Topic: Shooting Faked? Video (Read 2648 times)

The blood splatter is mostly movie stuff. Bullet wounds I have seen start with a clean hole then drain blood. Any splatter is contained under the clothing. That it true for a high power rifle or a small caliber handgun. I thought it was reported that he used a .40 cal.? That is a fairly large round and would pass through your body. A 9mm. will also punch through unless one is using a deforming round. Many of us who conceal carry use deforming ammo so that the bullet does not go on to hit someone behind the target.

Video: Virginia Witness Interview#2 She told the truth the proof

Talks more about the cops etc being there waaaaay too early for a real shooting. He also calls someone else to corroborate.

Notice how they both raise the opposite eyebrow to convey a feeling! You guys got this all figured out I beliebe!

True that.  Probably one of the most effective ways to 'progress' as a society is to make it recognizable how easy and how common it is for this to happen.  And how hierarchical this use probably is (meaning that so many people at different stations in life are similarly impacted.)  Looking back at my own beliefs and actions over the years I see countless examples of having been used this way, and I am sure that they continue to this day.  Seeing the mechanisms by which this happens makes it more understandable and less humiliating.

No problem. It was a really enlightening conversation and well worth the listen. Also, it shines a light on not judging a book by it's cover and digging deeper to find the truth. Luckily, she was willing to have a conversation with him after the first video. You see, what most people will do, is to be so hurt they won't listen to someone trying to explain where they came from. Everyone can take a little lesson from their books and see how actually communicating through the anger and hurt can lead to insights.

I mean this in the most general of senses. For example married couples can either ignore the hurts and pains and lead separate lives while in the same house because they love each other, or they can communicate through the troubles they have and grow closer together. These people don't even know each other and communicating the way a married couple should in that sense, by explaining where they came from, and why they reacted the way they did and I think they both learned something from it.

Sadly, she learned that the people in power used her as a pawn, but so is life.

If this woman is not for real she is the best actor ever.  Thanks MMH for the link, and thanks to Professor Doom1 for doing good work in follow-up.  This work gives great insight into some of the methods employed in some of these operations and the human elements of their targeting.

On a tangent, the event and the two persons drawn out in this tiny little side-branch say some worthwhile things about substance abuse.  Both individuals lives would doubtlessly be different (and better) had they refrained.  I've watched Doom's stuff for a while now and have not trouble imagining him having had such problems.  It's good to see an example of someone channeling his energies (and likely his anger toward the system) in a productive way that is benefiting society.

Sorry the link in the previous post got taken down, and re-uploaded. It's now up again here: Virginia Shooting witness Keli Kohlmeier Interview Reuploaded

Keli Kohlmeier woke up with a gun pointed at her head at the time of the hoax. The FBI and ATF were there to make sure she didn't see anything. She thought that they were checking to make sure the shooter wasn't in the apartment with them. (There's no way ATF and FBI get there that early without knowing it would happen).

Watch her original video interview on tv here: TV Interview

Then watch her start to believe that it really was a conspiracy: Virginia Shooting witness Keli Kohlmeier Interview Reuploaded

Edit: changed link to current position.

It's also a little hard to believe people are ok with the police telling these people to delete evidence:

Update: Virginia police order BBC journalists to delete footage of suspected shooter's crash

"....The BBC reporters, Strasser and McKelvey, were reporting from the scene of the crash when they were told by police to delete their video footage....."

"...According to Strasser's Twitter feed, the reporters were left with only low-quality iPhone footage. He has since been able to recover a few of the images and audio until the officer made sure the footage was deleted...."

I've been looking at these events with interest lately and they are coming 'fast and furious' so to speak.  To me is is highly probable that almost all are completely fake.

It is interesting to note that in the 2012 NDAA our leadership saw fit to 'modernize' (aka 'shitcan') the Smith-Mundt act of 1948 which placed limits on the types of psychological operations directly targetting the domestic population.  A thinking person has to ask why they would want to do that.  The explanation was something along the lines of needing to keep up with the propaganda offered by Islamic radicals.  Huh?

Sandy Hook was the event that really got people asking questions and got citizen journalists involved.  A lot of effort was put into it and a lot of information was produced which makes it nearly impossible to think anything other than that the event was a FEMA 'capstone' excersize which was passed off as live.  It would have been trivial for the authorities to have released any number of things which could have put these theories to rest but none of them have been forthcoming.  Occam's razor suggests that this is simply because nothing concrete exists because the event was fake.

The best two pieces I've seen on Sandy Hook are:

   CREATING REALITY: A TNN Redux of a Sofia Smallstorm

and

   We Need to Talk about Sandy Hook

I would challenge anyone to watch these two presentations and not have some SERIOUS questions about the official narrative.  And if Sandy Hook was a psyop, one must consider pretty much everything presented by the mainstream media to be in question (which I personally already did.)  If people start immediately pushing an agenda (gun control, psychological surveillance, etc) within hours of an event that needs to be considered a red flag.

For the liberals to push their gun control motives.

I don't think it was faked though, there are enough people who are very high profile that would make this nearly impossible to fake because the people killed would be easily recognized if spotted in public.

I think the likes of Obama will continue to take advantage of dead children to push his agenda

Cui bono? This questions remains unanswered, and all the people shouting "hoax" should really get a newer version of a tinfoil hat...

The father was on tv the first day, so get your facts straight. I didn't say he was in the picture. The picture clearly said it was the station manager.

It is indeed a shame that people use this as an opportunity to get some attention.

This discussion is hilarious.

All the "funny details" to support the hoax are easy to explain away. I won't go into all of them, but here's a few on the recent claims: The anniversary could have been for the first session hanging out (rather than the first romantic date), or all of us might not know exactly how long they were dating (which is much more probable), wearing the same thing for rafting is probable because these people may not go rafting often (anyone who has gone rafting knows that are are specific, dedicated shirts and jackets (he's wearing a rafting jacket in one photo), who doesn't where the same hat over and over again, and the "C" on the raft is similar because they probably went back to the same rafting service for the anniversary.

As for the "smile" - the boyfriend isn't smiling in this screenshot of the same interview:


Plus, the boyfriend is trained to be on TV and the relationship was young and new...you don't know how deep the feelings really were. It's possible that in a time of tragedy the love for someone can seem greater than it may have actually been (completely speculating here), especially if they weren't talking about it much to anyone. P.S. the guy standing next to him is the Station Manager not the woman's father...get your few facts straight.

The only thing that's logical here is that people will come up with whatever excuses and rationale they need to prove their theory...and I include myself in this category.

Fortunately for me and everyone else that realizes this is a major tragedy is that we have video proof that this mentally ill terrorist shot the female reporter and pointed the gun at the cameraman. We also have the support that people giving up their lives for some yet-to-be-determined motive to make a hoax out of this is incredibly illogical.

You all should be ashamed for pouncing on this as an opportunity to get some attention. Go back to the 9/11 truther's threads...

REAL LOVE MATTERS - THE VIRGINIA SHOOTING TRUTH!

First image is the news reporter on a trip in 2013, and the second one is her with her fiance (that image was uploaded 6 days ago - but wait he was only going out with her for half a year right? They didn't have time to have an anniversary, which would have meant a whole year.) Did she seriously wear the same outfit and same hat and take the same tube (notice the 'C' on the tube in both pics) on a couple years later?





Video: From Twitter "Delete footage" WDBJ7 Hoax

Update: Virginia police order BBC journalists to delete footage of suspected shooter's crash

"BBC reporters Franz Strasser and Tara McKelvey encountered a big obstacle in their coverage of a double slaying of journalists at a Virginia mall.

The two reporters were covering the manhunt of the suspected shooter when they were ordered to delete footage by police....."

