'60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2004-09-09 03:12pm

(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 honed 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.L.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."

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-09-09 03:28pm

Take with a box of salt. CNS isn't exactly a neutral player. If the documentations are fake, everybody will hear the explosion. But a news source run by a man with this bio:

L. Brent Bozell III
President, the Media Research Center and
the Cybercast News Service

Lecturer, syndicated columnist, television commentator, debater, publisher and activist, L. Brent Bozell III is one of the most outspoken and effective national leaders in the conservative movement today.

Founder and President of the Media Research Center, Mr. Bozell runs the largest media watchdog organization in America. Established in 1987, the MRC produces several newsletters and books. The very popular Notable Quotables lists the most biased media quotes and at year-end a panel of 50 opinion leaders selects the much cited awards for the year's most biased reporting.

Mr. Bozell's books include And That's the Way It Isn't: A Reference Guide to Media Bias; Pattern of Deception: The Media's Role in the Clinton Presidency; How to Identify, Expose and Correct Liberal Media Bias; and Out of Focus: Network Television and the American Economy. A sequel to And That's the Way It Isn't II will be published. The MRC web site at http://www.mediaresearch.org is quickly becoming one of the most popular conservative web sites.

Founder and President of the Parents Television Council, Mr. Bozell leads the only Hollywood-based organization dedicated to restoring responsibility to the entertainment industry. The PTC at http://www.parentstv.org features the Family Guide to Prime Time Television which aids parents across the country in making informed viewing decisions for their children.

In June 1998, Mr. Bozell launched his most ambitious venture yet -- the Cybercast News Service. CNSNews.com specializes in covering news stories the major networks seem to be omitting.

Mr. Bozell also serves as Executive Director of the Conservative Victory Committee (CVC). An independent multi-candidate political action committee, the CVC has helped to elect dozens of conservative candidates over the past ten years. He has also served as National Finance Chairman for the Buchanan for President campaign, and Finance Director and later President of the National Conservative Political Action Committee.

Mr. Bozell is a nationally syndicated writer whose work appears in publications such as The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Washington Times, The New York Post, The L.A. Times and National Review. He is regularly invited to provide media expertise on news programs by all the major networks and cable affiliates. His appearances include NBC's Today show; CNN's Crossfire, Inside Politics, Larry King Live; ABC's Good Morning America C-SPAN, and TCI's series, Race for the Presidency, as well as the Syndicated Entertainment Tonight. He has appeared as a guest and guest host on hundreds of radio shows, from local talk shows to the Cal Thomas Show and the Rush Limbaugh Show.

Named the 1998 Pew Memorial Lecturer by Grove City College, Mr. Bozell is a frequent speaking guest on school campuses and for civic and political organizations around the country.

Mr. Bozell received his B.A. in History from the University of Dallas, where he was named the 1998 Alumnus of the Year. He is married, with five children.

—isn't exactly the most objective of sources.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-09 03:45pm

I'm calling bullshit. Take a look at the records released by the White House. For example, this one has proportional-width fonts.

Of course, I'd like to actually see the documents before trusting CNS' take. If they are seriously false documents, then as Degan said, the mainstream press will be all over it.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2004-09-09 03:46pm

It'll just be interesting to me if this is the best rebuttal they can come up with.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-09 04:30pm

The documents are here ...

May 4 Memorandum

May 19 Memorandum

August 1 Memorandum

August 18 Memorandum

These guys are full of shit. If these things were forged in Microsoft Word, the letters would appear far more cleanly positioned than they do. But each line of text is a little askew, and the letters do not appear on perfectly straight lines.

And check out the Wikipedia entry for the IBM Selectric typewriter.

Wikipedia wrote:In the 1980s IBM introduced a Selectric III and several other Selectric models, some of them word processors or type-setters instead of really typewriters, but by then the rest of the industry had caught up with the trend, and IBM's new models did not dominate the market the way the first Selectric had.

"Not widely used" huh?

Also ...

The Selectric II had a lever (above the right platen knob) that would allow the platen to be turned freely but return to the same vertical line (for inserting such symbols as subscripts and superscripts), whereas the Selectric I did not.

The Selectric II was released around 1971. But I guess it's totally out of the realm of possibility that Killian's office had just bought some Selectric II's when they came out and actually typed memos on them.

Also, this is somewhat telling about the Selectric II's ubiquity ...

IDSA wrote:In 1961 IBM introduced a revolutionary electric typewriter, the Selectric I, which replaced the standard typebars with a moving interchangeable spherical "golf ball" printing element, while the carriage remained fixed. Development began in 1951, and the sculptured housing was designed starting 1959 by Eliot Noyes, FIDSA (see below). In 1971, a later version, Selectric II, entered the market. By 1975 Selectrics accounted for about 75 percent of the US electric typewriter market, which soon after went south when typewriters were increasingly replaced by personal computers.

So by 1975, Selectrics dominated the market, after the Selectric I had been out there for 14 years. That tells me that the Selectric II (which supported proportional widths and superscripts) contributed heavily to the Selectric's domination of the market. After all, people weren't buying Selectric I's when the II's came out.

Just for reference, here is what the "experts" 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."

And ...

"[Superscripts] 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.

Either way, the technology was clearly available at the time, and it came in the form of a popular brand name that claimed 75% of the typewriter market. I think that about seals this issue.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-09-09 07:57pm

I don't think it does. IF these were military doccuments (my reader can't download them so I don't know) then they'd appear like all the other military doccuments and have the standard typefaces, not the "rarely used" ones.

I leave it to the learned experts.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-09 08:01pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:I don't think it does. IF these were military doccuments (my reader can't download them so I don't know) then they'd appear like all the other military doccuments and have the standard typefaces, not the "rarely used" ones.

I leave it to the learned experts.

Obviously, the concept of burden of proof does not occur to you. The "experts" cited by cnsnews based their argument upon claims which were factually wrong. This throws their expertise into doubt and their conclusions into the shitter.

Not to mention the fact that White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett said that "they were found in Jerry Killian's personal records". I guess he's in on the forgery too, right?

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-09-09 08:13pm

Did it occur to you that there might be no standard typeface, but that the font used depends on the typewriter used?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-09-09 08:16pm

GySgt. Hartman wrote:Did it occur to you that there might be no standard typeface, but that the font used depends on the typewriter used?

Back in 1973, everybody in every military base in the USA shared one typewriter

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-09-09 08:18pm

You mean the fixed-pitch Mk I?

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-09-09 08:19pm

Darth Wong wrote:
GySgt. Hartman wrote:Did it occur to you that there might be no standard typeface, but that the font used depends on the typewriter used?
Back in 1973, everybody in every military base in the USA shared one typewriter

If this was official government equipment, shouldn't there be some record of the office supplies ordered for that office? Including the typewriter model.

That would settle if the typewriters used there could or could not make such a document.

Post by **Beowulf** » 2004-09-09 08:39pm

Couple comments:

Why is the th that is superscripted smaller than the rest of the font?

Why is the signature block not of the form:

JERRY B. KILLIAN, Lt Col, TexANG

like everyone I've seen do signatures? And like is done in another letter he's written?

Why is NLT written out, and then abbreviated?

The linked wikipedia page has nothing about the Selectric or Selectric II using proportional fonts. There is mention of being able to change the pitch.

As for the WH com director, he's probably just regurgitating what he's heard which is precisely what CBS News is claiming.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-09-09 08:46pm

I've seen Selectrics and IIRC they used monospace fonts, abliet with better output than most any other typewriter of the time. I suppose a proportional-width ball could have been available, though. I can't recall if their superscript/subscript ability also translated into smaller text, but there could have been special characters on the ball.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-09-09 08:51pm

There were characters for several superscripts (especially common ones like "st", "nd", "rd" and "th") in several versions of EBCDIC, so the capability probably existed on a Selectric (I don't have access, unfortunately, to any Selectric type balls to tell for certain).

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2004-09-09 08:55pm

Yes, there were I had accent symbol balls, and character balls on the one I used in civil service in the 1990's and that was an old Selectric II....

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-09-09 09:18pm

Iceberg wrote:There were characters for several superscripts (especially common ones like "st", "nd", "rd" and "th") in several versions of EBCDIC, so the capability probably existed on a Selectric (I don't have access, unfortunately, to any Selectric type balls to tell for certain).

EBCDIC is evil.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-09-09 09:19pm

phongn wrote:
Iceberg wrote:There were characters for several superscripts (especially common ones like "st", "nd", "rd" and "th") in several versions of EBCDIC, so the capability probably existed on a Selectric (I don't have access, unfortunately, to any Selectric type balls to tell for certain).
EBCDIC is evil.

All IBM machines up through the mid-1980s used EBCDIC, though. It wasn't until IBM saw serious market pressure from the clones that they switched to ASCII.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-09-09 09:23pm

Iceberg wrote:
EBCDIC is evil.
All IBM machines up through the mid-1980s used EBCDIC, though. It wasn't until IBM saw serious market pressure from the clones that they switched to ASCII.

Yes, I know, and EBCDIC was more flexible than ASCII (at least until EASCII came out), but EBCDIC was symptomatic of IBM's "I WILL CRUSH THE ENEMY" monopoly actions of the time.

tharkûn · Post by **tharkûn** » 2004-09-09 09:44pm

Quoting from http://www.selectric.org/selectric/:

Sorry, but due to excessive hits, this page is temporarily out of service.

Please check back after the election.

For those who want my opinion...the documents appear to be done in Word, and then copied repeatedly to make them "fuzzy". They use features that were not available on office typewriters the 1970s, specifically the combination of proportional spacing with superscript font. The IBM Executive has proportional spacing, but used fixed type bars. The Selectric has changeable type elements, but fixed spacing (some models could be selected at 10 or 12 pitch, but that's all). The Selectric Composer was not an office typewriter, but apparently did use proportional spacing. These were very expensive machines, used by printing offices, not administrative offices.

At least my low opinion of TV news remains intact.

Really this shouldn't be hard, if the selectric II's accounted for anywhere close to 10% of the US market back in the early 70's then surely dozens of the millions of such machines survive in functional use today (and yes such machines are up for sale on ebay). If they had such features then it should be easy to replicate them with an actual machine. So given statements to the contrary by collectors I'm inclined to think forgery until somebody shows me a typewrite which has the needed characters and can perform the needed functions.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-09 10:06pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:I don't think it does. IF these were military doccuments (my reader can't download them so I don't know) then they'd appear like all the other military doccuments and have the standard typefaces, not the "rarely used" ones.

I leave it to the learned experts.

Maybe you didn't read my whole post. These "experts" claimed that the technology for superscripts on typewriters was not available in 1972. This is incorrect. They claimed that IBM Selectrics were not widely used. This is also incorrect, given that they had 75% of the market just 3 years later and that the Selectric I was well-known for its market dominance. And since the Selectric II used a ball, it's entirely possible that a proportional-width ball was available for it. In fact, the use of a proportional-width font and a superscript indicates that he probably had a special ball.

The technology for both superscripts and proportional-width fonts was available at the time, which means that the simplest explanation is that they are genuine documents.

That narrows their criticisms down to "Uh that signature kinda looks weird."

Beowulf wrote:Why is the th that is superscripted smaller than the rest of the font?

Probably because there were special typeballs that had those symbols.

Why is the signature block not of the form:
JERRY B. KILLIAN, Lt Col, TexANG
like everyone I've seen do signatures? And like is done in another letter he's written?

Maybe because it was 30 years ago, and people didn't have nice e-mail programs that appended the same signature block to every document? Maybe he decided to change how he did his signatures in the 3 months between those two memos?

Why is NLT written out, and then abbreviated?

Who cares? Even I inconsistently abbreviate and write out certain things. It depends on my mood.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-09-09 10:07pm

According to Glenn Reynolds, Nightline is going to cover this in greater detail tonight. If they turn out to be forgeries this is like another Jayson Blair fiasco.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-09 10:13pm

tharkûn wrote:Really this shouldn't be hard, if the selectric II's accounted for anywhere close to 10% of the US market back in the early 70's then surely dozens of the millions of such machines survive in functional use today (and yes such machines are up for sale on ebay). If they had such features then it should be easy to replicate them with an actual machine. So given statements to the contrary by collectors I'm inclined to think forgery until somebody shows me a typewrite which has the needed characters and can perform the needed functions.

Oh please. Ask yourself something.

WHAT FORGER ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET IS SO FUCKING LAZY THAT HE WOULD USE FUCKING MICROSOFT WORD TO FORGE DOCUMENTS FROM 30 YEARS AGO WHEN YOU CAN EASILY OBTAIN A TYPEWRITER FROM THAT ERA TO MAKE THE DOCUMENTS LOOK AS GENUINE AS POSSIBLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN FORGING MILITARY DOCUMENTS?

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2004-09-09 10:22pm

INDC has tracked down Dr. Philip Bouffard, who is one of the top experts in the field. His evaluation from looking at a PDF of the documents: 90% certain they're faked.

UPDATE: Dr. Bouffard called me again, and after further analysis, he says that he's pretty certain that it's a fake.

Here's why

* He looked through old papers he's written, and noted that he's come up against the inconsistency of the "4" several previous times with forgeries that attempt to duplicate old proportional spaced documents with a computer word processing program.

* Regarding the small "th" after the date, Dr. Bouffard told me that it was possible to order specialty keys that would duplicate the automatic miniaturization completed by word processors after a numerical date, but it was certainly not standard, and wouldn't make a lot of sense in a military setting. "That by itself, while suspicious, is not impossible, but in conjunction with the (font irregularity of the) number four, it is really significant," he said.

* Dr. Bouffard said that signature analysis isn't that relevant because the signature could have easily been copied and pasted onto one of the photocopied forgeries from another document.

* He said that he didn't know who CBS contacted to verify the document's authenticity, but that there is really only one other man that may be more qualified to determine authentic typefaces than himself. I think that the burden of proof may be on CBS to reveal this information.

I asked him to put a percentage on the chances that this was a fake, and he said that was "hard to put a number on it." I then suggested "90%?" Again he said it's "hard to put an exact number, but I'd say it's at least that high, sure. I pretty much agree that that font is Times New Roman."

I hesitate to render verdicts, but based on an initial visual analysis by one of the country's foremost forensic document analysts that specializes in old typefaces, it looks like CBS was duped.

And Dr Bouffard's credentials

Dr. Bouffard has a PhD in Chemistry from the University of Michigan, but got involved in forensic examination of typefaces after working in “graphics” with NCR until 1973 and taking a two-year Certification Program in Document Examination at Georgetown University. After completing the program, he became specifically interested in typewriter classification and went to work for a prosecutor’s crime lab in Lake County, Ohio.

Using something called the Haas Atlas, the definitive collection of various typefaces, Mr. Bouffard (and other forensic document examiners) examined the veracity of various documents for over 30 years. Beginning in 1988, Mr. Bouffard hired a programmer to write a computer database program that catalogues the nearly 4,000 typefaces that appear in the Haas Atlas. This computer program is now a forensic standard that is sold as a companion to the Haas Atlas by American Society of Questioned Document Examiners (ASQDE). Though semi-retired, Dr. Bouffard is one of the top two experts in forensic document examination (regarding typefaces) in the country.

tharkûn · Post by **tharkûn** » 2004-09-09 10:26pm

WHAT FORGER ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET IS SO FUCKING LAZY THAT HE WOULD USE FUCKING MICROSOFT WORD TO FORGE DOCUMENTS FROM 30 YEARS AGO WHEN YOU CAN EASILY OBTAIN A TYPEWRITER FROM THAT ERA TO MAKE THE DOCUMENTS LOOK AS GENUINE AS POSSIBLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN FORGING MILITARY DOCUMENTS?

How about the lazy idiot who forged the Niger yellowcake papers?

If an idiot can date a forgery 1999 after talking about about events that occurred in 2000 or forget to check that name he signs to the stepped down in 1989; I can well beleive that you have an lazy idiot forger out there who doesn't know what in hell proportional spacing is, when superscript characters were introduced, etc.

Look there is a simple way to prove that it is possible for a typewriter from that date to have proportional characters and the needed characters - show an example of one that DOES. Rather than pissing that people can't be lazy or stupid, why not offer physical proof that the document could have been produced?

Post by **Beowulf** » 2004-09-09 10:31pm

Associated press weighs in...

AP wrote:News reports have said the memos, first obtained by CBS's "60 Minutes," were found in Jerry Killian's personal records. Gary Killian said his father wasn't in the habit of bringing his work home with him, and that the documents didn't come from the family.

The personnel chief in Killian's unit at the time also said he believes the documents are fake.

"They looked to me like forgeries," Rufus Martin said. "I don't think Killian would do that, and I knew him for 17 years."
...

"I'm virtually certain these were computer-generated," Lines said after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.