1] Sixteen questions that needed to be answered (a few have subsequently been addressed):
Idaho Congressional candidate Michael Snyder raised some pointed questions, prefacing:
2] The attack-dog journalism response led to an onward response:The public is not being told the truth about what really went down in Las Vegas. As you will see below, the evidence is mounting that there were multiple shooters and that this was an operation that was planned well in advance. But according to the mainstream media, a 64-year-old retired accountant with a flabby physique who had no military training whatsoever and wasn't very experienced with guns was able to pull the whole thing off all by himself. We are being told that Paddock was a "lone wolf" who didn't have any ties to terror groups, and since he is now dead, nobody is ever going to be able to interrogate him. But the American people definitely deserve some answers about what took place, and that means all of us should keep digging.The following are 16 unanswered questions about the Las Vegas shooting that the mainstream media does not want to talk about . . .
Michael Snyder responded to attacks in the media for asking his sixteen questions, starting:
3] Natural News raised questions about the plausibility of the claimed lone wolf shooter carrying out the attack (noting that the issue is whether he could have acted ALONE to effect the attack):I didn't expect that I would be getting "the Trump treatment" this early in the campaign. Last week, I wrote an article about the Las Vegas shooting that posed 16 questions I did not feel were being addressed by the mainstream media adequately enough. That article was picked up by Zero Hedge, and it has now been read more than 1.6 million times.All along, I have never claimed to know exactly what happened in Las Vegas. But I feel very strongly that there is nothing wrong with asking questions. In the old days, that is what real journalists would actually do. Unfortunately, the art of critical thinking has almost entirely disappeared from the field of journalism, and so it is up to us in the alternative media to ask the hard questions that "professional journalists" used to pursue.The emails have been pouring in from many others who also have serious questions about what happened in Las Vegas, but according to the Idaho Statesman, it was improper for me to ever raise any of these questions at all . . .
Even highly trained Navy Seals would have a difficult time running a full auto weapon for 10 minutes straight. Such weapon systems are brutal on the operator. They require tremendous strength, stamina and expert troubleshooting to keep running. Full-auto weapons overheat and jam. They demand incredible strength to keep aimed on target. They require expert reloading and weapons clearing in the case of jams, and the hotel room would have been so full of smoke and powder residue that it would be almost impossible to keep breathing from that enclosed space.
Far from what the firearms-illiterate media claims, these are not systems that any Joe off the street can just pick up and use to effortlessly mow down 500 people. Running these systems requires extensive training, experience and stamina. It is physically impossible for a guy like Stephen Paddock to operate such a system in the sustained, effective manner that we witnessed, especially when shooting from an elevated position which throws off all the ranging of the weapon system.
Far from being a Navy Seal, Stephen Paddock is a retired accountant senior citizen with a gambling problem and a flabby physique . . .4] Acoustic evidence is being raised as indicating a second shooter NOT in the Mandalay Hotel:
After a detailed forensic acoustics analysis rooted in science and physics, I have affirmatively identified the range / distance of a second shooter at the Las Vegas massacre. A detailed analysis video, complete with two whiteboards explaining the acoustics science, will be posted here this Tuesday.Vid no 1:
UPDATE: The video has now been released! See the full video, below…
I have also forensically confirmed that some rifle rounds were, indeed, coming from a range that is consistent with the distance of the Mandalay Bay hotel. This analysis is rooted in bullet time of flight acoustic analysis (forensic acoustics), and it is irrefutable proof based on the laws of physics. These are bombshell revelations that may change the course of the investigation. All the math will be clearly spelled out for you in the upcoming video to be posted here on Tuesday.
To repeat: YES, my analysis confirms that at least one shooter was almost certainly positioned at the Mandalay Bay. But a second shooter is also clearly identified at a significantly closer range through forensic acoustic analysis. I repeat: There were at least TWO shooters in play, operating at two very different ranges. One of these ranges is much closer to the concert venue than the Mandalay Bay property. The evidence is already encoded in all the audio of all the videos posted on YouTube . . .
Vid no 2:
(NB: The videos -- apparently unknowingly -- present a form of "crack-thump" analysis. The sharp, high frequency cracks heard are more likely to be sonic booms from supersonic rounds passing near the microphones on the cell phones being used to capture most of the recordings we can see, not pavement hits. With, the thumps being the reports from the discharge of the firearms. And yes, the similar crack of a whip is a miniature sonic boom as the tip speeds up. Lag time analysis is used also for things like estimating range of an earthquake due to different arrival times of P and S waves that typically travel at 5 and 3 km/s. The method is fundamentally sound, the results need to be confirmed by others.)
While the above is not an endorsement, it is a drawing together of evidence that needs to be pondered to gain a more balanced picture than is present in the dominant media narratives. And, the need for that for many, many topics, is the underlying reason for this post and the one yesterday. END
