It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Doubts raised over authenticity of Charlie Hebdo footage

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

He shouldn't feel regret for wanting to show the World what occurred at all...


That's real journalism minus the sound bite...


If all we accept is what we're fed, we deserve every bit of the slaughter us lambs get...
edit on 12-1-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




But I do wonder about a media that feels they need to appeal to emotion with the point blank narrative when it was already as disgusting as it could have been with the initial shots.


This is my question as well...if I have any.
It IS possible to me, even though I believe the round hit him....that the media has used this to portray the ruthless nature of these terrorist and appeal to emotion.

There is no doubt the officer is dead (again, may he RIP) but I believe one of the wounds was in his stomach before they run over to him because of the way he was rolling around on the ground.

IDK....more questions than answers, as always.

Personally though, I'll add, I think the round hit him and the footage is legit....just my opinion though, so.



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




If all we have is what we're fed we deserve every bit of the slaughter us lambs get...


What if it is legit and this "conspiratorial garbage" is exactly the thing we are being fed?

It works both ways, to be honest.



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Jakal26

There is no visible bloodshed or any violence in that video, people dont seem to realise there is multiple footage at various points of this event.

That video in particular shows not only how "live" footage was tampered with but also the official narrative being spun does not quite fit.

I also find it odd you post a link in your OP to a fake site that does essentialy contain an execution video with the intention of "deconstructing" the event that took place, yet you have little interest in viewing any other video of the event itself?
edit on 12-1-2015 by Dabrazzo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo




There is no visible bloodshed or any violence in that video


Oh....there is damn sure, clearly "violence" in that video.
The lack of blood "spraying out" and covering the street is irrelevant to those of us that have shot things made of flesh and blood enough to know what we're talking about.

How many things made of flesh and blood have you killed in your life and what is your firearm experience (in the field...not shooting targets)???



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Jakal26

The video that YOU originaly posted is not the video I linked too.



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Jakal26

I'd say we still deserve to be part of the group that determines its legit...

Rather than accepting everything at face value because talking heads who are paid vast amounts by people like Rupert "Runs Media" Murdoch says so!


edit on 12-1-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo

I know...

....but thanks for avoiding my other questions about your firearms and killing experience.

edit on 12-1-2015 by Jakal26 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Fake web site and fake terrorist attack. Everything is fake.



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Jakal26

So you have no interest in discussing footage that is blatantly fake?, despite creating an entire thread about a fake video???



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I agree.
I can stomach it....

Others can't...so.

Then we have the.......well, I'll just leave it alone.

But yes, I agree. We definitely have the right to analyze this stuff outside of the boxes placed around the discussions by the establishment and the media et al....



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I partly agree, i understand that he doesn't feel well with it now.

Another thing is, now the video is used to try and prove a false flag, which is not surprising as it always ends like this, it's IMO very "silly"



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo

You didn't read the thread, did you.

I didn't want to discuss the "fake footage" (as you call it)....I wanted to discuss the site and it's potential ties to the BBC and why the BBC would run an article (or even host an article) as piss poor as the one in the OP.

I have seen the video in the link you posted.....(I get around)

...but thanks again for avoiding my other questions.
Seems you like to play arm chair commentator vs lending an ear to those that have years of firearms and killing experiences...not trying to be rude, but damn man....



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

They have attempted to fake the bbc website. ..should we trust anything said on it?.



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

Well, everything is as simple as a "false flag" these days, don't cha know


I'd say, it's much more complex than that and that the true "conspiracies" are often overlooked because people are adrenal high on trying to claim "FALSE FLAG" on everything....looking at discrepancies in early reporting and the like vs digging into the more mundane details that show ties to groups (and potentially agencies) that are well known......the inability to stop those that they KNEW were threats etc etc....I think you know what I'm talking about without having to spell it out.




posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

Looks like the link has been killed.

Job done though, as even people on this discussion think the footage is fake now and the whole thing did not happen. All this against a background that the source was a lie.

Regards



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

No...not on the site in question.
Not at all.

I hate the lengths people go to, to try to push their agendas around.

....just be honest you mf's. The truth is enough to piss off the most "unthinking" of the masses...It doesn't need to be convoluted with half-truths and blatant lies! (not you Monkey, just ranting off a bit at these hoaxer types)

.....I would imagine the cover-up being more about intelligence failures, and/or rogue intelligence agent(s) fostering an environment that allowed for this to happen...That is where my money is, not on some bs about the shoot being "fake" or whatever the hell...



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Sounds like we have an operation under way to discredit the footage that does not jive with the "reports". Since the footage itself can not be labelled "fake" then the next step is to promote it through channels that can easily be discredited and then the video gets discredited with it.

At least that is what I would do...



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Jakal26




I didn't want to discuss the "fake footage"





I have been extensively discussing this particular thing and am convinced the policeman was shot....but doubts are being raised by others with just as much (and more) experience as I feel I have in "real world shots"


Pretty contradictory if you ask me.




Seems you like to play arm chair commentator


LOL

Your one of those people. Weird.

As to your questions they bear little relevance to the to subject at hand, so quite simply I ignore them and like many others do here espeicaly the mall ninja types seem to only ever use that as a tool to deflect and or ridicule. My personal experiance with firearms is neither here nor there as I have lended no opinion on the matter nor sought to counter any it is simply not relevant.
edit on 12-1-2015 by Dabrazzo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

Surely you aren't trying to pin that on me?
Oh hell no!

I presented something I found....notice what forum you are in, buddy!

I didn't say I approved it or thought it was fake....rather, I said otherwise, IN. THE. OP.

I didn't want to discuss the footage...remember reading that?

Don't claim



Job done though, as even people on this discussion think the footage is fake now and the whole thing did not happen.


...and act like I have a part in it. I can't control what others think. If they cannot glean the information and discern it themselves, that is on them. I came here to get opinions from fellow members who are rational and can often do things with computers that take me longer than posting a thread and allowing them to provide me with resources that I often later use, rather than having to bring it here....I didn't know how to (quickly) find domain information...Chadwicks provided it....

So...if your intention was to imply I brought this here because of some "agenda".....you need to back off!
...or clarify so I can not be angry about said implications. That actually hurts me to think some would think I have an agenda with this.......

Read the damned things I've clearly stated throughout this thread (and others in recent days).....



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join