Everyone knows: multiple shooters at Vegas, official narrative a big criminal lie
The biggest clue that attests to the identity of the perpetrator of the 1st October Las Vegas mass shooting is not what you think it is. There is excellent video footage that captures raw evidence, and that provides analysis – and some of it on its own verges on definite proof of a false flag attack; all to be discussed shortly. However, none of it constitutes the biggest give away to those of us who have been looking at this sort of thing for a while.
The corporate-media†, and thus therefore the wider western shadowy Globalist government, has lost control of the narrative of the story of the Las Vegas shooting, and it is probably due to one piece of amateur “war zone” filming – citizen journalism if you will – more than any other piece of internet sleuthing. That there is a terrible crisis in terms of maintaining public credulity regarding the yarn that is being spun is why you might have seen the Guardian publish an article entitled “Las Vegas survivors furious as YouTube promotes clips calling shooting a hoax”. It is why the New York Times has published an article headlined with this disapproving mother-hen clucking: “No, There Was Not More Than One Gunman in the Las Vegas Shooting”.
The people who are trying to create a universal international Hermetic/Luciferian order where the masses are enslaved by self-anointed supreme beings (a system otherwise known as socialism), have to disarm the American public first in order to have the remotest hope of achieving it. They need to engineer a process of mental change whereby retaining personal firearms would be viewed as being reprehensible and consequently everyone would give them up. This would the synthesis of the Hegelian method that is obviously being deployed. The thesis: everyone can own a gun, is joined with the antithesis: everyone must feel ashamed by this. And so there must be mass killings in order to engender a tension about owning guns which can be solved by relinquishing them. Notice, it isn’t about making gun owners feel threatened – if they did that, then it would be “cold dead hands” territory.
Of course, mass killings, left to their own devices, would not come along very often – it’s the same for any crisis that needs to be exploited. That’s why they need to be induced. Engineering such an operation naturally takes time, money, and the risk of incriminating the entire political infrastructure that by necessity must criminally collude together to bring the activity to fruition. Therefore, the official narrative that hides real guilt cannot be allowed to escape. If it begins to do so, then the sheep dogs are let loose to persuade anyone in the corporate news consuming herd who was likely to be convinced by a conspiracy theory that such people get called “tin foil hat wearers”, and it’s not nice to be disliked in that way nor to be ostracised by the trendy metropolitan mainstream. The big problem is, however, when the corporate-media has to address conspiracy theories then it is tantamount to admission of guilt. In fact, when the corporate-media has to address conspiracy theories in the way that it has around the Las Vegas shooting, then we should start wondering if a tipping point, where too much of the public just doesn’t believe the horse crap any more, can’t be very far away.
It is safe to say that the narrative explaining the happenings at Las Vegas is all over the field, and the desperation to shepherd it back into a pen was signified by the production of Eric Paddock, the supposed shooter’s brother, to insist “of course Steve did this by himself”. The author doesn’t believe that it is necessary to explain to the reader how preposterous this is. What could Eric Paddock possibly know that the “stumped” Las Vegas investigating authorities couldn’t?
The source of all the trouble is very likely the Taxi Driver footage. The location – here – where the author viewed it first is now partially censored by a YouTube age appropriateness restriction, and so a sign-in is required. However, it can also be seen here albeit embedded in a presentation (and if necessary it will be uploaded to the FBEL Youtube space – keep an eye at the foot of this page). The important stuff in this video is all in the first moments. A taxi driver is parked up on an approach to the porch of the Mandalay Bay, and gunfire can be heard. There are four patterns. There is a “on-the-spot” pattern of gunfire that is the loudest to be heard – denoting its source is in the immediate vicinity. Pattern number two is a rattling noise mixed in with the first one; it could be a close echo, which would indicate that the weapon is being discharged very near at hand. Then there is a distant noise that closely resembles the first pattern – so this is an echo from a surface further away. The fourth pattern also sounds distant, but it doesn’t correspond to an initial burst from the “on-the-spot” pattern. Indeed, when she hears it, the taxi driver comments on how it sounds as if gunfire is now coming from a different location. It can be heard at the 45 seconds mark in the video. It must be its own source of noise – indicating a second shooter. When the taxi driver moves off up to the porch of the hotel, she evidently leaves pattern one behind her – all the echoes disappear, and the volume is significantly reduced [see Update 16/10/2017]. However, she has now moved directly underneath the position in the hotel from whence Paddock is supposed to be shooting. And this presents a problem because in her previous position she had been slightly further away from this location. To explain: the approach to the Mandalay Bay porch comes off of Mandalay Bay Road, and bends round the arm of the hotel where Paddock was roomed. She had been positioned just below this bend. (Some illustrative diagrams might be added here by and by, but in the meantime have a look at the pictures helpfully collated together on a site called the Templeton Times – they will be helpful in the meantime). In both of the positions she takes up around the hotel, she only has more or less the same amount of fresh air between her and the supposed source of the gunfire. That the volume diminishes suggests that she might have actually put solid brick between herself and the shooter when she moved – suggesting that the shooter was outside of the hotel, on the ground very near her first position – as suggested by the close echo that can be discerned in the footage.
The silhouetted figure is the suspect (in shooting crouch?). The figure in the grey on the left does look to drop at the appearance of the light burst. What is going on?
