Thanks.
Posted on 09/13/2004 2:41:52 PM PDT by sonofatpatcher2
Howlin started a Live Thread September 10, 2004 to see what Dan would say. He told us his report was the facts and nothing but the facts.
Well, it is now Monday, the 13th. What will Dan say today?
I don't even understand the logic. Are they saying these were lowercase "ls" or the numeral "1"? If they are trying to say that this means the forger had to go through the extra trouble of adding then deleting an extra space, are they insane? What the heck do they think forgers do? Slap it together and say, good enough for government work? On the one hand, they want to say no forger would be stupid enough to make the mistakes all of us have pointed out, on the other they want to say no forger would bother to defeat the auto-superscript function with a few extra keystrokes. What morons. Let me cross-examine them.
I wouldn't know how to begin to research that,but there are a lot of smart people here:)
It IS amazing that Ben Barnes' daughter came forward,but maybe like Pat Caddell and a few others,the level of dirtiness within the DNC is just getting so high that no person with any integrity can stand to see them getting away with it anymore.
Dan Rather is no different from any of us. He takes a sh!t and wipes his ass with toilet paper like the rest of us. If any of us screwed up on the job we would be fired or sued in a heart beat (depending where we are on the totem pole).
We employ him through our consumer dollars. His position assumes a certain amount of public trust. (Okay in an unbiased media) When he abuses that trust, as he has...he has got to go.
The only ones who will see this through to the end is us.
Yes. And so the "expert" comes on the television today and "testifies" that this is consistent with technology that was available at that time--and those people who say otherwise are lying. This is how the Left operates. They omit the word "readily" (as in "readily available). They can then disparage the argument questioning the validity of these documents.
Man, you've got to be an attorney to talk to a Liberal these days....
Surely there are other Memos Killian typed, let's see those and compare. That would solve it as well.
Thanks.
You read (or heard) right; Times New Roman, as a font, per se, was commissioned for The Times of London in 1931 for their newspaper presses ... more history on this upon request ...
Post #23...sounds like the Matrix, LOL!
Three basic objections:
1 The Executive was a very expensive machine, and it stretches credulity to think a National Guard would have even had it, let alone used it to type up a personal CYA memo.
2 Having proportional spacing is not the same thing as getting the exact kerning as per the supposed "memos" in question.
3 Yes, superscript characters existed at the time. One would have had to replace the font ball. So, we are asked to believe that Killian (or, rather, since Killian *didn't type*, his secretary - who didn't initial it for some reason) was typing this memo and found it SO important to have the "th" raised that he/she paused to swap font balls, make the raised "th", then swapped again.
Each one of these three objections on its own gives one reason to think it very unlikely that the memos are genuine. Multiplied together and you get a miniscule probability.
There is absolutely no reason anyone has put forth to believe that these memos are real. Meanwhile, there are numerous reasons to think them highly suspect. That's enough to pronounce them fake unless/until reasons surface to think otherwise.
Anyone know?
Perish the thought! Do you really want the government arbitrating what's news and what's not??
I guess the sheeple don't put 2 and 2 together very well....but then again, he is mainly speaking to his own little choir. I think it will get a little smaller after this.
"Didn't Dan-o do something right before the 2000 election and bets were taken on him being fired before that election?"
If I am accurate in my recall, isnt Dan the one who called the race for Gore in Florida before the polls in the panhandle were closed? Is that the goof you are thinking of?
Still wouldn't prove they were authentic - only that it could have been done on a typewriter.
However, it is not known, except perhaps to IBM, whether any such Custom IBM Executive Model D was ever made. And, if one or more were made, who purchased it and what happened to it.
Moreover, while the fonts available to IBM would have been close to Times New Roman, there is no evidence that IBM ever licensed that font in the 1950s. The font was pretty much unknown outside of books and the London Times before Apple and Microsoft licensed it around 1990. Times New Roman makes a perfect match, the fonts available on even the Executive Model D do not.
One needs to read Bouffard's analysis as reported by INDCJournal and, of course, the Newcomer article, which taken together make it clear it would have been virtually impossible for the memos to be anything other than clumsy Word forgeries.
And, that's before applying Occam's Razor to the series of unlikely events that would have had to occur to even get close: non-typist types memos without typographical errors on a tricky-to-use IBM Executive Model D that was custom ordered by the Texas Air National Guard (or the Air Force and handed down) with a rarely used font with special superscript keys. Uh, huh. Right.
You know, I had no idea about the story about that song's title until recently. I always used to sing along, thinking it was about, I dunno, basketball or something.
Tacky isn't a strong enough word. Ugh!
Looks like it's "back to the drawing board," Dan.
Contact the FCC. Everyone has to fire off a letter letting them know that CBS has violated the public trust, they have abused their privilege to serve the public, they have ignored their responsibility to serve [all] the public and in so doing, they have undermined the American System.
Then hit 'send'....'send'...'send'....'send'....'send'....
I read he has not answered calls. (Mr Staudt)
I did watch that on C-Span yesterday,at least from John O'Neill spoke.
There MUST be some way to hold CBS accountable for this,I can't believe the medi can have the power to indiscriminately lie about elected officials with no repercussions.
There must be some department in the government in a position to investigate or sue? the media can sue officials for all kinds of things-information under the "Freedom of Information Act",for instance. Is there no accountability or system of OUTSIDE checks-and-balances for the media? Or are they some rogue fourth branch of "government"?
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.