For CBS, This May Be the Fat Lady Singing

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,828
1,790
a sweet song for Jihadthis!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18982-2004Sep13.html

washingtonpost.com
Expert Cited by CBS Says He Didn't Authenticate Papers

By Michael Dobbs and Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, September 14, 2004; Page A08


The lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush's former squadron commander in the National Guard said yesterday that he examined only the late officer's signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.

"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.

Matley's comments came amid growing evidence challenging the authenticity of the documents aired Wednesday on CBS's "60 Minutes." The program was part of an investigation asserting that Bush benefited from political favoritism in getting out of commitments to the Texas Air National Guard. On last night's "CBS Evening News," anchor Dan Rather said again that the network "believes the documents are authentic."

A detailed comparison by The Washington Post of memos obtained by CBS News with authenticated documents on Bush's National Guard service reveals dozens of inconsistencies, ranging from conflicting military terminology to different word-processing techniques.

The analysis shows that half a dozen Killian memos released earlier by the military were written with a standard typewriter using different formatting techniques from those characteristic of computer-generated documents. CBS's Killian memos bear numerous signs that are more consistent with modern-day word-processing programs, particularly Microsoft Word.

"I am personally 100 percent sure that they are fake," said Joseph M. Newcomer, author of several books on Windows programming, who worked on electronic typesetting techniques in the early 1970s. Newcomer said he had produced virtually exact replicas of the CBS documents using Microsoft Word formatting and the Times New Roman font.

Newcomer drew an analogy with an art expert trying to determine whether a painting of unknown provenance was painted by Leonardo Da Vinci. "If I was looking for a Da Vinci, I would look for characteristic brush strokes," he said. "If I found something that was painted with a modern synthetic brush, I would know that I have a forgery."

Meanwhile, Laura Bush became the first person from the White House to say the documents are likely forgeries. "You know they are probably altered," she told Radio Iowa in Des Moines yesterday. "And they probably are forgeries, and I think that's terrible, really."

Citing confidentiality issues, CBS News has declined to reveal the source of the disputed documents -- which have been in the network's possession for more than a month -- or to explain how they came to light after more than three decades. Yesterday, USA Today said that it had independently obtained copies of the documents "from a person with knowledge of Texas Air National Guard operations" who declined to be named "for fear of retaliation."

It was unclear whether the same person supplied the documents to both media outlets. USA Today said it had obtained its copies of the CBS documents Wednesday night "soon after" the "60 Minutes" broadcast, as well as another two purported Killian memos that had not been made public.

A detailed examination of the CBS documents beside authenticated Killian memos and other documents generated by Bush's 147th Fighter Interceptor Group suggests at least three areas of difference that are difficult to reconcile:

• Word-processing techniques. Of more than 100 records made available by the 147th Group and the Texas Air National Guard, none used the proportional spacing techniques characteristic of the CBS documents. Nor did they use a superscripted "th" in expressions such as "147th Group" and or "111th Fighter Intercept Squadron."

In a CBS News broadcast Friday night rebutting allegations that the documents had been forged, Rather displayed an authenticated Bush document from 1968 that included a small "th" next to the numbers "111" as proof that Guard typewriters were capable of producing superscripts. In fact, say Newcomer and other experts, the document aired by CBS News does not contain a superscript, because the top of the "th" character is at the same level as the rest of the type. Superscripts rise above the level of the type.

• Factual problems. A CBS document purportedly from Killian ordering Bush to report for his annual physical, dated May 4, 1972, gives Bush's address as "5000 Longmont #8, Houston." This address was used for many years by Bush's father, George H.W. Bush. National Guard documents suggest that the younger Bush stopped using that address in 1970 when he moved into an apartment, and did not use it again until late 1973 or 1974, when he moved to Cambridge, Mass., to attend Harvard Business School.

One CBS memo cites pressure allegedly being put on Killian by "Staudt," a reference to Col. Walter B. "Buck" Staudt, one of Bush's early commanders. But the memo is dated Aug. 18, 1973, nearly a year and a half after Staudt retired from the Guard. Questioned about the discrepancy over the weekend, CBS officials said that Staudt was a "mythic figure" in the Guard who exercised influence from behind the scenes even after his retirement.

• Stylistic differences. To outsiders, how an officer wrote his name and rank or referred to his military unit may seem arcane and unimportant. Within the military, however, such details are regulated by rules and tradition, and can be of great significance. The CBS memos contain several stylistic examples at odds with standard Guard procedures, as reflected in authenticated documents.

In memos previously released by the Pentagon or the White House, Killian signed his rank "Lt Col" or "Lt Colonel, TexANG," in a single line after his name without periods. In the CBS memos, the "Lt Colonel" is on the next line, sometimes with a period but without the customary reference to TexANG, for Texas Air National Guard.

An ex-Guard commander, retired Col. Bobby W. Hodges, whom CBS originally cited as a key source in authenticating its documents, pointed to discrepancies in military abbreviations as evidence that the CBS memos are forgeries. The Guard, he said, never used the abbreviation "grp" for "group" or "OETR" for an officer evaluation review, as in the CBS documents. The correct terminology, he said, is "gp" and "OER."

In its broadcast last night, CBS News produced a new expert, Bill Glennon, an information technology consultant. He said that IBM electric typewriters in use in 1972 could produce superscripts and proportional spacing similar to those used in the disputed documents.

Any argument to the contrary is "an out-and-out lie," Glennon said in a telephone interview. But Glennon said he is not a document expert, could not vouch for the memos' authenticity and only examined them online because CBS did not give him copies when asked to visit the network's offices.

Thomas Phinney, program manager for fonts for the Adobe company in Seattle, which helped to develop the modern Times New Roman font, disputed Glennon's statement to CBS. He said "fairly extensive testing" had convinced him that the fonts and formatting used in the CBS documents could not have been produced by the most sophisticated IBM typewriters in use in 1972, including the Selectric and the Executive. He said the two systems used fonts of different widths.

On last night's "CBS Evening News," Rather said "60 Minutes" had done a "content analysis" of the memos and found, for example, that the date that Bush was suspended from flying -- Aug. 1, 1972 -- matched information in the documents. He also noted that USA Today had separately obtained another memo from 1972 in which Killian asked to be updated on Bush's flight certification status.

CBS executives have pointed to Matley as their lead expert on whether the memos are genuine, and included him in a "CBS Evening News" defense of the story Friday. Matley said he spent five to eight hours examining the memos. "I knew I could not prove them authentic just from my expertise," he said. "I can't say either way from my expertise, the narrow, narrow little field of my expertise."

In looking at the photocopies, he said, "I really felt we could not definitively say which font this is." But, he said, "I didn't see anything that would definitively tell me these are not authentic."

Asked about Matley's comments, CBS spokeswoman Sandy Genelius said: "In the end, the gist is that it's inconclusive. People are coming down on both sides, which is to be expected when you're dealing with copies of documents."

Questions about the CBS documents have grown to the point that they overshadow the allegations of favorable treatment toward Bush.

Prominent conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh are insisting the documents are forged. New York Times columnist William Safire said yesterday that CBS should agree to an independent investigation. Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center, called on the network to apologize, saying: "The CBS story is a hoax and a fraud, and a cheap and sloppy one at that. It boggles the mind that Dan Rather and CBS continue to defend it."

Staff reporters James V. Grimaldi and Mike Allen and researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report.
 
Boy, is the Fat Lady Singing and she's wearing a helmet with horns and it's Wagner's Lohengrin , too! I think that the CBS folks may have been so eager to believe that they had a big story (like Dan Rather's scoop on the JFK assasination) that they may have "forgotten" to get some independent analysis.

Regarding the superscripting. I saw the PDF file of the supposed memos. I noticed that the superscripting on 111th occured in the body of the memo, but not in the letterhead.

I suppose that the letterhead could have been pre-printed, but if it were, it seems more likely that the printer would have put superscripting in the letterhead than not. Printers were able to do superscripting at the time.

