#Virginia #TV #Shooting (1)
#Virginia #TV #Shooting (2)
#Virginia #TV #Shooting (3)
#Virginia #TV #Shooting (4)
#Virginia #TV #Shooting (2)
#Virginia #TV #Shooting (3)
#Virginia #TV #Shooting (4)
Mexican coverage of shooting gives me a few questions
Jim Stone
They did a huge segment on this in the Mexican press, and used MY
twitter captures off this very page and probably the video I posted. :-)
The reporter, Alison, thought it was a real shooting, she was not told it was blanks.
So her reaction was real, but absolutely nothing happened. There is no
way she would not have been knocked off her high heels, there was no
body shudder when the bullets supposedly hit, no impact stutter in her
voice as she screamed through two gun shots, no camera jerk from gun
kick as the shooter fires and she runs away on high heels at full
speed in perfect condition with no marks visible anywhere, on either
side of her body while the shooter supposedly turns on the camera man.
I NEED AN EXPLANATION: The Mexican press clearly showed from all
angles the type of camera the news reporter cameraman had. It was a
modern high def 1080P broadcast camera in the $12,000 USD price range.
IF THIS BE THE CASE, I'D LIKE AN EXPLANATION FOR WHY, EVEN ON THE
MEXICAN TELEVISION, THE VIDEO SHOWN FROM THAT HIGH
DEFINITION CAMERA WAS
HIGHLY COMPRESSED 320x240 VIDEO with poor contrast and no clarity
whatsoever. I thought the horrible resolution was from the web.
Now that I know that horrible resolution was intentional I don't buy any
of it anymore, the Mexican press would have had better if it was
available, and I have the explanation for why it is not available:
Because the managers of this psy op have only provided horrible video
quality to obscure the truth. If they showed all of this in the true
high def that great camera no doubt captured it all with, it would be
OBVIOUS no real bullets were fired.
After the segment on this shooting, they went into a huge
extended segment on gun control, saying America needs a full gun ban to
stop this type of thing from happening. THERE IS MOTIVE 1.
Boyfriend news anchor does not wash for me.
Pretty boy
Chris says: "she was 'our bright, shining light' and it was cruelly
extinguished by yet another crazy person with a gun". Umm dear Chris,
it appears you have an agenda. If you feel this way, why not fake all
this to get a gun ban through?
Look at his face - he's faking it, trying not to laugh. None of the
pictures show a heart broken Chris! And OOH, he had a nice cute little
photo album, A GIANT THICK PHOTO ALBUM all ready to go, at the station,
ALL THE WHILE HE CLAIMED THE RELATIONSHIP WAS SECRET (thus
necessitating a giant photo album at WORK??!!?? Why have it at work, if
the relationship was never talked about and a surprise to everyone at
the station only revealed through his heartfelt tweets"?
Obvious answer: so he could flaunt the sad sad love story to the world
media, ON CUE and dig the gun control agenda a little deeper. Lovely.
And wouldent you know - the "shooter" is now dead, to simplify it
all, and the day of the shooting was Alison's last day as a reporter
(scheduled ahead of time) so THAT explains, FOR REAL, why she won't be
on the air there anymore! All just TOO PERFECT!
Logic: Chris was not her boyfriend. If he was, that album would not
have been at work if the relationship, according to his tweets, was a
secret there. The photo album and all cutie shots were all faked and
staged for this grand event, to be pulled out and flaunted at the right
time. Alison will go on to receive a huge payment of $600,000 dollars
and cool off with miss Batman Jessica Ghawi/Redfield enjoying "five
swimming pools and a lake" for a few years, and then emerge a whole new
gal. Cutie boy Chris will probably stay on the air after a huge 4 wheel
drive romp in the back country in a brand new rig he bought with his
payoff, girls included.
I have little doubt that this event was FAKE FAKE FAKE, things don't fit realistic scenarios, NO ONE DIED IN THIS THEATER.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario