6 Lesta Nediam LNC2018-01-02 1445 PUBLIC

Lesta Nediam LNC2018-01-02 1445 PUBLIC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYMSlFmEnsk&lc=UgzsyLc3AJfQ18B_9Xx4AaABAg
https://pastebin.com/0yMLejy7
__

When confronted with events that lack "sufficient proof", and where the reactions of supposed victims and their families can be construed as "odd", "unusual", "unexpected", or downright "suspicious", event skeptics are often informed that the reason is because _"everyone reacts differently to grief"._

While it is undoubtedly true that *not everyone reacts _the same_ to grief and tragedy,* this phenomenon just happens to give a perpetual free pass to any suspicious behaviour observed in pretend events. For how can genuinely suspicious behaviour - _that actually indicates a pretend event_ - ever be recognised and taken seriously if it can always be dismissed as _"people reacting differently to grief"?!_

Sure, it does explain "suspicious" behaviour spotted in a genuine event, but as I say, it also "excuses" any suspicious behaviour spotted in staged events. So, what kind of Internet commentator would respond with _"everyone reacts differently to grief"_ when suspicious behaviour is pointed out? It is a *worthless* utterance except for these two conditions:

1) *Every* event is *always* real.

OR

2) The objective is to steer people _away_ from doubting a pretend event.

With these things mentioned, here is an example of how "everyone reacts differently to grief". First, watch the following brief clip of "Andrew Finch's mother" speaking to reporters inside her home, just metres away from where her son was shot dead. She is speaking a day after the fatal shooting of her wholly innocent son whom she and her family had to carefully step over - as he lay dying without medical treatment - before getting handcuffed and waiting for officers to "clear" the house to establish there was no actual danger.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ys5g7OnExo

Once you have studied that clip, go ahead and compare it to the following footage of a gentleman arriving home to confront police who had shot dead his pet dog of three years while passing through his backyard in search of a missing three year old child: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCNNiRfQiTg

Keep in mind that without "sufficient proof" it might be that one, both, or none of the events are genuine. That said, I shall leave it to the thoughtful to ponder whether the discrepancies between the two clips are meaningful or not.


____________________________________________________________
My name is Lesta Nediam and I am cracking reality like a nut.

Lesta on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/c/LestaNediamHQ

Lesta on Twitter
https://twitter.com/lestanediam

Lesta on Google Plus
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

What does not exist - exists to exist.
What exists - exists to always exist.
As it is written - so it is done.