suzyrice.com Rotating Header Image

“LIBERTY FILM FESTIVAL”

LIBERTY FILM FESTIVAL
America’s First Conservative Film Festival
October 01, 02, 03, 2004, Hollywood, CA

RedSquareSmallDark.gif SPECIAL SCREENINGS :

Fri. Oct. 1st: FREE SCREENING – DC 9/11
“Time of Crisis” with Writer-Producer Lionel Chetwynd
Sat. Oct. 2nd:
Tribute to Ronald Reagan featuring his WWII classic, “Desperate Journey”

Sun Oct. 3rd:
“The Ten Commandments” with a special lecture by Michael Medved.

RedSquareSmallDark.gif SPECIAL GUESTS INCLUDE:
LIONEL CHETWYND
Writer/Director/Producer
Oscar-Nominated

MICHAEL MEDVED
Film Critic/Talk Show Host

LARRY ELDER
Talk Show Host/Filmmaker

ANDREW BREITBART
The Drudge Report
Hollywood Interrupted

JAMES HIRSEN
Newsmax
Tales From the Left Coast

VICTOR ELIZALDE
Sony Pictures

DAN GIFFORD
Oscar-Nominated Producer
Waco: Rules of Engagement

RedSquareSmallDark.gif PLUS THESE NEW FILMS & EVENTS!

“Terminal Island” – exciting thriller about terrorism in LA harbor

“Michael Moore Hates America” — irreverent look at Michael Moore

“Michael & Me” — Larry Elder’s provocative defense of gun rights

“Confronting Iraq” — compelling documentary supporting Iraq war

“Saddam’s Mass Graves” — from famed Iraqi filmmaker Jano Rosebiani

“Is It True What They Say About Ann?” — Ann Coulter documentary

“Beyond ‘The Passion'” — documentary on Mel Gibson’s The Passion

“Borrowed Fire” by Indian auteur Salil Singh
Conservative shorts from Protestwarrior.com, Brain-Terminal.com

“Greg Wolfe: Republican Jew” by noted satirist Greg Wolfe

“Right Stuff Comedy” performance by Eric Peterkofsky’s famed troupe

“Conservative Filmmaking 101” — nuts & bolts of digital production

“You’ll Never Eat Lunch in This Town Again!” — panel discussion

RedSquareSmallDark.gif PRESS RELATED & DOWNLOADS, HERE.

Festival Information: alexandrianfilms@cox.net

RedSquareSmallDark.gif Thanks to WIZBANG!’s “THE 10 SPOT” Thread, September 08, 2004.

13 C O M M E N T S

  1. -S- says:

    Yes, I read that article — and saved a copy of it — earlier this afternoon…

    CBS just can’t keep it’s stories straight, apparently, similar to the talkative Ben Barnes. Even the NYT appears to be scrambling to contradict it’s own content.

    WHO IS BEN BARNES?A Deep-Pocketed Kerry Partisan Who Can’t Keep His Stories Straight

    Ben Barnes Is Kerry Campaign Vice-Chair, Raising Over $100,000 For Campaign. (Kerry For President Website, http://www.johnkerry.com/fec/, Accessed 9/4/04)

    Barnes Is Kerry “Super-Bundler” Fundraiser. “Eleven [Kerry super-bundlers] are from Texas, including Dallas plaintiff’s lawyer Fred Baron and lobbyist Ben Barnes

    According To February 2004 New York Times Article, Barnes’ Story “Was Subject To Change And There Were No Documents To Support His Claims.”

    Barnes Is Considered “A Definite In” In Kerry Administration.

    Opening Night Of Democratic Convention In Boston, “Kerry Adviser And Veteran Political Fund-Raiser”Barnes Hosted Party For Convention-Goers.

    Sharpstown Bank Scandal In 1971 Ended Barnes’ Political Career.

    In 1998, Barnes Was Accused Of Funneling $500,000 To Former Sales Manager Of Corporation Running Texas Lottery.

    Investment Partnership With John Connally Went Bust In 1988 After Connally And Barnes Racked Up $200 Million In Debt.

  2. justaguy says:

    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

    http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200409\POL20040909d.html

  3. -S- says:

    EXCELLENT ARTICLE/LINK there, thanks!

    Barnes’ credibility is, from what I read this afternoon and yesterday, regionally known to be both “highly partisan” and “suspect” to many, and CBS’ credibility…well…that’s been under question by many for a long time, now.

    Interesting to me is that Barnes’ attributes these “documents” that CBS “refuses” to identify as to the source who produced them — that’s preposterous right there — Barnes’ attributes the source of the sudden find of these “documents” to a man who is deceased.

    Now THERE’s a handy dodge, if ever I read or heard of one. So we’re supposed to accept what Barnes says and what Dan Rather says who “questions” Barnes.

    On the law of averages ALONE, I’d give precedence to “…Three independent typography experts told CNSNews.com they were suspicious of the documents from 1972 and 1973 because they were typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today’s Microsoft Word program…”The Kerry campaign appears to be as exacting as, as, as a billionaire who has his/her mind set on acquiring a painting. They are going to try as much of that “creative financing” as they believe they can leverage…which Kerry Campaign is certainly doing, and has done in this campaign.

    Excellent link. Thanks.

    ’60 Minutes’ Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
    By Robert B. Bluey
    CNSNews.com Staff Writer
    September 09, 2004

    (CNSNews.com) – The 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by the CBS News program “60 Minutes,” shedding a negative light on President Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard, may have been forged using a current word processing program, according to typography experts.

    Three independent typography experts told CNSNews.com they were suspicious of the documents from 1972 and 1973 because they were typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today’s Microsoft Word program.

    The “60 Minutes” segment included an interview with former Texas lieutenant governor Ben Barnes, who criticized Bush’s service. The news program also produced a series of memos that claim Bush refused to follow an order to undertake a medical examination.

    The documents came from the “personal office file” of Bush’s former squadron commander Jerry B. Killian, according to Kelli Edwards, a spokeswoman for “60 Minutes,” who was quoted in Thursday’s Washington Post. Edwards declined to tell the Post how the news program obtained the documents.

    But the experts interviewed by CNSNews.com homed in on several aspects of a May 4, 1972, memo, which was part of the “60 Minutes” segment and was posted on the CBS News website Thursday.

    “It was highly out of the ordinary for an organization, even the Air Force, to have proportional-spaced fonts for someone to work with,” said Allan Haley, director of words and letters at Agfa Monotype in Wilmington, Mass. “I’m suspect in that I did work for the U.S. Army as late as the late 1980s and early 1990s and the Army was still using [fixed-pitch typeface] Courier.”

    The typography experts couldn’t pinpoint the exact font used in the documents. They also couldn’t definitively conclude that the documents were either forged using a current computer program or were the work of a high-end typewriter or word processor in the early 1970s.

    But the use of the superscript “th” in one document – “111th F.I.S” – gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it’s not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.

    “That would not be possible on a typewriter or even a word processor at that time,” said John Collins, vice president and chief technology officer at Bitstream Inc., the parent of MyFonts.com.

    “It is a very surprising thing to see a letter with that date [May 4, 1972] on it,” and featuring such typography, Collins added. “There’s no question that that is surprising. Does that force you to conclude that it’s a fake? No. But it certainly raises the eyebrows.”

    Fred Showker, who teaches typography and introduction to digital graphics at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Va., questioned the documents’ letterhead.

    “Let’s assume for a minute that it’s authentic,” Showker said. “But would they not have used some form of letterhead? Or has this letterhead been intentionally cut off? Notice how close to the top of the page it is.”

    He also pointed to the signature of Killian, the purported author of the May 4, 1972, memo ordering Bush, who was at the time a first lieutenant in the Texas Air National Guard, to obtain a physical exam.

    “Do you think he would have stopped that ‘K’ nice and cleanly, right there before it ran into the typewriter ‘Jerry,” Showker asked. “You can’t stop a ballpoint pen with a nice square ending like that … The end of that ‘K’ should be round … it looks like you took a pair of snips and cut it off so you could see the ‘Jerry.'”

    The experts also raised questions about the military’s typewriter technology three decades ago. Collins said word processors that could produce proportional-sized fonts cost upwards of $20,000 at the time.

    “I’m not real sure that you would have that kind of sophistication in the office of a flight inspector in the United States government,” Showker said.

    “The only thing it could be, possibly, is an IBM golf ball typewriter, which came out around the early to middle 1970s,” Haley said. “Those did have proportional fonts on them. But they weren’t widely used.”

    But Haley added that the use of the superscript “th” cast doubt on the use of any typewriter.

    “There weren’t any typewriters that did that,” Haley said. “That looks like it might be a function of something like Microsoft Word, which does that automatically.”

    According to an article on the CBS News website, the news program “consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic.”

  4. justaguy says:

    from DRUDGE

    CBSNEWS LAUNCHES INTERNAL INVESTIGATION AFTER SUSPICIOUS BUSH DOCS AIRED

    **Exclusive**

    CBS NEWS executives have launched an internal investigation into whether its premiere news program 60 MINUTES aired fabricated documents relating to Bush’s National Guard service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

    “The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected,” a top CBS source explained late Thursday.

    The source, who asked not to be named, described CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather as being privately “shell-shocked” by the increasingly likelihood that the documents in question were fraudulent.

    Rather, who anchored the segment presenting new information on the president’s military service, will personally correct the record on-air, if need be, the source explained from New York.

    MORE

  5. -S- says:

    Yeah, the entire ruse is a remarkable flash in stupidity for CBS and the Left Press worldwide, who was only yesterday relishing in what they proposed was some huge expose on Bush…seems to be, to the contrary, a huge expose, rather, on the Left and the Left Media and particularly on the Kerry campaign, and spokesperson for the deceit, Barnes himself.

    Not to mention Rather. Who I cannot believe is hapless or blameless in this situation. Certainly he and CBS are shown to be inept here; which leads me to ask, what ELSE is it that they’ve pushed into the public discourse that’s been equally as “forged” in nature? I mean, if you are to believe Rather, he hasn’t a clue.

    Alright, I believe that Rather hasn’t a clue.
    (Read Wizbang!’s latest — September 09, 2004 — about Rather…)

    I wasn’t at my computer from yesterday late to this evening early, so the entire episode unravelled during that time, thanks to our fabulously astute and alert conservative blogosphere (with mention to the inititial break of the idea that there was forgery responsible for the documents themselves from someone on freerepublic.com, apparently, in a discussion from a day ago about the Barnes’ documents).

    Anyway, from what I’ve read, INSTAPUNDIT, September 09, 2004 and WIZBANG! have the most comprehensive links and history about the entire episode, and littlegreenfootballs.com this evening has an excellent wrap-up thread going on.

    The Washingtonpost is going to print their tenuous piece tomorrow…title even includes a question as to whether or not the documents are even forgeries, while something approaching 99% of experts tonight and to even include family members of the accused, deceased non-author, appear to conclude, already, that they are, so the Left Media is still trying to drag the issue out and doesn’t appear capable of admitting the truth here.

  6. -S- says:

    Here ya’ go: “BAGDAD DAN.”Amazing how subtle terrorism is…when it isn’t.

  7. justaguy says:

    “These documents do not appear to have been the result of technology that was available in 1972 and 1973,” said Bill Flynn, one of country’s top authorities on document authentication. “The cumulative evidence that’s available

  8. justaguy says:

    I believe this is the nail in the coffin for the Kerry campaign.

  9. justaguy says:

    Washington Prowler
    Anatomy of a Forgery Print Friendly Format
    E-Mail this to a Friend
    By The Prowler
    Published 9/10/2004 12:09:06 AM

    More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian.

    The oppo researcher claimed the source was “a retired military officer.” According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign.

    “More than a couple people heard about the papers,” says the DNC staffer. “I’ve heard that they ended up with the Kerry campaign, for them to decide to how to proceed, and presumably they were handed over to 60 Minutes, which used them the other night. But I know this much. When there was discussion here, there were doubts raised about their authenticity.”

    The concerns arose from the sourcing. “It wasn’t clear that our source for the documents would have had access to them. Our person couldn’t confirm from what file, from what original source they came from.”

    The documents that CBS News used were not documents from any of Bush’s personnel files from his time in the National Guard. Rather, CBS News stated that they were documents uncovered in the personnel files of Killian. That would explain why the White House or the Pentagon had never before released or even seen them.

    According to a Kerry campaign source, there was little gossip about the supposedly hot documents inside the office of the campaign on McPherson Square. “Those documents were not something anyone was talking about or trying to generate buzz on,” says the staffer. “It wasn’t like there were small groups of people talking about this as a bombshell. I think people here weren’t sure what to make of it, because provenance of these documents was uncertain.”

    A CBS producer, who initially tipped off The Prowler about the 60 Minutes story, says that despite seeking professional assurances that the documents were legitimate, there was uncertainty even among the group of producers and researchers working on the story.

    “The problem was we had one set of documents from Bush’s file that had Killian calling Bush ‘an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot.’ And someone who Killian said ‘performed in an outstanding manner.’ Then you have these new documents and the tone and content are so different.”

    The CBS producer said that some alarms bells went off last week when the signatures and initials of Killian on the documents in hand did not match up with other documents available on the public record, but producers chose to move ahead with the story. “This was too hot not to push. If there were doubts, those people didn’t show it,” says the producer, who works on a rival CBS News program.

    Now, the producer says, there is growing concern inside the building on 57th Street that they may have been suckered by the Kerry campaign. “There is a school of thought here that the Kerry people dumped this in our laps, figuring we’d do the heavy lifting on the story. That maybe they had doubts about these documents but hoped we’d get more information,” says the producer. “If that’s the case, then we’re bigger fools than we already appear to be judging by all the chatter about how these documents could be forgeries.”

    ABC News’ political unit held a conference call at 7:00 p.m. Thursday evening to discuss the memo and its potential ramifications should the documents turn out to be a forgery. That meeting took place around the time that the deceased Killian’s son made public statements questioning the documents’ authenticity.

    According to one ABC News employee, some reporters believe that the Kerry campaign as well as the DNC were parties in duping CBS, but a smaller segment believe that both the DNC and the Kerry campaign were duped by Karl Rove, who would have engineered the flap to embarrass the opposition.

  10. -S- says:

    About that nail in the Kerry coffin…I’m thinking this morning that many voters have already decided not to vote for him but that the media just insists otherwise, such that it appears that Kerry has more support and promise than he actually does. AND, even more sadly, the Left is trying to make this recent Fontgate situation somehow the fault of Karl Rove.

    Who I am SURE finds that very funny to the point of preposterousness. I mean, what ELSE can the Left do to avoid responsibility? Kerry trying to say it’s his staff, so change his staff…it’s not his staff, it’s him. It’s not Karl Rove, it’s Kerry. And the stupid DNC who would manage to get such a Fontgate forgery onto television without assuming they’d be analyzed and questioned as to accuracy. Preposterous!

    Even the ridiculously rationalizing “atrios,” the Left is fraught with people who will dismiss anything, ANYthing, rather than change their resolute and irrational avoidance of the truth.

    Kerry would have had a whole ‘nother campaign experience if he’d only apologized to the Vets and the military a while ago, honed up to the damage he’d done, stop the deception and moveon from there with constructive positions and promises. Instead, he’s still grovelling to “protect” some territory he has long since lost to reality along with the confidence of many Americans. Same with the Kerry Apologists to this hour.

  11. -S- says:

    To “anonymous” Religion-of-Sexuality writer here:

    I don’t know where or why you would abstract a “religion” and/or “homosexuality” theme from this thread about this particular Liberty Film Festival. I’ve read the contents and participants and I don’t see any content there that either threatens or supports any suggestion that “religion” does or should oppose or flatter or even threaten particular religious interpretations about sexuality of any sort, much less about “homosexuality” within religious and/or political contexts.

    I will delete any further comments of this trolling sort in the future, if for no other reason than comments such as yours do nothing to add to or compliment my site and appear to represent an irrational abuse of my bandwidth. Not to mention dilute reader pleasure and experience of this site, thematically.

    As to your irrationally expressed “theme” here — your “religion” supports “homosexuality” and “the republican party should be declared unconstitutional…”: I have this to write:

    It is YOUR perspective that represents a truly fascist ideology, that any “religion” that represents some counter to your (‘religious’) issue of “homosexuality” be deemed by national governmental process to be corrupt. Government is humanity, and represents human beings and what they find most important…

    But from a perspective of “religion,” there are a myriad of experiences among humanity that some acquaint whatever to and about. Government, our Constitution thereby, delivers the FREEDOM of RELIGION for everyone. Not just for one or two percent of humanity who consider their sexuality to be “religious” in nature and homosexuality, particularly, as some sort of religios practice.

    You have to convince the majority of humanity to change their perceptions inorder to make your “religion” popular but as to the Republican Party, we and those who vote as Republicans are exercising our Freedoms under our Constitution. Democrats and particulary people who promote what you are attempting to promote in your comments can’t tolerate the Judeo-Christian and Christian religion, however, and therefore, do insist on intolerance. The intolerance of cultism, and a cultism based in sexuality. Which, thank God, the GOP does not support. Most of the world, much less most of Americans, do not, either.