Here are a few discrepancies:
1. Typewriter proportional spacing was not available in 1972 with the Times Roman font, the timeframe and font style of the CBS Memos. The IBM Executive had a pseudo proportional spacing but not the typeface used in the CBS Memos. (No confirmation that even this type of technology was available at TANG, see below for a discussion of the Selectric Composer which is a printshop device)
2. Superscripts not generally available. These are individual characters in smaller case that extend above the printed line in the CBS Memos. (The underlined "th" cited by CBS in the Chronological Listing of Service, which does NOT extend above the characters, is technically a single key element.) If anything, the superscript "th" in the CBS Memos versus the single key element even further indicates that the CBS Memos are a forgery.
3. 4's produced on a typewriter are open at the top. 4's on a word processor are closed. Compare the genuine Bush TANG documents, where the 4's are open at the top, to CBS 60Minutes' forgeries, where the 4's are closed at the top
4. Apostrophes in the documents are curled serifs. Typewriters used straight hash marks for both quotation marks and apostrophes.
5. Margins look like a computer's Word Processor unjustified default, not the way a person typing would have done it. Typewriters had fixed margins that “rang” and froze the carriage when typist either hit “mar rel” or manually returned carriage.
6. Words run over in a manner within CBS Memos that is consistent with a Word Processor.
7. Times Roman has been available since 1931, but only in linotype printshops and some Selectric typewriters...until released with Apple MacIntosh in 1984 and Windows 3.1 in 1991.
8. Signature looks faked, and it cut at the very end of the last letter rather than a fade when pressure would have been released.
9. Overlay of CBS Memos is an EXACT match for Microsoft Word Processor, versions disputed, but converted to pdf matches exactly.
10. Absence of hyphens to split words between lines, compared with 1970's typewritten documents.
11. It would have been nearly impossible to center a proportionately typed letterhead with proportional spacing without a computer (not impossible, but for Killian, who did not type, highly improbable). Further, doing this centering identically in memos two months apart, CBS May 04 and CBS August 01, absent a Word Processor is extremely unlikely.
12. Kerning was not available in any office typewriter. For kerning photographic analysis of memo see http://www.manchuriancandidate2004.com/kern.jpg
13. Why is the redacted address of Longmont #8 visible beneath the black mark? This would have been impossible after one copy, but it would be visible if the document was scanned.
14. The vertical spacing used in the memos, measured at 13 points, is not available in typewriters, and only became possible with the advent of computer driven type word processors and printers.
15. May 4, 1972 "order" memo and the May 19, 1972 "commitment" memo typeface doesn't match the official evaluation signed 26 May 1972. Or does the TANG have a new typewriter just for Col Killian's memorandum.
16. The only device that could have produced the superscripted “th” in that period and proportional type in that timeframe would have been a Selectric Composer. This is not a typewriter but is used for special publication composing. It cost some $4,000 then ($23,000 today) and was incredibly difficult to operate. The machine basically consisted of an IBM Selectric typewriter with a 3-1/2 ft. high upright case containing the magnetic tape reader reading long spools of magnetic tape in cartridges. It also needed a special IBM service person above and beyond repairing typewriters. It is not clear that the AirForce had even three units at that time and the TANG clearly did not. To suggest that Col Killian, who could barely type and even if he could, would have been able to operate one of these machines is absurd. The operating manual is here at http://www.ibmcomposer.org/docs.htm.
b. Issues that can only be processed by a better or original copy
17. Potential paper size issue: Air Force and Guard did not use 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper until the 1980s.
18. Is the document original or a copy of an original? Why all the background noise such as black marks and a series of repeated dots (as if run through a Xerox).(Rather explained his document was a photocopy-brings up additional questions of how redacted black address was visible from a several generation copy)
c. Issues that relate to custom and usage of text within the documents
19. Signature block. Typical authentic military signature block has name, then rank, then on the next line the person's position. The CBS Memos just have rank beneath the name.
20. CBS Memos have dates inconsistent with military style. Months should have three letters or in the form 110471.
21. No letterhead
22. Language not generally used by military personnel.
23. Not signed or initialed by author, typist, or clerk.
24. Not in any format that a military person would use, e.g. orders are not given by a Memo!
25. Why no two hole punches evident at the top of the page? …or even three or five on the side of the page?
26. In the CBS Memo 18 August, the acronym should be OER, not OETR.
27. The superscript "th" in the forged documents was raised half-way above the typed line (consistent with MS Word, but inconsistent with military typewriters which kept everything in-line to avoid writing outside the pre-printed boxes of standard forms).
28. The forged documents had no initials from a clerk.
29. CBS Memos on 4 May and 1 August have no distribution list as needed for orders.
30. Subject line in memos was usually, but not always, CAPITALIZED in the military
31. The forged documents used incorrect terminology ("physical examination" instead of "medical")
32. CBS May 4, 1972 "order" Memo and the CBS May 19, 1972 "commitment" memo typeface doesn't match the official evaluation signed 26 May 1972. Or does the TANG have a new typewriter just for Col Killian's memorandum.
33. USAF letterhead has been in required use since 1948. Instead the CBS Memos have typed letterhead. In general, typed letterhead is restricted to computer-generated orders, which were usually printed by teletype, chain printer or daisy-wheel printer, the latter looking like a typed letter. Manually typed correspondence is supposed to use official USAF letterhead. However, even special orders, which used a typed letterhead, were required to use ALL CAPS in the letterhead.
34. The typed Letterhead gives the address as "Houston, Texas". The standard formulation for addresses at USAF installations should require the address to read "Ellington AFB, Texas".
35. Killian's signature block should read: JERRY B. KILLIAN, Lt Col, TexANG Commander This is the required USAF formulation for a signature block.
36. Lt Col Killian's signature should be aligned to the left side of the page. Indented signature blocks are not a USAF standard.
37. The rank abbreviations are applied inconsistently and incorrectly. For example the use of periods in USAF rank abbreviations is incorrect. The modern formulation for rank abbreviations for the lieutenant grades in the USAF is 2LT and 1LT. In any event, they would not have included periods. Lt Col Killian's abbreviations are pretty much universally incorrect in the memos.
38. The unit name abbreviations use periods. This is incorrect. USAF unit abbreviations use only capital letters with no periods. For example, 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron would be abbreviated as 111th FIS, not 111th F.I.S.
39. The Formulation used in the memos, i.e., "MEMORANDUM FOR 1st Lt. Bush..." is incorrect. A memo would be written on plain (non-letterhead) paper, with the top line reading "MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD". However, Lt Col Killian is known to have relied on hand written notes on scraps of paper and not gratuitous memos to files.
40. An order from a superior, directing a junior to perform a specific task would not be in the memorandum format as presented. Instead, it would use the USAF standard internal memo format with left hand justification as follows: FROM: Lt Col Killian, Jerry B. (space) SUBJECT: Annual Physical Examination (Flight) (space) TO: 1Lt Bush, George W. Documents that are titled as MEMORANDUM are used only for file purposes, and not for communications.
41. The memos use the formulation "...in accordance with (IAW)..." The abbreviation IAW is a universal abbreviation in the USAF, hence it is would not be spelled out, rather it is used for no other reason than to eliminate the word "in accordance with" from official communications. There are several such universal abbreviation, such as NLT for "no later than".
42. Physical is due the last day of the Birth Month which be 31July; not at the May 14th date ordered in the memo. Moreover the May 14 date is a Sunday.
43. Day in the date of the CBS Memo 4 May should be "4" and NOT "04"; in the CBS Memo 1 August it should have been "1" and NOT "01". This is a tell tale artifact of a Word Processor default setting which was not been changed.
44. According to Lt Col Campelli (USAF ret), the CBS Memos 4 May and 1 August both have a letterhead for the wrong organization. Correspondence and orders in those days would have been issued in the name of the parent organization -- the 147th Fighter Interceptor Group -- rather than by the squadron. Moreover, the letterhead in the CBS Memos is typed. The unit used PRINTED ANG letterhead. Moreover, where written orders were issued they were on standard USAF orders forms. They were NOT in the CBS Memo format.
45. Consideration of all ordinal numbers occurring in the CBS Memos reveals two with miniature “th” superscripts as suffixes, four with spaces between the numerals and suffix, and five without a space, all of which include a digit of 1 (arguably a lower case L). Putting spaces between the numerals and the suffix is NOT how typists were or are trained. The only reason for spaces generally occurring after ordinals is to suppress MS Word's auto-superscript function. The most parsimonious explanation for the features shown by the ordinals in the CBS Memos is a forger intending suppress the auto-superscript function (which he didn't know how to turn off) but knew enough to use lower case L's in imitation of old typists or to insert spaces into other ordinals. He simply missed simply missed two instances and MS Word simply turned the “th” into superscripts.
d. Issues that relate to the context of the document (people retired, day of week, ANG policy, etc.)
46. 5000 Longmont #8 in Houston Tx. does not exist (actually does exist, but Lt Bush had already moved TWICE from this address at the time the memo was written). The address that the CBS Memo o4 May should have used is: 2910 Westheimer Rd. Apt 4. Lt Col Killian certainly would have known the correct address.
47. Subject matter is bizarre
48. Air Force did not use street addresses for their offices. For example, HQ AFLC/CC is for Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433.
49. In the CBS Memo of August 18, 1973 Jerry Killian purportedly writes: "Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush. I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job." but General Staudt, who thought very highly of Lt Bush, retired on March 1, 1972. General Staudt was no longer in the food chain!
50. Regarding CBS 04 May Memo: LT Bush would have had automatic physical scheduled for his Birth Month which was July! He would have received a routine letter notifying him of the pending requirement, month or date by which the flight physical was to be completing, and advising him to call the flight surgeon's office to schedule the appointment. There would not have been an 'order' issued and certainly not by May 14th in advance of July, his Birth Month. Moreover, if any orders ever are issued in writing, they are NOT issued via a Memorandum!.
51. The title of one of the memos is CYA, a popular euphemism for covering one's...ahem...posterior. It is extremely doubtful that any serving officer would use such a colloquialism in any document that might come under official scrutiny.
52. Both Lt Col Killian's wife and son relate that Killian wasn't a typist. If he needed notes, he would write them down longhand, but in general, he wasn't paper-oriented, and certainly wasn't a typist.
53. According to Lt Col Campelli: “Jerry Killian never went near a typewriter. In the Air Force, in those days, notes -- if anyone kept them at all -- were handwritten.” All the CBS Memos supposedly by Lt Col Killian are typed. Also, bureaucrats -- not fighter jocks -- write "CYA" memos.
54. The CBS Memo 1 August which Killian writes: "I recommended transfer of this officer…Officer has made no attempt to meet…or flight physical." This is inconsistent with the Lt Bush official performance evaluation dated 26 May 1972 in which Major Harris writes: "Lt Bush should be retained in his present assignment. He has gained valuable experience in the operations area and would be a welcome addition to any fighter squadron." Lt Col Killian signed off this evaluation on the same day.
55. According to Lt Col Campelli: “Orders -- like the purported CBS Memo 04 May order to take the flight physical wouldn't normally have been signed by Killian. They would have been signed by a senior sergeant ‘by order of’ Killian’.”
56. The CBS Memo 19 May 1972 to the file that is supposedly written by Harris or Killian states: "Says he wants to transfer to Alabama to any unit he can get in to. Says he is working on another campaign for his dad". The CBS Memo is pejoratively inconsistent with the Lt Bush 26 May 1972 Performance Appraisal which states under OTHER COMMENTS: “Lt Bush is very active in civic affairs in the community and manifests a deep interest in the operation of our government. He has recently accepted a position as a campaign manager for a candidate for United States Senate. He is a good representative of the military and the Air National Guard in the business world. His abilities and anticipated future assignments make him a valuable asset. He is a member of the National Guard Association of the United States and Texas."
e. Other issues (veracity of experts, etc.)
57. CBS admits that it does *not* have the originals, but only original documents can be proven to be real; copies can *never* be authenticated positively...repeat: only original documents can be proven real. CBS never had the originals, so CBS knew that it was publishing something that couldn't be assured of authenticity. Moreover, CBS's own validator, Marcel Matley, wrote in the September, 2002 issue of the journal, "The Practical Litigator": "In fact, modern copiers and computer printers are so good that they permit easy fabrication of quality forgeries. From a copy, the document examiner cannot authenticate the unseen original ..."
58. Small "th" single element not generally available (not common, but available. Highly unlikely the machines were available at TANG) [REDUNDANT. SEE 3.]
59. The blurriness of the copy indicates it was recopied a number of times which is a common tactic of forgers. (copying of the CBS Memos was stated in the 60Minutes broadcast).
60. No apparent errors or whiteouts. (CBS used copies)
61. The Killian family rejected these documents as forgeries. Then where did the “personal files” come from if not the family?
62. CBS validator was only signature expert, not a typewriting expert. Also there now seem to be emerging issues on the signature itself. For signature authenticity doubts see http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040910-104821-5968r.htm and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1213174/posts
63. Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the TANG, told 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".
64. The records purport to be from Lt Col Killian's "personal files". Yet they were not obtained from his family, but through some unknown 3rd party. It is an odd kind of "personal file" when the family of a deceased person is unaware of the file's existence and it is not in their possession.
65. Both Lt Col Killian's wife and son, as well as the EAFB personnel officer do not find the memos credible.
66. The CBS Memos are totally inconsistent with the glowing performance reviews for Mr. Bush.
67. CBS 60 Minutes' says validator Matley vouched for all four CBS Memos; Matley says he only vouched for one.
68. CBS 60 Minutes has not stated any provenance for the memos. This add further questions to the authenticity of the CBS Memos.
69. Robert Strong, who served with Killian as an officer tells the New York Times that he does not believe that his former associate used a proportional font typewriter during his time in the Texas guard.
70. The man named in a disputed memo as exerting pressure to "sugarcoat" George W. Bush's military record left the Texas Air National Guard a year and a half before the memo supposedly was written, his service record shows. An order obtained by The Dallas Morning News shows that Col. Walter "Buck" Staudt was honorably discharged March 1, 1972. CBS News reported this week that a memo in which Staudt was described as interfering with officers' negative evaluations of the future president's service was dated Aug. 18, 1973.
71. Retired Maj. General Hodges, Killian's supervisor at the Grd, 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".
72.The Director of the Texas Air National Guard at the time President Bush served there said Sunday that Guard documents obtained by "60 Minutes" purporting to show dissatisfaction over his performance are "forged as hell." "They're forged as hell," former Guard director Earl W. Lively told the Washington Times. "There's no way that [Bush's commanding officer] Jerry Killian would have written what they've come up with."
77. A CBS document purportedly from Killian ordering Bush to report for his annual physical, dated May 4, 1972, gives Bush's address as "5000 Longmont #8, Houston." This address was used for many years by Bush's father, George H.W. Bush. National Guard documents suggest that the younger Bush stopped using that address in 1970 when he moved into an apartment, and did not use it again until late 1973 or 1974, when he moved to Cambridge, Mass., to attend Harvard Business School.
78. Thomas Phinney, program
manager for fonts for the Adobe company in Seattle, which helped to develop the
modern Times New Roman font, disputed Glennon's statement to CBS. He said
"fairly extensive testing" had convinced him that the fonts and formatting used
in the CBS documents could not have been produced by the most sophisticated IBM
typewriters in use in 1972, including the Selectric and the Executive. He said
the two systems used fonts of different widths. 79. ABC's Brian Ross interviewed the two experts who CBS hired to
validate the National Guard documents and reports they ignored concerns they
raised prior to the CBS News broadcast. "I did not feel that they wanted to
investigate it very deeply," Emily Will told Ross. "I did not authenticate
anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," Linda James told
Ross. Ross reports 2 experts told ABC News today that even the most advanced
typewriter available in 1972 could not have produced the documents. Ross also
reported that Lt. Col. Jerry Killian's secretary says she believes the documents
are fake but that they express thoughts Killian believed. Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News
she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the
weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I
found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been
produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and
strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the
79. ABC's Brian Ross interviewed the two experts who CBS hired to validate the National Guard documents and reports they ignored concerns they raised prior to the CBS News broadcast. "I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Emily Will told Ross. "I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," Linda James told Ross. Ross reports 2 experts told ABC News today that even the most advanced typewriter available in 1972 could not have produced the documents. Ross also reported that Lt. Col. Jerry Killian's secretary says she believes the documents are fake but that they express thoughts Killian believed.
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.
Send any new ones to my email address