In the years since the alleged terror event of July 14, 2016 involving a large crowd along a major thoroughfare and promenade in Nice, France, we should have seen dozens if not hundreds of clear cell-phone images and clear footage from numerous CCTV cameras. Few ever emerged. Furthermore, French authorities confiscated all CCTV footage and have kept it away from public scrutiny.
Of course the question begs how does one manipulate and control a large crowd. The customary Bastille Day fireworks display took place between 22:00 and 22:20. The official narrative states that the truck turned eastward onto Promenade des Anglais at 22:30 a full ten minutes AFTER the crowd started filing out. At 22:35:47 – The truck came to a halt next to the Palais de la Méditerranée hotel and moments later the driver was shot and killed.
Peekay Truth makes key observations in the following video. There is useful footage of the crowd leaving. Initially it shows the crowd at the far end of the promenade some distance from where the truck stopped. On the TV banner you will see 10:36 PM. This crowd would have been stampeded well before the appearance of the truck and would have never seen a truck. This herded crowd has little idea what’s happening. They are used and filmed for advantage.
Several aspects point to 22:30-22:35 as the time the truck plowed through as violating the law of non-contradiction. In the clip staring at 18:30 with the TV banner marked 22:40 and 22:42, and oddly you can still hear the band playing on in the background. By 22:55 the crowd is largely gone.
Then at 20:30 in the Peekay clip we hear a “witness” say that it all went down at “just after 11:00 PM.” Then at 21:40 we hear Johnny-on-Spot Richard Gutjahr, who filmed the truck, stating it “was a little after 11:00 when the truck approached”. These accounts violate the law of non-contradiction given that the official narrative said it started at 10:30 PM. At 11:00 PM (23:00) the crowd was gone. The stagecrafters would have ensured that nobody but actors were around when the truck came to a halt at 23:05.
The truck is visible before it slips behind trees. What goes on then is anybody’s guess. Starting at 25 seconds in the clip only the very top of the container can be seen, and it does not appear to be moving that fast. The accounts say the truck moved at 40 to 50 kilometers per hour. After rampaging down the promenade for over a mile, 84 were alleged to have been mowed down and killed, and around 100 more were wounded.
A second video clip shows what looks like dummies out of Beatlejuice CGI central casting. These bodies are among the strangest I’ve seen in evaluating such events. They have no faces and no navels. Some look like animal carcasses. This violates the law of non-contradiction. The video quality is poor, and I submit that no one owns such a camera anymore, if they ever did. The viewer is given a very brief glimpse and only enough to get an impression. The video is slowed down to give a better look.
For video quality comparison, the next video is a night test of a non-cartoon world camera, the Samsung Galaxy S4, made in 2013. This would have been a 3-year-old camera at the time of the Nice “video.” Cell phone cameras made in the 2010’s are quite high quality and widely carried by people in public.
The question also begs as to how a truck can mow down people across multiple lanes. A delivery truck going 30 mph is not going to toss people this distance. The casualties were strewn out over a considerable distance (over a mile) and the width of the promenade of perhaps 30 meters. Furthermore, after an initial hit that would surprise the first group of people at the beginning of this rampage, there should have been ample warning and opportunity to get out of way. With bystanders milling around, we see the casualties already in body bags — but where are the aid personnel?
Now for 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 is at the end of the rampage and 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.
You can see the width of the truck. Compare this against the wide swath of once again covered bodies. You would think the truck was going 100 mph, not 30 mph. You would think those people had no warning and no clue about the danger. You would think the truck was 40 meters wide. This too violated the law of non-contradiction.
Next photo 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 claimed to have been an eye witness of the event (from this balcony) and said he saw 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 were ever forthcoming — other than Johnny-on-the-Spot Richard Gutjahr who spent much of his time afterward 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 the morning after in Nice was at 6:05 a.m. Seven hours later – bodies just left out?
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 when I checked the Goldsmith photo- 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 Goldsmith’s camera was set to that time, this would have been 4:47 a.m. Nice time. This is what we are offered as a timely eyewitness photo? Really? Where are all the images for 11 p.m., 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 nighttime aftermath photos that were used offer no metadata. Of course, CCTV footage could also be scrutinized, but French authorities have elected to destroy that.
Source of all the following photos is the Daily Mail. Casualties are again far apart. This was a 19 tonne truck alleged to be going at 30 mph -not a Sharknado – violates the law of non-contradiction.
Here we have a scene at another location. The bodies are strewn across the entire width of the promenade. And the person at the left couldn’t get out of the way? There is more covering of corpses, and again spectators are milling around. If a massive triage unit went through, did any of the bystanders take photos or footage of that operation? Haven’t seen it.
This next photo looks like standard cartoon world mocking from the Crime Syndicate. We are shown “a body” laying covered on the road. The form has lost it’s quite large left shoe, which happens to be black. The non-matching right shoe is definitely not black and is another type all together. To me, the small left foot looks like wax-museum quality. Somehow the form’s sock has come off.
The next photo shows what appears to be a woman laid out and covered. The chairs are untouched and there is no damage to the railing, quite the driving feat.
The second photo below shows the truck stopped after a 1.1 mile rampage. In a shocking display of no reaction, we see about 15 or more bodies laid out. Apparently these people had their backs turned and were not able to get out of the way? The Crime Syndicate media’s narrative shown on the left alleges people were trapped by the railings, but an examination of photos Winter Watch provides shows it would take little effort to step over and, in much of the area, there was no big drop-off to the sand.
Super truck is unfazed by a hit on a solid metal light-pole.
The finale shoot out. Truck is pristine, and no bullet holes visible in the truck cab or windows in the last few frames.
End of the line. This time in yet another contradiction lots of damage – but no visible blood on truck.
The U.K.s Daily Mail (aka Daily Fail) version of the Nice attack is pure, unadulterated nonsense and violates the law of non-contradiction. This was later changed to the entire attack taking place in six minutes over a distance of 1.7 kilometres (1.1 mi), between numbers 11 and 147 of the Promenade des Anglais. That would be about 10 mph- for the umpteenth time violating the law of non-contradiction.