Blood, sweat, toil, tears and Dan Rather’s word processor
Posted by Ron Coleman on May 6, 2008
British historians called Tuesday for a public report on the inquiry into 29 forged documents found at the National Archives that falsely accuse Winston Churchills government of having a secret, cordial relationship with Nazi SS chief Henrich Himmler at the height of World War II.
Eight leading historians signed an open letter urging police to take action against the suspect who faked the documents, which also allege that Churchill ordered the assassination of Himmler to keep the discussions secret. . . .
[C]oncerns about the authenticity of the documents were raised after [an expert] saw unexplained pencil marks beneath some of the signatures. He was also deeply suspicious about the use of some phrases, such as “devastating repercussions,” that were not widely used in the 1940s.
Okay, maybe they were forged. But couldn’t they still be fake but accurate?
May 7, 2008 at 9:12 am
If they had published those papers, a bunch of frummies would have been the first to point to these forgeries as *proof* that even Churchill was a bitter anti-Semite.
May 7, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Ah, but you and I know better, don’t we, Deek!
May 11, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Fake but accurate? Like the Dan Rather / George W. Bush service documents?