rigorousintuition.ca

That said, I think the big problem here is the lack of situational awareness. The fact that everyone--reporter, cameraman, and interviewed person-- allowed a gun toting individual to walk up, almost right next to one person (gun was level within inches of cameraman's shoulder), point a gun at someone else a few feet away--while muttering "bitch"--for several seconds, then back-off for another few seconds, and turn back to shoot is, in my humble opinion, unbelievable. One person lacking situational awareness is one thing, but all three????

This is why I included the TV crew story about a minor fire in my hood. While the reporter was putting on make up and the camera man was setting up to go live, anyone could have ambushed them. Situational awareness is not something news crews out on the "beat" for municipal matters worry about. Go in, do a report, get some footage for a 15 second spot to include in the 11 o'clock broadcast and then either return to base or go to the next nexus of footage.

Here in Seattle, I have had several media regulars over the years, both TV and radio and believe it or not they are regular people. Some are nuts and manic. But for the most part they are normal. These two would have had no reason to fear for their lives doing a puff piece. I think.

A long time staple on Denver TV (commercials for American Furniture Warehouse) was Jake Jabs. Seen here and the constant Denver references the dudes of South Park always mine:



I probably find SP more funny than most because I know exactly what they're talking about.

Anyhow, one time, that I just remembered, me and some friends were at Chili's and we saw Jake Jabs there and we were paying the bill at the same time as he. I said, let's follow him and see where he lives! So we did. We lost him and never found out. But as pizza delivery drivers we knew the area and were able to hone it down to a small area. I think he knew we were following him and shook us. But not for any reason other than it was exciting.

82_28 » Sun Aug 30, 2015 11:44 am wrote:

That said, I think the big problem here is the lack of situational awareness. The fact that everyone--reporter, cameraman, and interviewed person-- allowed a gun toting individual to walk up, almost right next to one person (gun was level within inches of cameraman's shoulder), point a gun at someone else a few feet away--while muttering "bitch"--for several seconds, then back-off for another few seconds, and turn back to shoot is, in my humble opinion, unbelievable. One person lacking situational awareness is one thing, but all three????

This is why I included the TV crew story about a minor fire in my hood. While the reporter was putting on make up and the camera man was setting up to go live, anyone could have ambushed them. Situational awareness is not something news crews out on the "beat" for municipal matters worry about. Go in, do a report, get some footage for a 15 second spot to include in the 11 o'clock broadcast and then either return to base or go to the next nexus of footage.

Here in Seattle, I have had several media regulars over the years, both TV and radio and believe it or not they are regular people. Some are nuts and manic. But for the most part they are normal. These two would have had no reason to fear for their lives doing a puff piece. I think.

82_28, the scene you describe sounds as if it was chaotic, and I'm sure one's situational awareness is effected by chaotic circumstances, but in this case, the scene seemed unperturbed...almost tranquil. True, they had no reason to fear for their lives so their guard was probably down, but on the other hand, one is more likely to notice the approach of an unauthorized presence in the absence of chaos. If you want to get away with something, do it in the midst of turmoil, when things are in a state of commotion, and you're more likely to get away with it.

He used one hand because the other hand was carrying the smart phone or whatever he used to videotape the incident.

The kick a gun has is a direct result of the caliber of the gun. A .22 has virtually no kick at all. What was the caliber of the gun? Anyone know?

The very nature of our culture makes such an incident inevitable. This was not a surprising, unthinkable occurrence. I wrote a screenplay years ago, back in the 90s, about criminals videotaping their crimes with POV cameras and releasing them into the world.

I think any assumption that this was faked is a real stretch. And coming from me, that's saying something! (I'm usually open to such ideas)

News reporters doing a street interview are very used to crowds gathering behind the camera. Every time I've ever seen a reporter on the street with a cameraman pointing at them (sometimes with a floodlight pointed at the reporter), there has always been a small crowd of people hanging around. We see all the time on news bloopers where someone will run into frame and hold up a funny sign or go streaking across the screen. Reporters have to deal with this, keep their composure, and stick with the interview or broadcast. There's a funny video somewhere on the net where a Weather Channel guy, Jim Catore, is doing a live broadcast and a crazy fan just runs up to him. Jim Catore doesn't even break his sentence or eye contact with the camera, he just raises his knee and hits this guy in the nuts. He WAS situationally aware, but he only reacted when the guy ran into his personal space.

For this incident, the woman reporter is turned towards the woman she's interviewing. She's not looking around. She's focused on her interview, which means giving eye contact to the subject. The subject of the interview is looking at the reporter and is probably aware of the cameraman with a big camera over his shoulder. She's probably focused on giving a professional interview, not darting her eyes around to the surroundings, which would make her look distracted and nervous.

Can we say that this is the first recorded incident of a news team being attacked during a live broadcast (outside of a conflict zone)? If so, then the team would have absolutely zero concern that they should be fearing for their lives in the middle of a live interview.

I think it was a Glock 9mm

I don't think it was a surprising, unthinkable occurrence...not by a long shot. But from what I saw on video, I think this particular occurrence was fake, not my normal take on this type of incident.

Did anyone posting here watch the video? Because I'm certainly not saying that this type of thing could never happen. Not at all. Just that the footage from the video I saw looked fake. Not to mention, the timing (economy), racial component, gun control advocating, manifesto....

Yes, I watched the video. The reporter was involved in a interview was being broadcast live. She seemed to be listening intently to whatever was being said by the person she was interviewing. I do not ever recall seeing any reporter being distracted enough to draw their attention away while actively interviewing their subject.

The cameraman too, was focused on his subjects and had his back to the assailant. I see nothing unusual about their, the victims, demeanor as the assailant approached, that his approach was unnoticed by his working victims until the first shot.

I was reluctant to view a murderer's video of his crime, but this really only showed a frightened woman running perhaps a few steps before the video cuts off. Still, it is disturbing to know neither she nor the cameraman survived and that you will be viewing the last few moments of their lives.

Insofar as those who want make this about more effective "gun control" or that this was staged to further that agenda, well that's plain foolish. The man legally obtained his weapon, just like many other murderers do. Unless there's enacted a mandatory mental competency examination prior to the issuance of firearms licenses, we'll always have some deranged individuals legally issued firearms licenses. And that's never going to happen.

Joe Blow from Kokomo with an IQ of 47 will always be able to legally own a handgun.

Only in America.

I have no idea if this was real or a hoax though I am leaning for it being real as like someone else said it is just much cheaper to go ahead and murder someone than it is to stage something like this with many actors involved who could talk or blow their part in it. Perhaps the shooter was handled or controlled in some way but I do think the people where shot, it was a 9mm and that is why I dont use them, I like a 45, if that were a 45 she would have fallen back and down immediately but with a 9mm shot in the abdomen and other fleshy areas she could run away for a short distance.

Anyway just saw this, they believe it was a hoax of some sort? Shrug.

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/08/is- ... -face.html

I think the people who generally push the ideas of these events being fake with crisis actors are playing right in to their hands, what better way to make the entire community of conspiracy researchers look like complete insensitive idiots than to push crisis actors and hoax theories on them and then have them spread it around like its gospel. And no I am not suggesting anyone here is doing that, I think people here have legit questions about things but I think I serves THEM well to have these ideas out there to make us all look bad. Just like they infiltrated 9-11 truth with holograms and shit like that, makes us all look pretty dumb, it is much easier to just murder people using a controlled shooter.

No. That fire story definitely wasn't chaotic. It was just low hanging fruit. A quick five minute drive straight north from their downtown enclave, get some footage and then go somewhere else. The fire wasn't that big a deal. I only noticed it because of the abundant sirens. It was a few blocks away so I decided to check it out. Within five minutes most of the trucks had left. I don't think they put any water on it either. My point was how easy it would have been to ambush them and this case we are talking about probably was just a psychotic and disgruntled ex-employee. I'm with Nordic as I am normally into these things, but I think what happened is probably the long and short of it.

Meant to add that the larger picture is (and could back up DnC's misgivings) that it happened on live TV. That, I think is the larger picture. He clearly waited until they were live and nothing could get edited at that point. He knew the ropes. He could have shot them before the interview or after it had wrapped up if that is what he was out to do. He wanted clearly, to do it live.

This is what scares me the most -- while I do feel for all of the victims -- doing it live was the point.

Also consider what you're implying, if you argue the video is fake. It's one of the following scenarios, :

1. Alison Parker, Adam Ward and Vester Flanagan were all actually whacked somewhere else by the nefarious 'them', then planted where ambulance staff and local cops found them. Vicki Gardner (the interviewee of the morning, who was wounded in the shooting) is in on it. The head of the chamber of commerce in a minor town in Virginia, she accepted to be shot in the back and very nearly paralysed or killed.

2. As above, except that local cops, ambulance crews and the coroner are in on it too.

3. As in 2, but all three are actually alive, and getting ready for another psyop

4. None of them ever lived, and people pretending to have known them, and telling anecdotes about their lives, are co-conspirators in a massive bit of psyop theatre

...all for the sake of making a video clip that'll have dropped off the news cycle in two months at the very most. That really doesn't seem more 'obvious' than the first-level explanation, honestly.

What fascinates me about these things - the crisis actor stuff - is how it has become possible to look at events on a screen and completely disregard the hundreds of people who were actually involved in it, and easily dismiss their experiences not only as actors in that event, but as people with their own entire collections of lived experiences. I'm not having a go at anyone here - it's an artefact of how we interact with the world, and how the technological mediation of our interaction has rewired us in a way that has changed what being a member of society actually means.

Chris Hurst's tweets after Parker's death, that we touched on last week, are part of that. And, after having thought about it a bit, I've decided that there's nothing very weird about what he did - he'd have been bombarded with texts and DMs and emails asking him what was happening, so tweeting something and posting on Facebook - after which both platforms became instant books of remembrance - might well have been the most private way he could have dealt with it (in that that made it possible for him to get left alone).

I don't think I have the skills to really express what I mean here - this is some Deleuze-level shit - but would like to hear what others think.

And I do think some important events are staged - but I only think that when I can identify some of the actors in it, as actual people with motivations that I can understand, and have some sort of sense of the networks involved and it makes sense to me that members in those networks would act in line with the overall scheme. That's not the case here.

For all the reasons stated above, I usually do not subscribe to the 100% "faked" theory. I think they normally mix it up, mingling crisis actors into a crisis that's real. However, as I've said before, creating an event that appears fake, while reporting on it as the God's honest truth gaslights the public, divides the public, distracts the public, etc. I'm living proof--and I'm not the only one-- because here I am investigating, researching, trying to prove this thing is fake when my time could be spent more productively elsewhere.

One of the reasons I'm so obsessed by this is my conviction that there are individuals, families and clusters of people, even entire neighborhoods throughout the nation that seem to be an essential part of the tradecraft infrastructure, maybe indoctrinated/brainwashed/trauma-based mind controlled/programmed to dedicate themselves to the state or shadow government. I've even seen evidence of this on mainstream media, like when Jimmy Fallon interviewed a young actress who told him she grew up with lots of other famous young actors/entertainers...they all lived on the same block as kids! I wish I could remember her name so I could find the interview.I find it sor of interesting that Bruce Jenner went to Newtown High School.

Yes, it takes a lot more planning, money, resources, etc., but maybe the psychological effect on the public and the distraction from real issues is worth it. If you look at the areas where these tragedies occur: Auruora, CO (Jeff Co), Sandy Hook CT, Littleton, CT (Jeff Co), Blacksburg VA, Smith Mountain Lake, VA (a little over an hour away from Blacksburg), Charlestown, SC, Fort Hood, TX, ...they're all areas populated with military, intelligence, and/or politicians/influentials

Just a minor quibble that means nothing. Columbine is in Jefferson County, but the Aurora shootings were in Arapahoe county. Very close as they do border with Littleton in between. I lived most of my life in unincorporated Arapahoe county. It's now become a city called Centennial. The county to county sprawl in Denver metro is astonishing.