[Plutarch]

“What’s wrong Plutarch, cat got your tongue or does this basic logic escape you totally?”

Post and hide.

Geez, I work for a living, and post when I get a break in my busy schedule.

I was convinced the Australian BC was the template the second I saw it, as it is an actual scan with detail. The Kenyan BC was photographed, not scanned, and with low resolution and at an angle so as to hide its tell-tale traces of manipulation. The Australian BC apparently has been there for several years. So, if anyone wants to pursue the Australian BC is the forgery angle, have at it, but unless someone produces another genuine paper Kenyan BC from 1964 with the same printing, and the same registrars, etc., I'm not interested.

As for Salon, it is a left wing site, but so is the rest of the main stream media [sic], so what's the dif?

(And shouldn't Salon's sic's be in brackets [] rather than parenthesis? ()

[agere_contra]

but unless someone produces another genuine paper Kenyan BC from 1964 with the same printing, and the same registrars, etc., I'm not interested.

Good for you. That indeed is the only way forward. All the digital fakery of the last few days is enough to give a man hives.

[traderrob6]

“Geez, I work for a living”

Geez, so do I, maybe harder than you.

“I was convinced the Australian BC was the template the second I saw it, as it is an actual scan with detail”

Are you a forensics expert?

[editor-surveyor]

Now that there is no doubt that the “Australian” BC is a fraud, why not have the moderator change the title?