Posted on 09/10/2004 12:47:25 PM PDT by WoodstockCat
Hannity just said a story will be filed later today that from sources inside CBS that the source of the documents is also the one who provided the Abu Grihab prison photos.
Gary Killian on Hannity right now.
The purportions of the different letters are not the same. Your example, the five "wwwww" looks about the same length as four "mmmm". A typewriter would have to have some regulularity, while a computer need not. So this makes sense.
In my test, the "wwwww" is just slightly narrower than the "mmmmm". Completly different than your image.
If your example is correct, I still think the font is hugely different. Which would entirely preclude making a duplicate unless every letter was adjusted to match MS Word.
Why does anyone think Hackworth is involved?....
It's the kerning, stupid!
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007779.php
"True Type divides them up into much smaller slices, with much finer resolution, plus kerning. You might have been very good with the Executive, but you would not match what a modern word processor and laser printer do, such that one would not be able to tell the difference. No way.
"
You'd be able to tell the difference, of course, if you held them next to each other, even. But the point is that, while I could make a nice document (the reason the Executive was created), it would have taken a lot of work, and I wouldn't have done it if I were some officer.
This was deliberate, and it was clumsy enough to get caught immediately. One "th" down, one "th" up. Why? So you'd notice the Word-like superscript right off the bat.
This was not done by an idiot. It was done by someone for some reason who wanted the forgery discovered. Who, I don't know. Why, I don't know. Time for the tinfoil.
just call him hack for short...
"What are you worried about...further (real) documentation that is more damning? A Republican source? A distraction?"
I don't know, and that's what's worrying me. This was a clummsy forgery, one sure to be detected. Why?
Don't you DARE turn this into an evolution thread!
You are right of course. As I follow these threads I keep thinking of the billion monkeys on a billion typewriters and eventually you have a document that matches the Word document perfectly. 8^>
13 point type!!!
"Was kerning possible, where one letter would share horizontal space with the immediate previous letter?"
Nope. If you used the Executive for typesetting, you used something else for headlines that needed kerning. A Kroy or something like that.
Again, I'm just trying to eliminate the things that you COULD do. The kerning's an excellent example of what you couldn't do.
add to that list no punch holes on top of page and Bush would had an automatic order for a physical on his Birthday not from his CO.
It's an irrelevant nit-pick, FWIW. Everybody on this thread agrees the documents were not made on that model of typewriter, but not for exactly the reason you gave.
The IBM Executive does proportional type, and could be fitted with special strikers to make the "superscript st." But several paragraphs of text, in the closest of the available fonts, would not match with the precision shown by MS word (yours) vs. the forgery. Therefore, the forgery was produced by MS Word.
That's all I'm trying to say.
You said you "could have created this document". But then you say about the overlay, "That would have been impossible".
If you can't make it overlay, then you can't "make that document".
I just heard killian hand wrote all his notes and then sent the notes off to the NYT to get them propperly typeset and printed. He liked neat notes.
(just kidding)
That's a provocative point, one that I'd like to see played out. I agree with the rest of your post.
I hate typewriters, and cannot imagine having survived trying to layout a magazine on one!
Wow, this is chilling.
PERFECTO!!!
WOW!!! We were right!
It is Mary Mapes. She recieved the documents.
I've been worried about this for the last 24 hours. But then the Niger memos out of Italy made their way to the UN when some said they were phony at first glance. I just don't know what to make of it, but I am more than suspicious.
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.