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.

 

Georgian Reporter shot on live TV (VIDEO)

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout


People, if you dont know what you are talking about dont make a fool of yourself. Bunch of Hollywood snipers.

First, there would be no "splitting the head like a coconut" because well trained snipers aim center of mass.

Second, it would be impossible to graze someone intentionally from any distance. Even locked into a vise no weapon is that accurate.


I take it you are a sniper? You speak as though you know more than the rest of us....

As you said, there is a very good chance a true sniper would have gone for center mass if he was firing from a far enough distance. However, if you knew anything about ACTUAL snipers, you would know that there is a BIG difference between a kill shot and a center mass shot. Center mass is almost always ONLY used at great distance(this is a possibilty, however, that doesnt change the fact that if he were aiming center amss, he is a VERY bad shot.)

Also, again, if you knew anything of sniping, you would know that it is by no means out of the question for an elite sniper to shoot the flame off of a candle, without breaking the wax. Again, you are talking about elite shooters, but to act as though someone COULDN'T graze an arm if trying shows that you are speaking arrogantly about a subject of which you know little.




posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 



I'm going with the 'stray bullet' theory myself. I think she happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and was the unintentional victim of a bullet fired from a considerable distance. I don't even think those sounds were gunfire, but the microphone being jostled around or other commotion near the camera.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRepublic
logically any real sniper would have blown her brains out all over the camera lens. snipers dont miss. hence the term "sniper". and if they do they dont miss the second shot. one shot one kill.


Dude, lay off the war movies. Snipers miss and if they shoot the head they pribably didnt mean to.




frankly if you believe everything you see on television
thats pretty sad.

See above.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by cavscout
 


the head shot isnt even important to my argument. it could have been center mass or whatever. the whole snipers dont miss thing is important, and if they miss the first shot they hit the second. that is why they are snipers.

what military is gonna train and outfit an elite group of marksmen that cant even kill their targets? they wouldnt be snipers then would they?

if she was supposed to be dead she would be.
all you see is a bunch of camera moving she disappers holding her arm and then they reshow her in the van a few seconds later with blood on her arm while all those around her seem in no hurry to get the hell out of dodge...

you may buy the sniper thing, but i dont... this smells of propaganda.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
I take it you are a sniper? You speak as though you know more than the rest of us....


Iwas a squad designated marksman, 19DELTA, Cavalry Scout, armored reconnaissance specialist. I trained with the US Army Marksmanship Team and almost made the Presidents 100.

I think I am a little more qualified than someone who heard all about sniping from their uncle who was a super-seal-sniper-K-9-tunnel rate-recon-demolitions expert/COOK.




Center mass is almost always ONLY used at great distance(this is a possibilty, however, that doesnt change the fact that if he were aiming center amss, he is a VERY bad shot.)


WRONG. Center of mass is the rule.


Also, again, if you knew anything of sniping, you would know that it is by no means out of the question for an elite sniper to shoot the flame off of a candle, without breaking the wax.



It is beyond the capability of any riffle!

Do you understand that if you lock a weapon down so that it does not move and fire at a target you will not be able to make that shot with any consistency.

Hit the wick of a candle!


Show me that riffle and I will pay $5,000 for it.

And you do realize that even if the riffle was that good even the blood flowing through your hand would put you off that wick half the time even if you were the best.


[edit on 14-8-2008 by cavscout]



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Once again, the angle bothers me. The cameraman and equipment were between the "sniper" and the reporter. The sniper needed to be at an elevated location to make that shot. Unless it were a stray bullet, or a ricochet.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   
At the start there was a real issue with reporting being 'discouraged' in South Ossetta. We saw footage of a Jet attacking a target and then swinging back to attack the cars/members of a BBC crew who had filmed the event.

I'm assuming they had done the usual warzone thing of writing PRESS all over the car wearing blue bullet proof vests.

It was also reported yesterday as I recall that militia had robbed some reporters (ITN?) of their cameras and car while the Russians stood about watching. So they were not back into a peace keeping roll.

--ScienceJoe



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:04 PM
link   
War movie people in here are making me laugh.

From some of the comments here i can tell a lot of you have little to no experience shooting a rifle at all.

For the most part any sniper that is shooting at his targets HEAD from any large distance is a idiot. (over 100-250 yards) Why AIM for a 6 inch target when you have a much larger target area you can hit? IE the chest/body.

Mind you things change when you are dealing with say a .50 cal. With proper long range sights .

Good Trained snipers do miss.. Anyone who says they don't .. Well is ignorant of the facts.

This incident is most likely some guy with a rifle at long range taking pot shots at targets he can barely see. Its called ineffective fire for a reason. Over open sights you really need to be trained well to be able to hit your target.. That or get lucky.

I doubt it was a Trained sniper ..

And i suspect that there was no bullet or shooter at all.. But that is just a suspicion.



"Center mass is almost always ONLY used at great distance(this is a possibilty, however, that doesnt change the fact that if he were aiming center amss, he is a VERY bad shot.)"

^^ The person who made that statement is totally ignorant about firearms and shooting.

Center mass is the rule .. Head shots are very rarely attempted... Only a idiot marksman would specificaly aim at the head at range.

Do your homework man....





[edit on 14-8-2008 by wolfmanjack]



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by wolfmanjack
 






And i suspect that there was no bullet or shooter at all.. But that is just a suspicion.




i couldnt agree more. and check this out at second 52 on the video the reporter SMILES knowingly at the camera like a kid who told a lie to get a class mate in trouble after it worked...



also note at the begining of the video there are people walking in the backround...at the sound of gunfire in a warzone thos people in the backround do not make even the slightest attempt to find cover. you would think by looking at them they were out for a stroll on the beach.

the more i look at this the less i believe it.
and i didnt believe it in the first place.
pure propaganda set up!



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout

Iwas a squad designated marksman, 19DELTA, Cavalry Scout, armored reconnaissance specialist. I trained with the US Army Marksmanship Team and almost made the Presidents 100.

I think I am a little more qualified than someone who heard all about sniping from their uncle who was a super-seal-sniper-K-9-tunnel rate-recon-demolitions expert/COOK.




WRONG. Center of mass is the rule.




Do you understand that if you lock a weapon down so that it does not move and fire at a target you will not be able to make that shot with any consistency.



And you do realize that even if the riffle was that good even the blood flowing through your hand would put you off that wick half the time even if you were the best.


[edit on 14-8-2008 by cavscout]


Dont have enough time to search through my videos and find the candle one, but I think this proves you are full of it:
www.youtube.com...
Go ahead, go to youtube, type in sniper shot. Then tell me again what your classification was and how you almost did this and that.

There is no such thing as a "center mass rule" nor is there a heashot rule. each situation is different, and snipers take different shots depending on trajectory, distance, etc. Either way, a trained sniper would not have missed multiple times, unless he intended to. Once, sure. Not 6 times, though.

Who said anything about locking down a weapon. My argument is that a true sniper does not need to lock down their weapon. A true sniper only needs to steady it.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by brettcal82
 


Clearly it looks as if a Russian sniper was having some fun ..

Am I the only one who notices that highly trained snipers rarely miss their shots when aiming for full body? .. a women standing in a deserted road.. common ..

The shot is on the wrist..

Which imo indicates a board Russian sniper who decided he was going to shoot the microphone hand off the reporter. The Reporter being incredibly lucky either had the shot miss because it was a bad shot, or moved her hand to an angle where the bullet grazed the skin instead of shooting the hand clear off.

Board Russians traumatizing journalist.. Doesn't show Russia in the best of light, especially seeing as no one will ever be punished for it. Unlike America, Russia just shrugs at crap like this.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic

Originally posted by cavscout

Iwas a squad designated marksman, 19DELTA, Cavalry Scout, armored reconnaissance specialist. I trained with the US Army Marksmanship Team and almost made the Presidents 100.

I think I am a little more qualified than someone who heard all about sniping from their uncle who was a super-seal-sniper-K-9-tunnel rate-recon-demolitions expert/COOK.




WRONG. Center of mass is the rule.




Do you understand that if you lock a weapon down so that it does not move and fire at a target you will not be able to make that shot with any consistency.



And you do realize that even if the riffle was that good even the blood flowing through your hand would put you off that wick half the time even if you were the best.


[edit on 14-8-2008 by cavscout]


Dont have enough time to search through my videos and find the candle one, but I think this proves you are full of it:
www.youtube.com...
Go ahead, go to youtube, type in sniper shot. Then tell me again what your classification was and how you almost did this and that.

There is no such thing as a "center mass rule" nor is there a heashot rule. each situation is different, and snipers take different shots depending on trajectory, distance, etc. Either way, a trained sniper would not have missed multiple times, unless he intended to. Once, sure. Not 6 times, though.

Who said anything about locking down a weapon. My argument is that a true sniper does not need to lock down their weapon. A true sniper only needs to steady it.


You're ignoring the wind variance and the movement of the target. She wasn't stood stock still, and her hair was pretty blown around by the breeze.

You can't guarentee the shot under conditions like that, ergo you couldn't guarentee a graze.

I didn't think her smile at the 52 second point looked conceited or anything of the sort, either. She looked like she was giving a brave smile to show that she was okay.

Can anyone translate what she was saying, out of interest?

This all being said, they do seem remarkably relaxed for people who have just been fired upon. I'd be hiding under something, sharpish!



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   
No way to know for sure if it was real or not but I way it looked like it could be real.

Notice how she looks down at her arm and the ground, as if she was surprised and was looking for what hurt her.

Seems like if she were staging it she would have looked up at the gunman and would probably have overreacted. Instead of overreacting, she moved away from the pain like anyone does when they are shot unexpectedly.

When you are shot the first time it does not feel like you think it will. It burns. Feels like someone is putting a cigarette out on you.

Watch again, she looks like she is reacting to a burn and doesn’t know its source. When she moves off the camera.

As to the people in the background this is what happens in a low intensity combat zone. People in Baghdad don’t even flinch until the rounds are going overhead or land close by. What are they going to do, run screaming like a decapitated chicken every time they hear a weapon fire, hundreds of times a day?

I vote authentic.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 



Dude, stop. You are going to embarrass yourself here.

It is PHYSICALY IMPOSSIBLE to hit the wick of a candle every time. PERIOD.

The riffle IS NOT THAT ACCURATE, regardless of how great the marksman is!

NO riffle ever invented in the entire world for all time could ever do what you say!

You cant argue this, son. What you are saying is impossible.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by cavscout
 





Instead of overreacting, she moved away from the pain like anyone does when they are shot unexpectedly.



which is why the van and camera crew chilled in the zone of fire for 5 min taking pictures of her arm looking unconcerned.

as for what normal people do when under real gunfire i suggest going to min 1:08 in this video. notice in this video it is georgians shooting a journalists...hmmm sounds familure.



this whole story is such a crock. no one should fall for this.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   


You're ignoring the wind variance and the movement of the target. She wasn't stood stock still, and her hair was pretty blown around by the breeze.

You can't guarentee the shot under conditions like that, ergo you couldn't guarentee a graze.

I didn't think her smile at the 52 second point looked conceited or anything of the sort, either. She looked like she was giving a brave smile to show that she was okay.

Can anyone translate what she was saying, out of interest?

This all being said, they do seem remarkably relaxed for people who have just been fired upon. I'd be hiding under something, sharpish!


I'm not ignoring anything. i'm simply stating the fact that it is possible to intentionally graze. And I'm stating that, contrary to what some would like to say on here, a true sniper does not miss their target with multiple shots. Period. Everyone can miss, but a tactical sniper, who is put out in the field AS A SNIPER, should be good enough to land 1 out of 3 shots, let alone 1 out of 6. If they can't, why exactly are they a sniper?

I agree about the smile, looked more like a child putting on a brave face than an evil one.

If it is a propaganda event, it's fairly obvious to me that the reporter did not see it coming. I'd say it's more likely just random fire, however.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRepublic
as for what normal people do when under real gunfire i suggest going to min 1:08 in this video.


Sorry sir, I have been to combat I dont need to base my opinion on videos.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 



Dude, stop. You are going to embarrass yourself here.

It is PHYSICALY IMPOSSIBLE to hit the wick of a candle every time. PERIOD.

The riffle IS NOT THAT ACCURATE, regardless of how great the marksman is!

NO riffle ever invented in the entire world for all time could ever do what you say!

You cant argue this, son. What you are saying is impossible.



Dont put words in my mouth. I never said someone could hit the wick of a candle every time. I said they can hit the wick of a candle. Funny, your stance has changed a bit from "there isnt a rifle in exhistance that can do that" to "you cant hit the wick every time".

Also, you'd have to think someone as highly trained and as good a marksman as you claim to be would know that the word is "rifle", not "riffle".

Go ahead, keep on diggin, "son".



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by cavscout
 


seeing as you are experienced, would you say my hypothesis has any weight (posted above)?



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
Also, you'd have to think someone as highly trained and as good a marksman as you claim to be would know that the word is "rifle", not "riffle".


Yes, I am wrong because I cant spell



Sometimes, a firearm's accuracy will be measured in MOA. This simply means that under ideal conditions, the gun is capable of repeatedly producing a group of shots whose center points (center-to-center) fit into a circle, the diameter of which can be subtended by that amount of arc. (E.g.: a "1 MOA rifle" should be capable, under ideal conditions, of shooting a 1-inch group at 100 yards, a "2 MOA rifle" .


en.wikipedia.org...

Show me a weapon that shoots 1/8th MOA or better.

Like I said, no rifle can make a grazing wound at any distance, it is physicaly impossible.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join