Posted on 11/21/2005 2:17:55 PM PST by kristinn
Anyways! Buckhead makes a great point. I was about 2 weeks into a desktop publishing class at college and I knew these were fakes (I had just learned about proprtional spaced and monospace fonts that week). I can't believe how much "wanting" a story to be true can blind someone so completely. I mean, this was the poorest forgery ever to come down the pike (hell, they didn't even bother to take it off the DEFAULT FONT!). Makes me wonder...if they would have used a monospaced font (remember the one NewsMax used to use for printer-friendly article versions), would this smear have worked?
I agree with Buckhead's assessment that was only a matter of time before plenty of other people noticed the forgery. I also worked in an office environment and used IBM Selectrics and every other manner of typewriter. Heck, I remember using the original "fax" machine (I forget what it was called) in the early '80s where you put your phone in a cradle and your document on a drum which spun around.
After Buckhead's alert, I looked at the document on-line and could easily see that it just wasn't right.
Early '70s? No way.
Buckhead is pure evil!
How can a lawyer, in his pajamas even, ever refute the $ millions that Rather and crowd had invested in this expose of the evil GW Bush??
Off with his head, and pour pigfat in his grave, as he exposed the main premise of the First Amendment, which has been controlled by the media!
Buckhead, our undying thanks!
Wonderful to see history so close up. Al's internet sure is cool.
Buckhead did great.
The first clue that the documents were fake was that they came from someone who had already been discredited (circa 1996 by Texas Monthly and 2004 by the Boston Globe), Bill Burkett.
The second clue was that CBS didn't have any originals and couldn't obtain any originals (a point that the NY Times still deliberately ignored in their book review for Mapes **this past week**).
The third clue was the language. The forged memos used words such as "physical" instead of the correct military term "airman's medical."
But the damning proof was what Buckhead cited: the proportional font and superscripting...items not available in the 1970's outside of room-sized print shops...certainly not to lowly Guard office clerks and Colonels (especially one who didn't know how to type, must less typeset).
Great Job Buckhead. I Lurked,real time, as your thread broke. It was fascinating. Happy Thanksgiving.
I'm wondering when we got to a point that press stories are true only if they can't be proven wrong.
Still think the MSM is unbiased?
Actually, it's zipped, not corrupted. The website did that automatically when I uploaded it. I just checked it, and my machine unzipped it and displayed it correctly.
Right you are.
BUCKHEAD for head of the CIA!
Way to go Buckhead!
I bet dandy Dan and little miss Mary are cussing Al for inventing this internet thing! lol
Buckhead rocks! Thanks, Kristinn!
We certainly have some smart knowledgeable FReepers. God Bless Buckhead. ;o) That's how good conservatives are; dealing with facts not the fiction the libs deal with.
Either way, I bet the documents came from Rove. It's brilliant in a Rovian sort of way...
Lost the case in the trial court, won it on appeal and then we settled.
nice point in your #24
It's really obvious that those documents look absolutely nothing like any of the others in Bush's entire file. I don't even think you need to understand proportional fonts to notice that.
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.