** CBS Bombshell - PROOF of foregery OR authenticity IS POSSIBLE - NG-FOIA REQUEST COMING

9-11 Commemoration | September 11, 2004 | Me

[woodb01]

PAGE 1

TRANSMITTAL MEMO BY FAX and U.S. MAIL

September 11, 2004

 

FOIA Recipient;

 

            It has come to my attention that the CBS 60 Minutes program, with Dan Rather, has aired documents purportedly from a military Colonel, with the apparent intent to malign the current Commander in Chief, George W. Bush.  These documents also appear to impugn the character of Col. Walter B. "Buck" Staudt (Retired, 1972).

 

            Dan Rather and CBS News have “produced” supposed memoranda, which are the subject of great controversy, from Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian (deceased, 1984).  The controversy stems from the fact that these memoranda, in all respects, appear to be forgeries where Dan Rather of CBS 60 Minutes on behalf of himself, and on behalf of CBS, is vouching for their authenticity after having the validity of the documents called into question.  By adhering to the document’s purported authenticity, while there are easily verifiable problems with the documents in question, both Dan Rather and CBS News have now accepted full responsibility and liability for the authenticity of these memos.

           

            There is a very simple way to resolve this conclusively, with copies of ANY memoranda, duty reports, or Officer Effectiveness Reports.  These documents, from before, during, and after the dates in question will conclusively demonstrate the following related to the late Lt. Col. Killian:

 

ü       Style of writing

ü       Use of military notations and abbreviations

ü       Signature block usage

ü       Typeface of the typewriters that were used by Lt. Col. Killian during that period

 

            It is widely accepted that the documents produced by CBS are forgeries, this additional documentation would be able to provide conclusive proof so that the next steps of pursuing potential criminal actions against both CBS News and Dan Rather may begin:

 

18 U.S.C. 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

18 U.S.C. 372 - Conspiracy to impede or injure officer

18 U.S.C. 494 - Contractors' bonds, bids, and public records

18 U.S.C. 506 - - Seals of departments or agencies (may include military signatures and branch)

18 U.S.C. 1001. - Statements or entries generally

 

            In closing, it is a routine tactic for those on the left to attack and undermine our US Military and those individuals who have served our country.  I will not tolerate this and will not stand by idly while those at CBS News attempt to use a deceased Lt. Col.’s name, for their own personal political agenda, to impugn our current Commander in Chief with what appears to be falsified documentation.

 

            Please consider this a plea to make this request the highest priority, and of the utmost urgency so that this entire matter may be resolved in a very public fashion.  I realize that there is much going on in the military right now, but the nature of this matter is of the utmost urgency.

 

Thank you for your consideration,

[SIGNATURE REMOVED] 

Bill Wood

 

cc:        Viacom - Sumner Redstone - (212) 258-6311

            CBS News President - Andrew Heyward - (212) 975-1893

CBS News Room - (212) 975-1998

Fax Verification – (208)988-2208

 

 

PAGE 2 

 

TO:       Chief, National Guard Bureau             Attn: NGB-JA (FOIA)             1411 Jefferson Davis Highway             Arlington, VA 22202-3231             (703) 607-3195

FROM: Bill Wood  [Contact info redacted]

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST

 

1.       This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 USC 552.

 

2.       I understand the penalties provided in 5 USC 552a(i)(3) for requesting, or obtaining access to records, or information, under false pretenses.

 

3.       If some of this request is exempt from release, please send me those portions reasonably separable or redacted to remove any sensitive or privileged information.

 

4.       This document constitutes my firm promise to pay fees and costs for duplicating the requested records.  Enclosed you shall find a money order in the amount of $100 to cover reasonable copying and clerical fees pursuant to 32 CFR 286.  Please contact me for additional requirements fees if this is not sufficient before continuing.

 

5.       This request is for copies of the following records:

Any memoranda, duty reports, or Officer Effectiveness Reports, personally signed by Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, from the following date ranges:

ü       One (1) or Two (2) documents of any of the above from January 1972 until May 19, 1972.

ü       One (1) or Two (2) documents of any of the above from May 19, 1972 until August 1, 1972.

ü       One (1) or Two (2) documents of any of the above from August 1, 1972 until August 18, 1973

(those closer to August 18, 1973 would be the most beneficial).

ü       One (1) or Two (2) documents of any of the above from August 18, 1973 until September 5, 1973.
 

PAGE 3

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST (cont’d)

 

6.       Please see the accompanying transmittal letter for many of the reasons for this request.  Also, the following summary is offered:

CBS 60 Minutes program, with Dan Rather, promoted a handful of questionable memos, by a now deceased military officer, which “suddenly appeared” after several years of rehashing this same National Guard incident with the current Commander in Chief, George W. Bush.  Meanwhile, hundreds of  living Swiftvets who've signed affidavits and are prepared to testify on camera were ignored.  This tends to increase the likelihood that CBS, Dan Rather, and 60 Minutes may have knowingly been promoting forgeries. 

The documents which form the basis of this request will conclusively demonstrate whether or not the CBS documents which Dan Rather has personally endorsed, and stands behind as a representative of CBS, are in fact forgeries and frauds.  These documents may further serve to demonstrate whether CBS, and in particular Dan Rather, were negligent in not performing even minimal due diligence in verifying and authenticating these documents against existing documentary records.  This would be the proper, non-negligent measure of preparation before disseminating documentation which casts a dark shadow on the military careers of Col. Walter B. "Buck" Staudt (Retired, 1972), Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian (deceased, 1984), and the current Commander in Chief, George W. Bush.  Further, it is assumed this is the proper level of “vetting” the documents before promoting them on the Nationally televised news program, 60 Minutes.

See the attached exhibit as a detailed account of the incident which has given rise to this request.  This attachment is what has caused tremendous suspicion about the authenticity of the documents which Dan Rather and CBS still adhere to as “authentic”.

7.       Please respond within Fourteen (14) business days of this request with the documents, or simply contact me to discuss any progress or additional time needs.

PAGE 4

** NOTE:   The underlined words represent Internet / HTML hyperlinks to the original supporting documentation.

Enumerating All CBS's Memogate Problems
RatherBiased.com ^

Posted on 09/10/2004 10:08:54 PM PDT by RatherBiased.com

September 10, 2004

Dan Rather's defense of himself tonight, while probably impressive to shallow observers was far from convincing. Here's a list of things he ignored, did not properly address, or concealed from viewers. Feel free to send us your suggestions to this live fisking. For the transcript, click here.

Sourcing problems

1. The 72-year-old anchor conveniently did not mention the fact that James Moore, one of his key validative sources, is a left-wing activist and author who has written two anti-Bush books, Bush's Brain, and Bush's War for Reelection. Rather referred to him as "author Jim Moore has written two books on the subject."
2. Not coincidentally, Rather also did not mention that one of its main validators, retired Maj. General Bobby Hodges is accusing 60 Minutes staff of lying to him in order to get him to say the supposed Killian memos were authentic. ABC News has the story:
         "Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Guard, tells ABC News that he feels CBS misled him about the documents they uncovered. According to Hodges, CBS told him the documents were 'handwritten' and after CBS read him excerpts he said, 'well if he wrote them that's what he felt.'
         "Hodges also said he did not see the documents in the 70's and he cannot authenticate the documents or the contents. His personal belief is that the documents have been 'computer-generated' and are a 'fraud.'"

      The Washington Post reported earlier today that CBS considered Hodges its "trump card":

      "A senior CBS official, who asked not to be named because CBS managers did not want to go beyond their official statement, named one of the network's sources as retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, the immediate superior of the documents' alleged author, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian. He said a CBS reporter read the documents to Hodges over the phone and Hodges replied that "these are the things that Killian had expressed to me at the time." 

      "These documents represent what Killian not only was putting in memoranda, but was telling other people," the CBS News official said. "Journalistically, we've gone several extra miles."

PAGE 5

      The official said the network regarded Hodges's comments as "the trump card" on the question of authenticity, as he is a Republican who acknowledged that he did not want to hurt Bush. Hodges, who declined to grant an on-camera interview to CBS, did not respond to messages left on his home answering machine in Texas.

