dxAce wrote:


dxAce wrote:


Llgpt wrote:


Subject: '60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake
From: Sir Cumference
Date: 9/10/2004 12:15 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Michael Bryant wrote:


Regarding the charge that the fonts prove the documents are fake:

BZZZZT! Try again. The White House distributed the memos ...

BZZZZT!! Wrong again mickeyboy, CBS faxed the memos to the White House.
Now go wipe you nose and finish you cookies and milk.



LOL!! Why don't you wipe "your" nose and finish "your" cookies and milk.
English and spelling are not your strong point.

But he did get his point across, did he not?


Here's an example: Les Locklear fax's me fake documents. I release said
documents to the public, indicating that they came from Les Locklear.

How does/or would that make me responsible in any way for the fact that they
were fakes?

Depends upon if you are touting the information in those documents as
being true are not. If you are touting the contents of the documents as
truth, you should be verifying the validy of the documents.

"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Thu 09 Sep 2004 11:28:21p, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"Kameron Spesial" wrote in message
...
On 10 Sep 2004 02:12:45 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Thu 09 Sep 2004 08:56:46p, "llortamai"
wrote in message
:

"Retarded Death Row Inmates 4 Bush" wrote in
message om...
dream on.

You wish you could dream it was false, but the articles keep coming.
Here's another one.

http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/...asp?idArticle=
459
6 &R=9FCD2F192

Is It a Hoax?
Experts weigh in on the 60 Minutes documents. Says one: "I'm a Kerry
supporter myself, but . . . I'm 99% sure that these documents were
not produced in the early 1970s."
by Stephen F. Hayes
09/09/2004 7:20:00 PM

{snippage}


I wouldn't be surprised to find that 60 Minutes cast some lines about,
offering to pay for similar information and by doing so, set
themselves
up
for getting "werked"!

If they turn out to be forged, it would be a further indication that
60 minutes was willing to take the info and run without validating it.

Here's a suggested topic for a 60 Minutes expose on their own stafers:
Blinded by Bias!

-=jd=-

And you're certainly not biased JD.

It's pretty unlikely that 60 Minutes "ran" with the story without a
fairly strenuous attempt to validate the documents. They might have
been wrong and it might turn out that the docs are plants, but 60
Minutes is regularly challenged by all quarters and I've got a feeling
that they go out of their way to vet anything they present as
"evidence."


From what I heard on the Radio (NPR), they asked the usual line of
questions, but didn't run the document past any typographers

then they lied.

(who would
have thought to?).

People who are regularly sued such as CBS.

In any event, I would be willing to bet that in the
future, if they are handed "the document of their dreams" similar to the
case at hand, it *will* get a typographical appraisal!


-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)

"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Fri 10 Sep 2004 09:33:32p, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Thu 09 Sep 2004 11:28:21p, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"Kameron Spesial" wrote in message
...
On 10 Sep 2004 02:12:45 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Thu 09 Sep 2004 08:56:46p, "llortamai"
wrote in message
:

"Retarded Death Row Inmates 4 Bush" wrote
in message
om...
dream on.

You wish you could dream it was false, but the articles keep
coming. Here's another one.

http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/...r_preview.asp?
idArticle=
459
6 &R=9FCD2F192

Is It a Hoax?
Experts weigh in on the 60 Minutes documents. Says one: "I'm a
Kerry supporter myself, but . . . I'm 99% sure that these
documents were not produced in the early 1970s."
by Stephen F. Hayes
09/09/2004 7:20:00 PM

{snippage}


I wouldn't be surprised to find that 60 Minutes cast some lines
about, offering to pay for similar information and by doing so, set
themselves
up
for getting "werked"!

If they turn out to be forged, it would be a further indication
that 60 minutes was willing to take the info and run without
validating it.

Here's a suggested topic for a 60 Minutes expose on their own
stafers: Blinded by Bias!

-=jd=-

And you're certainly not biased JD.

It's pretty unlikely that 60 Minutes "ran" with the story without a
fairly strenuous attempt to validate the documents. They might have
been wrong and it might turn out that the docs are plants, but 60
Minutes is regularly challenged by all quarters and I've got a
feeling that they go out of their way to vet anything they present as
"evidence."


From what I heard on the Radio (NPR), they asked the usual line of
questions, but didn't run the document past any typographers

then they lied.


/sarcasm on
My bad - Who are we to question the integrity of (ahem) "unbiased" NPR or
60-Minutes reporters?
/sarcasm off

I don't care if they're CBS or CNN or FOX or NPR. If they lied they lied.
CBS Stated that the documents had been reviewed by independent document
authorities. Go to cbsnews.com.

Now I'm used to lies and near lies from FOX but I've got to hold CBS to a
higher standard because it is supposed to be actual News. 60 Minutes is
even advertised as a New program. So if they didn't get those documents
reviewed by bona fide experts, then they LIED.



-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)

On 11 Sep 2004 01:12:04 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


So, yes - I *am* undoubtably biased: more than some, less than others. I
am also darn near dead-center according to a political leaning test
several of us took in here. So, if I look extreme-right from your vantage
point, you reveal the location of your vantage point:
( ---- it's back in that direction; some distance from the center )

I'm perfectly in the center. Take a look at my posts.

Gandalf Grey wrote:

"Kameron Spesial" wrote in message
...
On 10 Sep 2004 02:12:45 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:



I wouldn't be surprised to find that 60 Minutes cast some lines about,
offering to pay for similar information and by doing so, set themselves
up
for getting "werked"!

If they turn out to be forged, it would be a further indication that 60
minutes was willing to take the info and run without validating it.

Here's a suggested topic for a 60 Minutes expose on their own stafers:
Blinded by Bias!

-=jd=-

And you're certainly not biased JD.

It's pretty unlikely that 60 Minutes "ran" with the story without a fairly
strenuous attempt to validate the documents. They might have been wrong and
it might turn out that the docs are plants, but 60 Minutes is regularly
challenged by all quarters and I've got a feeling that they go out of their
way to vet anything they present as "evidence."

CBS said they submitted the documents to extensive examination by
experts before 'running' with the story, but nothing will convince the
conspiracy types.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
"Paolo Pizzi" wrote:

Greg wrote:

BTW - Drudge is often right.

Suuuuuuuuuuure, that's the guy who photomontaged Kerry
besides Jane Fonda. ****ing neofascist slimebag liar!!

Kerry was there. Was on the list of speakers, is in the FBI reports.
Nice try.

The photograph he is referring to has been proven to be a fake. The real
one shows Kerry sitting in a group behind Fonda, not standing next to
her.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

-=jd=- wrote:

On Thu 09 Sep 2004 04:43:50p, "Mr. N" wrote in

What if it *isn't* fake?


Then we may have found a clue that someone traveled thru time, armed with the
"Times New Roman" font set developed in the 80's, with the ability to use
them on a circa 1972 manual or electric typewriter!

Has *anyone* notified the Discovery Science channel yet !?!?

-=jd=-

The 'Times New Roman' font has been used since 1931 according to
typography experts.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article ,
longwave wrote:

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
"Paolo Pizzi" wrote:

Greg wrote:

BTW - Drudge is often right.

Suuuuuuuuuuure, that's the guy who photomontaged Kerry
besides Jane Fonda. ****ing neofascist slimebag liar!!

Kerry was there. Was on the list of speakers, is in the FBI reports.
Nice try.

The photograph he is referring to has been proven to be a fake. The real
one shows Kerry sitting in a group behind Fonda, not standing next to
her.

Well the photograph I'm referring to is not a fake. Kerry was there
according to the FBI reports as I said.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
longwave wrote:

Gandalf Grey wrote:

"Kameron Spesial" wrote in message
...
On 10 Sep 2004 02:12:45 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:



I wouldn't be surprised to find that 60 Minutes cast some lines about,
offering to pay for similar information and by doing so, set themselves
up
for getting "werked"!

If they turn out to be forged, it would be a further indication that 60
minutes was willing to take the info and run without validating it.

Here's a suggested topic for a 60 Minutes expose on their own stafers:
Blinded by Bias!

-=jd=-

And you're certainly not biased JD.

It's pretty unlikely that 60 Minutes "ran" with the story without a fairly
strenuous attempt to validate the documents. They might have been wrong and
it might turn out that the docs are plants, but 60 Minutes is regularly
challenged by all quarters and I've got a feeling that they go out of their
way to vet anything they present as "evidence."

CBS said they submitted the documents to extensive examination by
experts before 'running' with the story, but nothing will convince the
conspiracy types.

They are full of it. They also said if any information to the contrary
was available they would show it and they have not.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
longwave wrote:

-=jd=- wrote:

On Thu 09 Sep 2004 04:43:50p, "Mr. N" wrote
in

What if it *isn't* fake?


Then we may have found a clue that someone traveled thru time, armed with
the
"Times New Roman" font set developed in the 80's, with the ability to use
them on a circa 1972 manual or electric typewriter!

Has *anyone* notified the Discovery Science channel yet !?!?

-=jd=-

The 'Times New Roman' font has been used since 1931 according to
typography experts.

There is more to it than that. Time will tell.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California