Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

sandiego6.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 38 posts

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#21

Post by talmand »

dram wrote: post #20
salimmadjd wrote: post #3

Two points stick out from this article: 1: > "By using the video and the distance traveled (195 feet) as well as the seconds that lapsed prior to the explosion – in his opinion, the car was traveling roughly 35 mph." 2: > "The pre-explosion could possibly explain the flash of light on the video that preceded the appearance of the car in the video. The pre-explosion and slower speed could also explain the minimal dama…

The article and your comment are misleading. Despite the professor's calculation, it contradicts other evidence including the eye witnesses. Michael Krikorian observes that Hastings' car was going at least twice as fast as the other cars in the video. He estimated that the car was travelling at least 80 mph. And the video from Loudlabs' clearly shows Hastings' car speeding through a red light prior to the crash. And…

Well, I'm not a special effects expert but I would assume a bomb placed between the engine block and the firewall would indeed push the engine forward. One placed beneath the engine would seem to push it upward. Until placement (big if on placement in the first place) is determined, it doesn't seem likely to be able to explain the results.

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#22

Post by tptacek »

It's weird, there was a (stupid) debate on HN a ~month ago about whether cars "explode" the way Hastings seemed to have (it smoldered on despite the photographer who pointed out how much more violent the flames would have seen due to nighttime videography, and despite the EMT who posted his experiences dealing with car fires, and despite the posted video of a car almost literally appearing to explode when it ran into a tollbooth).

And anyways, what's weird is that since then I've driven past two horrible vehicle fires. One was on the west side of Chicago, a high-end Lexus on the side of the road roaring with flames as if someone had thrown a grenade into it. The other was a semi driving on the inbound Ike --- driving lazily across 4 lanes of traffic while burning so violently that little flaming chunks of it were flying off it and bouncing off the road in front of me, so hot that it was actually uncomfortable to drive past it (what else do you do?) even with the windows shut and the AC on.

The people who say it's implausible for routine circumstances to cause a car to burn violently don't know what they're talking about.

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#23

Post by Tloewald »

dram wrote: post #20
salimmadjd wrote: post #3

Two points stick out from this article: 1: > "By using the video and the distance traveled (195 feet) as well as the seconds that lapsed prior to the explosion – in his opinion, the car was traveling roughly 35 mph." 2: > "The pre-explosion could possibly explain the flash of light on the video that preceded the appearance of the car in the video. The pre-explosion and slower speed could also explain the minimal dama…

The article and your comment are misleading. Despite the professor's calculation, it contradicts other evidence including the eye witnesses. Michael Krikorian observes that Hastings' car was going at least twice as fast as the other cars in the video. He estimated that the car was travelling at least 80 mph. And the video from Loudlabs' clearly shows Hastings' car speeding through a red light prior to the crash. And…

The single biggest piece of evidence is that the engine and drive shaft were blown 200' away from the rest of the wreck. That seems like quite a big explosion, based on my extensive viewing of Mythbusters.

I doubt any witnesses saw much beyond the fireballs (which would have ruined their night vision), so whether the car was thrown up or not is unlikely to have been noted.

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#24

Post by unclebucknasty »

dram wrote: post #20
salimmadjd wrote: post #3

Two points stick out from this article: 1: > "By using the video and the distance traveled (195 feet) as well as the seconds that lapsed prior to the explosion – in his opinion, the car was traveling roughly 35 mph." 2: > "The pre-explosion could possibly explain the flash of light on the video that preceded the appearance of the car in the video. The pre-explosion and slower speed could also explain the minimal dama…

The article and your comment are misleading. Despite the professor's calculation, it contradicts other evidence including the eye witnesses. Michael Krikorian observes that Hastings' car was going at least twice as fast as the other cars in the video. He estimated that the car was travelling at least 80 mph. And the video from Loudlabs' clearly shows Hastings' car speeding through a red light prior to the crash. And…

I'm not clear on a few things here:

>Michael Krikorian observes that Hastings' car was going at least twice as fast as the other cars in the video.

Does that tell us anything without knowing how fast the other cars were going? For instance, could they have been slowing for a light as the article suggests?

>He estimated that the car was traveling at least 80 mph.

Not sure why some dude looking and estimating (i.e. "eyewitness") is more reliable than calculations based on time/distance caught on video? Granted he could have been slowing down or speeding up, but that could be so with the eyeballed account or the video. So, still not sure why this "eyewitness" estimate has more weight than the video in your mind?

>And the video from Loudlabs' clearly shows Hastings' car speeding through a red light prior to the crash.

Speed could have changed between then and the accident a couple minutes later, right?

>And the expert noted that a bomb would blow the car and engine upwards and not forwards.

Why couldn't it be both? In fact, even if the engine were blown upward, wouldn't it still have inertia from the car's forward momentum, thus also continue traveling forward?

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#25

Post by unclebucknasty »

jmadsen wrote: post #18

I just brought up Michael Hastings' death in a conversation yesterday - I think that, more important than the death itself, the lesson to be learned from this incident is how many "non-tinfoil hat" types who would have just rolled their eyes before are now willing to entertain the notion that he was assassinated by our own govt. Before, this would be the point where I say, "my guts tells me it was just.." Now, my gut…

What's funny is that the "burden of proof" to even open people to the possibility of an alternative explanation is so much higher than that required to prove the "official story" (i.e. none for the latter).

As a result, the "official story" almost always stands because it doesn't require evidence. Even if that story makes zero sense whatsoever, people don't tend to consider that there could even be an alternative explanation, unless such an explanation can be exhaustively detailed and proven.

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#26

Post by achughes »

talmand wrote: post #19
eli wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oof. I'm not going to argue with you, but that is pretty classic conspiracy theory logic.

It wasn't too long ago that there were classic conspiracy theories about the NSA that would get you labeled as a crackpot which have recently been shown to be true.

See: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/opinion/the-national-secur...

and

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/

It was hardly a conspiracy theory.

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#27

Post by dram »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #24
dram wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article and your comment are misleading. Despite the professor's calculation, it contradicts other evidence including the eye witnesses. Michael Krikorian observes that Hastings' car was going at least twice as fast as the other cars in the video. He estimated that the car was travelling at least 80 mph. And the video from Loudlabs' clearly shows Hastings' car speeding through a red light prior to the crash. And…

I'm not clear on a few things here: > Michael Krikorian observes that Hastings' car was going at least twice as fast as the other cars in the video. Does that tell us anything without knowing how fast the other cars were going? For instance, could they have been slowing for a light as the article suggests? > He estimated that the car was traveling at least 80 mph. Not sure why some dude looking and estimating (i.e. "…

Fair points but the author of the article, Kimberly Dvorak, appears convinced that Hastings' was murdered. It seems she found someone to support a theory that his car was travelling 35MPH. I think you can deduce from him speeding through the red light, the lack of brake lights in the 2nd video, the witness who said the car was travelling 100MPH, and the nature of the impact that he was in fact driving very fast.

If the video evidence was so clear that he was travelling 35MPH, I'm sure other people would be supporting this claim which would easily confirm a bomb was used.

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#28

Post by jtc331 »

eli wrote: post #12
j2d3 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I'll go with the "gut" feeling of someone who couldn't possibly have been pressured by anyone to say anything in particular when she goes on a TV show that will be seen internationally.

Oof. I'm not going to argue with you, but that is pretty classic conspiracy theory logic.

It might be more conspiratorial if the US government hadn't already assassinated no less than 4 American citizens which it immediately covered up and systematically lied about the age and combatant status of said individuals in order to calm the outrage.

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#29

Post by dram »

jmadsen wrote: post #18

I just brought up Michael Hastings' death in a conversation yesterday - I think that, more important than the death itself, the lesson to be learned from this incident is how many "non-tinfoil hat" types who would have just rolled their eyes before are now willing to entertain the notion that he was assassinated by our own govt. Before, this would be the point where I say, "my guts tells me it was just.." Now, my gut…

Here's a story about an FBI FOIA document that included the language, "planned to engage in sniper attacks against protestors in Houston, Texas, if deemed necessary." The plotters names are redacted but seems rather disturbing-

http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/06/27/fbi-document-deleted-plots-...

Re: CIA Director Brennan Confirmed as Reporter Michael Hastings' Next Target

#30

Post by [deleted] »

talmand wrote: post #19
eli wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oof. I'm not going to argue with you, but that is pretty classic conspiracy theory logic.

It wasn't too long ago that there were classic conspiracy theories about the NSA that would get you labeled as a crackpot which have recently been shown to be true.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN