Posted on 09/13/2004 4:50:36 PM PDT by TC Rider
"The only rationale I can come up with for their behavior is to protect the original source, the Kerry campaign."
This has already been hinted at by several press stories echoed here on FR. Names have been mentioned.
Its only a matter of time till this breaks in the mainstream press, and when it does GWB is going to pick up 10 States no matter how much flipping and flopping Kerry does.
Document-Gate is going to be Kerry's swan song, and will reveal the DNC for what it is.
Bush's genius is his ability to avoid creating firestorms that the media can burn him with.
If you don't give them a target to shoot at, all they can hit is air.
I always save the best for last. GO WOLFPACK!
Exactly!
The question isn't whether a typewriter could produce the documents (even though I know they can't). That is playing into the libs hands. If they can pretend that's the issue, then we have an interminable hunt for the one document that will prove they are real. Of course, there is no such document.
This is a bad idea because by implication you are saying that if a typewriter could produce the same document, then they are real. That's ridiculous. That would mean no documents since 1975--certainly since the advent of word processors--could ever be proved fraudulent. The issue is a combination of the likelihood even a similar document could be reproduced on a typewriter and if so, what would you have to do to produce it? Then the issue becomes, do any of the other TANG documents on file have any of these characteristics? Of course they don't. These documents are fake. But I've seen the trap of trying to prove a negative fail too often. That is not the standard. It will give libs all kinds of opportunities to claim a certain typewriter easily does this or that without ever addressing the issue of the myriad other problems there are that show these to be fake.
If it's a test you want, I'd like to see CBS instead put on someone with the typewriter they claim could have been used and show that person creating the documents. Show them centering the header, show them changing the balls to make the superscript, show how expensive the Composer was, and produce any other document from the known TANG files from that era with the the characteristics we've been talking about, other than these memos. Then show them superimpose the headers over each other and see if they align.
Yep. I watched CBS News tonight for the first time in at least 20 years just for the express purpose of seeing if the network at decided yet to come clean. Instead, CBS presented two nerd types who claimed that indeed the documents "could have been" produced in 1972. When it was over, all I could do was shake my head in wonderment and disgust and switch back to Fox where the roundtable was discussing.... the CBS forged documents.
By the way, I noticed that the CBS Newscast itself seemed stuck in 1972. The production qualities were lame and dated, and Rather's delivery was stiffer than I even remembered it. It's like nothing has changed there in decades. That is one poor news show.
We keep hearing about Occam's Razor, over and over. What is the POSSIBILITY that Rather could be correct (only if a large number of random suppositions came together at one instant) versus the possibility that these documents, fitting the Photoshop overlay, are forged. In a hypothesis one must assume the simplest answer is the correct answer, and then refute it.
The only thing that matters is WHAT HAPPENED - the Photoshop overlay proves it - stop letting Rather frame the argument.
FOCUS ON THE OVERLAY!!!
My goodness..... Dan has children
When does this youngster work? I assume it is some liberal outfit...ACLU perhaps?
Most modern books are set with Adobe fonts. Professional fonts can cost several hundred dollars for a single face. When I buy a book I usually look to see if it specifies the font. Many well designed books are proud of their typesetting and have a page devoted to it.
Books set electronically should be easy to match with a program like Quark or InDesign.
Many forged documents can only be shown to be forgeries by 'proving a negative'. There are few, like these ones, that can be positively shown to be forgeries.
Suppose that somebody had a photo of Einstein standing in front of a blackboard with a bunch of seemingly-random numbers on it. Would the photo be plausible? Perhaps. Suppose a check of the Illinois Lottery website showed that the numbers on the board were drawn on 1-1-2004. Would you still consider the photo plausible?
Given that the positive proof of fakery exists, the notion of 'typewriter searching' is silly.
This was a Word-wrote malfunction.
I totally disagree. You are usually not proving a negative when proving a forgery. You are proving a positive--that the document was forged. Here, they want us to have to prove it was impossible to make that document in 1972. That means the burden of proof is not only on us, but that they can defeat assertions of forgery by merely producing a typewriter that can do the various things that appear in the document. That proves nothing, but they get the benefit of not having to admit they are forgeries if that is the way it is played. That is intolerable, in my book.
Agree. C"BS" called the documents as "authentic". The documents were questioned with many serious discrepancies; therefor the burden of proof of authenticity is now in their ball park. But they keep dropping the ball and yelling "home run". Ain't going to fly.
I PREDICT:
Yes, had to be the DNC. CBS is afraid of the DNC so it won't attack the habd that fed them. THEY WILL ATTACK the person who gave them or is responsible for the documents. The attack will not be directly for the paper forgery as that would shoot them in the other foot. But they will attack "the" person relentlessly to destroy that person. Just wait. If CBS doesn't attack, then it will be RATher or one of his minions. BUT you will probably be able to read between the lines in order to send a message. None of the TV media want to be victimized like this.
Professional courtesy by the TV News Media gives CBS a pass. Courtesy will cause them to pull their punches, but they will, or the allies of CBS will, join the attack. Nothing personal, just business.
Thanks for the graphic!
What is mildly amusing, while in my graphic arts mode, I helped engineers 'recreate' screen dumps for tech manuals. The test equipment used old monospace screens, but weren't capable of screen captures.
We would retype the screens in "courier monospaced", reverse it out and put it on a black background.
If the geniuses who forged the CBS docs had used a courier type monospace font and then faxed/copied 15 times they might have dodged detection for at least a day or two.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.