API tools faq
paste
Lesta

17 Lesta Nediam LNC2016-03-29 0245 +babaloo42

Lesta
Mar 28th, 2016
87
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 6.44 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. Lesta Nediam LNC2016-03-29 0245 +babaloo42
  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA_RTMLbThk&lc=z13jjdia5pnoypj4v04cdprxpumyutbjfvc0k
  3. https://pastebin.com/jPQvHhJ6
  4. __
  5.  
  6.  
  7.  
  8. +babaloo42 __ I am pushed for time and so must type quickly but will try to mention a few things. *There is no reason to think every movement by her hand would lead to a corresponding camera movement.* There is no reason to think she would have to be "skilled". We are not talking about a "standard selfie stick"! Whatever is being used would need to be sophisticated/customised. It would also be "automatic". I.e., set up the angles in advance and then select them from the handle (or hand held device).
  9.  
  10.  
  11.  
  12.  
  13.  
  14.  
  15.  
  16. It is *very easy* to dismiss what I have presented here but only if you do not think too much about it. *If you accept "they" would have a budget to use a "camera operator" then you can accept they could afford a more sophisticated selfie stick that permits what we see.* A "camera operator" is a liability whereas a "selfie stick" can tell no secrets (like the autistic kid with her!).
  17.  
  18.  
  19.  
  20.  
  21.  
  22.  
  23.  
  24. Keep in mind that we never hear the interviewer. While that does not mean there isn't a person interviewing - *it is consistent with someone who is interviewing themselves.* If you are going to the expense of using a cameraman then you may want to involve them - *to help sell the experience.* (Of course - perhaps they remain silent because they are filming a number of people and their voice would give that away.)
  25.  
  26.  
  27.  
  28.  
  29.  
  30.  
  31.  
  32. Certainly - if she did not film this herself then we might expect to find the "interview" elsewhere with the interviewer speaking etc. If she filmed it herself then we're not going to find a more comprehensive version.
  33.  
  34.  
  35.  
  36.  
  37.  
  38.  
  39.  
  40. If this was not a genuine bombing then there would be three people at that interview if there was a cameraman. The kid - probably too young [and autistic] to understand the manipulation - would have eyes on another person. Who knows what the consequences of that memory might be. As for the cameraman - that means he/she also has eyes on others involved and it means one more person knowing at least something about what's going on. *All of this is "expensive".* Surely you can understand that with these things as few people who know anything the better. As I say - a selfie stick can tell no secrets.
  41.  
  42.  
  43.  
  44.  
  45.  
  46.  
  47.  
  48. There are more compelling reasons to think she interviewed herself.
  49.  
  50.  
  51.  
  52.  
  53.  
  54.  
  55.  
  56. Much of the footage is blurry and worthless. However - there are a few frames in the video where we get a decent/clear look at her eyes/pupils and can see a reflection in them. *We don't see the shape or outline of a person.* And there is something even more important:
  57.  
  58.  
  59.  
  60.  
  61.  
  62.  
  63.  
  64. There is an edit to the audio. You did not mention it in your reply but most people who have commented [especially those who disagree that it was a self-interview] have acknowledge the audio edit. *She went from saying "We heard an explosion" which was then quickly followed by "..in fact we heard two explosions".* That is extremely significant!
  65.  
  66.  
  67.  
  68.  
  69.  
  70.  
  71.  
  72. The camera was focused on her face but cut away to "generic footage" before she spoke those words. I strongly suggest that is because there won't exist footage of her saying what she did - because what we heard had to be edited in later (the line "in fact we heard two explosions" - I am suggesting this got added in later).
  73.  
  74.  
  75.  
  76.  
  77.  
  78.  
  79.  
  80. If she didn't film the interview herself then whoever did so would need to chase her down and get her to speak the updated line (if they used a cameraman - and the cameraman remained silent - it would be because he/she filmed other people - that could mean difficulties chasing her down later if he/she is elsewhere etc.). On the other hand this is all *easily done* if she had filmed it herself. _And there's more to it._
  81.  
  82.  
  83.  
  84.  
  85.  
  86.  
  87.  
  88. As she speaks the line that I say has been edited we can hear a siren in the background. *An audio edit is not unusual - but if an audio edit had been made then the sound of the siren would also have been edited.* Because the siren sound was smooth (uninterrupted) then it means the siren sound had been added over the top! I would say that had been done to further mask the audio edit. ("If the background noise isn't affected then there cannot have been an edit!" - stupid and unobservant people are thinking. *But such an audio edit means the interview was completely contrived.*)
  89.  
  90.  
  91.  
  92.  
  93.  
  94.  
  95.  
  96. So I am saying that she filmed the interview herself using a sophisticated "selfie stick" (one that can switch to some programmed angles) which is hand operated. *Even if I am wrong - the "interview" was contrived.* Only knowing about "one explosion" implies the interview was done ahead of time. *That right there suggests the entire event was fabricated.*
  97.  
  98.  
  99.  
  100.  
  101.  
  102.  
  103.  
  104. At the time she only knew to mention one explosion but that got updated to two. So she simply recorded herself saying what needed to be said and it got added. To show the public that interview required a hard cut because she never said those words *in a consecutive fashion* as we heard them.
  105.  
  106.  
  107.  
  108.  
  109.  
  110.  
  111.  
  112. As I say - I am pushed for time. These are just some notes. You are going to need to think it through for yourself. If you have any kind of follow-up then go for it. *I will likely have to do one more video on this to explain what I am pointing out properly.* I don't think all that many people understand.
  113.  
  114.  
  115.  
  116.  
  117.  
  118.  
  119.  
  120. The entire reason I suspected she had interviewed herself is because of the audio edit and that it had been masked by the siren sound (implying it was recorded "on site" but ahead of time). And because she seemed to be "hiding away" from the public (as though a bit self-conscious - or not wanting to be seen by people). A sophisticated "selfie stick" as I am describing might draw attention whereas - not so much - a person filming.
  121.  
  122.  
  123.  
  124.  
  125.  
  126.  
  127.  
  128. Let me know if you do not think there was an audio edit in the footage I presented etc.
  129.  
  130.  
  131.  
  132. __________________________________________
  133. Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's posts, comments, videos and discussions:
  134. https://pastebin.com/Bfr5RMSg
  135.  
  136. Here is Lesta Nediam's Google Plus posts (i.e., blog) - this is where Lesta is most active:
  137. https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ
  138.  
  139. Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's video uploads:
  140. https://pastebin.com/WV42jUb1
  141.  
  142. Here is Lesta Nediam's YouTube channel - for videos about the lie system:
  143. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3DalBOEZ6RqSyHk8_mGV7w
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Public Pastes
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!