Debunked: CNNs Fake News Broadcasts - Charles Jaco and the Fake Live Gulf War Reports

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
So, if a guy with an AK-47 walks into a room in which you're talking to a friend,
as he appears to begin to fire, you dive under the table to escape a hail of bullets...
later you realize that the guy was firing blanks to scare the Hell out of someone.
By your definition, your "reaction was faked" because you weren't genuinely under fire the moment you dove?
The cameraman didn't react. This indicates that he knew the fellow firing blanks was going to walk into the room.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
 

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
There was a reaction to warning of an attack.
No. I just watched it again...and Jaco doesn't react to the sirens in any way. They go off at 1:10 and don't startle him at all. He starts explaining what they are and someone crudely cuts him out.

The alarms go off again at 1:50. Again Jaco isn't phased whatsover. Not a flinch.

His fake reaction to the non scud attack is at 2:15.
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
No. I just watched it again...and Jaco doesn't react to the sirens in any way. They go off at 1:10 and don't startle him at all. He starts explaining what they are and someone crudely cuts him out.

The alarms go off again at 1:50. Again Jaco isn't phased whatsover. Not a flinch.

His fake reaction to the non scud attack is at 2:15.

Do you have any evidence that the report is fake? Based on previous postings the evidence supports it was a real broadcast. If you don't have any new evidence you should really stop posting.
 

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
Do you have any evidence that the report is fake? Based on previous postings the evidence supports it was a real broadcast. If you don't have any new evidence you should really stop posting.
Do you have any evidence that the report is real? Based on previous postings the evidence supports that it was a real broadcast of fake news. If you don't have any new evidence that it was real then you shouldn't tell me to stop saying it was fake.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Do you have any evidence that the report is real? Based on previous postings the evidence supports that it was a real broadcast of fake news. If you don't have any new evidence that it was real then you shouldn't tell me to stop saying it was fake.
Multiple sources say the same story. Nobody says otherwise.
 

AluminumTheory

Senior Member.
Yes, lots of hard evidence has been presented regarding the fakeness of the broadcast through this thread. It's just ignored by the regulars like kids ignore the box with the trap door where the rabbit comes from. The purported debunk relied only on a specific portion in the body of the first post, namely the notion that the fake news was taped somewhere other than where it was taped. My issue is that whether the fake news was taped in this or that place doesn't impact on the inherent fakeness of the news itself. This specific point has been made by multiple posters before...but it's all a variation on post 26.

The best defence that I've seen from the regulars here is that the reporter might have been thinking X or Y, or statements like "wouldn't you be nervous 20 minutes later?" and this type of thing, which is exactly what none of the regulars would accept from someone else in defense of a conspiracy theory.

To quote Soulfly, "This isn't a place to state your opinion, you are welcome to bring relative evidence that pertains to this thread topic though."

The most relevant indisputible fact is that there was no attack whatsoever during the filming of a purported attack. Thus there can't have been a reaction to an attack, because there wasn't one. So by direct implication the reaction was faked.

If you accept that there was no attack, and you hold yourselves to your own standards of proof, then you must accept that the news is fake.

So apparently you missed this post by soulfly.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/missile/scud_info/scud_info_s04.htm

That's called evidence. And we're still waiting to see yours. Having opinions and stating them as facts is not evidence.

I think this one didn't get enough discussion. The cameraman didn't react at all. That's because there wasn't anything to react to, of course...but, well, here we are, over two hundred posts in...

The cameraman didn't react. This indicates that he knew the fellow firing blanks was going to walk into the room.






So is the camera man supposed to start shaking his tripod during a scud attack to meet your standards of journalism?
 

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
So is the camera man supposed to start shaking his tripod during a scud attack to meet your standards of journalism?
There WAS NO SCUD ATTACK! That's the point. None. At all. The only SCUD attack was 20 minutes earlier and miles away. The alarms went off a minute prior to the purported reaction to the alarms, and he said "Oh that's just the (cut off). Then the same sound went off again 16 seconds prior to the purported reaction to the same alarms. And then voila! The "reaction" out of no-where. While nothing was actually happening. That's the thing. The reaction was in response to nothing at all. At best, it was a reaction to the repeated promptings of the woman interviewing him to put his gas mask on. LOL! I can't believe we are still debating this.

I'll give you guys this, you are good and stubborn :) But it doesn't change what happened.

I actually like CNN's apology that Pete posted. It speaks to the issue that this event didn't occur.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
There WAS NO SCUD ATTACK! That's the point. None. At all. The only SCUD attack was 20 minutes earlier and miles away. The alarms went off a minute prior to the purported reaction to the alarms, and he said "Oh that's just the (cut off). Then the same sound went off again 16 seconds prior to the purported reaction to the same alarms. And then voila! The "reaction" out of no-where. While nothing was actually happening. That's the thing. The reaction was in response to nothing at all. At best, it was a reaction to the repeated promptings of the woman interviewing him to put his gas mask on. LOL! I can't believe we are still debating this.
you've got me completely confused. He explains where the reaction came from right there in the report. I see nothing abnormal in the footage.
I guess he/they could be an EXCEPTIONAL actor/s (since facial expression and body language are dead on), but what would be the point of that?
Your theory is very weak.
 

AluminumTheory

Senior Member.
There WAS NO SCUD ATTACK! That's the point. None. At all. The only SCUD attack was 20 minutes earlier and miles away.

You seem to be deliberately ignoring facts. We know that there were SCUD attacks in Dhaharan that night. It would be helpful if you could post a link or at least show us what you are referencing here so we can discuss it (if that's what you're here to do). None of the CNN footage has a time code of any kind so what makes you so sure that the attack was 20 minutes earlier.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/missile/scud_info/scud_info_s04.htm


The alarms went off a minute prior to the purported reaction to the alarms, and he said "Oh that's just the (cut off). Then the same sound went off again 16 seconds prior to the purported reaction to the same alarms. And then voila! The "reaction" out of no-where. While nothing was actually happening. That's the thing. The reaction was in response to nothing at all. At best, it was a reaction to the repeated promptings of the woman interviewing him to put his gas mask on. LOL! I can't believe we are still debating this.
Again, it would be helpful if you would provide a reference as to what you're talking about.

I'm left to assume that it would be this @ 7:00


If you listen carefully. Jaco is asked "What did you see", later when he realizes there is no imminent danger he explains that he caught a whiff of something which he likely though was a sign of a gas attack. And the fast oscillating siren you hear in the CNN videos is said to be the hotel's siren. Not the one used by Saudi Civil Defense.

@ 2:54, a missile had been launched very near to the hotel that the reporters were staying at.

I'll give you guys this, you are good and stubborn :) But it doesn't change what happened.

I actually like CNN's apology that Pete posted. It speaks to the issue that this event didn't occur.

confirmation bias
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
I can't believe some people's insistence on maintaining this key CT myth in the face of all evidence to the contrary.
***** :mad:


I actually like CNN's apology that Pete posted. It speaks to the issue that this event didn't occur.

So an article talking about the idea that there's some concern that maybe the media should be CENSORING this exact sort of coverage, becomes to your thinking process support for the idea that CNN was FAKING it with the blessing of the US administration.
Un***believable.:confused:
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.
There WAS NO SCUD ATTACK! That's the point. None. At all. The only SCUD attack was 20 minutes earlier and miles away.

Incorrect. I presume that your "19-20 minute" time is an error and should state 10-20 minutes?

Try narrowing it down to a 10 minute window and then in the case of Jaco a 5 minute window from 0715? Also consider that the following times were launch indicator times.

Missile launch times 0709 and 0710. Now factor in the flight times and the reports from the journalists reporting on it and the times of the Scud alerts?

http://www.history.army.mil/CHRONOS/16jan91.htm

07:10 in following report. Again this indicates launch time.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/missile/scud_info/scud_info_s04.htm

http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/declassdocs/army/19970403/970313_sep96_decls13_0021.html

http://www.scudwatch.org/cwaareport

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-01-22/news/1991022113_1_missiles-saudi-arabia-iraq

So in reality Jaco looking at his watch and stating "at approximately 20 after 7 in the morning Saudi Arabian time" fits in with the events. 0715 Scud Alert with the sounds of Patriots being noted and Jaco reporting 2 mins and 36s later that the time is approximately 0720. Approximately being the key word here two and a half minutes after the 0715 Scud Alert.

Now take into consideration that the 0715 Scud Alert resulted in

Now watch the piece again and see how the timeline fits in with events from the Scud Alert at 0715 and Jaco reporting the time as approximately 0720.

[/EX]
 

Name

New Member
I know this thread is a bit old..Sorry if I opened up old wounds on this but Thank you for taking the time in looking into it. I read everything. Remember people..some actually edit videos on youtube. Some pictures get altered etc. Have an open mind..but be weary. I seen one video of them off camera and the laugh was the same in a couple parts of it...also you can tell it cuts off in parts when he laughs in the video. I was actually watching this one. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98JDKB-Qmxs
doing some research of my own because of the hype still and came across your site. It's based on perspective..Anyways, I do however still believe CNN is biased on their news reports. Plus they tend to interrupt people a lot if they don't conform to their views. They do not discuss it like adults. They act like children. FOX..MSNBC..and a few others are the same way..It doesn't mean their news is fake or even this particular one is fake. It's one sided. We were not there and the ones who were know better than anyone. Anyways I hope you have a great day.
 

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
I know this thread is a bit old..Sorry if I opened up old wounds on this but Thank you for taking the time in looking into it. I read everything. Remember people..some actually edit videos on youtube. Some pictures get altered etc. Have an open mind..but be weary. I seen one video of them off camera and the laugh was the same in a couple parts of it...also you can tell it cuts off in parts when he laughs in the video. I was actually watching this one. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98JDKB-Qmxs
doing some research of my own because of the hype still and came across your site. It's based on perspective..Anyways, I do however still believe CNN is biased on their news reports. Plus they tend to interrupt people a lot if they don't conform to their views. They do not discuss it like adults. They act like children. FOX..MSNBC..and a few others are the same way..It doesn't mean their news is fake or even this particular one is fake. It's one sided. We were not there and the ones who were know better than anyone. Anyways I hope you have a great day.
So whats your point here, that its pretending to be a 'live as it happens' news cast. In broadcast news, be it CNN, BBC, Fox, RT or whatever that rarely happens. Takes are rehearsed even they are going to be live linked, some times multiple takes are done, pre-sent to the video uplink for broadcast later (or multiple times), sometimes the live link up is redone as afterwards for use in later bulletins and round ups. TV crews waiting to send the dispatch will mug around, and the humour found among front line news crews is a bit rough and at times risque; after all if your reporting from a war zone where the next bullet or bomb could have your name on it. Its a normal human reaction,

I see nothing in that video that is any different to that. What you have there is sections of 'raw feed' prior to broadcast, and then the live broadcast footage, with one point where someone, I guess the person who owned the VCR switching channels.

As for bias, ALL news is bias. All news outlets, print, broadcast or otherwise, are competing with each other for viewers, readers, listeners etc, all news outlets spend millions researching their viewers etc and will slant their coverage towards those consumers political views, prejudices and expectations. To go against those views would result in loss of punters, which in turn would mean loss of advertising and therefore loss of revenue. Also consider the stand point of the channels owners and backers. Would Fox News owners, Murdocks News International REALLY be happy if their reporters started coming down on the side of socialist internationalism, or Fox News viewers for that matter. Would Putin and the Russian ministry of information be content if RT became critical of Russia's involvement in the Ukraine? Of course not, he who pay the piper calls the tune.

If you want to REALLY find out what going on in the world, watch the reports of the same incident from multiple sources and pick your way through from there.
 

Name

New Member
So whats your point here, that its pretending to be a 'live as it happens' news cast. In broadcast news, be it CNN, BBC, Fox, RT or whatever that rarely happens. Takes are rehearsed even they are going to be live linked, some times multiple takes are done, pre-sent to the video uplink for broadcast later (or multiple times), sometimes the live link up is redone as afterwards for use in later bulletins and round ups. TV crews waiting to send the dispatch will mug around, and the humour found among front line news crews is a bit rough and at times risque; after all if your reporting from a war zone where the next bullet or bomb could have your name on it. Its a normal human reaction,

I see nothing in that video that is any different to that. What you have there is sections of 'raw feed' prior to broadcast, and then the live broadcast footage, with one point where someone, I guess the person who owned the VCR switching channels.

As for bias, ALL news is bias. All news outlets, print, broadcast or otherwise, are competing with each other for viewers, readers, listeners etc, all news outlets spend millions researching their viewers etc and will slant their coverage towards those consumers political views, prejudices and expectations. To go against those views would result in loss of punters, which in turn would mean loss of advertising and therefore loss of revenue. Also consider the stand point of the channels owners and backers. Would Fox News owners, Murdocks News International REALLY be happy if their reporters started coming down on the side of socialist internationalism, or Fox News viewers for that matter. Would Putin and the Russian ministry of information be content if RT became critical of Russia's involvement in the Ukraine? Of course not, he who pay the piper calls the tune.

If you want to REALLY find out what going on in the world, watch the reports of the same incident from multiple sources and pick your way through from there.


I didn't post that video trying to be right. I posted it because it's what i watched and thought the one who posted it on youtube did something with the audio because the same laugh and you can hear it cut off the same way. Perhaps I wanted confirmation of what I heard to be true or not true..Have a second opinion. I know multiple takes are done. I'm not here to argue with anyone.

I think all news should be that..news. They should quit fighting for viewers and report both sides. That's what they are suppose to do anyways. They are not very professional if they only want to do it for viewers. It's not a TV show or a movie. It's real life. :p I rather hear both sides and not one side everything to benefit a few Democrat or Republican supporters. But that's just me.
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
I think all news should be that..news. They should quit fighting for viewers and report both sides. That's what they are suppose to do anyways. They are not very professional if they only want to do it for viewers. It's not a TV show or a movie.
True, very true, but sadly its a pipe dream. News, TV news in particular is very expensive to gather, and has to be financed. Be it funded by advertisers, rich individuals, governments... there's alway going to be a piper calling the tune. And equally sadly, in todays multi-format mass media age, people can always seek someone telling them what THEY want to hear. Fail to confirm their own stand point, they wont stay to listen to what you have to say, they will bugger off quick sharp to some one else who will. And there will alway be some one willing to oblige.

It's why I bailed out of the news scene myself and got into music radio and journalism. Far less BS all round.
 

Troop4truH

New Member
But surely all the facts indicate that the reports were filmed at that hotel?

You might quibble about the contents of the reports, but I don't think you can deny that they are where they say they are, can you?

The man makes a perfect point Mick. I love a good fashioned spirited debate and I appreciate your emphasis on sticking to evidence but your debating tactics often discourage debate on the very topics you post. I haven't been on metabunk for years because you and your cheerleaders don't really seem to genuinely appreciate the point of the debate.

Now, as for "the facts." As stated previously you haven't really debunked the core contention of the conspiracy with the videos in this post. You have surely supported your argument better than many of those who espouse this particular theory, however you do seem to miss the point. The point isn't so much where it was shot, although you have done a seemingly fair job in supporting the claim it was filmed on location at the hotel, but instead if the situation on the ground was indeed as it was presented.

You did little to refute the contention that they were giving a false impression to their audience. That is the central point of the conspiracy. I have been researching this "fake news" buzz and came across this post. Now we have many more examples of CNN specifically misleading their audience in order to push an agenda. That is the definition of propaganda. Our government legally pairs with news organizations to push agenda based news. I'm sure this clip from 1991 does not predate the practice.

The fact is there is a concerted effort to mislead viewers of "news" organizations such as this every single day on a various range of topics. This is especially the case when the government and the military is involved.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
you and your cheerleaders don't really seem to genuinely appreciate the point of the debate
this is a debunking site, not debate club.

the claim being addressed is
As stated previously you haven't really debunked the core contention of the conspiracy with the videos in this post.
You guys moving goal posts is your problem. Your opinions on 'impressions' is just that. Opinions. No point arguing about opinions. Either you have ebtter evidence to support your opinion, or you don't. and you don't.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
derrick06 Debunked: United Nations creates a "NWO" website Conspiracy Theories 2
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 4
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
W Debunked: Qanon claims there have been 51k sealed indictments filed this year. Current Events 11
K Debunked: Audio of David Rockefeller "leaked" speech in 1991 [Audio Simulation] General Discussion 2
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Mick West Debunked: XYO Device Replacing GPS, Saving $2 Million a Day General Discussion 23
Mick West Debunked: "Tip Top" as a QAnon Clue from Trump [He's said it before] Conspiracy Theories 5
Whitebeard Debunked: Nibiru FOUND? Mysterious gigantic rogue planet spotted lurking outside our solar system Science and Pseudoscience 1
Mick West Debunked: "There Exists a Shadowy Government" — Daniel Inouye Quotes Debunked 0
Mick West Debunked: Delta Lambda Compression General Discussion 16
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
JFDee Debunked: Wernher von Braun confirmed that rockets can't leave earth Conspiracy Theories 23
Mick West Debunked: Missing $21 Trillion / $6.5 Trillion / $2.3 Trillion - Journal Vouchers Conspiracy Theories 33
MikeG Debunked: Obamacare Article 54 (Satire FB Page) General Discussion 2
Mick West Debunked: "Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface:" [Stray Light] Contrails and Chemtrails 32
Astro Debunked: Apollo Lunar Module Hatch Too Small for Spacesuit Science and Pseudoscience 0
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Jedo Debunked: WTC7 was the only building not on the WTC block that had a fire on 9/11 9/11 0
Mick West Debunked: Thermite Slag on WTC beams [Oxy Cutting Slag] 9/11 2
Mick West Debunked: The WTC 9/11 Angle Cut Column. [Not Thermite, Cut Later] 9/11 137
Mick West Debunked: AE911Truth's Analysis of Slag Residue from WTC Debris 9/11 20
Dan Wilson Debunked: Steven Crowder: The AIDS epidemic was a hoax Health and Quackery 9
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top