[rocklobster11]

Here's info on what Dan Rather will be discussing. Note that it doesn't prove the documents to be real:

Since I posted the original article, I've learned a bit more. Take a look at the image below:

The first line is some stuff I pulled from the forged memo and the second line is taken from the official Bush document. Here's what I know now:

• The font on the second line is not proportional, and none of Bush's documents are proportional
• The superscript in the official document appears to have an underlines superscript ( ^th ), which may have been available as a special key on some typewriters, but there is no confirmation of this yet. The forged document has no underline
• The superscript in the forged memo is raised above the line, while the real document doesn't extend above the line. To believe the forgery, you have to believe that Killian turned the typerwirte 1/2 noth up to type the ^th then back down.
• the "4" in the date of the forged document is closed at the top (as opposed to the 4 in the second line image above) which has not been found to be on any typewriter font available at the time. This is a feature that has often been used by experts to find forgeries.
• Supposedly, the vertical spacing is 13 points in the forgery, which doesn't match typewriter spacing.

[Yaelle]

Thank you... I also thought that I had seen a raised "th" in typed letters from England when I was small, and I remember too that the "th" was always underlined. So the superscript ALONE is not the point, but the KIND of superscripting is.

[RobRoy]

Yer gettin' too anal. The non forged document is in courier and the "superscript" stays within the height of the other fonts.

These are completely different and not even comparable.

In a cursory comparison however, they do seem to be both in english.