Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Las Vegas Shooting

1246789

Comments

  • #152
    DinkyDinosaur
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFKZtZhphhU



    Then there's the brother. Not normal behaviour at all.

    Crocodile tears one minute, smiling the next.


  • #153
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    Overheal wrote: »
    Is there a problem?

    Yes there is, people looking for a link to gory bloody footage. Disgusting.


  • #154
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    DinkyDinosaur wrote: »

    People don't claim there is a conspiracy for no reason or because they are idiots. They question what is going on because things don't add up.

    Don't ever let anyone ridicule you for thinking 2+2=4 and try to convince you that 2+2=7 and that there is nothing strange going on.

    There is certainly something strange going on. Things don't add up.
    Yup believe what your told on youtube and conspiracy theory websites. Go with your first assumptions about claims sold to you! Even if they don't actually make sense.
    Don't bother with things like basic skepticism or common sense...


  • #155
    DinkyDinosaur
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur




    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nNNQoQ_DKw&has_verified=1

    No dead bodies in this video. Has anyone come across any images of any dead bodies? Cos I can't seem to find any.

    Google Images:

    https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&biw=1280&bih=658&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=vagas+shooting+blood+wounded&oq=vagas+shooting+blood+wounded&gs_l=psy-ab.12...22421.24126.0.26241.8.8.0.0.0.0.80.562.8.8.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.yI0sxKTdGTw#imgrc=Wkm_LDivD27TpM:


    No blood anywhere yet.


  • #156
    DinkyDinosaur
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yup believe what your told on youtube and conspiracy theory websites. Go with your first assumptions about claims sold to you! Even if they don't actually make sense.
    Don't bother with things like basic skepticism or common sense...

    Claims sold to me? lol.

    You're trying to imply that I can't think for myself. And trying to play down the fact that things don't add up.

    I wont be engaging you again. You have proven that you fight dirty and twist words around like how a narcissist does when they are trying to get their victim to doubt their own sanity. It's called gaslighting. I've come across enough trolls in my time to recognise one when I see one.

    Stay away from me.

    People are free to make up their own minds. They don't need you ridiculing them for asking questions.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    DinkyDinosaur wrote: »
    Claims sold to me? lol.
    Yes, claims sold to you. There are people out there who have vested interests in promoting these nonsense conspiracy theories. Either financially, because of their own personal agenda or just to mess with people.

    But you accept their claims as truth without scrutinising or examining them even when they have already been shown to not be true or otherwise don't actually make sense.
    And then when you get asked difficult questions, you start hurling abuse.

    My question from the first page remains unanswered.
    If you are thinking for yourself, are applying logic and common sense and still
    believe in the conspiracy theory, then it would be trivial to answer:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104857111&postcount=5

    But I suspect I'm just going to get more abuse and insults instead of an answer.


  • #158
    DoctaDee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,593 ✭✭✭DoctaDee


    @ Dinky .. what do you believe genuinely happened in Vegas ? ... leaving aside any particular motives for it happening - just the raw detail of the event


  • #159
    WMP
    Registered Users Posts: 84 ✭✭WMP


    pilly wrote: »
    Yes there is, people looking for a link to gory bloody footage. Disgusting.

    I'm not looking for gory footage, rather some convincing proof to back up the official story.

    None of the footage I've seen matches the claim that 59 people were shot dead. I like everyone was shocked when the news broke, but I'm no longer convinced its real.


  • #160
    DinkyDinosaur
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    http://truthfeednews.com/breaking-antifa-celebrates-las-vegas-shooting/


    Civil War is the plan. Antifa are part of the Con game.


  • #161
    jh79
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,286 ✭✭✭jh79


    WMP wrote: »
    I'm not looking for gory footage, rather some convincing proof to back up the official story.

    None of the footage I've seen matches the claim that 59 people were shot dead. I like everyone was shocked when the news broke, but I'm no longer convinced its real.

    The picture shows a trail of dead bodies scattered across the green area. The Daily Mail had a censored version of the picture on their website yesterday.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,584 ✭✭✭weisses


    King Mob wrote: »
    This is a dishonest twisting of his words.

    He did not say there was more than one shooter.
    He did not say anything about supporting the silly nonsensical conspiracy theories.

    Yeah It was poorly translated .... I looked it up
    So to summarize - He had help, planned to escape (so was not a suicide mission), there is a female potential accomplice at large, and the FBI further confirmed that "no evidence at this point to say it was an act of [domestic] terrorism."

    Maybe there was a second shooter ... did they rule that out ?


  • #163
    ShowMeTheCash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    iLikeWaffles wrote: »
    ShowMeTheCash wrote: »
    I already made the observation, maybe just read the whole thing

    The Audio to video sync can be unreliable but it does appear like the  blinking started a good 1 to 2 seconds before we hear the noise.

    As an engineer I have worked on data compression and streaming software in the past I know all to well the issues around synchronization of the video and audio feeds, but even with that said I acknowledge there seems to be a real gap of 2 seconds between the blink and the pop.

    No, I was the one who made the observation which you then replied to.
    ShowMeTheCash wrote: »
    The biggest issue with any of this is the device it is being recorded on.
    The Audio to video sync can be unreliable but it does appear like the blinking started a good 1 to 2 seconds before we hear the noise.

    I then went on to add. Which you have seemed to have not answered again!

    Well it's a mobile upload. So it most likely got uploaded to youtube from the mobile so from the source. There is multiple examples in the video that the audio and video are in sync.

    3.58 the car goes over a bump which can be seen and heard in sync!
    4.28 the window goes down the sound is in sync as is the timing of the taxi drivers dialogue with people standing outside the hotel
    4.56 the taxi driver pans the camera towards the building and notices the flash and says "oh ****" that dialogue is boxy sounding meaning that the space between the window and the mic on the phone has a shorter distance to travel so is having what they call in acoustics proximity effect. Also in sync Most importantly!
    5.18 Just after the taxi driver sh1tes herself the car goes over another bump. Both audible and in sync!
    Troughout the engine acceleration noises. In sync! Car door being shut by taxi driver 18.18

    Video is perfectly in sync.

    ↑↑ this is what may previous question is based on so yet again - does that address the issue of the audio and video being in sync? Throughout the video. Do you believe that the time it takes for the first pop to be heard and then displayed in the video would correspond with the video being in sync based on the observations I made for your claim that they could be unreliable.

    I'm not asking about the first pop you hear approximately 2.5 seconds after the flash I already know how long it takes. Its a simple question have I just proven that the video is in sync with the audio?

    Audio and video can move in and out sync at the micro second level, good software usually compensats to a degree, the accuracy of your speed of sound vs light at the microsecond maybe even millisecond level will probably not be accurate so to base the real calculation and values is pointless to a certain level, it might be reliable to about 0.1 seconds.
    That being said there gap is over 0.1 seconds 2+ so for that reason it is probably OK and reasonable to assume the popping and flashing are not the same source.


  • #164
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yup believe what your told on youtube and conspiracy theory websites. Go with your first assumptions about claims sold to you! Even if they don't actually make sense.
    Don't bother with things like basic skepticism or common sense...
    DinkyDinosaur wrote: »
    Claims sold to me? lol.

    You're trying to imply that I can't think for myself. And trying to play down the fact that things don't add up.

    I wont be engaging you again. You have proven that you fight dirty and twist words around like how a narcissist does when they are trying to get their victim to doubt their own sanity. It's called gaslighting. I've come across enough trolls in my time to recognise one when I see one.

    Stay away from me.

    People are free to make up their own minds. They don't need you ridiculing them for asking questions.

    Knock it off guys

    (and it's you're*)


  • #165
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    weisses wrote: »
    Yeah It was poorly translated .... I looked it up



    Maybe there was a second shooter ... did they rule that out ?

    Yes they have ruled this out. :rolleyes:


  • #166
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    weisses wrote: »
    Yeah It was poorly translated .... I looked it up



    Maybe there was a second shooter ... did they rule that out ?

    The LVPD investigated reports of multiple shooters - and of multiple shootings - that night, but those reports never appear to have been substantiated. There were reports of a security guard being shot also?

    A lot of different versions of events have been peddled around making it difficult to filter out.

    Honestly, I would not at all be surprised if foreign social media agencies (Russia for example) are actively doing this to further divide the country up and keep people actively distrusting the govt.


  • #167
    Mousewar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,741 ✭✭✭Mousewar


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yes, claims sold to you. There are people out there who have vested interests in promoting these nonsense conspiracy theories. Either financially, because of their own personal agenda or just to mess with people.

    But you accept their claims as truth without scrutinising or examining them even when they have already been shown to not be true or otherwise don't actually make sense.
    And then when you get asked difficult questions, you start hurling abuse.

    My question from the first page remains unanswered.
    If you are thinking for yourself, are applying logic and common sense and still
    believe in the conspiracy theory, then it would be trivial to answer:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104857111&postcount=5

    But I suspect I'm just going to get more abuse and insults instead of an answer.

    The "what's the point of a second shooter" question?. Answer seems obvious to me (not that I'm suggesting the conspiracy theories are true).
    A lot of the conspiracy theories around these type of shootings focus on the idea that the official shooter is a patsy of some kind. Moreover, a patsy that has been influenced through the application of mind altering narcotics or some kind of chemical mind control or heavy suggestion or something like that. The thing with a patsy like that however is that they're not terribly efficient. So, you influence them to carry out the atrocity but they're unlikely to do a very good job (they probably can't even aim straight). So you have a marksman nearby who does most of the actual killing while the patsy can take the fall for the whole thing.
    That's the idea anyway.


  • #168
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yes they have ruled this out. :rolleyes:

    Please review the charter about displaying basic respect to other posters please.

    CpeHBG8UsAEnMYK.jpg


  • #169
    murphthesmurf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 732 ✭✭✭murphthesmurf


    chewed wrote: »
    OK, so I'm not entitled to my own opinions? I thought this was a "Conspiracy Theories" thread? No? Most of the posts appear to be fixated with supposed flashing lights from the lower windows!

    Of course you are, but just because they are your opinions doesn't make them right. There is nothing in the link you provided of any real significance.


  • #170
    sabat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭sabat


    There is something very bullsh1tty about the autobiographical details that have emerged about Paddock and his profile in terms of age, wealth and lack of criminal or psychiatric history is most atypical for a mass killer. My own theory is that he's ex-military or some government agency and that it's being kept quiet for the time being either while they get to the bottom of what he was really into, or just for PR reasons. He may have been involved in arms trafficking and/or money laundering- there is no such thing as a "pro-gambler" who operates using slot machines like Paddock was said to have done (sports betting or poker I could believe), and even if he had figured out some method of gaming the machines he would have been caught and blacklisted everywhere in Nevada pretty quickly.
    The nature of the attack itself shares a lot in common with those committed by other former soldiers like Charles Whitman, John Allen Muhammad and Timothy McVeigh in its methodical planning and detached remoteness from the victims whereas your average high school or cinema shooter likes to be right in amongst their victims.


  • #171
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    murphthesmurf wrote: »
    There is nothing in the link you provided of any real significance.

    Can you support this statement? Which of the "5 Glaring Inconsistencies" do you refute? Why? Specificity is preferred.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    WMP wrote: »
    I'm not looking for gory footage, rather some convincing proof to back up the official story.

    None of the footage I've seen matches the claim that 59 people were shot dead. I like everyone was shocked when the news broke, but I'm no longer convinced its real.

    Does it not occur to you that normal people wouldn't:

    a) Film someone dead on the ground
    b) Share it all over the internet

    We have not gotten to that stage in our society yet where that kind of **** is acceptable. Thank God.


  • #173
    DinkyDinosaur
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    DoctaDee wrote: »
    @ Dinky .. what do you believe genuinely happened in Vegas ? ... leaving aside any particular motives for it happening - just the raw detail of the event

    I wouldn't be arrogant enough to claim that I know what happened. What I do know for sure is that my BS detector is detecting that things don't add up. The possibilities are endless as to what actually happened.

    Things that don't add up for me:

    I haven't seen any video or photo evidence of any dead bodies. Or anyone injured. (Not that I enjoy that kind of thing, but its not as if I haven't seen photo's of dead bodies before. And if there really were deaths we owe it to them to bring the real killers to justice.)

    I watched a video last night and could clearly hear a girl say "there doesn't seem to be anyone hurt" I just can't seem to find that video right now. It was footage from the middle of the crowd.

    The brother just doesn't come across as genuine. And after looking into Sandy Hook and seeing the really bad acting in other hoaxes, a pattern begins to form pretty quickly. It was the brother that did it for me. I knew straight away something wasn't right.

    Lots of video's show gunshots sounding close by and then another round of shots that sound further away.

    There may not have been anyone wounded but if there were, there should be gunshot holes in the ground. I haven't seen any pictures of any gunshot holes yet.


  • #174
    ShowMeTheCash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    ShowMeTheCash wrote: »
    I make no assertions I just ask the question around the footage.

    The issue is that you don't seem to like the answers or explanations you are receiving

    Even Snopes has had to put something up
    http://www.snopes.com/second-gunman-shoot-fourth-floor-mandalay-bay/

    "There is no evidence to support the claim that there were multiple shooters or that those shooters’ muzzle flashes could be seen from the fourth floor of the resort. "

    You on the other hand I think have watched too many episodes of CSI.

    No, just spent far too much time on conspiracy theory forums

    No, I just don't like some of the reasons given, I say reasons they are not answers.
    You could argue a case with nonsense but your posistion could still be correct.
    The window not being broken, fact and verifiable.
    You cannot open the windows, fact and verifiable.
    Looking at the video and the sound it does appear there is an issue with the sound and the flashes for them to be the source, fact and to a degree verifiable.
    The idea it is a reflection - Theory.
    The idea it is a phone light/strobe - Theory.
    What is released to the press in terms of the investigation and trying to argue this as fact to prove a position is not verifiable by you or me.
    Hypotherically if this was a conspiricy then by defininition it would be miss information. (BTW I do not think they have given any false information I was just pointing out, you really do not know, you like everyone else takes this information on good faith).
    My original post was asking the question around the flashing light, was not saying it was a shooter was looking at the footage and trying to work out what it was. Your position was "It was not a shooter because the police released a statement stating there was only one shooter" is not evidence we can verifiy, if you think it is I suggest you spend less time on conspiricy forums they really are not for you!


  • #175
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    sabat wrote: »
    There is something very bullsh1tty about the autobiographical details that have emerged about Paddock and his profile in terms of age, wealth and lack of criminal or psychiatric history is most atypical for a mass killer. My own theory is that he's ex-military or some government agency and that it's being kept quiet for the time being either while they get to the bottom of what he was really into, or just for PR reasons. He may have been involved in arms trafficking and/or money laundering- there is no such thing as a "pro-gambler" who operates using slot machines like Paddock was said to have done (sports betting or poker I could believe), and even if he had figured out some method of gaming the machines he would have been caught and blacklisted everywhere in Nevada pretty quickly.
    The nature of the attack itself shares a lot in common with those committed by other former soldiers like Charles Whitman, John Allen Muhammad and Timothy McVeigh in its methodical planning and detached remoteness from the victims whereas your average high school or cinema shooter likes to be right in amongst their victims.
    That doesn't match with the analysis from some sources such as snopes, who point out he appears to have frequented the high stakes video poker machines:
    Video poker machines are a mainstay at casinos around Nevada, with most of the machines placed in bars where gamblers can play poker from their bar stools for 25 cents a hand. They look similar to slot machines.

    Paddock favored the high-dollar variety version of the game, whose machines are separate from the main video poker and slot areas. Players like Paddock use strategies that can minimize the house winnings and in some cases gain a minuscule mathematical advantage.

    Michael Shackleford, who runs a gambling strategy website called The Wizard of Odds, said based on what is known of Paddock’s life, the gunman seems to have been what the casinos refer to as a “premium mass” player — one who bets in higher amounts, with a better understanding of the game than the typical player.

    Premium mass players pay close attention to the odds in the game they’re playing and the payout, and they typically need access to a lot of money because they may have long dry spells where they lose exorbitant amounts.

    Eventually, Shackleford said, if players stay true to a perfect strategy — one designed to maximize their performance over the long haul, such as by getting rid of potentially decent cards like low pairs to increase chances of a big-payout royal flush — their luck will turn, based on statistics, and they’ll break even or come close to it. When you add in the freebies from the casino, the player can come out ahead.

    “Vegas is full of people that are basically just gambling for free,” Shackleford said. “I think the shooter was one of these people who was basically milking the system, getting free vacations.”

    Why do the casinos have games where the players can come out ahead?

    “It’s because there are so many bad players,” Shackleford said. “For every skilled player, there are probably 100 lousy players. They subsidize the skilled players.”

    The stress of having so much on the line isn’t for everyone, he said.

    “In any form of gambling, you need a strong stomach and you need to have a very cool head about the ups and down,” he said. “If this guy was a millionaire, it’s quite possible he was not bothered by the ups and down. He probably had steel nerves and was a difficult person to move emotionally.”

    It’s unknown how much he wagered, but he apparently had been wagering more than $10,000 a day in some cases.

    A.G. Burnett, the head of Nevada’s Gaming Control Board, said investigators are looking for enforcement actions, for any disputes Paddock may have had as a casino patron and at any federally required currency reports of transactions he made greater than $10,000.

    http://www.snopes.com/2017/10/05/vegas-shooters-gambling-draws-new-attention-video-poker/

    More from snopes:

    Unproven - Did an Unidentified Woman Warn Las Vegas Concert-Goers They Were 'All Going to Die'?

    (News): Clues Few and Elusive for Motive of Las Vegas Gunman


  • #176
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    DinkyDinosaur wrote: »
    I wouldn't be arrogant enough to claim that I know what happened. What I do know for sure is that my BS detector is detecting that things don't add up. The possibilities are endless as to what actually happened.

