why do you think CBS was holding the story? Generally, if the broadcast media has a fault it is rushing a story onto the air. I suppose the Rather debacle may have made them cautious, but what evidence do you have for what you say?
Dana On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:05:16 -0500, Andy Ousterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Unfortunately, 60 minutes was hoping to delay the story until just before > the election. We don't know how long the Times choose to hold on either. > However, it is clearly a case of the press attempting to manipulate the > elections. > > Andy > > -----Original Message----- > From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 1:52 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: October Surprise > > my understanding - the administration knew some time ago, and the > story just came out, presumably dure to a leak. I got it in the > followiing order: > > 1) the stuff is missing > > 2) the stuff is missing but it wasn't there when our troops got there > > 3) Our troops didn't find it there but on the other hand they weren't > looking for it > > The latter being the update I posted. > > Dana > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:33:12 -0500, Andy Ousterhout > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I thought Sam's info indicated that the story had come out much earlier: > > > > News of missing explosives in Iraq -- first reported > > in April 2003 -- was being resurrected for a 60 > > MINUTES election eve broadcast designed to knock the > > Bush administration into a crises mode. > > > > Jeff Fager, executive producer of the Sunday edition > > of 60 MINUTES, said in a statement that "our plan was > > to run the story on October 31, but it became clear > > that it wouldn't hold..." > > > > Elizabeth Jensen at the LOS ANGELES TIMES details on > > Tuesday how CBS NEWS and 60 MINUTES lost the story > > [which repackaged previously reported information on a > > large cache of explosives missing in Iraq, first > > published and broadcast in 2003 > > > > If this is new stuff, then I recant and will shift my focus to the ball > > game. > > > > Andy > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gruss Gott > > > > maybe I'm missing something - didn't the story come out yesterday and > > the clarifications today? > > > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:11:34 -0500, Andy Ousterhout wrote: > > > It is not news because it was already reported on. Were any new facts > > > introduced? If not, why re-introduce this old story now? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: dana tierney > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Purchase from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=35 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:133240 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
