Nbadan
02-20-2005, 07:26 AM
White House withheld critical proportionately spaced document until after CBS flap waned
By John Byrne | RAW STORY Editor
A newly released document from President George W. Bush’s military records lends credence to rumors that the recent flap over ‘forged memos’ was in fact engineered from within the White House, RAW STORY has learned.
At the very least, the timing of the release shows that the White House deliberately withheld a genuine document which contained the characteristics of the memos which are said to have been forged. From the beginning, Bush’s supporters have claimed that typewriters of the period could not produce the documents.
It’s also the fourth time the White House has released Bush documents since they said they had released all of Bush’s non-medical documents. White House communications director Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that he had put out “absolutely everything” he had of Bush’s nonmedical military records in February.
The document (http://www.glcq.com/docs/(71-02-19)recognition_memo.pdf) in question was released to an independent researcher as part of a Freedom of Information Act request in 2000, but was not made available to the general media until the White House released it – under a federal court order after a lawsuit by the Associated Press – on Sept. 24.
The document is a memo written to Bush notifying him of his promotion to First Lieutenant. Dated Feb. 19, 1971, it was typed more than a year before the first of the CBS memos.
And, like the CBS memos, this document uses a proportionately spaced font and has the characteristics of a document produced on contemporary computers using Microsoft Word. Proportionately spaced fonts, in which characters had different widths, replaced older typewriter fonts in which all the characters were of the same width.
The discovery was made by Paul Lukasiak, a Philadelphia researcher who was the source of research proving that Bush did not complete his required Guard service, which RAW STORY reported Aug. 1, and was carried in September by the Boston Globe.
Bush’s Defense Department fought the AP lawsuit filed in July to have the original microfiche records examined to determine if documents were withheld by the White House.
And even though Defense released Bush’s flight records on Sept. 10, just when the memo controversy was gaining steam, and another 200 pages of records on Sept. 17th, it did not release the proportionately spaced memo at either point.
It was not until Sept. 24, under a federal court order, that the Pentagon finally released the proportionately spaced document, even though this document had been released in 2000.
The document was not made available to the general public on the department’s website until the following week.
Was Karl Rove involved?
James Moore, author of acclaimed best-seller Bush’s Brain, the acclaimed best seller about Bush and the relationship with his advisor Karl Rove, said the timing of the release was dubious.
“I find the timing of the release of this proportionally spaced document to be very curious,” Moore said. “The CBS documents were attacked for similar spacing because of an argument that typewriters did not have that capability more than 30 years ago. But this new document clearly proves that to be wrong.”
Moore said he suspects Rove was involved with the scandal.
“My suspicions about Rove’s involvement in the CBS document controversy arose after the well-coordinated attack on the memos,” he said. “Critics were ready with their analysis almost before CBS got off the air. And they knew precisely the forensic arguments to make.”
“This didn’t happen through simple due diligence,” he added. “They were tipped in advance. And that was only possible if Rove was involved in the creation and leaking of the documents or if he got
them in advance.”
“If anybody can pull those off, it’s Rove.”
Other studies of Bush’s Guard files
Another recent study (http://imrl.usu.edu/bush_memo_study/) appears to prove that the CBS memos were produced by a typewriter.
Director of the Interactive Media Research Laboratory Dr. David Hailey at Utah State University demonstrates that the CBS memos were produced on a typewriter, and not by a contemporary computer. Dr. Hailey is an expert on images, and has demonstrated that there are consistent flaws in certain letters that can only be attributed to a typewritten document.
Hailey’s study has received scant attention from mainstream media, despite the fact that it refutes the primary “evidence” that the Killian memos were forgeries.
He did, however, receive attention after a conservative blog, WizBang, started deriding his claims and research. Since then, he has been flooded with angry emails charging “academic fraud.”
This story comes on the tail of another story (http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=301) revealing that some of Bush’s genuine Guard files may have been tampered with. Physical anomalies in two documents suggest that changes were made to the documents after they were generated, perhaps to mask embarrassing information about the President’s service.
Fakes, or not fakes?
It has yet to be proven whether the CBS documents were actually fakes; CBS has said only that they can no longer be certain they are genuine. The alleged source of their documents was former Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett.
Some have suggested that the attacks were engineered to destroy Burkett’s credibility, who has been a thorn in the Bush’s side for many years. He was the source for USA Today’s 2001 series which proved the Texas National Guard (among other state Guards) was receiving federal funding for the training of Guardsmen who did not show up.
Burkett subsequently asserted he had observed Bush campaign officials in the act of purging Bush’s Texas Air National Guard files.
RAW STORY has followed the forgery claims from the beginning, noting Sept. 9 that the initial sources of the Matt Drudge’s forgery claim – CNS News and Powerline, are run by a conservative who chairs the Conservative Victory Committee and sits on the board of a conservative thinktank, respectively.
Salon followed with another story Sept. 10, stating that the same conservative operatives who attacked Kerry as Swift Boat Veterans
for Truth pushed the forgery claims.
Another blogger, “Buckhead,” posted a highly technical explanation posted within hours of 6o Minutes citing proportional spacing and font styles, the New York Times reported.
“It was the work of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes who helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica Lewinsky scandal,” the Times wrote.
“Reached by telephone,” the piece continued, “MacDougald confirmed that he is Buckhead, but declined to answer questions about his political background or how he knew so much about the CBS documents so fast.”
DEVELOPING….
