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.
This is taken from IBM's own website. The link is in the image. This is a document written in 1967 which describes the keyboard layout for the Selectric typewriter. It is from the designers. In this image you can see the "golfball" and below, the letters that can be typed. There is no superscript "th" to be found among them.
CBS. Proven liars.
This is an email that Jonah Goldberg just posted on the Corner, what say you?
"Jonah:
Interesting theory, but...
When I was stationed at Patrick AFB (1971-74), I distinctly recall our office (Office of Public Information) had a correcting IBM proportional typewriter along with our standard-issue Selectrics. Nobody wanted to use the damn thing. It was a pain in the butt to use because to backspace you had to use a table that prescribed the number of "ens" for each letter for both upper and lower case. I believe (but I'm not sure) that the typeface was some form of Times-Roman rather than Courrier.
Before my recollections are questioned, I want to assure you that the AF Good Conduct Medal listed on my DD214 is entirely legitimate"
I wonder if any from the Main Stream Media (MSM) will jump on this? Nah, it's not "news," just like "is" isn't is and "sex" isn't sex.
By the way, here is the link if you'd like to see it for yourself...
http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/121/ibmrd1201E.pdf
I am starting to agree that the argument that there was no proportional typing back then is without water. HOWEVER, I do believe that the abnormal abbreviations and the tiny superscript "th" are the THmoking gun.
Wowie! Great catch, and how great that looks side by side.
The keyboard is not proof. There were machines with a minute amount of memory.
"With the Selectric, however, only one key can be pressed at a time, and if there is only a momentary lag, the machine prints the characters in sequence; there cannot be an overstrike since there is only the single printing element. This feature was highlighted as a memory or stroke storage."
http://www.deadmedia.org/notes/17/170.html
I recall using something like that too, but it was so long ago that I don't remember details.
I don't know how it was in the Air Force but I have a nickname for my Navy GCM -- It's my "Didn't Get Caught" Medal. :=)
if it was a copy to his personal file, why would it even be signed? at best it would be initialed as reviewed wouldnt it? my brass never signed anything unless it was required
The May 4th memo also has an example of it for the "111th" on point #2. I'm telling you, the Selectric was probably the most common typewriter of that era & it had proportional spacing. It may have also had the superscript feature, but I haven't been able to find any proof if it yet.
I think this is a tempist in a teacup. I don't see why or how the content in any of these memos is all that damning.
Someone needs to run all this by Mr. Abagnale, (Catch me if you can) living happily ever after in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Eerybody is concentrating on the type as the primary evidence, I think the signatures are the primary evidence and these type differences are the secondary.
Still not rock-solid they are fake, but knowing CBS, I would highly suspect the docs!
Time to blow CBS out of the water once and for all, for basing a hit piece on clumsy forgeries.
Not a single print at that site has superscripted th or st.
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.