THE "New" CBS BUSH DOCUMENTS: Let's do some investigating

www.freerepublic.com | September 9, 2004

[McGavin999]

That should be September 27, 1999 :o)

[Law is not justice but process]

Another good point!

[Howlin]

Hark, a voice of sanity amongst a chorus of babbling.

If you think we're babbling, why are you wasting your time on this thread?

[M1911A1]

Some of the speculation is just fun for the sake of it, at least here. I don't expect there to be a "magic bullet" discovery that proves the documents to be forgeries, anymore than I expect my study of the Seattle Mariners to improve the team, but I enjoy it.

[Howlin]

I am unbelievable??? What on earth do you mean???

[Wild_Bill_8881]

WEll that's basically orderly room boiler plate for

GET YOUR BUTT DOWN HERE AND DO WHAT I TELL YOU OR I"LL TELL THE COMMANDER!!!!

typed up by some lowly cleark who gets a stack signed by the old man, oops commander in a big pile sometime between his lunch and happy hour at the O clubwhen when he's not to busy

then sent out to put the fear of god in some young troop

[Tamzee]

Holy Smoking Gun! Somebody slipped up by allowing the word processor to automatically print a superscript. No superscript in the header. How very sweet!

Great catch, you're right!

On first doc, you see 111th and then 111^th

[bobo1]

I googled:

"Although IBM had produced a successful typebar-based machine, the IBM Executive, with proportional spacing, no proportionally-spaced Selectric office typewriter was ever introduced."

http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Typewriter

"My favorite electric typewriter was the IBM Executive, of which I have owned two in my lifetime. The first had a proportional font called "Mid Century" that looked like 12 point Futura Medium, and the characters were anywhere from 1 unit wide (lower case i) to 5 units or more (cap M).

It produced beautiful letters long before there was any such thing as word processing, and corrections were a real bitch cause I had to remember how wide each character was when I was backspacing."

http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/archives/9505/techwhirl-9505-01222.html

Yep, I remember the backspacing problems. They were a real problem.

blessings, Bobo

[AndrewC]

I am also not sure that AFM 35-13 is the regulation that would prescribe the flight physical. I think the 35 series was a personnel series and the flight series was 50. I found out that personnel actions were described in 35-13 for failure to complete flight requirements(from the hit pieces out there on Bush), but I think that the requirements come from another regulation.

[Robert A Cook PE]

The carbon would carry the original impression, then also the re-typing, since the correction fluid/paper only affects the top page.

A CYA memo, written to "nobody," with no secretary/clerk initials, wrong/missing letterhead with a different address for the ANG unit (PO vice AFO and Base address), typed (somehow) in proportional-spced font ....

But typed "perfectly" and without errors or backspaces ...

Why?

Why write such a "perfect" type-written memo, and go to all that effort SPECIFICALLY to record a minor administrative problem AGAINST a very junior, soon-to-quit, non-flying, surplus and excess AF reserve officer? When the Vietnam War still rages, and the ANG units are stuffed full of combat-exerienced, more senior pilots fully qualified in newer aircraft?

Why write the memo at all?

[Dolphy]

Forgive me for this site, but it has a collection of records for this time frame that are interesting...even for document authenticity purposes.

Site

[AndrewC]

GET YOUR BUTT DOWN HERE AND DO WHAT I TELL YOU OR I"LL TELL THE COMMANDER!!!!

Orders do not come from clerks, and clerks put initials on documents to show who typed it.

[Robert A Cook PE]

I've manually printed superscripts and subscripts by hand by "half-rolling" the carriage back up a notch.

BUT - Are the superscript letter the exact same size as the regular letters?

Again ... Why go to all that effort?

If the memo is addressed to "nobody" then nobody is going to read it, so why superscript letters?

[Law is not justice but process]

Unless someone can explain the superscript on the 111th in the second paragraph of the May 4th memo, I believe that is a smoking gun. Can you explain it? I never saw a typewriter that could do that until the electronic typewriters that came out in the 1980s.

My father got out of the USAF in 1968. EVERYTHING typed in his discharge papers was courier font and had uniform character width. Was there a great retooling of the Texas ANG between 1968 and 1972? I didn't see superscripts, even in the preprinted letterhead. Please explain.

[El Gato]

Rush said it early on. "This is gonna be fun". Just sit back and relax and enjoy.

If they are so desperate as to fake these documents, and so poorly at that, what else might they be desperate enough to do? Scary thought.

[Leroy S. Mort]

That should be September 27, 1999 :o)

I demand a replay on Sept 27, 2004!

[intolerancewillNOTbetolerated]

"I am unbelievable??? What on earth do you mean???"

Your commitment, energy, enthusiasm...I admire such traits.

[danamco]

they are obvious forgeries written on a word processor.



Didn't I hear something about a guy who had boxes of sKerry documents that disappeared from a break in in his residence???

[Rokke]

"why are you wasting your time on this thread?"

You raise a good point. I guess I'm just fascinated that people know this much about typewriter balls.