28 Lesta Nediam LNC2017-04-05 0730 +Rob S.

Lesta Nediam LNC2017-04-05 0730 +Rob S.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clbC8Boa2ww&lc=z134st4pvo31ivdi404chhxhan3fdregovc0k
https://pastebin.com/CAw14TR9
__

+Rob S. __ Yes. Now - those claiming the event was a "hoax" must of course say that *both* interviews were "scripted". And if the event didn't happen then that would be true. But - in that case it would also mean *the "script writers" chose to have a former police chief commissioner* (i.e., an experienced officer and trained communicator) *say the words "hit by the CARS" - only to later give conflicting and reversed details*. _That doesn't make much sense._

We might expect such errors and contradictions from a "citizen witness" (even in a hoaxed event) but not an experienced and decorated officer who has been trained to handle stressful and tragic situations. That is not plausible even with a hoaxed event.

Of course - if the event had been a hoax then the pressure would be significantly reduced and the "mistakes" and conflicting details "Christine Nixon" gave *would not* be due to "pressure" but instead because it was written into her script. Again - that isn't plausible _and it doesn't make much sense._

However - everything makes far more sense had the event been genuine and the role of police contributing to the carnage covered up "on the fly". In that case we can expect a separate interview to serve as "damage control" for the slips made in the 3AW one.

A part of the "damage control" would be to discredit "Christine Nixon" as a witness. I.e., "She got simple details all mixed up therefore we can't trust anything she said!" This conveniently allows people to ignore everything she had to say *including when she said "hit by the cars".* _And that's exactly what those pushing the "hoax meme" have done!_

Either those pushing the "hoax meme" have been played like a fiddle or they are actively helping police.

At the same time - the "damage control interview" (ABC 774) encourages the public to believe that police only pursued on the road while the driver drove only along the footpath. "Christine Nixon" was careful to mention both of these details in her ABC 774 interview as noted here:

1) "And I kind of stepped back and *he* ["Dimitrious Gargasoulas"] went by and then continued on down Bourke Street *on the footpath*..." (She specifically mentioned the alleged driver was on the "footpath".)

Her sentence continued:

2) "...being chased by *police officers* who were probably about two or three seconds *on the road*..." (She specifically mentioned the police officers were on the road.)

*With that clever sentence "Christine Nixon" has painted a picture for the population's imagination.* The evil driver drove recklessly along the footpath knocking people over like tenpins while police pursued safely on the road where nobody could possibly have been hit.

And so it becomes very important as to whether "Christine Nixon" spoke her own words or the words of a script writer.

Everything would be perfect except "John Anstasio" says he saw a lot of police travelling at high speed along the pavement where pedestrians walked. And so the belief police only pursued on the road becomes contradicted. (Even though "John Anstasio" was in a different location he enables us to accept the possibility that police would have pursued the alleged driver *on the pedestrian footpath.*)

Thus it becomes essential to discredit "John Anstasio" as a witness along with "Christine Nixon" - and that's exactly what "Peekay" set out to do with his "interview".

Again - either those pushing the "hoax meme" have been played like a fiddle or they are actively helping police.

__


Not only did "Christine Nixon" switch from saying "stroller" to "pram" (which is bizarre unless a script writer had used the term "pram" without knowing "Christine Nixon" is someone who would normally say "stroller") but she also reversed how she described her location.

In her 3AW interview "Christine Nixon" said: "I was on the corner of William Street and Bourke..." *but that was reversed* in her ABC 774 interview when she said: "I was on the corner of Bourke and Williams..."

>>> She switched from "stroller" to "pram" and she switched from "William Street and Bourke" to "Bourke and Williams". <<<

It is important for us to be sure that "Christine Nixon" spoke her own words but these kinds of changes hint that her interview wasn't her own words. At the very least it introduces doubt.

Furthermore - just because she lied in one interview *does not mean she lied in both!*

Though - she may well have lied in both if she omitted to mention that police hit anyone. That would explain her slip when she said "cars" in her 3AW interview.

Again - if it had been an outright hoax there is no reason for the script writers to have had her say "CARS". It would simply have been "car".

A genuine lie system presentation does not contain these kinds of "mistakes" *but a genuine event which is being "covered up on the fly" certainly could.*

The people who are claiming the event was a hoax also need to explain why the police would want themselves to be filmed assaulting the alleged driver on the ground - even if it were a "dummy". After all - if the event was a hoax then everything was street theatre. And that includes when police assaulted the driver. It would mean the police intended for that to be seen and filmed.

However - had the event been real and tensions high then we can certainly expect the police to have *aggressively* arrested the driver as we saw them doing. Especially if police had been forced to run down some of the pedestrians in an effort to stop the alleged driver from killing more people.

The "hoax meme" does not stand up to scrutiny but nor does the idea it was a completely genuine event where only the driver hit people. The possibility that police contributed to at least some of the carnage *does* stand up to scrutiny. All the indications are there for that possibility being the true one.

And so it is strange that those pushing the "hoax meme" are completely closed off to the possibility of police contributing to the carnage when that idea seems to fit the evidence better.

Once again - either those pushing the "hoax meme" have been played like a fiddle or they are actively helping police.

__

Note: Anyone who is not yet familiar with the police assaulting the driver on the ground should refer to pp. 43-44 of the PDF in the section titled "Police Assaulted the Driver on the Ground". Watch the unlisted YouTube video showing an officer punch and then aggressively - and repeatedly - knee-drop the suspect as he lay motionless on the ground. That can be found on p. 43 of the document. There is a link to the PDF in the description box above.



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

Lesta Nediam's YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/LestaNediamHQ

Lesta Nediam's Google Plus:
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

Lesta Nediam's Official Blog:
https://lestanediam.blogspot.com

Lesta Nediam's Twitter:
https://twitter.com/LestaNediam

Lesta Nediam's Vimeo
https://vimeo.com/lestanediam

Lesta Nediam's Vidme
https://vid.me/LestaNediam

Lesta Nediam's Dailymotion
https://www.dailymotion.com/LestaNediam

Lesta Nediam's LiveLeak
https://www.liveleak.com/c/LestaNediam

Lesta Nediam's Disqus:
https://disqus.com/home/forum/lestanediam/

Lesta Nediam's Archived Public Comments:
https://pastebin.com/u/Lesta


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