Wednesday, August 10, 2016

Who Is Telling the Truth? Seddique Mateen or Clinton Campaign?

How did Seddique Mateen, the father of the Orlando terrorist who attacked a gay nightclub killing 50 people, end up on stage directly behind Hillary Clinton?


This event was by  invitation. 

Those who sit behind a candidate are carefully screened and these seats, due to the camera's inclusion, are important to the candidates. This is both for security (Secret Service present) and for political reasons.  Identification is mandatory.  

The Clinton campaign stated  they did not know he even attended until after.  He claimed that they invited him.  

Can we know if one of them is not truthful?  Is it possible that both are withholding information?  Remember:  people rarely lie outright.  

The rally was 30 minutes from "The Pulse" nightclub.  Mateen has made statements that "Allah would kill gays" and that Sharia will overtake the United States.  The controversy surrounding the photos is building.  

The Clinton campaign statement:  

This individual wasn’t invited as a guest, and the campaign was unaware of his attendance until after the event."


Mateen said that he was “invited by the Democratic party.
“I am a member, so as a member, I get the invitations. There’s nothing particular about it.” 

The Secret Service declined to comment on Mateen's presence.  

What is your conclusion?

A.  Both are truthful:  They did not know, and he was routinely invited; 

B.  Clinton Campaign is Deceptive; they knew and provided the specific seating as norm;

C.  Mateen is Deceptive, he was not invited routinely 

D.  Both Are Withholding Critical Information 






"The Murder of Amanda Blackburn" conclusion up next...




98 comments:

BlasticYT said...

A, but he was purposely seated behind H because he's brown

John mcgowan said...

D

Anonymous said...

D - they are both deceptive but Clinton's record on outright lying is much more extensive

OT - the 12-year-old rape victim has come forward and is lamblasting her big time

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3729466/Child-rape-victim-comes-forward-time-40-years-call-Hillary-Clinton-liar-defended-rapist-smearing-blocking-evidence-callously-laughing-knew-guilty.html

doubt anyone on the mainstream media will pickup on it

Jen Ow said...

D

Clinton's camp qualifies by saying he was not invited "as a guest". So how was he invited? As a gun control advocate/demonstrator? A controversial figure that can subtly convey her support for the Muslim community, and gun control? Or, was he perhaps paid/compensated to be there, and therefore technically not a 'guest', but part of the event?

Mateen shows sensitivity explaining why he was invited, and who did so. The 'democratic party' would encompass basically any and every registered Democrat. He knows exactly who invited him, yet he withholds that information, even while referring to 'the' specific invitation. His assertion that 'it' (the invite) was nothing 'particular' is meant to lead us to believe that 'it' was a open invitation to any member of the Democratic party, but as we all know, that isn't how this pony show works.

Anonymous said...

D

Anonymous said...

Both are being deceptive. Here is a possibility:

The Democratic party (not Hillary personally) invited Mateen. Hillary was made aware that he *MAY/POSSIBLY* attend but not confirmed so she could maintain some sort of truthfulness (considering her truthfulness is currently under fire). Mateen DOES routinely receive invitations to the Democratic events, but he was personally invited by some Democratic official to this event in particular.

Thoughts?

-KC

Anonymous said...

D

Nic said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nic said...

B. Clinton Campaign is Deceptive; they knew and provided the specific seating as norm;


“This individual wasn’t invited as a guest, and the campaign was unaware of his attendance until after the event.”


“This" is close. “That" is distancing. Whomever wrote this statement chose to use “this” to describe Mateen, making him “close".

“as a guest”
Mateen wasn’t imvited as a “guest”; but what about as a “contributor”, or as a “favour”. In what incidents are democrats invited to attend on stage with a presidential candidate?

“the campaign”
Who encompasses the campaign? The volunteers? The PR people? The communication people? Clinton is the candidate, she is not the “campaign". She is running (paying for) a campaign.

jmo

Anonymous said...

Nic

Interesting. Think about this...
"THIS individual" creates closeness.
HOWEVER, "this INDIVIDUAL" and not "Mr. Mateen" is distancing.

Peter - Can a statement section such as "This individual" show closeness and distance at the same time? How is that interpreted?

-KC

Nic said...

“I am a member, so as a member, I get the invitations. There’s nothing particular about it.”

IMO, Mateen is being truthful. Contributing members receive invitations to public events. I concede that "nothing" particular about it is sensitive (to other people). But I don't think he thinks he being there is unexpected *to him*.

I would be curious to find out how much he has contributed to Clinton's campaign. I don't believe a $25 contributor would be invited to sit on stage behind a presidential candidate. But if he is a "maximum" contributor and he RSVP's his attendance, would he not be elevated to the stage? I think so.

The Sheep said...

Those who sit behind a candidate are carefully screened and these seats, due to the camera's inclusion, are important to the candidates. This is both for security (Secret Service present) and for political reasons. Identification is mandatory.

Source?

Nic said...

KC said:
"THIS individual" creates closeness.
HOWEVER, "this INDIVIDUAL" and not "Mr. Mateen" is distancing.


Yes, I agree, KC. I had to give it some thought but decided that it wasn't the father's face plastered on TV, but his killer son. I think if security discovered who he was and pointed out his identity, *maybe* someone higher up in the chain of command thought he wouldn't be recognized and gave the green light.

Oops.

Hey Jude said...

Not SA - I cheated - checked out the Hillary ClInton website for pre-event publicity. There is an email application for places at the rally, apply to not miss out on the event - so, if he went that route, he was not 'particularly' invited, yet also was generally 'invited', so he could be truthful. The security would be lax if all applicants had not been vetted. Hillary would be foolish to knowingly have him seated in camera view behind her. I'd say the security and vetting either was not that good (unlikely) or maybe someone in Hillary's PR camp is not her greatest supporter, and wanted to make her look bad by placing him there.

Another possibility, if there were invitations in addition to email applications, is that he attended as a plus-one, so technically was a guest of another, and not directly invited. Might that account for 'this individual' was not invited - as in 'that (other) one' was the invited guest, while Masheen was a plus one? Would such events include 'plus ones' - even if they did, surely they also would have to be named ahead of the event for security?

