CBS Hoaxed?

Anti-Bush national guard story may have been based on false documents

Published on September 9, 2004 By Draginol In Politics

(comparison in print out using MS Word and the alleged document from 1973)

CBS's 60 Minutes may have fallen for a hoax yesterday. After airing documents that claimed to show that pressure was put on officers to "sugar coat" Bush's national guard service, blog sites such as Little Green Footballs and this one seem to provide compelling evidence that this was a hoax.

Story developing.

Comments (Page 1)

historyishere

on Sep 09, 2004

Looks pretty damning, but I wouldn't be surprised if the typeface Plantin was involved, not Times New Roman... I am not wholly convinced... 90% convinced yes... but there are inconsistencies which can't be denied with the overlay...

Like look at the top of the y's... they are serifed in the Times New Roman reproduction, the noticeable lack of the curl at the bottom of the t's and look at the 1 in 187(not to mention the shifting superscript).... those aren't the same either. And the don't in the first paragraph is a tale in and of itself.

historyishere

on Sep 09, 2004

Plantin:

http://www.fonts.com/findfonts/detail.asp?pid=202197

Daiwa

on Sep 09, 2004

There were proportional font typewriters in 1973 (good ole' IBM Selectric), but none that typed superscripts, no matter what the font. No question whatsoever - it's a fraud. It's been cleverly made to look "old" but it ain't. Suggests whoever at CBS "vetted" that document is younger than about 45 or so, old enough, anyway, to not remember what typewriters of the day were like and to not realize how obvious the fraud is.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Draginol

on Sep 09, 2004

That's really not the only damning thing, the spacing is really suspect too. The odds of a type writer having the exact same spacing as that seems very unlikely. Heck, what about the margins? These are the default MS Word margins we're talking about.

The only difference I see is due to photocopying over and over to "age" it.

Gideon MacLeish

on Sep 09, 2004

It is interesting that such a poor document forgery got through the editors. I guess they'll go for every little bit of "evidence" they can get.

By the way, I'm only 34, and I don't think it would have gotten past me. I typed on a manual typewriter until I was 14, so I know what something that comes off of a typewriter looks like, and I also know that superscript didn't come off electric typewriters of that era, either.

ShoZan

on Sep 10, 2004

This could be fake evidence planetd by Clintons in order to intially help Kerry but backfire on him so that he is not elected so Hillary can run in 2008, I know it's just a conspiracy theory, but everybody seems to be running around with one these days.

Daiwa

on Sep 10, 2004

Silly me - meant to say "young enough" - sheesh.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Daiwa

on Sep 10, 2004

An idea even Rush could embrace! I trust it's "quite" tongue in cheek, but you know, even before Bill got sick, hadn't seen much of Hill for awhile, had we? Last I can recall was the Newsweek article about her fighting "tooth and nail" to get Kerry elected. Did she speak at the DNC? (He says as he reveals he didn't even watch it).

Cheers,
Daiwa

Daiwa

on Sep 10, 2004

Drag -

It is odd that whoever did this made the forgery so obvious and then managed to sell CBS on it. Makes you wonder.

Cheers,
Daiwa

ShoZan

on Sep 10, 2004

The only difference I see is due to photocopying over and over to "age" it.

Or just photocopying it once with the bad copiers that some of the military (or an office) has NOW.

Lee1776

on Sep 10, 2004

Even if you could not prove that this is fake from the type, think of how 60 minutes got it.

It is said to be from the commander's private files with the rest of the documents received. But the family says they have never seen them and that thier father never kept files like this. The admin Sergeant that worked for him at the time said he never kept records like these and after 17 years of knowing the guy, can not believe he would write anything of this nature. The Unit also says that no records like these came from them.

What ever Editor let them run with this story should be fired.

messybuu

on Sep 10, 2004

Forgery? Or evidence that the military has time traveling capabilities?

JillUser

on Sep 10, 2004

Forgery? Or evidence that the military has time traveling capabilities?

Hah! You almost made coffee squirt out my nose with that one!!

CrispE

on Sep 10, 2004

Draginol:

If it turns out not to be a forgery, does that mean you will vote for Kerry? No. So, what is the importance of the document in either case? Isn't this much ado about nothing?

KarmaGirl

on Sep 10, 2004

Or just photocopying it once with the bad copiers that some of the military (or an office) has NOW.

I was just thinking pretty much the same thing. Or, put it on a dusty scanner and scan it at a low DPI. Or, send it through a well used fax machine.

You think that they could have at least dug out an old typewriter for it.

Forgery? Or evidence that the military has time traveling capabilities?

hmmm....didn't consider that angle....

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!