The Vegas Massacre Exposé: What Really Happened?

Scroll down to read this post.
For many reasons, mostly political but partly ethical, I do not use Google, Facebook, Twitter. They practice corrupt business policies, while targeting conservative websites for censoring, facts repeatedly confirmed by news stories and by my sense that Facebook has taken action to prevent my readers from recommending Behind the Black to their friends.
Thus, I must have your direct support to keep this webpage alive. Not only does the money pay the bills, it gives me the freedom to speak honestly about science and culture, instead of being forced to write it as others demand.


Please consider donating by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below.


Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:

If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652


You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

Link here. The article reviews the state of the investigation and notes the endless numbers of issues with it, from contradictory public statements to mysterious police actions to questionable events. The author raises good questions, and shines a light on a story that reeks of corruption and dishonesty, at the highest levels of the FBI and federal government.

There are those who will immediately begin speculating wild conspiracy theories. The story doesn’t require crazy theories, only simple but harsh ones, as noted by the author, linking the Las Vegas massacre to ISIS and some ISIS-allied Saudi power-brokers who have since been defanged by the Saudi government, all with the covert approval of the Trump administration, which also agreed to keep those Saudi links to ISIS and the Las Vegas massacre secret in order to help that friendly Saudi government.



  • Cotour

    And once again, right here on BTB, WE were way ahead of the official narrative. It did not and does not add up from the start.

    None of it adds up to what went down, Mr. Root lays out many similar observations as were proposed here many weeks and months ago, and even if some were over the top they were reasonable given the state of manipulation that we all are much more aware of, I.E., S.O.M. like agendas and operations that the public need not “Burden” themselves with.

    Let us not be naive.

  • Andrew_W

    The Moon landings were faked.

    The 9/11 attacks were committed by elements within the US government.

    The Vegas shooting was orchestrated by MGM and ISIS

    Just another flaky conspiracy theory.

  • Andrew_W: Trivializing the noted questions that the article raises is childish. I specifically noted that no crazy conspiracy theories are needed here to explain the inexplicable behavior of the investigators in Las Vegas.

    Most important, your comment suggests you didn’t even bother to read the article at the link. We are not dealing with crazy conspiracies here. Moreover, no one mentioned MGM as participant in the massacre. You are doing what you always do, posing fake facts to discredit real ones.

    What is considered is the possibility that ISIS engineered the massacre, and did so with the help of some Saudi individuals of power. This is entirely plausible.

  • Garry

    Andrew, did you read the article? The author doesn’t much delve into conspiracy theories as much as he asks questions and points out contradictions, speculates on the possible reasons why we aren’t being given much information on the Vegas shooting, and gives his working theory that perhaps ISIS was involved.

    On the other hand, I don’t give us too much credit; from the very beginning many acquaintances of mine have pointed out that the info is very sketchy and there’s much more than meets the eye.

  • Andrew_W

    I did read the article, which is why I dismiss it as just another flaky conspiracy theory. It has all the traits, using the technique of asking questions without offering answers to suggest vague implications, stating bold facts that are flat out wrong. There’s nothing there that builds a coherent picture, which is the intent of the article, not to establish a case for any specific alternate theory, just to cast doubt on what we do know.

    Someone tell that clown to come back when he has a testable theory rather than silly innuendo.

  • Andrew_W

    The author doesn’t much delve into conspiracy theories as much as he asks questions and points out contradictions, speculates on the possible reasons why we aren’t being given much information on the Vegas shooting, and gives his working theory that perhaps ISIS was involved.

    That’s a pretty good definition of a conspiracy theory: Speculation and innuendo built on claims of a lack of information to justify a claim of a cover-up.

  • Andrew_W: Now why didn’t you simply say this the first time, rather than being a snarky wise-guy? Your points here are valid and worth considering. This is what I want from people, not dismissive smug waves-of-the-hands that do nothing to further the debate.

  • Andrew_W

    I read the article and by the end of it I filed it in what I think is the appropriate category.

  • Cotour

    I think it plain that the “Crazy Paddock” theory is just not as plausible when all of the other elements are figured in.

    One item of evidence that Root misses, the door between the two rooms was locked and had to be breached by police with explosives. In the one room a window was broken out for a shooter and in the other separate room a window was broken out for a shooter, and these were apparently high strength hurricane grade windows.

    The questions remains:

    1. Were the windows broken out for one shooter or two?

    2. Paddock was found in the main room and the door was locked from the other side, thus requiring an explosive breach.

    3. Why would you need two windows? The other window did not offer any additional advantage IMO.

    4. Just show us the video that was said to have been recorded by Paddock himself. This one video puts every question to bed. We can not see it or any segment of it, why?

    Not to mention that Paddock was found peacefully laid out, with his left leg UNDER the rifle on the floor with the Bi pod. That one element alone has me scratching my head, someone shooting themselves in the mouth is an extremely violent action and Paddock showed no evidence of such violent contortions.

    What ever in the end is revealed as the “truth” it is never going to be completely believed because of the plainly secretive actions that the FBI and the local police have undertaken. And that action on their part has a cause / motive.

    There is just more here than less whether Andrew W likes it or not. No mystery, no “conspiracy” just reasonable common sense.

  • Garry

    Much like the case of liberal vs. conservative, I think that you and I have very different definitions of conspiracy theory, Andrew.

    To me a conspiracy theory is rather specific, asserting “facts” that are not real, such as “the CIA killed JFK.” This is very different from what this article does, which I summarize as “the official story is very incomplete and in some cases contradictory; we aren’t being given the full story.”

    I think the author did a good job of pointing out flaws, without giving a definitive theory of what actually happened. With caveats, he speculated on who and what might have been involved, and points out possible, but not definitive, connections between various dots. And he didn’t even point out all the flaws, such as the shooter’s home being robbed because no effort was made to safeguard it.

  • Garry

    To me, Cotour comes closer to conspiracy theory than the author does; he analyzes what has been released, running the danger of overanalyzing without having the proper background, whereas the author focuses more on what hasn’t been released. Don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying that Cotour is buying into conspiracy theory, only that he comes closer to doing so than the author is.

    By not releasing much, the FBI, police, etc. run the risk of people overanalyzing what little has been released, and the spread of conspiracy theories. Which makes me wonder even more why they are holding on to information so tightly.

  • Cotour

    Most everything in Roots article was laid out right here several months ago by me specifically, not much in the way of break through evidence. There is a lot there there, especially when you figure in the owner of the hotel, Prince Talal and where we all know he found himself soon after the event. Coincidence? Could be? I was surprised that he was allowed to live.

    One action by the authorities would settle it all, release just a partial segment of the video that Paddock was said to have recorded of himself in the room / rooms and at the window / windows doing the shooting, case closed for me. But that is not happening. We have not even seen any hotel video and Vegas is probably the most recorded location on the planet. Why no video?

  • Andrew_W

    Perhaps you didn’t read the whole thing Garry, the author offers his vague scenario near the end, trying to tie in Trump and the purge of corrupt Saudi elite. So I think it qualifies as a conspiracy theory, (I allow for the possibility that of some such theories are sound), and a flaky one because there are so many contradictory strands – He implies that MGM people were selling their stock because they knew what was about to happen. What are they devout members of ISIS as well? He claims “money laundering” but I don’t get how Paddock’s gambling is supposed to work as laundering of money, and to what ends? Tax evasion?

  • Andrew_W

    Root could have built a more tenable case if he’d focused on one theory, but by grabbing at everything he thought suspicious he creates a mess, one that would still though appeal to those disinclined to skeptical thinking about his case on this tragic event.

  • Cotour

    ” but by grabbing at everything he thought suspicious he creates a mess, ”

    It is a mess already, Root is not creating it he is only identifying it and its complexity.

    Until some actual verifiable evidence that supports some version of the known events is established then why would you choose to dismiss anything that presents itself as having some level of reasonable or credible evidence?

  • Garry

    Andrew, you just reinforce my assertion that we have different definitions of conspiracy theory. I read his article as saying that there are many unexplained things, and he offers what he admits are unsubstantiated theories on what the explanations might be.

    In my experience, conspiracy theorists are very certain about what happened; Root is not, at least in this article.

    I meant to ask you, in response to one of your earlier posts, to name outlandish facts that Root asserts as facts, rather than straightforwardly admitting that they’re speculation.

    I don’t have a problem with speculation when it’s admitted to be speculation, which is all that Root does. The conspiracy theory comes in when one asserts pure speculation as fact.

    For that reason, whenever I click on a headline on Drudge, for example, and it takes me to infowars, I hit the back button before the page fully loads.

  • Garry: You outline the reasons I posted a link to Root’s article. He doesn’t spend much time speculating, but instead focuses on the many specific and verifiable inconsistencies and problems with the investigation. These issues cannot be dismissed. They exist. The investigation into this horrible crime smells, and it smells badly.

    If you are intellectually honest, you face this fact, and address it.

  • Andrew_W

    Andrew, you just reinforce my assertion that we have different definitions of conspiracy theory.

    Fair enough, I obviously interpret the “theory” in “conspiracy theory” differently to you, I classify it a conspiracy theory when someone starts theorizing there’s a conspiracy, even when they don’t claim specific details, you don’t class the advanced theory as a conspiracy theory until believers have firmed up on the details and are more adamant that their reality is the truth.

    Maybe I should say Root is advancing a conspiracy hypothesis?

  • Andrew_W

    If you are intellectually honest, you face this fact, and address it.

    As I read it, Root spends much of his efforts trying to build a case using innuendo, to me that’s the main focus of the article, not complaining about the lack of openness on the part of authorities. He clearly goes well past that, using the perceived lack of openness to try to built an argument that there’s much more happening by suggesting: Insider trading, MGM for-knowledge, a link to the Saudi purge, Trump acting in ways that suggest an involvement in something bigger, money laundering and ISIS involvement. The same sorts of arguments that were initially advanced by 9/11 Troofers.

  • Dale Martin

    Most evil, it seems, comes from Insurance and Lawyers, in this case I think Mr Root has nailed it..

  • wodun

    I am certain that we are not getting the full truth on the Vegas shooting just like I am certain that GWP is not to be trusted. Sometimes they have good stuff but people need to bring buckets of skepticism with them when reading anything on that site.

  • Garry

    Andrew, point taken on “theory” in “conspiracy theory”; the word is right there, but I’m so used to conspiracy theories that purport to be factual rather than theoretical, that the idea of “theory” no longer even enters my mind. thanks for pointing this out; I value clear communication, and I wish I had a better expression to use than “conspiracy theory.”

    As I mentioned in connection with infowars, I usually don’t bother to read through articles that give what I see as conspiracy theories. Perhaps to you this article looks like one I would dismiss as conspiracy theory. I saw a huge difference; there was a good amount of speculation, but it was clearly labeled as such. Root admitted that he wasn’t sure, while he pointed out several dots that could potentially be connected.

    I don’t think we’ll ever know what happened in Vegas, and as time goes by I see the official story as less and less credible. Root does a good job pointing out plausible motivations for not disclosing information, and I try to be careful not make the leap from plausible to “that’s exactly what happened.”

  • Edward

    I realize that supplying actual definitions does not help, as people tend to continue to use their previous definitions, biased as they may be. However:

    Meanwhile, the claims that there were multiple shooters is not supported by the physical evidence. From the article: “Some [witnesses] swore they saw multiple shooters. Some say they were being fired at from different directions and levels. Yet police and FBI have ruled that out. So, all the witnesses are wrong?” Not all have to be wrong, just the ones who believe that they saw multiple shooters. Only one room in one hotel had any broken-open windows.

    It is clear that there was plenty of confusion during the incident, just as there is still plenty of confusion long afterward. Different witnesses tend to report different events when reporting on the same incident. Eyewitness accounts are not as reliable as we wish them to be.

    I agree with Root, that this is one of the worst handled mass shootings ever, from the security in place, to the response at the time, to the official and media reporting to the public. When I looked up the word “cluster[bleep]” in the dictionary, there was a picture of this Las Vegas shooting as a classic example. [Sarcasm Alert on that last sentence.]

  • Garry

    Edward, you remind me that as I read the article, I found that one of the 20 “facts” didn’t ring true: the shots coming from different directions. It’s difficult to locate the source of shots under any conditions; add in the mass confusion, the acoustics near large, tall buildings, and other factors, and it’s hard to say anything definitive one way or another.

  • DougSpace

    Re: the windows, there’s a picture of the room with a hammer with a pretty heavy metal head — basically a mini-sledge hammer. Perhaps if one swings it with force a corner or edge of that could exceed 800 lbs of impulse force:

    > Why would you need two windows?

    In case police started shooting back at one, he could run to the other?

  • Cotour


    Yes, I remember seeing the mini sledge hammer, shows intent and preparation over and above the fire power, but by who? That object being in the room may support the just plain “Crazy” Paddock scenario. If the event was the result a spur of the moment action by “other” actors in some sort of weapons or what ever deal gone wrong, then why the sledge hammer? It shows that there was an intent to break out the windows to effect the action. Although, you could have just shot them out and proceeded with the shooting. Could indicate either planning by paddock or others I suppose. (?) Show me Paddocks finger prints on it along with the receipt if its new.

    The second window to me is less a function of moving to another position to avoid return fire, the windows are essentially in the same position, no real advantage IMO. (I do not think that the police would return fire, they would work to breach the position) Return fire is not the problem, its the SWAT team hitting the door in the next ten minutes after you begin that is the problem. And its the locked door which is locked from the other room other than the one that Paddock was found dead in. In order to effect his plan, Paddock breaks out two windows, locks the door between the rooms, runs around through the hallway and begin firing in room 1. Paddock has a plan to run between the rooms which would entail going from room 1 to room 2 by having to breach your cover which is your locked door, go into the main hallway, where SWAT or security is going to be at some time soon and enter the other room and continue to fire. Why lock the door at all? You could break out the two windows and begin firing in the #2 room and move to room #1 and then you continue and then kill yourself.

    Makes absolutely no strategic sense, too complex, there is just too much there there. Let me see Paddocks video, case closed.

  • Orion314

    Having seen much of the footage, it appeared unmistakable that machine gun fire was also coming from the helicopter.

  • Cotour

    Listen to this guy Lucas Bruch’s first hand relating of what he saw and heard at the moment of windows breaking and shots fired.

    He heard what he though was “fireworks” (?, window being smashed and breaking or being shot out ?) then he heard shots, and then he immediately heard a second window being broken out.

    If this is accurate then there are most certainly two people and two shooters. Why? Because there is not enough time to get from one window to the other, especially if that door between rooms was locked.

  • Cotour

    A bit more to chew on:

    Paddock = Patsy, that is what its looking like from where I sit. And who is in the middle of it all?

    THE FBI.

    “When FBI brass was provided with forensic evidence of multiple gunmen, they told agents to stand down and focus on Stephen Paddock only. Even a key video captured by a hotel guest of multiple rifles firing from Mandalay Bay went ignored, covered up.”

    “When superiors instruct law enforcement to not follow credible leads, something usually smells funny for a reason and that fact has stuck with FBI insiders with knowledge of the Las Vegas probe.”

    “This is not a debate among would-be conspiracy theorists on YouTube and social media. These are seasoned professional investigators who say the Las Vegas investigation is tainted for reasons far above their pay grades, reasons they cannot comprehend. Law enforcement are trained to hunt and find bad guys and when their own bosses become an obstacle to that process — especially in a high-profile case like the Las Vegas shooting that killed 58 concert goers — suspicions begin to spill over.”

    This whole thing smells of an international level event.

  • Andrew_W

    “Even a key video captured by a hotel guest of multiple rifles firing from Mandalay Bay went ignored, covered up.”

    I listened to the sound of the firing in that video several times, I heard one rifle firing, the rate of fire was uneven, with the occasional single round fired immediately before the shooter got his bumpstock working properly. The sound of the rifle changed a bit as the phone was moved around.

  • Cotour

    I like this video because HE was apparently there and is an eye witness sitting under where the whole thing began.

    He plainly states that he heard what he thought was fireworks and then saw broken glass falling, then right after that firing and then right after that another window breaking. Now unless Paddock had some super powers that we have not been apprised of that scenario is not physically possible. Play it out in your mind. And we are not even calculating that he had to go through a door into another room. And that room was apparently locked……..from the other side so if the door was not open then he had to rush into the hall and into the room.

    Just like another “ONE” shooter situation from the past where the FBI and other officials insisted that there could only be one shooter, not because that is what the evidence indicated but because it better served “Other” interests. In other words Strategy S., Over O., Morality M.

    Once again, although we have really only eye witness testimony on the street and some basic measurements of recorded sound profiles and video that establish the mathematics and physics that indicate something other than what the official narrative is.

    Mathematics and physics is hard to get around, but somehow the FBI is able to do so over and over again when it serves a higher purpose.

  • Cotour

    Video of Paddock is released:

    Although it does not show him during the shooting. He is seen bringing 21 bags of varying kinds into his rooms during several days of activity. Waiting for more video during the act, it has to exist.

  • Cotour

    I think I found Paddocks “good” brother:

    He calls himself Richard Turner and he too lives in Vegas. Suggestion, although he is blind, don’t play cards with him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *