• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

I'm sorry but that is the very crux of the point. If you're going to elaborate lengths to stage an event where scores of people end up being slaughtered then there should be an end game as there is in others such as 9/11, the moon landings, death of Diana etc.

If people believe it without question then they have achieved exactly what they want. You will need to look at US military studies to see which group they put you in when staging a false flag. You would be surprised.
 
I am struggling with this.

Lots of thought and facts being put into what doesn't stack up but no consideration given to why anyone would want to organise the killing in the first place.

Why would someone want to stage this, what benefits are there to be gained for an organisation to do it and not claim responsibility ?

My point entirely.
 
I am struggling with this.

Lots of thought and facts being put into what doesn't stack up but no consideration given to why anyone would want to organise the killing in the first place.

Why would someone want to stage this, what benefits are there to be gained for an organisation to do it and not claim responsibility ?

So lets turn it round.....Why did Paddock do it. can anyone explain.
 
So lets turn it round.....Why did Paddock do it. can anyone explain.

Do you believe that there are people who are capable of abhorrent evil, such as mass shootings of innocent people?
 
As I cant post links from my computer, perhaps someone could put this up from YouTube. Las Vegas shooting survivor: I think I've been shot in the head.

Can any of you seriously believe this guy
 
Do you believe that there are people who are capable of abhorrent evil, such as mass shootings of innocent people?

Of course.......As history proves they are the ones normally in charge of countries
 
I didn't mean the bullet 'tumbles' in flight I meant how it behaves on impact and going through a body so perhaps I used the wrong term.

Ah I get ya, do you mean dum-dum bullets? Although I know they're designed to fragment on impact.

There are plenty of fakes in the hospital interviews and green screen interviews.....You only have to look on YouTube

But why would the true perpertrator's risk it, when the the sheer number of people in the hospitals that night, could easily dismantle not only those fake interviews, but the entire event? Why carry out a false flag terrorist attack, only to put actors on the news? Why not use the real injured people? Infact, why put people on the news in the first place? With all the mobile phone footage & social media stuff, injured people, whether they be real or fake, doesn't really add too much to the story.

Unless you're talking about media outlets faking the interviews, purely for ratings? That I could believe.

People act different to a target but what gun was you firing and how many bullets did it take to hit said target at 50yds.

So over the space of about 10 years, I've used a wide variety of guns. From Glocks, to Magnums, to Sniper Rifles, to 12-gauge's. And I've always been fairly decent with them. The AR's I've used on multiple occasions are M16, M4, AK47, SCAR, and MP5, UZI sub-machines. I've tried all on full-auto, and granted its hard, but I've always hit the targets, and been ok with them. With one standard clip, holding the gun free-aim, I obviously couldn't hit the same small target repeatedly when on full-auto, but I'd certainly tag it 30%-40%- minimum. If I'd have used a bi/tri-pod, like Paddock did, I reckon I could get Upto 60%-70%
 
So over the space of about 10 years, I've used a wide variety of guns. From Glocks, to Magnums, to Sniper Rifles, to 12-gauge's. And I've always been fairly decent with them. The AR's I've used on multiple occasions are M16, M4, AK47, SCAR, and MP5, UZI sub-machines. I've tried all on full-auto, and granted its hard, but I've always hit the targets, and been ok with them. With one standard clip, holding the gun free-aim, I obviously couldn't hit the same small target repeatedly when on full-auto, but I'd certainly tag it 30%-40%- minimum. If I'd have used a bi/tri-pod, like Paddock did, I reckon I could get Upto 60%-70%

Has anyone got MI5's number. :stunned:
 
Of course.......As history proves they are the ones normally in charge of countries

So it's plausible that Paddock is similar in some way to other perpetrators of other mass shootings? Don't see anything particularly unique about Paddock - loner white guy, gun owner/enthusiast, potential mental health issues - fits the model of other domestic terrorists in the US.
 
Ah I get ya, do you mean dum-dum bullets? Although I know they're designed to fragment on impact.



But why would the true perpertrator's risk it, when the the sheer number of people in the hospitals that night, could easily dismantle not only those fake interviews, but the entire event? Why carry out a false flag terrorist attack, only to put actors on the news? Why not use the real injured people? Infact, why put people on the news in the first place? With all the mobile phone footage & social media stuff, injured people, whether they be real or fake, doesn't really add too much to the story.

Unless you're talking about media outlets faking the interviews, purely for ratings? That I could believe.



So over the space of about 10 years, I've used a wide variety of guns. From Glocks, to Magnums, to Sniper Rifles, to 12-gauge's. And I've always been fairly decent with them. The AR's I've used on multiple occasions are M16, M4, AK47, SCAR, and MP5, UZI sub-machines. I've tried all on full-auto, and granted its hard, but I've always hit the targets, and been ok with them. With one standard clip, holding the gun free-aim, I obviously couldn't hit the same small target repeatedly when on full-auto, but I'd certainly tag it 30%-40%- minimum. If I'd have used a bi/tri-pod, like Paddock did, I reckon I could get Upto 60%-70%


That's what I thought at first and laughed at some of the hero stories but the more I looked I couldn't find one credible account from a hospital bed.

So if you used a bi-pod on a narrow window ledge (he didn't even clear the glass properly) could you hit the same man in the chest from 400yds 3 times with a the gun in automatic mode or come back and target the same person 30 seconds later like some 'victims' with more than one wound are claiming.
 
Of course.......As history proves they are the ones normally in charge of countries

The difference being Paddock is a lone wolf that likely didn't tell anyone else about his plans, one madman is plausible. If the government orchestrated this though then there would have been dozens of people involved to effectively cover this up, I can't see how you'd get dozens of people to go along with it without someone blowing the whistle.
 
The difference being Paddock is a lone wolf that likely didn't tell anyone else about his plans, one madman is plausible. If the government orchestrated this though then there would have been dozens of people involved to effectively cover this up, I can't see how you'd get dozens of people to go along with it without someone blowing the whistle.

How could you use the CIA to supply all the Black gangs of LA with drugs. But that's exactly what they did in the 80's, flying them into Arizona where Bill Clinton was governor. They used the money to fund a right wing group of terrorists who were trying to overthrow a socialist government in Nicaragua.

They were exposed by a journalist named Gary Webb.......he committed suicide by shooting himself in the head......Twice.

No one else blew the whistle. A film well worth a watch is Kill the Messenger
 
That's what I thought at first and laughed at some of the hero stories but the more I looked I couldn't find one credible account from a hospital bed.

I can't remember one credible performance from Frank Nouble but we was still here as a professional footballer for six months.
 
How could you use the CIA to supply all the Black gangs of LA with drugs. But that's exactly what they did in the 80's, flying them into Arizona where Bill Clinton was governor. They used the money to fund a right wing group of terrorists who were trying to overthrow a socialist government in Nicaragua.

They were exposed by a journalist named Gary Webb.......he committed suicide by shooting himself in the head......Twice.

No one else blew the whistle. A film well worth a watch is Kill the Messenger

A quick skim through wikipedia... his old boss at mercury news said "He was fundamentally a man of passion, not of fairness. When facts didn't fit his theory, he tended to shove them to the sidelines"

He would have loved this site!
 
A quick skim through wikipedia... his old boss at mercury news said "He was fundamentally a man of passion, not of fairness. When facts didn't fit his theory, he tended to shove them to the sidelines"

He would have loved this site!

Oh dear......
 
Back
Top