New Questions On Bush Guard Duty [CBS USES FORGERIES TO SMEAR THE PRESIDENT!!!!!]

CBS ^ | 9/10/04 | Staff

[TastyManatees]

New Questions On Bush Guard Duty

CBS) The military records of the two men running for president have become part of the political arsenal in this campaign – a tool for building up, or blowing up, each candidate’s credibility as America's next commander-in-chief.

While Sen. Kerry has been targeted for what he did in Vietnam, President Bush has been criticized for avoiding Vietnam by landing a spot in the Texas Air National Guard - and then failing to meet some of his obligations.

Did then-Lt. Bush fulfill all of his military obligations? And just how did he land that spot in the National Guard in the first place? Correspondent Dan Rather has new information on the president’s military service – and the first-ever interview with the man who says he pulled strings to get young George W. Bush into the Texas Air National Guard.

...

But 60 Minutes has obtained a number of documents we are told were taken from Col. Killian's personal file. Among them, a never-before-seen memorandum from May 1972, where Killian writes that Lt. Bush called him to talk about "how he can get out of coming to drill from now through November."

Lt. Bush tells his commander "he is working on a campaign in Alabama…. and may not have time to take his physical." Killian adds that he thinks Lt. Bush has gone over his head, and is "talking to someone upstairs."

Col. Killian died in 1984. 60 Minutes consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic.

[MistyCA]

Did you just hear what Harkin said about these? He says it shows proof that we can not trust Bush to be honest. That sort of says it all, doesn't it?

[TomGuy]

Did they have rollerball pens in 1972?

I know the rollerball pens were around in 1973. I remember a boss who had one.

[aft_lizard]

FWIW, when I was in the Army, memos and forms would be dated 4 May 1972 never, ever, "04 May 1972". The leading zero on the date is very suspicous to me. Anyone else smell a rat, or is just me?>>

Not really, I have seen different versions of dating on my own paper work such as 04051972 or 04MAY72 or the above 04 May 1972. I am curious that its not capitalized, as is usual but the form isnt that odd.

Part of the language in some of the official letterhead memos doesnt jive. I remember I had to type a new letter 10 times because my language wasnt proper for official military correspondence even being just a memo. Words like doesn't and don't generally are not acceptable, there is of course an official acronym list one must use also.

[bootyist-monk]

Conclusive proof that the Selectric didn't do superscript can be found by looking at the papers of the designers of the typerwriter. They are available on the IMB website. The list of available letters is on the second page. No superscript "th" is available. Fogeries.

http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/121/ibmrd1201E.pdf

[TastyManatees]

Thanks. See post # 156.

[MineralMan]

"IMO the preponderance of evidence says these were forgeries. Yes, they could have been written on an IBM Executive (and they were certainly produced on a typewriter of some kind; look at the variation in the letter heights and the strike angles.). On the other hand, I've used a similar typewriter, and they are the most colossal pain in the rear except for a very skilled typist; if you type the wrong letter on a proportionately spaced typewriter, and discover it after you type the next letter, you're screwed. Maybe the particular, word-processor like font was available. Maybe the non-standard military abbreviations were used. Maybe Lt. Col. Killian was a hipster and used 'feedback' and 'run interference' in the very modern sense they're used in the Aug. 18 memo. Maybe he had superscripted fonts. But given all these unusual aspects of these memos, what would you say the preponderance of evidence suggests?"

Well, you have a point. But, here's another thing to think about. Was Killian working full-time at this? If not, perhaps these memos were created not at the base, but in some other office. Perhaps dictated to a secretary, who DID have an IBM Executive typewriter. They were pretty common in some law offices back then.

I don't know, but if Killian had another job, that's a possibility.

It's a nice puzzle.

[B Knotts]

It's more a conncordance of small clues, not a smoking gun.

Agreed. There is some slight chance (0.001%) that these are genuine, but the simplest explanation is that they are rather crude forgeries.

They certainly look like a modern word-processed document to me.

[Darksheare]

LOL!
Good to see you as well.
I've been wandering about as is normal for me.
Been hanging out on really weird threads.

Was checking out Killian's signature in Beelzebubba's post, and they are by different people..

[bootyist-monk]

IMB=IBM (too fast on the keyboard today).

[demlosers]

CBS states that it "consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic.

"The memos on the website seem to be several generations away from the original. What kind of document expert would say that a 15th generation copy is "authentic"? That's crazy talk. "

Yes, it appears CBS has photo copies of these documents. Without the Killian's original signature on the papers, there is no way to authenticate if Killian signed them.

I one had the job as a production sheduler in the AF for my organization. Sometimes the cover page changed that had the original signature for the production schedule. I did not run down the bosses to have them resigned the cover page. I cut and pasted their signatures from a copy or original, onto the new cover page. Then I have photo copied the new cover page with the old signatures and wallah, the old signatures appear on the new cover page without getting anyone to sign.

[Chieftain]

Kerry, John Forges!!

[Timeout]

Thanks for the ping. I'll be here tonight!

[Right Wing Professor]

Well, you have a point. But, here's another thing to think about. Was Killian working full-time at this? If not, perhaps these memos were created not at the base, but in some other office. Perhaps dictated to a secretary, who DID have an IBM Executive typewriter. They were pretty common in some law offices back then.

Yes, I thought about that. In general, they look professionally typed, not by a hunter and pecker. Anyone have a bio for Killian?

[xzins]

Someone on one of the other threads said that typewriter balls had various options and one of them had a superscript "th."

The issue really boils down to the "spacing" if I understand this correctly. I don't know enough about that to either explain it or not explain it.

What I know is that those are names, places, locations, details, reports, etc., mentioned in these 5 memos that are very specific and related to events of 32 years ago.

A recent forgery would have an extremely difficult time creating all those people and places without slipping up. The PRESIDENT would notice it.

I'm fine with people pursuing the forgery idea. I think what it will have to be, if it's true, is that they must have changed a few words off original real memos.

[Travis McGee]

Please read reply #198, and tell us if you think that was likely in 1972 in the TANG.

[TastyManatees]

Amazing! Jeremy Chrysler at Pacetown blog sat down and experimented with the "1972" memos and Microsoft Word. He retyped the "old" memo in Word, and the result is an exact duplicate of the original. But, don't take my word for it.

See for yourself.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Nonsense.

A USAF officer, writing a supposed "memo" to himself, typing it BY himself (and typing it perfectly - I might add!) would NOT under any circumstances, go around REPLACING typewriter balls to "specially type in" TWO letters in HIS OWN UNIT ID designation for a memo that was NOT TO BE EVER PRINTED OR DISPLAYED AGAIN!

This is a memo FOR HIM to "cover his ass" (CYA - remember?) ... Is he (typing on his own (no clerk initial!) going to go around replacing typewriter balls?)

He (the supposed writer) is a military officer during a shooting war! He is a comabt-retrained FIGHTRE PILOT! I don't even believe ANY FIGHTER SQUADRON COMMANDING OFFICER would go around writing any excess memo's (to himself in particular!) about an officer who is leaving his unit on temporary assignment elsewhere!

And he would definitely not go around do it himself.

Further, the OFFICIAL WAY that Bush's unit designated itself (in all of the "real" documents from that base, at that time, form that office) used "111th F.I.S."

NO superscript! EVER!

[Cboldt]

Selectric - not proportional font, moving ball (not moving carriage).

IBM Executive (Models A - D) - proportional font, moving carriage, not certain what keyboard layouts were offered.

I find it plausible that superscript "th" and superscript "st" would be offered on a typewriter.

[Sacajaweau]

That's what I'm wondering also. Harris, Staudt and Hodges. Where are they?

Please notice that the Bush inquiry is the first memo...19 May 1972. Notice also that at No. 2. "Bush says he will do that in Alabama IF HE STAYS IN A FLIGHT STATUS". Sounds like we're not getting all the option info in No. 1.

[NYC GOP Chick]

Without reading through this entire thread (I just went through a 450-post one on the same topic!), has anyone actually opened up MS Word, set the font to Times New Roman 12 pt, typed the memos verbatim and then turned them into PDFs?

Compare them side by side with the ones being put out there now...