Congresswoman Gifford's YouTube Channel subscribed to her assailant's channel.

reply to post by pressure


Huh? If I do a Yahoo search for her youtube page and click 'cached', it gives me a cache from 12/01/11. I'm not too sure what this is meant to prove. I visited the site on the morning of 12/01 and the subscription was definitely there.

If the link you tried to post gives any clearer results, you'll need to repost it. The ATS system added a '...' which made the link invalid.

Quickly look at the comments section of this channel. It seems someone is posting under Jared's account "classitup10"!!!!!!

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Atlantican
Quickly look at the comments section of this channel. It seems someone is posting under Jared's account "classitup10"!!!!!!

www.youtube.com...

yeah, i can imagine three situations:
a). that is not his account(internet detectives sucks).
b). small(body frame, i mean..) chinese computer science master, that just for fun managed to log in onto that account(boogle moogle sucks, i mean).
c). well, password sharing sucks(always).

Just a shot in the dark, but I feel there is something fishy going on......

Originally posted by Jayhawker
I guess you guys missed my post on the other youtube thread.

This is the better place to post my info though.

Before a certain time last night Rep Giffords channel had not been accessed for 2 days. Thats before the shooting.

And she was subscribed to classitup10 (Jared Loughner) when I looked. Someone else pointed out that if you check googles cache as of December 2nd she was not subscribed to him.

So she had some form of contact with her shooter before the shooting and it was between 12/2/2010 and 1/6/2011.

Here's my screenshot:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2d6af69edcf4.jpg[/atsimg]

And here's my previous post to show the time frame

The picture is a fake (and a poor one at that). Note the Last Visit Date (2 days ago) and the most recently uploaded video under Recent Activity (1 day ago). How was there activity (how did someone upload a video) one day ago if the last log in was 2 days ago?

Originally posted by Atlantican
Quickly look at the comments section of this channel. It seems someone is posting under Jared's account "classitup10"!!!!!!

www.youtube.com...

It is not his account. Go to the page, it was signed up a couple days ago. His actual account hasn't had a video uploaded to it since December 2010, but this fake account was made in 2011.

His "real" account is www.youtube.com... (joined October 25, 2010)
The "fake" account is www.youtube.com... (joined January 10, 2011)

reply to post by SR71BLACKBIRD


This has already been discussed (I can't remember whether it's this thread or a thread on another forum I read about this subject) and it seems like the 'last visit date' is registered by when the username and password are entered. If you're remembered by cookies you can add videos without it affecting this date.

It does mean that the 'last visit date' is somewhat useless for determining when the subscription was made, but I assure you that photo is not fake. Myself and many other members saw the site when it looked exactly like that.

EDIT: In fact, check out the www.youtube.com...&cd=1&hl=en &ct=clnk&gl=uk" target="_blank" class="postlink">google cache of this page from Jan 13. It looks exactly like this screenshot, but without the subscription down the bottom. This link proves that the recent activity and the last visit dates are not tied.

just another unexplained oddity which could very well be the tip on a conspiratorial iceberg, or a simple misunderstanding of a persons actions. could be one as much of another

Originally posted by TheStev
reply to post by SR71BLACKBIRD

 

This has already been discussed (I can't remember whether it's this thread or a thread on another forum I read about this subject) and it seems like the 'last visit date' is registered by when the username and password are entered. If you're remembered by cookies you can add videos without it affecting this date.

It does mean that the 'last visit date' is somewhat useless for determining when the subscription was made, but I assure you that photo is not fake. Myself and many other members saw the site when it looked exactly like that.

EDIT: In fact, check out the www.youtube.com...&cd=1&hl=en &ct=clnk&gl=uk" target="_blank" class="postlink">google cache of this page from Jan 13. It looks exactly like this screenshot, but without the subscription down the bottom. This link proves that the recent activity and the last visit dates are not tied.

edit on 13-1-2011 by TheStev because: More info

Hi,
Thank you for your reply and I tend to accept your explanation. As I presently view the link you posted, it says the last video was uploaded 9 hours ago, and last login was 9 hours ago, so that does not really help. I'm not arguing that Mrs. Giffords' page was not subscribed to the classitup10 channel (so what if it was), but seeking proof that her page was subscribed to that channel before she was shot (because that would be quite interesting). Since you're claim is that the last login time is not necessarily accurate, then there is no way of knowing when her page was subscribed to his channel. Using Occam's Razor I will tend to accept that her page was subscribed to his page after she was shot and after his Youtube identity became known, unless further evidence comes to light that leads to a different explanation.

RATS!! I didn't even think that the google cache would be updated. Thanks for taking me on my word Possibly not wise on a site like this, but I do appreciate it

You're absolutely right there's no way to know whether she subscribed before or after. Subscribing after is probably the simplest solution, but it still seems pretty odd to me. Particularly as the subscription is gone now.

I suppose the only solution I can come up with is that the subscription was added by her staff so that more people would be aware of who the shooter was, and then the defence for Loughner asked them to remove the subscription and put a gag order on the whole thing. But since there can be no doubt Loughner was the shooter, and his Youtube page is so well known by everyone - I can't really imagine the defence would bother.

Adding the subscription is odd enough, adding then removing it with zero comment is particularly fishy - to me at least.

reply to post by ommadawn


'Tell me what's on your mind or tweet me.' Would this be a double meaning entry, as in a message to Jared to let him know she was thinking of him and 'veiling' the message so as not to draw attention to their relationship?
If she was having an affair with him, or if he is a son she gave up for adoption then she would keep go to any length to keep that from the public's eyes and her party?
Truth is stranger than fiction.....You never know?

I was just catching up on some of this "Loughner" madness and who cold called me on a Sunday afternoon ?
N R A

ironicsurrealism.blogivists.com...