Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (69907)	9/13/2004 10:56:49 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793919

She asks exactly the right question. The copy machines today are vastly superior to old ones....A copy made from an original, or even a copy is nearly perfect. Every office assistant should know that one puts a blank white paper behind the paper to be copied, and there are no marks to speak of on the new copy. Even a carbon paper with a white paper behind it becomes clear on the new machines. These copies are forged. I looked at the .pdf of the memo, itself, and something I haven't seen mentioned came to mind. It's got a lot of little dots on it, as if it had been copied many times over, or something. This is fairly typical copy-degrading, I think. But wasn't this supposed to have been "newly discovered" because it had been in Killian's personal files all these years and has only just now come to light? Doesn't that suggest the memos would have been originals, or have been touched infrequently, if at all? Maybe it is a carbon copy, and that would explain the dots. But I could certainly see someone thinking they were making it look older by copying copies of copies of it.