Does this suggest that gunfire wasn’t coming from Paddock’s location after all? Some on the internet believe they have film evidence that shows that it wasn’t. In one particular video, by Youtube user “GodBlessHipHop”, we are shown that the light that should be emitted by the gun in the form of muzzle flashes just doesn’t appear in the windows where Paddock is supposed to be. The same video carries the explosive interview with concert-goer “Corrine” who says “they started shooting… they kept shooting… it was definitely someone on the ground… they herded the crowd… they kept coming… they even came into the… parking lot and shot people there too.” Some guys on the internet think they have found an example of who “they” are; for instance, a video by Youtube user Josh Wimbish that its creator says shows a man dressed as some kind of security official firing on the crowd. The viewer of the film is told that there are muzzle flashes caused by this security official supposedly firing repeatedly, but this doesn’t seem to be the case. There is one bright moment of illumination – this could be a torch, but it could also be the discharge from a hand gun. In fact, someone in front of this security character does seem to fall down like a sack of potatoes. It is certainly true to say that this security official does behave strangely, because he retreats looking back over his shoulder at the place where he has just been (shooting?). It doesn’t feel like he is, for instance, looking for the injured to treat.
The author’s first reaction to these images was that it can’t show an assassin in the crowd because the people around him aren’t reacting in a reasonable way – fleeing from him. In fact, the jury is still very far from coming in to announce a verdict. However, we should recognise that if this character has let off a single shot under the cover of the noise of a volley of automatic gun fire, then maybe he could get away with it in those circumstances. And if what we are seeing in this video is a shooter, then what might be being revealed is some part of the method of the attack where individuals are in the crowd – as “Corrine” described – taking pot shots to create the killed and injured. There is a lot of information whereby a fuller picture could be speculated on, but there isn’t enough at this stage to keep it correct and concise, and so it won’t be done. On the other hand, enough data is in to show that the official narrative is in tatters. One wonders if public awareness of this is so keen and strong that this will be the false flag that finally sinks the ship, or breaks the camel’s back. More pointedly, are there enough concert goer victims amongst this woken number who won’t accept the lone wolf lie to form an angry crowd so that too many difficult questions get asked, and too many inconvenient truths are spoken? “Corrine” in her interview said of the shooters “I hope they get ‘em”. For once, instead of allowing sidetracking into prayers and learnt helplessness by government-organised weeping, kumby-yah and yoghurt-knitting, let there be a commonly held and resolutely, precisely targetted sense of grievance, and let the desire for properly-served justice be the consequence of a false flag attack.
Update 9/10/2017
Some more on the movement of the taxi driver. On the right is a section of an image from Templeton Times (why reinvent the wheel?). The start of the film sees the taxi sitting on the slip road up to the porch approximately under the “en” of the Templeton Times annotation.
Now consider the audio graphical representation from the video, below. The violent waveform between 0 and 5 seconds is the “on-the-spot” gunfire pattern. It is followed immediately with a gentler, but still pronounced amplitude, and this is the echo. At 45 seconds is the distant pattern. Graphically it is represented as not registering much above the background noise – the orange line marks where it commences. This is not an echo – it is its own source of sound.
The taxi driver then moves around the bend to come to a halt at the actual porch of the Mandalay Bay hotel. Consider the graphical representation of the audio, below. The first burst of high amplitude sound is the “on-the-spot” gunfire pattern. Again it is followed by an echo, and then at 1 minute and 12 seconds, another burst of “on-the-spot”, primary gunfire – which becomes compressed as the driver proceeds through the small pagoda-like tunnel. By 1 minute and 40 seconds, she is sitting at the taxi rank below the porch of the hotel. The amplitude of the waveform that occurs after that time is clearly greatly reduced – and by the experience of travelling with the taxi driver, we know that we are still hearing the “on-the-spot” gunfire, but at a distinctly lower volume because of the change in the position of the car. However, if you consult the street map in the image, this position is still directly underneath where Paddock was suppposedly shooting from.
Update 16/10/2017
The diminishing of the gunfire sound could be accounted for by the fact that the driver wound her window up! This video spots it – but also proposes that the roof of these “basement” buildings is where a shooter could have been located (it also points out that the rooftops stretch a good distance at the back of the hotel, and give access to a car park from which a timely escape can be made). The very volume and the clatter of the gun, and the close echo remain the strongest evidence that the shooter was literally on top of this taxi.
† To this broad church of controlled media we must now include supposed alternative media that over again demonstrates that it is aligned, and a particular word must be had on the conduct of Infowars. Already shod of the last vestiges of its credibility in the eyes of many other alternative media producers, it has been pushing the official narrative while offering a very limited hangout to retain support for people looking for real answers (who can then, presumably, be targetted to buy snakeoil). On top of this, there has been a persistent effort to associate the “lone wolf” with either ISIS or Antifa. These stories seem to be predicated upon the claims of unnamed intelligence sources, or whatever tittle-tattle that is coming out of a camp that might benefit politically if the blame for the incident was laid where they want it. Moreover, ISIS is definitely a US Government project, as Antifa is suspected to be amongst certain commentators and observers. While attributing the Las Vegas incident to these groups would appear absurd, and right-minded people would dismiss the claimed connections – especially as no real evidence is offered – it clearly furthers an identifiable Government agenda of rousing division for civil disruption – or even war – and is clearly agitprop for that purpose.
