Posted on 09/09/2004 6:42:06 AM PDT by Sue Bob
Yes, I do remember that they had selective sizes based on the width of each character. However, it should still be very easy to distinguish between a line written in selective vs proportional font.
I don't understand how you can say this. I didn't see the purported memos themselves, but read excerpts here:
In a memo from Aug. 18, 1973, Col. Killian says Col. Buck Staudt, the man in charge of the Texas Air National Guard, is putting on pressure to "sugar coat" the evaluation of Lt. Bush. Staudt, a longtime supporter of the Bush family, would not do an interview for this broadcast.The memo continues, with Killian saying, "I’m having trouble running interference and doing my job."
"He was trying to deal with a volatile political situation, in dealing with the son of an ambassador and former congressman," says Strong. "He was trying to deal with at least one superior officer, Gen. Staudt, who was closely connected to the Houston political establishment. And I just see an impossible situation. I feel very, very sorry, because he was between a rock and a hard place."
One of the Killian memos is an official order to George W. Bush to report for a physical. The president never carried out the order.
On Aug. 1, 1972, Lt. Bush was suspended from flying status, due to failure to accomplish his annual medical examination. That document was released years ago. But another document has not been seen until now. It’s a memo that Col. Jerry Killian put in his own file that same day. It says "on this date, I ordered that 1st Lt. Bush be suspended not just for failing to take a physical….but for failing to perform to U.S. Air Force/Texas Air National Guard standards."
He goes on: "The officer [then-Lt. Bush] has made no attempt to meet his training certification or flight physical."
These purported notes by Killian are NOT from Bush's official TANG record -- CBS claims they're from Killian's "personal file." (This strikes me as suspicious --are "personal files" subject to FOIA requests? And are they subject to the kind of security archived government documents normally get, Sandy Berger notwithstanding?) BUT, if they are genuine, wouldn't they be "bad" for GWB???
Ellington AFB was an active duty Air Force base south of Houston TEXAS. It's been the home of that ANG unit for several decades. The base was deactivated in '76 and is now Ellington Field, owned by the city of Houston, but for 8 years it was Ellington ANGB. THe ANG still owns the land its facilities are on. NASA has shared the runways pretty much since the Johnson Space Center has been in existence, and it goes back to the early Apollo days of the mid 60s. (i.e. When the Apollo Astronauts radioed "Houston, we have problem", they were talking to the JSC. The flight ops part is a bit north and west of the JSC proper.
From the history section of the 147th FW (of which 111th sqdrn is a subsidiary unit):
Between 1952 and 1959 the squadron flew many aircraft, to include the F-80, F-86D and F-86L. In August 1960 the unit became one of the first to transition to the F-102A all-weather fighter interceptor and began a 24-hour alert to guard the Texas Gulf coast. By January 1970 the wing was starting a new mission: training all F-102 pilots in the United States for the Air National Guard.
On 6 May 1971 the unit received F-101F fighter interceptors and became the training center for all Air Guard interceptors. In August 1974, after 14 years of service, the unit's F-102s were retired, but the unit maintained a full fleet of F-101s.
Which gets back to why the unit didn't really mind losing a -102 pilot a little early. Since he had indicated that he was not staying on after his obligated time anyway, they would not want to waste time (and money) retraining him into a -101 instructor pilot. They probably had plenty of already trained 101 pilots coming off active duty to pick from, and they knew the -102s were going away.
And didn't we used to put CCs on the bottom of memos?
Look at the size of the letters in SUBJECT and then OETR. They appear to be different sizes. That would be a neat trick on a typewriter.
You can find a scanned sample from an IBM Executive here: http://www.microsparc.com/news.htm
Blow up both documents. It is clearly NOT the same typeface. The top and bottom of an "S" on a real Executive are symmetrical. In the CBS document, the "S" has a smaller top than bottom. A type designer would find 1000 differences in a minute.
The Executive was a type bar machine. You can't change the font.
The Executive was the only machine in wide enough use to be a plausible source of actual proportional spacing in a typewritten document.
QED, the "Killian memos" in his "personal file" are forgeries.
That might be an artifact from the fax machine. Bad vertical registration. Dirty paper. A cheap attempt at "antiquing" the document.
The are not fakes. If they were, they would be more damning. As it is, all they do is confirm the Bush timeline and story. The only new infomation is that Bush had a strained relationship with one boss. Big deal.
Yes, Selectric fonts have distinctive features, like reeeealy looong serifs on the bottoms of "i"s so that they would not be too narrow.
Sorry dude.
Unless Arlen Specter can come up with a magic typewriter, these were made on a PC.
I can say it easily. I HAVE read the purported memos themselves.
In addition, I've posted the link to CBS's story numerous times (and at their site are the links to the memos) and I've highlighted the dubious way CBS obtained the documents. I've been plain as day that CBS and the secrecy shrouding who gave them the records is very suspicious.
But the memos themselves vindicate Bush.
I don't know why you are pointing out to me the documents don't come from Bush's file. I certainly NEVER said any such thing, and in fact have been posting numerous times that they do not.
Alert: ABC radio news just reported the Bush campaign is outright accusing the Kerry Kamp of coordinating with the media in the release of these memos and the spin that was then attached to them.
concur
I think they should keep quiet and let us do this.
Yep, the guy at "Little Green Footballs" has come up with the most convincing evidence yet imo.
concur, he might have typed it himself; but back then, most LTCs did not know how to type; and the unit clerk/typists typed a lot of very confidential info and were expected to be professional and loyal about it.
I was very surprised they took (according to the reporterette---needless to say, I'd like to hear or see the B/C statement myself) such an aggressive stance.
Perhaps they do see something hinky here?
Keep an ear out for this.
I just found this on Powerline:
UPDATE 5: Reader Timothy Sampson writes:
There is no confirmation of authenticity by the White House. See Kevin Drum's update:
I now have copies of the memos the White House released, and they are just versions that CBS faxed to the White House the day before the 60 Minutes segment aired. There's no indication that the White House had its own copies of these memos and had been sitting on them. Apologies.
Good point about the Lt. Colonel; I did not catch that - certainly not a standard signature block.
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.