Hello Everyone,
Very happy to be posting again. Today we’re returning to where this forum begun- the still unresolved Las Vegas Massacre of 2017. There was recently a reference to the atrocity on the Infowars.com website, with a link to a two-and-a-half hour interview between Tucker Carlson and a guy called Ian Carroll. I will provide a link to it at the bottom.
I’ve just finished watching, and here’s my summary. Firstly, there is very little profanity until the two-hour mark, but after that time the guest lets some profanities fly.
The Las Vegas massacre is the biggest mass shooting in US history, yet huge question marks over the official narrative still linger. According to this narrative, a lone gunman called Stephen Paddock opened from a high-up room of the Mandalay Bay Hotel, down at concert goers across the road (at quite a distance) of a country and western festival. There was a huge stockpile of guns and ammo in his room. He apparently grew tired of the massacre we’re told he committed, and allegedly suicided after some time.
There were weird activities in the hallway outside his room during the night, and the official timeline of events around Paddock and the hallway shifted several times over the subsequent days.
People’s on-the-ground experiences differed markedly from the official narrative. There is clear, available audio/visual evidence which proves that multiple gunmen were active in different locations across the Las Vegas strip, including other hotels, casinos and the nearby airport. Much of this even took place after the time we are told Paddock had killed himself. Moreover, several witnesses who were vocal on social media- about their certainty that multiple gunmen were involved- died very soon afterward. Maybe coincidence. Maybe.
The interviewee referenced a resource to check out (vegasshootingmap.com), which methodically documents the locations of the various incidents on the strip that night, and associated evidence thereof (lots of 911 calls came in about fresh incidents up to about an hour after the alleged suicide of Paddock).
There is evidence that some concertgoers were wounded at the concert, made it somewhere else, then succumbed to their injuries. There is also evidence that some uninjured concertgoers had been able to flee the danger zone, only to be shot dead in positions unable to be targeted from where Paddock was stationed. There is also evidence that, according to bullet trajectories, some of the victims were shot by culprits who were at ground level.
Then, the interviewee got into the subject of the highly suspicious, potentially very sinister presence of multiple helicopters flying around the scene of the massacre as it unfolded, not officially recognised on flight radar/s. In addition to this, the casinos and hotels of affected sites not only imposed gag orders on staff, but released virtually no surveillance footage thereafter.
The flow of the interview then moved back to Stephen Paddock and his room, which was almost certainly occupied by more than one person. We also heard about the dodgy, shifting narrative about the security guard who was shot in the leg (through the door) outside of the room of Paddock and his unknown associates. Of the police team that eventually breached the room of Paddock (after Paddock was obviously dead), members of Las Vegas SWAT team were largely absent (Why? Where were they?) and the breach team was mainly a cobbled-together hodgepodge of local cops.
The interviewee then mentioned how, soon after the massacre, YouTube and other social media began to censor and ban content which questioned the official narrative (I remember this aspect first-hand, myself).
Further to this, the background info we’re given about Paddock is dodgy and vague. There is no motive, none given. We ought to know a lot more about the guy we’re told was responsible for this carnage. For context, the slaughter happened about a year after Trump’s first election victory. The concert was generally the domain of Trump voters, in a political sense. This probably doesn’t mean a whole lot (in my opinion), but so be it.
Carlson and the interviewee then got onto the topic of potential motives of those who really orchestrated and carried out the massacre. Gun control and increased surveillance were briefly touched on, but given no real credence. The interviewee then detailed a potential Saudi angle; a theory which buys into the possibility that, somewhat separate to the slaughter of civilians at the concert, the incidents elsewhere could have involved clashes between different covert groups after something had gone wrong (or escalated).
To my mind, this still doesn’t explain the mass killing at the concert, although this was touched on later. The Saudi angle, in my opinion, is unsubstantiated although, to be fair, the interviewee pointed out the fact that Saudi Arabia has clearly been involved in other terror atrocities, including September 11th, 2001.
Overall, while I didn’t necessarily buy into the Saudi angle, the interviewee painted a picture of a possible scenario in which something covert went badly wrong, spiralled, and was then covered up on the fly. Broadly speaking, I believe that this is very plausible.
The interviewee delved further into factional Saudi stuff, even making a link to that guy who was murdered and chopped up in the embassy in Istanbul, Turkey, a year later (I vaguely remember this case, maybe you do, too). All-in-all, whether it be the Saudi angle or another angle, speculation is quite inevitable when not only 60 people are murdered, but the official explanation for it is patently and demonstrably untrue.
The flow of the interview moved back to the sinister helicopters that hovered around the massacre as it occurred. Circumstantial evidence linked them to Saudi Arabia, which had reportedly stationed helicopters in the desert nearby only a month or two beforehand, for seemingly unrelated exercises (presumably with US forces hosting them).
After the shooting at the concert had reportedly finished, there were reports of shooting and multiple gunmen at or inside of helicopter hangars at the nearby airport. A woman had apparently been shot, fate unknown, while other civilians purportedly hid. These reports regarding the hangar were separate to reports of mysterious figures on the tarmac as well.
Was the massacre at the concert a spontaneous means to divert attention from the other things going on across the Las Vegas strip? The question was posed in the interview, but wisely not answered. Besides this, the presence of an armed gunman on the 4th floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel (Paddock’s room was almost 30 storeys higher) was mentioned, before Carlson and the interviewee discussed the potential geopolitical elements involved, if in fact the Saudi theory would be proven.
Overall, as stated by the interviewee, the mainstream media official narrative has been comprehensively debunked, but no credible replacement theory has been offered up for what was a truly despicable act of evil. The government must know what really happened, that’s why the massacre was covered up, and no proper investigation into the carnage ever undertaken.
Towards the end of the interview there was a bit of talk about Charlie Kirk, as well as the ‘Mass Psychosis Formation’ that was evident during the Covid era. Lastly, it was agreed that of all the suspicious major incidents in recent decades that seem to have been false flags and/or inside jobs, the Las Vegas massacre is easily the most blatant, obvious example of this.
Link below. If my summary wasn’t enough, and you want to listen for yourself (the guy gives way more details than I can squeeze into my summary), you will find the link to the interview within the link below:
https://www.infowars.com/posts/watch-tu ... s-massacre
Posted: Fri Jan 31, 2025 10:31 pm