Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are the Killian Memos Fakes?
Powerline ^ | September 9, 2004 | Big Trunk at Powerline

Posted on 09/09/2004 6:42:06 AM PDT by Sue Bob

The Globe story is itself based on last night's 60 Minutes report: "New questions on Bush Guard duty." The online version of the 60 Minutes story has links to the memos. Killian died in 1984; CBS states that it "consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic." Reader Tom Mortensen writes:

Every single one of the memos to file regarding Bush's failure to attend a physical and meet other requirements is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing (especially in the military), and typewriters used mono-spaced fonts.

The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction high-end word processing systems from Xerox and Wang, and later 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 and other systems that were dominant in the mid 80's used mono-spaced fonts. I doubt the TANG had typesetting or high-end 1st generation word processing systems.

I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.

(Excerpt) Read more at powerlineblog.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2004; ang; awol; bush; cbs; killian
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 261-265 next last
To: Sacajaweau

You are correct and this whole matter was put to rest 4 years ago. The Dims are out of fresh ideas - what a shame!


61 posted on 09/09/2004 7:25:37 AM PDT by UseYourHead (This November, remember who the terrorists are voting for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SengirV

It should be easy to get in touch with his secretary or secretaries who worked in his office at that time. They should remember pretty clearly what kind of typewriter they used to type stuff. I still clearly remember the old manual I used to take my Civil Service Clerk Typist Test back in 1964, then got the job with NASA which had the IBM ball typewriter with symbols on it I had never seen before.


62 posted on 09/09/2004 7:25:52 AM PDT by Twinkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: faithincowboys

"Was CYA used back then?"

yes . . . The acronym was common, as was the tendency to document things for future recall, in case the issue came back to haunt the commander. IOW it was to protect the commander's career, if need be in the future; not to malign Bush's . . .


63 posted on 09/09/2004 7:26:30 AM PDT by AMDG&BVMH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: eno_

To simplify the problem, the key to detecting a forgery here may be carriage travel:

Modern non-impact printers have essentially infinitely variable "carriage travel" because, of course, there is no carriage. Variable spacing in typewriters is accomplished by permitting a relatively small number of choices in carriage travel between each character. This has to be designed into the fonts, too.

Therefore, it should be detectable, in a very general way, if a document was written on a typewriter, or if the memos are a "chop."


64 posted on 09/09/2004 7:27:52 AM PDT by eno_ (Freedom Lite, it's almost worth defending.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

I don't have a theory other than Evil Dums are liars, and their fellow travelers are liars. Actually it's not a theory but the FACTS.


65 posted on 09/09/2004 7:27:52 AM PDT by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: AMDG&BVMH; All

I think I need more than your assurance that it was. How old are you anyway?


66 posted on 09/09/2004 7:28:32 AM PDT by faithincowboys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: creepycrawly

The TODAY show said they "were released by the Whitehouse"


67 posted on 09/09/2004 7:28:46 AM PDT by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Not popular in proportional fonts in 1972. Read the history of Selectrics, e.g., with proportional fonts. There is a website.

More interesting to me is that the 04May1972 memo has a neatly done superscript in item 2. Proportional font or not, this is not what typewriters did in 1972.

68 posted on 09/09/2004 7:29:23 AM PDT by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

You're right. The IBM selectrics had interchangeable balls with different fonts. I remember a boss I had around that time saying that he wished he had invented it.


69 posted on 09/09/2004 7:30:57 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

What I find particularly interesting is how the media (including Fox to some degree) manages to interpret these memos, and how few of them ever read them entirely. You know, on the Scott Peterson case, which is relatively of no national importance, Court TV and others manage to reproduce transcripts on the screen as they read what's on them. Yet the news media just "describes" these memos, in terms that suit their agenda(s).

That said, however, I'm still troubled by the differences in signatures.


70 posted on 09/09/2004 7:31:19 AM PDT by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
The IBM Executive typewriter, available at that time, created documents with proportional spacing. The military had lots and lots of them.

Very true,

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.

I know because I used them during the mid 60's (while in the US Army, and sold them to the military during the 70's and early 80's.

71 posted on 09/09/2004 7:32:04 AM PDT by Freeper (I was culture in the 60's and now with Clinton "running things" I am suddenly Counter-Culture.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Chaguito
More interesting to me is that the 04May1972 memo has a neatly done superscript in item 2.

Nice.

This is looking more and more like Christmas in Cambodia.

72 posted on 09/09/2004 7:33:03 AM PDT by eno_ (Freedom Lite, it's almost worth defending.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: twigs

It cannot be a IBM selectrics, because they had fixed sized characters. Because the font is proportional, it was most probably either a IBM Executive or a forgery.


73 posted on 09/09/2004 7:34:48 AM PDT by igoramus987
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

I did some clerk typist duties in the Army in 75. I had a manual typewriter. An IBM would have been nice.. but I don't think they made it down into the trenches.


74 posted on 09/09/2004 7:35:06 AM PDT by tje
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

I saw some general differences in some signatures but assign it to fitting a signature into a box. My thought is one was going to cook up documents they'd at least make them damaging to GWB.

For those who haven't read them, here they are. Scroll down to links in this CBS article (which--SURPRISE!--completely distorts the contents):

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/08/60II/main641984.shtml


75 posted on 09/09/2004 7:36:30 AM PDT by cyncooper (We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

Sheesh, I take just a few hours off FR, and I'm WAYYY behind....

Killian memos?!? 60 Minutes II?? (who watches that? snicker)...

Seriously though. I have some catching up to do.


76 posted on 09/09/2004 7:36:37 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
If you found a memo in my files and tried to interpret it, I'd more than likely say "You're way off base".

The fact that it took a sideshow interpreter to interpret these memos tells me "they're quessing" based on their agenda. It's a dead issue as far as I can see and Blather and friend received their paycheck!

77 posted on 09/09/2004 7:37:04 AM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Chaguito

You are correct.

The Selectrics looked nice, but the typefaces are NOTHING like a modern word processor and non-impact printer.

There are even detectable differences in word processing software: Many programs can't grok kerning, so you can tell if a document was prepared on one program or another, even if they use the same font.


78 posted on 09/09/2004 7:37:14 AM PDT by eno_ (Freedom Lite, it's almost worth defending.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: igoramus987

You may be right...


79 posted on 09/09/2004 7:37:18 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: moehoward; creepycrawly
No, the memos were NOT releasted by the White House:

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."

80 posted on 09/09/2004 7:38:23 AM PDT by Howlin (I'm mad as Zell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 261-265 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson