Posted on 09/10/2004 3:18:38 PM PDT by Howlin
Edited on 09/10/2004 4:53:58 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
And he won't shut up. LOL
placemark
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1212724/posts?page=1
I saw this interview..another good Fox interview.
Geneva was the Arial or Helvetica of the early mac world. That much I do remember. (really, I do...I think...)
In other news, MY phone rang right before the the beginning of this show, so once again I missed Hannity's interview with Killian's family members. GRRRRRRR, I think I'm taking my phone off the hook, till November.
Anyone can cut and paste a signature. Anyone can simulate a signature and photocopy it. This handwriting expert was working with copies. His opinion is worthless. CBS knows where the original can be found, so why didn't they have the handwriting expert examine the original?
Because the original is a fake, that's why.
He also said that this situation has pushed him over the edge. He _was_ going to skip the election this year - he just couldn't bring himself to vote for Kerry. Now, however, he's decided to cast his vote for President Bush!
#####
Every new slam by Kerry and the DNC brings a few more voters over to President Bush! Let us pray that he stays protected from the ultimate slam, as the kool-aid drinkers grow more desperate.
Why report to the commander? Is he gonna check the prostate?
See the post I made from RedState on the Boston Globe's sole source for that article. It will just amaze you.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1212732/posts
I have seen (not done by me) a defense to a drug-dealing charge that the dealer said "The law doesn't apply to me, because I was selling talcum powder as heroin." LOL.
Congressman Billybob
Thanks for the link;I missed that thread. There is just NO way that I'm EVER going to be able to keep on top of this. LOL
See #1189
CBS says they don't have the original. With that admission, they must also admit that they can prove absolutely nothing about authenticity....certainly not regarding a signature.
Even I can copy my own signature to another document and print out a new "original."
I think my thread was pulled, maybe because I linked to a blogsite that had the Fox News transcript rather than to the Fox news site itself. My thread had the interview with Col Compenni, who served with Pres Bush at TANG at the same time, and who had major problems with the CBS documents. Here's my thread comment about the interview:
>
It dawned on me that Col Campenni says he has contemporary TANG documents from exactly the same time period, and from exactly the same TANG office (and maybe office typewriter) as the genuine Bush ones and when the CBS documents were supposedly typed up. If he could post those on the web where they could be compared to what we know is genuine and the CBS forgeries?? Anyone able to contact him through Fox News perhaps???
Mine rang when CBS/Dan came on and then the inlaws came over ... grrrr
I need to move and disconnect the phone till Nov .. LOL
That "partisan" crap really ticks me off. Yes, I'm a conservative, but I was a skeptic before I became a conservative. In fact, it was my skepticism that turned me into a conservative in the first place.
I ignored the first threads on this (tin-foil- I thought) until something in one of the titles drew my attention. Now, after going through the evidence and the reports of the Lt. Col.'s family, etc. I am absolutely convinced that these are forgeries.
And I'm rarely absolutely convinced of anything.
I've sent three emails to CBS, want to see them? OK. :)
# 1 - (angry email sent just after CBS broadcast tonight)
Guess what guys - we're onto you. Everyone knows the docs are forgeries. Interesting too, that Dan seemed nervous. Oh I can't imagine why. CBS has lost whatever little tiny bit of credibility they had left, and Dan drove the cart over the cliff. Rest in peace, CBS.
#2 - (after I calmed down a bit)
We're not buying the rebuttal,and here are a few of the reasons why.
1. Your expert was an expert in handwriting, not documents. You ignored everything about the document itself - facets of the accuracy of military style using contemporary examples, whether or not certain abbreviations were used such as the date, the written rank of the signing officer, how things were signed, etc.
2. You focused on the superscript as if the additional example you cited was the same when it was not. And besides, it was typed in Courier.
3. You twisted the truth in that Times New Roman may have been available since 1931 but not on personal typewriters.
4. You completely ignored every single reason why the typeset is suspect, and there are many.
5. Your people contacted Killian's family, but dismissed their opinions because they didn't further your agenda. You also ignored the fact that Killian filed glowing reports of Bush that ARE authentic.
6. You made the ridiculous claim that the copies you provided on your website would be somehow degenerated by the time internet "partisans" perused them, as if due to the magic of computers, the "partisans'" copies wouldn't be identical to yours.
7. You simply rehashed the same things, using the same witnesses, as in the original broadcast without once bringing on anyone new or independent of your investigation, which is VERY telling.
If we were wrong, you'd have this independently investigated. The thing is, we know. And you know that we know. And the best part is, no more biased media using stories to achieve a political end. You call the internet bloggers partisan, when in fact it is you who has brought American media to this point by reporting the news how you think we should see it rather than how it should be told. I could care less whether the fact that you bought a forged set of goods affects this election one way or the other. Much more important is that you're finally being forced to face the very populace you try to affect every night.
Change or die, liberal media. This won't be the last story you're called on, unless you choose to be honest and fair.
XXXXXXXXX XXXX
Ohio
3. - to my local affiliate
He's full of it, and we all know it. There are countless things he did not address in his "rebuttal" tonight. The docs are forged, no doubt. Affiliates should be making loud complains as to his "journalistic" methods. He's done, and he knows it. You know it too.
Damn drug dealers.....(*&_(*
Next thing ya know they'll be news anchors!
:>)
I have posted non stop it seems on this story...I may go watch frivolous TV fare....;)..There are some great threads...My favorites list is loaded lest I lose anything!
In an Orwellian sense he did. He has temporarily convinced people that watch his program that he is right and righteous. Perhaps when he is proven wrong Ivan will dominate the news. It was the worst case of deceiving the public I have seen in recent memory.
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.