24 Lesta Nediam LNC2017-04-12 0135 +Leonard French

Lesta Nediam LNC2017-04-12 0135 +Leonard French
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOMl21K4WH0&lc=z12agnv5ew2dyffue22btpawetqovbbhd04
https://pastebin.com/f0j0Yyvv
__

+Leonard French __ *Good presentation.* I have two quick points to make and hope you get to read them. *Summary:* A) This is a police state and the population needs to be trained to obey police. B) There is the potential for this incident to be fake and I will point out how the incident can be reasonably doubted.

__

In more detail..

*A) THIS IS A POLICE STATE AND THE POPULATION NEEDS TO BE TRAINED TO OBEY POLICE*

@ 20:17 you ask _"Do we live in a police state? Is this really what it's come to?"_

The obvious answer is "yes". In a police state the population needs to be trained to obey police since everyday people are not born with that instinct. This "viral video" - _which is being widely talked about_ - helps to get that message out. (While this makes you suspicious I can believe you are genuine.)


*B) THERE IS POTENTIAL FOR THIS EVENT TO BE FAKE*

@ 20:52 You remark that you are open to modifying or removing your video if it turns out to be fake or a hoax. That suggests some aspects of the incident seemed off to you. Perhaps you can't quite put your finger on it so here are some points:

First of all - you were right to double check if it was the same person getting dragged away as we saw at the end. His bizarre return was rather dystopian, wasn't it? It makes you wonder if you are not dreaming. It seemed "unreal" - _or "surreal"_ - so is there anything that could suggest it was a sophisticated hoax?

At 6:00 in your video (20s to 21s of the [main] original footage) *the person filming covers the camera briefly with his hand.* This is significant. *IF* this were a hoax because *THAT* is when a "clever cut" or "sneaky edit" would be performed.

In order to believe that this was real we needed to see the person's head appear to smash into a seat. *Otherwise we cannot be shocked and outraged and that seems to be the entire point of this news item.*

Thus we needed to see *something* - and that is what we appeared to see but that viewing angle contained a *potential editing point* when the hand momentarily covered the camera.

It seems innocent enough - hardly noticed - _unless_ you are someone who knows what to look for and can recognise its significance.

A quick aside: Interestingly - the person appeared to be knocked out but yet was able to grasp onto his phone. If he were knocked out can we reasonably expect him to remain holding onto his phone? Wouldn't it have fallen to the floor much like his hat? Or is gripping onto a mobile phone the next stage of human "evolution"?! ))

Then @ 7:13 you show the video from another perspective. This new perspective is important because it seemingly "fills in the blanks" for the first clip (that was undermined because it was briefly covered by a hand). *Between the two clips we can think we are getting a full picture _but that isn't strictly true._*

If there had been only one viewing angle then everyone would be able to point to the hand covering the camera and say "that's when the cut happened - this is fake!" (even if the event had been genuine).

The other perspective allows us to overlook that. However - from the other perspective (which conveniently "filled in the gaps" of the other perspective) *we do not see his head get smashed into the seat.* _Our imagination is still required to fill in the blanks._

At all times we convince ourselves of the event's reality (if we trust the footage).

>> *Thus - if this were a hoax then obviously all of the supposed passengers would need to have been "in on it" _and at least two takes would have been required._* <<

These requirements would make too difficult for most people to accept. And even if some could accept the possibility of it being a hoax - few could accept that an airline would participate in a hoax that can only harm it financially.

When it comes to the art of hoaxing these two reasons to *not* think of it as a hoax serve as "belief hurdles" that are too high for the trusting population to get over whereas for paranoid people - _they will reject it as fake regardless!_

(For those with insider knowledge there is probably a way to profit from a "public relations disaster" and perhaps there is strange benefit to be gained by adversely affecting some who have invested heavily in the airline. I don't know. I point this out because if it's fake some will always object: "It has to be real because there is no benefit!" - there may be a benefit but not one we can know about.)

Of course - no matter how skeptical we are of the footage it's not possible to know it was fake based on what we have been presented with. Only those who were present can know if it was fake or not.

To me it certainly seemed real enough but yet - upon scrutiny - it can be reasonably doubted (at least by those who do not automatically trust everything they're told).


*CLOSING REMARKS*

This news item is also packed with controversial issues and talking points. It wasn't just a simple case of "man gets forced off a plane and is hurt in the process". Nine times out of ten that would have been the case *but without footage and talking points, right?*

Real or fake - the consequence of this news item is that the entire population has been incrementally trained to comply to *any* request made by police. Even when you are a "doctor" who is going off to treat patients there is no one who can expect to be exempt from _this_ form of _"treatment"._

Even if you have every reasonable expectation of receiving a service you have paid for we have now seen proof that it can be taken from you at any time by the police. *In a police state these are the lessons the population must learn.* Will the next person in that gentleman's position - _mindful of this incident_ - resist or comply?

_I would think comply!_

Finally - with your remarks during the final 30 seconds of your video - I think you're about as genuine as they get. I have now subscribed to you because of this video and your thorough commentary of it. Very few people on YouTube seem "real" any more and thankfully you seem(!) to be one of them!


______________________________________________________________
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 DOT blogspot DOT com
[Reconstruct the URL as I am unable to post it!]

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

Lesta Nediam's Minds
https://www.minds.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 DOT com/home/forum/lestanediam/
[Reconstruct the URL as I am unable to post it!]

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.