SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Doug R who wrote (622796)9/12/2004 9:18:46 AM
From: jim-thompson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
i wonder if dan lather will name names when he deems it necessary to protect his own back side.

cbs needs to send dan lather packing over this RatherGate mess.



To: Doug R who wrote (622796)9/12/2004 9:49:09 AM
From: J. C. Dithers  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
Your analysis boils down to "anything is possible".

In this case, it's "possible" that an IBM typewriter could have been ordered in the 1970s with all the custom, state-of-the-art features (only the right ones and regardless of cost) to replicate the output of a word processor that was yet to be invented.

And it's "possible" that this unique, one-of-a-kind machine could have been ordered by the by 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron just in time to produce the Bush documents.

Yes. And it's "possible" that 9/11 never happened and was a Republican-orchestrated hoax.



To: Doug R who wrote (622796)9/12/2004 10:59:17 AM
From: Peter O'Brien  Respond to of 769670
 
So, it's just coincidence that all the manual typewriter
linebreaks were the same as the MS-Word automatic
linebreaks? ABSOLUTELY no variation?



To: Doug R who wrote (622796)9/12/2004 11:19:22 AM
From: Peter O'Brien  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 769670
 
Why didn't Killian use his fancy typewriter in Sept 1973
for this memo?

powerlineblog.com

Compare it to the CBS document that he
supposedly typed with his fancy "MS-Word"
typewriter just a few weeks earlier:

powerlineblog.com



To: Doug R who wrote (622796)9/12/2004 12:44:32 PM
From: GROUND ZERO™  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Much ado about nothing... You don't even believe it yourself, why do you continue with your charade?

In fact, you forgot the two most compelling pieces of evidence to prove it was a hoax... the signatures are not the same, and the signatory retired from service 18 months prior to the date on the memo he "signed," not too bright, I must say...

GZ