10 Lesta Nediam LNC2017-10-11 0715 +Oliver R

Lesta Nediam LNC2017-10-11 0715 +Oliver R
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoOd_ZWx7wY&lc=z22btpawetqovbbhd04t1aokgc5snsoyd3mssiqkeuxhrk0h00410
https://pastebin.com/twr8bYpp
__

+Oliver R __ Sure, these people may not know any of the artists or songs. Sure, they may not know *any* unreported details from the concert they attended. Not knowing about these things does not necessarily mean a person wasn't there.

*So why don't we just ask if they were really there?* They may not know the artists, songs, or concert details - *but* they _would_ know if they attended or not, yes?

Can you think of any potential problems with asking *that* question?

I'm happy to discuss your points with you, if you're willing to continue talking. I'd also like your thoughts on this: https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ/posts/bZVcU9o3fhn



__________
2017-10-11 0900

+Oliver R __ It is unreasonable to reject an event as fake when *"sufficient proof"* for it has been presented. "Sufficient proof" is a specialised *"lie system"* term/concept that covers any singular thing/evidence that _in and of itself_ necessarily proves an event/claim to be genuine.

Without an elaborate explanation of its types and nuances - a simple photo/video that does not have any "potential editing points" can suffice as "sufficient proof". There is also "technical sufficient proof", but photos/footage are widely/universally understood whereas technical proofs are not. (Just look at the problems flat Earthers have with technical proofs for curvature.)

You ask about which events I think are authentic. With the "Times Square" car attack of 2017 we were presented with "sufficient proof" by way of CCTV footage from multiple camera angles that clearly depicted people getting run down. In that example, any potential deceit would come by way of the claimed death/injury count, severity of injuries etc., _but not with regard to the *central claim* of people getting run down._

Thus, it is not reasonable to deny the event. Upon seeing the CCTV footage from that event, anyone insisting it was fake is either lying, stupid, or insane.

While video footage can certainly be faked (even perfectly faked) *that is not the _modus operandi_ of the lie system.* The consistent pattern we can observe from lie system events and claims is that "sufficient proof" - where possible - gets routinely withheld, crippled, and obscured. Especially where it can and should exist - such as the alleged "Melbourne Car Attack" of 2017.

If this were not the case, and especially if events were being faked, then we would be seeing a lot more "sufficient proof" (albeit faked). After all - if you're going to fake a terror event or a car massacre, then it's not much _additional trouble_ to include some fake CCTV footage to go with it. Especially since that would "prove" it happened.

But, that is not happening. And because the presentation of "sufficient proof" is the exception rather than the rule, the news media is responsible for the creation of "conspiracy theorists" (and the fallacy of the "conspiracy theorist" that goes with it).

The intentional and systematic withholding/censoring/obscuring of "sufficient proof" means that a *potentially genuine* event becomes indistinguishable from a staged event. This forces the population/audience to use its imagination to fill in the blanks. Belief in the event is now a matter of *trust* in the story teller. A person who trusts the nightly news will believe (even if the story is a lie), whereas someone who has lost trust in the nightly news will not believe (even if the story is true).

By filling in the blanks each person convinces himself of the event/claim. Once a person has become self-convinced in this way it becomes very difficult for them to shake free from the belief (whether it is belief for/against something).

In a nutshell, that is how the "magic" works on this placebo planet and it has been happening in this manner for a very long time. While we think of other countries as having "primitive voodoo cultures", we were born into a "trust voodoo" system as well.

I could write a whole lot more, and usually I do, but to spare you I'll leave it there.


____________________________________________________________
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.