For those who have not seen it, here is the video supposedly given to the New York Times by MGM:
So many things are wrong with it, beginning with the fact that we only see a half-dozen time stamps. The rest of the information is provided for us by an unknown narrator. How do we know "Stephen Paddock" drove to his home twice? Because the narrator said so? How do we know he went to the Ogden and staked out another concert? Because the narrator said so?
Why is he wearing the same clothing throughout the video except for one time when he was wearing a white pullover instead of a grey one? "Stephen Paddock" did not have any other clothes? Not even when he allegedly made two trips to his home? Why did he suddenly decide to wear a ball cap on the day of the shooting?
I would also like to know if the FBI in Las Vegas is trying to convince us that the hammer was used to break the windows? I am intrigued by all of the tiny pieces of glass all in a nice little pile next to the window. Why is the pile inside the room? Why is it all in one place? If the FBI is going to say the glass was blown inward, the glass should be spread out over the carpet, not sitting there like someone took a jar full of glass bits and poured them out on the rug.
Finally, where is the supporting documentation? Where are the key card logs? Where are the receipts showing when "Stephen Paddock" rented the two rooms? And, nothing on the video explains the room service receipt we have showing dinner for two people. Who was the second person? Did Marylou Danley ever appear? Her fingerprints were allegedly found on some of the ammunition.
Let us take a look at how someone could break the windows at the Mandalay Bay:
By the way, why are the drapes closed? Would a shooter want to fight with them as he reloads and/or switches weapons?
But let us answer the question of how someone could have broken those windows (because we definitely know they were broken). I have come across one possibility, oddly enough thanks to my extra-curricular reading rather than focused research. Some ammunition is made using tungsten carbide, otherwise known as armor-piercing bullets. The use of such ammunition can be dangerous; given the right load, it can ignite and cause fire:
A note to gun control advocates: It is already illegal to sell this ammunition, and it is not widely available. Yet it seems "Stephen Paddock" purchased these bullets in Arizona:
In my opinion, this answers the question of how he broke the windows. Remaining are all of the other questions, many of which I answered in my original article on the subject and which were supported in the video posted at the bottom of the post:
One piece remains. Were there helicopters firing on the crowd that night? I find that extremely difficult to believe. Tactically it would be a nightmare to conceal. However, I may have found one answer to the reports from some witnesses that they saw gunfire from the helos. Are any of my readers familiar with the Ghost Army?
If, as Mike Closer and I assert, the shooting was cover for an assassination, it is entirely possible special effects might have been used in order to distract from the real action. Obviously I cannot prove this theory (yet), but it makes more sense than firing live ammunition from helicopters that are impossible to conceal.
The following link contains some footage of what is being described as muzzle flashes from a helicopter:
It simply makes no sense, especially in this day and age of camera phones (not to mention the shooting occurred in a tourist town where everyone has a camera and/or video recorder). I could be wrong, but fake gunfire is a possibility that should be explored if we are to be thorough.
More as events warrant.