    Things that don't add up for me:

    I haven't seen any video or photo evidence of any dead bodies. Or anyone injured. (Not that I enjoy that kind of thing, but its not as if I haven't seen photo's of dead bodies before. And if there really were deaths we owe it to them to bring the real killers to justice.)

    I watched a video last night and could clearly hear a girl say "there doesn't seem to be anyone hurt" I just can't seem to find that video right now. It was footage from the middle of the crowd.

    The brother just doesn't come across as genuine. And after looking into Sandy Hook and seeing the really bad acting in other hoaxes, a pattern begins to form pretty quickly. It was the brother that did it for me. I knew straight away something wasn't right.

    Lots of video's show gunshots sounding close by and then another round of shots that sound further away.

    There may not have been anyone wounded but if there were, there should be gunshot holes in the ground. I haven't seen any pictures of any gunshot holes yet.

    I agree with you about the brother, definitely extremely weird guy.

    I don't get your point about Sandy Hook though? Are you saying Sandy Hook was a hoax? <Mod: Off-topic>


  • #177
    DinkyDinosaur
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    pilly wrote: »
    Does it not occur to you that normal people wouldn't:

    a) Film someone dead on the ground
    b) Share it all over the internet

    We have not gotten to that stage in our society yet where that kind of **** is acceptable. Thank God.

    So are you saying you think this photo is staged? By people who are not normal?

    http://yournewswire.com/las-vegas-shooting/


  • #178
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Mod: Sandy Hook has no relevance to this discussion. If you want to have a sidetalk about Sandy Hook, you can create a new thread for it as existing ones are several years old/locked/etc


  • #179
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    DinkyDinosaur wrote: »
    So are you saying you think this photo is staged? By people who are not normal?

    http://yournewswire.com/las-vegas-shooting/

    I won't click on that or look at it, I've no need to.


  • #180
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    pilly wrote: »
    Does it not occur to you that normal people wouldn't:

    a) Film someone dead on the ground
    b) Share it all over the internet

    We have not gotten to that stage in our society yet where that kind of **** is acceptable. Thank God.

    None of that means photos do not happen. Multiple user videos were operating during the concert, because concert. Most of which showed a lot of the initial moments of the attack. Photos and videos are primary sources of evidence, and it is not immoral to seek that information out. Nobody is glorifying the carnage in doing so. I don't feel there is a case for "moral outrage" at people for wishing to see said evidence.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    DinkyDinosaur
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    pilly wrote: »
    I agree with you about the brother, definitely extremely weird guy.

    <snip>

    <snip>


    I was heavily involved in the water protests and was in charge of one of the Says No to Water Charges pages. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it for myself but there were paid trolls who came onto the page trying to discredit the Says No movement. I got kind of good at giving them enough rope to hang themselves so it was obvious for all to see that they were indeed paid trolls.

    So that's a little bit about my background. It all seems so far fetched until you experience it for yourself the lengths these weirdo's will go to.


  • #182
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    Overheal wrote: »
    None of that means photos do not happen. Multiple user videos were operating during the concert, because concert. Most of which showed a lot of the initial moments of the attack. Photos and videos are primary sources of evidence, and it is not immoral to seek that information out. Nobody is glorifying the carnage in doing so. I don't feel there is a case for "moral outrage" at people for wishing to see said evidence.

    People want to see DEAD BODIES, INJURIES AND BLOOD as evidence?

    Why?

    Aren't the funerals that will take place over the coming weeks enough evidence that these people are dead?


  • #183
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mousewar wrote: »
    The "what's the point of a second shooter" question?. Answer seems obvious to me (not that I'm suggesting the conspiracy theories are true).
    A lot of the conspiracy theories around these type of shootings focus on the idea that the official shooter is a patsy of some kind. Moreover, a patsy that has been influenced through the application of mind altering narcotics or some kind of chemical mind control or heavy suggestion or something like that. The thing with a patsy like that however is that they're not terribly efficient. So, you influence them to carry out the atrocity but they're unlikely to do a very good job (they probably can't even aim straight). So you have a marksman nearby who does most of the actual killing while the patsy can take the fall for the whole thing.
    That's the idea anyway.
    But this just begs more questions even if we leave aside the dubious assumption that this is how they do or would operate.