      Looks like jokers are no longer wild.

3. He deliberately ignored statements from Col. Killian's wife and son who said that he hated using typewriters, hardly ever kept notes, and very much liked George W. Bush. In today's Washington Post, CBS conceded that it had not asked his wife to authenticate the letters it claims were written by her husband. Both Killian's widow and son say that the alleged memos are not characteristic of his style and do not believe they are all authentic.
4. Rather did not mention that Ben Barnes, the Democratic lobbyist who is now saying he helped young Bush into the Texas Air National Guard (TANG), has changed his story according to his Republican daughter, Amy. She says that Barnes is making his Bush claims in preparation for his upcoming autobiography and to build up his political profile in the hopes of getting hired by a Kerry administration, all of which he allegedly told her.
5. Also left out by Rather was the fact that one of the CBS documents dated in 1973 refers to pressure that then-Col. Walter B. "Buck" Staudt, had supposedly been applying on Killian to make things easier for Bush. Unfortunately for CBS's case, however, Staudt had retired in 1973.
6. CBS's own paid signature expert (the network featured no typographers or typewriter experts tonight or in Wednesday's report), Marcel Matley, directly undermined CBS's case several years earlier in an essay for the American Law Institute:
    

      "Do not passively accept a copy as the sole basis of a case. Every copy, intentionally or unintentionally, is in some way false to the original. In fact, modern copiers and computer printers are so good that they permit easy fabrication of quality forgeries."
      In his defense tonight, Rather admitted that "the documents CBS started with were also photocopies."

7. The original 60 Minutes report as well as Friday's rebuttal did not feature a single person person who was quoted as coming to Bush's defense who was not on his staff, despite the fact that it is not hard at all to find people who say they served with Bush during the period in which he is accused of being AWOL. The only person that CBS did put on camera hardly provided much support for the documents' authenticity. Rather quoted him as follows (read the rest here.
    

"Well, they are compatible with the way business was done at that time. They are compatible with the man that I remember, Jerry Killian, being. I don't see anything in the documents that are discordant with what were the times, what were the situation and what were the people that were involved."
      Reached by the AP today, Strong was even more lukewarm toward the documents'

 

PAGE 6

authenticity. His former colleague, Retired Col. Maurice Udell called them fakes: "That's not true. I was there. I knew Jerry Killian. I went to Vietnam with Jerry Killian in 1968."

 Typographical problems

1. Although he tried to minimize the typographical concerns raised by many critics, Rather nonetheless tried to defend himself in this area. He failed, however. On the superscript issue, which Rather tried to explain away by throwing out the red herring that "Critics claim typewriters didn't have that ability in the 70s. But some models did."

      The problem with this statement is that Rather fails to list any such typewriters which might have the capability or how an Air National Guard office would be able to afford such expensive machines. Simply showing a photocopy of a letter in Bush's official file which originated from the Army's national office is no proof at all.

2. The split screen image CBS offered of an official Bush document with superscript ordinal suffix and one of its own documents was not very convincing to Sandra Ramsey Lines, a forensic document expert who edits the Journal of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners who told the Associated Press that she "could testify in court that, beyond a reasonable doubt, her opinion was that the memos were written on a computer." She told the AP that she was "virtually certain" the CBS memos are not genuine.  
3. Rather also neglected to mention that all of the documents which were written by Killian himself and his officers relied on simple mechanical typewriters incapable of printing in proportional fonts, let alone superscript.
4. Despite the fact that Jerry Killian hated keeping notes, hated typing things (see above) that National Guard offices mostly use hand-me-down equipment from the full-time armed forces, and that Killian and his Guard officers have not been observed to have ever sent documents printed with proportional fonts, there is a possibility (OK really, really small) that Bush's superviser might have had access to an expensive IBM electric typewriter.

      Assuming Killian somehow had access to an IBM Selectric Composer (or similar model), Blogger Jeff Harrell wondered what one of the CBS memos would look like if typed in one of the re-famous devices. His results are yet more evidence that the CBS docs are forgeries.

