CNN's HOAX on America - Real CNN Footage from 1991 "Gulf War"

reply to post by SkitzoFrenic


HA HA HA HAAAAA!! That was hilarious! "Charles duck! Put your helmet on! Gas mask now! Camera man stay there and make sure you get all this. What do you mean you only brought one helmet and one gas mask?" Wow I would love to meet someone who actually believes this was real. I know this thread should be taken seriously but honestly it had me crying I was laughing so hard so thanks for the pick me up. It makes me want to show it to anyone who actually listens to CNN news. I guess the only people you can trust on TV is The Weather Channel.

Is there any update on this?
If this is real, it should be breaking on a lot of sites.

I'm not saying it isn't real - I think it is - I always felt that live coverage was some sort of fake war thing back then. I didn't have cable though, so I only saw pieces of it at my parent's house.

Is the problem that media people themselves cannot figure out what is real now and what is not? We have a lot of 'pretty' news reporters these days. Is it nefarious propaganda, or did we just sacrifice quality for superficial appearance..or both?

Sources seem to be divided in most people's head into 'fringe' and 'mainstream' but in my head, they are divided into 'poorly funded trying to find truth' and 'well funded propaganda'

reply to post by Shadowflux


I agree with everything you stated! And... I also noticed that there was ZERO satellite delay. It caught my attention immediately. Well, that and the obviously fake background. I am neither suprised nor outraged - to be either would be to imply that I believed their BS. People who believe anything they hear on the "News" deserve whatever fate that TPTB choose to deliver to them, "SHEEPLE" is right!

I hadn't realized trees could cast shadows on the open sky like that.

reply to post by loam


You obviously haven't been to Saudi Arabia then. Now aren't you grateful to CNN for allowing you to learn something new?

Saudi trees are like 20 miles tall or something. Those trees aren't even really right behind him. They're just so far away and so tall they appear that way.

That's the real reason why Saddam fired gas at that area that caused the reporter to throw his gas mask on. It was to kill the mutant trees.

This whole thread is the reason people don't take this kind of thing seriously. It's the prefect example of a lazy conspiracy. No one has bothered to give any evidence other than their own "it looks fake" opinion. The trees are not casting a shadow on the sky, it's a wall. Yes, it's painted blue. I know for many that is impossible to believe that the Saudi's have indeed discovered a way of using blue paint to coat their walls. Here is a link to a picture of the outside of the hotel www.dhahotel.com.sa...

Here is a link about production services including the hotel www.producersintl.com...

Did the reporters make up stuff, it's possible, but if your gonna argue about that then drop the it's all a studio rubbish, including there is no delay, there is, it's brief, but how long do you think it would be? Like I said, it's lazy, gives this kinda thing a bad name and for all the people that repeat the phrase "sheep/sheeple", I guess the irony of that is lost on you. Yes, you are the sheep by repeating the same old tired rubbish.

reply to post by logican


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d2460a8a15f6.jpg[/atsimg]

Give up.

reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi


And that image in your mind shows what?

reply to post by logican


It shows some TV crewman sitting around and laughing it up in a supposed war zone with an obvious cardboard background behind them and a black studio floor underneath them with artificial light shining down on them.

Even a "sheep" could spot that, which makes you just a troll - and not a very good one at that.

Seriously, give up. I know you see it. It's impossible to not see it. Your ego is just too big to admit it.

reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi


You know you set yourself a very low standard Novus. And then end it on a personal attack because I disagree with you which was needless and childish. But let's look at your evidence...

"It shows some TV crewman sitting around and laughing it up in a supposed war zone..." It was Saudi Arabia, which was then and still is a holiday destination, and you don't think people laugh in a war zone? Really? You can't be serious with that one? Let's continue "...with an obvious cardboard background behind them..." no you are just seeing what you want to see. Again you can't be serious with calling that evidence can you? I mean what academic do you think would go along with that? If you presented that in court would it be called evidence or an opinion? And again "...and a black studio floor underneath them..." Another piece of seeing what you want to see. How many studios have you been in lately? Why does the colour of the floor indicate it is a studio? But at last you said the one thing we can agree on "...with artificial light shining down on them." Of course they use lights, like all outside broadcast or far that matter inside broadcast units. It's standard.

So absolutely zero evidence just opinion which makes your final attempt at an insult all the more silly. It's a shame the general maturity level negates the possibility of an intellectual discourse about this. It's a shame that so many posters use poorly judged opinions and often blatant ignorance backed up with personal attacks should someone disagree with them to make their point.

I get I'm not gonna change your mind because you're using faith based reasoning. You don't need evidence with that only belief. It's a good thing the court system doesn't operate that way in your country. Think about it.


[edit on 18-10-2009 by logican]

[edit on 18-10-2009 by logican]

reply to post by logican


This is just pure comedy. I can honestly say that you are without a doubt the most blind person I have ever talked to. I have never seen someone deny something so painfully obvious as much as you have in this thread.

Enjoy wallowing in your ignorance.

reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi


Ok, Novus, you're right, I see what you see I've been a fool wanting evidence all along. I don't need it! At last I'm free from my pen, I've escaped the other sheep. From now on I shall take a leaf outta your book and simply insult anyone who disagrees with me...or not.

reply to post by logican


It doesn't look like a studio, to me. It looks like they're on the roof of a building next to another, taller building that's painted blue. Or perhaps it's the same building with an asymetrical design. Hence the railing and possibly tarpaper "floor."

If it's not a studio--and I don't think it is--the question is, why would they choose such an un-scenic background. I think an answer for that would be, if they had a clear vantage point, with obvious landmarks behind them, then their location in the city would be identifiable. And, as I recall, the reporters during that war were reporting surrepticiously and didn't want to be found (hiding under the bed and what not).

Artificial lighting? So what? Camera crews often use artificial lighting.

F

reply to post by Fuggle


The point in mentioning artificial lighting is because the lighting is very uneven, meaning the only lighting shown is artificial lighting. That means they are not outside, but inside, and likely in a studio.

I'm done trying to show you people the flaws in your logic. If you want to deny every obvious sign that lay in front of you that this broadcast was fake just so you can troll a dead thread, then be my guest.

reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi


Okay, thanks--I'm not sure that there ARE flaws in my logic though. Regardless, it is certainly an entertaining video.

F

Norvus, that was brilliant! Fuggle thinks you can use lights outside! You corrected his logic good and proper! I bet he feels silly now!

Wow, this is so freeing. Nothing has to make sense anymore.

Toward the end the guy is talking about America and then he says "I love this country". Did he forget he wasn't in America? Or was he saying that he loves Saudi Arabia? Both seem unlikely given the terror he just went through with the gas masks and all.

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
It was CNN back then and it's FOX news today. The fake news that is spewed out to the American people daily is nothing new and has perhaps been going on from day one. Talk about wag the dog! It also shows how our government is in bed with the media as they never stand up and say a peep. Democracy indeed! Controlled media sounds a lot like communism or fascism to me. Makes me want to puke!!!

And we are suppose to believe everything that NASA tells us too.
SPIT!!!!!!!!!!

[edit on 10/12/2009 by CaptGizmo]

I guess you guys never heard the reason why Connie Chung was "black listed" - She said on TV in answer to a censorship question/ "The FCC gives us what we can broadcast to the public." which is the definition of censorship. She's not worked since.
Federal Communications Commission = FCC - your "Big Brother Media source!"

Originally posted by logican
Norvus, that was brilliant! Fuggle thinks you can use lights outside! You corrected his logic good and proper! I bet he feels silly now!

Wow, this is so freeing. Nothing has to make sense anymore.

I shoot for public access and do my own movies and the like - and no, I do not do stuff like what you guys see on the net daily. I am learning to use green screen and the like now and I must say, it is fabulous what can be done with this stuff - and WHAT CAN'T BE DONE as well.
First: Yes you can use lighting outside. The difference between your pro shots and amateur shots is 'lighting': most don't use it and wonder why they don't get the same quality. You use generators to get the effect. If you have even been on a set in NYC/DC/CA, etc, you will see these huge diva lights that seem to wash the streets - because you need lighting! You never see shadows on a star's face, unless for dramatic effect. So yes, lighting is used outside and I can tell you the many different sources you can use as well in my next report!
Man you people make this so easy.

Originally posted by logican
This whole thread is the reason people don't take this kind of thing seriously. It's the prefect example of a lazy conspiracy. No one has bothered to give any evidence other than their own "it looks fake" opinion. The trees are not casting a shadow on the sky, it's a wall. Yes, it's painted blue. I know for many that is impossible to believe that the Saudi's have indeed discovered a way of using blue paint to coat their walls. Here is a link to a picture of the outside of the hotel www.dhahotel.com.sa...

Here is a link about production services including the hotel www.producersintl.com...

Did the reporters make up stuff, it's possible, but if your gonna argue about that then drop the it's all a studio rubbish, including there is no delay, there is, it's brief, but how long do you think it would be? Like I said, it's lazy, gives this kinda thing a bad name and for all the people that repeat the phrase "sheep/sheeple", I guess the irony of that is lost on you. Yes, you are the sheep by repeating the same old tired rubbish.

OK your powers of observation have been canceled due to no working knowledge of a hot set. That was suppose to be sky outside of a window. Go to 4mins zero point 2 seconds (4:02) and what do you see? The entire darn set that's what. Since when has any hotel done such tacky decorations? Shrubs and then a window frame for them INSIDE THE HOTEL?
This person is the lazy debunker who has never been in a darn studio let alone has a clue what a set is. Since I have built many of them I can see these discrepancies - I ought to or I wouldn't get paid what I do to make sets that don't have these unnatural discrepancies.
You know, it would really help if you stick to your strengths instead of making it easy to debunk you.