by Malcolm R Hughes
There are so many random attacks in public these days it is hard to keep track of them. The latest one occurred at Nice, on the French Rivera, on Bastille Day. Perhaps that reminds you of similar desecrations of popular events, such as the bombing (alleged bombing, anyway) at the Boston Marathon, or the Atlanta Olympics.
I can’t undertake a comprehensive study, but I was startled by the claim that videos were made on the spot at Nice by the very same person who made one on the spot in Munich. Seems an impossible coincidence.
First let’s see how the “Heroic motorcyclist” story was reported worldwide in the mainstream media. The Evening Standard of London wrote:
A motorcyclist chased and leaped onto the truck driven by the Nice attacker as he ploughed his way through the crowds on a murderous rampage.
The brave rider pursued the 20 tonne lorry driven by Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel before jumping off his bike and climbing onto the side of the vehicle. He fell from the truck and ended up under its wheels.
A German journalist, who witnessed the attack, said he saw the motorcyclist dismount and race after the lorry.
That “German journalist” is Richard Gutjahr.” He is happy to show his name with this spectacular reporting. One quote from him that was carried by many papers is:
“I stood on the balcony, right on the Promenade des Anglais, and saw how people celebrated there, and how suddenly a truck drove through the crowd,” Richard Gutjahr said.
But now we learn that Gutjahr and his wife also filmed an earlier attack in Munich! (I first saw this at rense.com which linked to an article at rumormillnews.com.) The claim is that a couple, said to belong to Mossad, were the videographers of two incidents (maybe more, who knows). Their egos may have compelled them to give their name in the credits!
As for the Minich attack, here is another quote:
Local reporter Richard Gutjahr described the scene at the shopping center as something “out of a bad movie,” with the shopping center completely surrounded by police, a helicopter overhead, and police carrying semi-automatic rifles. Gutjahr was not able to confirm reports of deaths or injuries.
I ask: “What are the odds of one person being at the scene of two terrorist attacks in different countries without knowledge of the planning of such? And the wife, Einat Wilf, is not just a journalist. She is a member of Israel’s parliament, the Knesset. Her Wikipedia write-up lists her spouse as: Richard Gutjahr.
The Odd Truck
Earlier in the week I read an article posted by Mike King, editor of TomatoBubble.com about the Nice terrorist attack. It showed photographs of the vehicle used. The article is entitled “Why No Blood On Murder Truck?”
Here is my similarly skeptical interpretation of those photographs. Although the front of the truck shows damage, there is no blood on vehicle or road leading to this site. Nor do I see any clothing attached to the truck, or strewn along roadway, though it supposedly hit 286 human bodies.
The truck has apparently 24 bullet holes in windscreen with no shattering or cracks visible. It is quite possible that these “bullet holes” are stick-on transfers — but since the photo is at a distance, it’s hard to discern.
Most of the “bullet holes” on the windscreen are on the passenger side of vehicle, so how bad a shot were the police officers? If these are transfers, being on that side of the vehicle would interrupt the driver’s view, less.
Something doesn’t ring true, to me, with these photographs. I can’t put my finger on it, but the front view of the truck doesn’t give me the same feeling as the side view. The police officer to the front is obscuring the area that is supposed to be damaged.
Why are the police officers on the opposite side of vehicle to the driver? Notice no bullet holes in side door of truck and what is the left-hand rifleman aiming at, certainly not the driver, and he is not even covering for his mates.
I have just viewed a video:
This gives me more insight to the tricks being played upon us, the public.
To me the truck appears to be an 8-ton vehicle, not a 20-tonne lorry, as stated by the London Evening Standard. (Note: 8 tons = 8.1 tonnes.) In Australia a 20-tonne truck has a second rear axle, but this truck only has a single axle.
Where the police officers are standing alongside the truck in photo, the driver is supposedly still in cab, but he’s not able to be seen. However another report tells us that the driver left the cab and was shooting from a position away from the truck. If so, how did he escape the officers who had attempted to shoot him while in the cab?
At this stage the front of the truck is intact. In another scene, the front panel of the cab has now disappeared. You can see that in the photo at beginning of article.
Peekay agrees with me that while there are no bullet holes in passenger side door, after the incident we see the truck with shattered passenger window. Is anyone going to explain that for us?
I also see “bullet holes” in driver’s side door, but they are too low to have hit driver. There’s a group of “bullet holes” in panel behind driver. With all this inaccurate firing there are no bullet holes in rear view mirror or canopy of truck. There are no bullet holes to driver’s side window, no damage at all. Amazing.
In the video the truck with blown-out passenger window is parked on a road having a high camber but in the photo below it appears to be on level ground.
As for photographs of the victims, I have seen quite a few on the Internet, but they are taken from a distance and are not very clear. The scenes of bodies could be a set-up — I just don’t know. One shot which apparently shows a child victim, to me, looks like a baby doll. Most of the “victims” are covered with sheets.
When we talk of 285 victims, that’s a lot of people. That is the equivalent of nine and a half army platoons. The photos only cover a very small fraction of that number.
In sum, as many incidents world-wide since 9/11 appear engineered by globalists, we must — for our own safety — look deeper into each catastrophe reported to see if the story in the media is feasible.
— Mal Hughes who became interested in the Port Arthur Massacre from 2004, now looks very closely at many incidents reported, with some suspicion.