It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pentagon Struck By Enhanced SLCM/BGM-109A Tomahawk Missile

page: 11
0
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

So can you show us the report that the part numbers on those parts found match flight 77s registration number.


Is that a standard thing you would find on an accident report. Do you see that on this report (not a 9/11 crash)?
www.ntsb.gov...
Isn't this the type of report you are referring to (like you did in this post...where you show the reports with the missing information.)


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So you can show me reports of an investigation and where the parts were taken for reconstruction, even though the NTSB is not going to show any reports to the public due to the FBI being in control of the investigation.

NTSB reports showing that they will not release informtion to the public :

www.ntsb.gov...

www.ntsb.gov...

www.ntsb.gov...

www.ntsb.gov...


I have also done a query of reports just like the ones above, here is the link to the results:
link

I don't see the detail that you suggest happens all the time in these reports. Maybe I am misunderstanding you? Or maybe I don't understand the reports? You tell me. Why don't they show the part numbers on those parts found at this particular crash site match the flight registration number on this particular flight? Maybe it isn't standard procedure? Maybe it isn't necessary?

Why wouldn't it be necessary? Here's why....1 plane missing in certain area, then there is indication of a crash, pieces of the plane and what have you. It isn't like 20 planes crashed that day in that area. The order of events as well as what they were able to track with radar (or whatever it is called) could only lead to one conclusion...that flight 77 landed into the pentagon. Why would they need to match part numbers with flight registration numbers? It seems like uncessary work. Why spend money when it isn't necessary.

Just my thought.




[edit on 10/18/2006 by 12m8keall2c]




posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   
First off, the media wasn't even allowed onto the lawn until the quick cleanup was done.

Where were the CSI workers? When did it became proper procedures for the secret service men to pick up evidence of the biggest crime in America history?

I would like to know why was the evidence removed within minutes after the attack and why was the lawn covered with concrete before there was any work done to restore the damaged wall of the Pentagon?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by jab712

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

So you can show me reports of an investigation and where the parts were taken for reconstruction, even though the NTSB is not going to show any reports to the public due to the FBI being in control of the investigation.

Why wouldn't it be necessary? Here's why....1 plane missing in certain area, then there is indication of a crash, pieces of the plane and what have you. It isn't like 20 planes crashed that day in that area. The order of events as well as what they were able to track with radar (or whatever it is called) could only lead to one conclusion...that flight 77 landed into the pentagon. Why would they need to match part numbers with flight registration numbers? It seems like uncessary work. Why spend money when it isn't necessary.

Just my thought.




www.9-11commission.gov...

By law, the FBI becomes the lead investigative agency when airline crashes are the result of a criminal act, and the NTSB provides support when requested. However, the families were advised by FBI officials that the FBI is investigating only the terrorists. Why, then, have we heard nothing from the NTSB?

According to Mary Schiavo, former Inspector General of the Department of
Transportation, "In every single aviation disaster, whether there was criminal activity or not, in every single one in the course of aviation history it has been followed -- not only where necessary a national criminal investigation -- but also a National Transportation Safety [Board] investigation into what went wrong in the aviation system so that it never happens again." NTSB experts would examine flight and data recorders, and ATC radar tracking data, as well as evaluate thetranscripts of air controller-pilot conversations and study air traffic control service on September 11th. They would have also collected airframe wreckage at the scenes and interviewed eye witnesses.



[edit on 16-10-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Ultima,

You asked this…..


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So can you show us the report that the part numbers on those parts found match flight 77s registration number.


The information on these reports is not being released, as you posted….


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So you can show me reports of an investigation and where the parts were taken for reconstruction, even though the NTSB is not going to show any reports to the public due to the FBI being in control of the investigation.

NTSB reports showing that they will not release informtion to the public :

www.ntsb.gov...

www.ntsb.gov...

www.ntsb.gov...

www.ntsb.gov...


In efforts to stop answering a question with a question, I will state this…
It does not appear that these reports by the NTSB generally, if at all, show that they do match part numbers with the flight registration numbers.

I have done a query of reports (4000+ reports) just like the ones above, here is the link to the results:

link

I just don't see the detail that you suggest happens all the time in these reports.

Ultima you come back with

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
www.9-11commission.gov...

By law, the FBI becomes the lead investigative agency when airline crashes are the result of a criminal act, and the NTSB provides support when requested. However, the families were advised by FBI officials that the FBI is investigating only the terrorists. Why, then, have we heard nothing from the NTSB? […]
Transportation, "In every single aviation disaster, whether there was criminal activity or not, in every single one in the course of aviation history it has been followed -- not only where necessary a national criminal investigation -- but also a National Transportation Safety [Board] investigation into what went wrong in the aviation system so that it never happens again." NTSB experts would examine flight and data recorders, and ATC radar tracking data, as well as evaluate thetranscripts of air controller-pilot conversations and study air traffic control service on September 11th. They would have also collected airframe wreckage at the scenes and interviewed eye witnesses.



I have read the entire 20 page pdf associated with this link. Thank you for that link.

I will concur that an investigation happens with every aircraft incident and/or crash. I will further concur that the details of these mandatory reports for the 9/11 flights have not been released to the public.

However, I will not concur that it is standard procedure for them to match part numbers of the plane pieces with the flight registration number. I just don’t see it on the reports on the query link I provided. I also don’t see a reconstruction of the plane as a standard practice in an investigation (if that is in fact what you are suggesting should have been done.) I did ask for clarification, but did not get an answer. So, I can only assume that is what you mean.




[edit: shortened long link]

[edit on 10/19/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by jab712
Ultima,

You asked this…..


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So can you show us the report that the part numbers on those parts found match flight 77s registration number.


The information on these reports is not being released, as you posted….

I will concur that an investigation happens with every aircraft incident and/or crash. I will further concur that the details of these mandatory reports for the 9/11 flights have not been released to the public.

However, I will not concur that it is standard procedure for them to match part numbers of the plane pieces with the flight registration number. I just don’t see it on the reports on the query link I provided. I also don’t see a reconstruction of the plane as a standard practice in an investigation (if that is in fact what you are suggesting should have been done.) I did ask for clarification, but did not get an answer. So, I can only assume that is what you mean.




Well if you look back at most aviation incidents there is always a reconstruction done, if its a accident or a crime.

An example would be flight 800, it started out as an aciident scene but became a crime scene when thier was a report of a missile.

The plane hit the water at very high speed exploded and small piecies were spread out all over the bottom of the ocean. It took navy divers months to collest peices but they did a reconstruction to try to find the cause of the accident.

Part of this recontruction would be to match parts to the plane to make sure they have the right parts.

IF you read the last line of the quote i made it states that NTSb would have collected parts to identify and do a reconstruction.

Quote:
"They would have also collected airframe wreckage at the scenes and interviewed eye witnesses."







[edit on 17-10-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well if you look back at most aviation incidents there is always a reconstruction done, if its a accident or a crime.

An example would be flight 800, it started out as an aciident scene but became a crime scene when thier was a report of a missile.

The plane hit the water at very high speed exploded and small piecies were spread out all over the bottom of the ocean. It took navy divers months to collest peices but they did a reconstruction to try to find the cause of the accident.

Part of this recontruction would be to match parts to the plane to make sure they have the right parts.

IF you read the last line of the quote i made it states that NTSb would have collected parts to identify and do a reconstruction.

Quote:
"They would have also collected airframe wreckage at the scenes and interviewed eye witnesses."

[edit on 17-10-2006 by ULTIMA1]


This has already been discussed, but it's worth repeating.

The factor in reconstruction is not wether its a crime or an accident. it's to determine a cause. In the case of flt800, the cause was unknown so a reconstruction was needed. At it was feasable because there wasn't extensive damage. While hitting water sounds like a lot to you, it means that the fastest it could have hit is at terminal velocity, or about 120mph. plus the fact that it seperated in the air adds in wind resistence from the parts, so probably much much slower.

This cannot compare to crashing a plane at 500mph into a solid concrete building and then burning for hours. There isn't going tpo be enough plane left to reconstruct. For the investigators the case is closed and there is no debate. It's an open and shut case for the experts. Hence the investigation being closed. For the same reason that no credible news media outlet will cover the conspiracies. It's not to take awy from those people, but ther media outlets, including ones that want nothing more than to find an inside job such as the NY Times won't touch it because they would lose all credibility and would be torn to shreds by experts. Some will contend that they are controlled by the government, but there is no way the NY times is. This is just a cop out. These guys have published classified government information that has completely damaged the war on terrorism. If that's being controled by the government, then god help us.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well if you look back at most aviation incidents there is always a reconstruction done, if its a accident or a crime.

[edit on 17-10-2006 by ULTIMA1]


This crash (report linked below) was deemed an accident (stated on the report itself), yet I don't see the reconstruction evidence in this report.

www.ntsb.gov...

This is the same type of report that you show the NTSB is not showing us for flight 77 or 93 or any of them for that matter.

Now if a separate entity was paid to do a reconstruction for the above crash, wouldn't you think it would be referenced somewhere in this report? Also, if it is a separate entity, then you shouldn't use the NTSB standard reporting's lack of information for the 9/11 flights as your argument for "always a reconstruction and there wasn't one for these flights"

Furthermore, if this particular reconstruction was not done on the crash report I provided, then how on earth can we be sure that it was, in fact, flight 587? Are we just supposed to believe them?

I feel to use the "no reconstruction of the plane" argument is completely pointless. Just because there wasn't a reconstruction of flight 77, doesn't mean that flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. This should not be used as evidence for no flight 77 at the Pentagon.

The report I provided showed a crash that killed 260 people in the plane and 5 on the ground. If there was no reconstruction here, then it isn't "always" a reconstruction. I am not denying that reconstructions are done, but they are not always done. It also appears that the reconstruction is done by a third party firm and would bet it costs a pretty penny.

An incident report...yes always done, a reconstruction...no not always.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Originally posted by snoopy




These guys have published classified government information that has completely damaged the war on terrorism.




Snoopy, I respectfully ask how you damage a war? Thanks.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   
[edit on 17-10-2006 by jab712]



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by snoopy

Snoopy, I respectfully ask how you damage a war? Thanks.


By giving away information about how a particular intelligence program investigates. Thus giving the people they are investigating a chance to circumvent the intelligence agencies. I think you are trying to use the term "war" in the traditional sense as oppose to the campagne sense. The War on terrorism is not a literal war like the korean war, it's more of a political effort/movement.



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Originally posted by snoopy




The War on terrorism is not a literal war like the korean war, it's more of a political effort/movement.




Snoopy, let me respectfully suggest that the war on terrorism is a gigantic hoax perpetrated by those whose real agenda is uncertain but whose efforts so far have claimed the lives of over 12,000 American soldiers and 655,000 Iraqi's. The bottom line is did we have to kill all of those people to conduct our war on terrrorism? Did we get any terrorists? Do you think it was worth it?



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Snoopy, let me respectfully suggest that the war on terrorism is a gigantic hoax perpetrated by those whose real agenda is uncertain but whose efforts so far have claimed the lives of over 12,000 American soldiers and 655,000 Iraqi's. The bottom line is did we have to kill all of those people to conduct our war on terrrorism? Did we get any terrorists? Do you think it was worth it?


It's all irrellavent. I am not trying to argue that the war on terrorism is anything more than propaganda. The point is that the NY Times agrees with you and is not being cencored shut up by the government. If they can post classified documents that would have anyone else arrested for treason only for the protection of the freedom of press, then they clearly are not under any government control.

And of course no one has made the argument that the media is controlled by the government, but since it's an inevitable argument, I thought I would address it in advance.



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Hi Jab:


Jab >> Terral, Emulsion here has an excellent point here. Let's just say, that you are right and it was a missile. I am going to pretend for a moment that the gray/white blob on the right is in fact a missile and that you have convinced me with all of your technical evidence of a missile..... The official story says, along with at least a hundred witnesses, that it was a plane. (let's not argue what kind of plane and whatnot) Flight 77 is "supposedly" what hit the Pentagon. What happened to Flight 77 and the people on board?


It is beyond the boundaries of my “Missile Thesis” in the Opening Post to address the question on the whereabouts of the passengers on the Boeing 757-200 Jetliner that was never anywhere near the Pentagon at any time. My Missile Explanation is provided by a careful examination of the photographic evidence of events taking place before, during and after the Pentagon was struck by the Tomahawk Missile around 9:40 on 9/11. To date I have look at hundreds of photographs of the crime scene and NONE of them include any evidence whatsoever of any 100 Ton Jetliner impacting the Pentagon on 9/11 or any other time. The American public has been mesmerized by the Propaganda “Opinion Molding” Media Machine spoon feeding them the Official DoD B/A Cover Story from the very beginning. Everything points to the Flight 77 Hoax as being an ‘inside job’ like the systematic demolition of WTC 7 ( www.whatreallyhappened.com... ).


Jab >> While your technical evidence of a missile could very well make sense, you haven't explained what the heck happened to flight 77 and the people on board. Which would make this theory...half baked. You have only half of the issue covered. In order for your theory to be more concrete, you would require the other half of the equation explained in as much detail.


The fact is that the damage inflicted upon the Pentagon tells us how the West Wedge wall was struck by a Tomahawk Missile. bedoper.com... The top picture shows the Missile approaching the Pentagon, with the white vapor trail appearing in the second picture. What we do not see is 155 feet of any 100 Ton Jetliner. The third picture (Column line 11) shows insufficient space to accommodate any 125 feet wide and almost 50 feet tall Jetliner. Look how low the actual impact zone is in relation to the windows on the left. The distance from the bottom of the engines to the top of the cabin is just about 20 feet, which is from the ground to the top of the second floor. Do you see any sign of any 100 Ton Jetliner? No, and neither do I.

This case is plagued by a serious “lack of evidence,” which is the sign of a ‘cover up.’ However, to address you point, my Tomahawk Missile does not carry any passengers, which is why none are mentioned in the Opening Post. The people covering up this crime know the whole story, but none of that matters if everyone keeps buying into their cover story. Do you know how most everyone came to know the world was round and not flat? Answer: One person at a time. The “PLANE” Theorists are the flatlanders in this case and Christopher Columbus is the captain of my “Missile ship.” One of these Tomahawk Missiles can be easily dropped from a B-52 Bomber or even something much smaller. The idea is to “Wake Up,” so we do not fall for the same kind of cover story again.


Jab >> You discount the passengers aboard the "alleged" plane because your technical evidence shows to you (and others) a missile. However, you need to be able to dispute all of it, not just some of it. You may say that the evidence of a missile in itself disputes the existence of Flight 77. But it doesn't because there is a passenger list, there are eye witnesses to the plane, etc. (Yes, i will come back with some links).


I am not discounting anything in this case and my studies reveal that Flight 77 never turned around from her westward heading. However, that ongoing investigation does not forward anything related to the “Missile” Thesis of this thread.


Jab >> I will admit, again, that there is something fishy going on. I just can't swallow the missile theory unless you have a good explanation for the rest of it. I am all ears (eyes)


The true terrorists are pulling the strings of the Bush Administration and the Department of Defense among other Government Agencies and they murdered many Americans in cold blood on 9/11 in order to give their ‘Cover Story’ the semblance of credibility. To figure out the whole story we must accurately identify the true ‘evidence’ in this case and follow the trail back to the real bad guys. You want to treat this case like we have achieved a ‘destination,’ when in truth all we are doing here is pointing to the ‘journey’ ahead. Every American that looks over the evidence in this Pentagon Case to realize there is “NO 100 TON JETLINER” takes us one step closer to tracking down the true terrorists working behind the scenes right now to do this to us again!

GL see the truth,

Terral



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Originally posted by Terral






The true terrorists are pulling the strings of the Bush Administration and the Department of Defense among other Government Agencies and they murdered many Americans in cold blood on 9/11 in order to give their ‘Cover Story’ the semblance of credibility. To figure out the whole story we must accurately identify the true ‘evidence’ in this case and follow the trail back to the real bad guys. You want to treat this case like we have achieved a ‘destination,’ when in truth all we are doing here is pointing to the ‘journey’ ahead. Every American that looks over the evidence in this Pentagon Case to realize there is “NO 100 TON JETLINER” takes us one step closer to tracking down the true terrorists working behind the scenes right now to do this to us again!

GL see the truth,

Terral




Very nice work Terral. I appreciate the time and effort you took to put this together. Thanks.



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Hi again Jab:


Jab >> John, I really don't want to seem disrespectful, but that is a copout. It is an easy way for you to try to rationalize something that doesn't make sense.


Please try to place yourself into the shoes of the “Missile” Explanation people for just one minute and tell me what you see in this picture of the Pentagon on 9/11.

www.worldnewsstand.net...

Where is all this PLANE debris everyone talks about? The bottom picture shows a single hole and not the silhouette of a 100 Ton Jetliner 155 feet long, 125 feet wide and almost 50 feet tall.

www.worldnewsstand.net...

Where is there any room for 100 Tons of Jetliner above the spools and below the red line of the 1st floor ceiling???? You are talking to John like the PLANE Theory people have a single photo of 100 Tons of Jetliner in their hip pocket, when the facts in the case reveal NOBODY on this planet has any such thing. Try to rationalize the PLANE Theory, when that makes no sense whatsoever! All I see is a bunch of flatlanders agreeing, “Yep, these round earth theorists are nuts - because everyone knows we would fall off the earth!”

Like everything else in life, seeing is believing and eventually enough people will begin seeing the Light on this topic.

GL,

Terral



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Hi Snoopy:

You are still defending the Official DoD Cover Story huh? Heh . . .


Snoopy >> I already posted pictures. There's tons of testimony. There's DNA testing. What more do you want? What more could possibly convince you? Perhaps the passengers surviving the crash and signing autographs? All you are doing is believing a conspiracy theory that has no evidence that you are shoving down our throats.


Pictures? Are you trying to say that Snoopy has pictures of the Boeing 757-200 Jetliner impacting the Pentagon, OR pictures of 100 Tons of Jetliner debris inside or outside the Pentagon? Please point us to that information ASAP. “Tons of testimony” is not worth a nickel, unless you can place corroborating physical evidence on the crime scene. Please send whatever evidence you have that places Flight 77 at the Pentagon on 9/11 or any other day. TY.

Terral



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
And of course no one has made the argument that the media is controlled by the government, but since it's an inevitable argument, I thought I would address it in advance.


This is again where you miss the point. The press isn't literally controlled by the government. It's just that most government connected news comes from press releases from, and written by, the government. Journalists are not given the opportunity to investigate these events. That's how they control, at the most basic level, what is released.

You should read some history of the press, especially during wartime.
'The Violent Decade' by Frank Gervasi is a good one. WWII American correspondent in Europe. Explains very well how the press is controlled, and things haven't changed much since then.



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   
I disagree Anok,

Murdoch has a stranglehold on the press.

Him and the governemnt I believe are in bed, to a major extent.

I mean, if news media was just, fair and balanced.. people like o'rielly wouldnt be on air, fox and co would of lost there rights to report based on the iraq debacle...

and the bias wouldnt exist.

so saying the press isnt in bed with the current government is wrong.
www.thenation.com...

You only need to look at the timing of events, and the similarities in reports to see that the effect the government has on the media.

During elections, they all used the same lines towards the opponents.
And they just HAPPENED to favour bush and co.

Go see a docco called '' out foxed ''
and tell me Murdoch isnt in bed with the govenrment.

Ask yourself..

How did the world end up in Iraq, being there was no weapons and no threat?
Answer: The man with 110million viewers worldwide, presented the side of the argument that supported the invasion. Anyone whom differed from the governments side, was discredited, and rarely even presented on a
'' fair and just '' news media.

Saying murdoch has no influence with, or OVER the US government is truley ignorant.



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terral
Please try to place yourself into the shoes of the “Missile” Explanation people for just one minute and tell me what you see in this picture of the Pentagon on 9/11.

www.worldnewsstand.net...


Do you want me to be honest? I see fire and smoke and firemen...OH and a fire truck. That's it.


Originally posted by Terral
Where is all this PLANE debris everyone talks about?


Inside the building? Destroyed on impact? Is this the only picture I get to look at?

I have one 911research.wtc7.net...


Originally posted by Terral
The bottom picture shows a single hole and not the silhouette of a 100 Ton Jetliner 155 feet long, 125 feet wide and almost 50 feet tall.

www.worldnewsstand.net...

Where is there any room for 100 Tons of Jetliner above the spools and below the red line of the 1st floor ceiling????


How far are the spools from the building? Do we know that? I can’t explain it Terral, maybe they are far enough away to have cleared it. I cannot answer that. But just as your discount 100+ witnesses to a plane, I am going to go with the plane cleared the spools. (I will actually keep trying to find an explanation for that.)


Originally posted by Terral
You are talking to John like the PLANE Theory people have a single photo of 100 Tons of Jetliner in their hip pocket, when the facts in the case reveal NOBODY on this planet has any such thing. Try to rationalize the PLANE Theory, when that makes no sense whatsoever! All I see is a bunch of flatlanders agreeing, “Yep, these round earth theorists are nuts - because everyone knows we would fall off the earth!”


John and I have already agreed to disagree and that I understood what he was saying ….


Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by jab712


I see your point. You believe it even though there is a huge loose end.


Thank you for your understanding.


However, because I, Emulsion, as well as many others, do not accept the loose end, does not make us wrong in believing it was not a missile...correct?


Correct.


Also, let me make sure I understand this as well, because YOU don't need to know what happened to the passengers does this no way mean that the discussion is no longer up for debate. Correct?


This discussion is always open for debate particularly with people llike yourself who are just interested in finding out the truth.



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by snoopy
And of course no one has made the argument that the media is controlled by the government, but since it's an inevitable argument, I thought I would address it in advance.


This is again where you miss the point. The press isn't literally controlled by the government. It's just that most government connected news comes from press releases from, and written by, the government. Journalists are not given the opportunity to investigate these events. That's how they control, at the most basic level, what is released.

You should read some history of the press, especially during wartime.
'The Violent Decade' by Frank Gervasi is a good one. WWII American correspondent in Europe. Explains very well how the press is controlled, and things haven't changed much since then.


So when the NY times released classified documents about secret government intelligence programs, it was the only thing the gvoernment fed them?

You seem to think that reporters are just lemmings who can't think for themselves and just do what they are told. But it simply does not work that way. Only a small portion of what they report on the issue is presented by the government. These people do their own research. And most of this information taht many people here claim is from the government, is in fact from mostly 3rd parties. The government played a minority role in the NIST reports even.

It's this need for the government to be this all powerful all knowing entity to give people security. Therefore when something goes bad, it must be that governemtn behind it since the government is infallable. Therefore if anything abd happens, they are behind it, and it something isn't reported, they are behind that. Anything that doesn't go ones way, the government is behind it. See where I am getting at?

So no, the government is not in control of the media, and the government is not somehow gaggins the entire media industry of the world. And no, every reporter on the planet is not being mum because every reporter on the planet is being threatened. And no every reporter in the world is not sitting silent because they aren't being given what to report by the government.

The press is the worlds biggest defense against governments and that's the primary purpose in freedom of the press. These are the people looking out for us, hence all the government bashing from the media. They simply aren't reporting these thigns bcause they would lose credibility for not being able to back up their stories. Look what happened to CBS when they made claims about Bush's background and used faulty information? People were fired and the news agency lost viewers and credibility. So imagine if they started claiming a missle hit the pentagon and had no proof what so ever? It's not to say it's impossible. but it's about responsibility.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join