Charlie Hebdo Shooting - A perception I can't get out of my head

a reply to: EternalSolace

I have multiple sources that all say he was shot in cold blood, I have (unfortunately) seen a video of him being shot.

I have not seen any evidence that he is still alive or that his cause of death was anything other than that gunshot wound to his head as he was lying on that street defenceless.

As such unless anybody has any evidence to the contrary I can say with 98% certainty that he was killed by those gun men.

I counted nine shots possibly ten before they ran over to him. Any one of them could have been the one that eventually killed him and the tenth/eleventh shot to the head may well have missed him. That should pretty much be the end of the argument.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Don't get me wrong; I'm with you in that I believe he was certainly murdered by those gunmen in the video. But I'm arguing for the importance of questioning, especially if you're not clear on what you've seen for yourself.

a reply to: Jamie1

Let's suppose for a sec the last shot really missed the head (which in reality is hard to say).

Now, we have all MSM claiming he WAS shot dead in the head and then blurring the precise moment he was suposedely killed. At this point, you have everyone thinking that was the killshot.
We could call this a lie, or an honest mistake. Who knows.

The prolem is there are always a LOT of flaws in MSM official stories when it comes to situations like this one.
Whether or not it is done intentionally is a mystery. The thing is they always maintain their official story no matter how wrong they may have been. So, in the end, people will remember a terrorist shooting a cop point blank in the head in the middle of the streets. Hating middle east even more for that.

And then, you wonder why people don't trust MSM. Well, I'll tell you something.
There are people on this planet that want to know the truth. And not some MSM BS.
If that cop was shot in the head, so be it. Otherwise, don't feed me with half-truths all day.

There is a reason why the MSM is loosing popularity. This is not randomly caused.

Yet, you talk about denying ignorance.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Don't get me wrong; I'm with you in that I believe he was certainly murdered by those gunmen in the video. But I'm arguing for the importance of questioning, especially if you're not clear on what you've seen for yourself.

QUESTIONING!!!!

Questioning is important!

But you do not need to post the video, again knowing it is against T&C's, do question it, especially if you, as the OP did, already know its no permitted.

And again, questioning is all well and good,

but when people use it as a excuse to openly embrace ignorance and try to say this man might not even be dead or his death was faked in some way. That is when i start to have problems, like in this very thread, people trying to argue that there should have been more blood or surreptitiously suggesting there should have been more blood. They are itching ever closer to the "he didn't really die" or the "he was a actor" lines.

And I know what you will say, you will say " ahhh but nobody is saying that....."

Well yes nobody is saying that.yet.

These tragedies always go the same way when it comes to conspiracies, be it Sandy Hook, Boston or any other massacrer. There are people on ATS who just love the idea of the "crisis actor" and try to say that the dead did not really die.

I find that even sicker than posting a video of a man being executed on a website intended for all ages.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Seriously man, will you ever get over those T&C rules?

I already told you there were many topics on this website with videos violating it but still going on and strong. The mods apply them whenever they feel like, and vice versa.
There is a video of a 12 years old kid being executed by a police officer right on the first page with many flags and stars, mods taking part in it, and no one gives a damn. Why do you take this one so personally?

Do you really believe I'm not going to repost a graphic video when I realize all of this? Taking also in consideration the footage is available for anyone to see everywhere on this planet?

Please, change your disc mate.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It might well be beyond you how i'm only just getting round to going over all the facts but it's seems there's an awful lot that's beyond you. Please, tell me, what have i been doing each day ? No ? you don't know ?
Of course you have no idea what my business is or how my time is taken up on other things. Perhaps you think all people do all day is trawl the internet.From the statement you made i have concluded that you have nonthing else to do but look these things up ALL day EVERY day. Other people have other things to do.

The fact you have had so many negative posts made against you that you have got to a point that you have become "fed up with it" ought to tell you something about yourself that you were unaware of.

Oh, and this : "i did not see a policeman killed in cold blood with my own eyes but i know he was executed" i hate to have to say because i don't like having a go at anyone unless they really do deserve it, but that was one of the dumbest statements i have EVER heard. And to read it on a 'conspiracy' site no less. Gobsmacked !!!

originally posted by: Judgie
Can't find the video so I am just taking what I can read on this page so without such is just an opinion. When people say "the blood isn't just going to ooze out like in the movies" or "it was under him".... This is my very highly experienced take on the matter as a combat medic for 6 years. A close gunshot to the head with an assault rifle would actually cause your head to explode. I am not kidding, that is what happens when you shoot a confined target with a high powered rifle while the bullet is moving so quickly. This is because the majority of your body is made of water, including your brain which cannot be compressed. However the large amount of kinetic energy involved needs to be release somewhere and as soon as the entry and exit hole are made. It pops like a zit! Gross right, try forgetting it with watching that a few times in person.
Secondly, I also read that he could have been instead shot in the neck? Neck wounds, which house two of the largest arteries in your neck which have huge amounts of pressure 120mm of mercury is actually a lot of pressure. Does Indeed go everywhere and very quickly.
Just for anyones consideration, like I said, I haven't seen the video it doesn't seem to be visible anymore.
6 years of trying to put people back together though makes me feel incredibly qualified to comment on what getting shot with and assault rifle at close range is like.

I have just watched a clear video of the shooting on YouTube......titled ....." Paris gunmen shooting attack kill policeman ".

As the gunman runs up to him, the policeman turns around and shouts...probably for mercy...
As he reaches him the gunman aims....seemingly for the head but after watching it a few times, it looks like he's aiming away...upward on the pavement and it looks to me like he misses by about eighteen inches to two feet.

There is no sign of anything around his prone body for at least eight seconds.....certainly no blood.
So maybe the policeman DID play dead so they wouldn't shoot again ?
I don't know.....just saying what I saw.

a reply to: sayzaar

Oh, and this : "i did not see a policeman killed in cold blood with my own eyes but i know he was executed" i hate to have to say because i don't like having a go at anyone unless they really do deserve it, but that was one of the dumbest statements i have EVER heard. And to read it on a 'conspiracy' site no less.

If you had bothered to read my comment at the top of this page you would have seen i have already addressed this.

I know he was killed because I have heard and it from multiple sources, additionally I have not seen any evidence he is alive or that he was not killed due to the gun fire of one of those suspected terrorists on that street on Wednesday. As such I can say with 98% centenary that he was executed.

a reply to: St0rD

I only bring it up because others seem to keep wanting to challenge me on it.

If you want to move the conversation on the please answer me this.

How do you believe that police officer died?

Ok, moving on.

Russian special forces "Alpha" unit veteran Igor Schevcuk says in an interview that the killing of this police officer seems fake (to every professional out there). He states that judging by the video, it doesn't look real because there is no smoke to be seen when the alleged terrorist shoots.

He also finds it strange that the French president visited the offices (crime scene) immediately after the Charlie Hebdo massacre. He says that No secret service would ever allow that because that would be a direct threat to a president's life and security.

There is also a political science expert who is blaming 'the usual suspects' but this is not a thread about politics so i won't be translating what he said.

link

originally posted by: sg1642
I counted nine shots possibly ten before they ran over to him. Any one of them could have been the one that eventually killed him and the tenth/eleventh shot to the head may well have missed him. That should pretty much be the end of the argument.

So then to all the people saying that a close range shot would not cause a bloody mess, what about the fact that multiple shots WERE fired before they ran up on him, those were from enough distance away that the bullet would have surely ripped right through the guy. Yet he was still holding his hands up until the last shot we see, the shot that did not appear to me to hit him in the head. Then, when the camera shows them running by his body AFTER the shooting, there is STILL NO POOL of blood. Nothing! Please explain that firearms experts.

a reply to: MysterX

It's strange you mention no muzzle flash because in the full footage you don't see muzzle flash...

Watch the sky news version that pauses & cuts instead of showing the death & the muzzle flash appears.



I don't know how or why, but one of the videos was doctored...

My bet is the MSM version.

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: sg1642
I counted nine shots possibly ten before they ran over to him. Any one of them could have been the one that eventually killed him and the tenth/eleventh shot to the head may well have missed him. That should pretty much be the end of the argument.

So then to all the people saying that a close range shot would not cause a bloody mess, what about the fact that multiple shots WERE fired before they ran up on him, those were from enough distance away that the bullet would have surely ripped right through the guy. Yet he was still holding his hands up until the last shot we see, the shot that did not appear to me to hit him in the head. Then, when the camera shows them running by his body AFTER the shooting, there is STILL NO POOL of blood. Nothing! Please explain that firearms experts.

like I already said a stab proof vest could allow blood to pool under clothing before it finds an exit. Holding his hands up has nothing to do with it. He could easily have been shot through a vital organ and had enough fight in him to put his hands up. You can't see underneath him. I haven't looked to see if there is blood spatter on the wall and to be honest I don't really want to. I don't think that final shot hit his head and at most I think it grazed him. But then again the video isn't very clear.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: MysterX

It's strange you mention no muzzle flash because in the full footage you don't see muzzle flash...

Watch the sky news version that pauses & cuts instead of showing the death & the muzzle flash appears.



I don't know how or why, but one of the videos was doctored...

My bet is the MSM version.

it's very rare you see muzzle flash in daylight.

a reply to: sg1642

I'm not denying that...

But it's as clear as day in the SkyNews footage, but not the unedited version that shows the whole thing, no pause or no blur, also no muzzle flash...

SkyNews actually make the point of pausing the shot at the time of the muzzle flash.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: sg1642

I'm not denying that...

But it's as clear as day in the SkyNews footage, but not the unedited version that shows the whole thing, no pause or no blur, also no muzzle flash...

SkyNews actually make the point of pausing the shot at the time of the muzzle flash.

if they have somehow paused the footage on the exact 'frame' as it were or moment the round left the end of the barrel you could capture a flash that is too quick for the eye to really make out.

The most ironic thing is the poor bloke was a Muslim. So what did they achieve? I hope the French authorities pumped them full of lead if I'm honest.

a reply to: St0rD

You are 100% correct. The headshot was a miss. It's clear to see the bullet strikes the pavement about 10inches in front of the guys face.

He died from his other injuries anyway though.


I have experience with many different assault rifles in various calibers. The standard AK caliber is 7.62mm, and you would absolutely see at least some blood and the physical reaction of the strike if he had been shot in the head.

Using 5gallon paint bukets for target practice here, when filled with water, an AK explodes the whole bucket.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The expelled gasses would not auto-cauterize the wound, the temperature of the projectile would.

In this case, it is in and out so fast it doesn't have time to heat the flesh in contact with it.

???