Author Topic: '60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake  (Read 4506 times)

Offline kevykev56

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1391
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« on: September 09, 2004, 04:59:38 PM »
http://www.cnsnews.com



'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
By Robert B. Bluey
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
September 09, 2004

(CNSNews.com) - The 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by the CBS News program "60 Minutes," shedding a negative light on President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard, may have been forged using a current word processing program, according to typography experts.

Three independent typography experts told CNSNews.com they were suspicious of the documents from 1972 and 1973 because they were typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program.

The "60 Minutes" segment included an interview with former Texas lieutenant governor Ben Barnes, who criticized Bush's service. The news program also produced a series of memos that claim Bush refused to follow an order to undertake a medical examination.

The documents came from the "personal office file" of Bush's former squadron commander Jerry B. Killian, according to Kelli Edwards, a spokeswoman for "60 Minutes," who was quoted in Thursday's Washington Post. Edwards declined to tell the Post how the news program obtained the documents.

But the experts interviewed by CNSNews.com homed in on several aspects of a May 4, 1972, memo, which was part of the "60 Minutes" segment and was posted on the CBS News website Thursday.

"It was highly out of the ordinary for an organization, even the Air Force, to have proportional-spaced fonts for someone to work with," said Allan Haley, director of words and letters at Agfa Monotype in Wilmington, Mass. "I'm suspect in that I did work for the U.S. Army as late as the late 1980s and early 1990s and the Army was still using [fixed-pitch typeface] Courier."

The typography experts couldn't pinpoint the exact font used in the documents. They also couldn't definitively conclude that the documents were either forged using a current computer program or were the work of a high-end typewriter or word processor in the early 1970s.

But the use of the superscript "th" in one document - "111th F.I.S" - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it's not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.

"That would not be possible on a typewriter or even a word processor at that time," said John Collins, vice president and chief technology officer at Bitstream Inc., the parent of MyFonts.com.

"It is a very surprising thing to see a letter with that date [May 4, 1972] on it," and featuring such typography, Collins added. "There's no question that that is surprising. Does that force you to conclude that it's a fake? No. But it certainly raises the eyebrows."

Fred Showker, who teaches typography and introduction to digital graphics at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Va., questioned the documents' letterhead.

"Let's assume for a minute that it's authentic," Showker said. "But would they not have used some form of letterhead? Or has this letterhead been intentionally cut off? Notice how close to the top of the page it is."

He also pointed to the signature of Killian, the purported author of the May 4, 1972, memo ordering Bush, who was at the time a first lieutenant in the Texas Air National Guard, to obtain a physical exam.

"Do you think he would have stopped that 'K' nice and cleanly, right there before it ran into the typewriter 'Jerry," Showker asked. "You can't stop a ballpoint pen with a nice square ending like that ... The end of that 'K' should be round ... it looks like you took a pair of snips and cut it off so you could see the 'Jerry.'"

The experts also raised questions about the military's typewriter technology three decades ago. Collins said word processors that could produce proportional-sized fonts cost upwards of $20,000 at the time.

"I'm not real sure that you would have that kind of sophistication in the office of a flight inspector in the United States government," Showker said.

"The only thing it could be, possibly, is an IBM golf ball typewriter, which came out around the early to middle 1970s," Haley said. "Those did have proportional fonts on them. But they weren't widely used."

But Haley added that the use of the superscript "th" cast doubt on the use of any typewriter.

"There weren't any typewriters that did that," Haley said. "That looks like it might be a function of something like Microsoft Word, which does that automatically."

According to an article on the CBS News website, the news program "consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic."
RHIN0 Retired C.O. Sick Puppies Squadron

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2004, 05:02:18 PM »
Dammit you conservative guys this is not fair!!!  Why cant we fake stuff?  What is flailing and issueless campaig to do??

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2004, 05:12:48 PM »
http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/year_1941.html
IBM announces the Electromatic Model 04 electric typewriter, featuring the revolutionary concept of proportional spacing. By assigning varied rather than uniform spacing to different sized characters, the Type 4 recreated the appearance of a printed page, an effect that was further enhanced by a typewriter ribbon innovation that produced clearer, sharper words on the page. The proportional spacing feature became a staple of the IBM Executive series typewriters.

My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2004, 05:18:05 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm371



Man are you Kerry scum desperate..  

Maybe we should just caption that picture:

I'd like to get my hands on the bastard that voted to send me here then voted against the body armor to protect me..

Offline anonymous

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 984
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2004, 05:20:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm371
http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/history/year_1941.html
IBM announces the Electromatic Model 04 electric typewriter, featuring the revolutionary concept of proportional spacing. By assigning varied rather than uniform spacing to different sized characters, the Type 4 recreated the appearance of a printed page, an effect that was further enhanced by a typewriter ribbon innovation that produced clearer, sharper words on the page. The proportional spacing feature became a staple of the IBM Executive series typewriters.



rpm371 thats very tasteless picture. it also says all anyone needs to know about extreme left and their attitude towards military.

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2004, 05:23:25 PM »
My attatude towards the military is VERY pro. Anyone that would try to belittle a war injury is the one with a poor attitude towards the military.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2004, 05:23:59 PM »
Yea that the hillarious thing about the 2004 campaign, liberals who 30 yaers ago would spit on veterns as baby killeres are now in love with a guy whoose only campaign issue is one about killing babies, raping women, blowing up bodies and shooting crippled VC in the back..  Right rpm, that is what kerry said went on in his area of vietnam regularly? Right??

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2004, 05:24:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm371
My attatude towards the military is VERY pro. Anyone that would try to belittle a war injury is the one with a poor attitude towards the military.


But it is OK to belittle National Guard soldiers?

Offline anonymous

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 984
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2004, 05:26:09 PM »
Personal attack
« Last Edit: September 10, 2004, 07:05:18 AM by Skuzzy »

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2004, 05:27:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
But it is OK to belittle National Guard soldiers?

If they go AWOL or use drugs, yes.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2004, 05:29:15 PM »
But killing babies in Vietnam is OK?

Offline ASTAC

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1654
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2004, 05:36:40 PM »
That fancy typewriter doesn't prove the airforce would have used it..I imagine it would have been expensive during a time of shrinking military budgets.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2004, 05:37:04 PM »
No, it was not.

Anon, you are the one that is overtly concerned with the political battle. I believe anyone that goes thru a battle and recieves a medal is a person of honor. To belittle it is unpatriotic.

If you, yourself, have or ever recieve a medal you have my gratitude and thanks. I don't care what your political affiliation is. It would sicken me to think that a soldier fighting or wounded in Iraq today would have his Purple Heart or decoration smeared in 30 years when he decided to run for public office.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2004, 05:48:42 PM by rpm »
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline anonymous

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 984
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #13 on: September 09, 2004, 06:28:34 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm371
No, it was not.

Anon, you are the one that is overtly concerned with the political battle. I believe anyone that goes thru a battle and recieves a medal is a person of honor. To belittle it is unpatriotic.

If you, yourself, have or ever recieve a medal you have my gratitude and thanks. I don't care what your political affiliation is. It would sicken me to think that a soldier fighting or wounded in Iraq today would have his Purple Heart or decoration smeared in 30 years when he decided to run for public office.


ill take your word for it. if you bothered to take the time to say it you probably mean it. i still dont like the picture though. and i think the sense of honor you have on the matter isnt shared by the people who made the picture. i have some medals. i also strongly believe in the concepts of "for every medal awarded theres a thousand or more guys who should have the same medal but no one saw them do what they did and they died doing it" and "you wear your medals for those guys who should have one but dont". thats why kerry chucking the medals bothers me so. i dont care about his medals. i care about what he said when he got home. i could get into things like when some political hack calls him a "hero" with a straight face because they dont know a thing about the military i think of guys i know who turned down purple heart because they only took one "clean through the meat" and their close buddy ended up paralyzed so them getting the same medal didnt seem right. i can tell you for certain that if i did four months in country if people in my campaign started calling me a hero id say stop it save that for the grunts who did one or two full tours on the ground. id be embarassed for someone who doesnt understand military or warriors to call me a hero. kind of like how bob dole was. big news story on 10MTN in world war two and how they forerunner of modern army sf and they go ask dole about this and how he part of 10MTN and this is while dole is running for president and he says in live interview "10MTN guys were elite i was only a replacement officer you cant count me in that group when youre talking about all their training". ill stop rambling. im sorry i said what i said about you i believe you support military. i really dont like that picture is all.

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
« Reply #14 on: September 09, 2004, 06:54:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm371
No, it was not.

Anon, you are the one that is overtly concerned with the political battle. I believe anyone that goes thru a battle and recieves a medal is a person of honor. To belittle it is unpatriotic.

If you, yourself, have or ever recieve a medal you have my gratitude and thanks. I don't care what your political affiliation is. It would sicken me to think that a soldier fighting or wounded in Iraq today would have his Purple Heart or decoration smeared in 30 years when he decided to run for public office.


It sickens me to realize that an admitted war criminal that aided the enemy faked his purple heart and silver star with the combat v.