Category Archives: Massacre

Guns: the one-size-fits-all solution is no solution

Guns: the one-size-fits-all solution is no solution

by Jon Rappoport

February 26, 2018

The novelist William Burroughs once wrote: “After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”

The overwhelming number of people who own guns in America aren’t killers. Anyone can, with a little digging, discover where most of the guns crimes are happening—and that’s where law-enforcement should focus their efforts. Trying to disarm the whole country is not only unworkable, it’s targeting the wrong people.

A one-size-fits-all strategy is the work of bureaucrats in a tyranny.

Vaccinate everyone—despite the fact that, by definition, those who are vaccinated should be automatically protected from those “germ carriers” who aren’t. And by the way, research shows that vaccinated people shed (spread) the viruses for which they’ve vaccinated.

Diagnose millions of people with a whole set of standardly defined mental disorders, despite the fact that every individual is unique and different. And by the way, there are NO defining diagnostic tests for ANY official mental disorder. No blood, saliva, urine tests. No brain scans. No genetic assays.

Educate millions and millions of schoolchildren in public government schools by programming them with the same set of “progressive” values, as if they’re all identical automatons in need of mind control.

Carry out wall-to-wall surveillance on the whole population, as if that is the only way to spot a small number of terrorists.

Go to war against major segments of a whole country (e.g., Afghanistan), as if that is the only way to root out a small number of terrorists.

Instead of searching out and vigorously prosecuting mega-corporations (with long jail sentences for executives) who actually pollute and poison the soil, water, and air, assume that the business of America is business across the board, and ignore the “side effects.”

And conversely, when the bureaucracy is rendered so thin it can’t adequately screen and vet the huge number of immigrants rushing into America, promote a policy of open borders so everyone can come in (because “they’re all good people”)—thus reflecting the values taught to the young in government schools. And say this is the meaning of America.

Surveying this list and adding your own examples, you might conclude that entrenched centralized power is actively trying to destroy the country.

And then many people would think you’ve gone off the rails.

And magically, those are the same people who’ve been given a lifetime of indoctrination in the policy of one-size-fits-all, because such a policy is humane and good and serves a brighter future for all, for everyone, for the Collective.

Amen.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Mass shootings and psychiatric drugs: the connection

Mass shootings and psychiatric drugs: the connection

by Jon Rappoport

February 22, 2018

I’ve been tracking the connection since 1999, when I wrote a long white paper, for the Truth Seeker Foundation, on school shootings and psychiatric drugs. The paper was titled: “Why Do They Do It? School shootings Across America.”

The drugs aren’t the only causative factor, but they produce what I call the Johnny Appleseed effect throughout society. Sprinkle enough of the drugs among enough people and you get otherwise unexplainable violence popping up—in schools, in workplaces. The psychiatric plague eats out the country from the inside.

Here are excerpts from my 1999 report—

The massacre at Columbine High School took place on April 20, 1999. Astonishingly, for eight days after the tragedy, during thousands of hours of prime-time television coverage, virtually no one mentioned the word “drugs.” Then the issue was opened. Eric Harris, one of the shooters at Columbine, was on at least one drug.

The NY Times of April 29, 1999, and other papers reported that Harris was rejected from enlisting in the Marines for medical reasons. A friend of the family told the Times that Harris was being treated by a psychiatrist. And then several sources told the Washington Post that the drug prescribed as treatment was Luvox, manufactured by Solvay.

In two more days, the “drug-issue” was gone.

Luvox is of the same class as Prozac and Zoloft and Paxil. They are labeled SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). They attempt to alleviate depression by changing brain-levels of the natural substance serotonin. Luvox has a slightly different chemical configuration from Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft, and it was approved by the FDA for obsessive-compulsive disorder, although many doctors apparently prescribe it for depression.

Prozac is the wildly popular Eli Lilly antidepressant which has been linked to suicidal and homicidal actions. It is now given to young children. Again, its chemical composition is very close to Luvox, the drug that Harris took.

Dr. Peter Breggin, the eminent psychiatrist and author (Toxic Psychiatry, Talking Back to Prozac, Talking Back to Ritalin), told me, “With Luvox there is some evidence of a four-percent rate for mania in adolescents. Mania, for certain individuals, could be a component in grandiose plans to destroy large numbers of other people. Mania can go over the hill to psychosis.”

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo is a psychiatrist in private practice in Washington DC. He is the president of the Washington chapter of the American Society of Psychoanalytic Physicians. Tarantolo states that “all the SSRIs [including Prozac and Luvox] relieve the patient of feeling. He becomes less empathic, as in `I don’t care as much,’ which means `It’s easier for me to harm you.’ If a doctor treats someone who needs a great deal of strength just to think straight, and gives him one of these drugs, that could push him over the edge into violent behavior.”

In Arianna Huffington’s syndicated newspaper column of July 9, 1998, Dr. Breggin states, “I have no doubt that Prozac can cause or contribute to violence and suicide. I’ve seen many cases. In a recent clinical trial, 6 percent of the children became psychotic on Prozac. And manic psychosis can lead to violence.”

A study from the September 1989 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, by Joseph Lipiniski, Jr., indicates that in five examined cases people on Prozac developed what is called akathesia. Symptoms include intense anxiety, inability to sleep, the “jerking of extremities,” and “bicycling in bed or just turning around and around.” Dr. Breggin comments that akathesia “may also contribute to the drug’s tendency to cause self-destructive or violent tendencies … Akathesia can become the equivalent of biochemical torture and could possibly tip someone over the edge into self-destructive or violent behavior … The June 1990 Health Newsletter, produced by the Public Citizen Research Group, reports, ‘Akathesia, or symptoms of restlessness, constant pacing, and purposeless movements of the feet and legs, may occur in 10-25 percent of patients on Prozac.’”

Other studies:

“Emergence of self-destructive phenomena in children and adolescents during fluoxetine [Prozac] treatment,” published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1991, vol.30), written by RA King, RA Riddle, et al. It reports self-destructive phenomena in 14% (6/42) of children and adolescents (10-17 years old) who had treatment with fluoxetine (Prozac) for obsessive-compulsive disorder.

July, 1991. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hisako Koizumi, MD, describes a thirteen-year-old boy who was on Prozac: “full of energy,” “hyperactive,” “clown-like.” All this devolved into sudden violent actions which were “totally unlike him.”

September, 1991. The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Author Laurence Jerome reports the case of a ten-year old who moves with his family to a new location. Becoming depressed, the boy is put on Prozac by a doctor. The boy is then “hyperactive, agitated … irritable.” He makes a “somewhat grandiose assessment of his own abilities.” Then he calls a stranger on the phone and says he is going to kill him. The Prozac is stopped, and the symptoms disappear.

The well-known Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics reveals a strange fact. It states that Ritalin [given for ADHD] is “structurally related to amphetamines … Its pharmacological properties are essentially the same as those of the amphetamines.” In other words, the only clear difference is legality. And the effects, in layman’s terms, are obvious. You take speed and, sooner or later, you start crashing. You become agitated, irritable, paranoid, delusional, aggressive.

In his book, Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin discusses the subject of drug combinations: “Combining antidepressants [e.g., Prozac, Luvox, Paxil] and psychostimulants [e.g., Ritalin] increases the risk of cardiovascular catastrophe, seizures, sedation, euphoria, and psychosis. Withdrawal from the combination can cause a severe reaction that includes confusion, emotional instability, agitation, and aggression.” Children are frequently medicated with this combination, and when we highlight such effects as aggression, psychosis, and emotional instability, it is obvious that the result is pointing toward the very real possibility of violence.

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was titled, “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed over a hundred adverse affects of Ritalin and indexed published journal articles for each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects then, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

• Paranoid delusions
• Paranoid psychosis
• Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
• Activation of psychotic symptoms
• Toxic psychosis
• Visual hallucinations
• Auditory hallucinations
• Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
• Effects pathological thought processes
• Extreme withdrawal
• Terrified affect
• Started screaming
• Aggressiveness
• Insomnia
• Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphatamine-like effects
• psychic dependence
• High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
• Decreased REM sleep
• When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
• Convulsions
• Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Other ADHD medications, which also have a chemical profile similar to amphetamines, would be expected to produce some of the same effects listed above.

The ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News publishes the following warning in bold letters: “Do Not Try to Abruptly Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs. When trying to withdraw from many psychiatric drugs, patients can develop serious and even life-threatening emotional and physical reactions…Therefore, withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done under clinical supervision…”

—end of excerpts from my 1999 white paper on school shootings and psychiatric drugs—

There is a problem. It is chilling. Pharmaceutical companies, which manufacture drug after drug for “mental disorders,” are doing everything they can to cover up the drugs’ connection to violence.

They use their lawyers and PR people—and their influence over the press—to scrub the connection.

And now, one typical, disturbing, official reaction to every new mass shooting is: build more community mental health facilities. Obama was prominent in this regard, after Sandy Hook in 2012. The implication? More drug prescriptions for more people; thus, more violent consequences.

I’ll close with another excerpt from my 1999 report. It is the tragic account of Julie Marie Meade (one account of many you can find at ssristories.org (also here)):

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo has written about Julie Marie Meade. In a column for the ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News, “Children and Prozac: First Do No Harm,” Tarantolo describes how Julie Meade, in November of 1996, called 911, “begging the cops to come and shoot her. And if they didn’t do it quickly, she would do it to herself. There was also the threat that she would shoot them as well.”

The police came within a few minutes, “5 of them to be exact, pumping at least 10 bullets into her head and torso,” as she waved a gun around.

Tarantolo remarks that a friend of Julie said Julie “had plans to make the honor roll and go to college. He [the friend] had also observed her taking all those pills.” What pills? Tarantolo called the Baltimore medical examiner, and spoke with Dr. Martin Bullock, who was on a fellowship at that office. Bullock said, “She had been taking Prozac for four years.”

Tarantolo asked Bullock, “Did you know that Prozac has been implicated in impulsive de novo violence and suicidalness?” Bullock said he was not aware of this.

Tarantolo is careful to point out, “Violent and suicidal behavior have been observed both early (a few weeks) and late (many months) in treatment with Prozac.”

The November 23rd, 1996, Washington Post reported the Julie Meade death by police shooting. The paper mentioned nothing about Prozac.

Therefore, readers were left in the dark. What could explain this girl’s bizarre and horrendous behavior?

The answer was there in plain sight. But the Post refused to make it known.

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.

Texas church shooter: what no one is saying about the insanity of his prior conviction

Texas church shooter: what no one is saying about the insanity of his prior conviction

by Jon Rappoport

November 7, 2017

Devin Kelley, the Texas church shooter, was convicted of crimes by a military court in 2012.

Mainstream press outlets are reporting this fact to show he never should have been allowed to purchase a gun after his release from prison—except the Army failed to enter his criminal record in a national database that would have red-flagged him, when he tried to buy several weapons.

But there is another issue.

In 2012, while stationed at Holloman Air Force base, Kelley “pleaded guilty to two charges of assault and battery on his then-wife and aggravated assault on his infant stepson. Five other charges that included multiple incidents in which he allegedly aimed either a loaded or unloaded firearm at his wife were withdrawn as part of the plea deal.” (ABC News)

Kelley kicked and choked his wife a number of times. He fractured his infant stepson’s skull. The Air Force stated Kelley used enough force to kill his stepson or at least cause “grievous bodily harm.” In his plea deal, Kelley admitted he struck his stepson intentionally.

Here is the payoff, from ABC News: “A mixed jury of officers and enlisted personnel sentenced him [Kelley] to a year’s confinement and a reduction in two ranks from an airman first-class (A1C) to airman basic. He also received a bad conduct discharge.”

That sentence is a crime compounded on Kelley’s crimes.

A year’s confinement?

How about 50 years in prison?

What kind of plea deal did the Air Force allow, and why? Who is investigating THAT?

With any sort of reasonable sentence, Kelley would never have shown up at the Texas Church.

Over the years, I’ve looked into numerous crimes of repeat offenders. I’m sure you’ve read reports as well. So-and-so robbed a store and shot the manager. At the time, he was serving probation after a conviction of assault on two teenagers…

What?!

In Kelley’s case, there is obviously some degree of political correctness at work. “Well, he didn’t actually kill anybody, so let’s confine him for a year and demote him…”

As my readers know, I investigate and report on many high-level corporate and government crimes—and the failure to adequately prosecute the offenders. But the same lunacy applies to street-level felonies.

Instead of, “Well, Bob is one of our own, a pillar of the community, so what if he’s poisoning thousands of people with his company’s medical drugs, let’s fine him and let him off with a promise to mend his ways,” it’s: “Well, this fellow had a very tough childhood, his father was a drunk and beat him and his mother, and the neighborhood was dangerous and everyone was in a gang, so let’s give him two years in jail for putting a girl into a coma…”

On the other hand, “Let’s see, this man committed two petty unarmed robberies and then he stole a candy bar from a traveling circus, so that’s three strikes and he goes away for life without parole…”

Devin Kelley should never have been near that Texas Church. He should have been in a lockup, after assaulting his wife many times and fracturing his infant stepson’s skull.

The press doesn’t appear to have noticed this, or if they have, they’ve declined to mention it, because, in their view, prison is some kind of illegitimate institution. It’s wrong, it shouldn’t exist. It’s “unfashionable” to demand tougher prison sentences for any street-level crime.

Fine. In that case, how about an island blocked off from escape by sea? Devin Kelley and those like him, at every level of society, can share roots and tubers, build huts, and try to share their new lives.

And the know-nothings, who reject all punishment for crimes committed against human beings, can swab the decks of ships stationed offshore to prevent the prisoners’ exit from their island paradise.

I wonder how well Devin Kelley’s jury members, from 2012, are sleeping at night.

Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From 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.

The mind game designed to produce losers

The mind game designed to produce losers

Separating logic from propaganda. Separating illusion from reality.

An individual has the capacity to think independently. A group does not have that capacity.

‘Vegas Massacre’ just one of a million examples…

by Jon Rappoport

October 18, 2017

“My friends, here is the game. On the table before you, you see many stones. Some are expensive gems, and some are worthless fakes. But you must decide they’re all fake or they’re or real. That’s the game.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Crazy choices. Untenable choices. A ridiculous game. But many people fall for it. Why?

If propaganda didn’t stimulate the way people’s minds already work, propaganda would be abandoned and thrown on the junk heap.

I need to repeat that: If propaganda didn’t stimulate the way people’s minds already work, propaganda would be abandoned and thrown on the junk heap.

Propaganda isn’t shaping minds to think in a way that is utterly alien. No. Propaganda taps into ways of thinking that are already there, in a latent or active state.

For example, propaganda feeds off the tendency of the mind to assert: It’s either A or B. It’s either all-A or all-B.

By design, let’s say an event under consideration happens to be BOTH A AND B.

However, the mind isn’t prepared to see that. At the “either-or” level of thinking, BOTH is impossible. It doesn’t show up as a choice on the radar screen.

So for that event, X number of people will say, “It’s all-A.”

And Y number of people will say, “It’s all-B.”

And then those two groups will oppose each other. Which is a hidden purpose of the propaganda in the first place.

Take the Vegas shooting as an example. Assume for the moment that it was designed to contain both real and fake elements. There were real bullets flying (no matter how many shooters held the weapons) and real people were hit by those bullets. And then there were “crisis actors” who were faking scenes of being hit and wounded by bullets.

And let’s say there is propaganda on top of the Vegas shooting, and the propaganda says, “Stephen Paddock was the LONE GUNMAN and he killed 58 people and wounded 500 people.”

The propaganda is a lie. Whatever did or didn’t happen at the concert, the propaganda is not the correct account.

The propagandists know that AS SOON AS THEY SAY “LONE GUNMAN,” there are going to be many people who think “LEE OSWALD AND CONVERUP AND CONSPIRACY” and then independently examine and analyze and offer opinion about what really happened in the shooting. By telling that central lie, the propagandists also know many of these independent researchers and reporters are going to be stimulated to react in the following way:

They’re either going to say all-A or all-B. They’re going to say the shooting was entirely real, or they’re going to say the shooting was entirely fake.

Tell that lie and then stand back and watch people break up into two opposing groups.

Which is exactly what propagandists want.

The central lie about the shooting has two purposes. First, cover up what really happened. And second, get independent-minded people to split into two opposing groups, vis-à-vis what really happened at the shooting.

This is all understood and planned for by the groups who design mass events and also design the propaganda lies about those events.

The fake planted elements of these events (crisis actors, pretended wounding, etc.) are put there to make sure there will be opposing groups of researchers, in the aftermath.

“Sow confusion; sow opposition.”

And the success of these plans depends entirely on the level of thinking that is compelled to choose all-A or all-B. A person who restricts himself to deploy this level of thinking will always deny anything exists beyond all-A or all-B, whichever side he chooses. Why? Because his level of thinking determines WHAT HE CAN SEE AND WHAT HE CAN’T SEE.

Obviously, we’re talking about much more than the Vegas shooting or any mass event. We’re talking about a pattern that bleeds into every area of life and perception.

“If you think Trump has done anything seriously wrong, you’re a traitor to the President and an enemy of America.”

“If you think Hillary has committed a serious crime, you’re a traitor to America.”

There are two sides, and you must choose all-A or all-B.

Now, of course, there are other levels of more intelligent thinking. But those who control education and major media want to minimize the more intelligent levels and maximize the “either-or” brand. This is their mission in life. They take it seriously.

Decades ago, when I taught school, I ran across many students who were the all-A or all-B type. Trying to break through that barrier was like using a nail file to cut a big hole in a brick wall.

Eventually, I found I could teach them logic at a basic level. And I watched the students change. They began to offload their blunt either-or approach. They began to SEE MORE. The lights were going on.

It was quite gratifying.

Let me give you another example: police brutality toward black people in America.

Let’s say we have two groups. One group claims there is absolutely no problem involving police brutality. The other group claims police brutality is THE problem.

All-A or all-B.

Now, imagine there are 20,000 black and white people, armed with the tools of analysis and logic, who take neither position. Instead, they separately and independently investigate a number of factors that plague black inner cities:

Drugs; gang shootings and other gang crimes; the Globalist theft of jobs, which are exported to other countries; the absence of fathers in homes; grossly sub-standard nutrition; the dumping of industrial pollutants into poor neighborhoods; toxic heavy metals in water systems; the diversion and theft of enormous amounts of money that have been poured into the so-called War on Poverty; police brutality; multiple problems honest police have in trying to keep neighborhoods safe.

This intelligent analysis points toward solutions. For instance (I’ve previously written about this at length), a vast spreading of urban farms in inner cities where residents grow their own fresh clean food, trade it among themselves, and sell the excess for profit.

Now imagine those 20,000 black and white people who are doing this analysis speak up and write, independently and separately, about what they’ve discovered.

Suppose THOSE voices rise and are heard.

Suppose THAT tide rises above the all-A and all-B crowds.

What might happen then?

In an educated society, this tide is supposed to rise.

However, education isn’t pointed in the direction of logic and analysis. It’s pointed away from it, on purpose.

Which means the task falls to individuals.

This may seem like an enormous hill to climb.

It is. But so what?

After more than a hundred years of sub-standard mind-numbing education, what else would you expect?

The overriding principle here is: if you see people all around you dividing into opposing camps, because they’re all-A or all-B, that doesn’t mean you have to follow their lead.

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

(To learn more about my rigorous high school -level Logic and Analysis course, click here.)

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 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 article—the 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.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9zi4t4zdtw?ecver=1&w=540&h=304]

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

power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s 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 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.