In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

I think that because CBS knew who recreated the memos,
they
were
comfortable shopping for consultants.

What do you mean by 'recreated'? Do you have evidence
that these same memos once existed, and were lost
or destroyed, and that somebody tried to recreate them
from memory?

Speculation. Tune in to 60 Minutes tonight for an interview
with
Killian's secretary.



Again, what do you mean by recreated?



To speculate, it would be copying the original (or recalling it
from
memory) and typing it into a word processor.

There are obvious problems with this.

If the source had the original, why recreate it?

Speculating again: the source had it temporarily; didn't have it but
memorized it or took notes.



If your speculation is about copying is correct, the source would
have had it and copied it in the Word era. IF he had the original,
he wou;dn't need to copy it, unless he knew, one,
he was going to lose it in the future, and two, he would need the copy
for this particular purposes. Your senses have
left you and gone to Lala Land. That's what
your overwhelming Bush hatred has doen to you.
I lovvve it, cuase it love it when Dem Libs can't think
straight while trying to win an election.

My senses? I said there were obvious problems with that scenario, not
that you mentioned any of them.

In the meantime, you're making stuff up about me and my motivations. If
you find that easier than considering the evidence, that's your problem.

you are the one that brought up the euphanism of "recreation" of documents.
By any other name, a forgery stinks so much.

It wasn't a 'forgery' until it was represented as an original.

You seem kinda mean-spirited about all this and you've lost your sense
of humor, so, bye!