CBS is standing by them so far

Post #173,604 by JayMehaffey 9/10/04 6:07:32 PM Reply	CBS is standing by them so far [link\|http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-08-presidential-debates_x.htm\|PR News Wire] Later today, CBS News will address on the air and in detail the issues surrounding the documents broadcast in the 60 MINUTES report on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. At this time, however, CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House. This and other issues surrounding the authenticity of the documents and more on this developing story will be reported on tonight on THE CBS EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER. So far they are standing by the memos. Which is not really surprising, they would have had experts vet the memos before running them. The experts can be decieved some times, but they are not likely to get caught on the sort of obvious things people are complaining about. Jay
Post #173,620 by bepatient 9/10/04 8:23:05 PM Reply	Rather is in over his head These things are obvious...in which case it becomes obvious that these documents were NOT, in fact, vetted. He's been caught with his pants down and he doesn't want to admit that his weenie is showing. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #173,624 by JayMehaffey 9/10/04 9:20:29 PM Reply	All of the obvious complaints are wrong [link\|http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C200409%5CPOL20040910e.html\|Rather's speech CNS news] [link\|http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml\|CBS] Questions have been raised about the authenticity of newly unearthed memos acquired by CBS News that say President Bush's National Guard commander believed Mr. Bush was shirking his duties. The network is defending the authenticity of the memos, which were obtained by CBS News' "60 Minutes," saying experts who examined the memos concluded they were authentic documents produced by Mr. Bush's former commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian. The obvious complaints are based on the features of the typing and font, but all of those objections are simply wrong. The use of superscript actually appears in other Bush guard records, and the font used was available before Vietnam. The documents could still be fakes, but they simply are not the sort of obvious forgeries that some are making them out to be. One of the best arguments for them being true is that the White House isn't questioning them, and in fact distributed them as part of their release of Bush documents after CBS gave them copies. Jay
Post #173,633 by bepatient 9/10/04 9:59:10 PM Reply	Considering... ...that people were interviewed that directly challenged their authenticity and the opinions given in the piece lend credence to the opposite. These interviews were squelched. And Rather is INSANE if he thinks that the >real< story should be discussed separate from the documents when there would be no story without them. Looney. Nuts. Out there. WAY LEFT FIELD. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #173,637 by Another Scott 9/10/04 11:21:16 PM 9/11/04 1:42:22 AM Reply	On the superscripts... E.g. [link\|http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/9-Miscellaneous.pdf\|This] (via [link\|http://www.dailykos.com\|http://www.dailykos.com] ) - see page 3. The "Pilot Trainee 111th..." line is the only place in this 19 page .pdf that I've seen "th" as a superscript. The typewriter used for this entry apparently had a "th" superscript glyph. But note that all of the text in this 19-page package uses a fixed-pitch font. If someone could find some other 1972-vintage documents that show a "th" superscript with a proportional font, the CBS documents wouldn't look so extraordinary. Have you seen such a document? (Also, on page 12 there seems to be an unobscured version of Bush's Social Security Number (but with too many digits). I wonder what else is buried there for the dilligent investigator.) I think the White House isn't questioning them, not because they think they're genuine, but because they don't want to have a horse in this particular race at this point. They're passing them out to try to look like they're not hiding anything from the press; I wouldn't take it as a stamp of approval. My $0.02. [edit:] A more complete copy of Bush's personnel records is [link\|http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/11-1_2004_Personnel_File.pdf\|here] (26 page .pdf). Page 2 has more examples of the superscript "th" - but again in a fixed pitch font. It must have been prepared after November 21, 1974 - the last entry date. Cheers, Scott. Edited by Another Scott Sept. 11, 2004, 01:42:22 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #173,625 by Another Scott 9/10/04 9:35:47 PM Reply	The CBS statement. [link\|http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/printable641481.shtml\|Here]. The expert they cite is a handwriting expert - [link\|http://www.aspghandwriting.org/Matley.htm\|Marcel Matley]. It doesn't look like he's an expert on the mechanical aspects of typewriting. The other expert cited is someone who knew Killian at the time. I hope they actually took the time to have the documents evaluated by someone who knows the technology of the time and the intricacies of typography. Cheers, Scott.
Post #173,627 by Nightowl 9/10/04 9:41:09 PM Reply	The big question is Did they ever tell us who discovered these new documents, and how they were discovered? I think if they were genuine, they could tell us that, couldn't they? Nightowl >8# "A determined soul will do more with a rusty monkey wrench than a loafer will accomplish with all the tools in a machine shop." -- Robert Hughes, Australian Art Critic, Writer
Post #173,632 by Another Scott 9/10/04 9:48:26 PM Reply	It depends on who they got them from, and the conditions.
Post #173,634 by JayMehaffey 9/10/04 11:07:24 PM Reply	Probably not If they are legitimate, then they where probably given to somebody at CBS by somebody that works at a military files storage department. Which is to say that handing them over was technically illegal. The military probably couldn't actually send them to jail but they would lose their job and career if they where identified.
Post #173,641 by Another Scott 9/10/04 11:47:48 PM Reply	NYTimes story: CBS won't disclose source. [link\|http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/11/politics/campaign/11guard.html?pagewanted=print&position=\|Here]: Bill Glennon, a technology consultant in New York who worked for I.B.M. in Midtown Manhattan for 14 years and repaired typewriters throughout that time, said that the Executive had proportional spacing and that its typebar could be fitted with superscript characters. Documents from the period show the Air Force tested the Selectric Composer as early as April 1969. But spokesmen for the National Guard and Texas Air National Guard said it was impossible to trace the machines that Colonel Killian's unit, the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron, or any unit, used so long ago. Mark Allen, chief of the external media division of the National Guard Bureau public affairs office, said there was no way to reconstruct the equipment or whether Colonel Killian typed the memos or had a clerk type them. "It's sheer speculation as to what might have transpired,'' Mr. Allen said, "and it's pointless for us to get into that kind of speculation." [...] Experts on documents said the veracity of the CBS memos might never be known because they had been copied so many times. CBS News officials said that its papers were copies, too, and that it did not have the originals. The network said it would not identify its original source. Mr. Rather said, "We worked long and hard and became convinced that, yes, this person had the capacity to get the documents, and, yes, this person was truthful." Mr. Matley, the documents expert, said in an interview after the program, that he had examined documents and handwriting since 1985 and had testified in 65 trials. Mr. Matley said the documents the network sent him were so deteriorated from copying that it was impossible to identify the typeface. "It's sheer speculation to say that you couldn't have done that until a computer came along,'' he said. As a result, he said, he focused on the signatures. CBS sent him the four newfound documents, as well as others that have been verified as signed by Colonel Killian. "There were significant similarities and the differences were insignificant," he said in the configuration of letters and the angle of the writing. It sounds as if it's going to be one of those situations that never ends in a definitive resolution since the originals aren't available. I think I'm about done on this topic. Is that a "Hallelujah!!!" I hear? :-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #173,644 by Nightowl 9/10/04 11:55:41 PM Reply	Nope. I think I'm about done on this topic. Is that a "Hallelujah!!!" I hear? :-) Not from me, I'm fascinated by document comparison and handwriting comparison. It's been something I've always been fascinated with. Nightowl >8# "A determined soul will do more with a rusty monkey wrench than a loafer will accomplish with all the tools in a machine shop." -- Robert Hughes, Australian Art Critic, Writer
Post #173,653 by Arkadiy 9/11/04 12:38:12 AM 9/11/04 12:38:22 AM Reply	This is pure bull Proportional vs. monospaced is a strawman. Yes there were proportional fonts available. It does not explain why a Word document matches so closely. Unless someone can produce similarly close match w/o the use of Word (I'd even allow the use of any other computer software, or, of course, any mechanical device), the document stays fake. Another thing that shuld be easy to verify: was superscript "th" common in other documents by the same author? There should be quite a volume of paperwork filed away by the Air Force NG from that time. Still another thing: we have a senior officer, presumably throughly skilled in navigating bureacracy. At least skilled enough to file a CYA memo. DOes the wording of memo match such skill? Would somebody who realizes he is on the pull minefield title the document that's supposed to save him later "CYA"? Mr. Roomberg could you chime in? (edit: misspelled name) -- ... a reference to Presidente Arbusto. -- [link\|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001417.html\|Geoffrey K. Pullum] Edited by Arkadiy Sept. 11, 2004, 12:38:22 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #173,667 by boxley 9/11/04 9:09:14 AM Reply	dumb question if I was writing a word processing program, would I want it to have at least the capabilities of the typewriter I wanted to replace? thanx, bill These miserable swine, having nothing but illusions to live on, marshmallows for the soul in place of good meat, will now stoop to any disgusting level to prevent even those miserable morsels from vanishing into thin air. The country is being destroyed by these stupid, vicious right-wing fanatics, the spiritual brothers of the brownshirts and redstars, collectivists and authoritarians all, who would not know freedom if it bit them on the ass, who spend all their time trying to stamp, bludgeon, and eviscerate the very idea of the individual's right to his own private world. DRL questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #173,676 by broomberg 9/11/04 9:51:47 AM Reply	Ahh Haven't read it. OK, I'll go look.
Post #173,677 by broomberg 9/11/04 10:05:22 AM Reply	Nope, not good CYA Looking here, at the comparative screenshots: [link\|http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12526_Bush_Guard_Documents-_Forged\|http://littlegreenfo...Documents-_Forged] He admitted to wrong doing with very little pushing. No one threatened him directly. He "backdated" since it was the expedient thing to do, while claiming moral highground by not rating? Feels wrong. There is nothing that would save this person from charges if it was found later, and admits too much. Add the typeface, kerning, word breaks, superscript issues (remember, I'm in junk mail). It is VERY difficult to match original text layout when reproducing it on the computer. We might spend hours on a single paragraph if it really needs to be done. It rarely does. If they need the EXACT text/layout, we use a graphics of the original, rather than try to create it ourselves. If this person REALLY duplicated using word defaults, then it seals it. Fake. Do the test yourself. I'm not going to bother.
Post #173,680 by broomberg 9/11/04 10:15:13 AM Reply	Manual typewriters don't kern. But I don't see any kerning in either of these shots.
Post #173,681 by broomberg 9/11/04 10:20:31 AM Reply	On the other hand, the upshifted "th" will not be shown on the screen, as he said. Not sure what happens when it is printed. Easy enough to physically cut and paste to move it up.
Post #173,688 by Simon_Jester 9/11/04 11:22:42 AM Reply	Kerning wasn't added and it's off by default in Word
Post #173,693 by Arkadiy 9/11/04 12:12:50 PM Reply	You're right -- ... a reference to Presidente Arbusto. -- [link\|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001417.html\|Geoffrey K. Pullum]
Post #173,692 by Arkadiy 9/11/04 12:10:46 PM Reply	I did. [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=173598\|Post #173598] -- ... a reference to Presidente Arbusto. -- [link\|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001417.html\|Geoffrey K. Pullum]
Post #173,996 by Arkadiy 9/13/04 5:44:59 PM Reply	IBM Selectric Composer Somebody tried.... [link\|http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/2004/09/the_ibm_selectr.html\|http://shapeofdays.t..._ibm_selectr.html] -- ... a reference to Presidente Arbusto. -- [link\|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001417.html\|Geoffrey K. Pullum]
Post #174,004 by Another Scott 9/13/04 6:05:20 PM Reply	Thanks.
Post #174,017 by deSitter 9/13/04 8:41:33 PM Reply	Wow It's remarkable that the kerning is so similar - I'd say identical with some variation allowed for operation of the device. Did Microsoft just steal the algorithm, or perhaps use a well-known one? After all it's a fairly simple problem depsite its complex appearence. -drl
Post #174,021 by Another Scott 9/13/04 9:08:59 PM Reply	The Story of Times (New) Roman By [link\|http://www.truetype.demon.co.uk/articles/times.htm\|Charles Bigelow]. Info on TrueType is on that site too, [link\|http://www.truetype.demon.co.uk/tthist.htm\|A History of TrueType]. They're good reads. Cheers, Scott.
Post #174,025 by Nightowl 9/13/04 9:27:20 PM Reply	Thanks, very entertaining and informational! All that fuss over a font! Heheh! All I know is that I like Times New Roman best when writing standard Word documents. Nightowl >8# "A determined soul will do more with a rusty monkey wrench than a loafer will accomplish with all the tools in a machine shop." -- Robert Hughes, Australian Art Critic, Writer
Post #174,032 by Another Scott 9/13/04 9:55:49 PM Reply	New Century Schoolbook is the One True Font! 60 kB .gifs. (new thread) Created as new thread #174031 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=174031\|New Century Schoolbook is the One True Font! 60 kB .gifs.]
Post #173,687 by Simon_Jester 9/11/04 11:19:52 AM Reply	Well, that's incorrect, isn't? But spokesmen for the National Guard and Texas Air National Guard said it was impossible to trace the machines that Colonel Killian's unit, the 111th Fighter Intercept Squadron, or any unit, used so long. Forget the machine, this was a military organization, they thrive on paperwork. Look for other documentation produced by Colonel Killian around the same time period and see if the documents match up. The FOIA should be able to produce tons of documentation.

Welcome to IWETHEY!