posted 11-12-2002 12:12 AM
Investigative? Other than parroting a AF 'public affairs' officer, I see no investigation referenced in this blurb whatsoever.In fact, the author didn't even see fit to attach his name to this, erm, in-depth investigation.
Not surprisingly, the entire site appears to be designed to insult the intelligence of the average grade schooler. Some other thought provoking articles from KKTV...
What is drought?
Why do leaves change color?
And don't forget the online poll; What's your favorite season?
I fear the reader my become mentally exhausted by the intellectual workout that KKTV provides it's audience with!
I've got a suggestion for their next little quiz:
How many years did the Pentagon lie to congress and the american people with regards to the covert spraying of US citizens with VX and Sarin?
First the Pentagon told Congressman Thompson (D-CA) that the spraying never happened. Then they change their story and tell him "not to worry, they only used simulants". Now they've changed their story, again, and admit that thousands were exposed to the real McCoy.
Given the facts, Canex, do you really believe that articles like this will do anything other than serve to confirm the worst suspiscions people harbor regarding the mainstream media's willingness to actually investigate the past, present and future of atmospheric modification?
Or that they will somehow restore the public's faith in our government's obvious obsession with institutionalized secrecy and shamless 'strategic deception'?
quote:
The Air Force says contrails are in no way harmful to us. However, they do say contrails affect the cloudiness of the atmosphere, so they're currently studying what type of impact that's making on the atmospheric temperature and climate.
Oh really? And since when does it fall within the Air Force's mission paramaters to study the environmental impact of a bunch of harmless condesation trails?
In a time of war, when they are gearing up for a full scale 'pre-emptive' invasion?
Putting on their tye-dies and renewing their Greenpeace memberships as well, I suppose?
One again, the facts:
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Chem11 on 11-12-2002]