12 Lesta Nediam LNC2016-02-27 0910 +shroomingnewman

Lesta Nediam LNC2016-02-27 0910 +shroomingnewman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8IkAXE3mlA&lc=z12iuvyhnpmjhprml22uzx5rvtrmgzkik04.1456522854418768
https://pastebin.com/uRpW1jgT
__


+shroomingnewman __ *I have pointed out a nasty black mole on your skin and you're choosing to ignore what it means.* You are expecting me to somehow - instantly and point blank - prove beyond all doubt (to your satisfaction) that "Peekay" is a complete fraud and outrageous liar - *and all with only his own videos to work with!* Veteran liars are not ever going to incriminate themselves in such a massive or conclusive way that you seem to need, want or expect to see.





We have to work with what we've got *and we must keep in mind at all times that good and honest people do not ever lie or misrepresent.* Anything. Ever. That's the key to unravelling this mess. *I have pointed out enough to realise that there is a serious problem* but it seems you have either not understood or are trying not to understood. This is very simple stuff. *Two tabs were evidently open. One with "333 views" and the other with "351 views".* The problem could be that you are looking for a "kill shot" - a "knockout blow" to be delivered against "Peekay" when you should have no expectation of seeing one. What has happened with the "view count" is all you need to know that "Peekay" is not aligned to the truth.





"Peekay" made a song and dance out of "333 views" *for no reason other than because he knows that a portion of his audience reacts to numbers* (like "33" or "666").





*But all along he knew the community strike didn't happen at "333 views" - it happened later - at or after at least "351 views".*





Someone willing to misrepresent a trivial detail is not going to balk at misrepresenting greater details. That is the key point you do not seem able to grasp. If "Peekay" is willing to misrepresent such a seemingly insignificant detail like the view count merely because he understands that a portion of his audience will react to it then it helps to explain why he would suggest ridiculous things like "Jeff Bauman" also being "Nicholas Vogt". This is the key point you are struggling with: *It's not because "Peekay" believes they could be the same person but because he believes his target audience can believe they are the same person.*





It also helps to explain why "Peekay" would keep up a viral video suggesting that the alleged "Virginia shooting" was done in two takes. That video - at the time of writing this message - now has around ~750,000 views and has been shown over and over and over to be *WRONG*.





But despite being wrong (and thus peddling "disinformation") "Peekay" won't take it down. *I wonder why a guy who claims to be "all about the truth" with a monetised channel won't take down a viral video because it is wrong?*





Do you think "Peekay" believes the alleged "Virginia shooting" was done in two takes or is it another example of "'Bauman' is also 'Vogt'" *where it's not so much that "Peekay" believes it but that his audience can believe it?*





*Why would you continue to make excuses for such a person?*





You seem fine with all of this! "Peekay" gave no explanation for the jumping view count *because he f_kced up and switched back to the wrong tab.* That's all. That's it. It was that simple. That was the effective "kill shot" but like many people you haven't realised what it meant and seem to expect it all to be far more dramatic. It was all over in seconds. "Peekay" couldn't redo his video because he'd already acknowledged the community strike and it had since been removed from the video manager.





*"Peekay" left the mistake in because he knows his core audience are stupid and unobservant and will just accept as true whatever he tells them.* (Have you seen the mountains of reflexive hate from them that I've been getting?!).





"Peekay" can only say "I don't understand how YouTube works". "Peekay" can only point out all the details I got wrong in an effort to distract his audience. *Is that how innocent people behave?*





"Peekay" is lashing out at everyone who has recognised the significance of the jumping view count - *including those who he must have known were either neutral or on his side* (for example Anthony B.). *Is that how the innocent behave or is that how guilty cult leaders go about dealing with criticism?*





"Peekay" has shown his followers what they can expect to happen to them if they so much as step out of line.





*I have pointed out a nasty black cancerous looking mole on your skin and you're welcome to continue ignoring it.* Why you would be so stupid, foolish and reckless is beyond me but I suppose it remains your choice.



__________________________________________
Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's posts, comments, videos and discussions:
https://pastebin.com/Bfr5RMSg

Here is Lesta Nediam's Google Plus posts (i.e., blog) - this is where Lesta is most active:
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's video uploads:
https://pastebin.com/WV42jUb1

Here is Lesta Nediam's YouTube channel - for videos about the lie system:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3DalBOEZ6RqSyHk8_mGV7w