I say the crazy woman was never there. All we hear about her are stories from crisis actors.

No

No, and I don't intend to. I have already shown that the Paddock we are seeing on TV isn't even the guy they say he is. So why would I waste my time on some fraud "channeling" some guy that never existed? The thing that is really ultra-bizarre is that you somehow think those videos have anything at all to do with this post. Unless of course you're trying to drown my signal with your noise.

On the other hand, I wrote a term paper in high school on how FDR provoked then allowed Pearl Harbor to happen, so in some ways I was slightly ahead of the curve.

Here, allow me to finish the quotation:

I decided that I would never again allow myself to ignore or reject any theory on the basis of plausibility. I swore to myself that I would pursue the evidence for any idea or any theory, no matter how absurd it seemed.

I was thrust into a couple of months of intense reading up on many different conspiracy theories, trying to sort fact from fiction. I’m still at it. And although I don’t intend to retrace these discoveries in great depth, as time goes on I hope to fill out parts of the blog with links on relevant subjects.

I’ve come to the conclusion, mainly thanks to others’ research, that much of what we see on TV or read in the newspapers is fake and phony. We’re being manipulated and duped on a grand, almost unimaginable scale. Our thoughts and passions are being molded and orchestrated. It’s sort of like in the Matrix movies, except that instead of a computer simulation, our Matrix has been created by a group of living, breathing human beings using mass media as their primary tool. Waking up to this realization was psychologically difficult at first. A bona fide ontological rupture. But I would not trade my newfound perspective for anything. I’m wide awake inside the Matrix, and I’m not going back to sleep.

So much of the world we think we live in is a sham, a conjob. But it’s not just mainstream or “consensus” reality: many if not most of the conspiracies we read about are either fake or filled with false leads and misdirection. Puncturing through consensus reality does not lead directly to the truth. Waiting for us on the other side of that membrane is a dizzying and disorienting fog of disinformation and misdirection. The mainstream lies are themselves wrapped inside of lies, inside of lies, inside of lies, inside of lies…

The Powers That Be do not want anyone to discover the truth about how this world works, and so they cover everything in a thick, suffocating layer of fog so it is nearly impossible for us to find our way to the truth. Will we ever reach the truth? I don’t know. All I know is that we can try to cut through the fog, a little bit at a time.

Really? That's funny: I just tried finding footage and the first thing that came up on Youtube was this video: Las Vegas shooting everybody locked in @HOOTERS! Or in other words: the exact opposite of what you and she said. How about providing a link to the video you are talking about?

So I offer the testimony of an eye witness employee plus a video literally showing people hunkering down inside the Hooter's casino, and you offer a video where people are 'talking about it.' Uh...ok.

I didn't see anything about Hooters. Only the Ballagio and Caesars. What time does the video mention anything about Hooters?

Let's see: we've got one eye witness and one video from Hooters showing people taking shelter inside and no shooters.

We have one video from outside Hooters (apparently), with some guy standing by a door (for some reason) telling people to come inside, then someone says there is a shooter inside, and they all run. But note that there are also no gunshots to be heard at all.

Are they both true? I concede it's possible. Hard to determine the time lines here, but you could argue that Kimberley et al. showed up at Hooters as people were running.

But note also that many of the people at the beginning of the video don't look like they're running for their lives. They are walking away from the concert area, to be sure, but they hardly look panicked. Or at least most of them don't. This is not consistent with Kimberley's 'shooters everywhere' narrative. Also note that the cameraman runs across the parking lot into a covered parking garage, which makes sense. He did run two miles to the airport terminal, then turn around and run another mile back the way he came.

In my opinion the planting of this kind of contradictory evidence is deliberately done to confuse us and make it more difficult to discern what happened -- and what didn't happen. All the reports of shooters at various casinos are part of this attempt to confuse.

And I accept that. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

Let's see: we've got one eye witness and one video from Hooters showing people taking shelter inside and no shooters.

We have one video from outside Hooters (apparently), with some guy standing by a door (for some reason) telling people to come inside, then someone says there is a shooter inside, and they all run. But note that there are also no gunshots to be heard at all.

Are they both true? I concede it's possible. Hard to determine the time lines here, but you could argue that Kimberley et al. showed up at Hooters as people were running.

But note also that many of the people at the beginning of the video don't look like they're running for their lives. They are walking away from the concert area, to be sure, but they hardly look panicked. Or at least most of them don't. This is not consistent with Kimberley's 'shooters everywhere' narrative. Also note that the cameraman runs across the parking lot into a covered parking garage, which makes sense. He did run two miles to the airport terminal, then turn around and run another mile back the way he came.

In my opinion the planting of this kind of contradictory evidence is deliberately done to confuse us and make it more difficult to discern what happened -- and what didn't happen. All the reports of shooters at various casinos are part of this attempt to confuse.

If you want to go down an even deeper rabbit hole, here is something else I did not include in my post, (but did write in a comment on my blog.](https://cuttingthroughthefog.com/2017/10/09/notes-on-the-route-91-shooting-on-101/#comment-135) Read the comment, then check out the paper I link to on the Dreyfus affair:

The first thing I did was check Intellius to see if she existed. She does appear, and the details match the published account. She struck me at first like a normal person leading a humdrum life. She works in SoCal as an ‘inventory specialist’ for Aero-Zone, a privately owned company that supplies parts to the aero-space industry. I went to their website, clicked on their ‘about’ page, and what do I see but an open letter from the company’s founder and president, Alfredo Dreyfus. When I saw that, I shouted out loud “You’ve got to be kidding me!” If you don't know why I reacted that way, check out my research on the manufactured scandal in 19th Century France surrounding Alfred Dreyfus.

Alfredo’s back story is unknown. His LinkedIn profile does not include any education history. It just says he founded aero-zone in 1994 and that’s it. The company’s website says that “Aero-Zone was founded in 1994 by a small team of dedicated industry professionals with a small office in Chandler, Arizona (a suburb of Phoenix)….By making sound business decisions, and resisting the urge to rely on excessive financing, Aero-Zone has grown at a trend-setting pace. In January of 1998, as a result of our growth, Aero-Zone moved from our first office and warehouse to a 6,000 square foot facility nearby. We again saw several years of tremendous growth, despite significant adversity in the industry. In March of 2004, Aero-Zone moved into a 30,000 square foot Headquarters and Inventory Control Center…”

How were they able to avoid relying on financing and grew during despite industry downturns? No chance they relied on nepotism and connections, right? What kinds of connections? Well, just look at the Wikipedia page for the LouisDreyfus company. It has historically been an agribusiness company, but it also is involved in finance, oil, weapons, etc. You can bet old Alfredo has called in a few favors over the years. Now I suppose they asked for something in return.

Cheers.

Could be just attention-seeking. But I think she was paid to fake her story and her death. Actually, I doubt she wrote the story herself, but whatever.