Good job guys, that's why you are the best.
~Cindy

Wow! Now THAT'S a major bombshell. Awesome job!

i think it's fair to say prof. hailey has been wizzed, banged, and blogged. good work!

You guys really should have waited for the Globe to pick up on the story before you blew it out of the water.

double the schadenfreude equals double the fun.

I don't mean to rain on the parade, but just because the guy put a defense of himself in that doesn't mean that he's lying.

You need to debunk his defense.

I don't understand, Posey. The point was that until he made clear that he did NOT type this stuff on a typewriter, the obvious assumption was that it WAS. What was the point of a demonstration that could only be done on a computer ... for something that wasn't supposed to be done on a computer?? Perhaps he wasn't deliberately lying ... but at best, the document was very misleading.

So fine: Perhaps he just made an honest mistake. So what did he do? Add a clarification to the beginning of the document, and note it as an update? Nope, he HID IT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DOCUMENT. And if nobody had kept a copy of the original, he could have gotten away with it.

THAT is dishonest at best.

Poser

As Pavelblov points out in the linked story, you are wrong.

http://tinyurl.com/436mp

"Let's say I sent out a memo saying, "Kerry is a card-carrying member of the Communist party." You debunk my story. I then send out a "revised" version of the memo, saying "Kerry was a card-carrying member of the Communist party, and by Communist party, I mean the Democratic Party."

Did I lie in the first memo? The answer is "yes." Did I get caught in my lie, and try to cover my tracks? The answer is "duh.""

In other words, there is no "need to debunk his defense."

Hey, Posey is claiming that the doc with the excuses inserted might be FAKE BUT ACCURATE. Good going dude.

On a more serious note, university investigators should be alerted to immediately recover all copies of the original PDF that might have been backed-up, emailed, or otherwise exist. If Hailey is trying to cover his tracks, he is trying to retrieve and dispose of all copies of the earlier PDF himself right now, so that he can try to claim that Kevin's copy is not real and Kevin is the forger.

Has the department head who Kevin is in contact with been advised yet to secure university copies? Most likely this has already been addressed, but redundancy is one of the blogosphere's strengths, right?

Could Hailey's work be justified under "social experiment" on how many leftwing moonbats uncritically believed it --and passed it on--simply because it said the memos (probably) were authentic?

Seems improbable given that the guy's picture has him wearing a get-out-of-Iraq T-shirt; and he's supposedly donated $250 to Kerry.

An interesting Goggle result where Hailey begs others on the ATTW-List for help.[Note that it's a post from a list member of Hailey's emailed request]

I just looked at the ATTW-List email (mentioned by Jim above). It seems to be inconsistent with the excuse that Hailey inserted into the updated PDF. The updated PDF says that it cannot be assumed that the font in the memo is Times New Roman just because it is consistent with Times New Roman. The copier could have stretched the font, so that a similar font ends up looking like Times New Roman. But in his ATTW-List mail he states positively that he has identified the font as American Typewriter: "I have been able to identify the font family for the memos. It is American
Typewriter." As Kevin put it: "One of these things is not like the other."

Whatever this means, the professor's home page at USU has gone to "no data"

However, chached version of his CV is:

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:YSPGRPU_Q1IJ:imrl.usu.edu/Hailey/content/topic01.html+David+hailey+professor+Utah+state+university&hl=en

(original URL is http://imrl.usu.edu/Hailey/content/topic01.html )

"Pre-index" imrl.usu.edu/Hailey/ is also gone

Search USU's website http://www.usu.edu/index/ for Hailey and the links bring up the same message "the document contains no data".

Wonder if our professor is also gone from the University?

Sorry, that should reach cached version.

http://techcomm.usu.edu/grad/faculty.htm
(See above URL for photo of Dr. David Hailey)
David Hailey (Ph.D., University of New Mexico)
David HaileyProfessor Hailey researches and teaches interactive media courses, including online help, online instruction, intranet technologies, and visual design for interactive technologies. His research has been published in journals such as Technical Communication, Computers and Composition, The Journal for the Association of Engineering Educators, and Text Technology. His current research focuses on the processes involved in capturing and archiving critical, professional skills before they are lost.

In his CV, Hailey claims to have a BA in Creative Writing and Fine Art. The writing was indeed creative, but the art was not quite fine.

Bloggers never sleep!

I see Biggles at 4:26 AM couldn't enter. Me too - at 4:16 AM (EDT) I tried http://imrl.usu.edu/bush_memo_study 3 times.

ALL ROADS LEAD TO (AND FROM) BOSTON:

WHOIS lookup shows that "imrl.usu.edu.com" is registered by Student Advantage, Inc. at 280 Summer St., Boston, MA 02210.

Lukasiak's "AWOL Project" site at glcq.com, on the other hand, is registered under ISP Bluehost.com - in UTAH (where Hailey is - or is Hailey working physically out of Boston?)

I'm still trying to find out from "Fresh Air" how he found Lukasiak's ISP is in Massachusetts - *ages ago* on 9/14/04 12:40 PM at ace.mu.nu.

Lukasiak's site contains numerous "OETR"s. (The same misabbreviation "OETR" appears in the fabricated memo "dated" 18 Aug 73. Should have been "OER" as in the actual military doc file names which he imported to his site.)

See Lukasiak's collaboration with Col. Lechliter, Boston Globe reporters and Martin Heldt at http://www.redstate.org/story/2004/9/10/135321/013

Boston Globe reporter Rezendes says he interviewed Burkett more than once in Jan 04 (Foxnews interview on 9/16/04 by Hannity).

All connected like chewing gum.

Now - who can tell us about Lukasiak's pay stubs? Or who pays his internet expenses? Or his office rent? Etc.

Congratulations. Wizbang tracked down and caught up with a Big Media lie-in-the-making. It was demolished before it could even be written.

This should scare Old Media partisans far more than Rathergate, which was exposed within hours, or Kitty Kelley, whose credibility was destroyed between the time Today scheduled her and the time she appeared.

The blogosphere is now officially operating inside - way inside - Old Media's decision cycle.

Are we expected to believe that Col. Killian used typographical gymnastics to write a memo-to-file about a young ANG officer?

BR - doublecheck your post about the domain name registration. Did you mean to use the ".com" domain?

Kerry Stops The Bleeding
Flash polls are showing that viewers thought that Kerry won Thursday night’s debate by almost a 2 to 1 margin. CBS showed 44 percent for Kerry, 26 percent for Bush, and 30 percent said it was a tie. ABC showed 45 percent for Kerry, 36 percent for Bush and 17 percent said it was a tie.

This is much need good news for the Kerry campaign. Going in to this week polls showed Bush with a 5 to 10 point lead over Kerry. Kerry was also having trouble in the battle ground states. Electoral College projections were predicting Bush victories in key states including Wisconsin, Florida, Iowa, and Pennsylvania. Bush was even competitive in traditional Democrat strong holds like Michigan, Maryland, and New Jersey.

More Spinback.blogspot.com

To LSU Engineer:

Do you mean Lukasiak's glcq.com or Hailey's UT university's imrl.usu.edu.com ? If you mean the latter, it is the only one I find. If I check ".org" instead, it shows that name is available to buy. I'm open to any correction you may have.
Regards, BR

John- the way things are going lately for Kerry, all those polls will prove to be forgeries...and then they will try to forge evidence showing that those folks _could_ vote for Kerry- and that too will be de-bunked.

What John Kerry needs is _less_ help from MSM. Some tough questions and rude behavior from the media would help his credibility more than all the softball interviews...

So, Killian used Photoshop to create the memos. What's the big deal?

To LSU Engineer again:

I just read your info at http://209.157.64.200/focus/user-posts?id=160965

Very interesting! What could this mean? Could a private person in Boston post their "authoritative" looking treatise at Utah University's site?

There is much more evidence of forgery than just the "th" superscript and the proprotionally-spaced font. For example, the heading of the memo (111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron and the address) is perfectly centered, to a precision almost beyond humanly impossible. And this perfect centering occurs on 2 memos. It's extremely hard to center text with proportionally-spaced fonts, and it's unlikely that such painstaking effort would be undertaken for these memos. Also, the vast majority of memos created by the squadron used fixed-spacing fonts. Arguing that a typewriter that could possibly employ proportionally-spaced fonts in 70's doesn't give much credibility to the memo's authenticity, especially when you consider the price tag of such a typewriter, and that the vast majority of memos were produced from a plain and mass produced typewriter...

Ohhhh - so this is what "IMRL" is! I wondered why Sandia would be funding someone like Hailey doing typography analyses. Obviously they fund "IMRL" type research at various universities.

Here's an excerpt from Sandia Science News, June 1991:

"A $27.9 million Integrated Materials Research Laboratory (IMRL) is being built at Sandia National Laboratories to help develop new critical materials for military and industrial needs.

"The 140,000-square-foot building will house the advanced material research and development functions of Sandia's Solid State Sciences, Materials and Process Sciences, and Components Directories.

"The facility will integrate new basic research in tailored materials with advanced development of electronic devices, components, and sensors. These approaches will be augmented by emergent computer modeling techniques needed for materials science and technology."

So - it has nothing to do with Hailey's typography treatise! What is going on with this "expert" Hailey?

Does anyone have a copy of the HTML version of this doc? I got the supporting docs folder but not that. There is a part in there that is not in the PDF. There is a line regarding the superscripting and computer printers that sounded ridiculus and I'd like to see again. (something about the superscript not being raised too high [as in the screen version he used] so computer printers can print the line in one pass...)

Where did Hailey get his high-res scans of the Burkett forgeries?

The PDFs on the CBS site are lower resolution than the samples of the Burkett forgeries that Hailey is comparing his Photoshoppery to.

Btw, BR, you're completely up the wrong tree on that domain name. The Hailey website is at imrl.usu.edu, not "imrl.usu.edu.com". There is no "imrl.usu.edu.com" name in DNS and the underlying root name "edu.com" is owned by an online shopping company.

And "IMRL" is Hailey's "Interactive Media Research Laboratory" at USU, and is unrelated to Sandia's "Integrated Materials Research Laboratory".

While his new updates did make it clear he was not claiming they were actually physically typed, unfortunately for the professor, they exposed critical flaws in his methodology and to be frank, appeared to damn him more.

I noticed (and commented over at Allah on the 29th) he never said he made fig 5 ( his version of Charles Johnson's "convincer") on a typewriter. It seemed awfully suspect to me at the time. It's no evidence if he made it with a word processor or photoshop.

HI! just sent a question to usu president asking him how much of an endowment cBS was giving for the good professors work. I also sugested that they might want to suspend hailey soon or it may be the pres who goes down also. all of you are GREAT AMERICANS THANKS.

If Hailey's "IMRL" is not the Sandia-related research, then why is Sandia listed as a funder in his CV?

I see the "Interactive Media Research Laboratory" in his document, but LSU Engineer pointed out in his post at http://209.157.64.200/focus/user-posts?id=160965

"Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't see anything in his CV, publications, or experience that reflect any qualification to do this type of analysis.

"To me, this makes it even more absurd that he has a link to this 'analysis' on the UofU IMRL department page:

http://imrl.usu.edu/IMRL/index.htm

"The mission and expertise of the IMRL isn't even remotely related to typography or document verification. However, having the 'analysis' hosted on a university server gives it a (faux) appearance of credibility."

*******

So we have conflicting data - IMRL can mean 2 things. Does Sandia fund both of them? It often pays to follow up on oddities.

To: JayeRandom - who is the server for imrl.usu.edu ?

just more proof that cBS is two thirds BS.