CNN flashes X over VP face - what's going on?

[LadyEagle]

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX MON NOV 21, 2005 21:25:35 ET XXXXX

CNN MARKS CHENEY: NETWORK FLASHES 'X' OVER VP'S FACE DURING LIVE SPEECH

**Exclusive**

At 11:04:45 AM ET Monday CNN was airing Vice President Dick Cheney's speech live from the American Enterprise Institute in Washington -- when a large black 'X' repeatedly flashed over the vice president's face!

The 'X' over Cheney's face appeared each time less than a second, creating an odd subliminal effect.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3cnc.htm

It's being discussed on H&C right now. Hannity says he saw it on the raw feed.

What kind of network would do this subliminal stuff on a VP of this country? It this a "mistake" or glich, or was it done on purpose as subliminal suggestion by CNN?

 

[KenH]

I would guess either a glitch or someone was playing with the video board.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

An official from CNN has made the statement, according to Colmes, that it was a glitch.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Enoch]

A glitch, ok sure. The person who caused the “glitch” should be terminated. Or just cancel CNN.

 

[hillclimber]

a glitch? There is no way in the world it was a glitch. It was a sophomoric political statement.

 

[Hardsheller]

Do What Most Americans are Doing. Turn CNN OFF!

 

[church mouse guy]

Democrats are getting to be real drama queens.

They say that they hate Bush for the election in 2000 and the war. But I think that they really hate America because they can't rule it anymore and they want the common man in the ditch or under their thumbs.

No one does that sort of stuff to Democrats because we remember when Kennedy was killed. The President deserves a certain amount of respect no matter what.

The drama queen stuff is too childish for words.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Why is this any worse than any of the other things that are being said about the president or vice-president, many by people in this forum? An X is far less offensive than the kind of tripe that is being regularly repeated.

 

[HankD]

CNN flashes X over VP face - what's going on?

CNN considers him "X" rated?

HankD

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
Democrats are getting to be real drama queens.

Aren't you jumping the gun there?

They say that they hate Bush for the election in 2000 and the war. But I think that they really hate America because they can't rule it anymore and they want the common man in the ditch or under their thumbs.

All of them want that so they conspired to put an 'X' over Cheney's face?

No one does that sort of stuff to Democrats because we remember when Kennedy was killed.

Sure, Republicans would never stoop to such silliness.

The President deserves a certain amount of respect no matter what.

Cheney's not president.

The drama queen stuff is too childish for words.

And yet, this thread is filled with them.

 

[freedom's cause]

what next

http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/archv-hm.htm

 

[freedom's cause]

next

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/2020chip.html

 

[LadyEagle]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
Why is this any worse than any of the other things that are being said about the president or vice-president, many by people in this forum? An X is far less offensive than the kind of tripe that is being regularly repeated.

Well, I'll tell you why it may be worse. CNN is seen all over the world by our friends AND enemies. A subtle X over the VP's face could subliminally suggest that he needs eliminated.

You are probably too young to remember the subliminal suggestions that used to play in movie theatres (to go to the concession stand) or the subliminal "sex" that was baked in Ritz crackers. I remember us sitting at the kitchen table with magnifying glasses and yes, the word "sex" was baked right in there. The basic technique for these ploys is called subliminal suggestion.

Those who wish to do harm to this country just can't get by with it like they used to do, thanks to the Internet and common ordinary people being able to communicate when something is awry and conservative watch dogs like Matt Drudge who probably has one of the web sites on the planet with the top number of daily hits on it.

That's why.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
Well, I'll tell you why it may be worse. CNN is seen all over the world by our friends AND enemies. A subtle X over the VP's face could subliminally suggest that he needs eliminated.

I think that's probably a bit of a stretch. But in the very least, the mistake was a stupid one. I'd be saying the same if it were someone other than the VP.

I must admit, however, that I did not see it, and am therefore not qualified to fully comment on it.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Well, I'll tell you why it may be worse. CNN is seen all over the world by our friends AND enemies. A subtle X over the VP's face could subliminally suggest that he needs eliminated.

Surely you don't think that America's enemies need to see an X to think that Cheney or Bush "needs eliminated." Come on, LE. YOu know better. They already think that. There have been numerous attempts long prior to this.

What the world is seeing right now is people who, without basis in fact, are calling the president a liar. They are seeing unmitigated personal attacks because of policy differences. They are seeing people call for America to bail out and quit.

I hardly think an X is worse than any of that.

You are probably too young to remember the subliminal suggestions that used to play in movie theatres

No ... But that isn't the point. The point is that it is far worse when it is not sublimal. When you have a decorated war veteran like Murtha suggesting that we should do in Iraq what we did in Vietnam ... that's a problem. Of all people that should know better, it should be him. But he is a pawn of the dem's who care only about power.

When the world sees people here wanting America to cut and run, they get the message that they just need to hold out a little while more, they get the message that America doesn't have the courage of conviction about freedom, they get the message that America is weak. And that is far worse than any X.

So, the truth is that this X is no worse than the tripe we hear every day from politicians and pundits.

 

[LadyEagle]

PL, would you feel the same way if al-Jazeera had put the X over the VP's face?

 

[JamesJ]

CNN's assertion that this was a glitch may be true, however, as a long-time, highly experienced, industrial electronics repair technician, now software engineer for the largest automation controls company in the U.S., I can say that IF this really was a "glitch", it could have occured at any time. That this occured when an image of our vice president was on the on-air screen raises my intrest a great deal. If a person could have directed the equipment to put the X up on the on-air screen, then let CNN say so and let's find out if that happened. And, if it did happen that way, let's find out why. If it was an equipment glitch, then let's find out why. Also, IF it really was a glitch, it should occur again sometime. This piece of equipment can be taken out of service and be brought into the "shop" for inspection. The hardware and software can be reviewed and scrutinized for possible causes and corrective action can be taken so this doesn't happen again. CNN and other broadcasters should want that assurance, shouldn't they? I believe that CNN should be made to show that this piece of equipment actually had a problem to prove their assertion of there being a "glitch". If they do not, or say that they will not because they feel that they don't have to prove anything to anybody, then that makes their assertion of a glitch even more suspect. I think that it's finally time for CNN to put up or shut up. I think that we have the right to demand this, what with their supposed to acting in the public intrest by broadcasting on the public airwaves as their license states.

 

[Pastor Larry]

[PL, would you feel the same way if al-Jazeera had put the X over the VP's face?

I would probably be less concerned about it if it was Al-Jazeera.

I can't understand any possible grounds on which you can argue that an "X" on a TV screen is anywhere nearly as serious as the rhetoric that flies daily out of the mouths of politicians and pundits. An "X" is simply that.

I think way too much is being made of the X and way too little of the rhetoric. No one ever confused CNN with an unbiased news organization. Why would we be surprised in the least by this X? And in the big picture, what difference does it make? Right now, we have elected officials spreading the word that our soldiers are not doing a good job because they have not yet quelled the insurgency. We have elected officials arguing that America should pull out immediately and be seen as losers who abandon their task. We have elected officials publicly calling the president a liar, without one shred of objective evidence. Right now, we have elected officials playing politics with the men and women of the military who are in harm's way.

And we are concerned about an X? Please ... It is no wonder this country is messed up. We can't even figure out what is important and distinguish it from what some computer glitch or some idiot technician did in a moment on a news broadcase that very few people saw and no one would have known about unless Drudge had picked it up.

We need to raise the sights here. There are more important issues in political discourse than an X.

Furthermore, even if this X did provide fodder to the enemies of America to eliminate Cheney (an absurd suggestion as we have already shown), how would they do it? The President and VP are more and better protected than anyone in history, especially during this time of war.

 

[JamesJ]

Yes, Pastor Larry, there are many more important issues, and I have a great deal of respect for you because of what I have read here from you in the past. If this is of little importance to you, why are you here? I ask this in the most friendly and respectful manner that I possibly can. There are MANY issues / discussions raised here on the BB that have no political or even eternal significance. Should we not engage in them also? The way I see it, this may be one more example of certain peoples in this country, and the world, who will do anything to discredit our president, his administration, our form of government, our way of life, and our right to live it. Why should we not discuss this issue as we do all the rest as I see it as a part of the larger picture. If this truly is a non-issue and was just a mistake, so be it. How can we know if it's not investigated? The decline of morality in this country, and the world, has happened because good people stood by and just let it happen because at the time it didn't seem so bad. Look at where we are now.

On the subject of Rep. Jack Murtha, D-Pa which seems to be a part of your concern that "we have elected officials spreading the word that our soldiers are not doing a good job because they have not yet quelled the insurgency. We have elected officials arguing that America should pull out immediately and be seen as losers who abandon their task. We have elected officials publicly calling the president a liar, without one shred of objective evidence. Right now, we have elected officials playing politics with the men and women of the military who are in harm's way." I find it intresting that he has taken a poll down off his website because "online voters overwhelmingly opposed his stance."

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47546

There's a bit of good news, yes?

 

[Pastor Larry]

I am here simply having fun ...

... I enjoy the conversation. On this particular topic, I was pointing out what I believe to be a misguided outrage comparatively speaking. On this particular tpioc, I believe we are swatting at gnats while the vultures are active. My point about important vs. unimportant (or less important) was not this conversation vs. others. It was the one time "X" vs. the constant rhetoric.

I don't see an X as equivalent to moral decline because good people stood by.

But inane and trivial conversations ahve their place. I enjoy them from time to time. But I don't think that applies here.