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

Skip to comments.

ANG Docs are Fake
Hank All-American | September 9, 2004 | Hank All-American

Posted on 09/09/2004 12:16:21 PM PDT by Hank All-American

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 last
To: GoLightly
I'm talking about right above the keyboard, on the vertical rise. Looking at the picture you posted on #85, there are 4 levers, two on either side of the IBM logo. Amidst one of the other threads about this today, there was a picture of a more modern machine & there were levers all of the way across.

Got you. I have no idea what those are for.

Anyway, my general point is to be cautious with the evidence of proportional spacing (certainly available and not uncommon at the time) and the superscript "st" (which may or may not have been available - some here recall using such a key, but one would need IBM catalog or other material to prove it was available) as proof of forgery.

121 posted on 09/09/2004 2:01:21 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: 1L
Bush won't sue, but I think if this turns out to be true (fakes), 60 Minutes is finished.

They have been caught several times faking stories, and they are still there.

Kudos for the freepers Shawn Hannity just gave us a big thumbs up for uncovering this story. Some freeper sent him a heads up on this. Also said Drudge has it as lead story.

(I exclude myself from those kudos since I am mostly a reader/griper)

122 posted on 09/09/2004 2:04:25 PM PDT by itsahoot (Sometimes the truth hurts, sometimes it makes a difference, but not often.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American
5--No way there were superscripts back then. No way.

Others have said that the IBM Executive typewriter did have superscript th and st.

Others say, no way would the TANG have such up-to-date equipment. Be careful. The Lt. Col. wrote this on plain paper. Remember, NG guys were weekend warriors. Is there any proof that he used a TANG typewriter? Or could he possibly have typed it at home or at his job?

123 posted on 09/09/2004 2:05:47 PM PDT by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ops33

The format is wrong.
The correct format in the 70"s would be:

RTAO: (Reply to Attention Of)
Subject:
TO:

Also, the signature block would be on the left margin.

Retired Chief. Have a great Air Force day.


124 posted on 09/09/2004 2:07:29 PM PDT by ThomasPaine2000 (Peace without freedom is tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American

Regarding the PO Box number, a search on '"p o box 34567"' shows up five pages of results, mostly in Africa.

'"p o box 34567" squadron' and '"p o box 34567" ellington' (the 111th was based at Ellington AFB) return zero results.


125 posted on 09/09/2004 2:26:28 PM PDT by ScottFromSpokane (Re-elect President Bush: http://spokanegop.org/bush.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American

Here's something interesting:

http://www.hd.co.harris.tx.us/pcd/ViolationNotices/1991HCPCDVNs.htm

This is a 1991 list of Texas Health Department violations, and it gives PO Box 34567, Houston, as the address of "Ashland Chemical Company, A Division of Ashland Oil, Incorporated."


126 posted on 09/09/2004 2:30:05 PM PDT by ScottFromSpokane (Re-elect President Bush: http://spokanegop.org/bush.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
LOL Now I want to create my own.

Some one already beat you to it.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1211227/posts?page=29

Post 29 on this very thread

127 posted on 09/09/2004 2:31:56 PM PDT by itsahoot (Sometimes the truth hurts, sometimes it makes a difference, but not often.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: struwwelpeter

Here's an example of a letter from 1972 evidently done on the same kind of typewriter:

http://www.genetunney.com/letter8.html

This font thing may not have legs.


128 posted on 09/09/2004 2:32:51 PM PDT by montrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks; All

Isn't it likely that Dan won't be in today? I'm think John Roberts will conviently be at the desk tonight.


129 posted on 09/09/2004 2:33:08 PM PDT by faithincowboys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Yes. I was talking to him and reacting to his fine work.


130 posted on 09/09/2004 2:36:15 PM PDT by Petronski (With what? Spitballs!?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: montrose

The 1972 letter you posted looks real. The ANG docs do not. The question is not whether Times New Roman was available in 1972, the question is whether Times New Roman was available with superscript and smart quotes in 1972. The answer is no.

Also, look at the size of the font in the 1972 letter you posted. Much larger, as would be expected.

You may be able to explain away one discrepancy at a time, but remember folks, its the totality of them that counts.


131 posted on 09/09/2004 2:43:08 PM PDT by Hank All-American (Free Men, Free Minds, Free Markets baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American

Welcome to FR


132 posted on 09/09/2004 2:44:18 PM PDT by clamper1797 (This Vietnam Vet is NOT Fonda kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American

I thought people were arguing that the font style is anachronistic as well as proportionalality. That seems clearly not to be the case.

So now the argument revolves around the superscript and quotes?


133 posted on 09/09/2004 2:46:35 PM PDT by montrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: montrose

It's already been established that typewriters with proportional typefaces were available in the early 1970s.

Incidentally, the Tunney letter is clearly not written in the same typeface as the alleged memos: the "legs" of the "M" appear to slant outwards, the downstroke of the "7" is curved, the downstroke of the "9" reaches below the line, and the "P" and "B" appear to be wider.


134 posted on 09/09/2004 2:50:54 PM PDT by ScottFromSpokane (Re-elect President Bush: http://spokanegop.org/bush.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: montrose

I never discussed the font, if you will notice. I think it's unlikely that font would have been used, in that size, but I did not use that as an indicator. I think superscripting and smart quotes are much stronger. But remember, there are a number of other discrepancies, too. The last time I saw a P.O Box numbered 34567, it was from a deposed general from the Congo who needed me to help him secretly move millions of dollars from a Nigerian bank account. But look, no matter what, the signature on the "01 August 1972" memo was cut and pasted. No question about it.


135 posted on 09/09/2004 2:55:09 PM PDT by Hank All-American (Free Men, Free Minds, Free Markets baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: faithincowboys

There are many things about this story, but "clear" is not one of them. The case is falling apart and then what are we left with? Downplaying the content of memos that we previously said were crass forgeries by political operatives?


136 posted on 09/09/2004 2:56:35 PM PDT by montrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American
Is anyone reporting this, we need to get on this with an e-mail/call in campaign.

I also had an idea, what if we were to organize into a ping list of freepers who will try to contact as many as possible in the up coming days. We all know what kind of full of $#it slime-bags Rats are, they are only going to get more desperate as they see their traitor Johns get flushed. A ready and willing group of freeper minutemen who will help mount a get out the truth campaign at a minutes notice may be helpful.

We could also recruit some who know how to set up form letters and petions that can be posted for freepers to simply sign and send.

137 posted on 09/09/2004 3:04:06 PM PDT by nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American

bookmarking


138 posted on 09/09/2004 3:12:55 PM PDT by TheSarce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montrose

The thing that gets me is the BG's involvement in this. They are the ones that said GIs raped Iraqi women on the basis of a really not credible picture.

And the fact that it is a dead guy and a well known Bush hater (Rather) and a well known Kerry fundraiser (Barnes) makes everyone suspicious.


139 posted on 09/09/2004 3:32:34 PM PDT by faithincowboys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Hank All-American

You would think "they" would have had an old retired company clerk review this stuff before "they" publish this trash.


140 posted on 09/09/2004 4:25:42 PM PDT by Calamari (Pass enough laws and everyone is guilty of something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 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