Woolwich HOAX (Copious Video Evidence)

So, if the govt would do this....

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ieZoPOPoQJM

.....then why wouldn't they do 9/11, OKC, VT, Sandy Hoax, Boston, Columbine?

So sad, that somehow the multitudes still trust their governments.

 

I hear this about every supposed hoax. Hoax believers clearly struggle with the concept of "evidence"

 

You going to look at the massive amount of video evidence showing this event was staged?

Or are you just going to dismiss it and pretend its not there?

 

Post your best YouTube evidence, then. La créme de la créme. And I'll have a look at it.

What you posted originally was a list of vids. Too much for me to bother with.

Ah, now I see what you did. It's some mobile link. Doesn't work for me. So, yeah, post a good video properly.

 

OK, fixed the link myself..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieZoPOPoQJM

I just see the original footage of the guy being interviewed with stupid commentary placed over it, and then I see a stupid interpretation of the crashed car photo. The car obviously bounced back a bit from the pole after hitting it.

Whoever made this video is an idiot.

 

Really? So cars just bounce off signposts without damaging them in any way? Why is there no evidence of braking? Why when it supposedly hit the signpost causing all that damage to the NSF of the car wasn't the back end of the car thrown out towards the wall as the laws of physics would dictate? Also if you could tell me which of the two posts you think it hit as the damaged area of the car doesn't line up with either?

 

Obviously a car with such heavy damage couldn't have been driven to the scene and would have had to have been taken there on the back of another vehicle The white lorry would be ideal. It looks to me as though it has been reversed into it's current position and the position of the wheels indicate that it had come from the small entrance way to the barracks across the road. Isn't there supposed to be a load of blood in front of the car?

 

Also, I love how bloody axe guys hands are in one video, and how bloodless they are in another.

 

I see damage to the pole in that image you've posted, actually..

 

Here's a close up of the two poles taken the following day before they were covered up with flowers. Is that damage consistent with the level of damage sustained by the car? Would you like to address any of my other points?

 

Gullibility cuts both ways you know.

 

Compare this collision with a signpost to the Woolwich crash. Same level of damage to the slightly bigger car, same thickness of post. Are we to believe that the post in Woolwich remained perfectly upright?

 

How would you judge what's "consistent" here? What is the pole made of? How fast was the car going? Have you even bothered to compare your image to similar accident scenes before drawing and sticking like mad to your kooky conclusion?

Here is an interesting one for you: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Car_crash_1.jpg

Would you have expected the tree to survive so well here?

Here's another featuring a metal pole: http://www.dailypress.com/media/photo/2011-02/274883620-03090738.jpg
And: http://www.pe.com/incoming/20121031-w_crash_1101a.jpg.ece/BINARY/w620x413/W_CRASH_1101A.JPG
And.... http://files.doobybrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/ferrari-pole.jpg

... Yeah, I'd say the damage looks more or less consistent.

 

It would help if you were comparing like with like. A tree is not a signpost, it has a system of roots that keep it imbedded in the ground and wood absorbs an impact totally differently to how metal tubing would. Your other two pictures are not signposts like the one in Woolwich and were obviously designed to support more than an aluminium sign. "Have you even bothered to compare your image to similar accident scenes..?" Yes, there's one in the post above yours. I would also add that the Ferrari that has hit the wooden telegraph pole is rear engined and more than likely made of fiberglass which would have offered little resistance on impact.

 

Well said

 

Yer these two or three women look very frightened looooooooool

It was a closed set and the Police do not scream and shout like that loooooooooooooooool

clever how the blocked out the 'unbloody' 'victim' in this nonsense.

[video=youtube_share;gWkvdx-gRyg]http://youtu.be/gWkvdx-gRyg[/video]



And what was all that 'in my Land' bull ? He is English .looooooooooooool ( sssshhhh he was just actingggggggg)

 

Did you notice the black car in the background at 0:27? Has this car somehow turned around and gone behind the lorry by 1:02? It couldn't be the black car in this picture could it?

 

Where did the debunkers go? Come on guys we've got to establish the truth here. It is being used to demonise a section of society and it's already got violent.

 

What an odd statement. What exactly do you think would come of establishing the truth here?

 

I must admit that I have pondered what the actual consequences of establishing the truth would be, not just in this case but with all conspiracy theory, for quite some time. Are we to believe that any government, especially one that is still in "power" would ever admit guilt. As we have now experienced suspect attacks under the control of both sides of the false paradigm it suggests common purpose. If proven that these attacks are acts of state terrorism on their own people there may be some who rise up in protest thus causing the chaos. They would instantly be demonised by the complicit media and those who haven't woken up to the reality, helped in their thought processes by shills would demand that these trouble causers be cracked down on. The police have been getting equipped for this for quite some time. Any protest would contain agent provocateurs ensuring that the police had justification for their heavy handedness. My concern is that the hoaxes are becoming more obvious precisely for this reason, it is what they want. It is important that this event is not viewed in isolation as it is easily proved that these actors are involved in other events with one of the alleged killers being pictured at a protest with Anjim Choudary and one of the witnesses pictured at the EDL protest in Woolwich after the event wearing the same hoodie. Then we should ask ourselves if anything else that has happened in Woolwich appears staged.
[video=youtube_share;4ne_w2rvBvU]http://youtu.be/4ne_w2rvBvU[/video]

 

Let's set aside your belief that this specific attack is a hoax for a moment. How do you tell the difference between a legitimate politically motivated attack and one that you think is a hoax? Do you think that anyone who calls himself a Muslim is above this sort of behavior?

 

There in lies the problem. People can call themselves whatever they like it, doesn't mean they are. The caught red handed alleged killer certainly wasn't raised a Muslim. Do I think anyone's beyond this sort of behavior?, no. Now if you could explain the reason that you believe a nutcase should be labeled according to which religion they say they are and why that should be used as a means to condem the religion as a whole rather than the individual?.

 

"How do you tell the difference between a legitimate politically motivated attack and one that you think is a hoax?"
Personally I tend to ignore the actors and examine the props and scenery. These cannot lie or change their story. If, as in Boston, windows are blown out in the direction of the blast that makes me suspicious. When I see a reflection in the window that is supposedly blown out that increases my suspicion. When I look at the second blast site and see no evidence what so ever of the shrapnel that supposedly ripped people's legs off in any of the street furniture I'm almost there. When I see three bottles stood upright on tables less than six feet from a blast that supposedly took out windows 10-12 feet away that just about clinches it. Then I look to see what other people have noticed.

 

?

What an odd point to try to make. You think this is a hoax because the person self identifies as a Muslim in a way that doesn't conform to your definition of what a Muslim is? Who can judge of whether you're a Muslim or not if not yourself? The only other entity that can make the call is God. Are you God?

 

What is God? I think this is a hoax because the car crash is an obvious hoax and the chances of the rest of the story being true are therefore around about zero.