|
In article vJ50d.78871$yh.53924@fed1read05, "bigdawg9"
writes: Subject: '60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake From: "bigdawg9" Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 16:29:37 -0700 "Art Vandolay" wrote in message t... It is strange 60 minutes won't run story on the Swift Vets but continues to hammer the anti-Bush stories. Can you say "another example of media bias?" So you would feel better if they ran more stories showing the swift boat liars are a bunch of disgruntled texas republicans doing Karl Rove's dirty work?...For that is the TRUTH...Art. BD Agree; and It would be interesting to have, as the camera rolls, a good reporter dissect their stories, get them to talk about their feelings of jealousy, the process of prepping for filmings, and discuss compensation they received for their doing Karl Rove's dirty work.. detail byt detail |
"Diverd4777" wrote in message ... In article vJ50d.78871$yh.53924@fed1read05, "bigdawg9" writes: Subject: '60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake From: "bigdawg9" Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 16:29:37 -0700 "Art Vandolay" wrote in message t... It is strange 60 minutes won't run story on the Swift Vets but continues to hammer the anti-Bush stories. Can you say "another example of media bias?" So you would feel better if they ran more stories showing the swift boat liars are a bunch of disgruntled texas republicans doing Karl Rove's dirty work?...For that is the TRUTH...Art. BD Agree; and It would be interesting to have, as the camera rolls, a good reporter dissect their stories, get them to talk about their feelings of jealousy, the process of prepping for filmings, and discuss compensation they received for their doing Karl Rove's dirty work.. detail byt detail Wow, more unsubstantiated smears. I would've thought you'd run out by now...or at least gone back to more posts with poll results in them. Oh, wait...guess that's a negative on the polls. |
Diverd4777 wrote: In article vJ50d.78871$yh.53924@fed1read05, "bigdawg9" writes: Subject: '60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake From: "bigdawg9" Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 16:29:37 -0700 "Art Vandolay" wrote in message t... It is strange 60 minutes won't run story on the Swift Vets but continues to hammer the anti-Bush stories. Can you say "another example of media bias?" So you would feel better if they ran more stories showing the swift boat liars are a bunch of disgruntled texas republicans doing Karl Rove's dirty work?...For that is the TRUTH...Art. BD Agree; and It would be interesting to have, as the camera rolls, a good reporter dissect their stories, get them to talk about their feelings of jealousy, the process of prepping for filmings, and discuss compensation they received for their doing Karl Rove's dirty work.. detail byt detail Hmmmmmm... are Kerry's Swift Boat pals being compensated? Have their stories been dissected? Have they been prepped for appearances or filmings? Something to think about. dxAce |
"llortamai" wrote:
32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by CBSNEWS 60 MINS on Bush's guard service may have been forged ... And you MIGHT not be a 37 year old virgin ... dream on. |
1 Attachment(s)
"Retarded Death Row Inmates 4 Bush" wrote in message
om... dream on. You wish you could dream it was false, but the articles keep coming. Here's another one. http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/...96&R=9FCD2F192 Is It a Hoax? Experts weigh in on the 60 Minutes documents. Says one: "I'm a Kerry supporter myself, but . . . I'm 99% sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s." by Stephen F. Hayes 09/09/2004 7:20:00 PM DOCUMENTS CITED Wednesday by 60 Minutes in a widely-publicized expose of George W. Bush's National Guard Service are very likely forgeries, according to several experts on document authenticity and typography. The documents--four memos from Killian to himself or his files written in 1972 and 1973--appear to indicate that Bush refused or ignored orders to have a physical exam required to continue flying. CBS News anchor Dan Rather reported the segment and sourced the documents this way: "60 Minutes has obtained a number of documents we are told were taken from Col. Killian's personal file," he said. The 60 Minutes story served as the basis for follow-up news reports for dozens of news organizations across the country. The memos were almost immediately questioned in the blog world, with blog Power Line leading the charge. And according to several forensic document experts contacted by THE WEEKLY STANDARD say the Killian memos appear to be forgeries. Although it is nearly impossible to establish with certainty the authenticity of documents without a careful examination of the originals, several irregularities in the Killian memos suggest that CBS may have been the victim of a hoax. "These sure look like forgeries," says William Flynn, a forensic document expert widely considered the nation's top analyst of computer-generated documents. Flynn looked at copies of the documents posted on the CBS News website (here, here, here, and here). Flynn says, "I would say it looks very likely that these documents could not have existed" in the early 1970s, when they were allegedly written. Several other experts agree. "They look mighty suspicious," says a veteran forensic document expert who asked not to be quoted by name. Richard Polt, a Xavier University philosophy professor who operates a website dedicated to typewriters, says that while he is