I set aside some time for more details of the Vegas shooting to emerge before writing this article. A few important data points have been released, but I have to say that this remains one of the most confusing terror incidents in decades.
The tactical and strategic thought applied in this attack denotes a sophisticated and experienced shooter, yet, we are told by Stephen Paddock's family and girlfriend that there was no indication that he had such knowledge or experience. There were some advanced tactical decisions involved in every aspect of the staging of the event, yet, there were also a few glaring mistakes that do not fit. Beyond this, there is evidence that Paddock (the alleged shooter) did not act alone, yet, the official mainstream narrative continues to tell us that he was a lone wolf.
Now, every terror event these days produces an endless supply of alternative theories, some practical and some ridiculous. I will be keeping my theories to a minimum here, because I don't think they serve much purpose in this instance beyond comfort for those that desperately want explanations. What I will be doing is presenting some questions and pointing out inconsistencies. My goal is merely to show that there is evidence which indicates far more complexity to the Vegas shooting than the mainstream media and federal officials are willing to discuss.
First, lets look at how the attack was staged versus what we are told about the background of Stephen Paddock.
Mass Shooter Psychological Profile
Psychological disposition is the root of tactical behavior. It is important to note that mass shootings are an extremely rare occurrence despite the propaganda often poured onto the pages of the mainstream media. Psychological profiling of the people behind these crimes is difficult because the number of candidates is very small. There are, however, some common themes.
For example — many mass shooters are motivated by revenge or envy. Shooters often exhibit signs of sociopathy, a self-centered nature and a lack of compassion along with past instances of abuse and violence towards other people and animals. There is also usually a previous history of mental illness. In most cases there is a "triggering event" which leads to a psychological break and a reaction to violence.
According to the personal accounts from the people that knew Paddock, including his girlfriend, none of these attributes seems to fit. Marilou Danley described him as a "kind and caring man," stating that he had never taken any action which would have led her to believe he was capable of such violence. The only factor that stands as evidence of a potential psychological break is the fact that Paddock was prescribed the anti-anxiety drug diazepam months prior, which has been known to cause aggression when taken in larger doses.
Did Paddock take this drug because of unrelated anxiety and did it trigger his shooting spree? Or, was his anxiety caused by the fact that he was already planning a shooting spree and the drug was meant to "take the edge off" so he could more easily follow through with the attack?
Paddock was prescribed the drug once in 2016 and on June 21st of this year. I have seen no evidence that he was using the medication in the days before the attack. The meticulous planning that went into this attack, as well as possible evidence that Paddock was renting rooms adjacent to major musical events for some time, shows that this was not initiated by a psychological break. Rather, there was a considerable level of conscious critical thought and foresight.
There is also no available evidence of domestic instability or financial troubles. Paddock was a multi-millionaire with a successful real estate investment portfolio. He was a former postal worker and tax auditor, as well as an employee for defense contractor Lockheed Martin (I have not seen any statements by Lockheed on what exactly he did for them). It should be noted that Paddock, at age 64, was one of the oldest mass shooters in recent history.
Paddock's father, a bank robber on the FBI's Most Wanted list, was not present for the most of the early lives of the children according to his brother, Eric Paddock, which undermines the notion of poor environmental influences.
Eric Paddock claims Stephen also had no strong ideological or religious leanings and simply "didn't care" about such matters. Meaning, no apparent ties to extremist views. He had no social media profiles and police claim they have found nothing in his home computers or phones to suggest a philosophical or political motive. So far I have not seen a single concrete and verified piece of evidence proving Paddock believed in anything other than making money, gambling and traveling the world for fun.
I personally find this extremely hard to believe. Stephen Paddock, for all intents and purposes, was positively the perfect "Gray Man," a ghost that blended completely into the background, so much so that his own family and girlfriend had no idea that he was amassing the weapons and training needed to pull off the Vegas attack.
The Tactical Know-How Of A Nobody
This is the area which brings up the most questions for me in terms of the Vegas incident. As an avid tactical shooter and long distance shooter, I immediately recognized some strange factors. For instance, the choice of his perch, two adjacent rooms on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel, was rather effective for a number of reasons.
If you have the chance to study counter-sniping methodologies or talk with veterans involved in counter-sniping in urban areas, you will learn that the most successful snipers tend to choose mid-ground perches to take shots from. Meaning, they never choose the highest points nor the lowest points, and never shoot from the closest points or the furthest points. Well trained snipers can and do sometimes shoot from 1,000 yards or more, but they prefer to shoot from the "sweet spot" around 300-400 yards away at an elevated point from an expedient hide in the middle of a building or structure.
They do this because when people (including trained combat soldiers) are shot at, their eyes naturally tend to scan for the highest points in the background and the closest points in the foreground first. Choosing mid-ground positions makes snipers more difficult to pick out quickly and also harder for the average person to shoot back at.
I would note that average, untrained mass shooters are more likely to enter a crowd and start shooting at point blank range in order to ensure hits on targets. Paddock chose the position of a trained shooter, which you can see a photo of in this article by The New Yorker. It was NOT the best possible position, but a very good one.
Paddock's choice to fire from the position of a large occupied hotel gave a layer of cover to his attack; anyone attempting to suppress him with their own fire would risk hitting innocent people within the building. Only a person with an understanding of counter-sniping and a scoped rifle would have the ability to stop the attack from outside. Nevada is a very concealed carry friendly state and attacking a crowd at close range on the ground would be a high risk scenario. Firing from the Mandalay was the shooter's most likely chance of a high body count without meeting opposition, as long as he had the proper training.
The first room Paddock used in the Mandalay is in the corner of the 32nd floor with a view of the concert area and the north. It has a diagonal range of around 400 yards and a linear range of around 240 yards. When firing from an elevated position snipers range targets and bullet drop according to the shorter linear range or "true ballistic distance" (base of the ground to the target) rather than the direct range from their perch to the target. This is because gravity only affects the bullet over the true ballistic distance and elevation in a scope must be adjusted to that distance. It is not as easy as it seems to hit targets from an elevated position, even with an "automatic" weapon.
It has been recently stated by Las Vegas police that the "note" found near Paddock's body was scribbled with calculations for bullet drop from his position. These calculations can be done with newer laser rangefinders, but Stephen apparently chose to do them on paper. Las Vegas Detective Casey Clarkson was on the grounds of the concert during the attack, and recounted "I'm like, how is he so accurate" (in reference to Paddock) in an interview with 60 Minutes. Yet another piece of evidence showing that Paddock (or someone else) had extensive shooter training.
The two adjacent rooms at the Mandalay offered extensive coverage of possible approaches for first responders. The first room gave the shooter good coverage of the concert and the north approach of Las Vegas Blvd. The second room gave the shooter a very wide angle of coverage to the south approach to the Mandalay as well as the main entrance of the hotel. More tactical know-how on display.
Finally, Paddock allegedly placed small surveillance cameras in the hall approaching his room. A valuable tool which a shooter could use to surprise law enforcement, maintaining a longer period of shooter effectiveness as well as possibly allowing for an escape. Las Vegas police are quoted as stating that it appeared as though Paddock had planned to evade capture. This fits in line with the rest of his tactical staging. His suicide does not.
Things That Don't Add Up
Again, I am not going to enter into much discussion on theory, here. I am only going to cite some instances of evidence and narrative that, for me, do not make sense. Let's begin...
The motive: No apparent motive. Paddock led a life of near luxury, had a happy relationship with his girlfriend and gave no indication to anyone of any instability or ideological affiliation. He had no criminal record. He was also well beyond the average age range of people commonly involved in such crimes. He does not fit any of the characteristics of mass shooters. Period.
The arsenal: Paddock put a substantial amount of thought and planning into the position of his perch as well as a potential escape. He had the knowledge and experience to calculate accurate shots from an elevated position at distance. But, for some reason the 64-year-old-man decided it was warranted to drag at least 23 guns and hundreds of pounds of ammunition in ten separate suitcases to his room at the Mandalay Bay. A person with the intelligence displayed in the planning of this event would know that most of these rifles were not needed in the slightest to achieve the effect desired. They are dead weight, and moving them into the Mandalay only presented unnecessary risk of discovery. Unless, of course, the original plan involved multiple shooters.
A strange year?: Family and acquaintances have mentioned Paddock's propensity for "disappearing" in the year previous to the Vegas attack. And, there is the fact that 33 of the 47 firearms Paddock owned were purchased in the last 12 months.
Security calls: Paddock called hotel security at least twice to complain about "loud music" on the floor below him the day of the shooting. Why would a mass shooter care, or take the risk of drawing too much attention to himself?
The windows: Why, after so much careful planning, did Paddock expose his position by smashing two separate windows in his adjacent hotel rooms? There are other ways of providing a shooter's loophole with less exposure? Very odd. Almost as if the decision to actually shoot was made suddenly, which does not fit the rest of the narrative or evidence.
"Unrelated" room alarm leads security right to Paddock: The Las Vegas Sheriffs Department indicates that security was originally led directly to the floor that Paddock was shooting from by a "door alarm" that was set off by someone three rooms down from him. Now, authorities have been forced to admit that this alarm and the confrontation between security and Paddock took place BEFORE he began his shooting spree. This means that police should have been alerted to Paddock's presence and exact location in advance of the attack. Who set off this alarm which conveniently helped to give away Paddock's position early, and why?
The surveillance cameras: Paddock had a head start on security, SWAT and anyone else that approached his rooms. He fired at hotel security through his door injuring employee Jesus Campos. He also had thousands of rounds of ammunition including .308 rounds which could easily be fired through several walls on the floor of his hotel room. Why did Paddock prepare for an escape, use his cameras to allow him to fire at hotel security through his door, equip rounds capable of annihilating any SWAT team that stacked up to breach his room, but decided to shoot himself instead before SWAT ever entered? Some people might argue that there is no logic to the mind of a "madman," but again, I've seen no evidence that Paddock was insane beyond the criminal act itself. Also, the hotel had its own surveillance in the hall near Paddock's rooms. No one noticed the man placing cameras about the area?
Multiple shooters?: Las Vegas County Sheriff Joseph Lombardo is quoted as saying that it was only logical to assume given the evidence that Paddock "had some help at some point" in the staging of the Vegas attack. To me, this is absolutely clear in the tactical planning. Paddock does not appear to have the background or training to have chosen and staged the perch.
The report suggesting that a phone charger was found that did not belong to Paddock has since been refuted by police, as well as the report that his card key was used to access his room while Paddock was gone. Of course, hotel surveillance would prove this one way or the other and should be made available to the public.
Still, there are multiple accounts by witnesses that there may have been a second shooter, including the initial reports given by first responders on the scene, who were told a shooter was on the 29th floor as well as the 32nd floor. All of these accounts have been dismissed as a result of "panic" and the fog of war.
The mystery woman: A witness on site at the concert stated that a woman (and her apparent boyfriend) approached people near the stage 45 minutes before the attack, telling them that "they were all going to die." She was later escorted out of the venue by security. Who was this woman? Was she trying to menace the concertgoers or warn them? Or, was it all coincidence?
Conclusion
In my view, there is simply no way that a man with Stephen Paddock's history and background committed the Vegas shooting alone. There is no motive, no clear evidence of mental illness, no ideological markers and nothing to be gained. The tactical expertise displayed in most cases shows considerable training. Theories will abound. It is possible that he was used. It is also possible that he was secretly radicalized and trained, as ISIS has continuously asserted since the attack. Or, perhaps he never pulled a single trigger and somehow ended up shot through the head in a room full of guns overlooking Las Vegas Blvd. and dozens of dead concertgoers.
The most disturbing aspect of this event and the mainstream narrative, though, is what it insinuates. It insinuates that anyone no matter how seemingly normal could one day simply "snap" and murder crowds of people with impunity. It is the anti-Second Amendment narrative personified, because if "anyone" is capable of such horror, and motive is nonexistent, then the mere existence of firearm access means that we are surrounded by millions of latent mass shooters. That is to say, we are supposed to fear everyone around us at all times. I will write about the solution to this problem in my next article. In the meantime, I suggest everyone ponder on the oddities of this event and continue to ask questions.
If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.
You can contact Brandon Smith at:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Unsuspecting Americans to be Hit Hard by this U.S. Scheme to Confiscate Your Savings: Alan Greenspan, 20-year head of the US Fed, reveals Washington's nasty trick to confiscate the savings of unsuspecting Americans. Here's How Some Americans Are Preparing
written by old bat , October 11, 2017
that is what mk-ultra does. splits you into personalities, then the appropriate one is activated when they wish. perhaps an alternate personality was activated and trained over these years.
written by Brandon Smith , October 11, 2017
@old bat
Yes, except no one that knew Paddock ever saw any indication of such behavior. People with split personalities do not remain perfectly dormant - it is not like the movies, they always display unbalanced behaviors. Theories are nice, but they can be a waste of time unless the evidence backs them up.
written by only me , October 11, 2017
YOU ARE 100% CORRECT JUST TO SHOW IF HE CAN OR WHOEVER CAN THAN ANYONE CAN THEY COULD HAVE USED A CHIMP
AGAINST OUR 2nd AMENDMENT OUR FREEDOMS
OUR OWN FREEDOMS WILL DESTROY US IN THE END
LOOK WHAT THEIR DOING TO THE WORLD
PURE EVIL
AMERICA IS LAST HOPE
STAND TALL TOGETHER FOR OUR FUTURE
FUTURE OF OUR COUNTRY AND NEXT GENERATION
written by Falcon 101 , October 11, 2017
Paddocks room was accessed while he was gone because the "Stage" was being set! Once he returned, he may have been held against his will and then killed after the perpetrators were finished to leave him as the shooter and the perfect patsy.
written by TrustNo1 , October 11, 2017
What about the image everyone see with his eyes closed. Did anyone recognize the number 13 tattoo on his neck. Did anyone noticed the dead guy (lone wolf) didn’t have a number 13 on his neck?
written by MJS , October 11, 2017
The powers that be must be getting pretty desparate
to destroy the 2nd amendment if by claiming that since
anyone can snap at any time,they need to disarm everyone.
With that thinking we might as well outlaw use of matches
and lighters as everyones a potential arsonist. And no driving cars either because all are subject to road rage and coulddecide to mow a bunch of people down at any time... and
on and on. Another thing-every state in the union & the
Feds combined, make many billions of $ off the sale of guns & ammo every year through sales and excise taxes.
How do they plan to make up that shortfall if weapons
are banned? I've yet to hear a politician explain that.
Alcohol and tobacco kill more people than guns,but you
never hear about banning them. They tried that in the
1920's with prohibition. History shows how well that worked out.
written by Huibet Van Veen , October 11, 2017
There were NO muzzle flashes visible in any video on the 32 nd floor- why? How can hundreds of rounds be fired for ten minutes from a dark room without a peep of light from a barrel?
written by soldier , October 11, 2017
What is your trained analysis of the different gun shot sounds from youtube videos? A lot of people have claimed the sound differences are 100% attributable to bullet echos and when bullets break the sound barrier and cause sonic booms. It seems to me that trained vets could tell the difference between multiple shooters and different sounds simply being echos or sonic booms. What is your take?
written by Brandon Smith , October 11, 2017
@solider
My analysis of the weapons fire? I've fired a bump stock rifle a few times; it was not a rifle with a bump stock that was used. This sounded like a belt fed weapon to me.
written by Brandon Smith , October 11, 2017
@Huibet
A trained sniper would fire from back in the room using screening fabric to hide his muzzle flash. Also, a weapon with a decent flash hider can reduce flash by quite a bit. The police claim they saw muzzle flashes, but they did not indicate what floor:
http://www.businessinsider.com/las-vegas-mass-shooting-police-body-camera-video-footage-2017-10
written by MadDude , October 11, 2017
He played video poker which is a game of skill in Las Vegas...highly regulated...
My friend is a professional Video Poker player as well..and that's all he plays...one night alone according to another casino host I know...my buddy won over $2 Million on Video Poker....
Look up Jean Scott and she made her living playing Video Poker as well...
Not the average person can do this...my buddy is a Mathematician and a Stats wizard with these things...
I'm assuming Paddock is similar but even higher stakes than my buddy...
As for Paddock I also question the FBI releasing SPECIFIC pictures of the crime scene and only CERTAIN weapons as well...and why were they released?
written by Orlando Santana , October 11, 2017
I believe this was a gun purchase by ISIS and they set paddock-up to be a patsy. He knew where his vehicle was with plenty of explosives, and that would have hurt/kill even more people but those doing the shooting took aim at the gas tanks by the airport instead, that leads me to believe that the shooters did not know where Paddock's vehicle was! They say he shot the security guard 6 minutes before beginning to shoot downwards, the authorities should look into that and get to the truth of the matter!
written by Ray Jones , October 11, 2017
if it is quite enough you can hear the sound of the and follow its direction....its more of a hissing sound than a crack....so its not a cracking sound its a hiss..
written by Major Skeptic , October 11, 2017
Was a federal crime committed?
Where's the evidence?
written by hillie , October 11, 2017
why wasn't the carpet burned from all the brass and why wasn't there more brass on the floor...like 3000.
written by Seen2013 , October 11, 2017
Guilty Until Proven Innocent Justice system is historically the foundation of open border policies, and it is the basis of the founder's warning about sacrificing liberty for security resulting in neither.
The economic model and justice system since globalization, open borders, and 9/11 dates to 1492 and prior, and Thomas Friedman states 1492 was the beginning of globalization 1.0 in his summary article of his novel "It's a Flat World After All".
In the same article, Friedman discusses 'flattener" events that includes "blockchaining".
Bare in mind, unalienable rights are not inclusive to guilty until proven innocent; privileges are.
written by Malcolm Reynolds , October 11, 2017
I have no idea if this is him but, what do you think about the images and the video claimed to be of Paddock in a pink pussyhat, protesting Trump?
https://pamelageller.com/2017/10/vegas-attack-antitrump.html/
written by NY Oathkeeper , October 11, 2017
Brandon have you seen the Forensic acoustic analysis that was done by Mike Adams of Natural News? He confirmed with actual science that there was a second shooter and he now has evidence to the distance of the person and it was not at the Mandalay Bay hotel.
written by mangledman , October 11, 2017
Your expertise in this area is great. Still too many unanswered questions. Great job, well done.
written by Brandon Smith , October 11, 2017
@NY Oathkeeper
No, I have not. Where does he believe the second shooter was positioned according to his analysis?
written by NY Oathkeeper , October 11, 2017
The rooftop of the AM/PM convenience store North of the concert venue.
The Oasis Apartments rooftops to the Southeast of the concert venue.
The dirt mound / construction site due South of the concert venue.
I believe at this point he has it down to a 250 to 275 yard perimeter according to time code and acoustics of the shots fired.
written by Guillermo Padgett Esq. , October 11, 2017
http://www.rense.com/general96...vegas.html
written by Implied Violin , October 11, 2017
This is stuff you would never touch, but I've just emptied a can of oven cleaner into my bathtub, so here goes:
The elite are into numerology. Without going too deep into it, the numerology of this incident involved lots of 10's and 1's, including the date of the attack; time of first shot; age of shooter (6+4 = 10) etc. The shooting happened at "91 Harvest" - 9 +1 = 10; and the numerology of "Harvest" is also ten (not to mention the word itself and what it signifies). Anyway, there were a LOT of numbers that added up to ten, with lots of ones as well.
1's always signify beginnings, or the start of something. Tens reduce to 1's, but 101 is the sign of the capstone of the pyramid. Look on your one dollar bill; that top of the pyramid has an eye and it is separated from the pyramid.
Astrologically, this was also a good time to further an agenda...and: the shooting happened right on the heels of a major Jewish holiday, and forty days after a total eclipse of America - all important signifiers according to these people.
Additionally: the massacre occurred in front of the Luxor hotel - a pyramid, with a replica of the sphinx - and during the shooting, the capstone on the hotel was LIT. There are pictures showing this.
There are MANY other things that signify NWO/elite involvement of this (e.g. "Paddock" is an "enclosure for animals - and the people were basically caged while they were shot).
If this really is an NWO event, all the one's signify that this was just the beginning - and the lit capstone indicates that they believe their "God" is here.
OK, taking off tinfoil hat and draining another beer...and thanks for this very rational examination of the shooting. Provable facts are always far preferable to mindless meanderings...but in any case, I do hope people have not stopped prepping, because there may be FAR more to come.
written by Perryman , October 12, 2017
Apparently some hotels have “unbreakable” windows but not at Manadalay Bay. How did the shooter know the windows were breakable? Imagine hauling all the guns and ammo up to the room only to find the windows wouldn’t break open. Also, hotel windows are often alarmed. How did the shooter know that no alarms would be triggered by broken windows. For all the planning that was done, breaking the windows with a hammer doesn’t fit. It is to sloppy. The falling glass should have alerted SOMEONE. Why not cut a hole in the glass and pull the glass into the room? Finally, if there were shooters on different floors or hotels, wouldn’t there be more broken windows? As for motive, maybe there was someone at the concert he was targeting.
written by Scary times , October 12, 2017
Perhaps he got the attention of an anti-gun group, the virulent kind. Just like in the movie Jack Reacher, they set up a fellow to take the fall, though Paddock actually did do the shooting, expecting to escape. But they had no intention of him escaping. Paddock had previous opportunities to open up, but did not. Perhaps his handlers just forced him this time. Triggered knowledge of his presence and left him to take his own life when he realized it, or they took his life with a lucky shot. Weapons analysis would determine if he shot himself.
Would have to be a group completely off the electronics radar. Communication by flags to send messages? Who knows.
It would not be ISIS, which may explain why someone claiming to be ISIS claims involvement to through the researchers off the track.
Just a thought.
written by Scary times , October 12, 2017
I hate to do this, but the security guard & maintenance worker is worth a look. They confused everyone with a changed timeline for the shooting. Very strange.
written by Rien , October 12, 2017
That is the best I have yet read about the shootings. Good job.
Do you have info about the IQ of Paddock?
If > 120 or better yet > 130, then yes it is possible to pull this off alone.
110 to 120 would at least need some advice from other sources.
< 110 necessitates help, also during execution.
written by Malcolm Reynolds , October 12, 2017
And now dude's home has been broken into
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/shootings/intruders-entered-stephen-paddocks-house-in-reno-police-say/
written by DBG8489 , October 12, 2017
A simple "back of the napkin" ballistics analysis shows that while anyone at that negative angle, at that distance, using a .223 or .308 with a bump-fire stock could injure or kill many people inside the concert venue, the odds of that person being able to hit a single target more than once are approaching zero. Why? Because the characteristics of firing a bump-fire stock equipped weapon (lots of barrel movement) means each and every round would likely have a trajectory that varied by sixteen inches or more.
Yet multiple people were reported to have multiple GSWs - and at least one of them was featured in news reports after the fact so it wasn't just "fog of war" reports from first responders...
written by DBG8489 , October 12, 2017
http://americanshootingjournal...ire-stock/
These guys are trained shooters, and their target is only about fifteen yards away. Look at their groupings when they're done.
They fired only ten rounds at "full auto" speed and the distance between impacts was inches to over a foot.
Now increase the distance by a factor of ten to 150 yards... Or twenty to 300 yards. What would that do to the grouping?
And that's providing the shooter was *trying* to concentrate their fire down to the smallest possible area. Not someone "spraying" a crowd with rounds...
No way an alleged single shooter hits a single person three consecutive times at full auto.
written by DanJanus , October 12, 2017
https://www.mandalaybay.com/content/dam/MGM/mandalay-bay/meetings/documents/mandalay-bay-meetings-convention-mb-private-security-policies-as-of-10-2012.pdf
written by Brandon Smith , October 12, 2017
@Rien
Even a person with a high IQ would need help executing this attack, at least in terms of learning the skills involved. No one is smart enough to skip over all the hands on training and apprenticeship required.
written by Brandon Smith , October 12, 2017
@DBG
I agree. As I stated above, I do not believe a bump fire stock was used. Rather, the sound and frequency of fire reminds me of a belt fed weapon. And, perhaps more than one weapon at one time.
written by Ned2 , October 12, 2017
Good objective article. Certainly lots to think about.
The powers that be are most likely deliberately obfuscating the investigation on purpose.
Average America's attention span is so short, they only have to do this for a few weeks and everyone will forget about it.
......nothing to see here,
written by HolyOne , October 12, 2017
On Spanish TV The waiter who served the food to his room had said two people also it showed this on the order slip.Univision .Reported.
written by Justadude , October 12, 2017
Excellent analysis. I agree with many of your points.
A couple items i'd love your thoughts on...
Jesus Campos knocked on Paddock's door because while investigating an alarm he heard drilling coming from Paddock's room. Imho, if this hadnt happened, the events that unfolded that night could have been very different and perhaps much worse. Your point regarding the window also alludes to a rushed reaction of him getting caught during the setup stage.
Im not huge on conspiracy theories; i think Paddock was the only shooter and i think he killed himself after a 10 minute assault on the concert goers below. But nothing adds up, namely the amount of guns stashed in his room, the sheriff's belief that Paddock was at least entertaining the possibility of escape, the additional weapons and tanerite in his minivan, and no character motive whatsoever.
It's important to note that while Paddock was apparently installing cameras in his room when Campos interrupted him, none of these cameras were actually recording yet. Perhaps the camera on the food cart was on and provided Paddock with intel outside his room, but that was it. Everything else was still being set up. Which begs the question, what was Paddock really planning?
Something I think would be very telling would be to know the calculations he jotted down on the "note" he left behind. Was Paddock zeroing in on the concert venue below or the fuel tanks another hundred yards or so beyond? If the fuel tanks, I think there was a much bigger plan involved. And what weapons were adjusted with the measurements Paddock jotted down? This could be indicative of him doing the calculation and adjusting certain rifles on the fly (an expert shooter), using one just for a specific target, or having some set up for short range combat and others for as accurate as you can get with a bump stock 32 floors above. Maybe a bunch of the rifles weren't even zeroed in at all and were just for show, which would lend to the gun control motive.
Paddock sounds calculating and smart enough to know that a 223 or 308 bullet (incendiary or not) wouldnt ignite or blow up the fuel tanks at the airport just beyond the concert venue. However, the 50 to 90 pounds of tannerite found in his car could be enough to set off a mass explosion. Although, this would likely create two big issues for Paddock.
1) At this range and elevation, the shooter would need to be very skilled to hit the tanerite. Especially if left sitting in a particular location inside his car. And 2), whatever vehicle the tanerite is in, a minivan, suspicious backpack, or sometime else, would quickly draw the attention of authorities based on where it would need to be placed to blow the fuel tanks up (see pic linked below). i cant imagine someone placing the tannerite near the fuel tanks and getting back to the hotel and up to the 32nd floor in the time it would take without getting caught or shutdown. Furthermore, the concert was on its last act and Paddock was still setting up. To me, this is something that also points to a possibility of someone else involved. A second person who was supposed to take Paddock's minivan with tanerite to the fuel tanks at exactly 11:05pm, for example. but had to abandon when the shooting started early.
Although, who knows, maybe Paddock had no intention to blow the fuel tanks up or ever even use the tannerite in his car. But just like the ridiculous number of guns he brought into his hotel room with no clear purpose, why put your plan at risk by stockpiling things that are far in excess of what you actually need and could expose you?
Since I think its reasonable to say that the attack happened earlier than Paddock had initially planned, I think you have to consider other items too. This was the last day of the concert and Aldeen was the last singer, but maybe Paddock planned to shoot at another concert in the coming days? Or at a VIP who was going to take the stage? Or something else that would provide us with a reason. Given the amount of guns, maybe a crew of people were planning something that night or days away.
Finally, he had been there for 3+ days, why was he installing the cameras now, most likely within an hour of his planned attack? And why use a drill, unless you want to conceal them longterm, otherwise just place them on tables or use adhesive or tape. Seriously, it sounds like wired cameras too? Maybe it was what he was comfortable with from installing them in different properties, but it seems odd.
Maybe he was installing cameras now to alert him if anyone came into his room, while he carried out reconnaissance elsewhere (fuel tanks)? Perhaps to record evidence of someone else's involvement? Maybe it was to live stream the mass shooting to garner even greater attention. To make a video manifesto? For ISIS? To draw attention to bumpstocks or gun laws? The obvious reason is to alert him of a SWAT team entering his room, but again, no reason to be drilling if this was the case. Just use some double-sided tape or lay the camera on a table.
There are a lot of things that dont add up. But i think it is completely reasonable to assume that the attack happened at least 30 minutes, and perhaps days, before it was supposed to and a lot of what happened was improvised as he panicked to complete his objective. Maybe what he was planning would have been much much worse.
http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/59d5a870c68d7b6d118b7a08-480/david-choi-skitch.jpg
written by Brandon Smith , October 12, 2017
@Justadude
I think there is a more important question - WHO set off the door alarm three rooms down from the shooter's perch, which led security straight to Paddock?
I have not seen any evidence that the security guard "heard drilling", which led him to Paddock's room. Sounds rather convenient on top of the "unrelated" door alarm. I would need to see a source for that.
Also, there is zero chance whatsoever that Paddock planned this event alone. The amount of tactical knowledge displayed indicates an experienced shooter, which Paddock was not, by all accounts of his family and girlfriend. Honestly, I haven't seen any evidence that Paddock pulled a single trigger that night.
written by TruthSerum , October 12, 2017
Floors 35 thru 39 at the Mandalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas is the four seasons hotel. It’s a hotel within a hotel. Owned by bill gates and some Saudi prince. FYI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandalay_Bay
The ISIS connection
http://canadafreepress.com/article/company-that-owns-mandalay-bay-sent-letter-to-employees-soliciting-donation
Maybe that’s why there’s no video of Paddock hauling ammo and guns up to floor 32. Because it went up via a secured private elevator to floors 35 to 39 which are possibly not video recorded. Also explains how other gunmen in room on floor 32 could escape w/o being caught. Simply go up to private hotel (via fire escape stairs during lull) and disappear. Leaving dead guy in room on floor 32 as the patsy.
written by Brandon Smith , October 13, 2017
@Angry
Yes, it is a suite composed of two large adjoining rooms.
written by DBG8489 , October 13, 2017
I also believe it is belt fed although I'm not sure of the caliber.
When i first heard it, the wife was playing a video on her laptop the morning after (we live on the east coast and were in bed when it happened). I had just woken up and could hear the firing and the screaming and yelling. Without looking at her or the computer, I immediately asked: "Who is firing those 249s and why are there people screaming? What are you watching?"
She's a former Marine but I don't hold it against her (LOL)... But she knows the sound almost as well as I do and said she heard the same thing.
My contention is that there were two belt fed autos - one in each room - talking. This was to keep the crowd freaked out and chaotic to cover at least one or two other shooters who were much closer using suppressed M4s. It would require at least one shooter to be closer in order to get the accuracy to put multiple rounds on targets. I believe it was at least two though.
I just think LE started from the "single shooter" conclusion - something they were carefully fed - and are now working backwards from there trying to make the evidence fit.
They should have effectively shut down an area 400 yards or so from the center of the field *that night* and searched every place inside that area for clues.
Although I'm not sure it would have mattered as the other shooters could have been mobile. The DC sniper killed 17 people from the trunk of a car and was only caught by accident...
But - not my circus, not my monkeys.
written by Malcolm Reynolds , October 13, 2017
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2...nterviews/
"When she knocked on Campos’ door, a woman answered and she told Loomer they could not 'talk about this.' "
Just getting more and more incredibly narrative based.
written by DBG8489 , October 13, 2017
Shocking...
The scariest part of this whole thing is that it looks (to an outsider) like the powers that be in this case *really* don't have a clue what they're doing.
It's like they're flailing around in the water hoping someone will rescue them.
written by Decontextualized , October 13, 2017
Here is the Health Ranger forensic acoustic analysis mentioned in a previous post:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxmEFeKy8aI
It should be noted that he's demonstrating the methodology here -- the actual weapons, ammunition, and position of the recording device need to be used.
His hard measurements are:
Shooter #1 = 0.559 s from bullet impact to muzzle report
Shooter #2 = 0.374 s from bullet impact to muzzle report
I don't know which recording he took these measurements on, so don't know the location of the recording device. The recording device may be closer or farther to the MB than the center of the venue.
To calculate the range from the numbers, some assumptions need to be made about the round and weapon. His estimations of 425 to 475 yds and 250 to 275 yds, respectively, assume Remington .223 55 gr FMJ out of a 16" barrel.
I don't think that weapon and round are likely. A 5.56 NATO/.223 only had a few-hundred ft-lbs of energy left at range from the Mandalay Bay. A 16" barrel handicaps it even more and increases report and muzzle flash. Given that the perpetrator(s) goal appears to be as much death as possible and he/they seemed to know what they're doing, I assume a 7.62 NATO was used from MB; the MB weapon sounds more like a 7.62 M240 to me anyway. I assume the perpetrator(s) have military training and weapons, so I ran some numbers myself using military rounds and handbook specifications.
Shooter1=0.559s, Shooter2=0.374s (time from impact to report)
Temp=60F Alt=2030ft 15&#xRH; 29.98inHg Vsound=1117fps
M193 5.56x45mm 55gr 3250fps: Shooter1=400yds, Shooter2=250yds
M855 5.56x45mm 62gr 3025fps: Shooter1=400yds, Shooter2=250yds
M80 7.62x51mm 149gr 2750fps: Shooter1=410yds, Shooter2=270yds
M2 7.62x51mm 152gr 2740fps: Shooter1=420yds, Shooter2=270yds
M852 7.62x51mm 168gr 2550fps: Shooter1=450yds, Shooter2=290yds
M118 7.62x51mm 173gr 2640fps: Shooter1=420yds, Shooter2=270yds
So I get a Shooter1 range from the recording device of 400 to 450 yds, and a Shooter2 range from 250 to 290yds based on the assumptions above, again not knowing which recording was used, or the location of the recording device.
Found this linked in an OK comment, a side-by side comparison of the weapons audio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG2oQ65zi-Q
The video seems to be being suppressed by YT: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LBrfZvb5dsQ
written by Zag , October 15, 2017
Maybe we are deliberately being dragged into a detective story due to the confusing storyline/testimonies.
Did you consider the possibility that the shooting was completely staged and nobody got shot?
There are multiple eyewitnesses who don't look credible. Emotionless interviews shortly after the tragedy which we have seen before in Paris and other shootings. Especially the interview with Paddock's brother seems bizarre.
Why would they bring in fake witnessess? Either they have an agenda to execute and bring the message through the interviews or they are there to convince us the shooting really happened.
written by Brandon Smith , October 15, 2017
@Zag
No. I personally know people who had family and friends at that concert. Some of them were harmed by shrapnel and had to go to the hospital. There was indeed a shooter at the event. The "crisis actor" theory reminds me of the 9/11 "hologram planes" theory; it is designed to make alternative researchers look ridiculous.
If a "crisis actor" theorist can show me a bunch of empty graves or an empty morgue along with evidence that thousands of people were involved in faking a mass shooting and are somehow all keeping their mouths shut about it, then I will be happy to look at that evidence. Until then, I will not be taking the "faked event" notion seriously.
written by testsererser , October 15, 2017
Controlled interviews with actors who were there to attempt to control the narrative.
written by Brandon Smith , October 15, 2017
@testererser
That is certainly more plausible, though, I would need to see more concrete evidence than "this guy sounds fake..."
written by Zag , October 16, 2017
Morning Brandon, you mean hit by a bullet, not shrapnel. At least I haven't seen any mention of grenades.
I would gladly take your word for it that there was a real shooting taking place, it would wipe the hoax version off the table forever and we can focus on the reason for the use of actors in these kind of tragedies.
Why do I keep saying that actors were involved? Well, for example, the incredible coolness of some eyewitnesses we were shown shortly after the tragedy. Most people cannot get it together after seeing a massacre and dead people, let alone seem coherent on camera when seeing a loved one hanging on for dear life. I have seen this behaviour with shootings in Europe as well. People going from disbelief, anger and mourning to acceptance within a week, then smiling on CNN saying they died doing what they love the most: going to a concert. See Bataclan and Ariana Grande.
Let's say the actor's are placed there to control the narrative. What did you find in the narrative that could not have been said by the real eyewitnesses? A shooter or multiple shooters located in different places to support the official version? The firecrackers story that nearly every eyewitness is saying they thought the shooting intitially resembled?
You see it is less credible that actors were used when a real shooting happened, I mean, it is easier to convince people to act as a victim when it is a full hoax. Acting a victim when people really died is extremely morbid.
I am in the dark on what really happened, but fairly convinced that some or even most eyewitnesses are not genuine, especially the ones that say they have a loved one that got shot.
written by Brandon Smith , October 16, 2017
@Zag
No, I mean shrapnel. When bullets hit concrete or steel targets they can produce "spall" or shrapnel as bullet fragments break away.
As far as the claim of crisis "actors" to control the narrative, again, I've seen no hard evidence whatsoever. Someone saying this witness or that witness seems "too cool" or "too happy" really means nothing to me. From what I've seen, a lot of people were happy just to still be alive. There are a lot of amateur armchair psychologists out there trying to interpret people's behavior but opinions are not enough. Evidence is necessary, especially when the theory seems so impractical.
written by DBG8489 , October 16, 2017
I am in the same camp as Brandon on this one - the "total hoax" crowd does nothing but drag the rest of us skeptics into their world where we get tarred with the same "whack-job" brush.
At which point we see well thought-out and reasoned independent analysis of audio and video data, ballistics, etc - tossed into the same salad as "totally fake, crisis actors, no one shot, false flag"...etc.
I also frequent another site and you can see it happening there. Bring up anything that goes against the "single shooter" narrative and suddenly you're accused of claiming the government did it - or was in on it - or you're claiming it was a complete hoax.
Just because I believe that LE was fed a good story with a single shooter - and they ate it up despite evidence to the contrary - doesn't mean I think the government at any level was either involved or complicit in the attack or any "cover up" after the fact.
Any initial conspiracy to plan and carry out the shooting required the involvement of at least three people in my opinion - but that doesn't mean they were .gov.
And what's happening now doesn't have to be a .gov cover-up. Simple incompetence and major ass-covering by all parties involved would easily explain it.
written by Zag , October 16, 2017
True Brandon, it is hard to say for sure that somebody is lying. It's the balance that did it for me. Too many of these folks act illogical in such a crisis situation and too many of them show up on tv too soon. On top of that, ISIS is involved again, even though the official story is saying they have nothing to do with it.
Did we find out what Paddock's motive was? That would be a big clue.
@DBG8489, for sure when the biggest mass shooting in US history takes place it could be none other than the gov if not the shooter & co. Certain departments of the gov of course. Which other group would benefit from shooting random people at a concert and not claiming responsibility? A country music one at that. Actually, what is there to benefit?
written by DBG8489 , October 16, 2017
It's not the biggest mass shooting in US history.
And because it only requires at a minimum three people - there's no need for any .gov agency to be involved. Incompetency and ass-covering explains the cluster-fu** that the investigation appears to be.
Law enforcement was served a conclusion - single shooter - on a big silver platter - and they took it without considering anything else. Now they're working backwards trying to find evidence to support that conclusion when there is plenty that says otherwise.
As for why someone would do it? Who knows? Who cares?
I'm dealing with facts here not guessing why because "why" doesn't matter. Although if they would have treated the *entire* area as a huge crime scene and actually looked for evidence within 400 yards of the middle of the field, they might know why at this point...
And FYI - ISIS did claim responsibility - something like three times IIRC. Does that mean they did it? Nope. But they did - for the record - claim it.
written by mangledman , October 17, 2017
It sounds like with your shooting experience, you can probably address a few of my questions. I wondered how barrel heating, fatigue, rapiid fire, and various factors will come into play in this type of scenario. I have no clue how much rapid fire it takes to ruin a barrel. I cannot see hardly Any way possible way this could have been performed with a semi automatic. Having never shot an automatic weapon, what are the recommendations for that distance? Three shot bursts, five? I realize this was like shooting fish in a barrel, but this just seems way too sloppy, and ignorant first responses is what we are being fed. Has anyone figured out how many rounds were actually fired? Why has no one seccumbed from injuries after the initial attack? How is it obvious lone wolf attack after investigation only half of a day? I may be an old hillbilly, but if I had that much time andthat many guns, I still can't make it make sense. If this guy had Isis affiliations he could have had more deadly weapons at his disposal couldn't he?
written by Guest , October 19, 2017
There are too many things about the hotel that don't add up. Who owns it??? That info may reveal motive.
Too many coincidences with employees there....time to start running background checks on front desk staff, porters, security and maintenance.
written by DBG8489 , October 19, 2017
An even bigger question is: Why isn't anyone looking at the audio?
Unlike other mass shootings, this one has no shortage of independent audio/video evidence available to anyone with a computer.
There's this study: http://www.btgresearch.org/Aco...042012.pdf that proves you can use recordings of a shooting to determine distance of the shooter. All you have to know is the caliber, weight, and load of the rounds used along with the atmospheric conditions and the location(s) of the microphones...
We have pretty much all of that. And even if we don't the analysis can be done for multiple variations to be thorough. Someone who decided to could legitimately prove or disprove that more than one shooter was in play that night.
So why isn't some audio engineer or engineering firm trying to prove or refute the theory that there were multiple shooters? Why was Mike Adams the "Health Ranger" - who frankly looks like a bit of a kook* - the first one to do this? And he did it without disclosing any of the specific science behind it and by limiting this analysis to one round of caliber and weight...
As another person told me today, a person or firm who takes this up and proves one way or the other - and publishes their methods and results so it can be falsified - makes a HUGE name for themselves.
*Please note, I'm not saying he is a kook. What I'm saying is that to the "man-on-the-street" he doesn't look like the finest example...
written by MSimon , October 21, 2017
I actually get calmer during a crisis. A few years Navy training.
If I'm going to break up it is 3 days later.
There is also the shock factor. That delays emotion. For some.
written by JDock , October 23, 2017
Here's another head scratcher:
Reports say a hammer or "hammer-like device" was used to break out the windows. Where is the hammer or whatever was used to break the glass? Most reports mention this magical bludgeon but to date there are no photos posted online of this object. Something was used to bust out those windows.
Since this object was featured in so many reports, you'd think someone would ask "Got a picture of this hammer thingie?" Did it get tossed out one of the freshly broken windows? The "shooter" couldn't have carted it off, being dead and all.
So, three places it could have been: On the ground at the base of the building, in the room or carried away by someone other than the deceased shooter. Figure this out and we may have a better picture of what may have happened.
