# If the CBS documents are shown to be fraudulent, should CBS produce their source? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 14, 2004, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459 "2004-09-14T19:50:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/41 "2004-09-16T06:02:51Z")
> [@cmkeller](#): > > AskNott: > > What are you talking about with the “4”? I just looked at all four documents linked in post 11 above. Two don’t have the number 4 at all, and in the other two, the number 4 is perfectly consistent with Times New Roman in Microsoft Word, at least on my computer. > **[TANG Typewriter Follies; Wingnuts Wrong](https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2004/9/10/49929/-)** > > (From the diaries -- kos) > > Against my own better judgment, but because I believe that the more rapidly charges are countered, the better, I spend a goodly portion of the last day researching -- s... There’s no link in post 11, but you might check out the reference in this link. For others, we’re not talking about the Selectric Composer, but the Executive, which could do proportional spacing and could be order with a superscript “th” key. To those who say the military would not spend a lot of money on equipment, I say thank you for the severe amusement that brought me. 😃 Oh, yes, the frugal military! Hoo boy. Thanks again. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/42 "2004-09-16T06:22:54Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > If not, then you shouldn’t post otherwise. What an interesting opinion you’ve got there. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/43 "2004-09-16T10:42:58Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Surely there is a journalistic precedent for that scenario and CBS should follow it. > > . A WAG from an idiot layman here. If CBS got the documents by promising they would not use the source’s name, then they will not use the source’s name. If the documents indeed turn out to be forgeries, CBS will have to take it on the chin. But IMO, they will honor their word, if given, that they will not name the source. That is, if they want anyone to come to them in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/44 "2004-09-16T10:44:11Z")
BTW, the idiot layman I refer to is me, not **John Mace**. Sorry if that wasn’t clear. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/45 "2004-09-16T11:55:13Z")
Hmm, Knox says the documents are fake but accurate: > [@](#): > > _Originally from [USA Today](http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-15-cbs-guard_x.htm)_ > > On Wednesday’s CBS Evening News, the former secretary to Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the Texas Air National Guard officer who purportedly wrote the memos critical of Bush, said that the documents that aired on CBS were fake and that she didn’t type them. > > But “the information in those (memos) is correct,” said Marian Carr Knox, who later appeared on Wednesday night’s edition of 60 Minutes. > > On that program, Knox said the questioned memos appeared to be based on real ones that she typed for Killian in 1972 and 1973. She said she had typed memos containing “the same information.” > > \*\*Specifically, Knox said she had typed a memo ordering Bush to report for a required flight physical that he had missed, one expressing Killian’s frustration at pressure from superiors to give Bush a better evaluation than he deserved, and one documenting Bush’s request to be excused from drills so he could go to Alabama to work on a political campaign. > > “It’s plain and simple. Bush didn’t think he had to go by the rules that others did,” Knox said. \*\* (Highlighting is mine) ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/46 "2004-09-16T12:43:49Z")
Seems the CBS and Rather “armor” (so to speak) is beginning to crack --– From the Houston paper – > [@](#): > > …CBS anchor Dan Rather acknowledged for the first time Wednesday night that there are serious questions about the authenticity of the documents. Yet, I did have to laugh when I got to this part of Rather’s admission > [@](#): > > …“If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I’d like to break that story,” Rather said Wednesday night. "Any time I’m wrong, I want to be right out front and say, ‘Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.’ " > **[Bush Guard documents linked to Abilene Kinko's](https://www.chron.com/news/politics/article/Bush-Guard-documents-linked-to-Abilene-Kinko-s-1505180.php)** > > Documents allegedly written by a deceased officer that raised questions about President... ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/47 "2004-09-16T12:50:49Z")
> [@spooje](#): > > …If the documents indeed turn out to be forgeries, CBS will have to take it on the chin. But IMO, they will honor their word… When honoring ones “word” wouldn’t that be cotingent on the other party honoring their word? Assuming that CBS did this – just assuming - wouldn’t that CBS promise be attached to something on the other side, a promise for a promise? Wouldn’t such a promise be attached to at the very least “good faith?” OR do you think that the CBS promise THEN gives the actor on the other side carte blanche to commit a fraud against CBS? Do you really think that was CBS’s (or the other party’s) understanding?? I suspect that Rather abd CBS MIGHT be ready to ‘begin’ the admisssion process - judging from Rather statement (given above). IF Rather follows through and finally admits that these documents are very likely forgeries - Rather and CBS has no obligation to the person who intentionally mislead us and CBS. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/48 "2004-09-16T13:00:36Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > What is the current evidence that the documents are false? (I haven’t seen the latest news.) > > 1. We know that typewriters _did_ exist at that time that produced the hypertext. > 2. We know that typewriters _did_ exist at that time that had proportional allowances for different letters. The problem is that a typewriter **that might reasonably have been available to a TexANG office in 1971** doesn’t have those features. We know that the technology to put a man on the moon existed in 1971, but nobody suggests that the gaps in Dubya’s NG record can be explained because he was on the moon at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/49 "2004-09-16T13:12:29Z")
> [@Tigers2B1](#): > > Note also that Col Killian, who couldn’t type, had to use a typewriter during the 70s that produced documents that look exactly like MS WORD ONLY when he was critical of Bush and then switched to a 1970s - conventional typewriter for other documents. I have this mental image of Killian pulling out the special Anti-Bush Typewriter[tm] with a flourish, kind of like Lex Luthor pulling out a chunk of Kryptonite. ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/50 "2004-09-16T13:19:11Z")
> [@Tigers2B1](#): > > When honoring ones “word” wouldn’t that be cotingent on the other party honoring their word? Not, as **spooje** said, if they want anyone else to come to them with inside info in the future. You think a janitor who finds a potentially incriminating document, but doesn’t know exactly where it came from, is going to send it to CBS if there’s a chance he’ll be raked over the coals in the national media as a result? ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/51 "2004-09-16T14:09:23Z")
> [@Mr2001](#): > > Not, as **spooje** said, if they want anyone else to come to them with inside info in the future. You think a janitor who finds a potentially incriminating document, but doesn’t know exactly where it came from, is going to send it to CBS if there’s a chance he’ll be raked over the coals in the national media as a result? Read again **Mr2001** - that’s not what I’m saying here. I’m **not** saying “the janitor” merely “finds potentially incriminating documents” - doesn’t know they are frauds and innocently passes them on ----- I’m saying the janitor creates the documents with the intend to defraud the public and CBS. Would THAT be part of the CBS deal?? IMO, it really makes no sense to take that position. I see no logic there. ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/52 "2004-09-16T14:12:31Z")
> [@](#): > > **AskNott** said: > For others, we’re not talking about the Selectric Composer, but the Executive, which could do proportional spacing and could be order with a superscript “th” key. For a character to be a superscript as in the alleged Killian memos, it has to break above the line of the text surrounding it, not just cover the top half of the height of the line as it would on an IBM Executive typewriter. Also, in order to have produced those memos on an electric typewriter of the 1970s, Killian, who could not type, would have had to reset the kerning continually throughout the document. His secretary did not have either an IBM Selectric Composer or an IBM Executive typwriter, but a _manual_ typewriter, and there is no reason to believe that a man who could not type would’ve had either the machine or the knowledge to create documents that, when overlayed with text produced using Microsoft Word’s default settings lines up exactly. For anyone who’d like to see it, I have an image of a document created in [Microsoft Word](http://www.mirthless.org/forgery/aug1873-pdf-word.gif), the [alleged original](http://www.mirthless.org/forgery/aug-18-1973-memo.gif), and a [an overlay of both.](http://www.mirthless.org/forgery/aug1873-pdf-overlay.gif) ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/53 "2004-09-16T14:44:55Z")
Let me add that I think that Rather and CBS will use the Knox interview as their way out of this mess. I can’t think of any NEW evidence that has just recently come to light that has caused Rather and CBS to NOW state that these documents may very well be fakes. This is almost a 180 from their position just a day and a half ago. Note that they put her on TV last night after her statement came out that while the documents were fakes, they expressed the sentiment of Col Killian. There are a few things I just don’t get about what Ms. Knox said however — or at least the part of the interview that CBS aired. Knox made the statement that whoever produced the fake documents probably did this so they would be caught. How in the hell does THAT work? In what fantasy world do you “retype” documents for fear of being ID’ed. Second — in one spot of the interview (that CBS showed us) Knox said that Bush acted as if he “was above” everyone else and that the pressure received from Bush Sr.'s influence made it difficult to management the National Guard post. YET, in another segment of the piece, Knox says that Bush was “very gentlemanly” and she wondered ‘what fine people the Bush family must be to produce such a son.’ OK — let me get this straight - Bush acted like he was “above everyone else” and the pressure from the Bush family influence made it nigh impossible to command ----- YET Bush came from fine family and was “very gentlemanly.” Short-term memory issues - Knox?? Third, the CBS spot doesn’t mention this for some reason but Knox is a long time Democrat who is one record as saying that Bush is ‘unfit for command’ - or some such. So - lets look at what we have - the partisans lining up – with the Killian family saying that Col Killian liked Bush and Knox saying he didn’t. Fine. **What they all agree on is that the documents are fakes.** After hearing Knox’s statement to the Houston paper the other day CBS decided to make a call. Hence the Rather admission that these are probably faked documents ----- since Knox has already stated the obvious and indicated that they are forged National Guard docs. CBS and Rather can now line up with Knox on this issue. CBS is attempting to use Knox as a ‘way out’ after being exposed for what they are. A partisan tool. ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/54 "2004-09-16T15:02:56Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > …For anyone who’d like to see it, I have an image of a document created in [Microsoft Word](http://www.mirthless.org/forgery/aug1873-pdf-word.gif), the [alleged original](http://www.mirthless.org/forgery/aug-18-1973-memo.gif), and a [an overlay of both.](http://www.mirthless.org/forgery/aug1873-pdf-overlay.gif) But … but … but … that’s just wild chance! The $4,000 IBM Selectric Composer could have done that with a lot of effort on Killian’s part - or even as one posted commented, the “less expensive” IBM Executive typewriter. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/55 "2004-09-16T15:10:28Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > What an interesting opinion you’ve got there. I’ll take that as an admission that you _ **do not** _ have a cite for your claim. Nice try, though, in trying to change the subject. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/56 "2004-09-16T15:11:19Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > What’s the big deal here? Even if the documents are forgeries, there’s no evidence of malice in this case. Can the same be said for Bush’s pushing of the African yellowcake forgeries? Well…yes. Both could simply have been [wrong](http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=222) . > [@AskNott](#): > > To those who say the military would not spend a lot of money on equipment, I say thank you for the severe amusement that brought me. Oh, yes, the frugal military! Hoo boy. Thanks again. You are quite correct except for one thing…we are talking about the NATIONAL GUARDS, not the regular US military. Have you actually ever BEEN to a National Guards facility? I’ve been to a Naval Reserve command center (such as it was) and I can tell you that they didn’t exactly have state of the art facilities. I have serious doubts that a Guards facility would have a state of the art typewriter in the early 70’s. Also, from what I understand these documents seem to be the ONLY ones produced so far from that facility that were typed in this way…the others I’ve heard about were not close. I think that the ‘they aren’t forged’ folks are increasingly grasping at straws, but thats neither hear nor there. To the OP, I don’t think CBS should give up their sources on this. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/57 "2004-09-16T15:17:21Z")
> [@](#): > > Also, in order to have produced those memos on an electric typewriter of the 1970s, Killian, who could not type, would have had to reset the kerning continually throughout the document. I’ve not seen evidence that the docs were kerned, just that a proportional font was used. Where is an example of kerned text in the docs? Thanks. I have tried overlays in Word, and never had a perfect match. If that match _is_ that perfect for a default Word setting I kind of suspect shenanigans on the part of thge person doing the test, since when I did it it was noticeably different even on short lines, even when I adjusted the margins to match as well as possible. A few of the letters did not appear to match at all. We can test this stuff ourselves, after all, and post examples; we don’t need to rely on others. I’ve posted my examples before: [http://www.triorb.com/stuff/gwbdoc2.gif](http://www.triorb.com/stuff/gwbdoc2.gif)[http://www.triorb.com/stuff/gwbdoc3.gif](http://www.triorb.com/stuff/gwbdoc3.gif) However, it’s freakin’ hard to tell _anything_ with these crappy 72 dpi things! > [@](#): > > …For anyone who’d like to see it, I have an image of a document created in Microsoft Word, the alleged original, and a an overlay of both. Did you do those yourself, catsix? And if you did, can I have the original word files? Also, I tried an overlay of the _exact two files_ you linked to, and the lines go well off at the ends, and the date doesn’t match well at all. [http://www.triorb.com/stuff/gwbdoc3.gif](http://www.triorb.com/stuff/gwbdoc3.gif) It’s certainly not a “perfect” match w/o some more tweaking, and if you do that you should say so. I’m kind of leaning towards “forgeries” right now (I really hope forgers don’t try to forge 1970s typewritten docs on friggin’ Word, but stranger things have happened), but the “look at this PERFECT MATCH” bit always makes me check it out. ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/58 "2004-09-16T15:21:13Z")
Sorry, I guess discussion of the docs should go in the other thread, since the OP wanted to talk about what CBS should do _if_ they are forgeries. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/59 "2004-09-16T15:46:37Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > …Also, in order to have produced those memos on an electric typewriter of the 1970s, Killian, who could not type, would have had to reset the kerning continually throughout the document… It is starting to look like there’s a strong case for the claim that the memos are either forgeries or some sort of transcriptions of the originals. Nonetheless, in the interest of fighting ignorance, the whole business about kerning seems, IMHO, to be a red herring. See my post [here.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=5254551t#post5254551) ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459/60 "2004-09-16T15:53:30Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > It is starting to look like there’s a strong case for the claim that the memos are either forgeries or some sort of transcriptions of the originals… Where is the strong case for the claim that they are transcripts of the originals - or that even “originals” exist? From Knox? Knox didn’t say that these documents existed, she said that these documents contained matter that she would not have typed in a National Guard document. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-cbs-documents-are-shown-to-be-fraudulent-should-cbs-produce-their-source/264459.md?page=4)