BBC journalists covering Virginia shooting 'threatened by police,' forced to delete footage

" Two BBC journalists say they were threatened by Virginia police after filming the scene where gunman Bryce Williams crashed and shot himself on Wednesday. They say a cop threatened to confiscate their camera and car if they did not delete their footage.

White House reporter Tara McKelvey and videojournalist Fraz Strasser were among the first to arrive at the scene on I-66, where Bryce Williams – also known as Vester Flanagan – crashed his vehicle and shot himself hours after killing journalists Alison Parker and Adam Ward during a live news broadcast in Virginia.

Strasser tweeted that he and McKelvey were told the footage “could be evidence,” and that they were forced to delete it. He added that a cop by the name of Officer Clark threatened to tow their car because it was apparently illegally parked....."

This clearly isn't a hoax. If you think this looks fake, you need to re-evaluate what you expect would look real, because you're out of touch with reality.

The "blood splatter" you're expecting simply doesn't happen in real life; unless the end of the muzzle is very close to the point of impact, where the rapidly expanding gasses leave the barrel at a high velocity and deflect, imparting additional energy, and displacing additional blood and small pieces of tissue. Even then, it would only be a small amount of blood for the vast majority of handgun calibers. It's based on the lb/ft. energy of the projectile (a factor of velocity and mass), the penetration distance of peak energy transference (a factor of velocity and coefficient of friction, which varies by the physical geometry and material properties of the projectile, and slightly by the mass of the projectile where an increase in inertia will increase the "area under the curve" mathematically speaking when graphing these relationships, while not necessarily affecting the peak energy transfer by an appreciable amount), and the anatomical structure of the impact location (fat tissue, muscle tissue, and bone will all react differently). You simply won't get the Hollywood effect in real life, not with anything much less powerful than a .308... Nobody goes hunting anymore, I guess it's easy to understand how Hollywood grabs so many imaginations. I suppose every car that falls off a cliff explodes too, right?

The shooter and the target victim were co-workers, the reporter who fell victim was in a secret office relationship; engaged to another co-worker. The camera man and the third (wounded but surviving) victim weren't the intended targets, rather they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. This wasn't some random killing, where gun control could even conceptually make a difference. This was an act of desperation by a deranged man who wanted the world to see his wrath unfold, for whatever yet unknown reason...

He worked for the news station, waited for a live broadcast, attempted murder on three people, killing two and critically wounding the third. Had he not used a gun, this broadcast would have been orders of magnitude more graphic, and the victims would have suffered. This murder couldn't have been stopped, the weapon was simply a choice for the killer who premeditated the murder. I don't see how this murder could've been prevented, unless the victim actually noticed early warning signs before the crime. Aside from having an awareness of a threat, and taking steps preeminently to protect yourself, sometimes it's only a question of "when" and not "if". Gun control isn't even a factor in this scenario...

The conspiracy theories surrounding the obvious and easily verifiable cases like this one, in my opinion, are likely fabricated in order to discount the veracity of other legitimate conspiracy theories; divide-and-conquer. The fact that some news publications don't fact check only results in inconsistent reporting, the spread of inaccurate information, and the misdirection of some individuals who can't sort through the conflicting information...

They are also silent on anti-depressant control.

Congress is remain silent on Gun Control. What they are waiting for? Such tragedies should not happen with anyone.

You most probably are right. And this would also explain why there's no blood visible and why the shoots were deadly. There are, of course, a lot of factors when you examine the wound of a shooting. However, a good base in forensics is the vulnerability index. A 9mm bullet in laboratory conditions has its biggest effect about 5 centimeters in the body. Then, the bullet loses most of energy. For those who are interested: There's a lot of scientific material available regarding "relative incapacitation index". This is partly outdated, but gives an idea about the effectivity of bullets. In correlation with the "vulnerability index", you will understand why the reality hasn't a lot to do what we see in movies and games.

It was a Glock 9mm seen in the video, not a .22