In article ,
"Gandalf Grey" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
..
.
In article ,
"-=jd=-" wrote:

On Sat 11 Sep 2004 11:47:47p, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"-=jd=-" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat 11 Sep 2004 11:10:02p, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Sat 11 Sep 2004 09:20:11p, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"-=jd=-" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat 11 Sep 2004 06:12:01p, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"John" wrote in message
...
Isle Of The Dead wrote:
"John" wrote in message
...


There is NO reliable evidence the documents are fake.


Dude, what part of "computer age"
do you NOT understand?



I USED TYPEWRITERS THAT COULD DO IT BACK IN THE EARLY
SEVENTIES DICKHEAD!

1. It's been established in the last 24 hours that
typewriters
of the time could do what we've seen.
2. Isle of the Dead is a known newsgroup psychotic. Don't
waste your time.



It's only been established that some typewriters had the
type-font. What has not been established is if *any*
typewriters
of the time could be used to reproduce what someone (according
to
NPR) has done: - Type the content of the suspect document using
MS Word. - Print the MS-Word doc on a laser printer.
- Scan the MS-Word doc
- Scan a copy of the suspect document
- Superimpose the two over each other and marvel at how they
line
up.

Maybe it's not outside the realm of infinite possibilities that
a
chiefly mechanical device in the early seventies has the same
typographical characteristics of a current software based
word-processing program to include type spacing, kerning,
justification, character registration, etc, etc, etc...

I wouldn't be so quick to declare it a definite or even
reasonable probability just yet...

Well, the raised "e" can only be accomplished in Word with great
difficulty.

It's beginning to look like the docs are legitimate. NPR or no
NPR.


Apparently the raised "e" can also be attributed to a defect
introduced by multiple-passes through a copier in an attempt to
artificially "age" a document. If you've seen the pdf (I
downloaded
it from the Washington Post).

No. That wouldn't effect the "e"s alone.

Try again.


In the single position and no other "e" being affected, I would think
it is an artifact from something other than the device that
originally
produced the document.

Now you're reaching.

No need to try again.

Wrong.


The new discoveries along with the Rovian character of the first
criticism out make it clear that the docs are legitimate.


Opinions vary...

Rove doesn't. He's a sleazeball trickster and this is just his style.



Besides that, the docs don't reveal anything that wasn't already
known about Bush's desertion.



And there we have it. Who needs the docs, right? Enough said - I
think
I see where you're coming from.

Yeah. I'm coming from the truth. The existing documents without
Killian's documents already prove Bush wasn't where he was supposed to
be. Then there are the missing documents and the picture put together
by the AP. Bush was a technical deserter, Killian docs or no Killian
docs. That was never really a question. The Killian docs are
interesting, but they don't change much of anything.




And Kerry received one or more of his decorations "technically". So
what?
Apparently, you come from "the truth" as only you can see it through the
filter of your bias. Wherever Bush was, the ANG apparently did not have
any problem with it, as can be determined by the honorable discharge
Bush
received. Or is that particular document "forged" and/or not up to your
standards of truth?

I think it is a mistake to spend much time on Kerry's 4 months in
Vietnam since it's his word against others.

More like 3 plus years.

Excuse me, 4 months and 2 days. If you don't know the time Kerry spent
in Vietnam best you stop writing and go find out.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California