    If the event is important enough that they need a specifically high body count and that a patsy is too unreliable to provide it, it's a bit of a risk to use such a pasty in the first place, so I'm unsure of what the benefit is for that.
    Most conspiracy theories don't suggest that he is a patsy. Some even claim he doesn't exist.
    Even then, assuming they need a patsy for whatever reason, there's easier ways to use him rather than with a second gunner. Simply kill him first, have the professional do the shooting from one position, leave the body as an apparent suicide, then slip away before the cops show up.
    Adding a second gunner adds a lot of risk in that it would leave clues to be found which apparently spoils the conspiracy.

    And again all of this is based on the assumption that such a patsy would be unable to cause so much destruction, which I'm not sure is a particularly solid one. If they were going to the bother of convincing and brainwashing this guy to go as far as mass shooting people, I don't see why they would be particularly worried about his abilities.

    The point of my question is that it highlights the absurdity of the premise.
    The only reason a second gunner exists is to provide clues and mistakes for keyboard detectives to find.
    If the Shadowy They existed and wanted to fake a mass shooting, then they wouldn't make so many pointless needlessly avoidable mistakes. Like for instance, a lot of the idea of a second gunner relies on apparent muzzle flashes: https://www.brownells.com/rifle-parts/muzzle-devices/flash-hiders/index.htm

    The only explanation I've seen that's logically consistent in how it explains why they leave such clues is that they are Satanists working evil magic on people and it needs them to leave clues for some reason.
    I've not heard any that are logically consistent and not silly.


  • #184
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    DinkyDinosaur wrote: »
    <snip>

    I was heavily involved in the water protests and was in charge of one of the Says No to Water Charges pages. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it for myself but there were paid trolls who came onto the page trying to discredit the Says No movement. I got kind of good at giving them enough rope to hang themselves so it was obvious for all to see that they were indeed paid trolls.

    So that's a little bit about my background. It all seems so far fetched until you experience it for yourself the lengths these weirdo's will go to.

    Okay, there's a huge stretch between paid trolls on a No to Water campaign and a mass shooting. Sorry but I don't buy it.


  • #185
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    pilly wrote: »
    People want to see DEAD BODIES, INJURIES AND BLOOD as evidence?

    Why?

    Aren't the funerals that will take place over the coming weeks enough evidence that these people are dead?

    Why? Forensic evidence. Forensic science is a huge element of law. That's why we have forensic analysts, morticians, ballistics experts, etc.

    For such a scale of an attack, it is a matter of public interest to desire access to at least the fundamental information: namely, photos and video of the attack and/or the aftermath. They can reveal a lot.

    Without video evidence, it would have been the word of Philandro Castille's girflfriend, and the police officer, as to what happened. Numerous other high profile cases where photography was paramount in informing the public about the situations - everything from Tamir Rice, to the coordinated attacks on September 11th, just for instance. There was also the original wikileaks dump which showed a US attack helicopter killing news reporters and killing first-responders to the scene of the attack. Many people would prefer to tackle this evidence first hand, rather than have it relayed by someone else.

    If you find it repugnant, that's your opinion, but it is not constructive to this discussion to wag the bell of shame at others who wish to explore the evidence.


  • #186
    sabat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭sabat


    Overheal wrote: »
    That doesn't match with the analysis from some sources such as snopes, who point out he appears to have frequented the high stakes video poker machines:

    It does match what I was saying about money laundering though...


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    ShowMeTheCash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    Have the released any footage of him taking the guns to the hotel room?


  • #188
    dicky dunne
    Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭dicky dunne


    DinkyDinosaur wrote: »
    I wouldn't be arrogant enough to claim that I know what happened. What I do know for sure is that my BS detector is detecting that things don't add up. The possibilities are endless as to what actually happened.

    Things that don't add up for me:

    I haven't seen any video or photo evidence of any dead bodies. Or anyone injured. (Not that I enjoy that kind of thing, but its not as if I haven't seen photo's of dead bodies before. And if there really were deaths we owe it to them to bring the real killers to justice.)

    I watched a video last night and could clearly hear a girl say "there doesn't seem to be anyone hurt" I just can't seem to find that video right now. It was footage from the middle of the crowd.

    The brother just doesn't come across as genuine. And after looking into Sandy Hook and seeing the really bad acting in other hoaxes, a pattern begins to form pretty quickly. It was the brother that did it for me. I knew straight away something wasn't right.

    Lots of video's show gunshots sounding close by and then another round of shots that sound further away.

    There may not have been anyone wounded but if there were, there should be gunshot holes in the ground. I haven't seen any pictures of any gunshot holes yet.

    I was in Vegas on Sunday night, the last night of my trip, on the flight home there was a couple who were on their honeymoon and cut it short as they were at the concert, he said it was mass panic and they didnt know where the gunfire was coming from, he also said he saw some horrific sights, but given the fact he was a normal human being he didnt stop to take pictures of the dead/wounded and instead rather ran for his life


  • #189
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Why are people asking to see the bodies blood etc? Are you really entertaining the possibility that no one was killed?

    Where They using a second shooter and both shooters were firing blanks? :confused:


  • #190
    Mousewar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,741 ✭✭✭Mousewar


    King Mob wrote: »
    But this just begs more questions even if we leave aside the dubious assumption that this is how they do or would operate.

    If the event is important enough that they need a specifically high body count and that a patsy is too unreliable to provide it, it's a bit of a risk to use such a pasty in the first place, so I'm unsure of what the benefit is for that.
    Most conspiracy theories don't suggest that he is a patsy. Some even claim he doesn't exist.

    Well, he exists as a patsy anyway as there is his name everywhere (whether he physically exists or not is, funnily enough, immaterial now).

    And you're unsure what the benefit of a patsy is? I mean, surely it's obvious, if this shadowy 'they' exist and want to carry out this kind of atrocity for whatever reason (gun control or whatever) then it's obvious why they need someone who is not them to take the rap?
    King Mob wrote: »
    Even then, assuming they need a patsy for whatever reason, there's easier ways to use him rather than with a second gunner. Simply kill him first, have the professional do the shooting from one position, leave the body as an apparent suicide, then slip away before the cops show up.

    Yes possibly, but I'm not sure it's that much more believable than the scenario as I presented it. And surely, having the patsy actually shooting makes it far easier for the authorities to accept him as the perpetrator.
    Again, I'm not suggesting this as true but you've gone on a lot about the ridiculousness of a second shooter but within the world of conspiracy it's as sound as anything else. Anyway, all you seemed to require was some kind of logical reason for one to be there and I think what I described meets that requirement (again I'm not supporting it).
    King Mob wrote: »
    Adding a second gunner adds a lot of risk in that it would leave clues to be found which apparently spoils the conspiracy.

    And again all of this is based on the assumption that such a patsy would be unable to cause so much destruction, which I'm not sure is a particularly solid one. If they were going to the bother of convincing and brainwashing this guy to go as far as mass shooting people, I don't see why they would be particularly worried about his abilities.

    Mind altering drugs leave you barely able to stand up, let alone aim and successfully fire an automatic weapon. The risk of adding a second shooter is justified by the fact that the whole plan would fail without one.
    King Mob wrote: »
    The point of my question is that it highlights the absurdity of the premise.
    The only reason a second gunner exists is to provide clues and mistakes for keyboard detectives to find.
    If the Shadowy They existed and wanted to fake a mass shooting, then they wouldn't make so many pointless needlessly avoidable mistakes. Like for instance, a lot of the idea of a second gunner relies on apparent muzzle flashes: https://www.brownells.com/rifle-parts/muzzle-devices/flash-hiders/index.htm

    The only explanation I've seen that's logically consistent in how it explains why they leave such clues is that they are Satanists working evil magic on people and it needs them to leave clues for some reason.
    I've not heard any that are logically consistent and not silly.

    The Satanists you find logical?


  • #191
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    Overheal wrote: »
    Why? Forensic evidence. Forensic science is a huge element of law. That's why we have forensic analysts, morticians, ballistics experts, etc.

    For such a scale of an attack, it is a matter of public interest to desire access to at least the fundamental information: namely, photos and video of the attack and/or the aftermath. They can reveal a lot.

    Without video evidence, it would have been the word of Philandro Castille's girflfriend, and the police officer, as to what happened. Numerous other high profile cases where photography was paramount in informing the public about the situations - everything from Tamir Rice, to the coordinated attacks on September 11th, just for instance. There was also the original wikileaks dump which showed a US attack helicopter killing news reporters and killing first-responders to the scene of the attack. Many people would prefer to tackle this evidence first hand, rather than have it relayed by someone else.

    If you find it repugnant, that's your opinion, but it is not constructive to this discussion to wag the bell of shame at others who wish to explore the evidence.

    Forensic evidence and science? Sorry, didn't realise you were a forensic analyst on the case. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    pilly wrote: »
    Forensic evidence and science? Sorry, didn't realise you were a forensic analyst on the case. :rolleyes:

    I don't think someone has to be to want to see first hand evidence. Knock off the snarky attitude.


  • #193
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,584 ✭✭✭weisses


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yes they have ruled this out. :rolleyes:

    Can you point towards a credible source stating this ?


  • #194
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    King Mob wrote: »
    Why are people asking to see the bodies blood etc? Are you really entertaining the possibility that no one was killed?

    Where They using a second shooter and both shooters were firing blanks? :confused:

    There were even some claiming that the sound of the gunfire was coming from the speakers, initially. Obviously I believe that its easy to debunk this wasn't the case.


  • #195
    RocketRaccoon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,542 ✭✭✭RocketRaccoon


    WMP wrote: »
    I'm not looking for gory footage, rather some convincing proof to back up the official story.

    None of the footage I've seen matches the claim that 59 people were shot dead. I like everyone was shocked when the news broke, but I'm no longer convinced its real.

    I have told you there is a video out there which will show you exactly what you want to see. It is a man running around between bodies seeing if they can be saved, he checks pulses etc.


  • #196
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,584 ✭✭✭weisses


    Overheal wrote: »
    Why? Forensic evidence. Forensic science is a huge element of law. That's why we have forensic analysts, morticians, ballistics experts, etc.

    After that piece from John Oliver my believe in these so called experts took a nose dive

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScmJvmzDcG0


  • #197
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    weisses wrote: »
    After that piece from John Oliver my believe in these so called experts took a nose dive

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScmJvmzDcG0

    Sure. But the body of that deep-dive from Oliver doesn't much apply to seeking out the primary evidence of the attack in this case, more to how science applies towards convictions within law. Given that the shooter is dead, I don't think he will get his day in court.


  • #198
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mousewar wrote: »
    Well, he exists as a patsy anyway as there is his name everywhere (whether he physically exists or not is, funnily enough, immaterial now).

    And you're unsure what the benefit of a patsy is? I mean, surely it's obvious, if this shadowy 'they' exist and want to carry out this kind of atrocity for whatever reason (gun control or whatever) then it's obvious why they need someone who is not them to take the rap?
    This is true. But it can be easily achieved without going to the bother of mind controlling some random guy and pumping him full of drugs to the point where he can't actually do the thing you want him to do. It seems a bit more round about.
    Mousewar wrote: »
    Yes possibly, but I'm not sure it's that much more believable than the scenario as I presented it. And surely, having the patsy actually shooting makes it far easier for the authorities to accept him as the perpetrator.
    But to pull off the conspiracy, specially with the second shooter, you're going to need the authorities in your pocket anyway, so I'm not sure why that would be a concern.
    Mousewar wrote: »
    Again, I'm not suggesting this as true but you're gone on a lot about the ridiculousness of a second shooter but within the world of conspiracy it's as sound as anything else.
    Anyway, all you seemed to require was some kind of logical reason for one to be there and I think what I described meets that requirement (again I'm not supporting it).
    I grant you that your suggestion is more well thought out and viable than most suggestions that I've seen.
    Mousewar wrote: »
    Mind altering drugs leave you barely able to stand up, let alone aim and successfully fire an automatic weapon. The risk of adding a second shooter is justified by the fact that the whole plan would fail without one.
    But this is a bit of a tautology. They need to risk a second shooter when they are taking the risk of using a drugged up patsy... Maybe if they pulled back on the drugs a bit or give him something to make him wired it would be far easier.
    And this is assuming that we can say anything authoritative about the effects of the mind controlling drugs the Shadowy They are using...
    Mousewar wrote: »
    The Satanists you find logical?
    More self-consistent at least. It doesn't run into the same logical problems that other explanations do.
    But it's far from a viable or reasonable or sane explanation


  • #199
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,584 ✭✭✭weisses


    Overheal wrote: »
    Sure. But the body of that deep-dive from Oliver doesn't much apply to seeking out the primary evidence of the attack in this case, more to how science applies towards convictions within law. Given that the shooter is dead, I don't think he will get his day in court.

    True .... Would be interesting to see though what comes up in regards to possible forensic evidence collected from the room


  • #200
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,167 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Maybe if they pulled back on the drugs a bit or give him something to make him wired it would be far easier.
    I'm just thinking of the movie Shooter, where no special drugs or mind control were needed, just clever manipulation of the patsy ;) but I digress.


  • #201
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,345 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Overheal wrote: »
    I'm just thinking of the movie Shooter, where no special drugs or mind control were needed, just clever manipulation of the patsy ;) but I digress.
    Or there's the possibility that they simply find someone with the predisposition to go on a mass shooting and give him a hand. Or they just suppress warning signs and investigations to allow someone to do the mass shooting they were planning on anyway.

    There are tons of ways to use a single shooter that doesn't leave a clear, easily findable clue.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement