NY Post/ABCNote link to Doc "expert" that says forgery -but He's not on

[papau]

point - the Expert challenges points not at issue - - MR. JOSEPH M. NEWCOMER, PH.D. - you are amazing! :-)

Meanwhile, Laura Bush says 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.' - but asked what reason she had to say the WH answer is "Mrs. Bush was asked her opinion and she shared it."


So NEWCOMER -the DOCUMENT EXPERT OF THE DAY (started with computer typesetting technology in 1972) - SAYS HE CAN MAKE FORGERIES WITH TODAY'S MACHINES!

http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/expert.htm

The Bush "Guard memos" are forgeries!

First off, before I start getting a lot of the wrong kind of mail: I am not a fan of George Bush. But I am even less a fan of attempts to commit fraud, and particularly by a complete and utter failure of those we entrust to ensure that if the news is at least accurate. I know it is asking far too much to expect the news to be unbiased. But the people involved should not actually lie to us, or promulgate lies created by hoaxers, through their own incompetence.

There has been a lot of activity on the Internet recently concerning the forged CBS documents. I do not even dignify this statement with the traditional weasel-word “alleged”, because it takes approximately 30 seconds for anyone who is knowledgeable in the history of electronic document production to recognize this whole collection is certainly a forgery, and approximately five minutes to prove to anyone technically competent that the documents are a forgery. I was able to replicate two of the documents within a few minutes. At time I a writing this, CBS is stonewalling. They were hoaxed, pure and simple. CBS failed to exercise anything even approximately like due diligence. I am not sure what sort of "expert" they called in to authenticate the document, but anything I say about his qualifications to judge digital typography is likely to be considered libelous (no matter how true they are) and I would not say them in print in a public forum.<snip>

(NOTE:The Selectric Composer does not count - in ABCNOTE and the NY POST- apparently - because ) The probability that any technology in existence in 1972 would be capable of producing a document that is nearly pixel-compatible with Microsoft’s Times New Roman font and the formatting of Microsoft Word, and that such technology was in casual use at the Texas Air National Guard, is so vanishingly small as to be indistinguishable from zero.<snip> LOL

(BUT HE KNOWS OF ).."proportional-spaced typewriters (such as the IBM Executive) and print production technologies (such as the VariTyper)" - (BUT not the Selectric Composer for the Killian memo - and the forms are just that - each line couhavevre been typed by a different typewriter - first Executive - the Composer - then Executive - etc - and probably was) - and while his attempted cut and paste forged signature is "pretty evidently a forgery, because of the artifacts" others with access to 1972 originals could do better - or not.

And never a word about the Selectric Composer - and the ABCNOTE and NY Post run with it!

Amazing.

LOL

but sigh .....

:-)

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB109511244977916674,00.html?mod=todays%5Ffree%5Ffeature

As in Olden Days,
U.S. Media Reflect
The Partisan Divide
September 14, 2004; Page A4

In the final moments of the Republican convention -- after the balloons had fallen and the cameras had turned away -- an unusual commotion broke out in the seats surrounding CNN's convention-floor set. Dozens of delegates turned to where Judy Woodruff and Wolf Blitzer were conducting interviews and started chanting loudly: "WATCH FOX NEWS. WATCH FOX NEWS."

The demonstration highlighted what may become one of the most lasting legacies of campaign 2004: The increasing polarization of the American media and their audiences. The delegates clearly viewed CNN as an enemy in their midst -- and Fox as a friend.

That media gulf widened further last week -- to Grand Canyon-like dimensions -- thanks to CBS's Dan Rather. Questioned about the authenticity of documents he used criticizing President Bush's National Guard service, Mr. Rather was quoted by the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz as saying: "Until someone shows me definitive proof that they are not , I don't see any reason to carry on a conversation with the professional rumor mill."<snip>

[Union Thug]

1. I've just decided the 'murkin swing voter is...

a stupid cow.

I think I lost my faith that we can fight the machine. The media is nothing but a corporate behemoth and voters their easy to program drones.

Meet the 'murkin middle of the road: A stupid and indifferent herd of cows.

[annxburns]

2. "The Note" is a perfect example

of how the corporate media has become slave to the RW echo chamber.

Later in the same article, The Note says "weblogs we are checking today" and guess what? They are all RW sites except for Daily Kos.

I am so sick of the media lamenting the tenor of the coverage and then doing EVERYTHING possible to promote whatever the RW echo chamber says.

The only hope I have is that one day, people will look back on this era in the media and wonder how it could of been taken over so completely by the corrupt Bush administration. Not even 1000 dead soldiers bother the media whores ...

[Qutzupalotl]

3. "nearly pixel-compatible"?

Think again.



Not even close.

[papau]

4. Excellent - but will NBC/ABC issue a "we're sorry we said CBS was wrong"

or will the Wash Post Editor Downie - who is never wrong after he beats up on Dems and then finds his "facts in error" - he still believes Clinton crap that was disproved -

Will Downie become a human and admit error -

not in my lifetime is my guess.

:-)