5. Dan also appears unfamiliar with fonts and typography. At one point in the rebuttal, he refers to the font used in the CBS documents as "New Times Roman," when the real name is Times New Roman. Rather also appears to be ignorant of the fact that Times New Roman was never used in typewriters and only came into wide use in the early 1990s when Microsoft licensed the font from the Monotype Corporation in preparation for the launch of Windows 3.0.
         Even if Times New Roman had been used in proportional typewriters during the 1970s, the font then was not the same as it is today since its present form actually dates from the 1980s following some changes that Monotype made to the font.

[grey_whiskers]

You wrote:

"While you are at it....ask for of a copy of AFM 35-13 that was cited in the alleged forgery dated 04 May 1972 and allegiddly signed by Jerry B. Killian, Lt Commander.
the one that orders GWB to report for annual physical exam"

Here's a lefty site which is discussing this AFM 35-13
and which is dated AUGUST 11, 2004. One month ago.
So the lefties have known of these documents for some time?

http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=8564&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported

[weegee]

Thanks for your effort/action. I have included a list of the possible charges and a link to this thread on my profile page.

The media cannot be permitted to "drop" this story. We need to expose how high up in the DNC/Kerry Campaign this plan went.

Also Dan Rather and other journalists need to be tossed out of their jobs. There have been other victories in the War On Error (media fraud), see my profile page for some examples.

Prosecution and termination are necessities in this case. Termination before election day. Prosecution will be slower. Heck, Sgt. Akbar, the muslim American serviceman who killed two officers and wounded another dozen last year, has successfully postponed his trial until next February (where he will now try an insanity defense).

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, here's another such site.
Again, dating from August 10, 2004.

The lefties have been shopping this one around
awhile. . . ?

http://cf.rrstar.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=32&threadid=3535

[weegee]

I think that the woman was eventually prosecuted. She did appear to be a mole even if she was acting as a "lone nut".

[GrandmaPatriot]

How about John Stossel?

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, lookie here:

Another democrat site. From APRIL. That quotes
the same documents.

http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2004/04/21/who-da-man/

Jeepers sh*t.

No wonder people at CBS were Nervous.


PS. Anyone know how to grab copies of those sites in case they suddenly disappear down the memory hole?

[grey_whiskers]

And look. I just Googled another site, quoting this,
from FEBRUARY 2004.

http://billhobbs.com/hobbsonline/003279.html

What is going on here?

[faithincowboys]

Yeah, that would be wonderful. But do you think Eisner's Disney and Jennings would be party to that? I DON"T. Not this close to an election.

[grey_whiskers]

And another site from
Feb 13, 2004.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=3261

This one has the following text:
Chris,

Yeah, this aspect of the story may die. But the media has a sense right now that there's stuff in the records that Bush doesn't want people to see, and they'll continue to follow that thread.

This document got posted over at Atrios's site, and it has a couple of interesting things. First of all, there was another guy (James Bath) who got suspended the month after Bush for refusing to take his physical. He's been linked to Bush before, but what interested me was this bit:

"Off[icer] will comply with para 2-1, AFM 35-13. Authority: Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13."

Anyone know what this means? I assume it has something to do with the regulations they violated, but googling on the reference (and I also tried assuming that it means Air Force Manual) turned up nothing.

Posted by: Kevin Brennan on February 13, 2004 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

Notice the following:

1) they had the same questions about the manual
2) Atrios's is a hypertext link-I'll look there
3) linked to Bush is a hypertext link;

I believe I saw in one of the other sites whose URL
I just posted, that JAMES BATH [see above] was supposedly suspended at the same time as Bush.

Will look a bit deeper and send in more info. . .

[Kaslin]

Bump

[grey_whiskers]

This is one of the hypertext links from my last post.

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/grounded.gif

It apparently makes reference to the mysterious
AFM 35-13 (about 1/3 of the way down).

The other link in the previous article takes you to
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Hatfield-R-091901/hatfield-r-091901.html

dating from July, 2001, apparently trying to link
Bush to BCCI and Osama bin Laden. (tin foil hats,
or just axes to grind?) Note the following quote:

(Interestingly, both Dubya and Bath were both suspended from flying in August and September 1972, respectively, for "failure to accomplish annual medical examination.")


THIS WAS PRE 9-11 and on a lefty site. Could this be why
Rather is so insistent the facts are accurate, and
the forgeries don't matter?

[woodb01]

It looks like all of this "memo planning" has been in the works for a long time. And rather than forging a real AFM 35-13, they just made up the memo instead.

They certainly wouldn't have wanted a real military form popping up at some time in the future that they hadn't anticipated.

Fact is, it looks like half the DNC were discussing all of these strategies for MONTHS before there was a coordinated Main Stream Media attack, complete with falsified documents.

[woodb01]

The inner workings of the DNC and the Media Wing of the DNC.

Note to DNC, next time don't pick Rather to be your water boy, and do a better job falsifying and forging your documents. Oh, and choose a real candidate next time. Your might have done better with Fidel Castro, the Main Stream Media loves him so much they'd sell their souls to make him president.

[supercat]

The problem with this statement is that Rather fails to list any such typewriters which might have the capability or how an Air National Guard office would be able to afford such expensive machines. Simply showing a photocopy of a letter in Bush's official file which originated from the Army's national office is no proof at all.

I wouldn't expect that typewriters with a "th" key would necessarily be more expensive than one without; my guess would be that ordinal suffix ligatures would probably replace fractions or some other symbols.

The smoking gun is the fact that Microsoft Word will produce the document, exactly as it appears (aside from copier-induced distortions), using entirely default settings. There are a number of typographical features which would be produced easily (or even unintentionally) in Microsoft Word but which nobody would have any reason to try to produce in 1972 even if they could.

Unlike some people here, I do not think it physically impossible that somebody with 1972 technology could produce a document that looks like these. What is absolutely inconceivable is that anyone--especially someone merely interested in creating a reminder for himself--would produce such a document.

[faithincowboys]

Cadell is right. This has a Watergate quality, in a way it's worse. Two institutions, the MSM and the DNC have gotten so corrupt and so in bed with one another that they seem to not be accountable at all. What can we do? Hit the sponsors? Well maybe that'll work, but not likely.

We really need to send a message and deliver a lesson they won't forget. Kerry and Rather need to both go DOWN in a BUG way.

[faithincowboys]

I meant BIG

LOL

[SteveH]

Item #7 on the bottom of page 5 has a minor typo:

(read the rest here.

Should be:

(read the rest here).

Otherwise nice. Also it might be useful to quote Carl Sagan-- "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

[BJungNan]

Maybe I have missed it with the numerous posting on this subject, but can't someone just research the PO Box number and where and who it was assigned to at that time? Sorry if this has been asked but seems like another angle to look at.

If you got an answer to that one, let me know please. Thanks.

[Lunkhead_01]

I think the claim that Tongue and Quill was not published until about 1975 is not accurate. I remember as a second lieutenant (1971 to 1973) being given a copy of Tongue and Quill. I doubt they wanted me to proofread and edit it.

[Lunkhead_01]

The signature block in the 1970s should have been left justified not under the date. The change to placing the signature block under the date did not occur until the late 1980s or early 1990s.

Do we have any Freepers at Maxwell AFB? I seem to remember Air University keeps old regulations and manuals for research purposes. AU should have old copies of the indexes (I think the index was something like AFR 0-1.) I think there was a regulation in the 10 series (AFR 10-1) with a title something like "Preparation of Official Correspondence" that absolutely drove the less experienced secretaries batty. Tongue and Quill was also in the AFR 10 series. We should be able to fix a date for those documents based upon the index even if AU doesn't have a copy of the documents themselves.

A Freeper at AU might get lucky and discover an archived copy of AFR 35-13 to see what that document has to do with flight physicals (if anything.) Another thought I just had is that whenever we made reference to an Air Force publication as authority, we were required to list the paragraph. Any vague reference to a manual without a paragraph number would result in the return of the document -- particularly if it was as important as an order!