Yet, an airman with little to average typing ability took it on himself to add superscripting to the body of a memo that he was typing?

Furthermore, I believe that that burden of proof here is on the accuser. If CBS maintains that they are authentic, they should start producing evidence that it is. So far, their document "experts" weren't really experts at all.
 
dilloduck said:
Rather is toast unless he produces his "source". What are the odds of that happening?



I'd say about the same as his saying, "I screwed up, I was wrong, and I'm sorry".
 
musicman said:
I'd say about the same as his saying, "I screwed up, I was wrong, and I'm sorry".

Yeah Im afraid he may get a pass on this. Are the documents actually being examined by forensics right now?

But more importantly than Rather's career going down the hopper is for America to see just how much the Liberal press is trying to make news, and shape news rather (pardon pun) than just report the facts. If this doesn't wake people up, I don't know what will!
 
Glenn Reynolds is 'rounding things up.' Links and links-with commentary from the WaPo article above:

http://instapundit.com/archives/017801.php

September 14, 2004
RATHERGATE UPDATE:


When I first wrote about this on Thursday, in a column that appeared on Friday, it seemed likely but not certain they were phony. We called the column "CBS' Big Blunder?" with a question mark just to be careful.

There's no need to pull any punches now. I'm going to be blunt here: Anybody who spends an hour reviewing the evidence and the expert testimony knows they're forgeries.

The discrediting has gone on now for five straight days. The conclusion isn't just overwhelming, it's inarguable.

The documents aren't just forgeries, they're bad, blatant, ludicrous forgeries. They're forgeries so easily detected that in the space of a few hours after CBS released computer photographs of them on the Internet, they had already been pegged and deconstructed.


Then there's this:


News has always been a dog-eat-dog business. The blogosphere just makes it more so, and with a nonstop feeding schedule. CBS's problem is, they seem to be determined to act like a Milk-Bone™ instead of a dog.


Meanwhile this Washington Post story just tightens the screws:


The lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush's former squadron commander in the National Guard said yesterday that he examined only the late officer's signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.

"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.

A detailed comparison by The Washington Post of memos obtained by CBS News with authenticated documents on Bush's National Guard service reveals dozens of inconsistencies, ranging from conflicting military terminology to different word-processing techniques.

The analysis shows that half a dozen Killian memos released earlier by the military were written with a standard typewriter using different formatting techniques from those characteristic of computer-generated documents. CBS's Killian memos bear numerous signs that are more consistent with modern-day word-processing programs, particularly Microsoft Word. . . .

Of more than 100 records made available by the 147th Group and the Texas Air National Guard, none used the proportional spacing techniques characteristic of the CBS documents. Nor did they use a superscripted "th" in expressions such as "147th Group" and or "111th Fighter Intercept Squadron."



Ouch. Read the whole thing, which is just devastating -- though not really news to people who have been reading blogs.

UPDATE: Jeff Goldstein is hearing things.

posted at 08:04 AM by Glenn Reynolds
 
One would think that Rahter would just say,"I didn't know the docs were bad". Bernard Goldberg says he doesn't think he necessarily gave false docs on purpose,but definiltey love the meat of the story,which of course,in Rather's eyes,would bring Bush down. What a roundabout way of admitting your wrong. SOunds lame to me.
 
krisy said:
One would think that Rahter would just say,"I didn't know the docs were bad". Bernard Goldberg says he doesn't think he necessarily gave false docs on purpose,but definiltey love the meat of the story,which of course,in Rather's eyes,would bring Bush down. What a roundabout way of admitting your wrong. SOunds lame to me.

I saw that Goldberg interview, and he also raised the point, that at some juncture in this Rather may have to reveal some kind of information or background on his source/sources. He stated further that this was proper journalistic protocol.
 
Bonnie said:
I saw that Goldberg interview, and he also raised the point, that at some juncture in this Rather may have to reveal some kind of information or background on his source/sources. He stated further that this was proper journalistic protocol.


Wouldn't it be great if Rather had a meltdown on national TV with cursing, slobbering, shaking and loss of control of bodily functions? I can see him babbling to himself in the psychward "THe memos are real, wapner in 30 seconds, I'm a good driver, I get my underwear from k-mart, water burn baby!"
 
rtwngAvngr said:
Wouldn't it be great if Rather had a meltdown on national TV with cursing, slobbering, shaking and loss of control of bodily functions?
Give him time, they all end up doing that don't they (Gore, Dean, LOL)?
 
rtwngAvngr said:
Wouldn't it be great if Rather had a meltdown on national TV with cursing, slobbering, shaking and loss of control of bodily functions? I can see him babbling to himself in the psychward "THe memos are real, wapner in 30 seconds, I'm a good driver, I get my underwear from k-mart, water burn baby!"

Yeah definately real memos, very sparkly memos :sausage:
 
Bonnie said:
Yeah definately real memos, very sparkly memos :sausage:

"So Mr. Rather, do you want to stay with Charlie Babbitt or Go back to Wallbrook?"

"Yeah."
 
Dan Rather isn't the only one going down....Bill O-Reilly is going to sink right with him, the fool.
 
"And that's the way it is (date).."

Maybe Danno can slightly alter that a bit...

"And that's the way we fabricated the news today."


Rather is gonna be toast... Somewhere Richard Nixon is laughing....
 
:teeth:

I love it! Everything is falling apart and we are finding out how bogus their so-called evidence really is.
 
tim_duncan2000 said:
:teeth:

I love it! Everything is falling apart and we are finding out how bogus their so-called evidence really is.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Investigation/bush_guard_documents_040914.html

Casting Further Doubt
Document Analysts: CBS News Ignored Concerns About Disputed Bush Military Records
By Brian Ross
ABCNEWS.com
Sept. 14, 2004— Since the CBS News program 60 Minutes II filed a report on President Bush's record in the National Guard during the Vietnam War, citing documents allegedly written by Bush's squadron commander, the authenticity of the documents has been widely questioned.

Two of the document experts hired by CBS News now say the network ignored concerns they raised prior to the broadcast of 60 Minutes II about the disputed National Guard records attributed to Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.

Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.

"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.

Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.

"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday if they ran that story," Will said.

But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.

"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told ABC News.

‘I Did Not Authenticate Anything’

A second document examiner hired by CBS News, Linda James of Plano, Texas, also told ABC News she had concerns about the documents and could not authenticate them.

"I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," James said. "And that's why I have come forth to talk about it because I don't want anybody to think I did authenticate these documents."

A third examiner hired by CBS for its story, Marcel Matley, appeared on CBS Evening News last Friday and was described as saying the document was real.

According to The Washington Post, Matley said he examined only the signature attributed to Killian and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.

At the heart of the dispute is whether any typewriter existed in 1972 that could have produced the documents, with their distinct type style, even spacing, and the tiny raised "th" known as superscript.

Two experts told ABC News today there was no such machine, not even the IBM Selectric Composer, the most advanced typewriter available in 1972.

"This machine is not the culprit for these documents," said software engineer Gary Kaplan.

Other new questions were raised today by National Guard officials who told ABC News that some of the language and abbreviations in the documents were not in use at the time.

CBS Stands by Its Report

CBS News says it still believes the documents are authentic.

"CBS News did not rely on either Emily Will or Linda James for a final assessment of the documents regarding George Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. Ms. Will and Ms. James were among a group of experts we consulted to assess one of the four documents used in the report and they did not render definitive judgment on that document. Ultimately, they played a peripheral role and deferred to another expert who examined all four of the documents used," the network said in a statement.

"Most importantly, the content of the documents was backed up by our reporting and our sources who knew the thoughts and behavior of Lt. Col. Jerry Killian at the time," the statement said.

Killian's former secretary, Marian Carr Knox, told ABC News she believes the documents are fake, but that they do reflect some of what her former boss thought of then-Lt. George W. Bush.

"He did have complaints about Bush. Bush missed his physical and went off to Alabama with none of the paperwork, I remember Killian talking about that," Knox said. "But it wasn't in memo file."
 

Forum List

Back
Top