Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussion / Re: WANT!
« Last post by mirth on Today at 11:50:02 AM »
That'll work.
2
General Discussion / Re: WANT!
« Last post by Windigo on Today at 11:49:32 AM »
Gus can't reach anything on the first story.
My thought was that you use a catapult
3
General Discussion / Re: WANT!
« Last post by mirth on Today at 11:48:36 AM »
Gus can't reach anything on the first story.
4
Enigmas of the Mystical / Re: More Pix For A Laugh
« Last post by Barthheart on Today at 11:48:27 AM »
5
General Discussion / Re: WANT!
« Last post by Windigo on Today at 11:45:58 AM »
Gus can be your 2nd story man.
6
Music, TV, Movies / Re: New Punisher Series
« Last post by Gusington on Today at 11:42:15 AM »
Maybe. Remember, we're shady.
7
Music, TV, Movies / Re: New Punisher Series
« Last post by DoctorQuest on Today at 11:35:58 AM »
Truth!
8
Religion, Politics, and Flame Wars / Re: Las Vegas Shooting
« Last post by JasonPratt on Today at 11:35:13 AM »
I've been pretty busy since last Friday when Sheriff Lombardo held his second update press conference. Here it is for reference.



Thoughts:

1.) This is where we receive official confirmation that Paddock was trying to shoot the fuel cells. I gather that he didn't succeed in penetrating, and that a detonation from penetration would have had a low chance anyway. (Also the tanks were set up so that a penetration wouldn't likely create a gaseous state for the fuel, and so there wouldn't have been an increased risk of detonation from that either.) It occurs to me that if the numbers on the notepads were sniper calcs (as now claimed), the tanks could have been the stationary target for which the calcs were made.

2.) Paddock did check into the room on the 25th and again on the 28th. Something the sheriff said gives me the impression that the occupant (at least officially) changes between then. His girlfriend Marilou checked in with him on the 28th. I have yet to hear a timeline adjustment that accounts for her presence in the shooting nest, but she's the one who basically got the other room where the window was broken out which was then naturally expanded into a larger suite through the attaching door. (This leads back over into questions of why the door between the suite rooms had to be breached, but there may be some basic breaching protocols here I'm not hearing details about.)

3.) The receipt where Paddock ordered room service for two people on the 27th wasn't mentioned, but we know this is valid. Given P's notions about women as "fungible", this could have easily been an escort of course, or someone else with no real connection to the shooting.

4.) Sheriff Lombardo mentions "locked interrogations" as a source of information about the timeline. To me that sounds like how you treat active suspects, but maybe not?

5.) Essentially, the timeline has been clarified to the first volley of fire, this being directed at Campos apparently, but quickly proceeding to the outside target area. I won't be surprised if I learn that the first outside target was the fuel cell area; then failing to cause a detonation, Paddock started sweeping the crowd while he still had a chance.

6.) Officers assisting Campos arrived 12 minutes after the first shots were fired (at him). Evidently, differences in timeline arrivals have been caused by stress perceptions.

7.) Firing from the shooting nest had ceased for about 2 minutes by the time officers arrived to assist Campos. (Around 10 minutes of shooting.)

8.) It's odd watching the sheriff's head as he's sweeping the room during his delivery (both off the cuff and from prepared statements). It's like he has trouble looking leftward. Don't know why, but it jumped out at me. Crick in his neck? old wound? tension between him and the lead FBI agent Rouse? (They rather avoid eye contact with each other in passing between the podium, each time. But tension between them could be from any factors, not necessarily conspiracy.)

9.) Rouse: "To date we have found no signs of ideology, or affiliations to any groups." Yeah, I don't believe that, for one simple reason: Paddock's brother's interview(s) provided signs of ideology. Those signs might be disputable in what exactly they implied, but they were there. These are brothers (the older one being a mentor to the surviving brother) who regard themselves as smarter than the average bear, who escape being called to account for their actions by being smarter (which they pride themselves on), who operate with patsies who will get caught to take the blame, who (at least Steven, the shooter) regard women as "fungible" (the younger brother's term), i.e. easily replaceable and interchangeable, and who (at least the surviving brother) regard this attitude as being equivalent to truly loving a woman. They also are angry, or at least the shooter was (and the younger brother seems to agree), at evidently the same things the mainstream media are routinely angry about every night, whatever that is. The surviving brother thinks the important point for everyone to learn from this murder spree, is that if his brother can do it then we're all screwed because anyone can do it, and that we should expect more like this to happen.

We can dispute what the signs mean, but those are signs of an ideology. I'm not an expert in many things, but I work hard at understanding worldviews and their implications. I may not be able to infer exactly what that information adds up to (yet), but those are clear signs of a strong ideology.

I'm sure the agent is trying to say that they haven't found connections to an organized group, of a sort that would explain the motivation of the shooting. But I fail to believe that the finest investigators in the world haven't already long ago built an ideological profile of Paddock, based on a ton more information than I'll ever have access to.

10.) Still no word about the warning during the concert, including to disaffirm it happened or was about the shooting. This remains super-weird to me. It would be extremely easy to say, "We talked to security for the concert, and they report never taking aside anyone for warning about anything," or, "Concert security says that they pulled aside an Hispanic couple who believe that country-western music comes from the devil and that everyone attending the concert, including their friend on the front row, was irretrievably damning their soul. It was a terrible coincidence, but only a coincidence: they knew nothing about the shooting and would have tried to warn about that, they said, had they known."

11.) No questions were allowed at this press conference. Under the internet scrutiny for conspiracy, I guess I can understand that.
9
General Discussion / Re: WANT!
« Last post by mirth on Today at 11:33:55 AM »
We have to get the timing right. Who do we know with a reliable watch?

I can't think of anyone.
10
General Discussion / Re: WANT!
« Last post by bob48 on Today at 11:31:37 AM »
We have to get the timing right. Who do we know with a reliable watch?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10