along with a 3-1/2 ft. high upright case containing a magnetic tape reader with spools of long magnetic tape cartridges. It also needed a special IBM service person and contract above and beyond repairing typewriters. The operating manual is here at http://www.ibmcomposer.org/docs.htm.
Moreover, D. Bouffard, the forensic document examiner described above, says: : "...the more information we get and the more my colleagues look at this, we're more convinced that there are significant differences between the type of the Selectric Composer that was available and the questionable document.... ... there are so many things that are not right: 'crossings,' 'downstrokes'..." For further information see http://www.indcjournal.com/ for the font discussion and http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm and many other web references.
The Selectric Composer, even if it had the right font- ?which it does not? could never have been operated by Lt Col Killian. Http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/2004/09/the_ibm_selectr.html discusses the tortuous operation of the Selectric Composer. It is not clear that the Air Force even had these machines at that time and the TANG clearly did not. To suggest that Col Killian, who could barely type, would have been able to operate one of these complex printing shop machines is not credible.
10. The CBS Memo fonts and spacing don't match the genuine TANG Lt Bush official evaluation that was signed 26 May 1972.
11. Looking at all of the number groups in the CBS Memos reveals two with miniature "th" superscripts. Four have spaces between the numbers and suffix, and five without a space, all of which include a digit of 1 (probably a lower case L in the cases of "lst"). Putting spaces between the numerals and the suffix is NOT how typists were or are trained. The only reason for spaces generally occurring after numbers in the CBS Memos is to suppress MS Word's auto-superscript function when the Spacebar or Enter key is pressed. The most straightforward explanation for the typing shown in the CBS Memos is that the preparer intended to suppress the auto-superscript function by using lower case L's in imitation of old typists or by inserting spaces after normally superscripted numbers. The forger simply missed two instances and MS Word automatically turned the "th" into superscripts. That being the case: why are there two instances of non-subscripted numbers "111th" in the headings? Probably, the forger simply made another mistake which would have occurred because of an idiosyncrasy of MS Word. It will only superscript something like 111th if you immediately hit the Spacebar or Enter key after having typed the "h". In this case the forger probably an error and typed "111 Fighter" and then realized that the "th" was missing. The forger went back and typed the "th" and then clicked on the end "r" in Fighter. In that case MS Word did not detect a Spacebar or Enter press at the "111th" and did not, therefore, superscript the added "th". The forger suppressed certain of the superscripting by using a lower case L in "lst" or a space as in "147 th". Also, to preserve the heading "111st" style, the forger may have simply copied and pasted between CBS Memos 04 May and 01 August since both typed headings are identical and perfectly centered.
12. Certain of the CBS Memo signatures look faked even to the untrained observer such as the abrupt cut at the very end of the last letter rather than a fade when the signing pressure would have been released. Other document examiners not affiliated with CBS are increasingly concurring that the CBS Memo signatures do not match known specimens of Lt Col Killian's signature as outlined in the Experts section.
B. ISSUES THAT CAN ONLY BE SATISFIED BY A BETTER OR ORIGINAL COPY
13. Potential paper size issue since the Air Force and Guard did not use 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper until the 1980s.
14. How far are the CBS Memos away from an original copy? The CBS Memos have significant background noise such as black marks and a series of repeated dots as if run through a copier for many cycles. Since the redacted black address in CBS Memo 04 May is actually readable in the pdf, this suggests that most of the generations of copies were done elsewhere.
C. ERRORS RELATING TO CUSTOM AND USAGE OF TEXT IN THE CBS MEMOS
To outsiders differences of how an officer wrote his name and rank or referred to his military unit may seem arcane and unimportant. However, within the military such details are highly regulated by rules and tradition as is the format of memos and orders. Thus, these kinds of typing details are of great significance in assessing the veracity of documents. The CBS Memos contain a number of key stylistic examples that significantly depart from the normal procedures in the Texas ANG.
15. USAF letterhead has been required since 1948. Instead the CBS Memos used a typed letterhead. In general, typed letterhead is restricted to computer-generated orders such as those printed by teletype, chain printer or daisy-wheel printer, the latter looking like a typed letter. Manually typed correspondence is supposed to use official USAF letterhead. Even special orders, which might have used a typed letterhead were required to use ALL CAPS in the letterhead.
16. CBS Memo letterheads give the address as "Houston, Texas". The standard formulation for addresses at USAF installations required the address to read "ELLINGTON AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS" in all caps. Also, the Air Force did not typically use office street addresses on letterheads. Moreover, the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron was renamed "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron (Training)" abbreviated 111th FIS(T), prior to 1 May 1972. This re-designation of 111th FIS to 111th FIS(T) is confirmed in every validated record covering the period from 1 May 1971 through 1 May 1973. Letterhead of any kind dated after 1 May 1972 would have been required to use the NEW 111th FIS(T) designation. All of the purported CBS Memos have Lt Col Killian using the wrong designation for his own group.
17. According to Lt Col Campelli (USAF ret), the CBS Memos 4 May and 1 August both have used letterhead for the wrong organization. Correspondence and orders in those days would have been issued in the name of the parent organization -- the 147th Fighter Interceptor Group -- rather than by the squadron. Moreover, the letterhead in the CBS Memos is typed whereas the unit used PRINTED TANG letterhead. Even more critically, Campelli states that when written orders were issued, they were on standard USAF orders forms. They were NOT in the format of the CBS Memos. For further information see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1212092/posts
18. The CBS Memos use periods in the unit name abbreviations. This is incorrect since USAF unit abbreviations use only capital letters with no periods. For example, 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron would be abbreviated as 111th FIS, not as the 111th F.I.S. used in CBS Memo 04 May. Moreover, in the CBS Memo 18 August uses "Grp" rather than the proper "Gp".
19. There is a significant error on the CBS Memo forger's part that would be immediately recognized by any military person. The day of the month in the CBS Memo 04 May date should be "4" and NOT "04"; in the CBS Memo 1 August, it should have been "1" and NOT "01". This is a telltale artifact of a word processor setting that had not been changed.
20. The CBS Memos are not in any format that a military person would use, e.g. orders are not given via a memo. Also, the CBS Memos contain language not generally used by military personnel and are not signed or initialed by an author, typist, or clerk.
21. CBS Memos on 04 May and 01 August have no distribution list that is universally needed for orders and also have no receipt confirmation box or signature.
22. CBS Memo 04 May and 01 August used incorrect terminology in stating "physical examination" instead of "medical". Furthermore, a medical is due the last day of the Birth Month which would be July 31 for Lt Bush; not the May 14th date ordered in the CBS Memo 04 May. Moreover the May 14 date is a Sunday.
23. An order from a superior, directing a junior to perform a specific task would not be in the memorandum format used in CBS Memos. Instead, it would use the USAF standard internal memo format with left hand justification as follows: FROM: Lt Col Killian, Jerry B. (line) SUBJECT [or SUB]: ANNUAL MEDICAL (FLIGHT) (line) TO: 1Lt Bush, George W. Documents titled as MEMORANDUM are used only for file purposes, and not for communications.
24. Subject line in memos was usually, but not always, CAPITALIZED in the military.
25. CBS Memos have an incorrect signature block. Killian's signature block should read: JERRY B. KILLIAN, Lt Col, TexANG Commander. This is the required USAF formulation for a signature block. Also in the CBS Memos, Lt Col Killian's signature should have been aligned to the left side of the page. Indented signature blocks are not a USAF standard. The CBS Memos just have rank beneath a name on the right hand side.
26. Rank abbreviations in the CBS Memos are applied inconsistently and incorrectly. For example, the use of periods in USAF rank abbreviations is incorrect. The modern formulation for rank abbreviations for the lieutenant grades in the USAF is 2LT and 1LT. In any event, they would not have included periods. Lt Col Killian's abbreviations are pretty much universally incorrect in the CBS Memos.
27. The superscript "th" in the forged documents was raised half-way above the typed line (consistent with MS Word, but inconsistent with military typewriters which kept everything in-line to avoid writing outside the pre-printed boxes of standard forms).
28. The formulation used in the memos, i.e., "MEMORANDUM FOR 1st Lt. Bush..." is incorrect. A memo would be written on plain (non-letterhead) paper, with the top line reading "MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD". However, Lt Col Killian is known to have relied on hand written notes on scraps of paper and not typewritten memos to files.
29. The CBS Memos use the phrase "...in accordance with (IAW)..." The abbreviation IAW is a universal abbreviation in the USAF, and would not also have been spelled out. IAW is used for no other reason than to eliminate the words "in accordance with" from official communications. There are several such universal abbreviations, such as NLT for "no later than".
30. The CBS Memos, all of which have proportional type spacing, do not match the typeface and letter spacing of the official evaluation of Lt Bush signed 26 May 1972. Furthermore, the easy to recognize CBS Memos' proportionally spaced typing does not match any of the some hundred other pdf's of Lt Bush records that are available on the internet, none of which have proportional spaced type.
31. CBS Memos do not, but should have had, two hole punches evident at the top of the page. or even three or five on the side of the page.
D. ERRORS IN THE CBS MEMOS RELATING TO CONTEXT (PEOPLE RETIRED, DAY OF WEEK, ANG POLICY, ETC.)
32. The address listed in CBS Memo 04 May for Lt Bush is wrong. The address the CBS Memo uses is 5000 Longmont #8 in Houston Tx. However, Lt Bush had already moved TWICE from this address at the time the CBS Memo was written. The correct address that the CBS Memo 04 May should have used is: 2910 Westheimer Rd. Apt 4. Lt Col Killian certainly would have known and used the correct address in the purported memo.
33. CBS 04 May Memo: Lt Bush would have had automatic physical scheduled for his Birth Month which was July! He would have received a routine letter notifying him of the pending requirement, month or date by which the flight medical exam was to be completed, and advising him to call the flight surgeon's office to schedule the appointment. There would not have been an 'order' issued and certainly not by May 14th in advance of July, his Birth Month. Moreover, if any orders ever are issued in writing, they are NOT issued via a Memorandum.
34. The CBS Memo 19 May to the file that is supposedly written by Harris or Killian states: "Says he wants to transfer to Alabama to any unit he can get in to. Says he is working on another campaign for his dad". The CBS Memo is pejoratively inconsistent with the Lt Bush 26 May 1972 Performance Appraisal which states under OTHER COMMENTS: "Lt Bush is very active in civic affairs in the community and manifests a deep interest in the operation of our government. He has recently accepted a position as a campaign manager for a candidate for United States Senate. He is a good representative of the military and the Air National Guard in the business world. His abilities and anticipated future assignments make him a valuable asset. He is a member of the National Guard Association of the United States and Texas."
35. CBS Memo 1 August 1972 says "I recommended transfer of this officer to the 9921 st Air Reserve Squadron in May and forwarded his AF Form 1288 to 147 th Ftr Intcp Gp headquarters. The transfer was not allowed." However, the 147th Ftr Gp (Tng) actually endorsed Lt Bush's AF Form 1288 application for reserve assignment on 24 May 1972 with "Recommend approval. Request this organization be notified on date of appointment." Texas ANG headquarters approved the endorsement on 5 June 1972, and AF Form 1288 was returned to the 147th Ftr Gp and filed in June 1972.
Lt Col Killian would NOT have written as is contained in CBS Memo 04 Aug 1972 that "The transfer was not allowed" since by 1 August if the Texas ANG headquarters already approved it. Sometime later in August, 1972 (the date stamp on the rejection letter cannot be determined.), the Headquarters of AF Personal refused this transfer on procedural grounds pointing out that Lt Bush needed to transfer to a National Guard Air Force Reserve Sqd, not an Air Reserve Sqd. In September, 1972, Lt Bush reapplied for transfer through Lt Col Killian and successfully transferred to the 187th AL Sqd, where he worked in the classified material office away from the flight line in September, October, and November. On August 1, the date of the CBS Memo, there is no indication that Lt Col Killian had received this (future) rejection letter.
37. In the CBS Memo 18 August Jerry Killian purportedly writes: "Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush. I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job." but General Staudt, who thought very highly of Lt Bush, retired on March 1, 1972. General Staudt was no longer in the TANG military chain of command.
38. CBS Memo18 August is titled CYA, a popular euphemism for covering one's posterior. No military officer in his right mind would use "CYA" to communicate in a memo that might come under scrutiny, even in a Memo to the File.
39. CBS Memo dated 18 August in 1973 specifically claims that Col Staudt was trying to influence Killian to sugarcoat Lt Bush's 72-73 Officer Effectiveness Report (OER). For one thing, Col Staudt had been retired over a year by then. Moreover, the facts in actual records do not support such a statement because there would be no reason for such pressure even if Col Staudt were still around. This is because Lt Bush's OER for the entire period from May 1972-May 1973 was signed as is TANG custom by Major Martin as "Not Observed" since Lt Bush was in Alabama serving with the 187th during part of this time. A "Not Observed" OER is routinely used for long periods of detached duty like this. All of Lt Bush's service time is correctly accounted for by these OER's. No discipline or missing drill times are noted, as would have been required had there been any discipline problems. Lt Bush's two-sentence May 1973 OER was simply a normal administrative accounting of time served. It was ABSOLUTELY NOT sugarcoated. Neither Lt Col Killian nor Col Hodges signed, endorsed, or reviewed the May 1973 OER. Lt Bush's May 1973 OER was NOT backdated or altered. It was properly signed, dated, stamped and is correctly filed with Lt Bush's records in November 1973.
40. CBS Memo 18 August uses the term OETR whereas the proper term would be OER. 41. According to Lt Col Campelli: "Jerry Killian never went near a typewriter. In the Air Force, in those days, notes ?if anyone kept them at all? were handwritten." All the CBS Memos supposedly prepared by Lt Col Killian are typed. For further information see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1212092/posts
42. Both Lt Col Killian's wife and son relate that Killian wasn't a typist. If he needed notes, he would write them down longhand, but in general, he wasn't paper-oriented, and certainly wasn't a typist.
E. CBS MEMO AUTHENTICATION ISSUES (VERACITY OF EXPERTS, ETC.)
43. The four CBS Memos have NO apparent errors or whiteouts or overtypes or corrections or misspellings or typographic changes visible in any of the documents. It stretches credulity to believe that Lt Col Killian, who did not type much, if at all, could use a manual typewriter to type all four of these relatively complex documents without making a single mistake.
44. CBS admits that it does *not* have the originals, but only original documents can be proven to be real; copies can *never* be authenticated positively. CBS never had the originals, so it is reasonable to conclude that CBS knew that it was publishing something that couldn't be authenticated. Moreover, CBS's own validator, Marcel Matley, wrote in the September, 2002 issue of the journal, The Practical Litigator: "In fact, modern copiers and computer printers are so good that they permit easy fabrication of quality forgeries. From a copy, the document examiner cannot authenticate the unseen original ..." See http://d2d.ali-aba.org/_files/thumbs/components/PLIT0209-MATLEY_thumb.pdf
45. CBS 60 Minutes says validator Matley vouched for all four CBS Memos. However, Matley says he vouched for only one.
46. CBS Memo validator Matley is only a signature expert, not a typographic expert. Also there now seem to be emerging issues on the signatures themselves. For signature authenticity doubts see http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040910-104821-5968r.htm and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1213174/posts
47. Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the TANG, told ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were "handwritten" and after CBS read him excerpts he said: "well IF he WROTE them that's what he felt." Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been "computer generated" and are a "fraud". See http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/NotedNow/Noted_Now.html
48. The CBS Memos purport to be from Lt Col Killian's "personal files". Yet they were not obtained from his family, but through some unknown 3rd party. It is an odd kind of "personal file" when the family of a deceased person is unaware of the file's existence and it is not in their possession. CBS 60 Minutes has not stated any provenance for the memos. This adds further questions to the authenticity of the CBS Memos.
49. Both Lt Col Killian's wife and son, as well as the EAFB personnel officer do not find the CBS Memos credible.
50. The CBS Memos are totally inconsistent with the highly positive performance reviews for Lt Bush by TANG.
51. The blurriness of the CBS Memos indicates they were recopied a number of times which is a common tactic of forgers. (copying of the CBS Memos was stated in the 60Minutes broadcast).
IT IS THE CONCLUSION OF THE PROJECT THAT:
CBS DID NOT EXERCISE REASONABLE PRUDENCE IN PUBLICATION OF THE FORGED MEMOS ON 60MINUTES
In addition to the many items detailed in the Project Report, the following were immediate red flags:
1. The superscript "th" in the 04 May and in the 18 August Memos would have been a clear forgery indicator to anyone familiar with a manual typewriter, the only equipment available in 1972.
2. The layout of the documents including proportional spacing should have caused any staff member to try to replicate the memos in Microsoft Word default settings. A simple overlay held up to the window would have revealed the forgery.
3. The use of the "0" in the 04 May and in the 01 August Memo dates and the lack of a distribution list for the these purported orders would have led anyone with past military experience, even at the private level, to know that the documents were not valid.
4. The use of a validator with no admitted typographic expertise. Moreover, that validator was instructed to validate only one Memo signature from a photocopy, despite that validator's own previously published statements that a photocopy could not be used to determine signature veracity.
IT IS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PROJECT THAT CBS AND 60MINUTES:
a. Issue a clear and unambiguous public apology to the American Public and to President Bush:
- on CBS News and on 60Minutes
- on the CBS web site
b. Terminate or accept the resignation(s) of those CBS person(s) asserting the authenticity of Documents on CBS News and on 60 Minutes.
c. Post on the CBS web site the source(s) of the forged memos and a chronology of the events relating to this matter specifically including contacts in electronic, telephonic, or written form with any 527, DNC, or Kerry Campaign employees, representatives, or agents. Also, immediately take steps to preserve all such notes and records.
d. Produce within 14 days a follow-up CBS 60Minutes presentation detailing the facts and circumstances relating to the acquisition and use on 60Minutes, CBS News, and the CBS web site of the forged documents.
e. As the forging and use of forged military documents, especially during a national election, is a serious and possibly criminal issue: formally notify the U.S. Justice Department, the Federal Election Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission of the details concerning the acquisition and use of the Documents and fully cooperate with any subsequent investigation(s) and, if appropriate, any prosecution(s).
CBS Memo 04 May: here.
CBS Memo 19 May: here.
CBS Memo 01 August: here.
CBS Memo 18 August: here.
CBS supposed find of a "th" in a TANG Document (It is single key ligature, NOT a superscript, and is not proportionally spaced): here. (See page 25 of 26)
The Buckhead Post on Free Republic that first unearthed the CBS 60 Minutes Forgery via the internet: here.
Download this as a 60Minutes Forgery Facts Microsoft Word Document.
Download this as a 60Minutes Forgery Facts PDF.
FreeRepublic.com, a member of the NEW Main Stream Media
September 20, 2004 5 PM EDT
I am glad you're on our side.
Absolutely a first rate piece. Every journalist in America will download this.
These are much more detailed and usable than the above html posting. They contain:
.extensive 10-page Project Report analysis as to why the CBS Memos are a forgery
.three page Summary for those folks who don't want to read all the analysis
. Technical Appendix showing the 04 CBS Memo overlay with MSWord
. Project Conclusion concerning CBS's "lack of reasonable prudence"
. Project Recommendation as to what CBS needs to do now that they should likely be entering the "penalty and restitution" discussion phase
While it might be argued that the need for the Project Report is now over, documentation of the obvious nature of the CBS Memo forgery may, and should, have a bearing on what CBS should be required to do regarding their discovery, validation, and broadcasting of the forged CBS Memos.
This next phase which might be termed CBS "discovery, restitution, and penalty" is also covered in the doc and pdf downloads under CONCLUSION and RECOMMENDATIONS.
I would like to thank a number of Freepers for input, most importantly one who provided valuable editing input and wrote the Summary, and the site hoster for the doc and pdf's. Thanks also to the pdf converter.
A couple of comments and questions:
1. the Free Republic tag line is not on the Conclusion and Recommendations
document. Should it be?
2. if some one wants to host the html above, I will be happy to E-mail
the FR posting code as a MSWord document that can be simply pasted
into a WWW page, as well as the two graphics. Just Freepmail me
with your E-Mail address. No doubt, the html can be improved with
some indents, font changes, text colors, and the like.
3. if you do want to reproduce and host the above article, it is preferred
that you just link to the present host site for the doc and pdf downloads.
That way if there are any changes to the doc or pdf, they will automatically
In any event, thanks to all of you who provided input. It is pretty clear
that the MSM was using some of the threads for their ideas. If you would
like any changes to the document and pdf that you download, please
post the suggestions so that they can be reviewed by all.
CBS is not credible.
Wow ... remind me to NEVER make you angry. I wouldn't hold my breath on ANY of this, though ... CBS will do nothing. Neither will the government, for it will be viewed as being "partisan." Never mind the breaking of laws ... what we REALLY need are MORE laws that we can ignore! Yeah ... THATs right! </sarcasem>
PING for your reference
Is there going to be a separate project thread on discovering "who" did the forgery, the chain resulting in airing and the timelines involved?
Looks like the media will not do it and from comments from the Whitehouse, looks like it will lead to Kerry.
A larger version can be downloaded here.
Download, print, and send to Rather.
Great job - I knew there were a number of facts that showed the forged nature of these documents, but I didn't realize how substantive that list was.
Maybe the new CBS investigative team will get around to this link sometime in '05.
Maybe it's time for the assignment editors & alleged "investigative journalists" to reassess if they're in the correct career line. If this can be constituted by a (perjorative) PJist--a so-called civilian journalist--then what thumb-dwiddling has been going by these alleged news agencies?
A FABULOUS post BUMP to the top!
This is incredible.....
Awesome work, my man! Hat tip.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is the centering of the top 3 lines. I remember from beginning typing class what it took to manually center 3 lines at the top of the page. You had to count all the characters and spaces (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I count 34, 15, and 20 spaces for the 3 header lines). You then divide the number of spaces by 2, dropping the remainder. This would get you 17, 7, and 10. Then you put the carriage at the center position (space 42 on a 8.5 inch sheet of paper using pica type), then BACKSPACE one by one, like 17 times, to know where to start typing "111th...." Repeat the BACKSPACE exercise for lines 2 & 3.
How could Jerry Killian, who "couldn't type," or "never typed," actually be able to properly CENTER the top 3 lines using a typewriter? Would Killian actually gone to that much trouble to center them? Most likely he would have used the left margin, as was much more in practice. That was called BLOCK style formatting, as I remember. MODIFIED BLOCK used the center point (space 42) but all such lines (usually the Inside Address/Date and the Closing) used a left margin of space 42, not centered on space 42.
Also, if typed on a typewriter, and manually centered, the 2nd line, which had an "odd" number of characters, would be "off center" with the 1st line and the 3rd line of the headers, which each had an "even" number of characters, right?
ahhhh didn't they admit today they were forgeries?
I did not notice that this included another important text issue:
The questioned documents not only employ proportional type spacing, but employ "kerning" (more accurately, "pseudo kerning"), which causes certain letter combinations to overlap to reduce white space between letters in a word. The combinations "fo" and "fr" are found in the documents, with the top of the "f" overhanging the next letter. This capability did not then exist in any typewriter, including the special IBM typewriter that produced rudimentary proportional spacing.
Outstanding. Now I feel ready for the Pajamilitia entrance exam.
Actually the TrueType employs a type of pseudo kerning using a lookup table for the space to the next letter based on the previous letter. Apparently true kerning which looks the same is when a piece of type has two letters on it. It was too technical to use when the proportional spacing was good enough to polish off the Killian letters.
For the true expert explanation see http://www.flounder.com/bush2.htm
However this site is sited in the FR Forgery Facts since that author is so eminently quotable.
Notice that a centered line with an odd number of characters could not be possibly be aligned perfectly with a "centered" line with an even number of characters. There being no way to account for the truncation error in the strictly integer number of spaces.
It also must be said that prior to the advent of word processing professionals left the typing strictly to secretarial help because typing clear (mistake-free) copy was a specialized skill. And, probably, an underpaid one.
We are on the same (unforged) page. I learned it from that site.
The reason to add the kerning issue is because it defeats the "IBM typewriters did proportional" argument. It is an independent and persuasive issue.
For condign punishment CBS would read this whole article on-air.
No, they admited they cannot prove they are authentic.
Conservative masterclass BUMP.
The only machine which did a half-assed kind of proportional typing (not like a word processor) was the IBM Executive which did not have the Times Roman or Times New Roman type. It was an ill aligned b***h of a machine that was aligned by bending the arms holding the type face and one was never aligned perfectly, even when it left the factory!
Even CBS now admits that the only real candidate was the Selectric Composer which is really not a typewriter, it only looked like one. It was -rather- a printing shop machine. It was an: expensive ($4,000 in 1070's), nasty. complex, ill tempered, error prone machine, with a user manual that might as well have been written by the idiots that write VCR manuals. One posting tells how his dad owned a print shop and got so disgusted with the Composer that he ordered the poster (his son) to carry it out to the street and put it in the garbage!
Add to all this technical stuff the fact that no MALE of the human species would ever remotely bother to so perfectly count and center a heading on a document. That was all I needed, but the rest of it is gravy. (Add to that Killian didn't even type, much less count spaces to center perfectly.)
Although you include links to the excellent "flounder" site, etc., I think it would be extremely valuable for you to get permission from the "flounder" author to include in your document his "look-see" comparison images of the Composer output vs. the CBS memos. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words -- and is much more convincing.
One more detail: You say that the reader can duplicate the CBS memos using the "default" settings on MS-Word. Perhaps that works on some versions of Word, but on mine at least, in order to duplicate the one memo I experimented with myself I had to select a font size of 12 (default was 10), and left/right margin sizes of 1.0 inches (default was 1.5). But after doing so, it was a pixel-perfect match, using just the default Word tab settings for matching the memo's indented text, etc. Also note that one-inch margins were standard for old-fashioned typed documents -- not sure if some versions of Word use it by default (I was using MS-Word 2000). Perhaps you should include some line like, "using Times New Roman at a font size of 12, and one-inch margins if those are not already the default in your copy of MS-Word".
Other than that, you've made an excellent presentation.
I had to read this more than once before it made sense. Suggest: "Furthermore, the easily recognized proportional spacing of the CBS Memos does not match..."
nice work. bump
Thanks. I appreciate all the comments. At some point when we accumulate several, we will likely do an update.
When will CBS report on any of these subjects?
My own | 9-24-04 | L
Posted on 09/25/2004 3:30:55 AM PDT by THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD
NOT ONLY WERE THE DOCUMENTS FORGED, BUT THE STORY ITSELF WAS FALSE. DOES CBS REALLY WANT TO REPORT THE TRUTH, FAIR AND BALANCED, Here's just a few to get started back to FAIR AND BALANCED:
WHERE are ALL OF John Kerry's military service records? WHERE ARE JOHN KERRY'S MEDICAL RECORDS FOR HIS FAKE PURPLE HEARTS? WHAT IS THE TRUTH ABOUT THE OIL FOR FOOD PROGRAM? HOW MUCH MONEY WENT FROM THE OIL FOR FOOD PROGRAM TO BIN LADEN AND OTHER TERRORISTS? How and when did John Kerry get his final discharge? Did John Kerry commit crimes when he was talking to the enemy, while still in the reserve? What EXACT atrocities did John Kerry commit? Were they war crimes? Did Ted Kennedy help with this cover-up? Is there anything in the Swift Boat Vet's claims that are TRUE or False, if so, which ones are true, which are not? DID JOHN KERRY TOSS HIS RIBBONS, HIS MEDALS, SOMEONE ELSE'S? Was John Kerry at a meeting where discussions took place to assassinate US Congressmen? Was that a Crime? THE FAIR AND BALANCED TRUTH ABOUT GEORGE BUSH'S "HONORABLE" SERVICE IN THE GUARD. Did John Kerry EMBOLDEN THE ENEMY, and give aid and comfort to the enemy with his rhetoric during Viet Nam, and is he REPEATING THE SAME THING NOW? WILL CBS NEWS ADMIT DAN RATHER, AND THEIR NEWS DIVISION AS A WHOLE, HAS BEEN BIASED TO HELP JOHN KERRY AND OTHER LIBERALS WIN ELECTIONS?
It also appears they're not much concerned about the cover up, indicating that the interview with Marian Knox, in which she clearly calls the documents forged, was an effort to "report" the truth, yet Dan Rather and CBS didn't care, Dan Rather and CBS still wanted the story told the way they wanted to tell it.
It appears Dan Rather and CBS just don't get it. THERE HAS BEEN A CRIME COMMITTED. SOMEONE SHOULD GO TO JAIL. DAN RATHER WAS PERSONALLY PART OF THE COVER-UP, instead they call it "reporting" to confirm the documents identity.
WHAT A JOKE.
ONLY 30% OF THE PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY ARE VOTING FOR KERRY, SAY THEY ARE VOTING "FOR KERRY" RATHER THAN ANYONE BUT BUSH. 90% OF THOSE VOTING FOR BUSH ARE ACTUALLY VOTING "FOR BUSH".
SO, WITH OVER 100 MILLION EXPECTED VOTES, AND ASSUMING A 50/50 SPLIT AT THE MOMENT, ONLY 15 MILLION (30% x 50 million) ARE VOTING "FOR KERRY" AND 45 MILLION ARE VOTING "FOR BUSH".
KERRY IS NOT ONLY NO WAR HERO, BUT ONE OF THE LEAST LIKED POTENTIAL PRESIDENTS IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES.... WHAT A TOTAL JOKE
I have a question, forgery indicates copying of something, the only thing about the documents that seemed to have been copied is the signature of Killian.
Would not the documents be fakes instead of forgeries???
CBS and MSM obviously doesn't care about the truth. They will never ask JFK for his records nor report the absence of them.
Look at the John F. Kerry Timeline. There is already plenty of dirt on this guy, but I'd like to fill in the holes.
I've already sent this to over 100 media outlets. I think everyone should copy these questions, along with the following 20 others, and send them to every media person you can...
ADD YOUR OWN QUESTIONS... TOO.
WE SHOULD COME UP WITH HUNDREDS, AND SEND THEM TO THE DEBATE TEAM THIS WEEK..
1. The Bush campaign maintains that you spent 20 years in the Senate with no signature legislative achievements. What do you consider to be the five most important pieces of legislation that you've authored?
a. What's the most important piece of legislation regarding intelligence you've authored?
b. What's the most important piece of antiterrorism legislation you've authored?
c. What's the most important piece of health-care legislation you've authored?
d. What's the most important piece of education legislation you've authored?
2. You'd agree that on paper, Dick Cheney's experience and qualifications dwarf those of your running mate. Why would John Edwards make a better president during the war on terror than Dick Cheney?
a. It's been widely reported that John McCain was your first choice as running mate. If true, why did you prefer Senator McCain to Senator Edwards?
3. Earlier this year you told Tim Russert that you'd release all of your military records, yet you've failed to do so and you refuse to release your Vietnam journal. Why shouldn't the public infer that the contents of these documents would undermine your credibility or otherwise damage your candidacy?
a. When will you release the documents?
4. You've stated that you believe that life begins at conception yet you voted against the ban on partial-birth abortions. At precisely what point is a life worth protecting?
a. Is there any limitation on abortion (waiting periods, parental notification) for which you'd vote? If so, what?
5. You've promised to repeal much of the Bush tax cut and while in the Senate you voted to raise taxes an average of five times per year. If current economic trends remain largely unchanged during a Kerry presidency, would you seek additional tax increases?
a. How would you raise taxes and what are the highest marginal tax rates that you'd support?
6. You opposed the 1991 Gulf War even though Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, had invaded another country, and France and Germany had supported the war. In the current conflict no WMDs have been found, France and Germany oppose the action, and Saddam hadn't invaded another country. Yet you recently stated that knowing what you know now, you'd nonetheless authorize the use of force even though you voted against funding it. Could you please reconcile these positions?
7. You acknowledge meeting with representatives of North Vietnam and the Viet Cong in Paris in 1970. Afterward you urged Congress to accept the North Vietnamese proposals. Please explain how this wasn't a violation of the Logan Act and, if you were still in the Naval Reserves at that time, how it wasn't a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice prohibiting unauthorized communications with the enemy.
8. In several speeches before black audiences you've stated that a million African Americans were disenfranchised and had their votes stolen in the 2000 presidential election. There are no official or media investigations that support that statement. What evidence do you have to support the statement and if you believe a million blacks had their votes stolen, why haven't you called for criminal prosecutions and congressional investigations?
9. Do you dispute the National Journal's assessment that you're the nation's most liberal senator? If you do, which senators do you consider to be more liberal and why?
10. Why did you propose cutting the intelligence budget by $6 billion in 1994?
11. As president, would you nominate anyone to be either an attorney general, FBI director, or CIA director who had been a leader and chief spokesman for a group that had discussed and voted upon a plan to assassinate U.S. senators (even if the proposed nominee had opposed such plan)?
12. You have consistently stated that you "never, never" attended the November 1971 Kansas City meeting of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War at which a plan to assassinate six pro-military U.S. senators was discussed. Several newspapers reported that when confronted with FBI surveillance reports, your campaign "all but conceded" that you were in attendance , but claimed that this was a mere "footnote in history."
a. Were you there?
b. Did you discuss the assassination of U.S. senators? What did you say?
c. Did you vote upon such a plan? How did you vote? Were any similar plans discussed by your group at any time? What were they?
d. If the plan was voted down, what steps did you take to insure that supporters of the plan didn't carry it out anyway?
e. Especially considering that this took place in an era of political assassinations and assassination attempts (Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., George Wallace, etc.), did you report the discussion to any law-enforcement authorities? If not, why not?
f. When did you resign from the organization?
g. Do you dispute reports that you continued as a spokesman for the organization for more than a year after the Kansas City meeting?
h. If this was a mere footnote in history why have you repeatedly and vehemently denied you were there?
i. Did your campaign, as alleged in several newspaper accounts, attempt to get a witness to change his story about your attendance?
13. You have criticized the Patriot Act. What portions would you repeal or amend and why? What evidence do you have of any abuses of the Patriot Act?
14. As president, what would you do about Iran's emerging nuclear capability?
15. During your eight-year tenure on the Senate Intelligence Committee you missed more than thee fourths of all public meetings. It's also been reported that you have skipped or delayed receiving intelligence briefings during the campaign. Why should the public believe that you're serious about this issue?
16. What do you think is appropriate punishment for guards (and their superiors) found guilty of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib? Do you believe they should be stripped of command and receive dishonorable discharges and prison time?
17. On May 6, 2001, on Meet the Press, you stated that you had committed "the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers" in violation of the Geneva Convention. Specifically, you said you burned villages and "used 50-calibre machine guns, which [you] were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people."
a. Who ordered you to use 50-caliber machine guns on people?
b. How many people did you shoot with the 50s and how many of them were killed or wounded?
c. When and where did these shootings occur?
d. What other atrocities did you commit and when?
e. Which village(s) did you burn down and when?
f. Were any of your crewmembers present during the commission of any of these atrocities?
g. Did you order them to participate in the atrocities? Did they follow your orders?
h. Why were there no reports of these atrocities? Did you order your crew not to report them?
i. Are any of these incidents described in your Vietnam journal? If not, why not?
j. Did you observe thousands of (or any) other troops committing atrocities? When, where and what kind? Did you report them? If not, why not?
k. In light of your admitted atrocities, if Abu Ghraib guards found guilty of abuse should receive prison time and be stripped of command, why do you believe you should be considered for commander-in-chief?
18. Who among the justices currently sitting on the Supreme Court would be a model for your nominees to the federal bench? Why?
19. In a speech before Drake University Law School you characterized U.S. allies in the war in Iraq as "some trumped-up so-called Coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted,..." Do you maintain that Great Britain has been bribed, coerced, bought, or extorted? What about Italy? Japan? Poland? Please specifically identify those members of the Coalition that have been either bribed, coerced, bought, and extorted and the officials who were bribed or bought.
20. You told George Stephanopoulos that you had a plan to get out of Iraq but refused to provide details. Would you consent to having your secret plan privately evaluated by an independent, bi-partisan panel of military experts who could report the plan's merits to the electorate without divulging the details?
a. Would you also consent to privately revealing to an independent panel the names of the foreign leaders who secretly support you so that the panel can confirm your story to the electorate?
b. Ditto regarding the leaders whom you say have secretly told Senators Biden and Levin that you must win?
Obviously, there are a lot more questions Social Security, health care, etc. Certainly there are tougher questions and those more artfully crafted. This is just a start. Feel free to add your own. TV-newsmagazine producers are welcome to use any of the above.
nice. you are a true American.
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.