You Like Coincidences? Same Guy Filmed Nice & Munich Attacks

[bradshaw2ben]

https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/how-one-reporter-covered-attacks-in-nice-and-munich-with-a-mobile-phone/s2/a658883/
filmed Nice from his balcony-- the iPhone footage that shows the beginning of the attack-- and filmed Munich shooter in progress from a few feet away.

I'll leave you all to your conclusions.

[Drummer Boy]

https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/how-one-reporter-covered-attacks-in-nice-and-munich-with-a-mobile-phone/s2/a658883/
filmed Nice from his balcony-- the iPhone footage that shows the beginning of the attack-- and filmed Munich shooter in progress from a few feet away.

I'll leave you all to your conclusions.

Crickets, of course.

Interesting post, B2B. I'll just note, without of course pretending to know what happened in Nice and Munich, that terrorism and the fear it generates benefits, not just the terrorists, but also intelligence and security elements within government and industry.

[R_S]

https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/how-one-reporter-covered-attacks-in-nice-and-munich-with-a-mobile-phone/s2/a658883/
filmed Nice from his balcony-- the iPhone footage that shows the beginning of the attack-- and filmed Munich shooter in progress from a few feet away.

I'll leave you all to your conclusions.

That the jihadists really don't exhist, it's the christians that are setting these killings up,,,,,right?

[Kodiak]

Well, no it's not a coincidence and the article makes that pretty clear. The Munich thing went on for a while, and he wasn't there at the start but decided to go cover it when he heard about it.

To be a coincidence he would have just happened to have been at the Munich scene when it started. Then of course that would be suspicious, it's just that's not how it happened.

[R_S]

Well, no it's not a coincidence and the article makes that pretty clear. The Munich thing went on for a while, and he wasn't there at the start but decided to go cover it when he heard about it.

To be a coincidence he would have just happened to have been at the Munich scene when it started. Then of course that would be suspicious, it's just that's not how it happened.

That about covers it. Still, the tin foil sombrero wearers won't take that as an answer.

[zeke5123]

https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/how-one-reporter-covered-attacks-in-nice-and-munich-with-a-mobile-phone/s2/a658883/
filmed Nice from his balcony-- the iPhone footage that shows the beginning of the attack-- and filmed Munich shooter in progress from a few feet away.

I'll leave you all to your conclusions.

Crickets, of course.

Interesting post, B2B. I'll just note, without of course pretending to know what happened in Nice and Munich, that terrorism and the fear it generates benefits, not just the terrorists, but also intelligence and security elements within government and industry.

There is a cottage industry promoting fear from terrorism.

[bradshaw2ben]

Well, no it's not a coincidence and the article makes that pretty clear. The Munich thing went on for a while, and he wasn't there at the start but decided to go cover it when he heard about it.

To be a coincidence he would have just happened to have been at the Munich scene when it started. Then of course that would be suspicious, it's just that's not how it happened.

Um Munich happened first- the coincidence is hat he happened to be filming looking directly at the start of second attack-- before the attack.

Oh and his wife is a "former" spy.

[Kodiak]

Um Munich happened first- the coincidence is hat he happened to be filming looking directly at the start of second attack-- before the attack.

Did you even bother to read the article you posted? According to the article, Munich was 8 days after Nice. The article also says he was snapchatting the fireworks when he noticed all the commotion, so he was not "filming looking directly at the attack during the start".

[bradshaw2ben]

Um Munich happened first- the coincidence is hat he happened to be filming looking directly at the start of second attack-- before the attack.

Did you even bother to read the article you posted? According to the article, Munich was 8 days after Nice. The article also says he was snapchatting the fireworks when he noticed all the commotion, so he was not "filming looking directly at the attack during the start".

well, I did read it originally-- long time ago

I will nitpick your point. Whether or not he was filming fireworks, he was positioned on a balcony directly overlooking the place where the truck struck the first person-- crazy lucky.

[Kodiak]

I will nitpick your point. Whether or not he was filming fireworks, he was positioned on a balcony directly overlooking the place where the truck struck the first person-- crazy lucky.

So? There are literally thousands of reporters throughout the world. He happened to be at the right place at the right time. You're supporting evidence of a conspiracy is utter BS, as has been explained.

You tried to link the 2 events to lend credence to your theory, and that supposition was destroyed by the article you linked.

[bradshaw2ben]

I will nitpick your point. Whether or not he was filming fireworks, he was positioned on a balcony directly overlooking the place where the truck struck the first person-- crazy lucky.

So? There are literally thousands of reporters throughout the world. He happened to be at the right place at the right time. You're supporting evidence of a conspiracy is utter BS, as has been explained.

You tried to link the 2 events to lend credence to your theory, and that supposition was destroyed by the article you linked.

I actually didn't try to make it a conspiracy-- just thought it was a hell of a coincidence. I'm still not sure it wasn't remarkable that he was where he was in Munich, although I now realize Munich was second.