• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The LV Shooter

Thoreau72 said:
At 27 days in, it is starting to appear that the shooters were somehow in the employ or under the influence of the FBI. Is this another case of some FBI stooges being set up in another sting, maybe one that spun out of control and real ammo was involved?

Poor Chief Lombardo, with every press conference he looks more like the cat who swallowed the canary, and he's having trouble holding it down each time he has to repeat the official lie.

Not to worry, most Americans will simply buy into it just as they did with Pulse and SB, and by Thanksgiving they will have forgotten that it happened. Next October the media will dutifully remind us on the anniversary, and it will be sealed in their collective mind, just like Sandy Hook.
Click to expand...

Let’s see some evidence for your claim they were in the employ or under the influence of the FBI.

I highly doubt the chief cares even a tiny bit about the opinions of some CT loons. And those are the only people with the same opinions as you. I think he will be ok.

It’s funny you make up lies about the other shootings but have zero evidence to back up your claims. Wonder why that is
 
braindrain said:
Let’s see some evidence for your claim they were in the employ or under the influence of the FBI.

I highly doubt the chief cares even a tiny bit about the opinions of some CT loons. And those are the only people with the same opinions as you. I think he will be ok.

It’s funny you make up lies about the other shootings but have zero evidence to back up your claims. Wonder why that is
Click to expand...

T72 is known to make statements and not provide sources or evidence to back them up. Don't expect any.
 
Some have bought into Mike Adam's analysis as accurate and true in establishing there was a second shooter. Adam admits he is not a sound expert. Here are a couple of vids done by a private citizen (don't know the background) that pretty much indicates a single shooter from the room the LV shooter rented.

Watch and make up your own mind on which vids are more likely accurate.






You may have to log into youtube to watch the shooting animation.

 
Well I listened to most of it Mike, and somehow it reminds me of the Stutt & Legge analysis of the FDR for 77. Interesting, but not compelling.

My little town has one of those systems to locate firing points. Not really sure if it's worth the money spent, but it looks good in the newspapers.

In this case, the analysis presents true information, but in many ways it incorporates much of what Adams did. We already knew that, but thanks.

This guy seems to place much emphasis on the cab audio, and I don't think Adams even mentioned that. At least this guy brings up the missing brass, so really he talks about more things than Adams did, and this guy seems to make many assumptions that Adams did not. Essentially, this guy puts window dressing on the long bankrupt official story.

It would be interesting to see Adams' critique of this analysis. As I say, it presents solid points and science, but in the end it sounds more like just a more elaborate telling of the same old story.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Well I listened to most of it Mike, and somehow it reminds me of the Stutt & Legge analysis of the FDR for 77. Interesting, but not compelling.

My little town has one of those systems to locate firing points. Not really sure if it's worth the money spent, but it looks good in the newspapers.

In this case, the analysis presents true information, but in many ways it incorporates much of what Adams did. We already knew that, but thanks.

This guy seems to place much emphasis on the cab audio, and I don't think Adams even mentioned that. At least this guy brings up the missing brass, so really he talks about more things than Adams did, and this guy seems to make many assumptions that Adams did not. Essentially, this guy puts window dressing on the long bankrupt official story.

It would be interesting to see Adams' critique of this analysis. As I say, it presents solid points and science, but in the end it sounds more like just a more elaborate telling of the same old story.
Click to expand...


Yes it would , since the vids I posted pretty much rules out the second shooter. It also seems to point out how Adams misinterpreted the sounds.
 
mike2810 said:
Yes it would , since the vids I posted pretty much rules out the second shooter. It also seems to point out how Adams misinterpreted the sounds.
Click to expand...

I will have to watch Adams again one day. The Vegas shooting has now become so damn yesterday.

I don't think Adams in any way referenced the audio from the taxi driver, but this new guy seems a bit focused on that one, as if to "debunk" it somehow. Several of the guys I've asked about the Vegas shooting, gun nuts themselves, and NOT conspiracy theorists, have all referenced the taxi audio. Yes 2 weapons.

I'm pretty sure Adams confined his work to audio taken from cameras in front of the stage, the point of impact of the rounds. Rather like an artillery exercise worked backwards, range but no azimuth.
 
Thoreau72 said:
I will have to watch Adams again one day. The Vegas shooting has now become so damn yesterday.

I don't think Adams in any way referenced the audio from the taxi driver, but this new guy seems a bit focused on that one, as if to "debunk" it somehow. Several of the guys I've asked about the Vegas shooting, gun nuts themselves, and NOT conspiracy theorists, have all referenced the taxi audio. Yes 2 weapons.

I'm pretty sure Adams confined his work to audio taken from cameras in front of the stage, the point of impact of the rounds. Rather like an artillery exercise worked backwards, range but no azimuth.
Click to expand...

I agree it is yesterday news.

Funny, I have talked to members of a local gun club. They looked at Adams and the vids I found. They basically stated One shooter. They were not that impressed with Adam's analysis.

Question on your statement of, ". Yes 2 weapons.". , Are you saying they believed that their were two shooters? Or are they saying two different weapons were fired.
The shooter had multiple weapons in the room.

Interesting how data can be interpreted so differently.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-shooting.html
 
mike2810 said:
I agree it is yesterday news.

Funny, I have talked to members of a local gun club. They looked at Adams and the vids I found. They basically stated One shooter. They were not that impressed with Adam's analysis.

Question on your statement of, ". Yes 2 weapons.". , Are you saying they believed that their were two shooters? Or are they saying two different weapons were fired.
The shooter had multiple weapons in the room.

Interesting how data can be interpreted so differently.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-shooting.html
Click to expand...

My guys are of the opinion only that the audio evidence says 2 rifles were firing from 2 different locations at 2 different ranges from points of impact. They reach that conclusion from the taxi audio and from Adam's analysis. That's really where I'm at too.

It would be difficult to accomplish that without 2 shooters.
 
Thoreau72 said:
My guys are of the opinion only that the audio evidence says 2 rifles were firing from 2 different locations at 2 different ranges from points of impact. They reach that conclusion from the taxi audio and from Adam's analysis. That's really where I'm at too.

It would be difficult to accomplish that without 2 shooters.
Click to expand...

We will agree to disagree.

Unless other evidence comes forward to support the two shooter theory, I will go with what is known. "difficult to accomplish" does not rule out a single shooter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom