| Author | Message | ||
     Macbuell |
It does make sense ... and if you add the psychopathic side effects of the anti-depressants that might have made him think this was a good idea ... you have a recipe for a disaster. | ||
| Ourdee |
I'm running out of tin foil. I am looking at pink man and can't help but notice his partner. I say partner because I remember observing a set of agents in other videos a while back at a "protest". Spikes my interest in who he worked for. | ||
| Sifo |
Here's one question ... there were reports about all of this gun purchases but did he ever shoot the guns at a gun range. If he did have a dislike for guns and gun laws and this was all about that political statement, did he ever actually fire the weapons he purchased? Prior to that night? That brings up some other things worth considering. He was a gun owner prior to this. Known to have about half a dozen guns. He certainly doesn't seem to fit the mold of an anti-gun fanatic. It has been pointed out that the vast majority of what he owned, was purchased since Trump won the election. I would think that may be a significant piece of the puzzle, understanding when he was gearing up for this. He purchased single guns at a time, from numerous gun shops, in a way that kept him off the radar. That's before he was supposedly turned by ISIS, so a strike against that theory. So tweak the anti-gun thing just slightly, and make it an anti-Trump theory. Certainly fits the time line for purchasing the guns. It certainly fits with him wearing a vagina on his head. It certainly fits with the mantra we have been bombarded with recently, where violence is OK against a NAZI, and Trump supporters are NAZIs. In one of the videos of him wearing a vagina, he was greeted by name by one of the event organizers. I have to question... Why are we being told he had no political leanings, despite evidence to the contrary being openly available? All I'm saying is that when the official version of events differs from what can be easily learned in public information, you have to question what that information is telling us. | ||
| Ratbuell |
Also don't forget the widespread (and unfortunately widely tweeted) view that "all those country fans are gun-toting Republicans anyway"... Public information is one thing...for those of us smart (or concerned) enough to actually LOOK for it. For the MSM's sheep audience, though...well, it doesn't mean dick unless the sheeple get a chance to see it. And since the MSM refuses to mention ANY of it... | ||
| Rick_a |
In the middle of the muddled truths, the wild conspiracy theories, and the media circus...usually the truth gets out somewhere in there and people tend not to care as the circus and theories are far more exciting. We'll see. There's more to it. Most of the violent wackos lately have shared a thing for Bernie Sanders. His daily propaganda is literally crazy, and nobody cares. It's been since Reagan that capitalism and America weren't dirty words, and the flag as a sign of some historic and ongoing oppression was lifted for a minute. Some wacko tried to kill him, too...and there was certainly a legion of moonbats and frenzied liberals to contend with then, as well. They just didn't go out and riot and shoot people, as far as I can remember. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Something just don't add up. I just saw a timeline of this shooting. According to this timeline, this homicidal maniac shot for 10 minutes then "offed" himself for no apparent reason. Cops did not breach the room for an hour and 15 minutes after the shooting started. Granted this timeframe MAY have been shorter if the shooting continued...PLUS he seemed to have a camera system setup so he could see the exactly when his room was being approached, presumably so he could kill himself at the last possible moment...therefore maximize the maximum number of victims on the ground. So you are telling me a homicidal, suicidal maniac with an arsenal at his disposal just decides to kill himself 10 minutes into his moment of glory? And that's after very sporadic shooting for the 10 minutes he was actively shooting. Sorry, I don't get it. The details just don't add up to me. Anyone "competent" would have had all those guns locked and loaded, then when those were exhausted, he would have two or three of his favorites to cycle through in order to keep them from overheating. It's maniacal and evil, but it's not rocket science. (Message edited by fresnobuell on October 11, 2017) | ||
| Macbuell |
Now there is a story going around the Internet the Soros shorted MGM stock for for $42M right before the attack. Someone should be able to confirm that as there would be a record of the transaction. | ||
| Mtnmason |
Don't forget the part of the official story that claims he fired 200 rds at the security guard BEFORE opening up on the concert audience. Why? Didn't he supposedly have cameras monitoring the hall? Wouldn't he have seen that there was only one person out there? Of course we haven't seen any pictures but I'm sure we can all imagine what that hallway (the down-range portion anyway) might look like in the after math. It's inconceivable that that many rounds would be dumped down an empty hall and not strike something of value, if not another person in another room. Consider the layout of the building. Also, was the door open or closed at that point? Wouldn't be much left of the door assuming that all 200 rds didn't go through the same hole. Plus if he were hell bent on killing as many people as possible at the concert, why waste 200 rds on one person in a hallway? The FBI has done quite a lot to discredit themselves over the past several years. This may be among the most damning. Second only to not bringing charges against HRC. (Message edited by mtnmason on October 11, 2017) | ||
| Rick_a |
Interesting perspective. Some of her assumptions are a stretch, but it all sounds plausible. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg_Z-oEEt-c | ||
| Mtnmason |
Forgot to mention - Paddock's Reno home was broken into either last night or night before. Shouldn't the properties of the most effective mass murderer in modern history be locked down pretty tight while an investigation is underway? This is either incompetence on a massive scale or we are being purposefully misled. | ||
| Rick_a |
Anything of evidentiary value should have been long removed, but that's still pretty bad. This no impact, no idea narrative on the motive is a tough pill to swallow. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Paddock is either the most incompetent mass murderer of all time (which is ironic because the "stats" say otherwise if they are true) OR we are being lied to. My vote is for the latter. | ||
| Torquehd |
If you're assuming that pink-hat man is paddock... please think about this. You're basing your opinion off of something like a 640x480 video. While it may be him, I think the conspiracy nuts are going to see Paddock anywhere they look and proclaim, "this is him!" So, those 70-some-odd-pixels may be him, but I think the odds are against assuming it is him. 200 rounds down the hall sounds stupid. I can't believe it. NO ONE would do that. Assuming those were 100 round magazine, that means he emptied TWO JUMBO-SIZED magazines with a slide-lock reload. How was no one else struck by a stray bullet? How did Jesus Campos (i believe that was the security guard's name) SURVIVE being barraged by 200 rounds? I don't believe that a hotel guest could sling 200 rounds in a five star hotel, and still have the cops take 72 minutes to arrive. | ||
| Sifo |
If you're assuming that pink-hat man is paddock... please think about this. You're basing your opinion off of something like a 640x480 video. While it may be him, I think the conspiracy nuts are going to see Paddock anywhere they look and proclaim, "this is him!" So, those 70-some-odd-pixels may be him, but I think the odds are against assuming it is him. The evidence is a bit stronger than that. 1) It's not a random anti-Trump rally. It's a rally local to Paddock 2) There is video of him in his vagina hat being greeted by name at the anti-Trump rally. Is it 100%? Probably not. Is it worth chasing as a lead? I certainly would answer yes to that question. 200 rounds down the hall sounds stupid. I can't believe it. NO ONE would do that. Assuming those were 100 round magazine, that means he emptied TWO JUMBO-SIZED magazines with a slide-lock reload. How was no one else struck by a stray bullet? How did Jesus Campos (i believe that was the security guard's name) SURVIVE being barraged by 200 rounds? I don't believe that a hotel guest could sling 200 rounds in a five star hotel, and still have the cops take 72 minutes to arrive. My understanding of this, and I could be wrong, is that he didn't shoot down the hallway, but rather blindly into the hallway, from inside his room. Basically spraying through the door and wall. Now for something completely different, and back to the 2nd shooter theory... The taxi driver video, to me certainly sounds like 2 shooters. The taxi driver makes that comment in the video too. That much is nothing but amateur opinion, not scientific evidence. Here's what I would consider pretty convincing scientific evidence of the second shooter. The science is pretty basic. Yes he could be full of sh!t, making up his data. That would be easy to verify by anyone with basic sound analysis tools. I'm not sure what the motive would be to fake this data. Are we getting the real story? | ||
| Snacktoast |
Are we getting the real story? Clearly, I think the answer to that question is a resounding "hell no!". I'm no conspiracy theorist, and in most cases I dismiss those theories as crazy, but there's much more to this that the public has either been purposely mislead about thus far, or massive amounts are being withheld. I can understand withholding information if they are following leads, as I'm sure they are. However, with the bullshit media we have these days antsy to report anything and everything whether they verify it or not, it sure makes for quite the roller coaster ride. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2017/10/11/ ann-coulter-media-begging-us-conspiracy-theories-l as-vegas/ | ||
| Mtnmason |
Thanks for posting that video, Sifo. I saw it back on Mon or Tues and meant to bring it here. I wouldn't necessarily consider it shit-tier science but it is rather flawed for one main reason. We can't truly hear the rounds making impact (with tarmac, soft tissue or anything else) from the videos available. If there is a sound audible from the video that sounds like a projectile making impact, how do we verify? Even further, if we can verify that a sound we heard is a round making impact, which muzzle report do you link it too if not the 1st or last round fired? My main frustration with all this is that we have no recourse. We've been given an official story that does not come close to passing the smell test, EVERYONE is at the very least skeptical, but what are you going to do? What is the FBI hiding and why? Anyone here interested in arming up and storming the Hoover building tomorrow morning? /s On another note, has anyone heard the reports of Soros shorting a bunch of MGM stocks prior to this happening? Very strange coincidence even for someone who normally eschews the tin foil in such situations. | ||
| Sifo |
We can't truly hear the rounds making impact (with tarmac, soft tissue or anything else) from the videos available. If there is a sound audible from the video that sounds like a projectile making impact, how do we verify? Even further, if we can verify that a sound we heard is a round making impact, which muzzle report do you link it too if not the 1st or last round fired? I'm not so sure the analysis is flawed. He discusses how the impacts, are at a different frequency than the reports. That makes it pretty easy to filter out the background noise, letting the data of interest become apparent. Any of the shots could be analyzed in this manner, but the easy ones are obviously near the beginning or end of a burst. Flaws I did see are that he used ballistics data for a .223, not a 5.56. Probably close enough for the purpose at hand though. If there was a change in weapons, where he was suddenly shooting .308, there would possibly be a change in the time between impact and report. I don't know the ballistics off the top of my head, but I really doubt it would account for the difference in the calculations. I also haven't heard of anything but 5.56 being fired. We may not have those facts though. I'm not 100% sold on the second shooter thing, but there is a lot of evidence that supports the idea. I would love to hear it all refuted, point by point based on known facts. It seems like they just decided they have their shooter... case closed! I hope they did their due diligence, but we seen the FBI involved in some pretty crappy stuff in recent years that leaves me skeptical of them when their story doesn't seem to be supported by known facts. | ||
| Mtnmason |
I'm not 100% sold on the second shooter thing, but there is a lot of evidence that supports the idea. I would love to hear it all refuted, point by point based on known facts. The big give away would be spent casings found somewhere other than the room Paddock was in. Unless, of course, the shooter was using a brass catcher or bothered to clean up after him. Neither very likely given the number of rounds expended. | ||
| Aesquire |
I'm just speculating here, so use plenty of salt, and feel free to correct me When I'm factually wrong out of ignorance. The Shooter whoever she was, smuggled a big pile of guns and ammo up to a Hotel room past casino security. Interesting, but not proof. Conspiracy Theory nuts (CT) would make the case that someone in Casino security was part of it and ignored/erased footage of the shooter or accomplices. I'm not sure about the security of the footage, If I ran security the footage would be redundantly stored to prevent a bribed guard from erasing cheaters. OTOH the police say there are issues with the timeline on the security recordings. This indicates incompetence or tampering. The shooter used 2 different windows to shoot at the concert and airport fuel tanks. The assumption of the FBI is that ONLY a few rounds were fired at the Fuel tanks from window 1 and all the rest at the concert from window 2. Don't know if they are basing this on piles of spent casings, Both windows face the concert, but one appears to have a limited view. Moving back and forth from window to window would account for very large differences in sound from one string of fire to another. Different faces of the hotel very different echos. The political and religious affiliations of the alleged shooter come form one source, the Brother. What the Girlfriend has to say is not known. The total unwillingness to investigate the matter by the press is normal if they are under orders to do so, or the information handed to them fits their own narrative. Since their own narrative and the propaganda of the Clintons is the same, it's hard to tell what kind of conspiracy the press is involved with, pure evil, or mostly evil, and ultimately it doesn't matter. Until someone tries to publish a tell all book and is shot in the back of the head in a "failed mugging". There has been zip forensic data released. Even an intern can tell the difference between .30 and .22 caliber rifle bullets, but nothing. Also besides the "bump stock" stories, there have been no reports on any actual full auto weapons employed. I remind you that while you certainly cam tell the difference between a M-16 with 3 round burst or Vietnam era full auto weapons, or bump stock irregular stuttering, with experience, the Press being utterly ignorant, cannot. I challenge anyone to tell the difference between me manually firing quickly and full auto. You might be able to, The old fart that Barack gave the tingles to certainly would not, and Dan Rather might, but he'd Lie about it for a Higher Calling Than Truth, destroying Bush/Trump. As to 5.56 vs. .223, there isn't enough difference to matter for an acoustic analysis. The difference that matter to shooters is mostly the pressure problem of shooting 5.56 NATO spec ( higher pressure limits) ammo in a .223 chamber, which has a smaller dimension allowed in the neck of the chamber, and a much shorter distance from the mouth of the cartridge to the Leade of the lands & grooves in the barrel, raising pressure even higher, and creating a hazard that you could split or shatter the barrel explosively.   A quick check of 5.56 spec ammo and .223 ammo with the Same Bullet from Black Hills shows a 200 fps to no difference in speed. Black Hills makes ammo for the military and civilians and in MY experience is utterly reliable and accurate, even the re-manufactured ammo that uses once fired brass. In the "more accurate than me" AR I owned ( and is now in the hands of a Marine son of a good friend ) Black Hills re-man shot as good as if not better than any other brand with the same weight bullet. ( my rifle liked 55 & 62 grain bullets but didn't like heavier as much ) So you can ignore the ".223 error" at the ranges involved. I don't know which specific ammo he assumed. | ||
| Aesquire |
This is a pure speculation Conspiracy Theory. (CT), completely made up with no evidence by me, based on some questions I have. If the Mandalay bay and the concert are 450 yards apart, that's pretty good shooting for anything other than a machine gun/full automatic. That doesn't count bump stocks that would spray over a larger area than the entire concert venue in my experience. ( if you are an expert shot with these toys, please correct me ) If the Apartment building only 200 yards from the concert, had a "second shooter" IN A ROOM, not on the roof, shooting with sound baffles, recordings would show the report of the firing and the crack of the supersonic bullets, but a bystander wouldn't be able to tell direction. I don't know of footage that shows bullets coming in from nearly 90 degrees to the Mandalay Bay shooter. That would be proof of a second shooter. The police possess the information if it exists. It's pretty easy and common forensics. But, for this CT, assume a second shooter at the apartment building, and that he is the primary killer with the shooter from the Hotel spraying randomly all over the place. The Hotel Shooter is the patsy, intended to die, and be blamed. The Apt. shooter is intended to escape. Presumably the control, or leader. This scenario doesn't reveal a motive, but might fit the facts on the ground. If there is a Conspiracy, it would be by very evil men. The list of Evil people who use violence to push their agendas is long, but the most likely would not be disgruntled Masons upset about events in France before the Protestant Reformation, but would be people who have recently shown a willingness to murder and lie. That gets us down to Obedient Islam and Leftists/Marxists. ( that includes fascists/nazis/Soviets/Maoists, since they are competitors, but much alike ) So my pick for the BAD GUY in this CT is the Clinton Campaign. Look at motive. Hillary wants a comeback cause and gun control is already hers. The Clintons have left a trail of dead by suicide and other causes behind them in their careers, with unsolved cases older than Bernie Voters. The Clinton Campaign hired the mentally ill to beat up old people at Trump rallies, and has ties to the Soros organizations, who have a trail of unsolved murders behind them in multiple countries. So it's obvious there are no moral qualms about a staged mass murder in the minds of the Clinton Campaign. I, of course have no proof, and I still require utter silence from all the conspirators, but I figure we only need about 3 more people than the dead guy in the Hotel. A second shooter/mastermind. A deniable connection between the mastermind and Hillary, and Hillary. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/10/ve gas_gunmans_use_of_bump_stock_reduced_casualties.h tml Statistically speaking I agree. Emotionally is a harder argument because then facts don't matter. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/10/wh y_i_oppose_banning_bump_stocks.html I agree. It's not the Bump stock, or the rifle. It's the lie for power, Period. The use of a made up term like "Assault Weapon", which until the Wiki article was purged, correctly defined as a word meant to inspire fear in the ignorant created by an anti-civil rights activist. That says it all. | ||
| Mtnmason |
As if this whole story wasn't already beyond suspicious: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/13/las-vegas-sec urity-guard-jesus-campos-disappears-moments-before -tv-interviews.html If I had to propose some CT angle around this, I would say that Campos went up to the 32nd floor and saw something that he was not supposed to see. It's anybody's guess what happens to this guy in the coming days/weeks. | ||
| Sifo |
Statistically speaking I agree. Emotionally is a harder argument because then facts don't matter. Mostly, I agree. In this specific case though, I do think the bump stock probably added to the casualty count. No doubt that at that range, his ability to "aim" was close to nil. The crowds at such an event make so that you really don't need to aim at a target. You simply have to point at the mass, and you are going to get a hit percentage that would likely put police hit ratio statistics to shame. Sure, when you pull the trigger, the muzzle will rise off target, just like when you pull the trigger on a pressure washer wand. In a similar manner, you will be able to pull it back down and point it at what you want to spray. Will it do any good to ban a bump stock though? Given that anyone with internet access and a file can modify a standard trigger group to auto fire quite easily. All you have to do, is do what you are warned not to do in so many videos. Sure, it will lack the ability to stop firing if you let go of the trigger, but if I'm doing what this idiot did, what do I care? An AR modified like that will probably dump a 100 round mag in under 10 seconds anyway, so what's the issue. Banning the bump stock would slow only the least motivated mass murderers. It might even lead to someone looking for more creative ways of killing people when they are packed in a crowd. Banning the tool, simply is not the correct answer. | ||
| Torquehd |
I disagree that the bump stock produced fewer overall casualties. Fewer deaths than if he had been plinking through a can, yes. But, rounds down range is what produced such a high number of casualties. If he was taking slow, well aimed shots, he would have had to have taken about 600 shots. That's 20 standard 30 round mags. That's 10 continual minutes at 1 round per second (which is NOT slow), which he would not have been able to sustain. A bump stock does decrease accuracy of a POINT target, but he didn't have a point target, or even point targetS. He had one massive area target. As I mentioned earlier, when you're firing cyclic, you don't even need sights. Point the gun down range and walk the rounds onto the target. If I were him I would have used tracers just for added effect. I know for me personally, the visual effect of being able to see the rounds coming at you is scarier than simply hearing them snap and whip around you. Hearing them is bad enough but hearing and seeing a stream of fire and lead is scary AF. Throwing the maximum amount of lead downrange in the least amount of time at a dense area target is what created such a huge casualty list. The shooter had a fully automatic weapon, no matter your stance on bump stocks. And fully automatic weapons are illegal unless you have the proper FFL or someother wazoo legal loophole. | ||
| Aesquire |
Actually we don't KNOW what the shooter had. We only have a few photos that were staged. One report is that there were boxes of tracers in the room, he apparently didn't use. I haven't watched the whole video with the "forensic sound guy" yet, but the bits I have do NOT sound like the stutter of a bump stock. So He may indeed have had a fully automatic weapon. I'm not buying any of the theories yet... except the one about Harvey the fat rapist who, says the CT, was doing a movie about Israel and the persecution is in payback for that. So he's going to attack the NRA to get back in the graces of the Jew hating Progressives his Movie offended. I actually buy that one. I could be wrong and I'm taking bets, but it does explain the sudden change of heart at the NY Times that has refused to publish stories about his alleged sex crimes for decades. What else could make the Left eat their own, Except Supporting Israel? | ||
| Mtnmason |
This video covers a lot of info already discussed here. I find it relevant to share as it does discuss the shots fired that night at Bellagio. For whatever reason, that detail has been washed from the story line. Sargon (creator of vid) pieces together all the official information released. When viewed together, it really brings into focus how the FBI's narrative has been botched from the get go. I couldn't devote all 45 min (yet) but if this event is still of interest to you it is certainly worth investing some time. Edit: The concert attendees testimony is worth a hear if you don't have time for all of it. FF to 33:18 (Message edited by mtnmason on October 13, 2017) | ||
| Aesquire |
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/us/las-vegas -timeline.html?referer=http://www.drudgereport.com / The Sheriff says there is no conspiracy between the FBI and the Hotel. How would he know? Technically he's the victim. This is a combination of bad reporting, fake certainty by the police in the beginning of an investigation and butt covering. My rule of thumb is to pay close attention to the initial reports. They are almost always wrong, since it's too early and most of the forensic stuff takes time. Then I watch with mild interest as the back tracking and butt covering takes center stage. ( where we are now ) Later we'll get more details but not all since anything in the news is poison in a trial. Just because there are no captured or sought after parties in crime, yet, doesn't mean the police will tell you everything. Early days yet. By poison I mean everything on the news gets into the thoughts of jurors. So a defense lawyer can get the court to order the jury to ignore any evidence that the Sheriff or FBI or Hotel leaks or gives out in a press conference. CNN, for example has already made bump stocks a problem after lying about them, provably, obviously. There are, however, times the initial reports are the most honest. Full of errors, perhaps, but untainted by cover-up, corporate or government. I see this a lot in plane crash reporting. The reporter knows nothing about airplanes, so he'll have stuff stupidly wrong, but his sources may have told him facts that later they are under threat of firing or prison or disappearing to not talk about. Far too soon to point fingers. Except at Hillary. She deserves it.  . | ||
| Torquehd |
As I said earlier, "official stories" are as much CYA as to find the truth. No one likes an investigation. Policies, guidance, SOP's get broken all the time. But if you just fudge the numbers a little bit, bump the timelines and who said what to who, and who did what with what, well then suddenly you go from being technically wrong to being a hero in a matter of a few paragraphs and a signature. There may be some crazy communist muslim democrat clinton foundation conspiracy... that would never come to light because the local PD will do everything in their power to present themselves flawless in their handling of the situation. Good luck finding the truth. Perception is reality. I'm becoming CityXslicker version 2.0. | ||
| Rick_a |
Machinegunnery is an art.   |
