Re: Claim by 'Stevo' - "CEOP show Maddie is missing on 30th April 2007"

by canada12 23.06.15 8:48

HKP wrote:@Canada12. I was convinced (I'm not a techie though!) that this was a index and replay (reconstruction) error but there was a McCann page on 30/04. However I did struggle a bit with the October page, the penny didn't drop until you pointed out that the Oct. page belongs to the ceop page not McCann (others may have pointed this out and I've not noticed/paid attention). Your one photo, two photo scenario makes sense (who was it that dismissed this whole issue as common sense tells us..... Pat Brown) with this page being prepared in advance. To me it is also probable that the October page is the erroneous one (not that it matters anyways)

I just keep wondering why the arguments tumbled into apples and oranges.
The CEOP page is an apple.
The mccann page is an orange.
Both fruit, but entirely different entities.

by Guest 23.06.15 9:18

Could be interesting to see if Missing People a/o the Fraudulent Fund founders were crawled sporting the name McCann on or before April 30th 2007

Then we'd be sure(r)

by **Tony Bennett** 23.06.15 9:35

canada12 wrote:Tony, I love your Statement by the Chief Executive Officer of Wayback Machine

PS... I'm a "she" :-))

@ canada12 I was glad to see the Way Off CEO drawing attention to your post yesterday. I have absolutely no doubt, however, that indeed he will in due course totally demolish and raze to the ground, blow to smithereens etc. your case that WayBack was accurate in this case.

I have just seen this further statement from the Way Off CEO:

Further statement

Timed at 9.30am, 23 June (subject to ratification by the Board of Way Off)

I regret that in my earlier statement I referred to 'canada 12' as 'he' and not, as it should have been, 'she'.

In accordance with our revised Data Revision policy, Para 30.4, 'Correction of Embarrassing ~~Records~~ Mistakes', you will see that I have taken steps to alter the original data in the post above and also make consequential amendments in later posts.

I apologise for this further error and thank you for giving us the opportunity to put things right.

Way Off Machine CEO

by Phyllis Tyne 23.06.15 9:41

Much preferable to the alternative of leaving the Way Out record as it is and making "corrections" to canada12.

by sallypelt 23.06.15 9:43

Oh dear! Look at McCann hashtag on Twitter big grin

by Doug D 23.06.15 9:43

PLEASE can someone explain in layman’s terms, why when the CEOP ‘download your holiday photos’ page

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

was captured on 23^rd May, two days after the first appeal for photos was announced, which looks about right (ie virtually immediately), yet we are being asked to believe that the original ‘CEOP Maddie Missing’ page (which had to have been created between about 30^th April and 10^th May) did not get captured by WBM until 31^st July.

This is just not believable.

by sallypelt 23.06.15 9:45

Twitter is in meltdown over Way Off Machine's "statement" titter

by whatsupdoc 23.06.15 9:59

PS... Well done , Tony... choc full of goodies...lol.

I must save that with the musings from a burger bar salesman...wasssisname.
I don't know how you manage to do all the research, visits, fora etc thumbsup

by rustyjames 23.06.15 10:55

As per my last post on Sunday, I'm struggling for time to keep up with this thread and post, but a couple of quick comments...

Firstly the Wayback Machine remit (!!!) is not to provide an infallible legal service or capture everything perfectly; in some cases it is a by-product of what they do

Secondly they have available a MUCH more important set of information. As I've explained wayback :-) in this thread, the pages we see are not like a screenshot of a page, or a folder full of everything that has been grabbed, but are re-created from information that was captured during crawls.

To replay the page, information is accessed using an index called CDX which tells Wayback where to find the original information contained in files callerd warc files that hold all the stuff they hoovered up during a crawl, (they have lots of hoovers and stuff can end up in different bags to continue the analogy).

I previously supplied some examples of the CDX data for the 30th April. I believe they used to provide the full CDX records, but they now omit the most crucial part - the link to the appropriate warc files and the offset into those files. I believe looking at those warc files would give a much clearer idea as to whether the issue is one of indexing the data, (and therefore dropping those indexes and re-creating them from source would correct things), or whether those warc files did actually capture the mccann.html file on that date, (for example considering the extra meta-data it contains, the other stuff that was captured at the same time etc).

Hopefully that is what they are researching.

by HKP 23.06.15 12:22

ustyjames. The recreation (replay as they call it) has been mentioned several times (a few by myself) but no real 'takers' as such. My opinion was swayed to at the 'rebuild/reconstruction of the page(s), which is at the piont of retrieval, it was picking up a page which although was in the index was in there in error (October). The retreival can only reconstruct against whatever is in the index, however the October page belongs on the main ceop page, not McCann.htm therefore is not so relevant.

by Gaggzy 23.06.15 12:31

Tony Bennett wrote:
canada12 wrote:Tony, I love your Statement by the Chief Executive Officer of Wayback Machine

PS... I'm a "she" :-))
@ canada12 I was glad to see the Way Off CEO drawing attention to your post yesterday. I have absolutely no doubt, however, that indeed he will in due course totally demolish and raze to the ground, blow to smithereens etc. your case that WayBack was accurate in this case.

I have just seen this further statement from the Way Off CEO:

Further statement

Timed at 9.30am, 23 June (subject to ratification by the Board of Way Off)

I regret that in my earlier statement I referred to 'canada 12' as 'he' and not, as it should have been, 'she'.

In accordance with our revised Data Revision policy, Para 30.4, 'Correction of Embarrassing ~~Records~~ Mistakes', you will see that I have taken steps to alter the original data in the post above and also make consequential amendments in later posts.

I apologise for this further error and thank you for giving us the opportunity to put things right.

Way Off Machine CEO

Ah, but according to WBM, on APRIL 30 2007, canada12 was a 'he.'

The last job they gave Christopher Butler before sending him to the Labour Exchange was to erase all records of APRIL 30 2007.

APRIL 30 2007. BE AFRAID ... BE VERY AFRAID.

Unlucky, Jim. Looks like the GAMBLE didn't pay off.

laughat

by **Tony Bennett** 23.06.15 12:55

Gaggzy wrote:
Ah, but according to WBM, on APRIL 30 2007, canada12 was a 'he.'

I knew I'd got this from somewhere

by whodunnit 23.06.15 16:39

The mccann.html page archived on May 13 still has the April 30th capture date in it's code under 'next/previous capture'. I screen capped it but I cannot post the image or a link. To see the cap go to my twitter @MollyWasaDame

by snook 23.06.15 16:41

I admit to being completely tech ignorant but I have to ask @nuala, if stuff on the Internet, ie pictures etc that you mention cannot be seen unless they have a link or hyperlink, how do security services spy? Surely anyone wishing to communicate, plot online would be able to do so undetected if I understand your comments?

by whodunnit 23.06.15 16:51

I'm no tech expert and nuala can answer for herself, but in my opinion snook the mccann.html page was live and DID have a link to it from the April 30, 2007 CEOP homepage, which is how the WBM crawlers found it that day---they were captured on the same date and time. This is why so much effort has gone into discrediting the homepage capture.

by canada12 23.06.15 16:53

Tony Bennett wrote:
Gaggzy wrote:
Ah, but according to WBM, on APRIL 30 2007, canada12 was a 'he.'
I knew I'd got this from somewhere

I was a "he" but I had a placeholder for a "she".

by xxxxxxxxx 23.06.15 17:41

Look at the very first post on this topic - click on the link.

Explain why May is missing?

by snook 23.06.15 17:45

Quite possible whodunit. Or it may be a red herring to cause more disruption? I fund it odd how Isabelle seems to have the ears of and a hotline to the PJ . How could this, right or wrong be dismissed so quickly? If true, it would convixtcthe TM outright, if not then surely the PJ, unless already aware would want their own tech team to debunk?

by **PeterMac** 23.06.15 17:53

xxxxxxxxx wrote:Look at the very first post on this topic - click on the link.

