How Deep Does It Go?
There's no way this memo was written in 1972. Compare the "1972" version (above) to the Microsoft Word 2002 version (below) I just typed out. The spacing is exactly the same.
Click here for a larger version of this graphic.
Original PDF here
Powerline has much more
Charles at LGF has done the same thing with another document. *MUST READ*
More here
UPDATE 12:27PM PST Charles provides this stunning overlay shot:
UPDATE 12:43PM PST Here is a relevant video from last night's broadcast of 60 Minutes on CBS:
UPDATE 2:07PM PSTCommand Post has Powerline's original post mirrored. Powerline is down for us right now -- most likely swamped with hits.
UPDATE 2:24 PSTMore here from CNS News. Still More here from AllahPundit. And of course the one and only Drudge is on the case.
Click here for a larger version of this graphic.
Original PDF here
Powerline has much more
Charles at LGF has done the same thing with another document. *MUST READ*
More here
UPDATE 12:27PM PST Charles provides this stunning overlay shot:
UPDATE 12:43PM PST Here is a relevant video from last night's broadcast of 60 Minutes on CBS:
UPDATE 2:07PM PSTCommand Post has Powerline's original post mirrored. Powerline is down for us right now -- most likely swamped with hits.
UPDATE 2:24 PSTMore here from CNS News. Still More here from AllahPundit. And of course the one and only Drudge is on the case.
14 Comments:
If you look at item 2, the superscript "th" was not a key stroke on keyboards of that area.
Elsewhere in the document you can see where the th (111th on top of the page of the complete doc pdf) and st (MEMORADDUM FOR 1st Lt. ) are as they should be from a typewriter from the 70's
Nice try guys but think about EVERYTHING next time.
By Anonymous, at 2:58 PM
To see that the recent memo of "04 May" is fake, just look at the signature for "Jerry Killian". Compare that with the Jerry Killian signature on the authentic document on page 7 of "Bush 6-Reassignments_Spilt_Training.pdf" found on the USAToday website. I am no handwriting expert, but there is no way that the two signatures were made by the same person!
PaulK
By Anonymous, at 3:10 PM
Check this out http://howco.blogspot.com/
I am absolutley positive its a fake, or someone went to a heck of alot of trouble to make it look like a fake. And not for all the reasons you would think. It is the paper, and the copier.
By Howco, at 8:28 PM
Washington Post is on the case now. Recent article claims that CBS reporters had verified the documents by talking to unidentified people who saw them "at the time they were written."
....or what we like to call "last week"
By Anonymous, at 8:49 PM
(Pardon the anonymous, I'm in an airport without the spare minutes to register - this is Mariachi.)
One explanation that occurred to me yesterday, and that may be corroborated by stuff I heard this morning, is that the original memo-to-file was in longhand, and that what's being passed around is just someone's contemporary retyping of the holograph. That's why it exactly matches default Word settings - nobody really cared, it was just for legibility's sake. The transcriber may have erroneously assumed that a xerox of the longhand notes (perhaps illegible after faxing) would accompany the transcription; but instead it got separated.
What really matters is, did Killian write this in any form at the time. We need to know where the originals went.
By Anonymous, at 6:58 AM
It would also be interesting to see the original suspension notice from Aug of 72 and to compare that type face with the type face of the current scandalous documents.
By Anonymous, at 10:55 AM
Ive heard a number of people saying that this document is just a modern transcription done on word of either an old document, or possibly a hand written doc.
OK, i pride myself on usually displaying some decent good ol' American common sense... heres your problems with this explanation
A. the document has the writers signature on it, he died in what? 1984? that would predate the document to at least that time, was MS word using these fonts and type style at that point? was the program even around then?
B. say you argue that it was recently done, then why does the document look like its from the 1960's quality wise if its a recent document? did modern photocopiers suddenly plunge back into the dark ages?
reguards,
Kess
By Anonymous, at 2:01 AM
It has probably been both photocopied and faxed, and yes, that does degrade quality, in fact today's digital copiers are in some ways worse than the old analog xeroxes on that score.
My guess is that Killian may have transcribed his own notes when he retired.
Since it is trivial to produce a document that looks more convincingly "typical" for a 1973 military memo, it seems to me unlikely that a serious forger would forget to make it look old, yet still forge a signature in.
By Anonymous, at 5:10 AM
Then option A. applies
"A. the document has the writers signature on it, he died in what? 1984? that would predate the document to at least that time, was MS word using these fonts and type style at that point? was the program even around then?"
By Anonymous, at 8:56 AM
This is disgraceful. You could convince a jury of these documents being fake beyond a reasonable doubt with all the clues that have been found. However, I'll bet you a dollar this controversy just quitely goes away. CBS will stick to their guns and stand by their supposed "expert", and most of the other liberal news media will lie low as well hoping this will blow over.
The thing that convinces me are the overlays on the "original" with (another) MS-Word produced document. I've spent 3 hours trying to get my address to fit properly on a sheet of address labels, adjusting a tab here, row spacing there, etc. What are the odds you could sit down, and in 10 minutes type out an exact duplicate of a (supposed) 30-year old mechanically produced document?
Has anyone checked on PO Box 34567? That seemed suspicious to me.
I sincerely hope the 16 year old hoaxster that probably did this stands up next week, claims his 15 minutes of fame, and ruins CBS and Dan Blather forever.
By Anonymous, at 9:15 PM
This is disgraceful. You could convince a jury of these documents being fake beyond a reasonable doubt with all the clues that have been found. However, I'll bet you a dollar this controversy just quitely goes away. CBS will stick to their guns and stand by their supposed "expert", and most of the other liberal news media will lie low as well hoping this will blow over.
The thing that convinces me are the overlays on the "original" with (another) MS-Word produced document. I've spent 3 hours trying to get my address to fit properly on a sheet of address labels, adjusting a tab here, row spacing there, etc. What are the odds you could sit down, and in 10 minutes type out an exact duplicate of a (supposed) 30-year old mechanically produced document?
Has anyone checked on PO Box 34567? That seemed suspicious to me.
I sincerely hope the 16 year old hoaxster that probably did this stands up next week, claims his 15 minutes of fame, and ruins CBS and Dan Blather forever.
By Anonymous, at 9:39 PM
Nice site!
[url=http://xxbxlafn.com/sadq/wrbc.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://bbooxahg.com/vypw/widj.html]Cool site[/url]
By Anonymous, at 8:11 PM
Nice site!
My homepage | Please visit
By Anonymous, at 8:11 PM
Nice site!
http://xxbxlafn.com/sadq/wrbc.html | http://honnquzr.com/wfvy/wrpk.html
By Anonymous, at 8:11 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home