CNN used blue screen to pretend to be in Saudi Arabia in the early 90s - Polidicks

This video shows the raw footage from CNN in 1990 that was fed via satellite from Atlanta, Georgia. They used a blue screen to pretend to be on a hotel roof in Saudi Arabia, pretending to cover the gulf war. The video even shows them smoking weed. CNN no loner uses these 12 foot satellites to transfer their feed. For those that remember the early 90s, those who had satellite TV had massive satellite dishes to receive their channels. Little did CNN know, that these residential satellites dishes were capable of picking up the raw feed that was being transfered to their head quarters. If you don't believe me, look up Charles Jaco on google. You will see he worked for CNN. :tinfoil: :tinfoil::tinfoil: [video=youtube;jTWY14eyMFg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTWY14eyMFg[/video] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Not a credible news source, and the video itself was uploaded almost 4 years ago" - Megafan))[/highlight]

[img]http://puu.sh/1ZDDX[/img] I believe it.

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39524814]I believe it.[/QUOTE] So just because the channel is filled with conspiracy theory crap, you discredit this video with someone who is identifying themself as a former CNN report, claiming to be in Saudi Arabia, who is infront of a blue screen?

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39524820]So just because the channel is filled with conspiracy theory crap, you discredit this video with someone who is identifying themself as a former CNN report, claiming to be in Saudi Arabia, who is infront of a blue screen?[/QUOTE]Yes. Yes I do. You know why? Because it is on a conspiracy theory channel. It is a conspiracy theory. Ergo it has a 3% chance of being true. [editline]8th February 2013[/editline] Also; it claims that you would get it due to receivers. While this is true, the footage seen is LIVE (Or "Live" in this case, they say). The raw feed is usually people practicing with graphics, so why would they still have a blue screen in the live feed?

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39524829]Also; it claims that you would get it due to receivers. While this is true, the footage seen is LIVE (Or "Live" in this case, they say). The raw feed is usually people practicing with graphics, so why would they still have a blue screen in the live feed?[/QUOTE] probably because it wasn't live How do you think feed is transmitted? They don't put it on a VHS tape and send it USPS. I imagine they had feed going into the CNN HQ, and because you can see in the video that they took multiple takes, someone probably picked the best one and edited it. I don't understand how you can discredit someone on film who was a CNN reporter infront of a blue screen. It's like hearing Richard Nixon's voice on tape with the Water Gate scandal, discrediting it, and calling it a conspiracy theory.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39524856]probably because it wasn't live How do you think feed is transmitted? They don't put it on a VHS tape and send it USPS. I imagine they had feed going into the CNN HQ, and because you can see in the video that they took multiple takes, someone probably picked the best one and edited it.[/QUOTE]But then you have the usual, "Why has nobody picked this up?" And in this case you can't really use the media excuse; as wouldn't their rival companies eat this up?

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39524873]But then you have the usual, "Why has nobody picked this up?" And in this case you can't really use the media excuse; as wouldn't their rival companies eat this up?[/QUOTE] Wow, the media isn't reporting on something that would completely discredit them as a news source? That isn't logical at all. Who can I write about this?

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39524889]Wow, the media isn't reporting on something that would completely discredit them as a news source? That isn't logical at all. Who can I write about this?[/QUOTE]Uh, except this is just CNN. Like I said, wouldn't the other companies tear them to pieces?

uzixxx, FP's own investigative journalist

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39524897]Uh, except this is just CNN. Like I said, wouldn't the other companies tear them to pieces?[/QUOTE] Because of people like you; any time someone brings it up, they're labeled a crazy conspiracy theorist, which is why no one has heard about this, because every time someone brings it up they're called crazy, and thus no one hears about it. I'm not saying everything that CNN has done has always been fake, but to be honest, the video speaks for itself. As for who posted it, it doesn't really matter.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39524910]Because of people like you; any time someone brings it up, they're labeled a crazy conspiracy theorist, which is why no one has heard about this, because every time someone brings it up they're called crazy, and thus no one hears about it.[/QUOTE]They're called crazy because the only evidence is a video on youtube. It's the bloody internet; how many out of a hundred stories like these are true? And it DOES matter who posted it, because if they're posting conspiracy theories before, then what do you think their next video will be? A cat jumping into a box?

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39524926]They're called crazy because the only evidence is a video on youtube. It's the bloody internet; how many out of a hundred stories like these are true?[/QUOTE] How many of those stories have footage of a real CNN reporter smoking weed this is clearly a set, you can see it in the video.

I never understood why almost every story gets an on-location reporter anyway. Honestly, NBC sends someone to D.C. whenever Obama sneezes.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39524929]How many of those stories have footage of a real CNN reporter smoking weed this is clearly a set, you can see it in the video.[/QUOTE]Look; I tell you what. Get me a better source than [url=http://patriotportal.yolasite.com/]this[/url] and I'll consider it.

SNIBBEDY SNAB

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39524962]Look; I tell you what. Get me a better source than [url=http://patriotportal.yolasite.com/]this[/url] and I'll consider it.[/QUOTE] you realize how fallacious this is right? how is the video fake, why shouldn't we assume it to be real? trying to discredit the source doesn't discredit the video.

"I don't believe it because it's a conspiracy theory." is a really terrible way of thinking.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39525050]you realize how fallacious this is right? how is the video fake, why shouldn't we assume it to be real? trying to discredit the source doesn't discredit the video.[/QUOTE]But why should we assume it to be real without evidence? There's both sides to that thought processes. I'm not for ignoring everything, I'm just saying there's a lack of evidence in this case.

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39524962]Look; I tell you what. Get me a better source than [url=http://patriotportal.yolasite.com/]this[/url] and I'll consider it.[/QUOTE] I don't think there's any need for that, if you actually watch the video it certainly is a set. Hell you can see the shadow of the palm tree on the blue screen (I assume it's supposed to imitate the sky?). I don't see how a better source is going to confirm anything when you can see for yourself from the video.

[QUOTE=RosettaStoned;39525051]"I don't believe it because it's a conspiracy theory." is a really terrible way of thinking.[/QUOTE] "I need to strenuously examine the WHY of how 9/11 couldn't have been perpetrated by an alien hologram missile"

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39525056] I'm not for ignoring everything, I'm just saying there's a lack of evidence in this case.[/QUOTE] But thats not really what you were saying though. You said - "I don't believe this. You know why? Because it is on a conspiracy theory channel. It is a conspiracy theory. Ergo it has a 3% chance of being true"

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39525056]But why should we assume it to be real without evidence? There's both sides to that thought processes. I'm not for ignoring everything, I'm just saying there's a lack of evidence in this case.[/QUOTE] there is evidence. there's a fucking video right there! why is the evidence faulty?

[QUOTE=RosettaStoned;39525074]But thats not really what you were saying though. You said - "I don't believe this. You know why? Because it is on a conspiracy theory channel. It is a conspiracy theory. Ergo it has a 3% chance of being true"[/QUOTE]The channel has not provided much evidence in the past. Would I trust one that provided at least some evidence that was reliable? Sure, I would give it some consideration. But looking at its site gives me no reason to give cause to believe it. It's the same thing as if a news outlet put out a story. I'd need proof, which they usually provide solid proof, that the story was true. In this case there just isn't any, and this is the case in most conspiracy theories, hence why I dismissed it.

[QUOTE=scout1;39525072]"I need to strenuously examine the WHY of how 9/11 couldn't have been perpetrated by an alien hologram missile"[/QUOTE] debunking that hypothesis requires no strenuous examination because it is a ridiculous claim that does not have a ridiculous amount of evidence to back it up. the amount of evidence needed to assume something as true is directly correlated with how outrageous the claim is. "great claims require great evidence". i wouldn't call cnn faking news to be a "great claim" due to how easy it would be to do, and how they might have had motivation as well.

Does anyone actually care This was 20 years ago.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39525081]there is evidence. there's a fucking video right there! why is the evidence faulty?[/QUOTE]There's just a video, nothing else. No word from people involved, no word from CNN (Albeit, of course they wouldn't reply). I want to make sure the video is real before I pass judgement on, just as I'd want to make sure the Watergate tapes were real.

not to mention cnn has a track record of shoddy journalism.

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;39525105]There's just a video, nothing else. No word from people involved, no word from CNN (Albeit, of course they wouldn't reply). I want to make sure the video is real before I pass judgement on, just as I'd want to make sure the Watergate tapes were real.[/QUOTE] what objections do you have about the video? how does it look faked to you?

Again, I'm not accusing CNN of being 100% fake, but the video speaks for itself.

Why exactly are we meant to care about this