Explain why May is missing?

AT LAST ! One I can answer
I have just done it for my own website.

It was saved (or jammied or whatever you call it) on a few days last year.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />

When I clucked (cluck ?) on the May entry it shows this

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />
I assume this indicates very few "saves / archiving"

1 Mark.

by XXXXXXXX 23.06.15 18:00

So you clicked on May and it showed Mar?

by XXXXXXXX 23.06.15 18:06

"XXXXXXXX Today at 6:00 pm
So you clicked on May and it showed Mar?"

Not only that - but there was no blue highlight for 8 Mar?

by **Richard D. Hall** 23.06.15 18:19

An observation I would like to make is the lack of reporting of this in mainstream media. When one considers how eager mainstream have been to report continually on their front pages in huge letters to millions of people, the slightest piece of unsubstantiated hearsay on the case. It really does demonstrate their modus operandi when they ignore a potentially game changing story like this. Whatever side of the fence you are on at this time - surely it is news? For two and a half hours it seemed there was proof, confirmed in an email by a highly reliable organisation that CEOP must have known about Madeleine McCann on or before 30th April 2007. This fact, if it is true would have shown the whole official story to be a pack of lies, something which millions of people now suspect. Then there was a second statement by the same organisation claiming they got it wrong, and are now working to fix the issue. Many people understandably do not believe the second statement for a range of different reasons. Looking at ALL our mainstream publications - it is as if nothing has happened. A simple internet search for "CEOP 30th April Madeleine McCann" reveals there is no mainstream coverage of this issue.

There would have been no risk of libel for the mainstream with this issue. They could have reported it and sat on the fence. All they had to do was publish both the emails, then provide links to all the debate and discussion and perhaps get a few interviews with people on either side of the issue. But they chose to ignore it.

In my opinion they chose to ignore it because even bringing attention to this story would open the public's minds to the facts of the case. Facts which MSM have been helping to bury for the last 8 years.

by Gaggzy 23.06.15 18:27

Richard D. Hall wrote:An observation I would like to make is the lack of reporting of this in mainstream media. When one considers how eager mainstream have been to report continually on their front pages in huge letters to millions of people, the slightest piece of unsubstantiated hearsay on the case. It really does demonstrate their modus operandi when they ignore a potentially game changing story like this. Whatever side of the fence you are on at this time - surely it is news? For two and a half hours it seemed there was proof, confirmed in an email by a highly reliable organisation that CEOP must have known about Madeleine McCann on or before 30th April 2007. This fact, if it is true would have shown the whole official story to be a pack of lies, something which millions of people now suspect. Then there was a second statement by the same organisation claiming they got it wrong, and are now working to fix the issue. Many people understandably do not believe the second statement for a range of different reasons. Looking at ALL our mainstream publications - it is as if nothing has happened. A simple internet search for "CEOP 30th April Madeleine McCann" reveals there is no mainstream coverage of this issue.

There would have been no risk of libel for the mainstream with this issue. They could have reported it and sat on the fence. All they had to do was publish both the emails, then provide links to all the debate and discussion and perhaps get a few interviews with people on either side of the issue. But they chose to ignore it.

In my opinion they chose to ignore it because even bringing attention to this story would open the public's minds to the facts of the case. Facts which MSM have been helping to bury for the last 8 years.

by HKP 23.06.15 18:36

@RR Hall. You mean it's buried by mainstream media? Now there's a good title for a video!

by whatsupdoc 23.06.15 18:39

All very predictable, Richard. The coverup continues.

I think your views are the same as mine in that the only way to get out of the widespread corruption is to start again with a new system and a new type of government coz the setup we have now isn't working for the people. I think most decisions are made in collaboration with US and EU, we don't even get a say. I'll believe an EU referendum when it happens.