Whatever, his insensitivity in attending is astounding - shame at what his son did should have kept him away. It's astonishing - he is even smiling and taking photos. Bizarre.



Nic said...

Hey Jude,

From previous reports I read, when Clinton "won" the nomination, the Sanders supporters were seated in the nosebleed section and the Clinton supporters were seated closer to the stage.

There has to be something to elevate a supporter to the stage. I'm betting it is money, -- just like other fundraising campaigns who showcase their sponsors based on their contribution. (The more a sponsor contributes the more advertising they are garnered, i.e., on signage, in advertising, etc. In political campaigns it is seating and pictures. People get their picture taken with the candidate at a fundraising event if they are super-duper contributors. Nothing is free.

Nic said...

“I am a member, so as a member, I get the invitations. There’s nothing particular about it.”

Huh. Can I change my answer?

"So" doesn't bother me as much as "the invitations".

Sateen has obviously been asked why he was there, so, "so" answers why.

However, I get "the" invitation is not grammatically correct.

He doesn't say, I get invitations. He says, I get "the" (singular) invitations (plural). This invitation was special and therefore "particular".

Nic said...

"Sateen" was an autocorrect. I did type "Mateen".

Jon The Layman said...

I'm going D. Clinton's campaign seems to be obviously deceptive, which the posts above explain.

One thing that I don't think other people have mentioned however is the possibility that Mateen is deceptive, but the context may be that he's minimizing the invitation by saying "There’s nothing particular about it" which seems like he feels guilt by association. What I mean by this is that he's effectively being deceptive on behalf of the Clinton campaign as one of their supporters.

Jon The Layman said...

Actually, I guess technically my answer then would be B.

Nic said...

"get"

When you "get" something, such as in the mail, it is expected.

Both are deceptive.

Lemon said...

D

And a controlled controversy to replace the airtime regarding her lying lies about lying and that issue...what was it? Email, I think.
Unless this is another "short circuit".

Lemon said...

Link:
http://nypost.com/2016/08/09/emails-reveal-hillarys-shocking-pay-for-play-scheme/

Anonymous said...

D absolutely

Peter please please please


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/10/assange-implies-murdered-dnc-staffer-was-wikileaks-source.html

Fm25 said...

Mateen's statement appears deceptive in that he is trying to imply that he was invited without outright lying. I thought this yesterday when I saw him interviewed and he failed to answer a direct question as to whether or not he was invited by the Clinton campaign. I don't think the statement above from the Clinton campaign is a reliable denial with the qualifier of "as a guest", but without knowing the full context I cannot say it is deceptive. Why would the Clinton campaign invite Mateen anyhow and seat him behind Hillary. It doesn't appear to benefit her in any way unless I'm missing something. I think it' was a security fail. I would love to see analyses of some of trumps statements. Does anyone actually believe he did meant the "2nd amendment people" could stop Clinton lawfully vs by way of violence? Both candidates have issues but trump"s free editing process is a gold mine for analysis.

Anonymous said...

@Nic - I don't see Mateen's use of "the invitations" as necessarily incorrect or a red flag: He in fact receives 'the member invitations', he receives 'the invitations they send to members'.

He may also still have some slightly different phrasing patterns, having acquired English as a second language.

That said, I'm still baffled how he ended up sitting there.

Val

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

A new Netflix documentary exploring Amanda Knox and the notorious Meredith Kercher murder case will launch next month.

Titled 'Amanda Knox', the documentary will explore the murder mystery which made headlines around the world.

Miss Kercher, 21, was found half naked and with her throat slit in the house she shared in Perugia with Knox in November 2007.

The US student and Raffaele Sollecito were initially found guilty of murder and sentenced to 26 years in jail in 2009, but after appeals and retrials they were acquitted last year by Italy's highest court.

The pair were first acquitted in 2011 after evidence used against them was found to be flawed.

Knox immediately returned to the United States protesting her innocence, but in January 2014, the Italian courts overturned that acquittal and reinstated the guilty verdict.

However, the case ultimately went to the Supreme Court and their conviction was definitively overturned in March last year.

Knox, now a journalist in her hometown of Seattle, has since taken her case against Italian police to the European Court of Human Rights, claiming she was mistreated during their murder investigation.

Sollecito finished his undergraduate degree in computer science at the University of Perugia in 2008 while in prison.

He has since become an 'expert' for Italian crime show 'Mystery of the Week' and offers a perspective on the 'faults of the justice system'.

The brutality of the attack on 21-year-old Miss Kercher, the alleged sex games, and multiple trials provided fodder for tabloids on both sides of the Atlantic and inspired books and films.

It has previously been the subject of the documentary A Long Way From Home and TV movie Amanda Knox: Murder On Trial In Italy, with Hayden Panettiere in the title role.

Rudy Guede, from the Ivory Coast, is halfway through a 16-year sentence for his involvement in Miss Kercher's death after a separate trial.

He has always denied killing her.

The documentary will premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival [TIFF] next month before a global launch on September 30.

Netflix is planning to unveil three other non-fiction titles at TIFF before making them available to subscribers online in the autumn.

Leonardo DiCaprio is executive producing 'thriller' documentary The Ivory Game, which take viewers to the front lines of the fight to save the African elephant from extinction.

Werner Herzog and volcanologist Clive Oppenheimer's Into The Inferno will look at volcanoes across the world to understand their relationship with humankind, while The White Helmets follows three volunteer rescue workers in Syria and Turkey in early 2016 as they try to save civilians affected by the war.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3733178/Netflix-screen-new-documentary-Amanda-Knox-notorious-Meredith-Kercher-murder-jailed-cleared.html

Anonymous said...

Whoever said he should have been ashamed and stayed home ought to stay home himself. This man committed no crime and his participation in a democratic government should be celebrated, not vilified. If he said what he did about sharia law, that is his viewpoint. I strongly disagree with his viewpoint but support his right to believe what he wants to believe and say what he wants to say. That's why our constitution has a First Amendment. As far as anyone lying or being truthful, I too am curious about the campaign statement that appears to use closeness and distance at the same time. As far as his statement goes, I think it may be incomplete, not necessarily evasive. The campaign statement seems intentionally vague and worded so as to be true but missing important information.

Anonymous said...

Published on Aug 10, 2016

Will Julian Assange be Assassinated?

Is the Wikileaks founder the next victim of the Clinton body count?

https://youtu.be/-Lbu1VXZIsI

Nic said...

@Val

Yeah, that's what I initially thought. But do you:

1) get invitations, or
2) get the invitation

?

I always look at what Peter underlines. A lot of the time I wonder why he underlines something. Like "get". Peter has written quite a bit about "so, because, therefore,"... "this" and "that", "the" and "a", but this was the first time I noticed <-- (I skim a lot) him underlining "get". I didn't "get" it.


After I "finished" my analysis, which is a term a use loosely, I was writing a response to my cousin and said, "they were happy to get it." This was in response to a conversation I had with "them" about something I was trying to unload (a pump organ I donated to my city's art centre for their "prop" inventory). That's when I think I "got it".

Anonymous said...

I can see no advantage for the Clinton campaign to knowingly put him in the audience behind the candidate. In any case it is very insensitive to the families of the victims. I believe this was a huge gaffe. People in the campaign organization did not recognize him. That's not good judgment, the campaign organization should be competent enough to screen him out.

The father of the murderer most probably is a member and gets invitations like all members of the party in a particular area. He has no shame or compassion whatsoever to act this way.

So poor judgment from both sides, but they did not lie.

Nic said...

Anonymous said:
Whoever said he should have been ashamed and stayed home ought to stay home himself. This man committed no crime and his participation in a democratic government should be celebrated, not vilified.


Perception, perception, perception.

There is guilty by association (or what they say, as is the case of Trump).

Nic said...

Pardon me, what they say and what is interpreted.

Lemon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Anon 8:20,

Are you kidding me?!?!

This guy's son KILLED 50 gay people and the son himself was gay and probably involved with ISIS!!!! Of course, he should have stayed home!!! Out of shame!!!!!

He raised a gay mass murderer!!!!!!!!

There is something shady about the whole thing. Very scary that he was allowed in. It makes you realize how poor security is if they don't even know who is sitting right behind the Presidential candidates.

I think the Clinton campaign probably did invite him but maybe in their opinion "not as a guest"...just as a supporter?????

He shouldn't have been allowed in. His son had potential ISIS ties. He scouted out and attended gay clubs to fit in so he could attack. His wife was initially suspected as having knowledge of his terrorist plans! Who is to say his father didn't know? Does the father look upset about what his son did????

More and more I think gay people are so deviant. To me, many (not all) seem diabolical, and half the time if you meet their parents you can easily figure out how they turned out that way. This guy is proudly smiling on camera only a few short months after his son gunned down 50 people?!?!

Right. But gay people are normal and so are their parents.
Seriously, welcome to crazy town...where gay people are supposedly "normal" and should be "celebrated" and look at their crazy ass parents who probably totally fucked them up and caused them to turn gay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Hillary is sicker than I thought if she invited him!!!!!!!!!!

Im sure she has turned many people gay also.

Anonymous said...

How patriotic of you Hillary: there is nothing that says I love America like supporting gay mass shooters, right?!?!

She is a loser!

Anonymous said...

"I'm Hillary and I'm here to support the gays, trannies, cross-genders, perverts...she probably supports pedophiles too.

BlasticYT said...

Yes, please, it this truthful?

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:52 p.m. - what in the world is wrong with you? The claims you make about gay people and their parents are SICK!

Anonymous said...

Really?!?!?!?

What was every single gay pedophile priest????????

Answer: GAY

But I can't make the connection between gay and perverted?

My opinion is I don't trust gay people and yes I think their parents are usually crazy. (Not always.)

Some gays are OK, but I would say that 60 % are NOT.

Anonymous said...

And oh I know, it's so en vogue for everyone nowadays to say "oh that's so wonderful!" when 2 men are engaged or married. But do people REALLY think it's wonderful or do they think it's a hilarious joke? Because that's what it looks like to me. It looks ridiculous. Why wouldn't a man want to act like a man? That is humiliating for a man to be like "oh wow that hairy smelly guy is so awesome, I think I want to put a ring on his finger!" That's crazy! Plus, and I'm just being honest, AIDS is spread through gay sex yet people think that should be celebrated? Try telling all the women and children dying in Africa of AIDS (spread by gay men) that that should be celebrated OK? I'm so sick of people denying reality and sugarcoating what is actually an abomination!

Anonymous said...

@ Nic - Interesting point about his use of "get". It makes me wonder how frequent the invitations are...? For example:

I just realized I used almost the exact same phrase recently, when a store clerk asked if I received loyalty emails. I said "I get the emails" - it's a continuous, ongoing thing, with regular loyalty emails, "I got" would not be accurate because I receive/"get" them all the time...and they are "the emails" because they are specific, loyalty emails.

For Mateen, a simpler direct response might have been "I received the invitation as a member" or "I am a member and receive invitations. I accepted this one."

His statement includes the explanatory justifying "so", the possible sensitivity to being a "member", and a phrase that could use some timeframe/frequency context "get the invitations".

"There's nothing" suggests there may be "something"; is "there's nothing particular" similar to 'normal' in terms of sensitivity?
"It" is an unknown reference. Did he switch from plural invitations to singular "it" meaning the invitation to this event? Is "it" a general reference to members receiving invitations? Is "it" referring to attending this specific event? ...

It may just be a defensive irritated response. Or it may be truthful, while withholding information.

Val

Anonymous said...

