The Las Vegas Massacre and Alternative Media Triumph

by Matt, SGTreport:

I love the alternative media. For many reasons really, not least of which is not having to lie to everyone everyday. The main reason though is through the alt-media you can find out what’s actually going on. To be sure, there is a lot of speculation and educated, as well as uneducated guesswork but watching the alternative media completely dismantle the official narrative in real time has always been a pleasure to watch.

This is all certainly true with the latest horrific attack in Las Vegas. The official narrative being pushed, that Stephen Paddock, alone and with little experience initiated a massacre and the whole problem is down to to that ‘pesky’ 2nd amendment. Repeal that, and the problem will be solved.

Like many things you might be able to judge motive with a certain amount of back reasoning depending upon what the politicians push for following the incident. It will be interesting to see how the US Liberty act gets strong armed. A Deep State push for this agenda would lend further credence to the multiple shooters explanation currently being developed.

Remember the Patriot Act. A 352 page document signed into law on October 26th 2001, a whopping 6 weeks after the 9/11 terror attacks. This thing was written beforehand for sure and I think everyone can speculate as to why.

I usually like to wait a few days on these type of things though in order to get a more rounded perspective on what’s likely to have gone on.

What’s emerging has been quite fascinating. Certainly adding to the intrigue is a mysterious character names John on 4chan warning people away from Las Vegas and talking about the ‘High Incident Project’ all the way through to Robert Steele, who purportedly actually ran false flags for the CIA giving his opinion that this indeed was a false flag.

Then there's a question of the expended brass or the alleged ballistics calculation note. The fact that he was on Diazepam, a known drug for the treatment of anxiety (who prescribed him that). Common side effects are nausea or sickness, however, in extreme cases it can cause hallucinations, agitation and anxiety (the very thing it’s supposed to cure) as well as paranoia. The sort of side effects that lead to a mass shooting maybe?

Although taking note of these things I do prefer hard reasoning based on evidence or experienced personnel commentating on observable evidence. Alex Jones is hinting at an ISIS connection and Trump is covering it up on the basis it may contain sleeper cell activation codes. Without any evidence I’ll wait out on that.

One of the first respected opinions I heard though was Paul Joseph Watson’s recent appearance on the Stephen Crowder podcast.

In my opinion he made two wholly general points with his attempt to smear those who chose a different opinion. Despite agreeing with Paul on many issues I thought he was more than denigrating to a group of people putting information and theories out into the Open Source of the internet for scrutiny.

Although there are many click bait sites, and trying to put informative information on any subject while avoiding these articles is a task in itself on a daily basis I thought Paul on this occasion made a couple of woefully inadequate points.

I take complete note of his point about locations of recordings and echoes and the strobe light on the 4th floor. All perfectly possible. Not definitive but perfectly possible.

Firstly though his comments about mike accuracy. While it’s true cellphones don’t have directional mikes and the greatest technologically possible hardware they are excellent enough at recording sequence. What happened in what order. Analysis of sound recording can filter out noise and a mike on a phone can pick out an individual round being fired and an individual bullet strike. It’s also timeline sequential, that is to say it’s a recording of real time in order. It becomes perfect possible to distinguish between an original shot, an echo, distant gunfire and bullet strikes. Each has very different sound waveforms.

Secondly he seems to conflate the whole issue of echoes and muffled gunfire. Apparently being satisfied that muffled fire was the result of Paddock turning around to shoot within the room. This statement can only have come from someone who has never heard an automatic weapon in real life. Assuming he didn’t move greatly, or wrap the end of the weapon in a pillow the sound that emanates from a weapon mostly behaves like light from a torch. Simply turning the weapon around to fire in a different directing produces the same sound to the observer all other things being equal.

The alternative media investigation is starting to move onto firmer ground though. If you haven’t seen it yet, I’d recommend watching the Alex Jones interview with Craig Sawyer, a former Navy Seal and, as he lets slip, a guy who has his services used by the government for litigation purposes on weapon sounds. The interview also includes the taxi driver footage and sounds.

You can watch it here,

You can quite clearly hear distant shots BEFORE Paddock begins firing. They didn’t appear to be echoes, thus discounting a negligent discharge from a Police Officer who empties his MP5 clip into the roof of his cruiser or a civilian performing defensive automatic fire then it is prima facie evidence of a second shooter. I have so far (and that doesn’t mean there aren’t any) heard absolutely no reports of any return of defensive fire taking place. Paddock seems to have committed suicide (another one) before SWAT entered.

