Posted on 09/10/2004 9:02:55 PM PDT by AaronInCarolina
The video available from the CBS News web site suggests that the "th" superscript proof of forgery is debunked by the fact that other documents in Bush's military records contained superscript examples.
THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THE EXAMPLE THEY SHOW IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT, AND DOESN'T EVEN LOOK TO BE SUPERSCRIPT
The reference example they show at around 1:25 into the video is a closeup a "111th" where the "th" has an underline integral to the glyph, but it is not superscript. It does not get elevated above the normal level of the text. It just sits beside the "111". I don't know how they can call that a superscript. It would seem to be that it would take a much less sophisticated typewriter to produce a "th" that is level with the normal text than one that moves the "th" up partially above the normal text. What do you think?
That was already posted this morning. Is there a way to upload photos? I have it local but not available on internet. It's from this morning's thread.
If you go to usatoday and look at the copies they have and then watch the video cbs has you will notice CBS doctored the close up of the "superscript"
There is at least one geniune example of a 1970s "th"
glyph in the known-valid Bush docs, and that's the one
CBS showed.
The typed line is mono-spaced type (not proportional
like the memos) and the "th" is a single character
space wide. It is printed against, but not above, the
upper bound of the character cell available for the
typewriter.
It does nothing to explain the Killian memos.
Note that several other lines in that form use the
in-line "111th". The form was probably typed upon at
different times and places. One of those places had
a typewriter with a "th" gylph, probably on a ball.
CBS is simply ignoring all the evidence that points to fakery and pointing only to some minor things that might point to the document's authenticity. That is simply dishonest. The evidence that these documents are fake is beyond ANY doubt (reasonable or otherwise). The fact that there might be some evidence that points to authenticity at that point is irrelevant.
And, for instance, the possible superscript evidence that they point to is not even consistent with the documents in question. The other examples in Bush's records were not superscripts, but in line fonts.
Since Killian couldnt' type his way out of a paper bag, there is no way he could have found the small "th" font if his life depended on it. And besides, the small "th" font was not automatically superscripted. That would have had to have been done manually by rotating the return carriage 1/2 turn. There is now way he could have done that twice on the same page.
See BS.
All the links in CBS's website seem to work just fine with the exception of the 'contact us' tab. Clicking generates an error. It would appear that CBS does not want to be 'contacted' right now.
From what I gather, Killian's office had one old, shared, typewriter.
The legit - th - is indeed underlined.
Type the memo in 13 point Times New Roman using the default margins. When you are done, roll the document into a little ball like you are going to throw it away. Then unfold it, place it on a dirty copier and you will have an IDENTICAL memo to the CYA memo.
Then send it to CBS and tell them its the original. They'll love you forever.
wow...cool...
Thanks for posting the graphic. I couldn't find a way to capture a still from the video short of installing video editing software.
LOL!! You should include some statement like: "If I die someday, I hope and pray that somebody finds this note in my personal files and gets it to the DNC or CBS, or anybody who is a Bush-hater."
LOL!
Also, your date stamp is far too legitimate. You should have "18 June 1973".
But look, these 200$ Bush notes have a polyesther strip! Heh.
LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.