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


To: Mary Cluney who wrote (99496)2/9/2005 10:10:22 AM
From: aladin  Respond to of 793624
 
Mary,

Give it up already :-)

1. If it is true that it was printed from someone using MSWord to forge a document, CBS should be able to get to the bottom of this. Someone physically brought them this document. Where did they get this document? There is an audit trail. Someone has to be responsible for bringing this to CBS and made some representations that were false. They should be prosecuted unless they gave up the people that gave them the file/document.

Thousands of people retyped the doc to see if MS Word really was the culprit. It would be very hard to audit all possible computers - but they should audit the CBS staff computers and their sources.

2. If it is true that it was printed using MS Word, and no one criminally created this document, then there is a file stored in some computer somewhere that was created using MS Word or the file was copied into MS Word and converted. If the file was authentic, does it matter that it was reprinted using MS Word?

Absolutely, it was presented as an original document. Anything else is the now famous CBS/Rather 'fake, but true' defense.

To believe that the doc was created on 1970's computer and then transferred to a modern computer for printing is belied by the fact that it was repeatedly copied to make it 'look' old. If your supposition were correct they could present the electronic device it was stored on and then have a technician validate it was accurate. Why didn't they? - Because it didn't exist.

3. Besides bloggers "saying" there were no "word processing" equipment at TANG at the time, how do you know that is true? Were the bloggers expressing an opinion, or did someone who worked in Killian's organization at the time say that.

Killians secretary herself - specifically specified that she used an Olympia typewriter. This was not a leading edge Selectric with similar (but rudimentary) capabilities to a word processor - it was a fixed font device.

4. If we believe Marian Carr Knox (Killian's secretary) when shown the documents she said "These are not real," why do we not believe her when she said "the information in here was correct, but it was picked up from the real ones.".

What real ones? Where are the real ones?


Your back to 'fake, but true'.

What happened at TANG wrt George W. Bush is no longer immportant.

What is important, is how do we get to the truth and how MSM handles their responsibilities.


Yes - on this we can agree. Someone at CBS is either criminally responsible for fraud or simply using their positions to permit others to commit fraud.

The font stuff proves nothing. It is just political noise.

Your back to denying facts. The font 'stuff' proves the forgery, which became the basis for this whole discussion. Not even the NY Times denies the font 'stuff' anymore.

John



To: Mary Cluney who wrote (99496)2/9/2005 10:15:50 AM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793624
 
It wasn't just bloggers who busted CBS. It was others in the main stream media, including the Washington Post, ABC, USAToday, and CNN.

I am not going to go back out onto Google and answer your questions for you. You're being lazy, and to be honest, you don't really want to know the answers.

You didn't want to know the answers when the story broke, either.

You subscribe to the "fake but accurate" explanation.