July 15 2016
UPDATE: The truck driver rampage in France story has multiple gaping holes which I will briefly mention here: 1. No second party cell phone coverage despite 40,000 people present. Also nothing from people on balconies who were far enough away from the action to cover it with real cameras. 2. No first responders, relatives, or anyone else with the dead bodies more than a half hour after the carnage started, with the truck sitting there with windows shot. NO FIRST RESPONDERS FOR OVER A HALF HOUR? NO POLICE MOB? EVEN LONG AFTER EVERYTHING WAS COMPLETELY SECURED? Just photo op bodies lying there. YEP. STAR WARS HAPPENED. It looked so real. I never saw an ambulance in Star Wars either.
In some of the much much later videos and photos they show ambulances, but if it was a truck attack happening over a mile, then even a quarter mile away, where the people were hit, there should have been mobs of ambulances while this was going on. Yet there was not even one. How would bystanders or ambulances even know it was a terror attack? They would not have stayed away, they would have responded like normal. First responders should have been at the beginning of the scene in minutes, not over an hour later, especially since this supposedly happened at a major event, where first responders are staged and ready to go, EVERYWHERE. So they got blankets to cover the bodies, but no paramedics? HOAX!
My original post follows. It is different from what other people said, so I am leaving it as is to provide perspective in addition to discoveries others have made.
Truck driver rampage story has a glaring hole
Here it is: Supposedly this guy went on a 40 MPH rampage for 30 minutes. But he only went 1 mile. Common Core failure. COMMON CORE BREACH! 40 mph for 30 minutes equals 20 miles. To cover only one mile, he could have only been going two miles an hour.
So we have a glaring problem with this story already.
If this story actually happened, something else makes a lot more sense: The truck was taken over via remote control, the people remote-controlling the truck caused a malfunction in a little less than a minute and a half, and the driver sat inside the disabled truck in shock for 28 minutes and 40 seconds until the police arrived and shot him. Gun thrown in to add spice; he probably did not have one or he would have shot bystanders. "Allahu Akbar" line added for spice (yes, he "shouted that" the moment before the final bullet hit him, even though he'd already been shot at for a while). How would he know RIGHT WHEN THE RIGHT BULLET WAS COMING, SO IT WAS TIME TO SAY THAT?
Lots o' bullshit here already; if they want REAL NEWS to be believable, they can't spike it with this B.S. if it is real to begin with!
OK, let's line-item this:
1. He went 40 mph.
2. He went one mile.
3. It took him a half hour to do it.
4. He had a gun, and already "demonstrated" with the truck that he wanted to kill people. But he shot no one.
5. He conveniently shouted Allahu Akbar.
Yep, that all makes sense to me. How about a little more sense than that even?
REAL PROBABLE SCENARIO 1:
1. His truck was taken over via remote, as all vehicles sold in the U.S. are required to have after a little-known law passed in 2005 mandating that some form of cell network linked control had to be in all new vehicles from 2005 onward. This probably became law in Europe also.
2. They sped it to 40 mph, went through the barricades, and started mowing people down with it.
3. After a mile or so and in less than 2 minutes, they caused a malfunction in the truck and it stopped, probably by ripping an air line loose (which would lock up the brakes).
4. Mo sat there in shock, with the doors locked because they locked them via remote, for (according to the requirements of not-so-common-core math), 28 minutes and 40 seconds (until police arrived). That is how you can explain why he did not get out and run during all that time, and why he shot no one despite "having a gun" which would have allowed him to get out and run.
5. Finally, armed police arrived and shot him through the glass, and they made up an excuse that he had a gun.
6. "Allahu Akbar" was added to the story for spice.
Probable scenario 2:
It was a drill and they killed the patsy.
One way or another, real or not, they have spiced this story with enough B.S. to wreck its credibility entirely. Who knows: maybe the guy did flip out and start mowing people down, but if the story is sown with obvious patent bullshit, it's a fat chance I am going to believe any of it.
AS USUAL, PATSY DEAD. This time (obviously) because if they did remote-control his truck, they could not have him in court saying that. The same tired story we have seen far too much: dead men tell no tales.
France TRUCK Attack… What Will the Scriptwriters Come Up With Next?
Alain Soral - stratégie du chaos et opérations sous fausse bannière / faux drapeau (false flag)
Mouvement de panique à Nice après le feux d'artifice du 14 Juillet - "Terror Attack Hit" Nice, France
Infamous Bloody Bataclan Photo Is a Fake That Could Have Been Staged Anytime
Paris attacks: who warned Éric de Rothschild?