The Blue Lemur (http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=324)
By John Byrne | RAW STORY Editor
A newly released document from President George W. Bush’s military records lends credence to rumors that the recent flap over ‘forged memos’ was in fact engineered from within the White House, RAW STORY has learned.
At the very least, the timing of the release shows that the White House deliberately withheld a genuine document which contained the characteristics of the memos which are said to have been forged. From the beginning, Bush’s supporters have claimed that typewriters of the period could not produce the documents.
It’s also the fourth time the White House has released Bush documents since they said they had released all of Bush’s non-medical documents. White House communications director Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that he had put out “absolutely everything” he had of Bush’s nonmedical military records in February.
The document (http://www.glcq.com/docs/(71-02-19)recognition_memo.pdf) in question was released to an independent researcher as part of a Freedom of Information Act request in 2000, but was not made available to the general media until the White House released it – under a federal court order after a lawsuit by the Associated Press – on Sept. 24.
The document is a memo written to Bush notifying him of his promotion to First Lieutenant. Dated Feb. 19, 1971, it was typed more than a year before the first of the CBS memos.
And, like the CBS memos, this document uses a proportionately spaced font and has the characteristics of a document produced on contemporary computers using Microsoft Word. Proportionately spaced fonts, in which characters had different widths, replaced older typewriter fonts in which all the characters were of the same width.
The discovery was made by Paul Lukasiak, a Philadelphia researcher who was the source of research proving that Bush did not complete his required Guard service, which RAW STORY reported Aug. 1, and was carried in September by the Boston Globe.
Bush’s Defense Department fought the AP lawsuit filed in July to have the original microfiche records examined to determine if documents were withheld by the White House.
And even though Defense released Bush’s flight records on Sept. 10, just when the memo controversy was gaining steam, and another 200 pages of records on Sept. 17th, it did not release the proportionately spaced memo at either point.
It was not until Sept. 24, under a federal court order, that the Pentagon finally released the proportionately spaced document, even though this document had been released in 2000.
The document was not made available to the general public on the department’s website until the following week.
Was Karl Rove involved?
James Moore, author of acclaimed best-seller Bush’s Brain, the acclaimed best seller about Bush and the relationship with his advisor Karl Rove, said the timing of the release was dubious.
“I find the timing of the release of this proportionally spaced document to be very curious,” Moore said. “The CBS documents were attacked for similar spacing because of an argument that typewriters did not have that capability more than 30 years ago. But this new document clearly proves that to be wrong.”
Moore said he suspects Rove was involved with the scandal.
“My suspicions about Rove’s involvement in the CBS document controversy arose after the well-coordinated attack on the memos,” he said. “Critics were ready with their analysis almost before CBS got off the air. And they knew precisely the forensic arguments to make.”
“This didn’t happen through simple due diligence,” he added. “They were tipped in advance. And that was only possible if Rove was involved in the creation and leaking of the documents or if he got
them in advance.”
“If anybody can pull those off, it’s Rove.”
Other studies of Bush’s Guard files
Another recent study (http://imrl.usu.edu/bush_memo_study/) appears to prove that the CBS memos were produced by a typewriter.
Director of the Interactive Media Research Laboratory Dr. David Hailey at Utah State University demonstrates that the CBS memos were produced on a typewriter, and not by a contemporary computer. Dr. Hailey is an expert on images, and has demonstrated that there are consistent flaws in certain letters that can only be attributed to a typewritten document.
Hailey’s study has received scant attention from mainstream media, despite the fact that it refutes the primary “evidence” that the Killian memos were forgeries.
He did, however, receive attention after a conservative blog, WizBang, started deriding his claims and research. Since then, he has been flooded with angry emails charging “academic fraud.”
This story comes on the tail of another story (http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=301) revealing that some of Bush’s genuine Guard files may have been tampered with. Physical anomalies in two documents suggest that changes were made to the documents after they were generated, perhaps to mask embarrassing information about the President’s service.
Fakes, or not fakes?
It has yet to be proven whether the CBS documents were actually fakes; CBS has said only that they can no longer be certain they are genuine. The alleged source of their documents was former Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett.
Some have suggested that the attacks were engineered to destroy Burkett’s credibility, who has been a thorn in the Bush’s side for many years. He was the source for USA Today’s 2001 series which proved the Texas National Guard (among other state Guards) was receiving federal funding for the training of Guardsmen who did not show up.
Burkett subsequently asserted he had observed Bush campaign officials in the act of purging Bush’s Texas Air National Guard files.
RAW STORY has followed the forgery claims from the beginning, noting Sept. 9 that the initial sources of the Matt Drudge’s forgery claim – CNS News and Powerline, are run by a conservative who chairs the Conservative Victory Committee and sits on the board of a conservative thinktank, respectively.
Salon followed with another story Sept. 10, stating that the same conservative operatives who attacked Kerry as Swift Boat Veterans
for Truth pushed the forgery claims.
Another blogger, “Buckhead,” posted a highly technical explanation posted within hours of 6o Minutes citing proportional spacing and font styles, the New York Times reported.
“It was the work of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes who helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar President Clinton after the Monica Lewinsky scandal,” the Times wrote.
“Reached by telephone,” the piece continued, “MacDougald confirmed that he is Buckhead, but declined to answer questions about his political background or how he knew so much about the CBS documents so fast.”
DEVELOPING….
The Blue Lemur (http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=324)