The Las Vegas Shootings

I did not comment on the shootings straight away. There was insufficient information. But the first thing that struck me, even without sufficient information, was how similar the events were to the Manchester arena events. The method was very different, but the essential idea was the same – identify a mass target and then inflict as much indiscriminate pain and suffering as possible. The truck event in France was much the same – get a big truck and mow down as many people as possible.

I have been watching all sorts of programmes and videos from the USA for several hours today. Absolutely none of the videos show anything conclusive. There are masses of conjectures and conspiracy theories, as has been the case with the Twin Towers. InfoWars has been asking all sorts of questions and attributing the attack to ‘the deep state’. I find those ideas very odd. 9/11 killed thousands – why would the CIA be satisfied with an operation which killed only 58 people when it could sink a liner containing thousands of staff and guests?

What I found extremely disturbing was the police ‘Inspector’s’ claim, within a short period of time after he claimed that the perpetrator was ‘down’, that the attack was the work of a single nutter. What’s more is that the ‘nutter’ was an old man (65) and a wealthy man at that. You do not get to be wealthy by being a nutter.

It annoys me no end when ‘police inspectors’ make statements about what happened when they have no clue about the reality. For example, when the ‘inspector’ said that Mr Paddock was a ‘lone wolf’, had Paddock’s hands been checked for powder residue? If so, why did he not say so. If Paddock was gunned down by the police, why did he not say so? Most reports said that Paddock killed himself before the police broke into his room. Why did the inspector not just say that, rather than saying that he was ‘down’? Was his room filled with smoke from the guns that he had been firing? Why were there longish pauses between bursts of machine gun firing?

I could fully understand if the police ‘inspector’ told the American people and the world what actually happened. That is, how they knew which room to break into, and what to expect. I must find out how to convert a screen-shot into a format to display as a picture in a post.

I had an idea. The screenshot shows two windows, which are quite widely separated, blown out. Were those windows in the same hotel room or suite? What floor were they on and what were the room numbers? How did those windows get blown out? Those questions are very simple, but there has been no attempt to explain.

I have no doubt that some sort of enquiry will be instituted, but I expect that it will be fake. That is, unless President Trump INSISTS that it is not fake. In this specific case especially, it ought not to be hard to discover the truth about what happened.

It was really weird, in 9/11, that the authorities could not wait for a few days, to try to evaluate the evidence from the rubble, before shovelling it all up and transporting it to barges.

As regards 9/11, I personally think that New York State had contingency plans to bring down tall buildings before they could fall over. Imagine the destruction had the twin towers actually fallen over! Far better, if they cannot be rescued, to demolish them on the spot by inducing an internal collapse.

But why should such plans be secret? Why should not the people know that there are risks? If they know that there are risks in working in skyscrapers, they can make the choice.

The ‘deep state’ is real, I have no doubt, but I think that no one would consciously set up an operation to kill and injure masses of concert-goers just to get gun control in the USA.

Will the world ever really know what happened? Doubtful. By Christmas, it will have been forgotten.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

2 Responses to “The Las Vegas Shootings”

  1. Samuel Says:

    100% of the “mass murderers (with firearms)” in the US, for the last several years, have been “Democrats” and were taking prescription “anti-depressants”. The “news” always steers all “discussion” toward the danger of people with guns with nary a mention of the danger of people roaming about on powerful mind altering drugs.

    • junican Says:

      I should imagine that such people would make use of any weapon to hand, if they felt like it. You make a very fair point.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: