Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380 (Warning: NOT for the "h..

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 2:37:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:

http://home.exetel.com.au/pamuva/MOVIES!/A380Video.wmv

Bill
March 4, 2005 3:23:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Bill Leaming wrote:
> New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:
>

Are you sure that was fake?? d:->))
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 5:38:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:37:46 -0500, Bill Leaming <n4gix@comcast.net>
brought the following to our attention:

>New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:
>
>http://home.exetel.com.au/pamuva/MOVIES!/A380Video.wmv
>
>Bill



Hear anything about two dedicated A-380 terminals being sabotaged?
ANd what about the Concorde mishap? any relation? is this stuff true
or just theory [fake]? content that follows by J. Vialls.. for amuse!



* * * * *



The Boeing 747's design and manufacturing techniques date back
to the fifties and the 'good old days' of the Cold War. Despite
new engines and flashy flight deck instruments, nothing else has
changed. This aircraft is essentially as old and out-of-date as
the Boeing B-47.

After successfully sabotaging Concorde 4590... [bankers] went on
to deliberately sabotage the dedicated A-380 airport terminals
in Dubai and Paris. The subliminal message was obvious, i.e.
hinting strongly that anything aeronautical designed or built by
Europe was intrinsically unsafe, and thus "certain to crash".


France was the principal driving force behind both Concorde and
the Airbus A-380. Jaque Chirac is justifiably proud of "Old
Europe's" stunning technological achievement.


Nineteen sixty-six (1966) seems a very long time ago, but it was
on March 11 that year that French President Charles de Gaulle
stunned the western world by sending an aide-mémoire to France's
14 partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), in
which he announced that all French forces would be withdrawn
from the Alliance integrated command. De Gaulle also stated that
all French NATO bases and HQ's would be closed within a year.

General de Gaulle was a gentleman, and he kept his word. At the
diplomatic level, the reason appeared to be that Charles de Gaulle
could not and would not trust America to 'protect' France if Russia
attacked Europe, but the real reasons behind his decision were
infinitely more profound.



He continued, "For since a man and a country can only die once,
deterrence exists once one has the means to inflict mortal
damage on a possible aggressor, the determination to use them
and the confidence in one’s ultimate decision."




Somehow, Europe as a whole had to find a way of freeing itself
from the stranglehold of worthless US Federal Reserve notes,
which would had to be replaced with revenue derived from the
sale of tangible [real] products, such as cars, aircraft, farm
products and so on. This was finally achieved in January 2005,
when Germany alone (just one of 25 EU member states), published
its export/import figures for the financial year 2004.



During 2004, Germany exported products worth US$ 950 billion,
while importing products valued at only US$ 748 billion, meaning
that Germany made a gross profit for the year of US$
222,000,000,000. During the same time frame, America's total
exports were two hundred billion less than Germany, with
American imports completely off the clock. If anyone out there
ever wanted hard proof that America is now totally bankrupt,
Germany just provided that proof in the form of properly audited
balance sheets.





Though few people would consider the luxurious Airbus A-380 as a
warplane, its very existence will have strategic impact on future
wars..


For nearly a hundred years, the.... [bankers] and their
forbears have held the world to ransom, using blackmail and
sheer force of arms to extract real goods in exchange for
useless 'fiat' currency notes, junk bonds, and political bribes.

It was never going to last for ever, and the launch of the A-380
on January 18 marked the official beginning of the end, at least
from a European perspective. Though it is one of the main
instruments designed to undermine Boeing Aircraft Corporation
and thus the entire American defense industry, the A-380 Super
Jumbo is still a stunning aircraft in its own right, and will
doubtlessly attract vast numbers of passengers on its merits.



Though in standard three-class configuration the A-380 will carry
around 560 passengers, rather than a possible 810 maximum
in 'cattle truck' mode, it will do so 27% cheaper per passenger-
mile than the Boeing 747, with part of this made possible by the
engines burning about 20% less fuel.

Curiously, Boeing's counter propaganda about the giant aircraft
seems to have fallen flat on its face. The A-380 is not noisier
than the Boeing 747, but many decibels quieter, even at maximum
takeoff power. The A-380 does not require a special runway, and
in fact has a shorter takeoff and landing run that the Boeing
747. The only airport alterations required are special departure
and arrival gates, which were originally designed to handle a
throughput of around 350 passengers, and will be hard pressed to
handle 550 in their current configurations. They could still do
the job of course, but the delays would be unacceptable.


Perhaps most irksome of all for the Wall Street moneylenders, is
that the giant European aerospace corporation that own Airbus,
has not borrowed a single American fiat cent in order to
complete this or any other Airbus project, meaning that Wall
Street cannot pull the financial plug and make Airbus Industries
simply disappear.


Unable to stop the A-380 by direct means, or by indirect acts of
sabotage on Concorde and the A-380 terminals, the money lenders
sent Boeing off on a different and quite ridiculous tack, made
necessary by the fact that America no longer has enough spare
cash to build new aircraft or new production lines.

Armed only with a cheap artist's impression, Boeing salesmen set
off around the world in an attempt to achieve the impossible, to
wit selling the concept of a middle weight airliner dubbed the
Boeing 7E7 "Dreamliner", but without first building a prototype
of even a full scale mockup.


This was to be an exercise in gathering sufficient cash to start
building a mockup - which is an incredible way of trying to sell
aeroplanes, because it tells everyone instantly that you are so
broke you can't afford to show them the real thing.

This is not the first time Boeing has tried this bizarre approach.
Within twelve months of the sabotage of Concorde 4590,
the corporation suddenly released an artist's impression of the
"Sonic Cruiser", a hybrid space-age transonic jet they seemed
sure would replace the Concorde, once orchestrated American
media pressure had managed to have the Mach 2 Concorde
permanently grounded, which, curiously enough, is exactly what
happened. Unfortunately for Boeing, no one wanted to buy their
'Sonic Cruiser" painting, so the project eventually folded and
died.


But the 7E7 was going to be different, and during the Spring of
2003, All Nippon Airways of Japan placed a firm order for 50 of
these unproven aircraft at a fixed price of US$115 million for
each airplane. Alas though, All Nippon was not prepared to hand
over any ready cash in advance, meaning the full scale mockup
and production line could not be started.


"Dreamliner" is a very appropriate name, because this aircraft
only exists in the fertile imaginations of Boeing's sales
personnel. There is no prototype and no pre-production aircraft,
although Boeing does have a few hundred spare copies of this
artist's impression. Time dragged slowly by, and then on Friday
January 28, 2005, Boeing got the big break it had been looking
for. The Boeing Company and officials from the Peoples' Republic
of China signed an agreement for the purchase of 70 Boeing 7E7
Dreamliners by Chinese airlines. The agreement mentions a fixed
price of US$110 million per airplane. The salesmen had pulled it
off, and managed to sell more than 100 aircraft based only on an
artist's impression! Not bad, but there was to be a very nasty
sting in the tail.


The very next day at Davos in Switzerland, Fan Gang, director of
the National Economic Research Institute at the China Reform
Foundation, boldly stated [on behalf of the Chinese Government],
"The U.S. dollar is no longer, in our opinion is no longer seen
as a stable currency, and is devaluating all the time, and
that's putting troubles all the time," he said in impeccable
English.

Fan Gang continued, "So the real issue is how to change the
regime from a US dollar pegging to a more manageable - pause -
reference - pause - say Euros, yen, those kind of more
diversified systems. If you do this, in the beginning you have
some kind of initial shock; you have to deal with some
devaluation pressures."


China is a very powerful economic force nowadays, and the man
from China had just put his boot into the US Dollar, a point
well noted by all present. Naturally this means the US Dollar
will continue to fall like a stone, going into final free fall
when Russia and OPEC decide to start trading their oil stocks in
Euros instead of dollars.


So, Boeing has talked itself into the fixed-price delivery in
2008 of more than a hundred 7E7s [now the 787s], with that price
fixed in US Dollars. Oh dear, now how much will the US Dollar be
worth in four years time, when the Euro has become the world's
only viable reserve currency? Let us take 25% of its current
value against the Yuan and Yen, which means that Boeing will be
contractually obliged to deliver brand-new 787 aircraft to China
and Japan for today's equivalent price of a second-hand Boeing
737, or declare bankruptcy.




It is no exaggeration to say that Boeing is the 'flagship' of the
American defense industry, and if Boeing goes to the wall..
[then??]
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 7:01:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 12:23:28 -0600, CRaSH wrote:

> Bill Leaming wrote:
>> New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:
>>
>
> Are you sure that was fake?? d:->))

Hmmm, now that you mention it, that obnoxious rhino in the front row did
resemble one of our fellow denizens of this insane asylum... ;) 

Bill
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 11:08:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:37:46 -0500, Bill Leaming wrote:

> New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:
>
> http://home.exetel.com.au/pamuva/MOVIES!/A380Video.wmv
>
> Bill

"It Comes From France"
Geez! :-)))

--

Marcel
(It's good to be the king! - Mel Brooks)
March 5, 2005 12:36:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Oh come on, you're just jealous because Boeing didn't do it first ;-)

Ian.
Anonymous
March 5, 2005 12:36:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 21:36:42 +0000 (UTC), Ian wrote:

> Oh come on, you're just jealous because Boeing didn't do it first ;-)

Actually, I'm not. Frankly I could care less about the A vs. B "rivalry."

But I did think the "newsreel" was very well done and quite funny!
March 5, 2005 2:06:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

I think the movie was produced by Boeing : )

Arthur

"Ian" <iankporter@btinternet.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:2flh21dvv72i7tq8rgjm7f4c74ukjf71ef@4ax.com...
> Oh come on, you're just jealous because Boeing didn't do it first ;-)
>
> Ian.
March 5, 2005 9:15:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

That was very well done. Thanks for the link Bill

Paul


"Bill Leaming" <n4gix@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:p uxe6197666b$.1e4s993js96xk$.dlg@40tude.net...
> New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:
>
> http://home.exetel.com.au/pamuva/MOVIES!/A380Video.wmv
>
> Bill
Anonymous
March 5, 2005 12:19:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 05:45:11 -0500, Bill Leaming <n4gix@comcast.net>
brought the following to our attention:

>On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 21:36:42 +0000 (UTC), Ian wrote:
>
>> Oh come on, you're just jealous because Boeing didn't do it first ;-)
>

>Actually, I'm not. Frankly I could care less about the A vs. B "rivalry."
>But I did think the "newsreel" was very well done and quite funny!

especially the cattle scenes.. :)  did all those cattle have RFID
chips? probably not due to the old footage.. but you could imagine
that HAd them. Speaking of which.. will A380 passengers each carry
an ID chip? maybe unknowingly? {more humor}
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 12:17:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

interesting...... well if thi was even to be 20% valid, then let us hope
that boeing would not be forced to cut corners with the 787

"Gregory Abbey" <gabbey.maps@bkwds.dynanet.com> wrote in message
news:gfdh21d3t12jl8433efpjgs0rn5b36929b@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:37:46 -0500, Bill Leaming <n4gix@comcast.net>
> brought the following to our attention:
>
> >New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:
> >
> >http://home.exetel.com.au/pamuva/MOVIES!/A380Video.wmv
> >
> >Bill
>
>
>
> Hear anything about two dedicated A-380 terminals being sabotaged?
> ANd what about the Concorde mishap? any relation? is this stuff true
> or just theory [fake]? content that follows by J. Vialls.. for amuse!
>
>
>
> * * * * *
>
>
>
> The Boeing 747's design and manufacturing techniques date back
> to the fifties and the 'good old days' of the Cold War. Despite
> new engines and flashy flight deck instruments, nothing else has
> changed. This aircraft is essentially as old and out-of-date as
> the Boeing B-47.
>
> After successfully sabotaging Concorde 4590... [bankers] went on
> to deliberately sabotage the dedicated A-380 airport terminals
> in Dubai and Paris. The subliminal message was obvious, i.e.
> hinting strongly that anything aeronautical designed or built by
> Europe was intrinsically unsafe, and thus "certain to crash".
>
>
> France was the principal driving force behind both Concorde and
> the Airbus A-380. Jaque Chirac is justifiably proud of "Old
> Europe's" stunning technological achievement.
>
>
> Nineteen sixty-six (1966) seems a very long time ago, but it was
> on March 11 that year that French President Charles de Gaulle
> stunned the western world by sending an aide-mémoire to France's
> 14 partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), in
> which he announced that all French forces would be withdrawn
> from the Alliance integrated command. De Gaulle also stated that
> all French NATO bases and HQ's would be closed within a year.
>
> General de Gaulle was a gentleman, and he kept his word. At the
> diplomatic level, the reason appeared to be that Charles de Gaulle
> could not and would not trust America to 'protect' France if Russia
> attacked Europe, but the real reasons behind his decision were
> infinitely more profound.
>
>
>
> He continued, "For since a man and a country can only die once,
> deterrence exists once one has the means to inflict mortal
> damage on a possible aggressor, the determination to use them
> and the confidence in one's ultimate decision."
>
>
>
>
> Somehow, Europe as a whole had to find a way of freeing itself
> from the stranglehold of worthless US Federal Reserve notes,
> which would had to be replaced with revenue derived from the
> sale of tangible [real] products, such as cars, aircraft, farm
> products and so on. This was finally achieved in January 2005,
> when Germany alone (just one of 25 EU member states), published
> its export/import figures for the financial year 2004.
>
>
>
> During 2004, Germany exported products worth US$ 950 billion,
> while importing products valued at only US$ 748 billion, meaning
> that Germany made a gross profit for the year of US$
> 222,000,000,000. During the same time frame, America's total
> exports were two hundred billion less than Germany, with
> American imports completely off the clock. If anyone out there
> ever wanted hard proof that America is now totally bankrupt,
> Germany just provided that proof in the form of properly audited
> balance sheets.
>
>
>
>
>
> Though few people would consider the luxurious Airbus A-380 as a
> warplane, its very existence will have strategic impact on future
> wars..
>
>
> For nearly a hundred years, the.... [bankers] and their
> forbears have held the world to ransom, using blackmail and
> sheer force of arms to extract real goods in exchange for
> useless 'fiat' currency notes, junk bonds, and political bribes.
>
> It was never going to last for ever, and the launch of the A-380
> on January 18 marked the official beginning of the end, at least
> from a European perspective. Though it is one of the main
> instruments designed to undermine Boeing Aircraft Corporation
> and thus the entire American defense industry, the A-380 Super
> Jumbo is still a stunning aircraft in its own right, and will
> doubtlessly attract vast numbers of passengers on its merits.
>
>
>
> Though in standard three-class configuration the A-380 will carry
> around 560 passengers, rather than a possible 810 maximum
> in 'cattle truck' mode, it will do so 27% cheaper per passenger-
> mile than the Boeing 747, with part of this made possible by the
> engines burning about 20% less fuel.
>
> Curiously, Boeing's counter propaganda about the giant aircraft
> seems to have fallen flat on its face. The A-380 is not noisier
> than the Boeing 747, but many decibels quieter, even at maximum
> takeoff power. The A-380 does not require a special runway, and
> in fact has a shorter takeoff and landing run that the Boeing
> 747. The only airport alterations required are special departure
> and arrival gates, which were originally designed to handle a
> throughput of around 350 passengers, and will be hard pressed to
> handle 550 in their current configurations. They could still do
> the job of course, but the delays would be unacceptable.
>
>
> Perhaps most irksome of all for the Wall Street moneylenders, is
> that the giant European aerospace corporation that own Airbus,
> has not borrowed a single American fiat cent in order to
> complete this or any other Airbus project, meaning that Wall
> Street cannot pull the financial plug and make Airbus Industries
> simply disappear.
>
>
> Unable to stop the A-380 by direct means, or by indirect acts of
> sabotage on Concorde and the A-380 terminals, the money lenders
> sent Boeing off on a different and quite ridiculous tack, made
> necessary by the fact that America no longer has enough spare
> cash to build new aircraft or new production lines.
>
> Armed only with a cheap artist's impression, Boeing salesmen set
> off around the world in an attempt to achieve the impossible, to
> wit selling the concept of a middle weight airliner dubbed the
> Boeing 7E7 "Dreamliner", but without first building a prototype
> of even a full scale mockup.
>
>
> This was to be an exercise in gathering sufficient cash to start
> building a mockup - which is an incredible way of trying to sell
> aeroplanes, because it tells everyone instantly that you are so
> broke you can't afford to show them the real thing.
>
> This is not the first time Boeing has tried this bizarre approach.
> Within twelve months of the sabotage of Concorde 4590,
> the corporation suddenly released an artist's impression of the
> "Sonic Cruiser", a hybrid space-age transonic jet they seemed
> sure would replace the Concorde, once orchestrated American
> media pressure had managed to have the Mach 2 Concorde
> permanently grounded, which, curiously enough, is exactly what
> happened. Unfortunately for Boeing, no one wanted to buy their
> 'Sonic Cruiser" painting, so the project eventually folded and
> died.
>
>
> But the 7E7 was going to be different, and during the Spring of
> 2003, All Nippon Airways of Japan placed a firm order for 50 of
> these unproven aircraft at a fixed price of US$115 million for
> each airplane. Alas though, All Nippon was not prepared to hand
> over any ready cash in advance, meaning the full scale mockup
> and production line could not be started.
>
>
> "Dreamliner" is a very appropriate name, because this aircraft
> only exists in the fertile imaginations of Boeing's sales
> personnel. There is no prototype and no pre-production aircraft,
> although Boeing does have a few hundred spare copies of this
> artist's impression. Time dragged slowly by, and then on Friday
> January 28, 2005, Boeing got the big break it had been looking
> for. The Boeing Company and officials from the Peoples' Republic
> of China signed an agreement for the purchase of 70 Boeing 7E7
> Dreamliners by Chinese airlines. The agreement mentions a fixed
> price of US$110 million per airplane. The salesmen had pulled it
> off, and managed to sell more than 100 aircraft based only on an
> artist's impression! Not bad, but there was to be a very nasty
> sting in the tail.
>
>
> The very next day at Davos in Switzerland, Fan Gang, director of
> the National Economic Research Institute at the China Reform
> Foundation, boldly stated [on behalf of the Chinese Government],
> "The U.S. dollar is no longer, in our opinion is no longer seen
> as a stable currency, and is devaluating all the time, and
> that's putting troubles all the time," he said in impeccable
> English.
>
> Fan Gang continued, "So the real issue is how to change the
> regime from a US dollar pegging to a more manageable - pause -
> reference - pause - say Euros, yen, those kind of more
> diversified systems. If you do this, in the beginning you have
> some kind of initial shock; you have to deal with some
> devaluation pressures."
>
>
> China is a very powerful economic force nowadays, and the man
> from China had just put his boot into the US Dollar, a point
> well noted by all present. Naturally this means the US Dollar
> will continue to fall like a stone, going into final free fall
> when Russia and OPEC decide to start trading their oil stocks in
> Euros instead of dollars.
>
>
> So, Boeing has talked itself into the fixed-price delivery in
> 2008 of more than a hundred 7E7s [now the 787s], with that price
> fixed in US Dollars. Oh dear, now how much will the US Dollar be
> worth in four years time, when the Euro has become the world's
> only viable reserve currency? Let us take 25% of its current
> value against the Yuan and Yen, which means that Boeing will be
> contractually obliged to deliver brand-new 787 aircraft to China
> and Japan for today's equivalent price of a second-hand Boeing
> 737, or declare bankruptcy.
>
>
>
>
> It is no exaggeration to say that Boeing is the 'flagship' of the
> American defense industry, and if Boeing goes to the wall..
> [then??]
>
>
>
>
!