Comments? If Admin Mod's don't believe this finding belongs in "breaking news," please move thread to general posting section and I apologize for any inconvenience. Thank you.
To: streetrepair
Bam! Another nail in CBS/Rather's coffin...!
Good find!
2 posted on
09/12/2004 6:20:06 AM PDT by
TXnMA
(FR Rox!!!)
To: streetrepair
I think its fairly common to work on a 'story' and release it on a pre-determined date. Especially if its not breaking news.
3 posted on
09/12/2004 6:20:13 AM PDT by
finnman69
(cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
To: streetrepair
Just hyping their upcoming so called 'revelation'.
4 posted on
09/12/2004 6:23:30 AM PDT by
OldFriend
(It's the soldier, not the reporter who has given US freedom of the press)
To: streetrepair
I've actually seen this from CBS before...
They have an annoying tendency to post newer stories on older links (dated as you just noted).
There's no rhyme or reason to it.
To: streetrepair
In anycase, CBS's response to the controversy is about as good as a 4th grader trying to explain how the dog ate his homework.
6 posted on
09/12/2004 6:27:16 AM PDT by
Drango
(What's the Font, Kenneth?)
To: streetrepair
"Holy cystal ball Batman!"
This is unbelievable. I wrote in another thread to be careful of being "setup." by this thing...
7 posted on
09/12/2004 6:28:19 AM PDT by
sirchtruth
(Do you just think I fell off a turnip truck?)
To: streetrepair
EXCELLENT DETECTIVE WORK!
Rather/CBS/Kerry/DNC knew they were lying and were preparing a cover-up for the inevitable reaction. CBS underestimated the Internet reaction to its forgeries, and overestimates its rapidly waning influence.
9 posted on
09/12/2004 6:30:48 AM PDT by
FormerACLUmember
(Free Republic is 21st Century Samizdat)
To: streetrepair
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml Does bear a date that is consistent with premeditation BUT it is not definitive. There is a need to review the page source for any added data. Page source reveals: The page was written / placed on the WWW on SEPT11 based on the data I saw. There is one more trick. If there is a date on the server and IF the server is accessable from the public, then we have more information. Other than that, nice catch, but no cigar.
11 posted on
09/12/2004 6:55:24 AM PDT by
Henchman
(I Hench, therefore I am!)
To: streetrepair
The webmistress may have reused a page from the 6th and just left it there in that folder, or may have started on the story on the 6th, both easily possible.
I tend to vote for incompetence over conspiracy, especially with big organizations.
12 posted on
09/12/2004 6:56:30 AM PDT by
texas booster
(Make a resolution to better yourself and your community in '04 - vote Republican!)
To: streetrepair
As Freep sometimes eats the "<" or ">" indicators of meta tag I will print the data on the source page without the meta tags to defeat the processing of the meta tags.
Page source reveals: "<" meta name="doc_date" content="September 11, 2004 19:47:57" ">"
Please note, right now we have credibility, let's not waste it on erroneous data or jumping to conclusions until we have them cold. Again, the subject may still be valid, but not definitive.
13 posted on
09/12/2004 7:00:03 AM PDT by
Henchman
(I Hench, therefore I am!)
To: streetrepair
If our IS guys are any indication....its nothing more that a couple of lazy "putzes" who do the website.....nothing more.
To: streetrepair
One of my friends was at WFAA in Dallas in 2000 when the message went out over the AP that Gore was caught biting off a child's arm in Austin.
Turned out he was teaching a new blonde bimbo reporterette how the system worked. She hit "send" instead of "save" and broadcast the fake news article to the world.
Jesse gets fired because on-air talent never makes mistakes.
Incompetence, incontinence and conspiracy, in that order, will explain most happenings in big media.
15 posted on
09/12/2004 7:01:57 AM PDT by
texas booster
(Make a resolution to better yourself and your community in '04 - vote Republican!)
To: streetrepair
Preparing a defense for memo gate. "We were clueless. We don't even know what day it is half the time."
To: streetrepair
I think the answer lies in the fact that CBS has been forced to updated its Bush AWOL story. In other words, the info about how the docs are being challenged are being pasted onto the original story, to the point now that it IS the story.
It is just a guess, but I have unimpeachable sources, such as a DNC political operative, a handwriting expert, and a dead man to back my story.
To: streetrepair
Amazed you can stand dragging yourself through the democrat media.
One thing's for sure.
Bush never collaborated with the enemy the way Kerrry did.
Whatever Bush did in or after his time in the service.
19 posted on
09/12/2004 7:15:58 AM PDT by
BenLurkin
(We have low inflation and and low unemployment.)
To: streetrepair
20 posted on
09/12/2004 7:18:34 AM PDT by
BenLurkin
(We have low inflation and and low unemployment.)
To: streetrepair
The docs were sent to the WH at least one day before the story aired, and some reports have the forgeries in CBS hands as long as 6 weeks ago. So it is entirely consistent for them to have started a story early in the week, even though the broadcast didn't occur until later in the week.
21 posted on
09/12/2004 7:26:03 AM PDT by
Cboldt
To: streetrepair
I believe they set it up knowing full well there would be controversy regarding the documents, but they thought it would be the type of controversy that would bring down a president.
To: streetrepair
I'm sure Karl Rove is behind it.
To: streetrepair
...AND you may want to rummage around at http://www.archive.org/web/web.php to see if files you need are there. Nothing really ever disappears off of the WWW. Even residual data are stored on search engine databses.
Have fun
26 posted on
09/12/2004 8:04:55 AM PDT by
Henchman
(I Hench, therefore I am!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson