Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Maj.Gen. Hodges confirms"non-forgeries"-"were expressed to me at the time"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 09:49 AM
Original message
Maj.Gen. Hodges confirms"non-forgeries"-"were expressed to me at the time"
A CBS reporter read the documents to "retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, the immediate superior of the documents' alleged author, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian...and Hodges replied that 'these are the things that Killian had expressed to me at the time.'"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9967-2004Sep9.html



washingtonpost.com
Some Question Authenticity of Papers on Bush

By Michael Dobbs and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, September 10, 2004; Page A01


Documents unearthed by CBS News that raise doubts about whether President Bush fulfilled his obligations to the Texas Air National Guard include several features suggesting that they were generated by a computer or word processor rather than a Vietnam War-era typewriter, experts said yesterday.

Experts consulted by a range of news organizations pointed out typographical and formatting questions about four documents as they considered the possibility that they were forged. The widow of the National Guard officer whose signature is on the bottom of the documents also disputed their authenticity.<snip>

A senior CBS official, who asked not to be named because CBS managers did not want to go beyond their official statement, named one of the network's sources as retired Maj. Gen. Bobby W. Hodges, the immediate superior of the documents' alleged author, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian. He said a CBS reporter read the documents to Hodges over the phone and Hodges replied that "these are the things that Killian had expressed to me at the time."

"These documents represent what Killian not only was putting in memoranda, but was telling other people," the CBS News official said. "Journalistically, we've gone several extra miles."

The official said the network regarded Hodges's comments as "the trump card" on the question of authenticity, as he is a Republican who acknowledged that he did not want to hurt Bush. Hodges, who declined to grant an on-camera interview to CBS, did not respond to messages left on his home answering machine in Texas.<snip>

William Flynn, a forensic document specialist with 35 years of experience in police crime labs and private practice, said the CBS documents raise suspicions because of their use of proportional spacing techniques....While IBM had introduced an electric typewriter that used proportional spacing by the early 1970s, it was not widely used in government. In addition, Flynn said, the CBS documents appear to use proportional spacing both across and down the page, a relatively recent innovation. Other anomalies in the documents include the use of the superscripted letters "th" in phrases such as 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, Bush's unit.
<snip>
CBS officials insisted that the network had done due diligence in checking out the authenticity of the documents with independent experts over six weeks. The senior CBS official said the network had talked to four typewriting and handwriting experts "who put our concerns to rest" and confirmed the authenticity of Killian's signature.<snip>


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. previously validated document has superscripted "th," -GOP experts wrong?
CBS News sent reporters a previously validated document last night that does appear to contain a superscripted "th," which confounds some experts we spoke with, including Katherine Koppenhaver, who said she is 75 percent certain even still that the new documents are forgeries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
2. IBM Selectric Composer of the early 1970's had all necessary technology
From Wash POst - same link:

However, Dr. Bouffard said, a colleague had called his attention to similarities between the font in the memos and that of the IBM Selectric Composer of the early 1970's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Oops! So not only did he type memos, he was vocally stating his
concerns to other people in the Guard. Gives CYA an added dimension.

Please, anyone who doubts that bush* was AWOL is an absolute moron. When you talk about 'character' it's obvious that he is totally devoid of anything even resemblind character and integrity. He's been caught lying so many times about so many things that everytime he opens his mouth you know he's going to say something that has no bearing on the truth or reality.

A surprising number of Americans sure have lowered their expectations in their government and their leaders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
4. Talk about insanity
Edited on Fri Sep-10-04 10:04 AM by LynnTheDem
1. Two witnesses who were THERE AT THE TIME believe the docs are genuine and that Killian was stating at the time exactly what the docs say.

2. Handwriting and typewriter experts who SAW THE ORIGINALS say they're genuine.

3. According to the USAF's own documents, the USAF WAS using IBMs that DID HAVE proportional spacing BY 1969 and OTHER BUSH RECORDS also show superscripted letters.

4. Killian's own son thinks they're ALL GENUINE, EXCEPT for the CYA memo.

VERSUS:

All the "independant" document experts, including Ms "Republican Women for Government" Lines, who say they're forgeries, HAVE NOT seen the originals.

Sheesh.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
5. Also his claim of early 70s intro of prop spacing is false - goes back
much earlier - another thread had an ad for an IBM Executive much earlier than 1970 touting the proportional spacing feature. And I believe the first Selectric was 1961 - it certainly had proportional spacing. (I think the "vertical proportional spacing" idea is bunk -how would that show up in a document unless different fonts were used within the document?) Much is being made of the Times New Roman font. Isn't it true that it was designed to closely resemble the most popular typewriter font and therefore we might expect that a similar document could be produced with MS WORD?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. proportional goes back to 1941 but unusual then - not unusual in 60's
"Word processing - Systems to make writing easy

The era of word processing machines began in the mid 1960s with memory typewriters. These machines were designed specifically for word processing and rationalized the production of documents, especially in the course of day-to-day business.

Stereotype formulations and texts were input once and stored under a code number. By combining these boilerplate texts and adding brief personal texts, a typist could prepare letters quickly and print them out as often as required.

The first typewriter equipped with a magnetic tape storage unit appeared in 1964 and was an input/output device. It enabled typed text to be changed or corrected after typing."

From a HISTORY OF TYPYING


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolajazz Donating Member (68 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
7. Why can't we have our experts on the TV to debunk theirs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
htuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Because we don't own enough TV networks
Other than CBS, and only part of that, what network is willing to risk the wrath of Bush?
Most of them seem to do his bidding quite happily. That became VERY clear over the last 24 hours.

Freedom of the press is only guaranteed to those who own a press, as they say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
9. The gloves don't fit; you must acquit. Tainted tainted tainted!
CNN is casting aspersions at every mention. To the faithful, of course, they're forgeries. (The Shroud of Turin, on the other hand, is genuine...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC