Howlin, every single one of these memos to file is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman.
In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing, and typewriters used monospaced fonts.
The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's. Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used monospaced fonts.
I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old.
This should be pursued aggressively.
You're absolutely correct. I just looked at the files, and they don't pass the smell test. Most typewritten items from that era would have been in Courier font. And why would these items be copies, anyway, if these memos were for the guy's own personal file? They wouldn't have that run through the copy machine a zillion times aura to them in that case.
Further evidence of forgery is given here:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php
How do we get this to CBS?
I guess your point depends upon what you mean by "common use".
I was certainly using an IBM typewriter, with proportional pitch type-balls by 1969. At the time, I was working at a very low-budget publication, where most of the staff never drew a salary. We could afford the typewriter, though.
I don't think you've actually caught anything here.
She says the "ball" typewriters of this period were huge, heavy, and confined to the desks of secretaries who typed constantly. It is unlikely that the Texas National Guard had any during this period.
IMO the proportionately spaced fonts of "ball" typewriters of this period would be distinctive, and easily distinguished from those produced by later specialized word-processors, and modern computers.
America Thanks you.
It would interesting to look at other memos from this Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian from the same time period that are unrelated to Pres. Bush.
All documents from that timeframe should have the same properties....
Tell us the truth-- you're really the Deep Throat in this operation.
: )
Congratulations, kudos, and best regards to Freeper who made a real difference today!
Indeed! The raised "th" is a dead giveaway. This just wasn't possible on the typewriters of the day. Where's the letterhead? Military paper of the day was not 11" long... where's the tell-tale line at the bottom?
The reply that's rocking the nation BUMP!
YOU TOOK DAN RATHER DOWN.
He must resign.
Applause.
Easy, Bumpsters. Read this, from a non-partisan source:
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/IBM-Executive-series-typewriter (a.k.a. http://tinyurl.com/5tb25 )
>>>The IBM Electric typewriters were a series of electric typewriters that IBM manufactured, starting in the late 1940s. They used the conventional moving carriage and hammer mechanism. Each model came in both Standard and Executive versions; the Executive differed in having a multiple escapement mechanism and four widths for letters, producing a near typeset quality result. [!!!]
One model of the series was introduced in the late 1940s:
IBM Model A Two models of the series were introduced in the 1950s:
IBM Model B
IBM Model C One model of the series was introduced in the early 1970s:
IBM Model D Modified Standard versions of the A, B, and C models were commonly used as "console typewriters" or terminals on many early computers (e.g., JOHNNIAC, IBM 1620, PDP-1). Following the introduction of the IBM Selectric typewriter in 1961, which was much easier to interface to a computer, these typewriters were rarely used anymore as "console typewriters" or terminals.
<<<
"Near typeset quality". I don't mean to rain on any Freeper's parade, and I'm happy to dump on Kerry's, but let's not make a stink about this until we know -- otherwise we lose credibility.
Bumping for first blood. FR was first in the world to post the likelihood of the Space Shuttle disaster, and no FT has scooped the world on Rathergate.
Congratulations. Thanks for the great job.
Congrats on spotting that!
Bookmark for History.
Kudos to you for getting the ball rolling!
See post 47
You da man. Power to the people.
FR Bttt Award!!!
Buckhead's Post #47: It's History!
CBS'S BIG BLUNDER? (Credits Free Republic)
Howlin & TankerKC - Take a bow too! ;-)
THANK YOU BUCKHEAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Congratulations on your well deserved recognition. The fallout from this may be just enough to save the world. If it keeps kerry out of the White House, that's exactly what's been done. And you started the ball rolling. Thank you.
Way to go!!!!
Congratulations! for 'the post that launched a thousand "Oh $h!t$"'.
This should be pursued aggressively.
This thread will be one that goes down in history as a turning point in the election of 2004 that assured the survival of freedom. I will be able to tell my grandchildren that I was here on this thread.
I recommend that this thread be locked to preserve it in its original condition!
Buckhead, you are a HERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Friends and I used to do this very thing to create humorous and imposable parody "newspaper clippings" back in the very late `80s and early `90s. We only ran them about 4 generations, doctoring each generation with whiteout to get rid of the pasteup "lines" from the edges of the different pieces of paper stuck together to create the "article." By the 5th generation it looked ok for just a casual glance.
What is shocking is someone or some people are so juvenile to think this old joke would pass inspection at this level of scrutiny?
Can they REALLY be that stupid?
It sounds cliche but I am genuinely surprised by this.
TEAR THE ROOF OFF THE SUCKER !!!!!!!!!!
Great catch!
God Bless You!
Deacon Francis
Thank you is inadequate. Your post appears to be the shot heard round the media. They must realize now that we are watching and we know!
Very good Freepin' there Buckhead! Congrats!
The Post that silenced Rather's blather.
Little Green Footballs has picked up on your theory and has taken it further. Take a look.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12524_Bush_Guard_Documents-_Forgeries
You rock.
Bravo! Congratulations!
Well done, Buckhead!
Congratulations upon the import of your observations.
An honor to post in the same thread with you.
Post #47 will go down in Internet history.
You'll be known as a FReeper Hero for life.
I noticed something related that may or may not have been brought up yet. Whenever the forger writes 1st Lt Bush or 147th or anything like that, it's always 1 st or 147 th.
It looks like the forger put the space in on purpose to get by the automatic superscripting, but missed a couple.
-Eric
Applause!
Congrats on being part of the vast right wing conspiracy....
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote.html
We always favor looking at the content and substance over WHO is offering up the information, but in the war that will ensue about WHO gave CBS the potentially phony documents, it is interesting to Note that the right (Drudge, Fox, right-leaning blogs, others) led the way in pointing out the questions we have all been asking — and they were onto the questions, with remarkable detail, relatively soon after the documents were made public.
Here's part of how this story got here . . . from a little Marc Ambinder back-lurking on the blogs . . .
At 8:00 pm ET Wednesday night, CBS News does the story . . .
at 8:59 ET — before the broadcast is finished!!! — the documents come into question via a poster named Buckhead on the Free Republic Web site: LINK
Buckhead seems well-read on his forensic document examination skills.
"Howlin, every single one of these memos to file is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing, and typewriters used monospaced fonts. The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90's. Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn't used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used monospaced fonts. I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old."
Well, this is bandied about by dozens of Freepers, as they're called and is picked up at 8:30 am ET and added to by www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/ — this little green football guy is a very popular conservative blogger . . .
Bumping the 'Deep-Font' post