Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Zechariah11

"Actually, they told him they WERE handwritten."

That might explain the handwriting expert IF Rather is setting us up. But why type a document to look like the real thing if the original is handwritten? This makes no sense.



132 posted on 09/10/2004 8:00:44 PM PDT by airborne (2/504 PIR - 'Devils In Baggy Pants')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: airborne

WHy defend a type written document when you have a handwritten one proving authenticity, nah these documents are thre one and only.


151 posted on 09/10/2004 8:02:57 PM PDT by aft_lizard (I actually voted for John Kerry before I voted against him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

To: airborne
That might explain the handwriting expert IF Rather is setting us up. But why type a document to look like the real thing if the original is handwritten? This makes no sense.

No, that can't be because Rather spent all that time this evening explaining how typewriters in 1972 could do superscript and blah blah blah..

He can't come back now and say it was hand written.

162 posted on 09/10/2004 8:05:18 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

To: airborne

"Actually, they told him they WERE handwritten."

That might explain the handwriting expert IF Rather is setting us up. But why type a document to look like the real thing if the original is handwritten? This makes no sense.

And why then add a forged signature to the memos? No, there were no handwritten memos.


165 posted on 09/10/2004 8:06:20 PM PDT by Kirkwood (I think, therefore I am Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

To: airborne
That might explain the handwriting expert IF Rather is setting us up. But why type a document to look like the real thing if the original is handwritten?

Because the "original" handwritten document is ALSO a forgery; by replicating it on a WP and letting everyone wail away at it as a "forgery" for a week, they can say "well, the original is really hard to read -- it's 30 years old and has been copied many times -- so someone replicated it to make it easier to read, but we've seen the handwritten copies." And then they'll announce that the "forgery" issue has been refuted, and act like the documents are valid.

Notice the wording of Rather's remarks tonite: "people are focussing on the documents instead of what they say..." I smell a sneaky trick about to be sprung, and this explains why Rather isn't backing down. They are going to proclaim the originals WERE handwritten, and that all this internet frenzy about "forgeries" is "much ado about nothing".....

It also explains why they had a handwriting analyst instead of a document analyst as an expert, and why they only showed him examining the signature.....

The "bait and switch" is about to be played on us....

231 posted on 09/10/2004 8:23:59 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

To: airborne

"Actually, they told him they WERE handwritten."

Maybe they knew that LTC Killian did not know how to type.

It is not likely that they have original memos in LTC Killian's handwriting. Not at all. Those would be in his personal files which the family has. People don't copy and distribute handwritten notes to other officers (the alleged source); a typed memo COULD have been copied and given to someone else - some other officer - hypothetically.


433 posted on 09/10/2004 10:40:28 PM PDT by AMDG&BVMH (Proudly served in the National Guard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson