SwiftVets.com

[ASPB]

Superscript on a typewriter? Not a chance in hell! Maybe on a high-end 1st generation word-processing system like Wang or Xerox but those were even around until the late 70's if I remember correctly.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[You GottaBeKidding]

Interested,

Use two blank lines between the date and "Memo to" and two blank lines between "Memo to" and the date.

I'm not seeing two spaces between "him" and "and" in the second paragraph, fourth line. The "h" at the end of "with" on that line falls under the "ur" on the previous line in both my document and the PDF.

Look at the capital P in "Phone" in the first paragraph and in "Physical" in the second. They're different. I think that's an artifact of the scanning/manipulation.

[Nomorelies]

FRAUD!

I never saw a superscript "th" on any darn typewrite in 1972. I was a clerk typist and I know my types. And, I was in graphic arts for years. That kind of letter character would have to have been typeset.

This is too good. Off to Drudge we go.
_________________
Nomorelies Make a donation HERE

[tvaughan]

This is weird. Seriously.

Why wouldn't they even try to make this forgery believable? These people are either complicit or incompetent. How could non-journalists pick up the obvious so quickly and they miss it?

I don't get this at all. It doesn't even appear that anyone went to great lengths to forge this thing. They just went to their Word program.

Very bizarre indeed. That kind of incompetence has to mean something. "incompetent" can't be the end of it.
_________________
Talking point #1: Sign 180
Talking point #2: Sign 180
Talking point #3: Sign 180

[Rdtf]

If anyone wants to see if any of these people would possibly want to volunteer their expertise ...


http://www.documentexaminers.org/index.html

[You GottaBeKidding]

Notice that the "th" is not superscripted in the address at the top, but is in the text.

Even if someone was using a typesetter for this back in 1972, I don't think superscripts would be automatic and I can't imagine anyone wasting time creating them for something like this.

I smell a big, fat rat!

[stevieboy]

Aside from the type analysis, why would the colonel not have used the memos as an administrative tool to get 1stLT Bush to conform? I think I would have had Bush sign it. I think I would have had his immediate supervisor sign it as well.

Why would this career military man have esentially "put himself on report" with such damning memos of his own failure of leadership? "CYA"? No, CYA would have been making a formal case of it, not this chicken sh*t. If a subordinate was not doing what he was supposed to do, why does he not use these adminstrative tools to make a point to the subordinate? Instead, they are squirreled away somewhere for no one to see, not even Bush.

Pretty shakey stuff!

[ASPB]

I smell the death knell of CBSNews, Dan Rather, and the Boston Globe!
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[Interested]

@ASPB - there is superscript on the other memos posted at the CBS site also. I just mentioned the first as it caught my eye.

Any data on when it became an option...a replacement selectric ball or something? Could be another point...

@You gotta be kidding: I matched the subject line up first... the date and memo lines are a partial line off for me...in my version they are dropped so that the dot above the 'i' in 'Memo to File' is visible in the 'original'.

I agree many of these differences may be artifacts of scanning, plus my having to rotate the original pdf in photoshop to align the two copies.

[You GottaBeKidding]

ASPB,

But how do you get the story out since the MSM is all pro Kerry???

Looks like Fox, Rush, Hannity, Ingraham all need to be in on this.

[kmmpatriot]

[You GottaBeKidding]

Interested,

I didn't scan. I'm comparing my original to the printed PDF. I'm not seeing anything except a difference in size.

[rua]

>I'll raise another question:

in the 4 May 1972 memo on the CBS site in the second paragraph the type for the "th" part of "111th F.I.S." is done in superscript...would that be normal?<

I'm reasonably sure superscript was unavailable back then. I learned to type on those old Selectric typewriters in the early 80's and superscript was not on them. I also have one of the older typewriters that you have to do manual returns on and it certainly wasn't on those either. To sum it up, I've used the daisy wheel typewriters, no superscript, selectrics, no superscript (unless you manually moved the roll bar to make it so then you had to worry about whether or not you could line it back up correctly so your document body didn't look funny), the ancient dinosaur typewriters, no superscript unless you manuually moved it to make it so, see above as to why that was aggravating at best...so my feeling on the whole thing...it's forged. Most word programs these days automatically superscript. Also if one owns a PDF Editor, it is VERY easy to take an existing PDF document and change it. You can download a fully functioning trial version from Adobe.

[gulf1609]

This is not a pro Bush site but compare the documents from the ANG that the Bush administration has released with these "newly found" documents.

http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp

[ASPB]

Just got through to Major Garrett. He's on the story and will call me back.

Tom
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB