SwiftVets.com

[rekcutt]

After looking into CBS's claim that Superscript was available on machines in the early 70's and that Times Roman was available since the 1930's.

I have located one type of IBM machine print system (The IBM Composer)that had the surperscript ability, it also had 3 variations of Roman type (Aldine Roman, Journal Roman, and Press Roman) - none of which look like the Times Roman used on the memos.

Here is a site that displays this system:

http://ibmcomposer.org/

I worked with several typewriters and mainframe computers in the late 60's and early 70's and know they were VERY expensive, I seriously doubt that TANG had this system available. And certainly know that people did not have these systems for personal use because of the Cost.

I am now emailing companies and sources that may know the GSA price and if any of these systems were available in the DoD, much less TANG.

Has anyone ever seen or used this system during their service? Or anyone know more details about it?

We need to show enough information that proves CBS's explanation bogus and unreasonable.

Rek
_________________
SwiftVets, keep up the GREAT work, truth will win out over spin.

[azpatriot]

Maybe a better thing to do would be to get the TANG to check there purchasing records and just tell us what typewriters had been on the base at that time. If one of these monstrocities wasn't on the base then it's not a factor .
_________________
Proud to be an American! and member of the PAJAMAHADEEN
FedEx Kinko's: When it absolutely, positively has to be forged overnight

[Wing Wiper]

If you want a Composer, there is one on E-bay for $15 right now:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=41816&item=3839419995&rd=1

[You GottaBeKidding]

Here's a great site that pretty much proves that the Composer didn't produce the memo:

http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/the_shape_of_days/2004/09/the_ibm_selectr.html

[rekcutt]

Thanks, yougottabekiding, the URL responded in spades. Is I though, no way was this ever done on the IBM Comppser.

rek
_________________
SwiftVets, keep up the GREAT work, truth will win out over spin.

[arymann]

I'm sure if someone retrieved the 4 Lt. Bush documents from Col. Killian's personal or personnel (I've seen it both ways) files, there had to be other unrelated documents in those files as well. Just get access to those other files, if indeed they exist, and compare them to the 4 in question. There should be other documents there to prove CBS's claims, dontcha think?

[You GottaBeKidding]

arymann,

You may have hit on the reason that we are only seeing four of the memos, when there are six (on the US Today site). The other two will magically appear to support the four. But they're all about Bush..... Hmmmmm.

[arymann]

But, there have to be OTHER, UNRELATED memos that can be used for comparison. If someone has access to Killian's old files, they should trot ALL of them out. Surely "Lt. Bush-related" documents were not the only ones in the file.

[grandforker]

Why would an organization such as TANG have an IBM Selectric Composer? The two reasons I can think of are 1) to produce professional-looking certificates and 2) to impress very important people.

Based on what I've read, it seems highly unlikely that this machine would be used to compose day-to-day memos and routine correspondence.

Also, because it was a very expensive machine and required special skills to operate, you'd think that somebody who worked in the TANG offices during that time would remember seeing the Composer or know who operated it.

Why has nobody come forward to say that he or she remembers TANG having a Compsing Seletric? Why had nobody said, "Yes, that machine was there and I operated it."

So far, the only bit of information I've heard about this was from retired Col. Turnipseed, who said on Alan Colmes' radio show that TANG didn't even have IBM Selectrics in their office. For the kind of typing normally done at TANG, not having Selectrics seems far more plausible than having a Composer.
_________________
Hard pounding, gentlemen. Let's see who pounds the longest. -- Wellington at Waterloo

[You GottaBeKidding]

arymann,

My point is that that aren't any other unrelated docs. Someone thinks we are stupid.

-------------

I just did a test. I typed the 19 May memo in Lotus Word Pro to see how it would line up with the Word version. Had to fiddle with margins to get the wrap right. The two documents are close, but when you superimpose one over the other and hold them up to the light, there is a subtle but clear different in both the horizontal and vertical spacing.

I can't even reproduce the memo in a different modern word processing program. What are the odds of Word being able to reproduce something created on a typewriter 30+ years ago?

[arymann]

YouGotta,
I agree completely re no other documents--that's were my original post was leading. I also agree that they think we're stupid. I would just like to see their explanation re this point as well as the others.

[PC]

rekcutt -- Thanks for posting the link to the IBM Composer site.

It should be pointed out that out of the 4 models shown, 2 do not even output ink on paper. The output was photo imaged as a separate process that required photo developing.

The two Composers that produce output by photo imaging were commonly found in high quality typesetting service bureaus.

It is highly unlikely that Col. Killian, whose wife has said wasn't a good typist, sat down and wrote his memos on a photo typesetter.

What will be more satisfying? The day Rather has to put his tail between his legs and admit what a fraud this has been or when Scary concedes on Election Tuesday?

[poljunkie]

http://peterduncan.net/CBS_Documents.html

A nice side by side comparison of the forged docs.