not an expert on typesetting, the documents "look like typical word-processed documents." There are several reasons these experts are skeptical of the authenticity of the Killian memos. First the typographic spacing is proportional, as is routine with professional typesetting and computer typography, not monospace, as was common in typewriters in the 1970s. (In proportional type, thin letters like "i" and "l" are spaced closer together than thick letters like "W" and "M". In monospace, all the letter widths are the same.) Second, the font appears to be identical to the Times New Roman font that is the default typeface in Microsoft Word and other modern word processing programs. According to Flynn, the font is not listed in the Haas Atlas--the definitive encyclopedia of typewriter type fonts. Third, the apostrophes are curlicues of the sort produced by word processors on personal computers, not the straight vertical hashmarks typical of typewriters. Finally, in some references to Bush's unit--the 111thFighter Interceptor Squadron--the "th" is a superscript in a smaller size than the other type. Again, this is typical (and often done automatically) in modern word processing programs. Although several experts allow that such a rendering might have been theoretically possible in the early 1970s, it would have been highly unlikely. Superscripts produced on typewriters--the numbers preceding footnotes in term papers, for example--were almost always in the same size as the regular type. So can we say with absolute certainty that the documents were forged? Not yet. Xavier University's Polt, in an email, offers two possible scenarios. "Either these are later transcriptions of earlier documents (which may have been handwritten or typed on a typewriter), or they are crude and amazingly foolish forgeries. I'm a Kerry supporter myself, but I won't let that cloud my objective judgment: I'm 99% sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s." Says Flynn: "This looks pretty much like a hoax at this point in time." CBS, in a statement Thursday afternoon, said it stands by the story. The network claims that its own document expert concluded the memos were authentic. There are several things CBS could do to clear up any confusion: (1) Provide the name of the expert who authenticated the documents for Sixty Minutes. (2) Provide the original documents to outside experts--William Flynn, Gerald Reynolds, and Peter Tytell seem to be the consensus top three in the United States--for further analysis. (3) Provide more information on the source of the documents. (A spokeswoman for CBS, Kelly Edwards, said she was overwhelmed with phone calls and did not respond to specific requests for comment.) |
"Granger" wrote in message news:WF10d.136482$4o.10407@fed1read01... Ya right! It doesn't mean the original documents were fakes. The original documents after 32 years probably were faded, discolored and not legible. They were almost certainly reproduced using a Microsoft spread sheet in order to make them more legible. I see no problem with this. I would however like to see the originals. I have searched the CBS website and their archives, but I haven't been able to locate anything on this. Maybe, someone has an address. I have a $100.00 bet that they are genuine. JB "llortamai" wrote in message ... http://www.drudgereport.com/ 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by CBSNEWS 60 MINS on Bush's guard service may have been forged using a current word processing program. typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program, Internet reports claim... Developing... |
"llortamai" wrote in message ...
http://www.drudgereport.com/ Drudge Report... There's a reliable source! Next he'll be reporting the 9/11 Report was a forgery because it was published by W.W. Norton. Conservatives hate Americans. |
From: "-=jd=-" Organization: Little... If any... Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.democrats,r ec.radio.shortwa ve Date: 10 Sep 2004 02:12:45 GMT Subject: '60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake On Thu 09 Sep 2004 08:56:46p, "llortamai" wrote in message : "Retarded Death Row Inmates 4 Bush" wrote in message om... dream on. You wish you could dream it was false, but the articles keep coming. Here's another one. http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/...idArticle=4596 &R=9FCD2F192 Is It a Hoax? Experts weigh in on the 60 Minutes documents. Says one: "I'm a Kerry supporter myself, but . . . I'm 99% sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s." by Stephen F. Hayes 09/09/2004 7:20:00 PM {snippage} I wouldn't be surprised to find that 60 Minutes cast some lines about, offering to pay for similar information and by doing so, set themselves up for getting "werked"! If they turn out to be forged, it would be a further indication that 60 minutes was willing to take the info and run without validating it. Here's a suggested topic for a 60 Minutes expose on their own stafers: Blinded by Bias! -=jd=- -- My Current Disposable Email: (Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly) How does that explain the White House releasing the same documents after 60 Minutes aired them? Did the White House fake another set of papers to make dubbya look bad? Greg (I heard it on the radio) BTW - Drudge is often right. He has very good sources. He is also often wrong. And he's a salacious gossip monger. Visiting his web site can turn your brains to mush. |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:28 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com