Killian Signed a Doc with a Different Typeface and Other Diffs One Year Later (FR EXCLUSIVE)

Bush ANG Doc Dump Feb. 2004 ^ | February 14, 2004 | Bush ANG Doc Dump Feb. 2004

[litany_of_lies]

So, I wondered, what does the document dump from six months ago have in it that would support or refute the CBS Killian docs?

I posted a clearly contradictory doc on one of my URLs as a JPEG that all should be able to see.

This is Page 16 of Document 15 listed on a page containing the Bsush-ANG docs that I am not allowed to link to per FR rules (sorry), which is why I had to post it myself (Admin mod, this is public record stuff, so I see no reason why you kill this thread).

On Page 16 of that PDF document is a note, clearly pre-typed (secretary's initials are redacted below where W's signature would have been), where W is asking for discharge and reassignment.

Below the space for W's signature is the space for Kilian's with the indicator "SIGNED."

Note that for starters:

1. the doc is in a traditional courier font.

2. it's signed "JERRY B KILLIAN, Lt Col, TexANG (line break), Commander" vs. "JERRY B. KILLIAN (line break) Lt. Colonel" on CBS's probable forgeries.

3. the dating style is different (5 Sep 1973 in the USAT doc vs. 01 August 1972 in one of the CBS docs)

Re each item:

1. I'm supposed to believe that Killian's secretary DOWNGRADED to an old-tech typerwriter between August 1972 and Sept. 1973.

2. In a highly regimented environement, I'm supposed to believe that there is such a big difference in how a commanding officer would sign documents.

3. The dating style has been mentioned before, but calling the first of August "01" is, I belive something no one did until computers became widely used and databases started demanding two digits for every date.

I'm sure there are other points to be made here, so have at it.

[weaponeer]

Also note that the signature block is left justified, as is normal for military correspondence, and the forgeries have the sig block on the right, only used for correspondence going to civilian entities.

[litany_of_lies]

Now THAT is an impressive piece of work.

It just gets deeper and deeper......

[VRWCTexan]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/1-Enlistment_Packet.pdf

Someone with the tech skills please go to the above website - you can cut and paste the actual signature and signature block from at least two of Bush's documents for Killian - they do not match the CBS signature

[tophat9000]

Because this is written as a letter from Bush for Killian to sign for permission to leave the guard, It can be argued in this case that this letter was not type on Killian typewriter

[Azzurri]

That font clearly looks like Courier, not the fancy-pancy stuff on the falsified documents!

[bin2baghdad]

It may not prove anything. If 1LT Bush (or a clerk) prepared the memo, he may have also prepared the endorsement. It all appears to be on-line, something that wouldn't be the case if the paper had been reinserted into a typewriter. If the someone else prepared the memo, then the style may not be Killian's own.

[Rokke]

Let me clarify....Traditionally, the line under your name in the signature block refers to your specific position. Nobody in the military cares who types a document, so I doubt the line has anything to do with a secretary.

[litany_of_lies]

Great point.

Didn't know about distinction between military correspondence to civilians vs. other military.

[OHelix]

Is the significance of being able to read the marked over section evidence it was marked out AFTER it was copied?

[flevit]

thanks,

now, would this (or the bottom part of memo) be from the killian typewritter? were there more than one in the "office"

[MagnumRancid]

This document looks more like the real thing. What strikes me the most is the

FROM:
SUBJECT:
TO:

I was in the USAF 1973-80. That was how we did it. The questionable documents just don't look military enough.

[colorado tanker]

This signature makes more sense to me, even though I'm Army. We would sign, XXX. LTC, USA or USAR or whatever Guard, Commanding. I understand the Air Force signs Commander instead of Commanding and uses the abbreviation Lt. Col. It just seems goofy that the questioned documents do not identify the source of the commission (TexANG in this case) which in my experience is routine.

[Rokke]

Thanks. I have absolutely no expertise on that and marvel at those who do. You guys are doing a great job tearing down the old media.

[litany_of_lies]

Because this is written as a letter from Bush for Killian to sign for permission to leave the guard, It can be argued in this case that this letter was not typed on Killian typewriter.

I realize that it's a possible out, but you'd have to believe that the base had other secretaries (somewhat possible), and that the secretary had different equipment (again possible), but the likelihood diminishes with each possibility.

This thread isn't meant to be conclusive, but it is certainly a useful supplement.

[MagnumRancid]

You are correct.
USAF used the dd/MON/yy format.

[tophat9000]

Is the significance of being able to read the marked over section evidence it was marked out AFTER it was copied?

See my post:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1211008/posts?page=93#93

[bvw]

You see, if this doument had come up about Saddam Hussein's military serivce in the Iraqi National Guard, Dan Mister Rather would have procliamed it a forgery sight unseen. Love Saddam, Hate Bush. Just the way it is.

Does anyone remember that tragic California Freeway earthquake where ol' moldhead Dan flew out first flight and plopped himself at an anchordesk overlooking the section of freeway most likely to contain dead and crushed people. He was positiviely gloating then -- waxing on and on -- over how many "poor souls" where crushed horribly beneath the griders and concrete.

A day or two went by -- with anchor vulture Dan on station.

Finally the S&R crews uncovered all what was to be uncovered.-- only one or two cars -- tragic for that. But moldhead Dan was crestfallen. Not dozens and hundreds.

Oh the humanity of it.

[OHelix]

Is the significance of being able to read the marked over section evidence it was marked out AFTER it was copied?

So that would be a YES? :o)

[litany_of_lies]

Actually (correct me if I'm wrong), it's either "d" or "dd" depending on the day of the month.

One of CBS's forgeries has the date "01 August 1972" and another is "04 May 1972"

Both of these are at odds with the format of the letter on this thread, and actually all four are at odds with the yy format you identified.

[Timeout]

I discovered the same thing when I printed the document. I just posted that address on another thread...it showed clearly through the marker when I printed it.