To: FreedomCalls
If someone hacked the headers, why would they date them for 2001 when the claim is the photo was taken recently? I specifically said I didn't think someone hacked the headers in this particular case, since someone who was going to do that would have created a better fake photo to start with. But in general, JPEG image tags can be manipulated (btw, I wouldn't necessarily trust the 2001 date either. My digital camera's clock/date sometimes goes goofy when I swap batteries and I don't always notice it.
988 posted on
02/01/2005 10:31:08 PM PST by
supercat
(Michael Schiavo is trying to starve Terri not because she's dying, but because she ISN'T.)
To: supercat
> I wouldn't necessarily trust the 2001 date
I heard somewhere that the doll wasn't manufactured until sometime in 2003.
989 posted on
02/01/2005 10:53:42 PM PST by
ADemocratNoMore
(Jeepers, Freepers, where'd 'ya get those sleepers?. Pj people, exposing old media's lies.)
To: supercat
990 posted on
02/01/2005 10:55:12 PM PST by
FreedomCalls
(It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson