FACT: No one has yet been able to reproduce the memos?

[Must_B_Free]

Is that right. So far I have not seen were anyone has been able to reproduce the memos on any machine, Selectric or MS Word.

I have seen the attempts with word, but noone cam make all the spacing match.

Does anyone have any info on typewriter tests? Has anyone claimed to reproduce the document exactly with a typewriter?

It's very simple - it's like a fingerprint. Two may look similar, but none will be an exactl match except the real thing.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

1. Nope. You're correct...no exact reproductions to date.

[hexola]

2. The Freepers are resorting "crumpled paper" theories...

to account for the moving baseline...in a supposed "Word Forgery"

[Must_B_Free]

4. Try it on your copier.

In my experience, the crumples show up. We used to photocopy crumpled paper for the texture it produced in an art class.

[Lex]

3. The expert I heard said this about the memos

The memos CAN'T be exactly reproduced on a MS Word.

Most people were saying "They can't be reproduced on a typewriter."

But this guy was saying "Just try to reproduce them on MS Word--you can't--so that's why they WERE typed on a Executive or Selectric IBM typewriter."

Something about how the 1 was used the same as a lower-case L ( l ).

[Must_B_Free]

5. Our generation of copy is too degraded to tell.

at least I can't tell, can you? I'm looking for a better copy.

I am confident that the 8s are different.

The memo's "8" has a smaller hoopon top and its quite larger on the bottom. In Word, the effect is there but much less pronounced.

Even the LGF "proof" graphic reveals the problem with the 8s.

[Hepburn]

11. Oh, dang, I forgot about that...

...old typewriters did not have a Roman numeral "1" on the keyboard. A lower case letter "l" had to be used. Some times I still hit the letter "l" for the number "1" because old typist habits are hard to break. Until you posted this, this had not come to mind.

[yardwork]

14. The Selectric II had a roman numeral "1" on the keyboard

but I don't know about the early 1970s vintage ones.

I dragged out my old Selectric II but the only ball I have is a Pica type one, which is different from the time used on the CBS documents.

My kids had a great time playing with it, though.

[Hepburn]

25. You know...

...I cannot remember when the keyboards added the "1", but I do remember having to use the letter "l" for this. I remember that the manual I had in college in the 60's did not have the key...but I just cannot remember when I had a typewriter that did have it. Seems to me that it was somewhere in the early 70's, but I am not sure.

[0rganism]

34. Even if you have a "1" key, if you've been substituting the "l" for 30 yrs

you're probably going to keep right on doing it, especially if you type 80+ WPM.

For me, bouncing around between different keyboards is quite the pain. Sun Sparc stations have different layouts from standard PC keyboards, including the locations of some important programming characters. I use both fluently, but the first hour of switching can be funny.

So I can certainly sympathize with anyone who decided not to immediately adapt their typing habits when IBM decided to add the 1 key.

[Tansy_Gold]

20. Tiny detail, Hepburn, but it's "arabic" numerals.

The Roman numerals are I, II, III, IV, etc.

The ancient Remington I first learned to type on in the late 50s, early 60s had no numeral "1" and so the lower-case L -- l -- was the only thing to use.

Using a sans serif font like arial, one can still see the similarities between numeral "1," capital "I," and lower-case "l."

I've been playing around with some original typed documents from my files from the early to mid 1980s. I can't say anything conclusive or definitive yet, but here are some very preliminary observations:

Even electronic typewriters with film-ribbon sometimes left distinct differences between individual strikes. This wouldn't or shouldn't happen with a printed document generated from a printer, where there is no physical connection between the keying in of the data and the production of the printed document.

I used an IBM Executive in two separate employment situations, once in 1967 or 68, then again in 1975 or 76. I didn't use it that much and don't recall very much in the way of detail about its performance. One thing I do recall, however, about the second time I used that particular piece of equipment, was that corrections were a real PITA because one had to line up with the proportional spacing both to erase the error and again to make the correction.

IF the Killian memos were typed on an IBM Executive, there MIGHT be traces of such corrections still visible on the originals. Although it's possible for a skilled typist to produce error-free documents, even the best of us make mistakes.

IIRC, the Executive still employed individual type bars, rather than a type ball or a wheel. From what I'm seeing on the documents I personally typed, the ball or wheel machines were far more uniform in the print impressions than the type-bar machines. To me, this suggests that the less uniform the printing, the more likely it was done on a more mechanical, less electronic machine.

But I'm no expert. Far from it.

[Hepburn]

23. LOL,...

...thanks for pointing out my goof...I meant Arabic numerals. Ooooooooops!

The golf ball Selectrics had a much more uniform type thank the ones with the arms with the character at the end. Those arms could get out of alignment - could happen you jammed the keys and and two arms got locked together. So, IMO, you are correct about the less uniform, the more mechanical. And the proportional type indeed was a PITA. I remember looking at that chart with the values given to the different characters and wondering some times how I was goint to correct something. Thank heavens for the half space feature. LOL, could squeeze a few things in.

[yardwork]

27. LOL! We're just good 'Muricans

Roman, Arabyiac, whatever....all the same to us here in 'Murika!

I made the same mistake. Thank you for pointing it out.

[Hepburn]

32. LMBO!!! n/t

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Must_B_Free]

8. This thing is ALIVE until someone can demonstrate the perfect reproduction

That's my whole point. There's a smoking typewriter out there somewhere and it will be found sooner or later.

[Hepburn]

12. The problem is...

...that identical model typewriters after long use are not the same. They wear down and develop different characteristics in the type. Not like a computer WP program and a computer laser printer.

[Tansy_Gold]

22. Any typewriter using a ball or wheel element

won't wear the way the old metal typebars and typefaces did.

The IBM Selectric type balls I used in the 70s and 80s and I think even into the 90s were plastic. They frequently shattered and had to be replaced. They never wore the way metal striking on a platen did.

[Hepburn]

26. The golf balls were better...

...but they got "dirty" and that did change the letters a bit - but they did not get out of line and shape like the typewriters that had the characters at the end of the striker arms. On the typewriters I used with a plastic daisy wheel, those did get out of wack and did have some misformed characters at times. These, however, I used mainly in the early to mid 80's and this was on a Smith Corona product. I think the Selectric I have now still has the metal ball and not a plastic one - not sure, tho. I just do not want to run downstairs and take a look at it right now. But I will look tomorrow.

Wow, I cannot believe how many of us on here are old timers that remember what things were like before computers and WP software.

LOL, the next thing we will have to discuss is ALBUMS!! I still have my Pearl album! Now if I could find a turn table!

[yardwork]

15. Don't worry. #6 is tombstoned already.

That was a short visit.

[Kazak]

9. Haha!

Welcome to DU. ;)

[AuntPatsy]

10. Ya think? Maybe we should move on but in moving on from

this stupid forgery theory, we should move on to more important matters, like asking is Bush really the man to lead our country in a time of war. considering his own worthless military record? Is Bush really the man to lead our nation out of it's incredibly deep and ever getting deeper deficit problem, and asking Bush, with more and more innocent lives both Americans and Iraqs (you know, those people we went to protect from distinction for that ruthless dictactor Saddam) how in the world are you going to get us OUT of this messy and wrongful war in Iraq?

Just to name a few, he has yet to answer any of those questions to my satisfaction and I do listen when he talks, it's not my fault he doesn't actually say anything that is actually important to the real issues facing Americans today..I have desperately tried to give him the benefit of the doubt no matter how foolish a hope it has been.

[Union Thug]

7. Try reproducing a signature AND forged docs..

The forgery story is bullshit and any rational person knows this. Geezus christ, I published Robin Goodfellow on a mac using Pagemaker attempting to produce a duplicate of the original and you just cannot do it with a computer. You can't reproduce letter press and you can't reproduce type strikes. They are inconsistent while Word is not.

Furthermore, a handwriting expert for CBS has said that it's his opinion that the signature is genuine.

Typical fantasy dwelling conservatnazis...

[TexasUnderground]

50. For the uninitiated

What is a type strike?

I'm one of the skeptics, btw, but am open to counter arguments.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[yardwork]

16. They don't look anything alike!

LOL! That was lame.

[uhhuh]

18. Not Even Close

Look at the "S" in F.I.S. Look at the "8" in Longmont #8.

You have to WANT it to be the same to think it is.

The "B" in Killian's name is run right through in the typed copy, but in yours, it is at the edge of your line.

You should keep trying though....really you should.

A Susan B Anthony Dollar is "pretty close" to the size of a quarter, but they are not the same thing.

[Must_B_Free]

19. even at a glance, it falls apart

- the 4's are totally different - the memo is a smaller interior space, your 4, the bottom cross is lower.

- the memo 8's have a more pronounced smallloop/bigloop than the Word 8's.

- the numeric zeros are fatter in the memo, yours are thinner.

- your capitol H in Houston has the crossbar in the center, the memo has it up higher.

- the memo's capitol P's loop closes in the middle - in word, the P closes much lower - see P.O. Box

- in "Box", your o is even with the middle bar in B, in the memo it goes above the middle bar in B.

In general - the memos characters look larger and closer together. I agree they line up, but in lining up, they lose letter resembelence.

Thanks for posting that. I think it demonstrates how carefully you have to look. I am not seeing a match at all.

[Must_B_Free]

21. Why the heck was that deleted- we were using that!

can we get that back please? at least the graphic?

[uhhuh]

24. I agree

That was a really pathetic example. It was fun to play with.

[Must_B_Free]

28. recovered!

I discovered it still open in another window and got the link location

I think its important to show how something can look silmilar, but still not be a true match.



This pretty clearly proves that it definitely WASN'T MS Word.

[Hepburn]

31. Just NOT the same...

...the "8" in the Killian memo has a slight slant to it and I caught that right off. But the MSW memo has an entirely different feel to it. It is way too crisp and IMO, copying it does not account for the difference. Much more of a delicate type in the MSW memo.

[Must_B_Free]

35. Yes - all of the letters are just smaller

If you make the spacing the same, the letters just are too small and thin.

These two example with these two different memos prove to me that it was NOT MS word. The smoking typewriter is still out there.

[Hepburn]

38. LOL...

...the smoking typewriter. I wonder if anyone has looked in any storage lockers in Houston???

[lanparty]

44. No it doesn't ...

I also find the "forgery" story to be bogus.

You made a "close but no cigar" replication. That does not MEAN that it's impossible to forge.

Somonone good with typfaces could customize a font to match the wear on ANY typewriter. They can drop the letters, twist them, smear them, wear off portions, etc.... Than all you need to do is run it through the analog distortion of a photocopier 5 or six times.


The true test here is to obtain OTHER memos typed for Lt Col Jerry B Killian at the same time and see if the typefaces match. Chances are, all his documents were typed by his secretary on the same typewriter.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hepburn]

29. I saw somthing and I think it was from their site...

...a video maybe?

[Must_B_Free]

30. It was an animated gif -

an animation of a fade from one doc to the other.

It was more misleading than the above, because it was reduced to about %50 of the original. It did reveal the difference in 8's even at that size.

actually - here it is - you can see for yourself it has differences, be sure to check the 8 in the date and in 187th. Totally different ways of making an 8.

[Hepburn]

36. Wow...

...they really look different to me. And I do not think it is because I am a mega Kerry supporter and just wanting to see things, but because I have done so much WP'ing over the years and my eye for this is just telling me things. It is just a different type. And the baselines are different. The numerals looks different to me, too.

Thanks for posting this!

[lanparty]

45. Either way, this proves nothing ...

The way to authenticate the document is to find OTHER valid documents from the same individual and see if the typefaces match up. Chances are that all of this guys documents were prepared by his secretary on the SAME typewriter every time.

Beyond that, chances are that everyone in the same office would be using the SAME TANG issued typewriter.

[ConsAreLiars]

33. The calls for an "exact" reproduction on an existing machine are bogus

since even the original typewriter will have aged unpredictably. CBS has the best quality reproductions, the pdf files are likely to be inferior, and the 400x250 pixel screenshots that so fascinate the denizens of Club Moran are a complete joke. All that can be determined, if the reproductions are sufficiently detailed (and what I saw on CBS suggests they are), is if the letter shapes correspond to standard shapes on Executives or Selectric Composers of the era. They certainly look nothing like computer generated Word output.

[Must_B_Free]

37. I agree they look nothing like Word

but if we find the right model of typewriter, we'll be able to tell we have a match. The spacing and character weight will line up. The specific details of the numerals, in particular, will correlate in a way that they obviously don't do with MS Word.

[ConsAreLiars]

42. Quite right

Depending on the quality of the CBS docs. This guy thinks the IBM Executive model is more likely than the Selectric Composer, but the best evidence is is the known fact that chimpy refused an order to take a medical (drug) test and was prohibited from flying, and then dodged further obligations, and has been covering it up. Speculative at this point, but anyway: from http://www.ibmcomposer.org/
---
Q: Could the IBM Executive Typewriter produce such a document as the memos?
A: It is likely that it could have. It is much more feasible that there were IBM Executive Typewriters at the colonel's disposal than IBM Composers for him to use. The IBM ET had proportional spacing. I do not have an IBM ET, so I cannot vouch for its capabilities. It is not impossible that the ET could have had a special key on the keyboard for the "th". IBM probably published a simple step-by-step method of centering text on the ET, but once again, this question is better suited to someone who is either an IBM serviceman or an enthusiast of the IBM ET.
---

(The "centered text" is the letterhead portion, and probably was created once only and was a part of the standard form for such documents, so it is another irrelevancy,)

[lanparty]

46. The superscript 'th' is a toughie ...

It's the only thing I've found worth investigating. Such a typewriter would probably also have a super-'rd' character.

The centered text is a red herring. They taught us how to center text in high school typing class. It's not fucking rocket science.

[Iceburg]

47. But what about the supercripted "th" in other docs realeased by WH

taken from page 3 of 19 -- USAtoday collection of bush military records released by the White House. see http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/9-Miscellaneous.pdf

Does that mean these white house docs were doctored or forged?

Or is it more evidence that superscripts were available and used in military records as early as 1968?

[lanparty]

48. Excellent point !!!!!

It should be noted that most people NEVER ask word to make the super-scripted 'th' character. It is an automatic feature that occurs whenever you type a th after a numeral.

The freepers are noting that the document contain a lot of '111 th'. Type stuff. That is, it contains a space between the numeral and the 'th'. Well, if you add a space after the numeral, word doesn't superscript. This could be a fingerprint that ALL of these documents (including those of the White House) came from the same forger.

The freepers are also howling that the date isn't recorded in a consistent fashion. Well, the above document shows both DD MM YY format and YY MM DD format style dates. Some written, some typed. This could be an indication that TANG wasn't so stringent about document regulation. It could also be another fingerpring of a White House document manipulator.

Such a revelation COULD be damming that the White was releasing doctored documents of Bush's service record. Remember, that the coverup is almost always more damming than the actual offense.

[ParanoidPat]

39. Instead of trying to duplicate documents that you don't have the.....

.....originals of, has anyone requested copies of contemporary documents produced at the same time and at same base WRT other people who served there and checked to see if they share similarities in style and content? :shrug:

I would assume there were thousands of documents prepared during the time period that Bush* was or should have been in the TANG that were composed on the same equipment. Has anyone even tried to do a comparison to any of those documents? If not, why not?

[Hepburn]

43. This is a good idea....

...that secretary had to have typed other documents. What about other letters that Killian sent out at the time. If they look the same as the memos and have the characters that some are saying could not be done, then that would pretty much settle the argument on whether these are forgeries. I am sure that have to be other typed documents from that period of time. Wonder how we could go about getting some of these?

[Must_B_Free]

40. And another thing -

how is it that so many "experts" got on board with a judgement that you can plainly see is false, as demonstrated above. That in itself is frightening. I suspect that the "expert" business involved giving the customer what he paid for.

[TexasSissy]

41. I saw a memo here on DU typed out that matched the

one that CBS had, except it wasn't "aged." But the spacing was the same, and the lettering was the same, including the suprascript "th." It was Word, Times New Roman, 12 pt., I think.

[Iceburg]

49. Pop-Quiz from PC Mag: Which image was typed on an IBM Selectric Composer?

Which one was typed in Microsoft Word?




And the answer is ... at the bottom of page
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1644869,00.asp

snip
The fact that the two resemble each other does not prove that both of them were typed in Microsoft Word. It only proves that Microsoft Word (by default) uses a typeface very similar to one that was available in the early 1970s for the IBM Selectric Composer.
/snip

[Oddman]

51. It doesn't matter

the GOP won the spin . . . it's now a story about whether the documents are forged not what they contain . . .

[Iceburg]

52. Oh yes it does ... see new 2 minute video "Fortunate Son" featuring AWOL

http://www.democrats.org/fortunateson/index.html

The spin cycle may be complete but now they are going to hang awol out to dry.

[FearofFutility]

53. CNN Actually Had A Freeper on Last Night

Who claimed that one of their very own (I think his screename was buckhead)proved that the document was a forgery and did it in a matter of 15 minutes using Word. I was so pissed off that Free Republic was presented as credible! (Further proof that CNN has gone the way of Fox...)