Memorandum: Fill & Download for Free

Pretty much. Obviously, with history, nothing can ever be absolutely 100% proven, but all the available evidence strongly indicates that the shroud is a forgery. The very first known definite mention of the shroud comes from a memorandum written in 1390 by Bishop Pierre d'Arcis of Troyes, France, addressed to Pope Clement VII.The memorandum states that Pierre d'Arcis’s predecessor, Henri de Pontiers, had tracked down the artist who had created the shroud and that the forger himself had confessed that he had created the image on the shroud by means of a cunning painting technique. The memorandum does not state the forger’s name.All currently-known evidence supports the conclusion that Bishop Pierre d'Arcis’s memorandum is correct. In 1988, the material of the shroud was subjected to three radiocarbon dating tests, which confirmed that the portion of the fabric of the shroud that was tested dated to between the years 1260 and 1390, which is consistent with Bishop Pierre d'Arcis’s memorandum.Supporters of the shroud’s authenticity have tried to insist that maybe only the part of the shroud that was tested was from the late Middle Ages and that the rest of the shroud might be ancient, but there is currently no evidence to support this hypothesis. As far as historians are concerned, the shroud is a medieval forgery.ABOVE: Photograph of the full-length Shroud of Turin

Of all the eventually declassified secret documents that I have seen the one that surprised me the most was this memorandum from Winston Churchill addressed to his war cabinet in August 1940.What is surprising about this memorandum is that it is classified SECRET even though it just contains Churchill's request that others aim for brevity in their communications.To do our work we all have to read a mass of papers. Nearly all of them are too long. This wastes time, while energy has to be spent in looking for the essential points.I ask my colleagues and their staffs to see to it that their Reports are shorter.Certainly this is a useful way to save time but hardly a secret that would have given the enemy an advantage had they been able to get hold of it.Or maybe...Since I learned of this story I imagine an alternative history where some German master spy steals this memorandum. Armed with this fiendishly clever secret weapon, the German High Command suddenly becomes much more efficient, conquering the Soviet Union, then the United States and finally threatens Britain itself. By then Churchill wishes he had never written down this powerful secret.

It doesn’t appear that can be done at the moment. The document being loosely referred to as the “transcript” is actually entitled “Memorandum” and has the following language on the bottom of page 1:CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty Officers and NSC policy staff assigned to listen.and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place. A number of factors can affect 'the accuracy of the record, including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation. The word "inaudible" is used to indicate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unable to hear.(Emphasis mine.)Perhaps it’s just me, but when I see a document that has a big disclaimer “This is not a verbatim transcript” on the front page, I tend to take the view that it is not a verbatim transcript.