Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums


GR.net Supporter
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by calius

  1. Are you totally blind to what I am talking about here or are you deliberately missing the point? Re-read everything ive posted. Its not thier right to charge for it, its there obligation to secure there data that licence payers are paying for and have a login system, so those who dont want to pay dont get the benefit of it, simple as that, pick the analogy apart how you will. The difference is the example para, its a website with streamed content, the BBC site is the exact same tech, you dont see youtube charging YOU to stream it & forced to do so becuase the site happens t
  2. Because any other website with this content charge via login (that's your right as an account holder), of which you choose to sign up too that's how the web works and has always done. Currently its not equal and encoded and the license states any medium that can watch "live" broadcast of which nearly all of Iplayer is not, its post broadcast stream. You pay tax and insurance on your car? So should passengers be charged too? On what websites do you know on the internet that show there content for free, start to charge you to view it without a login, which means anyone can see it even
  3. This is the same point about that quote I posted above. Who is it that "lets" it be viewed for free? Is it a non payer? or is it the BBC? So how can you defend a corporation that charges you as a license payer and then insults the license payer by letting anyone else view the content? Its the BBC that needs to sort it out internally and not slap a fee on people because there signals and data gets broadcast out of their control. Then defend the corporations with a notion that becuase the BBC lets other see it, they should now pay? Thats the brainwashed argument, literally arguing FOR the
  4. Its not "yet" but they are trying to crowbar it in. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1297660/The-internet-licence-fee-Viewers-watch-TV-charged-year-hints-minister.html So the BBC lands on the internet and then you pay for it, license is for live signal ... so they simply set up a subscription service for valid license owners to access their data online ... you know, like every other website on the internet, that's how it works. Nice bit of media wording, this actually should read: Iplayer is a stream site not a live site, so they should simply set up a
  5. So did a "passenger jet" smash into the pentagon (it must have to fit the official lines)? And if so show where has it been certified as real, has anything of the evidence looked real as regards a "passenger jet" smashing into it? If they suddenly after all these years miraculously release clear pentagon footage from different cameras, will you then say "here guys look, proves its real" ... becuase that would be a sticky one going by your logic. Or is it that anything that sits perfectly to official sources is selectively the best proof and anything else is filed under must be proven? When in
  6. I dont think anyone has noticed the Irony in the name
  7. Thats exactly what I thought too.
  8. I think its the LM position/turn based on the perspective shift of everything else is what they are getting at. For me the most interesting is the last two images on page two where it "seems" as if the LM is far to the right, then a camera move later (but all the same things in the background) and the LM is bang in front near field. The crater to its left in the second pic is the crater in the first. I think the floor is confusing but the background staying the same makes it odd (all be it the camera is lower down in shot two and moved forward a touch). To me if this was anyone else making moo
  9. I actually saw this on the player and didn't click to watch it, so I will give it a viewing this eve.
  10. Well its a shame to close this thread on the basis of Trolling or anything such as that, so I hope it stays open, I feel the "noise" as I put it has put it in that area and apologies to a certain extent to continue with direct replying to certain things, ive tried to keep it on point as much as possible. Everyone is entitled to post but a hint of cynicism doesn't really help a debate or a thread of such a topic, a point ive been trying to make (all be it very long winded and a few pages of to & fro) for a while. I guess that draws a line under that side of it, so fair enough. ... I
  11. Sure it does ... how? I refuse to accept a kids mobile phone video and a small hole as undeniable evidence of a large jet, well ... yes I dont "accept" that to prove it, not at all. Its really very simple, the case is done, the act has happened official lines made the commission report, nothing to see here, move on people. So, show the old evidence of the attacks and CCTV footage just like the mountains of footage for the towers, its not hard, they have it ... show it, they dont show it .. its not "acceptable". We have footage of the pentagon from the hole in the wall so no security issu
  12. Yes indeed, have you tried out the "Jackal" scenario ... its much like the stealth mission of Arma1 at the militay base, although much better IMHO. That mission with FLIR is such a great example of stealth with new features. Have to say I got this a few days ago, training is so much better improved, FPS and performance is a slight ###### with new houses and AI "thinking" ... used with ambient civy's = nightmare on my system, but that's just one area, its well worth it and puts Arma back on the map so to speak
  13. Im having a good eye ball at the images of these cloud types, very similar yet not exactly what im seeing (although I do see those) when im referring to seeing a "trail" (lets loose the "chem" bit so not to go direct). I have seen these that "are" the ending result sheets IE its those exact trails that are then spreading/lowering and becoming wide spread sheets, but keeping its line form at a distance. Yes im aware of flight plans/flight and general flight patterns. What im referring too is a very specific section in one part of the sky, yet to the right you have standard cloud format
  14. Read what I posted ref the plane I was referring too, prove the plane hit (an actual large jet) you get a cookie. If not then its open debate and if its open debate its not a closed case, etc and so on. Its not really about views contrary to my own, you must have ignored every-time I replied to that notion that you brought up. What I'm saying is, every time a conspiracy gets posted from here on in (which is what would be posted hence its title), then its pretty obvious where you will come from with a reply. I wonder when you or some others would get to a point of thinking ... hmmmm, th
  15. Todd .... Dead? Coffee & Croissants (Neighbors)
  16. Ironically no one will believe until they see it Well seeing as the date time scale in this thread is 2020 ... why not? Infancy now and 10 years difference and the rate we are producing new tech its not a massive stretch of imagination. You could say "will it be as good and in release state at that time as depicted" that's another point.
  17. That was a great read, word for word it summed it up perfectly. I based all my next game purchases off of [GR] and that meant alot of time purchasing not a lot, I got IL2 & expansions because to me it was [GR] in flight I then went to Raven Shield for CQB (everything after that didn't do it for me at all in that area) and after a spell of pretty much buying things I got bored with fairly fast and then finally putting [GR] to bed about 2006, nothing for a year and then Arma ... 2 and now Operation Arrowhead comes forth. Slightly off topic I guess but my point was through most of them
  18. Sorry Rocky .... From the perspective of official lines and the fact that no anomalies have been explained (FULLY) (the domino effect from the cause and surrounding missing links) me thinks its worth holding out on exactly what it adds up to right now. 2 plus 2 = BBC and other news reporting building 7 collapsed BEFORE it did? Theres but one of a few minor kinks in that calculation. Here the BBC rather hidden blog reference this, the only reply to come from the BBC (Yet its a massive mistake to make).. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html Im sor
  19. http://www.1940chronicle.com/ Thought a few people would be interested in this, very good idea.
  20. I will be ordering next Tuesday, Arma2 satisfied my needs and this is just a massive bonus and the icing on the cake. One thing is finally they have whispering when in stealth mode etc which is welcomed. theres a few things in OA that put small SF missions back into that old GR feel once more. Especially with the FLIR for weapons and so on. I ended up getting Arma because it offered what I got a hint of with Oringinal GR .. I have never looked back since and now with these addons and the superb mods that are out its playtime for years Its funny I still go into the editor with Arma2 a
  21. I really dont know, oh the Irony Is this all you can add to this thread rocky!? I mean its a conspiracy thread and all you can do is make it into a quote issue? Are you suggesting we are being undermined here via the quote system? I need more information ... stat. I guess to not quote would confuse, and to then quote can confuse. Tell you what, I will spend the rest of my time desperately not trying to quote and see how it pans out ... must ... not .... hit ... the .... quote .............. button ..... *gasps for breath* ...
  22. I can see from that you haven't really looked into this area much then, the debate is just that. You suggest in words to the effect im young in previous comments but yours is getting a bit childish isn't it, come on ... laughing gas ... yes indeed its all so very funny, hardy har .. but its happening over your head too, hardy har. Well one thing is for sure, you have been made fully aware of it by having this point to make, so that's not a bad thing after all Just bear it in mind as the future rolls forward its not that hard to just bear it in mind if nothing else. BTW: Patriot Act
  23. Well, well I see the usual suspects are in for the kill Just depends on whos truth you are stuck too. For yourself maybe. That really very cheap comment is just ludicrous. I saw chemtrails over my house and have been aware more and more of really odd cloud formations etc since 2002 onwards, it was at that point i saw online information on it not the other way around so do my friends. One of which lives on the coast and has notices the trails always begin off the coast on into/onto dry land ... and has been seen and documented on countless home videos via online uploads
  24. I thought you would post that Para Nice and dismissive no debate required, nothing to see here, move along folks. To think I would not know about contrails before posting and just thought every white line is a danger isn't why i posted it. That 1 video of thousands, have a look at some more, unless you assume they are all idiots without questions so no need to bother. You love that word dont you. Seems to me anything remotely off kilter with general public opinion and official line (what this thread is about mainly) is in fact low in credibility in your mind, so I'm quite happy to acc
  25. Id have to say anything by the composer Thomas Newman. http://www.last.fm/music/Thomas+Newman The reason is i saw films like American Beauty and Shawshank Redemption / Road To Perdition & Revolutionary Road and realised they are great films with superb soundtracks, only to then find out they are all the same composer
  • Create New...