Bush Service Memos Questioned

Twirlip of the Mists writes "Last night, CBS News released a set of memos dated 1972 and 1973 that are purported to raise questions about President Bush's National Guard service. Some are saying those memos might have been produced with a computer. Blogger Scott Johnson ran with the story first this morning, raising questions about the typography of the memos. Blogger Charles Johnson (no relation) went one step further, actually reproducing one of the memos in its entirety using Microsoft Word's default settings. Matt Drudge is running the story now with a link to a CNS News article that includes quotes from typography experts at font foundries Afga Monotype and Bitstream. There's a round-up of key facts about the story on this blogger's web site." The experts in the CNS News story and others could come to no conclusion, and even if the documents are not originals or photocopies of originals, that doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't faithfully retyped copies of originals. CBS continues to assert the documents are authentic.

Comments

Try this

[captnitro]

While I agree with the assertion that these could be retyped, CBS is claiming that's not what has happened, that these are originals.

I've made a superimposed image of Word vs. the documents. They have been lined up according to the period after the '1' in the first paragraph. The 'originals' are in red, the Word version in blue.

Re:Try this

[captnitro]

I hate replying to my own post, but I should note that the difference in the 187'th' has to do with the difference between screen fonts and printer fonts; in the printed version they are aligned perfectly. This was first pointed out by Little Green Footballs.

Re:Try this

[_xeno_]

I was curious about this, so I decided to check it out for myself. I retyped the memo into my copy of Word 2003, and printed out a copy.

I then scanned it back in and wound up with a document that looked surprisingly similar to the "original document." Specically, look at the "187th." It's practically identical.

Oh, and for added fun, try this animation I created showing a copy in Word fading in with the PDF. Note that the PDF is ever so slightly tilted, so things don't line up quite correctly after the first line. But the animation makes it very clear that the two are very similar.

Anyway, to sum up:

• Original document (mirrored on my site)
• Scanned copy I made - this is not an original, it is a copy I typed in Word, printed, and scanned back in to a PDF

Very supicious.

List of websites:

[jlgolson]

Here are a few websites that reference this situation:

UPI: breaking news

littlegreenfootballs.com

AllahPundit here and here and here.

indcjournal.com

cnsnews.com

command-post.org

hftp.blogspot.com

An analysis

[Futurepower(R)]

I'm not saying this is the only possible explanation, but this is what I thought of when I looked at the Bush documents in PDF format that can be seen on the Washington Post web site. The documents brought back strong memories of working with those machines.

Typeface and font used in the letters. -- Much is being made of the proportional font used in the letters. People are saying the proportional spacing is an indication of forgery, because the letters look like Microsoft Word documents.

However, I've often had the experience of walking into a military office and being shocked by the office equipment there. There are numerous ways that people in the military get things that they don't really need. For example, a general may requisition something and then discover that his secretary doesn't want to learn how to use it. So, then it is available to an office of lower rank.

The fonts are consistent with those sold with a kind of upscale IBM Selectric typewriter that was actually a low-cost typesetting machine. (Typesetting was what it was called before everyone could do it on a personal computer.) These machines had a one-use carbon ribbon. The impression of each character was clearer than the clearest laser printer.

I'm a bit confused about the model numbers of the typewriter. It could have been called a Selectric costing then about $2,500, I believe. I seem to remember that they had another name for the more upscale, true typesetting machines. (I wrote computer manuals which I typed on a Selectric and were prepared on those machines.)

There were usually some odd symbols and characters like "th" on the type balls used by the Selectric family of typesetting machines. That's because of the design of the balls. Whereever there was room, there were characters, partly to assure that the balls would be balanced, I suppose, and partly just because there was room.

There's a funny side to the self-consistency in my guess about the machine used to prepare the memos. Back then anyone writing and publishing computer user manuals really struggled with the publishing. Whenever something needed to look professional, we had it typeset. To do that, we did what is called "spec type". On one occasion I spent 11 hours specifying typesetting values for one particularly complicated page.

After you have spent many, many hours worrying about the look of type, you begin to be extremely sensitive to everything about it. (Either that, or you wouldn't be successful.)

Looking at the letters discussing preferential treatment for George W. Bush brings back strong memories. The Selectric was an unbelievably complicated machine that needed frequent service because it depended on everything being adjusted to extremely fine tolerances.

Anyone familiar with this can see something funny about the letters immediately. It's obvious to me. Whoever had the typing machine did not have the maintenance contract. It's easy to know this because the letters are not all level with the baseline. That's what would happen when the Selectric or other typing machine from the same family was not adjusted.

The funny self-consistency is this. It's easy to guess that they got the machine from the general's office after some civilian secretary there decided that the new machine was too complicated to learn. But, since an office of lower rank was not allowed to have such a machine, they did not have the maintenance contract. That could be why the baseline of the type is so messy.

Someone said that the letters were forgeries because they were obviously done with Microsoft Word. It is impossible to simulate the variation of baseline with Microsoft Word; Word is too basic a tool, it is not able to do many of the functions of real typesetting. People who are sensitive to the beauty of type certainly don't use MS Word.

I use Ventura Publisher. It is possible t

Re:An analysis

[Twirlip of the Mists]

The forgery camp has been making blanket statements that superscript "th" was utterly unavailable circa 1972. They have also said that proportional spacing was utterly unavailable circa 1972.

That's kind of an oversimplification. Okay, it's not really an oversimplification as much as it is out-and-out wrong. "They" have been saying since early Thursday morning that superscript type balls for the IBM Selectric were available, but only by custom order to IBM and at great cost. "They've" also been saying that the only typewriter that could produce the superscript "th" seen in the CBS memos could not have produced proportional letter-spacing.

I think it will be helpful for everyone to be very clear on exactly what is claimed to be anachronistic

The list is not a short one. Basically everything about these documents is wrong. The format is not correct. The typography is impossible with 1970's-era equipment. The signatures on the two signed memos do not match the signing officer's actual signature. One memo refers to an Air Force manual, AFM 35-13, that never existed; there was a regulation AFR 35-13, but it dealt with supplemental pay for soldiers who were proficient in a foreign language. And, of course, the contents of these memos is suspect because it doesn't jibe with any other account.

And so on, and so on, and so on.

I think the jury's still out on this.

Oh, technically it is. But we're not convicting a man of murder here. There's no reason to err on the side of caution -- either way. Do these documents appear to be forgeries? Yes, definitely. Is there anything about them that suggests they're not forgeries? Nope. Ergo ...

It is possible that some obscure custom typebar for the IBM Executive was in use

It is not possible, actually, according to representatives of IBM's media relations office. They have the records, and they say that no such custom-made Executives were ever produced.

Right now it looks to me like CBS screwed up bigtime.

Yes, either by passing off obviously forged documents ...or by forging them. Not sure we'll ever know which it was.

Re:But why from the WHouse?

[Zeinfeld]

The documents that were distributed were done on IBM typewriters.... typewriters that didn't have the superscript "th". The IBM typewriters then also didn't have proportional fonts.

The IBM Executive had proportional fonts in 1942, it was the workhorse typewriter for much of business for that exact reason. A Lt Colonel is exactly the type of person who would want correspondence to be written in an impressive typeface. The clerk would use the same machine to write all memos regardless of importance.

There were many variations of the typefaces. A business would be very likely to want special characters such as $ and yen, pounds etc. A law firm would have different requirements and so on.

Since these were mechanical machines it was quite easy to change individual striking levers to add special characters of the customers choice. Eva Braun used an earlier IBM typewriter with a special symbol for the SS with the lightning bolt glyphs.

Superscript th was not an unusual requirement. Even if the machine started as stock it was the type of upgrade that happened regularly in the field. The striking pins have to be accessible because every so often a machine will jam.

The arguments about Word documents mean absolutely nothing. The alignment of the two documents does not look all that good to me, the resolution of the images is way less than the difference I would expect.

When self proclaimed 'experts' start making categorical claims such as proportional spacing typewriters did not exist at the time and those claims are proved false it is time to discount their expertise.