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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: unclewest who wrote (55540)9/12/2004 9:27:08 PM
From: TigerPaw  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
you will likely laugh at how dumb the changes are.


They are not consistent with any theory put out to explain forgeries. Each change and inconsistency has a differnet theory or motive in the explaination. Sometimes it is described as the work of a young generation-x who didn't know what a typewriter was like, and other times by such a typewriter veteran that they couldn't break the habit of using little-L for a One.

There is no overall theory for the forgery, there is a whole series of little theories for each characteristic.

Instead, the memos look like some were typed for personal use by a hunt and peck typist, and some were typed in the typing pool.

TP



To: unclewest who wrote (55540)9/12/2004 9:37:58 PM
From: TigerPaw  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
Be sure to look compare the address block on the 24 June 1973 memo

Perhaps you have a link to an analysis.
Just look open ended at poor copies is much like listening for satanic verses on hard to understand pop-music. You are likely to see what you are looking for.

My opinion on the headers, (I think that's what you mean by address blocks), is that they were typed onto papers and zeroxed into piles of basicly blank papers, but blank papers that couldn't be stolen because they had this homemade letterhead. Pilferage is an obsession with govt. agencies like the guard.

TP