No im saying that the sentiment on the ground was misrepresented by the media personell. The investigating you've done on this has been excellent and it has narrowed the argument for manipulation from a complete fake set to intentional overdramatization. The wild 'o its all fake!' aspect of this has been put to rest by you, but the bigger problem of media manufactured terror has also been highlighted. You've trimmed the fat from this and it is much appreciated. thanks for leading me in this direction!Since you were not there (22 years ago), suggesting that they would be totally unconcerned when the sirens went off seems rather ridiculous.
You're saying this is not debunked just because you personally think they overreacted.
No he isn't. He is reporting the Scud attack of 7.10 am on the 22nd January.at this point id be repeating myself, but obviously charles jaco is reporting a false alarm, which was common.
Folks, my family and I were there. The CNN videos are real; the hotel photos are real; Charlie Jaco was really there in eastern Saudi Arabia, along with many other reporters. We lived a few miles from the airport and it was the site of a Patriot battery and was indeed a target of Saddam's Scuds- we lived in the "intercept zone" where the Patriots were supposed to self-destruct and take out the Scuds. Missile debris rained down nightly around us. What was not real was the reported effective rate of Patriot missiles. They were originally designed as anti-aircraft missiles, and missed the Scuds completely at first; later, as they were re-calibrated, they improved, but never equaled the reported 99% rate (our neighbor put out a video camera to record the flights overhead). CNN was relatively new then and pioneered real time war reporting. BTW, our source of CNN was from Bahrain, not Saudi TV. We kept it on constantly and could see the live reports as we also heard the sirens. There was one hilarious incident of Charlie Jaco reporting and running for cover as a siren went off- I don't recall, but there may have been an actual attack nearby. It was not fun and games; we were sleep-deprived, ill-informed by our government (U.S.), and fearful of possible gas attacks (which never transpired). Thankfully, it only lasted two months.
Folks, my family and I were there. The CNN videos are real; the hotel photos are real; Charlie Jaco was really there in eastern Saudi Arabia, along with many other reporters. We lived a few miles from the airport and it was the site of a Patriot battery and was indeed a target of Saddam's Scuds- we lived in the "intercept zone" where the Patriots were supposed to self-destruct and take out the Scuds. Missile debris rained down nightly around us. What was not real was the reported effective rate of Patriot missiles. They were originally designed as anti-aircraft missiles, and missed the Scuds completely at first; later, as they were re-calibrated, they improved, but never equaled the reported 99% rate (our neighbor put out a video camera to record the flights overhead). CNN was relatively new then and pioneered real time war reporting. BTW, our source of CNN was from Bahrain, not Saudi TV. We kept it on constantly and could see the live reports as we also heard the sirens. There was one hilarious incident of Charlie Jaco reporting and running for cover as a siren went off- I don't recall, but there may have been an actual attack nearby. It was not fun and games; we were sleep-deprived, ill-informed by our government (U.S.), and fearful of possible gas attacks (which never transpired). Thankfully, it only lasted two months.
Can you tell us where they were able to order a hamburger and coffee at 6 AM in wartime Saudi Arabia in 1991?
Here is another version of the broadcast that includes commentary and the joking at the end:
The commentary in this version implies that the air-raid sirens are faked and turned on and off on queue. We do know that a missile or two landed three miles away, but that seems to have been at a different time of day than this video. So were the air-raid sirens added for dramatic effect, like the gas mask and helmet? If so, then this is most certainly not news.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...-JNAAAAIBAJ&sjid=X4sDAAAAIBAJ&pg=1990,2850114Report by Jack Dorsey - A long, frustrating trip to the Middle East But we owe an explanation here. It's and explanation being shared by many of the 700 journalists who joined the safari to Saudi Arabia, only to be upstaged by CNN and its nightly coverage. No doubt television has made you familiar with the Dhahran International Hotel - or at least the back side of it where the television networks broadcast where the Scud missiles are sighted and where the shelters are located. Maybe you've wondered about those blue balloonlike structures forming the background of Charles Jaco's nightly CNN telecasts. Most thought they were radar domes or complex satellite communication equipment. They are the tops of the sun-shelters and cabanas surrounding the hotel swimming pool. They have that lofty look about them only because the networks have constructed tree-house like broadcast platforms from plywood and 2-by-4s - each one successive one built higher than the first - and they sit atop a minuture golf course initially designed for the enjoyment of the guests.
The air-raid sirens tie in with the actual events. Seriously think about it again?. Hundreds of journalists and rival networks also watching or able to watch re-runs of the CNN live reports and none of them are calling them out?
In three laborious pages, we have only managed to establish that CNN put out fake news from a set built at a Saudi Arabian hotel rather than putting it out from a set in Atlanta. But isn't this missing the point? The topic is whether CNN puts out fake news broadcasts...not whether they put them out from in Saudi Arabia or Atlanta.
Jaco was filmed doing at least two takes of the same purported missile attack. And the time of the news report does not match the time of the only recorded missile attacks. Therefore it seems that this was a reconstruction of what an attack might have been like rather than a news report which was actually interrupted by an attack. In short, it is a fake depiction of prior real events. So it should have been represented as a re-enactment rather than as news.And how has it been established that the broadcasts in this thread are faked? You'll have to refresh my memory on that one.
Were those separate takes?
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...e-fake-live-gulf-war-reports.1140/#post-46339
"CONSPRIACY THEORY CLAIM: CNN ( and mainstream News Media in general) puts out Fake News Broadcasts" - I think the answer is clearly "Yes".
It does - the thread's purpose was to debunk the claim that they weren't where they said they were. It's been shown they were.Location: Hotel in Saudi Arabia - Does not equate to a debunk. There is so very much wrong with this whole thing.
This post was why I said "at least two" and not "at least three". In those takes he says he is live and at 2:12 says "let me just size my mask and fit it as I always do"...before swearing a bit and taking a break to have a hamburger.
At 5:22 the anchor says "I notice that you have your gas mask" but you can't see that from the video. I think she is simply referring to or queuing Jaco to do what he was rehearsing at 2:12 in take two.
And regarding the siren, Jaco seems to be spilling the beans on what that is and is pasted over with something very crude. This happens at 6:09.
So anyhow, there were at least two takes as I said. They are at the beginning of the video. Interesting anomaly on 2/3 for sure. But as I said there are at least two takes...and the one with the earlier gas mask rehearsal is at 2:12. You can see it coming into the frame very briefly.
To reiterate what I said just before, "the time of the news report does not match the time of the only recorded missile attacks. Therefore it seems that this was a reconstruction of what an attack might have been like rather than a news report which was actually interrupted by an attack. In short, it is a fake depiction of prior real events. So it should have been represented as a re-enactment rather than as news."
As I opened with, almost the entire contents of this thread have focused on location. The fellow that opened this one prefaced his question by saying that "[That's] not to say they were atop of the CNN new building as some have said but only that they weren’t where [they] claimed to be." - Which I think was this fellow's way of expressing concern that they were claiming to be under attack when they were not.
Location: Hotel in Saudi Arabia - Does not equate to a debunk. There is so very much wrong with this whole thing.
Jaco admits himself that he reacted to nothing in the final cut. I think it was his attempt at journalistic integrity, having likely been asked or forced to conduct this re-enactment as if it was real. So point 1) of this original post seems to have been well established. I think the rules on the site forbid getting into things like "WHY." My experience with that is that there is no way to agree on an answer to "WHY" so that's probably a good rule. On point one though:
"CONSPRIACY THEORY CLAIM: CNN ( and mainstream News Media in general) puts out Fake News Broadcasts" - I think the answer is clearly "Yes".
Could you explain how the time of the news report does not match the time of the recorded missile attacks?
Another thing that I have to add here is that it's also clear that whoever made the video that proliferated this conspiracy theory very obviously intended to deceive his audience. From repeating the same clip to taking clips out of context etc. After such deceit, why do so many CTs not question the original video's credulity while still questioning CNN's 1991 broadcast even though various documents prove they were there?
My guess is that depictions like "no panic" and "obviously misrepresented" may be interpretations/conclusions of yours,Jaco looks at his watch and confirms it is 7:20 - ten to twenty minutes after the only reported SCUD missile attack, which was three miles away. He is conducting a re-enactment for the camera in which he does with his mask what he was doing in his early rehearsal: i.e. "let me just size my mask and fit it as I always do". He then admits himself during his broadcast that he reacted to nothing. But that isn't quite true. He had been prompted immediately prior by the interviewer at 5:22 to take out his gas mask and put it on - "I notice that you've got your gas mask in your hands. If you need to put it on, please do so. If you need to take cover, please do so."
Obviously there are issues with the video, the most interesting is the looping of the laughing as well as the evident looping of him as highlighted earlier. So I'm with you regarding the apparent deception in here. There is also deception by CNN. We need to hold CNN to a high standard as they claim to be reporting the news. So all of this crap in the first 3 minutes of the video deserves attention. It looks to me like this is what the fellow who posted this was drawing attention to. Yet despite the poster prefacing his post by saying he wasn't standing behind any location stuff, this thread has been largely spent on a "debunk" of location. Location was never offered forth by the poster as needing debunking. Almost no time was spent on the deception by CNN that was offered up for a good look.
Marcus Mudd nailed it in post #84 when he said that "the sentiment on the ground was misrepresented by [CNN]. The investigating you've done on this has been excellent and it has narrowed the argument for manipulation from a complete fake set to intentional overdramatization."
Mick West replied by asking:
A) What was the sentiment on the ground?
B) How was it misrepresented?
But these questions had already been answered in the video itself. The sentiment on the ground was that no-one paid attention to the alarms, as reported at 8:20 through 8:30 - namely "no panic". It was very obviously misrepresented with the gas mask and helmet crap, which was both rehearsed and prompted.
"No Panic" was the sentiment as reported in the news report itself from 8:20 through 8:30. It is a direct quote of Jaco's description of the sentiment, not a depiction. I'll certainly stand by "obviously misrepresented."My guess is that depictions like "no panic" and "obviously misrepresented" may be interpretations/conclusions of yours,
that many or most others would not or do not share.
Does this look like people in the middle of a warzone?
That's the video that is explained in the first post.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...jaco-and-the-fake-live-gulf-war-reports.1140/
So, yes it does.
Does this look like people in the middle of a warzone?
I find it interesting that you can read all the info about this, and still be convinced that it's "fake," but people of course can reach different opinions.NO!! It does NOT look like people in the middle of a warzone! I agree with JDM. In my opinion this IS all completely fake! I cannot see where any intelligent person would or could say that this video is NOT fake. This video has the feel of a homemade movie inside somewhere. I'm not going to argue with people that says this video IS NOT fake. It won't get anyone anywhere. I have tried looking at this video over and over to see if I see what the other people see in this video for them to come to the conclusion that it is NOT fake but I simply can't. And I know the others will keep saying I don't know what I am talking about and that you can see and tell this is real but I simply so not see it. All I see is poorly made video trying to convince people that they are where they are and missles are coming in and all that but this video feels like an amateur put this together instead of a major news agency. Maybe they did that on purpose trying to convince people they really are where they say they are but I am not convinced at all. This newscast is so fake in my opinion that it is laughable.
NO!! It does NOT look like people in the middle of a warzone! I agree with JDM. In my opinion this IS all completely fake! I cannot see where any intelligent person would or could say that this video is NOT fake. ....
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA512306The US and international press corps went from zero on 2 August, to 17 on the first pool, to 800 by December, and to nearly 1400 just before the ground war started
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA235734From late August to early January 1991, the military was able to handle the vast number of correspondents trying to cover the story. A Joint Information Bureau {JIB} was set up at the Dhahran
International Hotel. The mission of the JIB was to aid the media in covering the deployment of forces. This became an increasingly difficult task as the number of correspondents grew to over 1,000
by early January.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...-JNAAAAIBAJ&sjid=X4sDAAAAIBAJ&pg=1990,2850114
Report by Jack Dorsey - A long, frustrating trip to the Middle East
But we ow an explanation here. It's and explanation being shared by many of the 700 journalists who joined the safari to Saudi Arabia, only to be upstaged by CNN and its nightly coverage.
No doubt television has made you familiar with the Dhahran International Hotel - or at least the back side of it where the television networks broadcast where the Scud missiles are sighted and where the shelters are located.
Maybe you've wondered about those blue balloonlike structures forming the background of Charles Jaco's nightly CNN telecasts. Most thought they were radar domes or complex satellite communication equipment.
They are the tops of the sun-shelters and cabanas surrounding the hotel swimming pool. They have that lofty look about them only because the networks have constructed tree-house like broadcast platforms from plywood and 2-by-4s - each one successive one built higher than the first - and they sit atop a minuture golf course initially designed for the enjoyment of the guests.
Does this look like people in the middle of a warzone?
NO!! It does NOT look like people in the middle of a warzone! I agree with JDM. In my opinion this IS all completely fake!
It's a war on dignity!!Can you define what you mean by "middle of a warzone".
Does this look like the middle of a warzone?
passing through to go to the forward positions.
With reference to the gas mask, he is following the immediate action drill for masking up. He tells us he could smell something and took appropriate action.Quite simply, if you "buy" the gas mask scene, you're fool. There's all the proof i need ... aside from the full examination of this done during the law suit that brought up "unexplainable" things like, oh i don't know, the receipts SIGNED by Jaco at a San Fran restaurant, dated to the day of the 2nd broadcast!!! That's right folks, there was a law suit, several in fact. go do some damned research and stop just believing what you read in some fake ass debunking forum where half the admins probably work for the NSA anyway ... Yeah, i'm call you admins out, prove you "don't" take any "personal gains" in any way, shape, form or fashion by discrediting "conspiracy theorist" ... because i'm sure, given enough time, I can find evidence you do, and it won't be just simple speculation.
evidence would be good. maybe you can present some evidence of this 'receipt' and the lawsuits. SHOW us some proof and maybe more people would agree with you.Quite simply, if you "buy" the gas mask scene, you're fool. There's all the proof i need ... aside from the full examination of this done during the law suit that brought up "unexplainable" things like, oh i don't know, the receipts SIGNED by Jaco at a San Fran restaurant, dated to the day of the 2nd broadcast!!! That's right folks, there was a law suit, several in fact. go do some damned research and stop just believing what you read in some fake ass debunking forum where half the admins probably work for the NSA anyway ... Yeah, i'm call you admins out, prove you "don't" take any "personal gains" in any way, shape, form or fashion by discrediting "conspiracy theorist" ... because i'm sure, given enough time, I can find evidence you do, and it won't be just simple speculation.