Posted on 09/09/2004 9:17:58 AM PDT by mingusthecat
UPDATE: Thanks to all the readers who have written regarding this post. Several have pointed out that the Executive line of IBM typewriters did have proportionally spaced fonts, although no reader has found the font used in the memos to be a familiar one or thought that the an IBM Executive was likely to have been used by the National Guard in the early 1970's. Reader Monty Walls has also cited the IBM Selectric Composer. However, reader Eric Courtney adds this wrinkle: The "Memo To File" of August 18, 1973 also used specialized typesetting characters not used on typewriters. These include the superscript "th" in 187th, and consistent ’ (right single quote) used instead of a typewriter's generic ' (apostrophe). These are the sorts of things that typesetters did manually until the advent of smart correction in things like Microsoft Word. UPDATE 2: Reader John Risko adds: I was a clerk/typist for the US Navy at the Naval Underwater Systems Center (NUSC) in Newport RI for my summer job in 1971 when I was in college. I note the following with regard to the Killian memos:
1) Tom Mortensen is absolutely correct. Variable type was used only for special printing jobs, like official pamphlets. These documents are forgeries, and not even good ones. Someone could have at least found an old pre-Selectric IBM (introduced around 1962). Actually, I believe we were using IBM Model C's at the time, which was the precursor to the Selectric.
2) I also used a Variype machine in 1971. I fooled around with it in my spare time. It was incredibly difficult to set up and use. It was also extremely hard to correct mistakes on the machine. Most small letters used two spaces. Capital letters generally used three spaces. I think letters like "i" may have used one space. Anyway, you can see that this type of machine was piloted by an expert, and it would NEVER be used for a routine memo. A Lt. Colonel would not be able to identify a Varitype machine, let alone use it.
3) US Navy paper at the time was not 8 1/2 x 11. It was 8 x 10 1/2. I believe this was the same throughout the military, but someone will have to check on that. This should show up in the Xeroxing, which should have lines running along the sides of the Xerox copy.
4) I am amused by the way "147 th Ftr.Intrcp Gp." appears in the August 1, 1972 document. It may have been written that way in non-forged documents, but as somone who worked for ComCruDesLant, I know the military liked to bunch things together. I find "147 th" suspicious looking. 147th looks better to me, but the problem with Microsoft Word is that it keeps turning the "th" tiny if it is connected to a number like 147. And finally......
5) MORE DEFINITIVE PROOF OF FORGERY: I had neglected even to look at the August 18, 1973 memo to file. This forger was a fool. This fake document actually does have the tiny "th" in "187th" and there is simply no way this could have occurred in 1973. There are no keys on any typewriter in common use in 1973 which could produce a tiny "th." The forger got careless after creating the August 1, 1972 document and slipped up big-time.
In summary, the variable type reveals the Killian memos to be crude forgeries, the tiny "th" confirms it in the 8/18/73 memo, and I offer my other points as icing on the cake.
Point.
60 Minutes Spokesperson: Kelli Edwards 212-975-6795
Anyone out there remember the feel of a typewritten paper?
Could there be a chance these papers were forged by people wanting to help President Bush cover something up? I am totally in support of our President, but we need to remember that if this probable forgery gets attention there will be those in the press thinking Bush did something to cover up and not the other way around. I sure hope that someone can make Dan Rather look (more) like a dufus for bringing these papers up.
Rather said last night that these did not come from the Pentagon but from an un-named source.
After Drudge ran with this and Rush mentioned it, the Powerline Blog HAS CRASHED!!!
WHERE IS THE MEMO ANSWER? THE ONLINE IBM SELECTRIC MUSEUM, OF COURSE [09/09 02:59 PM]
Kerry Spot reader Ed is awesome. He points us to the Selectric Typewriter Museum at http://www.selectric.org/selectric/index.html
(Sigh. Silly me! I had just been thinking about taking Mrs. Kerry Spot to the Selectric Typewriter Museum the other day.)
The available fonts are listed there:
10 Pitch Type Styles: Advocate, Bookface Academic 72, Delegate, Orator, Courier 72, Pica 72, Prestige Pica 7212 Pitch Type Styles: Adjutant, Artisan 12, Courier 12 Italic, Scribe, Prestige Elite, Courier 12, Elite 72, Letter Gothic
Special Typing Applications: Light Italic, Script, Printing ANSI-OCR, Symbol 10, 108 OCR, Manifold 72, Symbol 12
To my layman's eye, none of those fonts look quite like Times New Roman, or the font on the CBS memo.
"Rather said last night that these did not come from the Pentagon but from an un-named source."
Oh, ok thanks.....that's what I get for not watching. (I just couldn't do it) Now I'm REALLY FRIGGIN MAD about this!
The question i have is why there would be multiple generation copies of the letters, if they were in Killian's personal files?
Wouldn't they be originals or perhaps carbons intead of copies of copies of copies.
Or is the copying only done to obscure the origins of the documents? This doesn't smell right to me given the provenance of the documents.
The initials were not written by the same hand as the signature; the signature flows and has characteristics that do not appear in the initials.
This signature is much closer to the initials in #46 than to the signature there.
MY document created in MS Word
My document overlaid on the original. Since my photo editing program will not allow rotating in increments of less than 1 degree, it is not an exact layover, however, it is easy enough to tell that the "Smoking Gun" documents that were mysteriously "found" are fakes.
P.S. Does the P.O. Box "34567" look suspicious to you, too?
...Excerpted from LibertyPost.org:
Title: DESERTER/THE STORY OF GEORGE W. BUSH AFTER HE QUIT THE TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD
=====
...APPENDIX 2—THE “NON-LOCATEE” ADDRESS SEQUENCE...
Bush’s request for discharge from TXANG, dated September 5, 1973, does not contain any information regarding where mail should be sent, despite noting that Bush was moving to Boston.
Nevertheless, Bush’s discharge papers (dated 10/1/73) indicate that TXANG had changed Bush’s official address. Under “Permanent Address For Mailing Purposes”, the discharge papers say “Harvard Business School, Boston, Mass 02263.”
However, this is not the first place where a “Harvard Business School” address occurs. In his indorsement of Bush’s discharge (dated 9/18/73), Major Bobby Hodges (Commander of the 147 Fighter Interceptor Group) listed Bush’s “HOR” as “Harvard Business School, Soldiers Field, Boston, Mass 02263.”
It is this same address that is included in the written orders (dated 10/16/73) that accompanied Bush’s discharge itself.
Of particular note is that this is actually an incorrect address for Harvard Business School. There is no “02263” zip code, and Harvard Business School’s actual zip code is 02163.
It should also be noted that, despite this address appearing on three separate documents in the Bush files, there is no evidence that either Bush or TXANG ever officially notified ARPC (through the required “change of address” procedures) that Bush was no longer living in Texas.
In fact, it can be determined that no official change of address occurred prior to October 1, 1973. Bush’s payroll report for the third (calendar) quarter of 1973 (which could only have been generated on or after 10/1/73) listed Bush’s “check address” as “#4, 2910 Westheimer, Houston, TX 77006.”
And it is to this “Westheimer” address that the “Retirement Credit Summary” that was “prepared” on January 30, 1974, and that notes that Bush’s status had been changed to “Inactive”, was sent..
Bush’s failure to respond to mail is confirmed by the use of a different address in a document that was mailed to Bush on March 7, 1974, a mere five weeks after January 30. “5000 Longmont, Apt B, Houston TX 77027” was the address that Bush listed as his residence when he signed up for TXANG in 1968. However, he had not lived at that address for at least three years on March 7, 1974.
There are two possible reasons why the Longmont address would have been used. The first is that “5000 Longmont” was the address that Bush had listed as the home of his parents on the “emergency data” form that Bush had filled out for the Air Force in 1968.
However, it appears that the “Longmont” address may have only been the “official” address being used by George HW Bush in 1968 when he was a congressman from Harris County (Houston), Texas. GHWB had built a “family home” on Briar Lane in Houston when he first moved to that city in 1959 after hitting it big in the oil business. (The GWHB archives contain documents indicating that he stilled owned the Briar Lane property in 1971, after he had left Congress, and contemporary articles about GWHB and Barbara Bush reference the fact that they currently live in the “family home” built by Bush.)
The second explanation for the use of this address is that “Longmont” may have been the most recent address that Bush’s local draft board had on file for him. APRC and Selective Service policies guaranteed that there would have been communication between the Air Force and Bush’s Houston draft board, especially when Bush was placed on “Inactive Status”, and ARPC may have found this address on such communication.
Bush’s official address had changed once again by May 1, 1974, when ARPC notified Bush that upon the completion of his MSO, Bush would be transferred to the “Inactive Standby Reserve List Section (ISLRS). Mail was being sent to “Harvard Business School” address, but this time with the correct (02163) zip code.
Bush at this point finally does provide ARPC a street address in an undated letter in which he requests information about how to get out of the “Standby Reserve”.
The Air Force made the appropriate change in Bush’s personnel data, because the final entry in the Bush papers (dated November 21, 1974) are sent to “mail to” address indicated by Bush in the undated letter.
This address sequence, especially the inclusion of the ”Longmont” address, can only be explained if Bush was not responding to significant communications from the Air Force, and in fact was being treated as a “non-locatee.” Bush’s status as a “non-locatee” provides the explanation for his being placed on “inactive status” on or around January 30th, 1974, and the fact that the Longmont address is used over a month after that date indicates that he remained a “non-locatee” for some time.
Excerpted from LibertyPost.org:
Title: DESERTER/THE STORY OF GEORGE W. BUSH AFTER HE QUIT THE TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD
Wouldn't they be originals or perhaps carbons intead of copies of copies of copies.
Or is the copying only done to obscure the origins of the documents? This doesn't smell right to me given the provenance of the documents.
Exactly. And Killian's been dead for 20 years. Why would his widow keep his work-related personal files for that long? There's an assumption through all the MSM's writing about Bush in the National Guard that W was from a powerful family that is comparable to the Kennedys. GHWB was a 2-term Republican Congressman in a Democratic state who couldn't even get elected as senator in 1970. He lost to Lloyd Bentsen for the Senate race. Heck, W wasn't even close to having a father as the biggest name even in his own unit; Lloyd Bentsen's son and John Tower's son were also in the unit, IIRC, and their fathers were much more powerful at the time than GHWB was.
Anyhow, back to my point of keeping these records. W, by all accounts, was not exactly future presidential material at the time Killian died. It makes no sense that Killian would have hung onto such files, or that his widow would have had them 20 years after his death. And if, hypothetically, Killian and his widow had hung onto these files to use them against W in the future, wouldn't the time to do that have been 1994, when he first ran for governor, or 2000? Why now?
Only if you had the original documents. These look like 10th generation copies which itself is odd for a memo for a personal memo file.
I'm wondering if at the time, a carbon copy was more likely than a Xerox?
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.