News Ticker

Nice Attack: Scene Behind Truck Completely Inconsistent

This will be a straightforward visual assessment using photos provided by the mainstream media.

Photo 1 shows the aftermath scene taken in the lattice area (which you can see on upper right) facing toward the truck at its final stop. It shows a swath of covered forms stretching down the promenade.


Photo 2 was taken much closer to the truck. The forms are scattered immediately behind the truck and extend back perhaps 50 meters. When Photos 1 and 2 are combined, the covered forms go back well over a hundred meters. For reference the lattice shown in the featured photo is 55 meters long.


Photo 3 was alleged to have been taken by Sasha Goldsmith from a hotel balcony shortly after the truck stopped. This photo reveals NO BODIES behind the truck (Photo 2) or near the lattice area (Photo 1). In a newspaper interview Goldsmith claims to have eye-witnessed (from this balcony) people “being mowed down like ants.”

Presumably many, many other photos and video clips would have been taken and by now emerged from the “hundreds of hotel occupants” in the area, but none have been forthcoming, other than Johnny-on-the-Spot Richard Gutjahr who spent much of his time afterwards explaining why he didn’t take revealing photos.


The photos establish what is alleged to have happened and where it happened, but of course we need to know when the photos were taken. For Photo 3 to reveal no bodies would mean that a major evacuation and removal operation had already occurred since the time that Photo 1 and 2 were taken. That is not consistent with other images released. Sunrise on July 15th in Nice was 6:05 a.m.



However, there is no footage or photos showing a large-scale evacuation in the “kill zone” between the lattice area and the stopped truck. So to determine more details about these photos, we turn to a photo analyzer that reveals metadata. Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that metadata would have to be removed from photographs. Besides the time, the EXIF metadata would give the artist or photographer. It would also give the camera model used, which would be useful in examining the grainy, poor quality of so many of the images seen in these events.

And if you checked Photo 3 right now, the analyzer says, “Does NOT contain EXIF metadata.” But when I first ran it, I screen captured it and it showed Goldsmith as the photographer and the date as 1:47 p.m. the next day, July 15. Goldsmith is from Melbourne so if we assume she was set to that time, this would have been 4:47 a.m. Nice time. This is what we are offered? Really? Where are all the images for 11:00 PM, or even midnight?

Photos 1 and 2 do not contain EXIF metadata either. Indeed, enter a Google search for images using the key phrase “Nice France truck attack”, use the original media url, and you will see that with few exceptions most of the media night time aftermath photos that were used offer no metadata. Of course CCTV footage could also be scrutinized but French authorities have elected to destroy that. 


The following is a frame-by-frame analysis of the “Sharknado” truck approaching the crowd. As you will see, all of the blurry “victims” were frozen in place for the entire 1.83 seconds that we are allowed to see. They didn’t even so much as flinch as the vehicle bored down on them. There is obvious evidence of CGI layering and staging in this film.

3 Comments on Nice Attack: Scene Behind Truck Completely Inconsistent

  1. So the main photographers were a Melbourne jew and the husband of a “former” israeli intel agent. Obviously a complete coincidence!

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this:
Secured By miniOrange