Fox News/CNN Sold Us Out & Destroyed The Evidence, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 40 times


reply posted on 10-8-2007 @ 12:21 PM by HaveSeen4Myself
Originally posted by Esoterica
So Fox and CNN didn't want to be responsible for a panic over what, at that point, may still have been an accident? This is somehow not a valid interperetation of events?

Just look at any major news event, the first 15 minutes they're always trying to figure out what's going on and if it's a real emergency or just a misunderstanding. The different thing about 9/11 is the attacks were still going on for those 15 minutes.


Thanks for your input Esoterica. I contend that what they did was far worse than creating a false panic. The erroneous reporting resulted in a false sense of security, creating more obstacles for first responders to fight through. There is no way that FOX and CNN were both oblivious to what was happening at street level of the WTC.

Sirens were blaring and the mayhem was already in progress all over the city when the story broke. Many injuries ranging from minor to fatal are a fact of life when very big jets hit very tall buildings during rush hour in very big cities. The Fox News Channel Headquarters is in Manhatten and CNN also has an office in Manhatten.

You're certainly entitled to your own opinion and I respect that. Had I not seen this deception play out first hand, I would never have believed that such an industry wide curtain of propaganda could be possible as Americans lay dead in the streets. So I really can't expect everyone to take my word on faith alone.



[edit on 8/10/07 by HaveSeen4Myself]


reply posted on 10-8-2007 @ 12:25 PM by Damned_Zombie
I'm not sure if this is helpful, but at the 22:55 mark of this video from the archive posted above they get one of their correspondents, Don Dahler, on the phone. During his description, he repeatedly said it was not a prop plane. In fact, he says it was "...perhaps a jet, but it could have been a missile as well." I'm listening to the report as I type this, and he just said the hole is too large for a Cessna plane.

To me, it seems like he was making point in saying that it was definitely not a propeller plane.


reply posted on 10-8-2007 @ 12:59 PM by JIMC5499
Sometimes I think we were better off before we had instantaneous communications. It gave people time to think and the news people had time to verify information instead of being in such a rush to be the first to spread rumor and inneundo.

This may sound cruel, but I'm glad that the attacks occurred on September 11th, see I was supposed to be at a breakfast at the Top of the World restaraunt on September 18th at 9:00 AM. At that time I worked for a lighting company that was working on a project for the mall between the towers called Zig Zag Alley. There was going to be an unveiling the morning of the 18th and then we were to recieve an award at the breakfast.

On September 11th I was at work in Pittsburgh finishing up the documentation on the Zig Zag Alley project. One of the guys had a radio on and said that a small plane had hit one of the towers. Our first thought was that it might cancel our trip the folowing week. During the next few hours we heard all kinds of things over the radio. We heard that a plane was forced down at Allegheny County Airport and there was a hostage situation. We heard that there was a plane circling around Pittsburgh (that one had enough credability that the US Steel building was evacuated). Downtown Pittsburgh ended up having a voluntary evacuation. There were reports of up to 12 aircraft unaccounted for and reports of crashes all over the place.

I honestly think that the news networks have gone back and edited their archives of the 9-11 coverage, but not for the reasons that some on this thread seem to think. I think they edited out some of the reports that make these networks look like the fools that they are.


reply posted on 10-8-2007 @ 01:07 PM by Odessy
Originally posted by Niall197
www.archive.org...

That site has BBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN & Fox coverage from before the attacks happened all the way through. Might help. I've never watched continuous US coverage so it might help me see where the OP is coming from.


I watched the Fox coverage and it looks like they cut the original footage from here as well. No mention about a Sesna, but they do have ground interviews and talk of a MAJOR explosion.


reply posted on 10-8-2007 @ 01:59 PM by JIMC5499
Originally posted by HaveSeen4Myself
Originally posted by JIMC5499
What does a missile sound like?


To quote the guy (Correspondent Don Dahler) on the phone:

"I am about 4 or 5 blocks just north of the WTC...and about 10-15 minutes ago there was a loud sound that .....I can only describe it as it sounded like a missile...not an airplane....and there was a loud explosion and immediately lots of screaming out on the streets. I dont want to cause any speculation, but that's the only way I can describe the sound...and it was definately not the sound of a prop plane or anything like that....I have a pilot's license and I grew up on miltary bases, so I know what jets sound like...and I've been in war zones and heard those kinds of different sounds."

He does go on to say that it could've been a jet or a missile, but definately not a prop plane.


Right, and as we know now the aircraft were jets. Problem is that some people only hear the word "missile" and try to use that to justify their arguement that it wasn't planes that hit the towers. Several years ago I wanted to be an air crash investigator. At the time I was working at an airport and was taking classes at Emory Riddle. NTSB had an office at the airport and I got to know some of the investigators. They kind of took me under their wing and helped me out. I got to attend some of the training seminars that they had and one of these was on the subject of interrogating eye witnesses. I was asked who I thought would make the better witness, someone with an aviation background (pilot, mechanic ATC controller) or someone who knew nothing about aircraft? To my suprise, the person who knows nothing about aviation makes the better witness. The reasoning behind this is that the person with the aviation background colors their testimony by trying to explain the incident instead of just telling what happened.


reply posted on 10-8-2007 @ 03:31 PM by wenfieldsecret
as far as the cessna goes....the recordings of NEADS...a local part of NORAD....says that at first they thought it was a cessna.....

and by the time of the pentagon strike...they thought they had 5 hijacked aircraft in the air...including flight 11
www.vanityfair.com...


watching these news casts is.....different.....i was on cst at the time...(indiana didnt change back and forth back then)...so i was just getting to school when it happend....we were taking the ISTEP...(stupid standardized tests)....i didnt hear about it till about 10 am local...when the principal came over the intercom and told everyone in the school that the WTC's and the pentagon had been bombed....we discussed it at lunch, as rumors floated around....and i didnt see anything else until i got home and my mom was home from work watching.....


p.s. the second abc film...at 9:17 for the news time....4:41 for run time....it says that what was said in the presidents ear was..."do you know whats going on in new york, and the president said i did"

[edit on 10-8-2007 by wenfieldsecret]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 15 hours ago, 68 replies