By far the best to date has come from Mike Adams at Natural News

Mike runs through the information needed to qualify the existence of a second shooter. Having come from a science background I’d have personally liked to have seen the audio waveforms as well as the sounds played but I have absolute no reason to suspect Mike’s integrity here.

I watched the Mike Adams’ analysis twice, the first time in general and the second time with a sceptical scientific eye. The reasoning I find is sound but rests on 3 key assumptions that I didn’t hear addressed.

Firstly, the 2nd shooter is using the same rifle and rounds as the 1st shooter. For the 2nd shooter to be at a range of 250-275 yards identified by the analysis, you are presuming the weapons are the same. If the 2nd shooter’s rifle is more powerful then the bullet strike sound will be further ahead of the rifle percussion. Thus the calculations need to be altered.

Secondly, the audio pickup is close to enough to the bullet strikes so as to be negligible. If the sound of the round striking the ground has to travel from its impact point to the recording device, this has to be factored in. Mike didn’t show the clip from which he took the audio, but I’m speculating that this may not have been a problem. If the recording device is perpendicular to the bullet trajectory then conceivably the bullet strike and rifle report sounds could reach you at the same time. I don’t conceive this as a problem as Mike identifies the 1st shooter from Mandalay Bay, which is known.

Thirdly, the bullet strikes from the 2nd shooter need to be in the same position, or at least calculable distance in a known direction. If the 1st shooter is firing at your feet and the 2nd shooter is firing 200 metres away, then this needs to be taken into account.

What’s fascinating about all this is what Mike hints at, and I’m hoping the alternative media can help here.

For those not familiar with the principle of triangulation let me briefly explain. It’s a military or civilian idea used to locate an unknown position from known factors. Sailors use it to locate their position on charts near a coastline.

If a ship can see two identifiable landmarks on the coastline then it can take a bearing to each. The navigator can then calculate the ‘back bearing’ (The reverse bearing i.e. the direction of the land mark to the ship) and draw a line on a chart. At this point you know you are somewhere on this line. If you do it a second time to a landmark on a more perpendicular trajectory then these two lines will cross. Where they intersect will be your position.


With sounds the principle is similar. If you know the sound and you know the physical properties of sounds coupled with known bullet speeds then you can calculate distance. Thus a given time between the bullet strike and the rifle report gives you a known distance away for any given rifle and round combination. Drawing a circle around that position gives you infinite but quantifiable shooter positions.

What this investigation needs now is TWO known recordings of the same incident from known location points. You can then perform the same analysis and get a range of the 2nd shooter from two locations.

Possibly you can help here. Despite YouTube and Google cracking down and removing these uploads if you know of two then you should make it known.

A couple of stipulations

They need to be far enough apart location wise so that when you draw the circles it’s easy to see where they intersect. Two recording devices next to each other will produce almost the same circle. The second circle will be within the margin of error and therefore useless. It’s also helpful if they are both equidistant from the bullet strikes.

Secondly, the locations of the devices needs to be known or be able to be calculated. This is critical as it’s the basis for the triangulation. The camera on the phone if it’s recording can help a lot here. This needs to be known so that the centre of the triangulation is as accurate as possible. The more error here the more the inaccurate the 2nd shooters position.

Mike talks about this in his presentation and I’d term the phrase ‘Acoustic Triangulation ‘ for the idea.

The idea being;


With two known locations from which you can calculate accurate distances for the gunfire you can draw 2 circles with precisely two bisecting points.

Your 2nd Shooter MUST BE at one of those 2 points. Only at those 2 points can each recording device have recorded the results they did.

Common sense then comes into play. If point A is the middle of a road and point B is a lovely sniper position then you have almost certainly recorded the position of your shooter.

As a word of caution, elevation plays a role in distance. A man on the 1st floor firing at you is a shorter distance than the man on the 32nd floor doing the same. What you learnt of Pythagoras’ theorem applies here.

As a side-note, one thing I’ve not heard a lot about is how Paddock died. Apparently the SWAT team found him dead after he learned of their presence through position cameras. No doubt all that’s above board.

So, the hunt is on. Out of the hundreds of hours of footage, with YouTube and Google doing their best to get in the way, and hamper a decent alternative media investigation;

Do you know of two recordings from two identifiable positions that capture the overlapping gunfire of the second shooter that have line of sight?

Stay tuned, this could get interesting.

For REAL NEWS 24/7 Visit us @