Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BUCKHEAD REFUTES MARY MAPES ON RATHERGATE DOCS
How Did Buckhead Know? ^ | Monday, November 21, 2005 | Buckhead

Posted on 11/21/2005 2:17:55 PM PST by kristinn

Ever since the controversy over the CBS use of forged memos erupted, those disappointed by the exposure of the forgeries have wondered if the whole thing wasn't some sort of set up perpetrated by the Dark Lord, Karl Rove. Integral to this paranoid theorizing was their slack-jawed amazement that anyone could have observed and commented that the documents were fake based on typography as quickly as I did. How could anyone not on the inside have articulated a technical and convincing explanation that the documents were fake within a few hours of the broadcast? Well, here's your answer. It's probably too late to make any difference, but I am no longer able to stifle myself now that Mary Mapes' has written a several hundred page book parading her venomous disregard for those who exposed her lies and her delusional self-image as the Joan of Arc of investigative journalism.

So, how did I know?

The short answer is that I am 47 years old and I am not a blithering idiot.

A more elaborate answer is  this:

I have been interested in computers since 1979.  I have  used dot matrix, mainframe line printers,  daisy wheel,  ink jet, & laser printers.  I have worked in an office environment  from 1980 forward, except for 3 years of law school from 1982-1985.  I  have typed thousands of pages on IBM Selectrics, and a few hundred on various  mechanical and electric typewriters of the conventional variety.  I have changed the type ball and  pitch on Selectrics many, many times.  I have changed the daisy wheel on  daisy wheel printers.  I have typed at least a thousand pages on a Wang  word processing system, and had typed for me many thousands more.  I was one of two people in our small firm that  spearheaded the purchase and installation of a Apple Macintosh computer network in 1989.  I was the office computer geek for 8 years.  I  read the manual for Microsoft Word 4 for the Macintosh.  The manual has a  discussion in the beginning explaining that with personal computers, word processing software and laser printers, typeset print quality and  proportionally spaced fonts were available to everyone and not just those who  could afford typesetting machines, and how this was a Great New Thing.   The manual distinguished between monospaced fonts and proportionally spaced fonts.  I immediately began using proportionally spaced fonts and have done so to this day.  The distinction between monospaced and proportionally spaced fonts is very noticeable to me.  

I have been typing my own documents in various versions of  Microsoft Word, using proportionally spaced fonts, since 1989. In the 16 years since then, I have myself typed, prepared, and signed many thousands of pages using MS Word.

In my work career,  especially the law practice, I have reviewed several hundred thousand, maybe more than a million, pages of  documents prepared by businesses and government agencies from many time periods prepared on all manner of machines.  I have many times reviewed  documents that were multiple generation copies of the original, and bear the  distortions that go along with that.

I have  been a litigator for 20 years.  I have encountered a lot of fancy and not so fancy lies.

In 1999, I filed a brief  with the U.S. District Court, Northern Dist. of Ga., in Times New Roman 12. I  used that font, which is rather small, to fit within the page limit, which I  could not otherwise do using my preferred font, Palatino 12.  (Most courts now specify font and type size by rule to preclude this ruse.   Ask any litigator.)   In any case, the other side objected to the brief on the grounds that it did not comply with the local court rule specifying that there could be no more than 10 printed characters per  inch - a rule of which I was not aware at the time.  I filed a brief in  response to the objection. Trust me, the prospect of losing a contingency case over a font rule when you have invested years of work in the case will galvanize your attention on the subject of fonts.  A pdf scan of a certified copy of that brief  is available here at the link above to "1999 Brief."   Compare what I said about typewriters, monospaced fonts and proportionally spaced fonts in the brief filed in 1999 with what I  said in post # 47, on 9/8/04.  I knew what I knew a long time ago, and the brief proves it definitively.   So long, conspiracy theory.

I relied  upon  no one and nothing other than what I already knew and what I saw when I looked at the documents.  I acted entirely alone, with no advance  knowledge or warning of any kind or nature whatsoever from anyone anywhere at  any time prior to the post.  After the post, the blogosphere was on the  case, and I was no longer alone at that point.

The notion that the ability to spot these memos as fakes for the  reasons I articulated in that post is some kind of dark art limited to a select priesthood of credentialed experts in forensic typography is totally false and, on a moment's reflection, completely ridiculous.  Any person  who worked in an office before, during and after the desktop printing revolution and who was awake for more than a few minutes during that period could tell immediately that the documents were not from 1972.  There are many millions of such people. If  you read the thread you will see that less than seven minutes after my post  another poster, NYCVirago, said "You're exactly correct."  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1210662/posts#49. There are many  such comments later in the thread and in a later research thread on the subject,  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1210702/posts.  Many such comments were posted before 6:00 AM the following morning,  which proves that the knowledge is common and widespread. The outpouring on the rest of the web, at Powerline, Little Green Footballs, INDC Journal, etc., proves the same thing.  The problems  with the documents that I identified were obvious to millions of people and  that is one reason that the story took off like it did.  That it was me  rather than someone else who first noticed the font problem is pure  coincidence.  It would have been picked up  by someone else in a few  minutes if I just gone to bed instead that night.

But I didn't, and so Mary Mapes hates Buckhead along with everyone else that has participated in refuting her lies.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: buckhead; mapes; marymapes; rathergate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-279 next last
To: kristinn

You are a font of wisdom of extraordianry type!


41 posted on 11/21/2005 2:33:00 PM PST by dblshot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
Great Job Buckhead. I Lurked,real time, as your thread broke. It was fascinating. Happy Thanksgiving.
42 posted on 11/21/2005 2:33:09 PM PST by fedupjohn (Kennedy Lied when MaryJo Kopechne died)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Supreme Court eh? Sounds like a banner idea.


43 posted on 11/21/2005 2:33:34 PM PST by Poser (Willing to fight for oil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
CBS and Mapes are not stupid... but they know that the sheeple who rely on them for news ARE.

Anybody who worked with that model back in the early 70's knows that the Texas, Air National Guard didn't use those for inter-office memo's. I doubt that even the commanding officer HAD one.

44 posted on 11/21/2005 2:34:53 PM PST by johnny7 (“Wish me Happy Birthday!”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
And most importantly buckhead told all of us. Thankfully we still have the freedom to read and express OUR opinions, and not just parrot yours, Ms. Mapes.
45 posted on 11/21/2005 2:34:55 PM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn; Buckhead

Awesome as usual!


46 posted on 11/21/2005 2:35:52 PM PST by big'ol_freeper ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." Pope JPII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lil'freeper

Ping


47 posted on 11/21/2005 2:36:08 PM PST by big'ol_freeper ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." Pope JPII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

I bought her book last week and read the first two chapters. I haven't laughed so hard when reading a book in years. The part where she's melting down the day after the broadcast because of the "bloggers" on Free Republic, Powerline and Little Green Footballs is uproariously funny.


48 posted on 11/21/2005 2:36:23 PM PST by kristinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: kristinn

Good for you. You have smarts as well as training, leavened with a dollop of humility.

The following is what stood out most to me from your post:

"I have been a litigator for 20 years. I have encountered a lot of fancy and not so fancy lies."


49 posted on 11/21/2005 2:36:24 PM PST by billhilly (If you're lurking here from DU (Democrats unglued), I trust this post will make you sick.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Rearden
Anyone who believe a syllable of this dame's spewage must therefore be As Dumb As A DemocRat.

'Rat == Stuck on stupid.


50 posted on 11/21/2005 2:36:33 PM PST by Milhous (Sarcasm - the last refuge of an empty mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: kristinn

ping


52 posted on 11/21/2005 2:37:56 PM PST by ocr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn

Great post. Excellent example of how MSM can get away with gross incompetence. Another example of "never mind the facts, it is our conclusion that is important."

Ms Mapes' book is a fitting epitaph for a career in misleading the public and deluding herself.


53 posted on 11/21/2005 2:38:32 PM PST by bjc (Check the data!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
I am not a blithering idiot.

I think this is the key difference between Democrats and non-Democrats.

54 posted on 11/21/2005 2:38:36 PM PST by thoughtomator (Hindsight is 20/20, or in the case of Democrats, totally blind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
And a democrat 501 just happens to start a add campaign about the same subject at the same time as this CRIME was being committed by cBS?
55 posted on 11/21/2005 2:39:20 PM PST by southernerwithanattitude (new and improved redneck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn

Well said.

AND WELL DONE!!!


56 posted on 11/21/2005 2:39:24 PM PST by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
The short answer is that I am 47 years old and I am not a blithering idiot.

ROF!

57 posted on 11/21/2005 2:40:04 PM PST by mtbopfuyn (Legality does not dictate morality... Lavin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
Kudos Buckhead. Saw your post in live time as you put it on. Piqued my interest right away, then watched the avalanche as it came through that night and the next day.

I also saw "your post in live time as you put it on." I sort of dismissed it at the time as wishful thinking.

I was pretty sure the documents were fakes, I just assumed that cBS and their Democrat masters were not so stupid as to use technology that wouldn't be around for a few decades.

It was only until someone made the overlays that I perked up! Boy was I wrong ... fortunately.

58 posted on 11/21/2005 2:40:06 PM PST by Smedley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
The short answer is that I am 47 years old and I am not a blithering idiot.

In Mary's world, that does not compute since anyone who does not immediately bow down to the high priests and priestesses of the mainstream media and accept their word as law, is by definition a blithering idiot.

59 posted on 11/21/2005 2:40:15 PM PST by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn

Thanks, Kristinn.


60 posted on 11/21/2005 2:40:26 PM PST by Buckhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-279 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson