Why did they do it, though? Money? Gun control? I've heard more theories about it being a blown assassination attempt on some Saudi/UAE guy who was there, and either the shooting was cover or a way to diverge any potential story into a mass shooting. I don't know what happened that night, but I suspect a few people know and will take it to their graves.
This guy's seen the surveillance of the saudi prince being escorted by armed guards in full tactical gear with rifles. 3 years later they arrest 3 senior members of the royal family for treason along with a bunch of lower level folks in the circle.
I have an alternate theory that there are "good guys" in the US gov and while they'd never admit they've been allowing Isreal/Saudi to do terrorism against us for decades to pull us into unwanted wars, they do try to cover up those terrorisms to avoid the unwanted wars.
Who suggests terrorism and who consents to suggested TERROR (Latin terreo, to frighten; fear) by being afraid? Who but oneself can choose to admit (allow) fear to terrify self?
unwanted wars
What if ones consent (want or not want) to anything suggested (want); while ignoring perceivable (need)...shapes war aka conflicts of reason (want vs not want).
AMEND', verb (Latin emendo; menda, mendum, a fault) + MENT (Latin mentis; mind). Who wields the faulty mind...the one suggesting false flags or the one consenting to the suggested?
Why did they do it, though? Money? Gun control? I've heard more theories about it being a blown assassination attempt on some Saudi/UAE guy who was there, and either the shooting was cover or a way to diverge any potential story into a mass shooting. I don't know what happened that night, but I suspect a few people know and will take it to their graves.
Shooting would have distracted and given cover for the assassination of the Crowned Saudi Prince who was in Vegas that day.
This guy's seen the surveillance of the saudi prince being escorted by armed guards in full tactical gear with rifles. 3 years later they arrest 3 senior members of the royal family for treason along with a bunch of lower level folks in the circle.
The rumor that I like: a false flag to justify taking down Alwaleed bin Talal.
That's what I've heard too, or similar too it. Maybe it's just me, but it sounds a little too "movie-like" for my taste if you know what I mean.
I have an alternate theory that there are "good guys" in the US gov and while they'd never admit they've been allowing Isreal/Saudi to do terrorism against us for decades to pull us into unwanted wars, they do try to cover up those terrorisms to avoid the unwanted wars.
Who suggests terrorism and who consents to suggested TERROR (Latin terreo, to frighten; fear) by being afraid? Who but oneself can choose to admit (allow) fear to terrify self?
What if ones consent (want or not want) to anything suggested (want); while ignoring perceivable (need)...shapes war aka conflicts of reason (want vs not want).
These false flags justify them going after the 2nd amendment.
AMEND', verb (Latin emendo; menda, mendum, a fault) + MENT (Latin mentis; mind). Who wields the faulty mind...the one suggesting false flags or the one consenting to the suggested?