Would it be considered hyperbole for me to say that if this proves true, it could be as big as Watergate? Only with much, much quicker consequences?

I think that would be hyperbole, but not by an awful lot.

This story, if true -- and I have become almost completely convinced it is -- proves the case of liberal media bias beyond all doubt.

It may not top Watergate, but it will definitely be the press' Watergate.

Dan Rather will be gone in three months.

Well, CBS says "60 Minutes consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."

So there's some butt coverage for CBS. They can lay it off on whoever this expert is. It's not INDC Bill's guy, that's for sure.

Link:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml

By the way, Ace, I'm not sure Rather will take the heat for this. While the article says he interviewed Barnes, it credits 60 Minutes with producing, or, um, finding these documents. I don't watch them much but I don't think Dan Rather has anything to do with 60M.

The thing I dont understand is why someone like Rather would take a chance like this. And such obvious forgeries, I mean he's an asshole but fuck, you would think whoever made these would at least try to make it believable. The content seems fairly authentic (I dont know shit about military stuff)but to use a completely different handwriting and to type it up on a computer to boot. What in the fuck? It seems like maybe they wanted to be caught. Also have you read the cbs online article? They say that they had the documents authenticated, I think someone should start by asking who did the authenticating and then tracking that guy down and finding out his response to all these questions about the proportional spacing, the signature etc.

Sorry Ace, I don't see it. The only argument in favor of that second signature being a forgery is that it's almost *too* perfect. The loops are the same, the heights of the loops are the same, and the differences are pretty obvious, almost like they've been chosen to throw off the trail.

That said-- I've seen a million signatures in my job, and very few people have identical signatures. Hell, my signatures differ quite a bit, and not just when I sign my name "The Sexecutioner".

Sure, handwriting analysis can sometimes prove forgery, but it's far from an exact science with alloys, and compositions, and molecular structures.

In this case, again, I'd rather have someone more expert than me (or you, or Allah, may He be merciful) calling this a forgery. But even then, it'll only be a piece of the puzzle, because while the FBI cna prove forgery in a court of law, proving forgery in the court of public opinion is another matter entirely.

We have to be absolutely sure before we drop the big one.

Cheers,
Dave
Garfield Ridge