Loudlabs is obvioulsy a CIA front, and the CIA is handling this.
The loudlabs videos are deception masterpieces. But these two frame captures say it all. And the top one is from a local news channel two hours after the “crash”, NOT loudlabs even though loudlabs used it. But they had to show the original video because people knew it existed, and then they proceeded to give you different shots later in the video to make you forget all about that perfectly intact car even right after you just saw it, which is a perfect mind control tactic. The top one is not available ANYWHERE on the web without the loudlabs dub in anymore, and I’d like to ask why. I don’t even think loudlabs was there AT ALL. The local news channels said NOTHING about loudlabs, they just ran their broadcasts straight up. Then Loudlabs took the local news channel video, buried all the local reports, and interspersed the original local news channel video with their own B.S.
This particular psy op was too important to leave up to the local news channels, OBVIOUSLY.
WHO COULD ACCOMPLISH FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE, OTHER THAN THE CIA?
This article was first published on Jimstonefreelance.com.
From: Eileen Dannemann <[email protected]>
Date: June 21, 2013 11:04:46 AM PDT (CA)
To: Piotr Bein <[email protected]>, John <[email protected]>
Subject: Come on…Hastings “car crash” FUNNY HE WAS BURNED BEYOND RECOGNITION..”SURE”
They don’t even say what he hit. To be burned beyond recognition he would have had to hit an oil truck. Sounds like a 911 fire!
PB: Jim Stone notes below: extremely strong fire for a car crash, most likely fuel spilled and ignited by a planted charge. Perhaps some burning stuff was added to the bomb?
PB: Sorcha Faal is known for BS, deceptive articles without a base (report circulating in the Kremlin)…
Eileen Dannemann: I have heard of Sorcha for years…but I figured this is not just a subtle spin that you can’t figure out if it is real or not. This was a pretty blatant story that could be checked. Don’t you think SF is too stealth for this kind of obviousness … if it was not real?
PB: Definitely I do not think so, the info coming from BS-er Sorcha… a drone? what for if it could be done the way Stone describes? Pure fantasy without any proof, propped up with Sorcha’s usual BS circulating in the Kremlim; an official statement (e.g. via RT) gives a basis.
Eileen Dannemann: Oh yeah…how many people heard the “whatever it was” that hit the pentagon?
PB: Pentagon: quite a few witnesses, suppressed in the merdia — I studied it at the time, more info available than now… Explosion in Texas fertilizer plant – a few witnesses heard a missile… A missile is more difficult to disguise than a car bomb. NATO’s camera-guided AGM missiles were heard on Easter 1999 before they hit a civilian train at Grdelica (Serbia).
Eileen Dannemann: The technology was there…probably drone technology….him the commission didn’t think of that…ha ha Oh sure… Check this out..just came in. Oh well….I should have known a drone separating from the pack was far fetched. Unless it was one of those little guys. I wonder how SF could be so blatant of she/he is really wanting to be believed?
PB: Observers have discredited Sorcha repeatedly – probably a PsyOp/disinfo operative. A drone could only do it with a missile (precisely guided via camera and heat-seeking to hit the engine, then why would the engine fly away instead of being blasted to smitherines?). A missile approach is audible, too many people would hear it.
Eileen Dannemann: I was thinking a plant charge too. But you know…I know there a “small drones” like the ones that look like bees. It could have been deployed…and burned up in the crash automatically as part of the deal. How far is Camp Pendleton from the crash (under 17,000 miles/)
PB: “Insect” drone with a nuclear nano-charge on a timer is a possibility… but could not add fuel to the fire and the explosion would need to be timed precisely — from an observation drone deployed over the scene of remotely-controlled speeding car, it would be difficult to carry out, though; t would have to be exactly in the moment of “collision” with the tree; therefore I favour Stone’s hypothesis of inscenization/dummy car in one set of videos.
PB: The author ignores the fact that videos seem to be of different cars and street scenes.
“For all 3 of those normal reasons, which account for virtually all car fires in modern cars, the fire would have started in the engine compartment, progressed slowly, and scorched the hell out of the paint before ever reaching the gas tank. That clean paint is the be all tell all, Michael Hastings was murdered, and the rest is detail.”
Accident scenes switched. They swapped cars and locations to hide explosive damage, PROOF IS BELOW
For those of you who do not know, Michael Hastings was the Rolling Stone reporter who interviewed Assange, brought down General McChrystal, and did several other high level exposures of government corruption.
It seems to me that Hastings may have been dead, his car parked there, and then blown up with him in it. This is because the flames are way too fresh for the car to have been there long, there is no impact damage where the car “struck the tree” to cause a gas tank explosion, and there are no flames on the road behind the car to indicate it was blown up while it was moving.
This appears to be a classic mafia hit, where you are killed and then burned in a car to hide the evidence. In this case, they obviously used a bomb to blow the gas tank as evidenced by the fact that the rear portion of the car is blown open and shredded with the rest of the car nicely intact, read the initial analysis below. And obviously, there was no high speed crash as reported by the lie factory. I will be working on this throughout the day.
It was perfect to have this happen on a late late Tuesday night, the quietest night of the week, one so quiet that many restaurants will not open. This would have helped ensure a proper setup with few witnesses.
Take a look at the following screen capture of this “crash” and observe a few things:
1. There is no impact damage to this car. The only damage there is BLOWN OUT in the back, not smashed in the front and it obviously missed the tree as it rolled to a stop. The front bumper is obscured by the tree, all the way to the tire, OOPS! .
2. This was a Mercedes, not a Pinto, which means it did not burst into flames on its own. One (seldom quoted) eyewitness said the car “exploded”. Interesting stuff.
3. Here is where it starts to get REALLY damning – LOOK AT THE FRONT PASSENGER DOOR. The paint is PERFECT yet the entire car is ablaze. This means that whoever photographed this was on scene right away, with a camera ready to film this in the wee hours of the morning, and nail it before the fire scorched the paint. HMMMMMM . . . . . .
4. Unlike what the so called single “eyewitness” report says about a high speed crash, the car did not impact a tree. The car did not impact ANYTHING. Look at where the car stopped. The car went off the road at a few miles an hour and missed the tree as it rolled to a stop.
5. There is no damage to the front of the car, it has no frontal impact damage AT ALL, it is blown out in the back and not crunched in from the front. HOW ON EARTH DID THAT BLOWN OUT BACK END HAPPEN?
AND FINALLY, THE MOST DAMNING THING OF ALL –
Here we have a car FULLY, and I mean FULLY in flames, from front to back, with NO SCORCHED PAINT because the flame is too new, which means the flame went from the back of the car to the front of the car instantaneously, at the same time it breached the floor and engulfed the passenger compartment before it had a chance to scorch anything, which means ONE THING – A BOMB ON THE GAS TANK, and a PHOTOGRAPHER READY TO SNAP THE PHOTO VERY EARLY ON. Even rapid car fires take time to progress through the car, and totally scorch the paint as they progress. Only a bomb could have blown gas through the floor to the inside of the passenger compartment and under the car all the way to the front of the engine compartment and lit the whole thing up at once. That’s the only explanation for the shiny paint while it sits completely engulfed in flames. That flame did not progress through that car, it was blown through it with force and the photographer was on the scene the moment it happened and bagged a perfect shot. I’d like to know how that happened – early morning walk?
I’d like to also mention something here – Sheriff Larry Dever was most likely killed by an ECM hack, because he was driving something big and needed a serious high speed accident. With me, when they tried, the incident was with a semi because I was driving a Geo Metro. And in the case of Michael Hastings, his car was such a safe one that you could not guarantee a death in an incident with a semi, and also could not guarantee a death in a high speed crash. I’d bet Hastings wore his seat belt all the time, and Dever did not, and the murderers would know these details before doing it. So to have Hastings definitely dead, kill him first, put him in his car, and blow the gas tank. It may have been possible to remote control the car to where it is with the engine computer via an ECU hack with the oh so convenient Federally mandated always on 3g cell connection to the heart of the car’s control computer with Hastings dead the entire time, and just blow the bomb when the car was where they wanted it. Mercedes are extremely advanced, and it is possible Hasting’s car was full drive by wire.
No matter how you slice this particular pie, a Mercedes is not just going to explode into flames without a little assistance. Car fires in new cars happen for three main reasons – running the engine out of oil, or running the engine out of coolant, or after an absolutely huge car mangling accident, having the hot side of the battery short out against the frame before it reaches the fuse panel. And for all 3 of those normal reasons, which account for virtually all car fires in modern cars, the fire would have started in the engine compartment, progressed slowly, and scorched the hell out of the paint before ever reaching the gas tank. That clean paint is the be all tell all, Michael Hastings was murdered, and the rest is detail.
Update: LOCATIONS CHANGED AND PHONY WRECK USED TO HIDE EXPLOSIVE DAMAGE FOR DAY TIME PHOTO OP
Here is what they want you to believe
But that is not consistent with this: And notice the trees.
All of these photos are from the same news video. One question – Why is there a sheet on the front of the car in the photo below? Why are the trees not the same as in the original photo above? Where is the blown out section at the rear of the car, which is CLEARLY visible in the original photo above?
The answer is obvious. THEY SWITCHED CARS AND LOCATIONS FOR THE DAY TIME PHOTO OP. Look at both of these pictures, you can clearly see the car is not the same. The location is not the same. On top of that, why is the car still there the NEXT DAY, 10 hours after the crash, when wrecks always get towed away within a couple hours, as soon as the flames are out? Why is the front end not mangled in the original photo, or even the tree for that matter?
For the day time photo op which should not have been possible anyway (it would have been towed long before) they used a different location with different trees, and interspersed the night time fire photos and the daytime shots with those of a different wreck to show pictures of a car that was not destroyed by a bomb. Just look and think, it is OBVIOUS.
This is so far out there that I had to double and triple confirm I did not screw this up, and indeed I did not, ALL of the photos are frame captures from the exact same news video. They TOTALLY blew it with this one.
This is as screwed up as Woolwich.
A note to the setup crew: When you produce your garbage, REMEMBER, it is going to be analyzed by a LOT of brilliant people, and if you are STUPID your efforts won’t cut it. I am ashamed of you, SURELY the old world Russia or maybe East Berlin would have done this A LOT BETTER.
A note to the world: Take a look at what is here, and REMEMBER THIS THE NEXT TIME YOU SEE A BUNCH OF HYPE ABOUT WHAT A GREAT FREE COUNTRY AMERICA IS. THEY DO THIS TO JOURNALISTS AND WHISTLEBLOWERS HERE.
A version of his article was first published on Jimstonefreelance.com.