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: pheilman_ who wrote (70446)	9/15/2004 1:37:29 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 794233

Now check out the 6 forged documents posted by the USA Today, they are very compressed, but it is still blatantly not from a typewriter. At the risk of triggering a nuance-allergy-reaction, I submit that it's possible to regard the documents as frauds without rushing to judgment that Rather or anyone else at CBS was behind the fraud. In case there's some misunderstanding of my position on the validity of the memos, the following are my two posts on the subject: ---------------------- To:unclewest who wrote (68420) From: kholt Thursday, Sep 9, 2004 1:51 PM View Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70399 I was a computer programmer for the Army in 1972. There were no computers in the field. The mainframes in the Pentagon had less capacity that the all but the earliest PCs and they required special rooms, big rooms. One of the systems I worked on was for Tables of Organization and Equipment. By equipment they sure didn't mean computers. ------------------------------ To:Nadine Carroll who wrote (69272) From: kholt Saturday, Sep 11, 2004 12:41 PM View Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70401 This typewriter arcana is getting ridiculous. Amen. Regardless of where one heard the question raised, if one knows anything at all about the process of producing memos in 1972, it takes maybe two or three minutes to conclude "oh, yes, obviously" and be done with it. It's incomprehensible to me that folks would spend two or three days turning it over and over. --------------------- You'll notice that those posts were two days apart. It boggles my mind how this thread managed to dredge up enough on such a cut and dried issue to fill a thousand intervening posts. I've been relegated to skimming and the use of the ignore feature to keep abreast of the thread. I don't know how the rest of you manage such volume. That said, I still don't know how I could have missed the posting of some document identified the culprits.

To: pheilman_ who wrote (70446)	9/15/2004 1:48:32 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 794233

Now it doesn't really matter how much the USA today compressed the 6 forged documents, the difference just blazes from the page If you look closely at the word "flight" in the fake memo, you will see an unaesthetic feature of the Truetype font Times New Roman. The lowercase "f" has a negative offset, which makes the following letter's block overlap the f's block. This tucks the "r" under the "f" in a pleasing way in words like "from" but makes the riser in the "l" actually overlap the "f" in words like "flight". As always, the fun part of the story is that you can test it at home.