In addition to Seddique's many evil beliefs, he has exhibited symptoms of psychosis or drug abuse. On his Facebook page, he posted bizarre videos, while dressed in fatigues or sitting in front of the Afghan flag, while declaring himself to be the President of Afghanistan. In the videos, he stated he was controlling Afghanistan from his American apartment. Psychotic individuals can strongly believe in their delusions and hallucinations even when overwhelming evidence to the contrary is presented to them. It's unknown if Seddique was psychotic when interviewed about attending Hillary's rally, so analyzing his statement is useless.

Hillary's spokesperson lied. Evil, crazy Seddique was sent an invitation to the rally and was seated behind Hillary so his face would easily be seen.

Donna said...

Anon 12:01,

Let me just say you are a horrible person! There is nothing more beautiful than two men falling in love! My brother is gay and when he met his husband he said that as soon as the too of them held hands and brushed their hairy knuckles together and felt the first brush of their whiskers together they knew it was TRUE LOVE!!!!! They have done studies that have proven that sex has nothing to do with reproduction!!!!! Are you an idiot???? You do NOT deserve to fly a rainbow flag you bigoted nasty horrible person!!!! In fact I hope you never see a rainbow for the rest of your life!!!!!!

Donna said...

Hillary UNITES! What do you do except DIVIDE Anon 12:01? In case I wasn't yelling loud enough let me say again I hope you never see a rainbow again for the rest of your miserable life!!!!!!! Hillary loves everyone!!!! Gay, straight, immigrant, veterans, everyone!!!!!!!!!!! I picture her holding up an umbrella to protect US ALL from the rain while YOU snatch that umbrella away!!!!! And because of that, because you snatch that umbrella, it blocks your view from the beautiful rainbows HIllary wants us to see, and know, and become a part of!!!!!! Hillary wants us all to be a part of the rainbow and you are nothing but a storm cloud in the sky. Do you see that???? Do you see what you truly are?!?!?!

Anonymous said...

I agree Donna. Hillary will kickstart this country and make America great again. There is nothing wrong with her letting this gentleman sit behind her. That was his American dream was to sit there and he is living it out. Just ignore the bigots.

Hey Jude said...

"There's nothing particular about it" - lots of interesting comments on that - I think you all are right, there was something particular about it, rather than that he was someone elses's guest. Yet he does not give the straightest answer, if actually it was a personal invitation - as he is so shameless, I would expect him to straight out say with pride, 'I came to support Hillary Clinton because I was invited' - but as someone said, he seems delusional, so his responses may be off. He looked pleased to be there - maybe wanted to be behind Hillary as some sort of vindication of himself as a person in good standing and not viewed as a security risk/extremist.

I don't know how he got to be there - Lemon's 'controlled controversy' seems a good possibility, yet it is still such bad PR.

It's very strange - I stand by my opinion that he should have stayed at home - if he had an ounce of sensitivity or common sense he would keep a low profile, knowing that family and friends of his son's massacre victims would be present or viewing at home. His presence says all the wrong things. Thinking how, controversially, Israelis so ruthlessly demolish the family homes of Palestinian terrorists - meanwhile in the US the family member of a mass murderer gets to sit behind a presidential candidate a few weeks after the massacre in the place where it occurred. It looks insane to me, not only as PR goes - the man has no respect for the victims, and would not appear to be a too genuine supporter of Hillary - he did not know it would be better for her campaign for him to stay at home - at the very least sit on the sidelines where he would not be so readily noticed? He is smiling. His presence is a mockery of the Land of the Free, IMO. Well, just because he can, doesn't mean he should have gone there - it's outrageous.

John mcgowan said...

Coincidence?

Clinton according to the reporter was supposed to be talking about jobs but started of by paying tribute to those affected by the Pulse night club shootings.

Later a reporter catches up with Mateen

Reporter: "What were you thinking when she was talking about the Oralndo incident"?

Mateen: "We've been helping and we were cooperating with federal government FBI and that's all, thank you.


"we were cooperating with"

Who are "we"

Note the past tense. Are they not cooperating anymore? Have "federal government FBI" finished their enquiries with them?
Note the word with showing distance.

He didn't want to answer any other questions. They ran into him later.

Reporter: "Did Hilary Clintons campaign know that you were going to that event and sitting right directly behind her?"

Mateen: "It'a a Democratic party so everybody can join"

This is a yes - no question and should be answered as so. Instead he avoids the question making the question itself sensitive.

Reporter: "Do you think that some people will be surprised to know and to see you were there in Orlando"?

Mateen: "Why they should be surprised i-i love United states and iv'e been living here for a long time"

Again this is a yes - no question and should be answered as so.
Instead he begins with answering the question with a question making this, too, sensitive. It also gives him time (albeit brief) to think. Note he reflects back "Surprised" He then goes off on a tangent professing how much he loves the United States.

When someone uses the "tangent" it is to avoid or distract away from the topic in hand.
Note the stutter "i-i" when it it comes to loving the United states. Remember it is him who brought up this topic, yet the stutter "i-i" shows sensitivity, if he is not a stutterer.

Questions avoided.
Answering questions with questions.
Stalling for time.
Reflective language.
Employing the tangent, often used by deceptive people.
Stuttering on the pronoun "i" (while loving the US) the most used word in the English language, although it is his second language.

Mateen is withholding information. What it is is to be determined.

More in the VT below.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/09/seddique-mateen-hillary-clinton-rally-pulse-shooting

hari narayan said...

Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas l Raviv Dozetas

Nic said...

The Reuters news service has poured cold water on CNN’s overheated claim that the Secret Service warned Donald Trump’s campaign that his gun rights rhetoric seemed to threaten the safety of Hillary Clinton.
Reuters reported that “a federal official on Wednesday said the U.S. Secret Service had not formally spoken with Republican Donald Trump’s presidential campaign regarding his suggestion a day earlier that gun rights activists could stop Democratic rival Hillary Clinton from curtailing their access to firearms.”


http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/10/reuters-dumps-cnn-secret-service-trump-warning-clam/

Nic said...

I have an idea why Seddique Mateen was put where he was when he was:

To bait Trump.

IMO, if Trump had taken the bait, the way they were hoping he would (over-the-top comment,) and worked his base into a lather, "the republicans" would all end up looking like a bunch of "racists" or "bigots", (as per Anonymous @ 2:57am)

lynda said...

OT

Very anxious to read AB conclusion Peter...

I have another for us amateur SA.

This text was received by a young 20 something woman. She has no relationship with the sender except that of a professional. The sender has seen her professionally in the medical field. There was NO conversation between the sender and the receiver regarding anything in the text. It was sent to the receiver "out of the blue in no context."The sender is approx. 40 years older than the receiver.

Is there a hidden "crime about to be committed" in his words? Being able to analyze texts such as these..would that be helpful in PREVENTING crimes against women? Is sender a potentially violent predator? I am very interested in people's opinion about the wording of the text statement and their opinions on the future crime probability. Thank you!

Text contents in full..

"Been working all night on the script for our low budget film
I have written a pretty tasty part for you
Now it's going to ask you to dig deep and give one of your best performances ever....but I think your up to it.
Tomorrow we should spend the day together trying to find the best location for filming.
Then tomorrow night will be rehearsals with shooting starting first thing Thursday morning.
Better get plenty of rest."

Anonymous said...

The US can thank the GOP for the clintons. GOP smeared H Ross Perot and he withdrew, reassessed, rentered the race. Media smeared him as the quitter. GOP smear was against his family. Also disrupting his companys financial trading. Even the pseudo christian media tried the scare tactic remarking on EDS corp surveillance possibilities due to its computer systems based business. Look what we/world got. NAFTA. 911. Endless war. Racial strife. Clinton round 2.

Nic said...

This is what Mateen said:
“I am a member, so as a member, I get the invitations. There’s nothing particular about it.”
**********

This is what the Clinton campaign tweeted:

Clinton campaign statement part I: "This rally was a 3,000-person, open-door event for the public. This individual wasn't invited as a guest

Part II: and the campaign was unaware of his attendance until after the event.
*********

This is what a campaign staffer for a former presidential candidate said:

Those behind the candidate are almost always screened in advance,” a campaign staffer for a former presidential candidate told Breitbart.

It is standard protocol for the Secret Service to not allow people behind the stage unless they are given permission from certain campaign members.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/terrorists-father-disputes-clinton-campaigns-account-of-how-he-ended-up-at-rally/

Something to note, you have to plan well in advance to visit the White House. We discovered while in DC that we had to arrange through the US Embassy, ahead of time, to get tickets and part of the process would include being screened.

Hey Jude said...

Lynda - he maybe sent it in error, or accidentally on purpose, as though intended for another, to see if/how she would respond to such an oddly suggestive text. Whatever his intention, he sounds like a misogynist creep with whom any woman would do best to not go anyplace. Does he want to alarm her? I'd find that alarming.

John mcgowan said...

At first glance.

"Been working all night on the script for our low budget film"

Working on the script lacks commitment given the dropped pronoun.
He doesn't give the name of the "script" but employs passivity. Passiveness is to conceal.


"I have written a pretty tasty part for you"

The pronoun "I" now enters his language ( i will refer to the person as a male, it's usually a male, it may not be.) This part of the statement is important to him he takes ownership and on it's form is most likely true.


"Now it's going to ask you to dig deep and give one of your best performances ever....but I think your up to it.

He doesn't say "i'm going to ask you to "dig deep" but "it's going to. What is "it"?

"Tomorrow we should spend the day together trying to find the best location for filming".
"Then tomorrow night will be rehearsals with shooting starting first thing Thursday morning.
"Better get plenty of rest."

Who should get "plenty of rest"?

"Dig deep"
"Find the best location"
"Shooting"
"Plenty of rest

Fm25 said...

"the U.S. Secret Service had not formally spoken with Republican Donald Trump’s presidential campaign regarding his suggestion a day earlier that gun rights activists could stop Democratic rival Hillary Clinton from curtailing their access to firearms.”
- I do not consider this a "reliable denial". What do they mean by "formally"? The inclusion of that word suggests they are leaving something out imho. Did someone speak to him informally?

lynda said...

Hey Jude said...
Lynda - he maybe sent it in error, or accidentally on purpose, as though intended for another, to see if/how she would respond to such an oddly suggestive text. Whatever his intention, he sounds like a misogynist creep with whom any woman would do best to not go anyplace. Does he want to alarm her? I'd find that alarming.

_________________________

He did not send in error. His goal was to make her want him and to be a part of this.
________________________________


Blogger John mcgowan said...
At first glance.

"Been working all night on the script for our low budget film"

Working on the script lacks commitment given the dropped pronoun.
He doesn't give the name of the "script" but employs passivity. Passiveness is to conceal.


"I have written a pretty tasty part for you"

The pronoun "I" now enters his language ( i will refer to the person as a male, it's usually a male, it may not be.) This part of the statement is important to him he takes ownership and on it's form is most likely true.


"Now it's going to ask you to dig deep and give one of your best performances ever....but I think your up to it.

He doesn't say "i'm going to ask you to "dig deep" but "it's going to. What is "it"?

"Tomorrow we should spend the day together trying to find the best location for filming".
"Then tomorrow night will be rehearsals with shooting starting first thing Thursday morning.
"Better get plenty of rest."

Who should get "plenty of rest"?

"Dig deep"
"Find the best location"
"Shooting"
"Plenty of rest

August 11, 2016 at 11:35 AM

______________________________________

John..it's chilling the language, right? The passivity suggests he is harmless? What are your thoughts on future/past crimes in regards to language? Violence?

Hey Jude...what do you think of crime potential?

I will explain what happened after this text once your opinions are in!

Fm25 said...

Nic said "I have an idea why Seddique Mateen was put where he was when he was:

To bait Trump."
-
I dont buy this. Trump is doing enough damage without having to be "baited". It seems far fetched to suggest the campaign invited Mateen of all people to provoke him. There was just no need for it. The attention that mateens appearance at the event is silly and the only person it has served is trump himself in deflecting from his most recent controversial statements.

Anonymous said...

@ Lynda - This is my non-professional opinion. Not using statement analysis, just going on gut feel & general predator awareness, here are my thoughts on a few scenarios:

The text message may have been sent by accident. It's very specific and detailed, and seems like it's continuing discussions on that topic. If they have never spoken of anything to do with acting, film-making, etc., and it arrived out of the blue, then it may be accidental. We've all mistakenly dialed or messaged the wrong contact.

However, building on scenario 1, the "accidental text", it's possible it was a non-accidental wrong number meant to engage the young woman outside of professional context. "Haha are you sure you're not up to acting? Well you saved me, telling me about the wrong number, at least let me buy you a coffee" etc. Not necessarily threatening, but still an entirely inappropriate creepy dishonest way to meet someone. It's covert boundary-crossing and that is indicative of someone who shouldn't be trusted.

Separately, if in the course of professional chit-chat there were a few random comments about acting or films, or lame "jokey" comments that the young woman may have laughed at or even ignored...then the "random" message would cause me some concern.

And, if the young woman is currently involved in acting or has been in the past, yet they haven't spoken of it ever, that would also cause me concern.

One of the best books I have read is by Gavin de Becker, "The Gift of Fear", subtitled "and other survival signals that protect us from violence". It changed my life - how I see things now, and it also opened my eyes to things I'd taken note of in the past, but hadn't recognized. I highly recommend it.

Val

Anonymous said...

@ Lynda - This is my non-professional opinion. Not using statement analysis, just going on gut feel & general predator awareness, here are my thoughts on a few scenarios:

Edited - I now see you said it wasn't sent by accident. So, a non-accidental wrong number meant to engage the young woman outside of professional context? "Haha are you sure you're not up to acting? Well you saved me, telling me about the wrong number, at least let me buy you a coffee" etc.
Not necessarily threatening, but still an entirely inappropriate creepy dishonest way to interact. It's covert boundary-crossing and that is indicative of someone who shouldn't be trusted.

Separately, if in the course of professional chit-chat there were a few random comments about acting or films, or lame "jokey" comments that the young woman may have laughed at or even ignored...then the "random" message would cause me some concern.

And, if the young woman is currently involved in acting or has been in the past, yet they haven't spoken of it ever, that would also cause me concern.

One of the best books I have read is by Gavin de Becker, "The Gift of Fear", subtitled "and other survival signals that protect us from violence". It changed my life - how I see things now, and it also opened my eyes to things I'd taken note of in the past, but hadn't recognized. I highly recommend it.

Val

lynda said...

One of the best books I have read is by Gavin de Becker, "The Gift of Fear", subtitled "and other survival signals that protect us from violence". It changed my life - how I see things now, and it also opened my eyes to things I'd taken note of in the past, but hadn't recognized. I highly recommend it.

Val

Excellent and MUST read for every young woman and young boy in my opinion. Young boys are the "lost ones" so much focus on our females when prepubescent boys etc are targeted at an alarming rate.

Anonymous said...

Lynda - to add to what others have commented:

"Been working all night on the script for our low budget film"
- "our low budget film" - is highly disconcerting to me, since you've clarified this was no accidental message. This sounds like 'forced teaming' with the young woman, creating a "we/our" where there is none. Major red flag, boundary-crossing, I would not view the sender as trustworthy, and he is likely controlling/abusive.

"Now it's going to ask you to dig deep and give one of your best performances ever....but I think your up to it."
- I see his use of "it's" as merely referring to either the script or her part - hip industry-speak, where they often describe scripts or roles asking an actor to dig deep, reach down, etc.

He may just be a standard bully of a certain age in an industry where the "assumptive close" style that is common in sales often works with young women desperate for a career. Possibly a narcissist, no acknowledgment of or questions for the young woman. And quite possibly controlling/abusive, but not necessarily a serial killer.

Val

Hey Jude said...

Oh, now I am alarmed, Lynda. I think he does not have respect towards her from the off - not only because the text is so inappropriate to send but also the innecessary 'low budget film' - he is suggesting she is only worthy of a low budget film. Then there's the 'pretty tasty part for you' - I'd be thinking he has porn in mind, and if I thought too much, might even suspect cannibalistic porn, but as that is so rare, less likely. 'Dig deep' - well graves are deep. No way would I meet with that creep - I would take that message to the police, prompto. The fantasy/presumption/entitlement - scary stuff. I hope he didn't kidnap her.

What happened?

---

Val - I've read the Gavin Becker book, too - Peter recommended it a while back.


lynda said...

OT

So the man that wrote the text is in the health care field. The girl, barely past being a minor was his patient. She had suffered a traumatic injury that she needed his expertise in. When the girl received the text..she was nonplussed but chose to ignore it. Later on, the professional went to her home during the middle of the night and left a letter on her car so she could see first thing. The letter was obsessive in its speak. The girl turned over letter and text to her father and father made a complaint with the Board.

The professional had his license revoked indefinitely for violating the ethical code of conduct for his profession. He lost his career, a somewhat prestigious reputation in his field, his wife, his family, his money, his license, everything.

In lieu of what we have learned about Sierah and her murderer, especially comments he made 30 years ago about "burying" the next one..I was intrigued with what people thought about the potential of the text writer to have committed crimes before or likelihood to begin. When I read the text my vibe..without SA..was one of stalker rapist. He wants to be looked at as a "hopeless romantic" but he is not. I fear there were woman before this girl that succumbed because they felt they had no option. They were raped but didn't correlate it with the sickness of the professional stalking, wearing them down, flattering, infiltrating, etc. It made me think of Sierah's killer and his "room of torture" and all his filming. *shiver*
Thanks for the feedback. I thought the "buzzwords" that John pointed out were also words that jumped out at me also.
Since being on the blog..I look at everything in such a different way. I supposes that could be good AND bad.

Anonymous said...

Lynda that is seriously bone-chilling. The context makes it very frightening, I thought they were just connected via the medical industry. That the writer was a medical professional and not a film-maker - and the young woman was very young and a patient - cancels any question of "innocent" intent, even without the follow up letter.

Using his professional status & authority is predatory, and I agree there were other victims before. Writing that reminds me of Cosby, and the medical professional aspect makes it even sicker.

I'm glad to hear this young girl is safe.
Val

Hey Jude said...

Lynda - That's so creepy - meant to intimidate, leaving a letter on her car at night. 'While you were sleeping...'

I read the letter from Sierah's presumed murderer to the judge - there is a similar lack of respect and sense of entitlement, and that in relation to the judge - contemptuous attitude, so manipulative, and his 'mother's truck' shtick was pathetic. Horrendous 'man' - he is not any type of man.

Sierah's murder was written of in the Mail Online today. My sympathies again upon her loss, and of all that might have been.

lynda said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Val said..

"Lynda that is seriously bone-chilling. The context makes it very frightening, I thought they were just connected via the medical industry. That the writer was a medical professional and not a film-maker - and the young woman was very young and a patient - cancels any question of "innocent" intent, even without the follow up letter.

Using his professional status & authority is predatory, and I agree there were other victims before. Writing that reminds me of Cosby, and the medical professional aspect makes it even sicker.

I'm glad to hear this young girl is safe.
Val"

_______________________

yes..The Dayton (ohio) Daily NEws just ran an investigative report regarding medical professionals and their sexual assault of their patients WITHOUT losing their licenses. The investigation is called, "License to Betray"
Physicians are the upper echelon of medical workers. It takes close to murder for a physician to lose his license for good.The statistics are staggering on the amount of physicians who rape and molest their patients. Some, while they are under the influence of drugs. These people have their victims at their most vulnerable. They're weakened by illness or in shock from a sudden traumatic event. The physician is perceived as a "God" who is the only one that can help "heal" what is wrong them then. The predatory medical professional uses this knowledge to begin to weave a manipulation so sinister that when the patient is raped or abused, they rarely acknowledge it as such. The knew breed. Intellectual rapists who go unpunished because of their education and standing in the community. Having come from the medical field myself, it's absolutely sickening.

Anonymous said...

Id say the best thing to do - if you want to disguise - your writing is to use - little dashes. It's been working well - for the hydra - here.

lynda said...

Hey Jude said..


"I read the letter from Sierah's presumed murderer to the judge - there is a similar lack of respect and sense of entitlement, and that in relation to the judge - contemptuous attitude, so manipulative, and his 'mother's truck' shtick was pathetic. Horrendous 'man' - he is not any type of man"

________________________

That letter he wrote to the judge will go down in my personal annals of *DANGER DANGER...HE IS GOING TO KILL*** and that was written 25 years ago. I completely agree that his contempt for the judge and for the victim is very telling. He not only BLAMES the victim for bringing this on herself and calling her a liar, he ridicules and blames the Judge for believing HER. JDW was SO twisted 25 years ago I am fearful of what we will learn in the coming months about what he's been up to for all these years.

Thank you all for commenting on the texting.

Anonymous said...

Medical professionals belong to a powerful group. Physicians, the AMA. Dentists, the ADA. Business people, the Chamber of Commerce. The medical groups are very powerful. Membersbip is, lets say'Obligatory". These groups are Unions. They"ll walk all over a patient who has been harmed to protect their paying Members. Chamber of commerce involment in wages, campaigns, elections. They are nor portrayed as Unions. Thats exactly what they are. Unions for the rich. Protection for malpractice & fraud. Run afoul and you"ll see. Union ok for them. Nit ok for others. US is teeming with physician group fraud. Patients cheated. Medicare cheated. Insurance companies cheated. BILLIONS.

Hey Jude said...

The hydra is a poor mimic, though, Anon, even if imitation is said to be a form of flattery. In trolls it at least tends towards the mischievous, and that in the ill-natured sense.

Hey Jude said...

Yes, you read him well, Lynda - vile man who has ruined so many lives. I would not know where to put the anger. I can understand why so many people favour the death penalty.

lynda said...

Anonymous said...
Medical professionals belong to a powerful group. Physicians, the AMA. Dentists, the ADA. Business people, the Chamber of Commerce. The medical groups are very powerful. Membersbip is, lets say'Obligatory". These groups are Unions. They"ll walk all over a patient who has been harmed to protect their paying Members. Chamber of commerce involment in wages, campaigns, elections. They are nor portrayed as Unions. Thats exactly what they are. Unions for the rich. Protection for malpractice & fraud. Run afoul and you"ll see. Union ok for them. Nit ok for others. US is teeming with physician group fraud. Patients cheated. Medicare cheated. Insurance companies cheated. BILLIONS.

August 11, 2016 at 6:01 PM

__________________________

the investigation by the Dayton Daily has started to try to instigate new legislation I believe, ITA with everything you said.

Nic said...

Fm25 said:
I dont buy this. Trump is doing enough damage without having to be "baited". It seems far fetched to suggest the campaign invited Mateen of all people to provoke him. There was just no need for it.


The same thing could be said about inviting Kahn to speak at the Democratic convention and talking to Trump through the TV while waving the Constitution. Far fetched indeed. Needed? Apparently.

Anonymous said...

If any have wondered how/why monsterous fraud occurs and has a long run, look up Harry Markopulous. He warned the US SEC about Madoffs global ponzi early in its span. His book. No One Would Listen. He"s an accountant. A lesson in real life Mega Deception.

Anonymous said...

AnonymousAugust 11, 2016 at 6:01 PM said:
Medical professionals belong to a powerful group. Physicians, the AMA. Dentists, the ADA. Business people, the Chamber of Commerce. The medical groups are very powerful. Membersbip is, lets say'Obligatory". These groups are Unions. They"ll walk all over a patient who has been harmed to protect their paying Members. Chamber of commerce involment in wages, campaigns, elections. They are nor portrayed as Unions. Thats exactly what they are. Unions for the rich. Protection for malpractice & fraud. Run afoul and you"ll see. Union ok for them. Nit ok for others. US is teeming with physician group fraud. Patients cheated. Medicare cheated. Insurance companies cheated. BILLIONS.

------
I disagree. Many physicians feel they failed at taking over the business aspects of their profession. Non medical professionals run the hospitals and the regulations are difficult to uphold. Physicians are being told how to treat patients by no medical personnel with the threat of losing their jobs. Where did you get your information from?

Anonymous said...

Threat of losing their jobs? Ask michael jacksons family who prescribed anaesthesia to him. Ask prince also. Ask the cosmetic surgery addicts family if surgeon lost job. Ask florida how it became pain clinic abuse capital of usa. Ask southeast michigan woman what happened to dentist that drilled 40 holes in her teeth in 1990. Ask the parents of 2 yo daughter that died from a fricking root canal. The industry is full of fraud. Michigan, cancer surgeon fraud. Billing and performing surgeries on patients that did not have cancer.

Anonymous said...

Oh please do enlighten us with your misspelled garble.

Anonymous said...

Grammar knit pickker awake.

Anonymous said...

Enlighten Us? Not me?

Anonymous said...

One needn't nitpick when faced with such a blatant assault on the English language.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I said "us". Are you jealous?

Anonymous said...

Knit pikkers arent discerners of truth. Too much can be missed. Control freaks are knit pikkers. Petty and arrogant. Personifying a language as a victim.

Anonymous said...

"Blah blah blah blah....you personify language as a victim." ?? Seriously, that's not even coherent. Please dont explain what it means either.
You're the biggest control freak there is. Is there anything you dont hyper-control?
Your insults are desperate projections. Pathetically incoherent jibber-jabber.

Anonymous said...

Oh, I get it. Because I said you assaulted the English language.

A little tip for you: Complete sentences are your friends.

Anonymous said...

Discerners cant rely on perfection of grammar and spelling. Thinking is required. Try it. Thinking could become your ally.

Anonymous said...

Milwaukee Wisconsin USA Aug 12, 2016
Medical Examiners Office
Heroine suspected in 20 deaths in 2 weeks.

Anonymous said...

Oh youre right anon. I cant think. Can you think for me since you're so brilliant? Piss off.

Anonymous said...

And what would you know about truth since you're a shameless two-faced liar? When is the last time truthful words left your mouth? How many decades ago?

Anonymous said...

Hows heroin get to wisconsin from middle east? Long haul. Which laundrymatt cleans it?

Anonymous said...

Political ideology influences statement analysis in these blogs.

Anonymous said...

You're anonymous sometimes and it's no secret. Troll

trustmeigetit said...


It's amazing to me how many lies Hillary can tell and her supporters don't care.

It's amazing that 40 some strange deaths have occurred to those that either oppose her, have a lot of inside information or those that were set to testify against her and her supporters don't care.

But this guy being there by accident?

No way.

Is he a democrat? No he's not.

He is Muslim and wants Sharia Law.

You can not be for Sharia Law and be a democrat. They conflict each other in every way.

He may actually be registered as one, if so I question his motives.

He supports the Taliban. Even made this clear on his radio show.

In April he was in Washington DC doing advocacy work with Congress and the State Department. Interesting..

So no, this was not just random.

And what is sad, people should be very concerned about what his motives are yet no one is asking questions.

Muslims are told to work to advance Islam. They are even in our gov't now....Some are members of the Muslim brotherhood.

Want to know the Muslim Brotherhood's motto:

"Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu akbar!

And a little quote from its founder:

"It is in the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.” —Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna

So for those ready to defend this man as just a "democratic" supporting Hillary are simply failing to really see what this religion is about.

And Trump while he has said some rude things, the things lately the media is attacking are things that were clearly taken out of context.

And with Khan....Khan was the one at fault!

Yes, Trump said to ban Muslims. But the rest of that was "until we can figure out what's going on". Several presidents have put bans in place but Trump says it and is now a racist?

Kahn was on Hillary's payroll and was used only to bash Trump.

What is really sad however is that Khans son was killed by the people Trump wants to keep out. And then he basically said Trump needed to learn the constitution. First off, Khan also wants Sharia Law so he can wave his copy but it means nothing. Second, the president is actually able to put a ban in place.


Under U.S. Code, the president does have the statutory authority to keep anyone out of the country, for any reason he thinks best. Per 8 USC §1182:

“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

So we have 2 men claiming to support democrats at Hillarys rally's when both want Sharia Law. Sharia Law is not comparable with any US laws. Period. So their support for Hillary is not for America. It's because she plans to bring in Muslims will will help advance Islam.

At the core Hillary is a woman who lied and lied and lied and yet people think she's telling he truth now about her plans? Hillary has changed her stance so many times. She does it for votes. She called blacks "super predators" and now is trying to act pro black. She was against gay marriage now she claims she's for it. Said she was even for the wall at the Mexican border but now excuses that because they called it a "fence".


So I will end with 2 questions.

How many Muslims need to kill in the name of Allah before people understand this is not a religion of peace. 1 billion, 10 billion? How many?

How many lies does Hillary need to tell for her supporters to finally stop believing her. 200, 300? How many?

Anonymous said...

What was mateens purpose in DC? Who'd he meet with? How many times & why? Lobbying for his son to be removed from watch list? This is scandalous. The issue w/ mslm relocation and concern about radicalization among those already here is about, and only about, security. Charges of racism is despicable. What is their motive?

Anonymous said...

Oh gosh just imagine what it"d mean if mateen Sr lobbied for his son"s benefit. Huge implications.

Anonymous said...

National guard in Milwaukee? Dont forget chicago, Indy, Ft Myers, cleveland, Pittsburgh

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:58 p.m., Aug. 10
You have got to be joking. Yes, pedophile priests are bad, but they make up only a small number of child molesters, most of whom are NOT gay! Gay people are no more likely to be child molesters than heterosexuals. And so you don't make this about me, I am not gay. I am a heterosexual woman. And, in the context of John Ramsey, what was he? A heterosexual man. Don't go trashing gay people and calling them pedophiles, and making up statistics about what percentage are okay, and what percentage "are not".