I am no expert on the topic, but, I do understand that there is a red fluid contained in most mammals which tends to leak all over the place when one's head is detached from one's body... Especially if that somebody was alive at the time the aforementioned head became a separate entity. Maybe the Brits have a special kind of fluid that evaporates before it makes a mess of the pavement which warrants further scientific study, and possibly the full-out quarantine of the Corporation of London to prevent possible contagion --OR-- maybe there is something not quite right about the whole scene. Sure there is some blood on the sidewalk, but the body has leaked less fluid than the car did... Chances are that the official story on what has transpired here will be changed a few times, so pay attention and take notes, because eventually people involved will begin to have mysterious life-terminating accidents, and there will be nobody left to tell the gruesome truth.
As I was saying yesterday, London is a massive surveillance grid of police CCTV cameras. For example, The youtube video was shot within range of 2 cameras that I can see in google street view as I have demonstrated in this picture:
this blog. (Though I do quite like his montage of the woman in the grey sweatshirt, who does appear to lie down on her back next to a supposedly headless corpse as most humans would instinctively do when confronted with a headless corpse).
My questions are:
- Why waste the time and energy to drag the body into the street?
- For a good aerial shot?
- Because you hope to have it in the backdrop your one camera interview?
- Because you take pride in your work and need to clearly demonstrate that the job is done?
- If there was a camera rolling while the attackers were alive enough to speak, where is the footage of them allegedly attacking police officers?
- oops had to change batteries?
- sealed in an evidence bag?
- I thought all the important stuff had happened until after the 2 suspects were on the ground 150m away when I started recording again?
- It's too graphic for a televised news report and was edited?
- There was no attack?
Let's look at these... Here is an unedited frame of the news exclusive:
OK, maybe it's coincidence, so let's try another frame:
Now the second video:
Beginners luck maybe... Let's try again.
There is already a HOAX debunk video out there which is claiming that the 'no blood' video had it's colour filtered. Then states that the 'red route' lines on the road are supposed to be red:
OK let's go back to the beginning, I am not questioning that somebody was killed gruesomely in the middle of the afternoon, and I am not hiding the blood trail on the sidewalk near the car... I am not even suggesting that the knives have no blood on them, they are simply not clear enough to say one way or the other. What I am saying is in one video his hands glow like he's holding pink lights and that his hands appear to have halos on them, while in the other, they do not. The degree of orange vs red in the lines on the road could also be attributed to the camera having selected a different white balance. The google street view has the redder lines as seen in the 'with blood' video, but it also went down that street on a sunny day which completely changes the white balance and colour perception... What else can we look at?
That sign which is pale yellow, vs bright yellow-orange?
Photoshop "Selective color" Reds= -100% Cyan + 100% Magenta -100% Yellow +100% black
I am actually overshooting the mark for effect, and because I found something interesting in the bloody video:
Now. Somebody could have been killed and beheaded, and there is blood on the sidewalk across the street (even if I don't think there is enough of it)... This is not what I am questioning here. What I am questioning, is:
why doctor the video to illustrate 'bloody hands' when an amateur analysis can prove in a couple of hours that this is not true?
Why is this woman in blue casually walking by the ranting knife-wielding man who's been flailing his arms about in an agitated manner? Though I shudder to think that the answer may be that she's completely oblivious to everything.
Why wait around long enough to get 2 people filming you, and, later, police shooting you?
Why take knives to a gun-fight that you started by threatening police with knives?
Why is only one person in danger (or he would be were he not dead) in this whole scene?
Why not take the grey sweatshirt lady as a hostage?
Why let the grey sweatsuit lady get right up close and personal with your "prize" beheaded body?
Why is grey sweatsuit lady so apparently calm?
And what the hell kind of lame riot is this?
It also does not help that the 'debunked hoax' video is from the Alex Jones dis-information de-truthed-truther channel... When I found that I had to triple the length of this post and dig deeper into the whole which video is real.
The other important thing to note, is that this happened despite the massive camera grid in London... More, more, more, would not have prevented this.
Found the entire rant here, curious how most of it is edited in other clips... Also this is a third camera, with a red double-decker bus, proper sign and line colour, and his hands still don't look all that blood-stained to me.