.
Posted on 10/31/2015 6:17:28 PM PDT by Kevin in California
No Cyrillic script here ... how could it be localized?
Someone was saying earlier that it could have been taken down by a Hillary manpad. Were there manpads left at the CIA annex in Beghazi when it was overrun?
Most of it is related to angled quotation marks, both single and double. So when one copies html with those angled marks, the symbols for those marks appear. I'll type a columnar sample of opening and closing single and double quotation marks into Word and copy them here:
Opening single quote or apostrophe: ’
Closing single quote: ‘
Opening double quote: “
Closing double quote: â€
Does that explain it for you? It is a pain to read. There are probably more of these, but you get the idea. To get rid of them, retype those particular characters within the text box when posting.
If it’s proven that ISIS brought them down, then it’s a game-changer.
Use nuclear weapons.
Leni
It will reveal much information.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-31/islamic-state-claims-responsibility-russian-airplane-crash
The video is down atthe bottom of the article.
The plane in the video was not at 30,000 ft.
Real or not, Putin should take this as license to bomb the Islamic world into submission, even occupying Mecca. Isn’t it about time to arm everyone to simply kill anyone that dares show an Islamic state flag?
has there been a recent charset change? possibly for a database version upgrade?
I’m noticing the change in characters also. Could be a difference between what people are copying and pasting vs whats being read out of the db. just started yesterday.
jimjohn (background: Full Stack; DB / System Admin)
The wreckage did not look at all burnt, ergo not a video of this plane/crash.
Looks the video has been zotted everywhere. Anyone else have a link that's working?
Leni
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2i2GIpX5ec
I’m not seeing why it’s a fake.
I could accept that it’s of a different incident - but then which one? we’d have likely already seen it. One doesn’t by chance alone take long-range video of a particular plane starting right before it explodes. Having taken such a video, being in on the plot by knowing which plane, where, and when, one doesn’t not publish the video as proof of credit. Having used the video for proof already, one doesn’t re-use it to claim proof for another incident, and others these days will find the original to disprove the latter.
Otherwise, I don’t see any editing artifacts to disprove it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.