BROKEN:: biggest US government orchestrated shooting in history - 500+ wounded

[Mad7Scientist]

Breaking news on TV. Mass shooting 57+ dead. Almost as high as automotive crash deaths in a typical day in the US. Las Vegas Nevad. He shot from a hotel room window down to a big crowd at a music festival. They say the shooter shot himself. According to TV, the shooter's home as been searched and the garage door on his home is completely destroyed. What's up with that?

Enough people were killed to get close to the number of vehicle accident deaths in a typical day in the US, which is around 92.

These kinds of things are usually orchestrated by the government. Why? Gun control? Blaming it Islam?

He probably could have used several an RPGs and done more damage. But he used a gun, which is typically what's done to support the gun control agenda when a bomb could have otherwise been used to do more damage.

Sandy Hook turned out out to be a lie. The school wasn't even open and the victims were all fictitious characters. Is it some kind of government test to see what people will believe?

The target was a County Music concert, not some music festival full of extreme left hippies. If the government was involved in making it happen then they wouldn't want to target their own supporters.

Just think of how things like this happen all the time in Iraq and similar places but when we read about it we don't think much of it. Another 70 people killed in a bombing is just another day.

Is it possible that foreign terrorists actually did this but the police found an innocent man to blame it on? It makes perfect sense if you think about it. They went in, killed the terrorists, then they checked a gun ownership database for all people in the building, which is easily obtained from the all cell phones located in the building. Then they found someone who owned guns, went and got him then put him in the terrorist's room and shot him. This would explain why the news is saying he may have checked in under a false name, since he wouldn't have actually been in that room. And it explains why two windows were broken and how so many people died in such a short time. Audio recordings will tell if multiple guns fired at once. The real terrorists were then smuggled out of the building. The raid of the man's home then fixed any descrepencies of evidence needed to be done. I'm almost sure any security camera recordings were confiscated first thing. Now that all that's covered up the cover story can be used for more gun control, and the terrorist act is defeated in the best way possible way. Even if ISIS claims to be behind the attack, if nobody believes them then it doesn't matter.

This post has been edited lots of times.

[1714193651]

1714193651

[1714193651]

1714193651

[1714193651]

1714193651

[1714193651]

1714193651

[allthingsluxury]

We shall see... Need much more proof.

[eminemcookie]

Given that it was a white American citizen I don't think they will be blaming it on Islam or even labelling it as a terror incident.

[Tribizz]

As @allthingsluxury said let wait to get more proof before we can jump into conclusion.
 

[Crankautist]

Gun free zones mother fuckas.

If we just had 2 niggas with a gun there they would have shot dead that muslim pig in half a second.

[Mad7Scientist]

As @allthingsluxury said let wait to get more proof before we can jump into conclusion.

I got fooled by 9/11 believing the official story at first. Not falling for that again!!!!

[Fortify]

The dust hasn't even settled and you are already claiming a conspiracy theory. It's sad that some people are so disillusioned with reality that they have to make up stories to get attention or try to antagonize others. I feel bad that your life is so sad that you have to pounce on tragedies like this.

[Crankautist]

As @allthingsluxury said let wait to get more proof before we can jump into conclusion.
 

You two are fucktarded idiots.

I hop3 n3xt time muslim pigs will get you.

[Mad7Scientist]

The dust hasn't even settled and you are already claiming a conspiracy theory. It's sad that some people are so disillusioned with reality that they have to make up stories to get attention or try to antagonize others. I feel bad that your life is so sad that you have to pounce on tragedies like this.

Often the first news out is the most accurate. They as the days pass they try to change the story.

You're the one who is sad. At the end of it you'll go around voting for gun grabbers and accusing people who believe in self defense of being mentally unstable saying that such people are likely to go crazy and shoot people. In reality there is no way to know who shot from the hotel and the accused shooter is dead and has no defense. You have to trust the Las Vegas police. Everything you know of comes through them. If they lie then the whole story can be a lie. Somebody could shoot from that window, then shoot a scape goat and claim that he did it then leave.

The news says that he had 10 guns on his bed, and that would be coming through the police. Very strange. That's way more guns than necessary. Sounds like something that would be done for a political reason like gun control and getting the public to be fearful of people who have an interest in guns, since they will often own many different kinds.

[robbylove]

-------------------------------------------------
Why would I want to vote against Trump but for people like that? Sad.

[BADecker]

The answer is basic. Here is a simple example.

Imagine you are driving your neighbor to work a couple times a week. Every time, your neighbor asks that you stop at the local convenience store to pick up a bottle of water to drink at work. If your neighbor robs the convenience store while you are in the car waiting, and especially if your neighbor kills someone in the store during the robbery, as you drive away, are you not an accomplice to both the robbery and the murder? The law will look at it as though you are, and you just might have a very difficult time explaining your way out of it.

In other words, the hotel across the street was an accomplice.

In Arizona and some other states where it is free to open or conceal carry, the law states that, if a place of business wants to deprive you of your right to bring weapons into their building, onto their premises, they need to provide lock-boxes for you to place your weapons into, and also provide the security for you that you would have done for yourself if they had allowed you to keep your gun.

If hotels and businesses took security serious, they would provide some REAL security, and check their "guests'" luggage for weapons thoroughly.

The hotel might be considered innocent by standard law. But if people wake up to what is going on, they just might be able to sue the hotel for $zillions in damages. Security just might become an individual thing for all business. And, as somebody mentioned above, arm the populace so that they can protect themselves (It's the people that are too chicken to arm themselves; they would rather die in mass shootings like this.).

Roughly 95% of the people are good people who would never harm anyone. Even among the 5% of bad people, only a few would ever do something like this. If everyone wore a gun strapped to his thigh, people would learn to respect each other, and most of the 5% would be too scared to try anything against the people at all. The few who did would be dead in short order.

Gun respect with an armed populace might take a bit of time to get going... because of how far away from self-protection the people have moved. It will take a while for them to get used to it once it is started. But get used to it, or die. Why? Because gun control means slavery. Death is the greatest form of slavery, because you can't even wiggle in the grave.

[robbylove]

The answer is basic. Here is a simple example.

Imagine you are driving your neighbor to work a couple times a week. Every time, your neighbor asks that you stop at the local convenience store to pick up a bottle of water to drink at work. If your neighbor robs the convenience store while you are in the car waiting, and especially if your neighbor kills someone in the store during the robbery, as you drive away, are you not an accomplice to both the robbery and the murder? The law will look at it as though you are, and you just might have a very difficult time explaining your way out of it.

In other words, the hotel across the street was an accomplice.

In Arizona and some other states where it is free to open or conceal carry, the law states that, if a place of business wants to deprive you of your right to bring weapons into their building, onto their premises, they need to provide lock-boxes for you to place your weapons into, and also provide the security for you that you would have done for yourself if they had allowed you to keep your gun.

If hotels and businesses took security serious, they would provide some REAL security, and check their "guests'" luggage for weapons thoroughly.

The hotel might be considered innocent by standard law. But if people wake up to what is going on, they just might be able to sue the hotel for $zillions in damages. Security just might become an individual thing for all business. And, as somebody mentioned above, arm the populace so that they can protect themselves (It's the people that are too chicken to arm themselves; they would rather die in mass shootings like this.).

Roughly 95% of the people are good people who would never harm anyone. Even among the 5% of bad people, only a few would ever do something like this. If everyone wore a gun strapped to his thigh, people would learn to respect each other, and most of the 5% would be too scared to try anything against the people at all. The few who did would be dead in short order.

Gun respect with an armed populace might take a bit of time to get going... because of how far away from self-protection the people have moved. It will take a while for them to get used to it once it is started. But get used to it, or die. Why? Because gun control means slavery. Death is the greatest form of slavery, because you can't even wiggle in the grave.

So you are saying people should not miss this great opportunity to make money for their lawyers? Since I grew up with Christian values, I have a hard time understanding this type of mindset, looking to make a quick buck, turning death into a profit, etc, but I can understand it is useful for some people...

[salinizm]

United states of america is the biggest creator of ongoing terrorism on earth. There is not the shadow of a doubt that this brutally horrible attack was orchestrated by United States' official forces . This brutal reality is so saddening.

[BADecker]

The answer is basic. Here is a simple example.

Imagine you are driving your neighbor to work a couple times a week. Every time, your neighbor asks that you stop at the local convenience store to pick up a bottle of water to drink at work. If your neighbor robs the convenience store while you are in the car waiting, and especially if your neighbor kills someone in the store during the robbery, as you drive away, are you not an accomplice to both the robbery and the murder? The law will look at it as though you are, and you just might have a very difficult time explaining your way out of it.

In other words, the hotel across the street was an accomplice.

In Arizona and some other states where it is free to open or conceal carry, the law states that, if a place of business wants to deprive you of your right to bring weapons into their building, onto their premises, they need to provide lock-boxes for you to place your weapons into, and also provide the security for you that you would have done for yourself if they had allowed you to keep your gun.

If hotels and businesses took security serious, they would provide some REAL security, and check their "guests'" luggage for weapons thoroughly.

The hotel might be considered innocent by standard law. But if people wake up to what is going on, they just might be able to sue the hotel for $zillions in damages. Security just might become an individual thing for all business. And, as somebody mentioned above, arm the populace so that they can protect themselves (It's the people that are too chicken to arm themselves; they would rather die in mass shootings like this.).

Roughly 95% of the people are good people who would never harm anyone. Even among the 5% of bad people, only a few would ever do something like this. If everyone wore a gun strapped to his thigh, people would learn to respect each other, and most of the 5% would be too scared to try anything against the people at all. The few who did would be dead in short order.

Gun respect with an armed populace might take a bit of time to get going... because of how far away from self-protection the people have moved. It will take a while for them to get used to it once it is started. But get used to it, or die. Why? Because gun control means slavery. Death is the greatest form of slavery, because you can't even wiggle in the grave.

So you are saying people should not miss this great opportunity to make money for their lawyers? Since I grew up with Christian values, I have a hard time understanding this type of mindset, looking to make a quick buck, turning death into a profit, etc, but I can understand it is useful for some people...

Are you telling me what I am saying? Or are you asking me? If you are asking, did I say anything about lawyers? Part of the mindset of people is to turn to lawyers when they shouldn't. People have been brainwashed into thinking that lawyers have to be part of the deal, just like they have been brainwashed into thinking that the police will protect them. Just ask these dead and injured how much protection they got from the police. Just look at the people in prison to see how much protection they got from their lawyers.

The Christian way is to forgive an injury done between "brothers." This doesn't include public mass shootings. The church has brainwashed you into wrong thinking. Why? Because it is an arm of the Government - it has a Government 501 c 3 number. Let the brainwashing continue until you are fully within Government slavery.

Gun control brings death = full slavery.

[robbylove]

The answer is basic. Here is a simple example.

Imagine you are driving your neighbor to work a couple times a week. Every time, your neighbor asks that you stop at the local convenience store to pick up a bottle of water to drink at work. If your neighbor robs the convenience store while you are in the car waiting, and especially if your neighbor kills someone in the store during the robbery, as you drive away, are you not an accomplice to both the robbery and the murder? The law will look at it as though you are, and you just might have a very difficult time explaining your way out of it.

In other words, the hotel across the street was an accomplice.

In Arizona and some other states where it is free to open or conceal carry, the law states that, if a place of business wants to deprive you of your right to bring weapons into their building, onto their premises, they need to provide lock-boxes for you to place your weapons into, and also provide the security for you that you would have done for yourself if they had allowed you to keep your gun.

If hotels and businesses took security serious, they would provide some REAL security, and check their "guests'" luggage for weapons thoroughly.

The hotel might be considered innocent by standard law. But if people wake up to what is going on, they just might be able to sue the hotel for $zillions in damages. Security just might become an individual thing for all business. And, as somebody mentioned above, arm the populace so that they can protect themselves (It's the people that are too chicken to arm themselves; they would rather die in mass shootings like this.).

Roughly 95% of the people are good people who would never harm anyone. Even among the 5% of bad people, only a few would ever do something like this. If everyone wore a gun strapped to his thigh, people would learn to respect each other, and most of the 5% would be too scared to try anything against the people at all. The few who did would be dead in short order.

Gun respect with an armed populace might take a bit of time to get going... because of how far away from self-protection the people have moved. It will take a while for them to get used to it once it is started. But get used to it, or die. Why? Because gun control means slavery. Death is the greatest form of slavery, because you can't even wiggle in the grave.

So you are saying people should not miss this great opportunity to make money for their lawyers? Since I grew up with Christian values, I have a hard time understanding this type of mindset, looking to make a quick buck, turning death into a profit, etc, but I can understand it is useful for some people...

Are you telling me what I am saying? Or are you asking me? If you are asking, did I say anything about lawyers? Part of the mindset of people is to turn to lawyers when they shouldn't. People have been brainwashed into thinking that lawyers have to be part of the deal, just like they have been brainwashed into thinking that the police will protect them. Just ask these dead and injured how much protection they got from the police. Just look at the people in prison to see how much protection they got from their lawyers.

The Christian way is to forgive an injury done between "brothers." This doesn't include public mass shootings. The church has brainwashed you into wrong thinking. Why? Because it is an arm of the Government - it has a Government 501 c 3 number. Let the brainwashing continue until you are fully within Government slavery.

Gun control brings death = full slavery.

Are you telling me what the Bible is saying? Or are you asking me what an infidel is? No such thing as to not help a non Christian in the bible, and I read the Bible ions ago. Obviously the people will have to hire lawyers if they want to sue a multi billion hotel business, that is reality.

 

Now if only we could talk about the victims, lots of them Christians Trump supporters, and the real criminal, the killer.

[BADecker]

The answer is basic. Here is a simple example.

Imagine you are driving your neighbor to work a couple times a week. Every time, your neighbor asks that you stop at the local convenience store to pick up a bottle of water to drink at work. If your neighbor robs the convenience store while you are in the car waiting, and especially if your neighbor kills someone in the store during the robbery, as you drive away, are you not an accomplice to both the robbery and the murder? The law will look at it as though you are, and you just might have a very difficult time explaining your way out of it.

In other words, the hotel across the street was an accomplice.

In Arizona and some other states where it is free to open or conceal carry, the law states that, if a place of business wants to deprive you of your right to bring weapons into their building, onto their premises, they need to provide lock-boxes for you to place your weapons into, and also provide the security for you that you would have done for yourself if they had allowed you to keep your gun.

If hotels and businesses took security serious, they would provide some REAL security, and check their "guests'" luggage for weapons thoroughly.

The hotel might be considered innocent by standard law. But if people wake up to what is going on, they just might be able to sue the hotel for $zillions in damages. Security just might become an individual thing for all business. And, as somebody mentioned above, arm the populace so that they can protect themselves (It's the people that are too chicken to arm themselves; they would rather die in mass shootings like this.).

Roughly 95% of the people are good people who would never harm anyone. Even among the 5% of bad people, only a few would ever do something like this. If everyone wore a gun strapped to his thigh, people would learn to respect each other, and most of the 5% would be too scared to try anything against the people at all. The few who did would be dead in short order.

Gun respect with an armed populace might take a bit of time to get going... because of how far away from self-protection the people have moved. It will take a while for them to get used to it once it is started. But get used to it, or die. Why? Because gun control means slavery. Death is the greatest form of slavery, because you can't even wiggle in the grave.

So you are saying people should not miss this great opportunity to make money for their lawyers? Since I grew up with Christian values, I have a hard time understanding this type of mindset, looking to make a quick buck, turning death into a profit, etc, but I can understand it is useful for some people...

Are you telling me what I am saying? Or are you asking me? If you are asking, did I say anything about lawyers? Part of the mindset of people is to turn to lawyers when they shouldn't. People have been brainwashed into thinking that lawyers have to be part of the deal, just like they have been brainwashed into thinking that the police will protect them. Just ask these dead and injured how much protection they got from the police. Just look at the people in prison to see how much protection they got from their lawyers.

The Christian way is to forgive an injury done between "brothers." This doesn't include public mass shootings. The church has brainwashed you into wrong thinking. Why? Because it is an arm of the Government - it has a Government 501 c 3 number. Let the brainwashing continue until you are fully within Government slavery.

Gun control brings death = full slavery.

Are you telling me what the Bible is saying? Or are you asking me what an infidel is? No such thing as to not help a non Christian in the bible, and I read the Bible ions ago. Obviously the people will have to hire lawyers if they want to sue a multi billion hotel business, that is reality.

 

Now if only we could talk about the victims, lots of them Christians Trump supporters, and the real criminal, the killer.

No, they don't have to hire lawyers. That kind of thinking is brainwashing done by the legal system.

Obviously, there is no way to repay for loss of life as done in this tragedy. What does that have to do with not helping a non-Christian? Why do you even bring this up?

[okala]

We should pray for Devine intervention as the most secure countries in the world are having this high rate of insecurity. I do pray for the soul of the departed to rest in peace.

[robbylove]

We should pray for Devine intervention as the most secure countries in the world are having this high rate of insecurity. I do pray for the soul of the departed to rest in peace.

Amen.

[robbylove]

The answer is basic. Here is a simple example.

Imagine you are driving your neighbor to work a couple times a week. Every time, your neighbor asks that you stop at the local convenience store to pick up a bottle of water to drink at work. If your neighbor robs the convenience store while you are in the car waiting, and especially if your neighbor kills someone in the store during the robbery, as you drive away, are you not an accomplice to both the robbery and the murder? The law will look at it as though you are, and you just might have a very difficult time explaining your way out of it.

In other words, the hotel across the street was an accomplice.

In Arizona and some other states where it is free to open or conceal carry, the law states that, if a place of business wants to deprive you of your right to bring weapons into their building, onto their premises, they need to provide lock-boxes for you to place your weapons into, and also provide the security for you that you would have done for yourself if they had allowed you to keep your gun.

If hotels and businesses took security serious, they would provide some REAL security, and check their "guests'" luggage for weapons thoroughly.

The hotel might be considered innocent by standard law. But if people wake up to what is going on, they just might be able to sue the hotel for $zillions in damages. Security just might become an individual thing for all business. And, as somebody mentioned above, arm the populace so that they can protect themselves (It's the people that are too chicken to arm themselves; they would rather die in mass shootings like this.).

Roughly 95% of the people are good people who would never harm anyone. Even among the 5% of bad people, only a few would ever do something like this. If everyone wore a gun strapped to his thigh, people would learn to respect each other, and most of the 5% would be too scared to try anything against the people at all. The few who did would be dead in short order.

Gun respect with an armed populace might take a bit of time to get going... because of how far away from self-protection the people have moved. It will take a while for them to get used to it once it is started. But get used to it, or die. Why? Because gun control means slavery. Death is the greatest form of slavery, because you can't even wiggle in the grave.

So you are saying people should not miss this great opportunity to make money for their lawyers? Since I grew up with Christian values, I have a hard time understanding this type of mindset, looking to make a quick buck, turning death into a profit, etc, but I can understand it is useful for some people...

Are you telling me what I am saying? Or are you asking me? If you are asking, did I say anything about lawyers? Part of the mindset of people is to turn to lawyers when they shouldn't. People have been brainwashed into thinking that lawyers have to be part of the deal, just like they have been brainwashed into thinking that the police will protect them. Just ask these dead and injured how much protection they got from the police. Just look at the people in prison to see how much protection they got from their lawyers.

The Christian way is to forgive an injury done between "brothers." This doesn't include public mass shootings. The church has brainwashed you into wrong thinking. Why? Because it is an arm of the Government - it has a Government 501 c 3 number. Let the brainwashing continue until you are fully within Government slavery.

Gun control brings death = full slavery.

Are you telling me what the Bible is saying? Or are you asking me what an infidel is? No such thing as to not help a non Christian in the bible, and I read the Bible ions ago. Obviously the people will have to hire lawyers if they want to sue a multi billion hotel business, that is reality.

 

Now if only we could talk about the victims, lots of them Christians Trump supporters, and the real criminal, the killer.

No, they don't have to hire lawyers. That kind of thinking is brainwashing done by the legal system.

Obviously, there is no way to repay for loss of life as done in this tragedy. What does that have to do with not helping a non-Christian? Why do you even bring this up?

You said "The Christian way is to forgive an injury done between "brothers." This doesn't include public mass shootings. " I say there is not way for a Christian to know who is a brother or not a brother and should help everybody.

This is how I feel from all those years spending my time on Po&So: We can believe we are good or we can believe we are bad from birth. That is pretty much what you see here and in real life, no matter the shape this takes. I believe we are good from birth, but that is not a way for me to make money or to control other people's life through taxation, or the way they breathe, or the way they've chosen to defend themselves. Common laws are the natural law of creation, but a multi billion hotel that can hire goons to threaten your children is not "good". You have to have lawyers because it is reality, even if we should not have to. This is where they get you, not because you won't crack but because they know you'll not let people you love be a pressure control device against you.

Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's
Sounds like Somebody is acknowledging the power of State and taxation.

[Torque]

Supposedly the shooter sprayed the crowd from his hotel window on the 32nd floor.

Mandalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas. Thick tinted, insulated plate glass windows that can't be opened from the inside. Completely sealed. For climate control purposes as well as to deter jumpers. For someone to shoot out or smash those windows, it would make one hell of a noise. Not to mention the shards of glass raining down into the streets below, hitting anyone in it's path. At least someone would see it or hear it, either inside the hotel or on the street. But no one did.

But what if... the window was still completely intact during the shooting?

Photo from the night during the shooting:
https://i.imgur.com/A2PDtbQ.jpg

Photo of the next morning:
https://i.imgur.com/jbyxsnO.jpg

And if there was only one shooter, then why are there two windows smashed?