Vegas security guard cancels interviews, then goes missing; concert witness escapes shooting uninjured, testifies there were multiple shooters, then dies at home

Vegas security guard cancels interviews, goes missing; concert witness escapes shooting uninjured, then found dead at home

by Jon Rappoport

October 15, 2017

FOX News, Friday, October 13: “Where in the world is Jesus Campos?”

“The Mandalay Bay security guard shot by Stephen Paddock in the moments leading up to the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history was set to break his silence Thursday night with five television interviews, including one on Fox News, Campos’ union president said.”

“Except when the cameras were about to roll, and media gathered in the building to talk to him, Campos reportedly bolted, and, as of early Friday morning, it wasn’t immediately clear where he was.”

Did Campos decide his account of the shooting would become a problem for him, because it would contradict the official scenario? Did his Mandalay Hotel employer, or the police, tell him to keep his mouth shut?

According to police, the accused shooter, Stephen Paddock, fired 200 rounds through his hotel room door at Campos, wounding him in the leg, either six minutes BEFORE Paddock started shooting at the concert crowd, or at about the same time Paddock started shooting at the concert attendees. The official timeline of events keeps changing.

On a practical level, the timeline would become very important if lawsuits are filed against the Mandalay owners.

Meanwhile, Jeff Rense has posted the long, detailed, written testimony of a witness at the concert, 28-year-old Kymberley Suchomel. Here is a brief excerpt: “We are all hanging out on this sheet [at the concert], dancing our booties off, enjoying ourselves so much that we took off our boots to get even more comfortable…the first volley of gunfire was released. It was a shorter volley than any of the others [that followed]…So, as we are running, we approach this fence where men are throwing women over, and we ran up to it as they had knocked It down, so we were able to get out…”

“But the gunfire wasn’t stopping this whole time. It wasn’t ceasing. It wasn’t slowing down. And It was directly behind us, following us. Bullets were coming from every direction. Behind us, in front of us, to the side of us. But I know, I just know, that there was someone chasing us. The entire time I felt this way. The farther we got from the venue, the closer the gunfire got. I kept looking back expecting to see the gunmen- and I say MEN because there was more than one person. There was more than one gun firing. 100% more than one…”

Kymberley Suchomel and her group did finally escape and get home safely. Then…

As seacoastonline.com reports, “About a week after surviving the mass shooting at the Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas, Kymberley Suchomel has died.”

“Suchomel, 28, who was not injured during last week’s shooting, died early Monday at her Apple Valley home, according to her grandmother, Julie Norton, the co-founder of the High Desert Phoenix Foundation.”

“Norton found Suchomel just after 8:30 a.m. when she arrived to care for her 3-year-old great-granddaughter, Scarlett. She believes Suchomel may have died in her sleep after her husband, Mike, left for work at 4:30 a.m.”

“’Kymberley had epilepsy and she’s always been prone to seizures — she told her friend that she recently had three focal seizures,’ Norton told the Daily Press. ‘I believe the stress from the shooting took her life’.”

Embedded below is a video from a man who states he has military weapons experience, and knows about wounds from high-powered weapons. He views the Vegas shooting as rife with fraud on several levels. Some people will interpret his analysis to mean no one died and it was all a hoax, and others will draw the conclusion that people did die, but there were multiple shooters. I repeat what I wrote in a previous articlethe Vegas event could be both a fraud and real:

People did die. And others, planted in the concert crowd, were faking wounds. If researchers on both sides of this issue start arguing with each other on the basis of “all-fake” or “all-real,” the truth will suffer. And mainstream news can cherry-pick the most “absurd conspiracy theories,” highlight them, and thereby paint all independent analyses with same broad brush.

(To learn more about Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation, click here.)


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Vegas shooting: concert workers’ phone footage wiped clean by FBI

Vegas shooting: concert workers’ phone-footage wiped clean by FBI

What??

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2017

Paul Watson at infowars has the story:

“Workers at the Route 91 festival during which Stephen Paddock unleashed his massacre have reportedly been given back their phones and laptops by the FBI only to discover that all messages and videos from the night of the attack have been wiped clean.”

“According to a Las Vegas resident who posted a status update on Facebook, ‘A bunch of people that worked the Route 91 [concert] said they got their cell phones back today. They all said that all their phones are completely wiped clean! All messages and info from that weekend are completely gone. Anyone else experience this’?”

“’A few different people who were vendors there are all saying the same thing,’ the woman later comments.”

“Later in the thread, a Route 91 worker confirms the story, commenting, ‘Of course. It’s an active federal crime scene. They can wipe it clean. I was the beverage manager for the entire event. My laptop is wiped clean’.”

What?

First of all, in a recent article, I demonstrated in detail why you can never trust what the FBI says about evidence in any investigation. There is a notorious history of the Bureau cooking and slanting and inventing data to support prosecutions.

Second, who says the FBI can take people’s phones and laptops, watch and copy the video footage, and then wipe it all away before returning the devices to their owners?

The FBI literally owns the crime scene AND any record of what happened at that scene? Baloney.

The obvious reason for wiping out the footage: it contained evidence that contradicts the official scenario. And most likely, that evidence revealed multiple shooters.

As Vegas cops, the FBI, and the owners of the Mandalay Hotel have changed and massaged the official narrative, one assertion has remained constant: there was only one shooter, and he was Stephen Paddock.

Law-enforcement pounced on that claim early on, without the slightest justification. Without interviewing multiple witnesses who state they saw other shooters.

“Okay, the mass shooting happened yesterday and we know there was only one shooter. That’s it. Don’t ask us any questions about this. Anyone who disagrees with us is spreading rumors and impeding the investigation.”

Admitting multiple shooters is admitting there was cooperation, collusion, conspiracy, a plan, and a purpose for that plan beyond “the lone gunman was crazy.” This is the door law-enforcement keeps slamming shut every time it opens.

And now we have reports that the FBI has wiped witnesses’ phones and laptops. No more footage of the shooting. No more evidence.

Let’s be clear: the FBI is impeding the investigation.

There is no Constitutional rule that states private citizens can’t investigate crimes. There never was. There never will be.

Law enforcement doesn’t OWN investigations.

If they did, every time a journalist probes beneath the surface of a crime and uncovers important information, the FBI could say, “Well, we just opened an investigation of that very crime, and therefore we want all your notes and we want you to cease and desist your inquiry. Shut up and go cover Sunday picnics.”

In most cases, law-enforcement doesn’t have to worry about mainstream reporters. Those denizens simply take dictation from local cops and federal cops and their stories appear in papers and TV news broadcasts wiped clean of independent thought.

That leaves the truth a wide open field.

Private citizens and non-mainstream journalists own that field, not through edict, but through default. Don’t blame us. If you were doing your jobs, we wouldn’t have to do them for you.

Your first rule would be: stop lying.

Destruction of evidence is a felony. Those concert workers whose phones and laptops were wiped clean had a felony committed against them. By agents of government who have sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution.

Thousands of smart lawyers out there will say, “Come on, there’s no way you could make a charge like that stick.” Well, maybe there would be a way, if enough of you decided there has been enough destruction of the Constitution and it’s time to stand up and be counted, come hell or high water.

Meanwhile, whoever can look past the lies and fabrications and distortions of a criminal investigation can say something because they saw something.

Here is a quick excerpt from my recent piece about the FBI’s stance on crime probes. It should give you a clue about the Bureau’s attitude and reputation:

April 20, 2015, The Atlantic: “…the Washington Post made clear Saturday in an article that begins with a punch to the gut… ‘Nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000,’ the newspaper reported, adding that ‘the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death’.”

In the Vegas shooting case, the FBI is saying: Trust us. We’re the pros. We do investigations the right way. Now give us your cell phone so we can look at video footage of the shooting and make a copy and wipe your phone clean and give it back to you.

Don’t worry, be happy. All is well. The centurions are on duty.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Vegas cops change their story: Paddock shot security guard BEFORE mass shooting: huge new can of worms

Vegas cops change their story: Paddock shot security guard BEFORE mass shooting: huge new can of worms

LA Times: “Police said Paddock fired 200 rounds into the hallway” wounding a hotel security guard.

by Jon Rappoport

October 10, 2017

LA Times, October 9: “Police have dramatically changed their account of how the Las Vegas massacre began on Oct. 1, revealing Monday that the gunman shot a hotel security guard [in the leg through the closed door of his hotel room] six minutes before opening fire on a country music concert — raising new questions about why police weren’t able to pinpoint the gunman’s location sooner.”

The previous police story was: Paddock shot security guard Campos after he finished firing on the concert crowd.

The LA Times focuses on how this new information changes the timeline of events—in particular, the addition of minutes before police arrived at Paddock’s door.

Really? That’s the takeaway?

There is a far more serious question. Why did Paddock shoot the security guard through his hotel room door, with 200 rounds of ammunition (according to police), BEFORE starting to fire on the concert crowd?

Whether or not Paddock was using a silenced weapon to shoot the security guard, didn’t he think 200 rounds through a door might possibly alert people in the hotel to what he was about to do—kill people at the concert?

Security guard Campos, according to the Times, was on Paddock’s 32nd floor to check on an alert about another guest’s room door having being left open. Campos wasn’t there to check on Paddock. There is no indication Paddock was suspected of anything.

The new Vegas police sequence of events now goes this way: Paddock is in his room preparing to slaughter people at the concert; security guard Campos comes to the 32nd floor to check on a report of another guest’s door having been left open; Paddock sees Campos out in the hallway outside his door (using a camera Paddock had installed); Paddock fires 200 rounds through his door and hits Campos in the leg; leaving Campos there, Paddock then WAITS SIX MINUTES and begins firing through his broken window(s) at the concert crowd.

Perhaps the police will change their story yet again. Paddock didn’t fire 200 rounds through his door. He stepped out into the hallway and wounded Campos with one shot using a silenced handgun. He then left Campos there, went back into his room, waited six minutes, and then started firing on the concert crowd.

Or, after wounding Campos with one bullet, he paid Campos with a pile of casino chips and told him to wait in the hallway and say nothing to anyone for a half-hour.

Or he bound and gagged Campos after shooting him in the leg and stuffed him into a laundry closet in the hallway.

Or, the most popular tactic in these untenable and absurd stories: “Obviously, Paddock was crazy. There is no way to account for all his actions. We may never know why he did what he did.”

That usually works with the public. The police or the FBI paint themselves into a corner trying to hide the truth. They realize their latest version of events makes no sense. So they invoke the time-honored “we may never know” explanation.

If some reporter wakes up from his stupor and resists going along with the story, he’ll probably hear: “Yes, we’re looking into that. But we have no further comment at this time.”

Or most likely, any time.

Here is a reasonable assessment: since very early on, police had decided on this story: Paddock was the shooter; he was the only shooter; he wounded the security guard after he finished firing on the concert crowd.

But the fact that the security guard was wounded BEFORE the concert shooting was leaking out. People in Las Vegas knew about it. So the cops (or the FBI) decided they had to get out ahead of the leak, if possible. It would be better to change their story than wait and end up with egg on their faces.

And so far, it looks like they made a smart move. Because how many media outlets are pointing out how crazy the new story is?

Most importantly, how many other egregious lies are sitting under the previous security-guard lie? How many other devious twists and turns in the true tale are being hidden?


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Why you shouldn’t believe anything the FBI says about the Vegas shooting

Why you shouldn’t believe anything the FBI says about Vegas shooting

by Jon Rappoport

October 9, 2017

No matter how the Vegas shooting investigation looks, the FBI is playing a large role. The forensics, in particular, would be checked by FBI techs and labs.

Vital lab analysis of weapons and ammunition and bullet-angles and cartridges and residue. Weapons Paddock had or didn’t have. Ammunition he had or didn’t have. Modifications he made or didn’t make to those weapons. How many different kinds of bullets were found in victims? What weapons did those bullets come from?

And depending on that evidence—were there multiple shooters, for example?

Should you believe the FBI’s analyses?

Are you kidding? The scurrilous reputation of the FBI in its handling of forensics is astonishing. Read on. Note: I’m saving the best for last:

In 2014-15, stories appeared in the press about the phenomenal corruption of the FBI evidence lab. But since then, there has been very little follow-up. I find no compelling evidence that the federal government has fixed the problem.

April 20, 2015, The Atlantic: “…the Washington Post made clear Saturday in an article that begins with a punch to the gut… ‘Nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000,’ the newspaper reported, adding that ‘the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death’.”

August 12, 2014, New Scientist: “…the initial results were released of an ongoing review of thousands of criminal cases in which FBI scientists’ testimony may have led to wrongful convictions – including for some people now on death row…[an FBI source states] ’we teach these people [lab techs in training] for two weeks, and they would go back to their laboratories with a certificate of completion and be told: Great you’re qualified to do this [analysis of evidence] – here’s your caseload.’”

Washington Post, April 18, 2015: “The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000.”

“Of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit, 26 overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent of the 268 trials reviewed so far, according to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Innocence Project, which are assisting the government with the country’s largest post-conviction review of questioned forensic evidence.”

“The cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison, the groups said under an agreement with the government to release results after the review of the first 200 convictions.”

Giant long-term scandal and corruption. The story is covered. Then it disappears.

Now here’s the capper:

On April 19, 1995, one-third of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City blew up, killing 169 people and wounding 680 others.

Three men were arrested and convicted: Tim McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Michael Fortier. McVeigh was put to death on June 11, 2001, Nichols is currently serving multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole, and Fortier was sentenced to 12 years (he served that term and was released).

The official narrative of the bombing stated: A Ryder truck parked at the curb outside the Murrah Building contained barrels of ammonium nitrate plus fuel oil (ANFO bombs), and their coordinated explosion occurred shortly after 9AM on the morning of April 19th.

In addition to the deaths and the woundings, the explosion impacted 324 buildings and 86 cars in the area.

(In my 1995, book, “The Oklahoma City Bombing, the Suppressed Truth,” I laid to rest the claim that ANFO bombs could have caused that much damage; and more importantly, I showed that an explosion coming out of a Ryder truck at the curb could not have caused the particular profile of damage sustained by the Murrah Building.)

The vaunted FBI lab decided that, indeed, all the damage and death HAD been caused by ANFO bombs in the Ryder truck.

But wait.

Buckle up.

Two years after the bombing, on March 22, 1997, we had this from CNN: “The Justice Department inspector general’s office has determined that the FBI crime laboratory working on the Oklahoma City bombing case made ‘scientifically unsound’ conclusions that were ‘biased in favor of the prosecution,’ The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday.”

“…[FBI] supervisors approved lab reports that they ‘cannot support’ and…FBI lab officials may have erred about the size of the blast, the amount of explosives involved and the type of explosives used in the bombing[!].”

“…harshest criticism was of David Williams, a supervisory agent in the [FBI] explosives unit, the paper [LA Times] said. Those flaws reportedly include the basis of his determination that the main charge of the explosion was ammonium nitrate. The inspector general called such a determination ‘inappropriate,’ the Times said.”

“…FBI officials found a receipt for ammonium nitrate at defendant [Terry] Nichols’ home and, because of that discovery, Williams slanted his conclusion to match the evidence.”

And with those revelations, the case, the investigation, the court trials, and press probes should have taken a whole new direction. But they didn’t.

The fake science was allowed to stand.

So now…there is no reason to believe anything the FBI says about Paddock, his weapons, his ammo, his modifications, the degree of his participation (or non-participation) in the shooting, the trajectories of bullets, the types of bullets found in victims, the nature of the expended shell casings, and other VITAL forensic details in the case.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Vegas shooter: the “bump stock” revelation contradicts the official scenario—Oops

Vegas shooter: the “bump stock” revelation contradicts the official scenario—Oops

by Jon Rappoport

October 9, 2017

There are so many holes in the official story of the Vegas concert shooting, anyone who buys it should consider laying out cash for condos on the moon.

File this one under: GUN ENTHUSIAST WITH LARGE KNOWLEDGE OF WEAPONS USES RIDICULOUS RIFLES THAT ARE NOTORIOUSLY INACCURATE. That’s called a contradiction. Oops.

SMART GUNMAN CHOOSES DUMB WEAPONS.

The latest piece of fraud? The bump stock revelation.

A bump stock is a legal device that turns a semi-auto weapon into a simulation of full auto: faster fire rate. Legislators are falling all over themselves to ban it.

According to press outlets, the accused shooter, Stephen Paddock, brought not one, not two, not five, but 12 rifles to his hotel suite at the Mandalay that were outfitted with bump stocks.

At the same time we’re told Paddock left a note in his suite that revealed he was calculating distance and gravity and other factors—he was carefully plotting out his upcoming shooting spree to obtain the highest degree of accuracy.

There is one problem with that claim.

Bump stocks aren’t accurate. And if Paddock had even superficial knowledge of weapons, he would know that.

Reason.com: “No one seems more mystified by the sudden enthusiasm for bump stocks—from both gun nuts and gun grabbers—than gun store owners. Because bump stocks sacrifice accuracy for speed hunters, sportsmen, and most other enthusiasts have little need for them, some experts say.”

“’I’ve always thought these bump stocks were just a novelty,’ Andrew Wickerham, owner of the 2nd Amendment Gun Shop in Las Vegas, told The Christian Science Monitor. ‘They’re not that good, and they’re hard as hell to control’.”

“’I will order them if someone wants one, but I highly discourage them from purchasing. It’s not safe, they don’t work, and it’s a gimmick,’ Tallahassee gun retailer Will Dance told CNN Money.”

One of my source on weapons wrote this: “There are some devices (like AutoGlove and Bump Fire) that can simulate full automatic fire, but they cannot be used accurately or effectively.”

“The [weapon] on the right [in a photo taken in Paddock’s hotel suite] with the Bump Fire device has something like an EOTech or RedDot optic that is only good for close quarters shooting and out to maybe 75 yards [far shorter than the distance between Paddock’s suite and the concert grounds]…”

Again, if Paddock was making careful calculations to ensure accuracy in his shooting spree, the last thing he would do was bring TWELVE rifles outfitted with bump stocks with him.

Yet another piece of the official scenario crumbles.

Were these twelve rifles planted in the hotel room? Was the room set up by others as a stage prop?


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Vegas shooter brought more than ten suitcases into the hotel

Vegas shooter brought more than ten suitcases into the hotel

No problem

by Jon Rappoport

October 9, 2017

Even the Washington Post (10/2) expresses puzzlement: “Among the questions they [investigators] have: “…how he [Stephen Paddock] was able to bring it [a weapon] and many other weapons into a Vegas hotel suite undetected.”

“[Las Vegas Sheriff] Lombardo said hotel staff had been in and out of the two-room suite, which Paddock had stayed in since Sept. 28, and spotted nothing ‘nefarious,’ though he had more than 10 suitcases.”

I see. Ten suitcases. More than 10. How many? Fifteen?

Paddock, a high-stakes gambler the casinos know well, a man they know is a local resident, suddenly shows up with 10 suitcases. Hotel staff are in and out of his suite and no one has questions?

This raises no red flags?

In a city where the hotels and casinos have many layers of security, including metal detectors, Paddock quietly slipped in with more than 10 suitcases holding weapons and ammo?

The city of Las Vegas has shown up in ISIS chatter as a target of interest. Wouldn’t that cause hotels and casinos to step up their already heavy security?

A year ago, KTNV reported, (“Steve Wynn talks about ‘extraordinary’ security measures with Jon Ralston, Part 1”):

“’Terrorism is very much in the forefront of every casino owner’s mind,’ said retired Lt. Randy Sutton, 13 Action News Crime and Safety Expert.”

In the same KTNV piece, hotel magnate Steve Wynn said: “Las Vegas is a target city. We have hardened the target at the Wynn [Hotel]. This is the first time I’ve ever revealed this publicly. But we went [sic], there’s a division in the Marine Corps of special people that are specially trained to guard the embassies. That’s a whole division with separate base, separate training.”

“There are almost 40 of them at every opening [entrance] of my building, plain clothes, armed, on the look-out, changing shift and being relieved every two hours so they don’t get bored.”

“We have another group of a half a dozen seals team six guys and CIA guys who are a counterterrorism unit that … relate on a daily basis to Homeland Security, the FBI, and Metro. My company has metal detectors and devices at every entrance of the building for employees and guests that are non-visible to the public. We have done extraordinary things to make that sure we protect our employees and our guests at the hotel.”

Surely, other hotels in the city have installed major security, too. But again, Stephen Paddock gets more than 10 suitcases filled with metal up to his suite without incident.

And keeps them there for several days.

Here is a revealing nugget: New York Magazine, October 6: “He [Paddock] was also a heavy drinker, known to demand high-end cognac and treat cocktail waitresses and his own girlfriend rudely, according to a source in guest services at a casino he frequented.”

In other words, Paddock was aggressive. Casinos knew he was tightly wound. He could go off on people. This was a reason to hold him in suspicion. But those 10 suitcases in his room? Not a cause for concern or question.

If metal detectors are used at the Mandalay Hotel, how did all that steel and weight slip through security? Was this an inside job? Did Paddock have help from hotel security?

At the moment the first window in Paddock’s suite was broken, you would assume alarms would go off and Hotel security would rush to the suite. Why have we heard nothing about this?

Take this one step further. Is it possible Paddock was set up, or was part of an operation whose ultimate objective was unknown to him? Is it possible some group with far more clout than Paddock managed to get those suitcase into his suite?

The Mandalay Hotel, at this moment, is doing everything it can to minimize and deflect blame for its “lax security.” Therefore, how much Hotel video of Paddock can we expect to see in the coming days? What cover stories will emerge? What lies will be told? What falsehoods will be promoted to defeat lawsuits filed against the Hotel?

Las Vegas will certainly try to allay tourist fears. All the hotel and casino business in the city is on the line. Billions of dollars. The people who make the lion’s share of that money will tell whatever lies they need to, in order to keep up the appearance of “tourist safety.”

Final thought for the moment: If security devices in the Mandalay were turned off briefly, to allow someone to bring in those suitcases full of weapons, we are now talking about a sophisticated level of intrusion, beyond the ability of Stephen Paddock. How would the breach go unnoticed by the Hotel’s full security detail? How would the cover-up of that breach have been rigged?


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Vegas shooting: real vs. fake

Vegas shooting: real vs. fake

by Jon Rappoport

October 6, 2017

These are a few observations leading to a hypothesis.

First, there is a video, taken at ground level, of a man going from victim to victim lying on the ground at the concert. He is checking their pulses, asking if they’re all right, calling for medical help. Notice the color of the blood on the ground and on the victims. It is a quite bright red. Would real bloodstains on the ground be that color, or would they be darker?

Next, there is the matter of how Stephen Paddock, the accused shooter, brought 23 weapons and ammo into the Mandalay Hotel and up to his suite.

He was a well-known high-stakes gambler. Hotel personnel surely knew him. They knew he lived in the Vegas area. Yet there he is with a number of suitcases—or over the course of a few days, he appears in the lobby with another suitcase or two each time.

These hotels are security-conscious to the max. No suspicion was aroused? And Paddock risked exposure to take weapons he would never use up to his suite?

Did Paddock bring in the weapons through another hotel entrance with the help of staff? Was this part of the operation an inside job?

Did he actually bring in all these weapons? Or was his hotel suite staged as a prop by others? Was it set up as a showcase for gun-control advocates who, after the fact, would push for new restrictive laws?

The photos of the hotel suite—when were they taken? In the immediate aftermath of the shooting? Where are the hundreds or thousands of shell casings that would have been ejected from the weapon(s)? The photos of the floor show very little brass. My understanding is these casings would have been quite hot. Where are all the burn marks on the carpet and furniture and walls?

This whole “hotel suite” scenario is very murky and needs much more investigation.

There are cell-phone videos taken at ground level at the concert, while you can hear automatic gunfire. A reader brings up an interesting point. Many of these shots would miss human targets. Instead, they would hit solid objects and either remain embedded or bounce. Where are the loud sounds, on the videos, of ricochets—not just a few sounds, but many.

Now here is a hypothesis. Obviously, it applies to more than just the Vegas shooting. In SOME of these events, we see a MIX of fake and real happenings. There are real victims and fake victims. This confusion and conflation of the fake and the real stimulate different and opposing lines of independent investigation.

Some say all the victims are fake. Others say all the victims are real. Both viewpoints tend to generalize from a few sets of facts.

The result? This is perfect for those who are actually behind the operation in the shadows, who want to engender false trails and dead ends and “unsolvable” anomalies.

And conflict among independent researchers who, after all, are the only real threat to the party line.

“Look, here is a group of obvious crisis actors. They’re fakes. Therefore, the whole event is a fake.”

“Here are real victims. Therefore, the whole event is real. There was nothing fake about it.”

Then, on top of this, the mainstream press, in its usual fashion, cherry picks the most far-out “conspiracy theories,” presents them, and says: “Look how ridiculous ALL these people are who question the official investigation.” Another generalization. A way to discredit all independent researchers.

When you think about it, the hypothesis I’m presenting is not strange at all. What do major media news broadcasts do? They mix real facts and fake facts. This is SOP. They mix and stir and derive bizarre conclusions that mislead the public.

“Real or fake” is not always the correct formulation, although that is what many people want to decide. “It must be black or white, yes or no, this or that.” We’re looking at a trap, we’re looking at many minds disposed to function in this fashion.

In certain cases, it can be “real and fake.”

And when it is, and when it’s intentional, it confuses people and they throw up their hands and walk away.

Which is the desired effect.

“Was the whole thing real or fake? I have to know.”

It was both.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.