United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Las Vegas shooter's laptop missing its hard drive
Source:
ABC News
URL Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/las-vegas- ... g-hard-drive/story?id=50709285
Published: Oct 25, 2017
Author: Jack Date, Mike Levine, Pierre Thomas
Post Date: 2017-10-25 14:48:35 by nolu chan
Keywords: None
Views: 6330
Comments: 85
Las Vegas shooter's laptop missing its hard drive By Jack Date A laptop computer recovered from the Las Vegas hotel room where Stephen Paddock launched the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history was missing its hard drive, depriving investigators of a potential key source of information on why he killed and maimed so many people, ABC News has learned. Paddock is believed to have removed the hard drive before fatally shooting himself, and the missing device has not yet been recovered, sources told ABC News. [snip]
Mike Levine
Pierre Thomas
ABC News
Oct 25, 2017, 12:15 PM ET
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 83.
#2. To: nolu chan, Willie Green (#0)
The hard drive might have been removed well before the massacre. To monitor his video cameras and do casual web browsing, he could do it all with a Linux LiveCD or memory stick.
You've thought this one out, huh? Why connect dots that aren't there? Even you are stretching on this. Why would someone so supposely cold-blooded and unemotional give flying eff about his hard drive contents? "Embarrassment"? Why not also then consider David Copperfield's involvement? Penn and Teller? Or, how about THIS: Paddock is a patsy?... ...And this was and still is an Op. Or is that as impossible as 911 being an Op? Or JFK?
Paddock was locked in and alone in the room. If you aren't aware of it, disassembling laptops and removing their hard drives and reassembling them takes some time. Even someone who is fast would take at least a half hour, I think. Paddock was smart enough to know it is better to leave no tracks. With a LiveCD, you can be sure there are no cookies, not hidden supercookies, no viruses, no trojans or remote control botnet programs, etc. Lots of paranoid people use old laptops this way with a LiveCD. Or they use a USB memory stick, either locked (so nothing is saved) or unlocked and set up to function exactly as a hard drive would work. Paddock seems determined to leave behind no evidence and leave a lot of questions, to remain a man of mystery and murder. He was planning for post-massacre fame.
I'm guessing that you've never used a bump fire rifle to open up a laptop? It's not like he was trying to preserve the data for future generations. He could smash it an' bash it, whatever it takes. What with government incompetence and all, it took the FBI/Fusion Center team two weeks or so to "lose" the hard drive. The private sector is much more efficient. The Fusion Team has come up with so many tall tales, that it's difficult to believe their latest lone wolf stories anymore. Why bother to take out the HD, just lose the whole laptop?
It took the FBI very little time to find the hard drive. It took them weeks to decide it had to be "lost."
And you base this on what evidence (other than sheer conjecture)?
Evidence that I have not gone senile yet. The very first thing they do in computer forensics is mirror the hard drive and write block it. Then they work off the mirror image. Bill Nelson, Amelia Phillips, and Christopher Steuart, Guide to Computer Forensics and Investigations, Fourth Edition, Curse Technology, Cengage Learning, 2010, page 174,
And you think that proves that the FBI made the hard drive disappear deliberately. Whatever. If that's your position, we don't have much to discuss at all. The problem with subscribing to many different CTs to explain the world is that you quickly snowball into a requirement of tens of thousands or even millions of conspirators plotting to keep the truth from the public. It would include witnesses to the events, victims (crisis actors), relatives, police, EMTs, doctors/nurses/hospitabls, morticians/staff, coroners... the list is huge even for just one supposed false-flag event like Vegas. But if that is the case, why do you watch the news at all? If they can fake Vegas (and the JFK assassination and the moon landing and 9/11 and Newtown and aliens at Roswell, etc.), then they can just fake anything so nothing is newsworthy at all. Do you own that book or have access to a physical copy of it? How do you know it's not a fake book intended to deceive people like you trying to penetrate the veil of secrecy that apparently is the primary work of the entire federal government? If you just found that off the internet, you can't prove there is a book or that it was written by persons named Bill Nelson, Amelia Phillips, and Christopher Steuart.
Whatever. If that's your position, we don't have much to discuss at all. Aaah, but apparently we do. As evidenced by this thread as well as many others HERE as well as on the entire interweb, lit up like a pinball machine over the non-specificity, vagueness, yet un-proven claims made by "authorities." You yourself have speculated and engaged in quite a few theories as to what happened; No, you don't refer to YOUR theories as "conspiratorial," but aren't they? Unless you have definitive proof that there was indeed a "Paddock," and he indeed pulled off this op ALONE. conspiracy: a secret plan made by two or more people to do something bad, illegal, or against someone’s wishes (Source: Cambridge Dictionary) The problem with subscribing to many different CTs to explain the world is that you quickly snowball into a requirement of tens of thousands or even millions of conspirators plotting to keep the truth from the public. Not necessarily... ...and NOT if the tasks are compartmentalized. The roles subbed-out. And key players/witnesses/patsies ELIMINATED from the equation. Yes, purely speculation here. But based on circumstantial evidence and eyewitness testimony. You'll find a very sizable number people who've never believed the Warren Commission conclusion regarded JFK's assassination as the work of JUST Oswald and JUST one single bullet and shooter. For good reason: Precisely because THE MATH DOESN'T WORK. It's simply implausible. And the single-bullet/assassin account defies the law of physics. It [all major False Flag events] would include witnesses to the events, victims (crisis actors), relatives, police, EMTs, doctors/nurses/hospitabls, morticians/staff, coroners... the list is huge even for just one supposed false-flag event like Vegas. Yes, operations like this would require many actors (everyone is aware that requests for "crisis actors" and companies who provide them exist and advertise.) Ops would also require directors AND scripts, wouldn't they? And massive training grounds. HOW could such events be pulled off? Here's a solution: CrisisCast http://crisiscast.com/ "Award winning role play actors and film makers specially trained in disaster and crisis management. "We dramatise events for emerging security needs in the UK, Middle East and worldwide. "Our specialist role play actors – many with security clearance – are trained by behavioural psychologists and rigorously rehearsed in criminal and victim behaviour to help police, the army and the emergency services, hospitals, schools, local authorities, government, private security firms, shopping centres, airports, big business, criminal justice departments, media and the military to simulate incident environments for life saving procedures. "We use state of the art British film industry techniques, props and special effects to help trainers deliver essential, hands-on, high octane crisis response and disaster management training. We also work with trainee doctors, psychologists and care professionals." Large Scale Incidents "We can provide up to 400 actors, fully trained and rehearsed along with professional teams that look after make-up, prosthetics, pyrotechnics, wardrobe, special effects, covert and aerial footage. "Our specially trained professional role-play actors and internationally credited film crews bring realistic, informed, crisis management and disaster incidents to life. as a company we use state of the art uk and Australian film crafts, tricks and skills for live training that requires hyper real battlefield effects, role players, stunts, medical simulations and combat flashpoints. "We are able to use specialist film techniques and disciplines to bring the best of theatre and film to our live, immersive simulations." Why do you watch the news at all? If they can fake Vegas (and the JFK assassination and the moon landing and 9/11 and Newtown and aliens at Roswell, etc.), then they can just fake anything so nothing is newsworthy at all. Kinda hard to wrap your head around it all, ain't it? Since the "news" reporting is now simply an overt propaganda arm of the gubmint, many have indeed tuned out the "news," or regard it for what it is: Disinfo, Diversion, and Brainwashing. The Media's cred is practically null. NEW REALITY: Practically ANY event can be staged. The above 'Crisis Cast' and "Roleplay" company claims it can "provide up to 400 actors" on site. MANY of whom (as mentioned above) possess "SECURITY CLEARANCE." Hmmm....This particular "Crisis Management" company mentions "security clearance" as one of its featured advantages for its clients... COULD IT BE that this "Crisis Management" outfit is actually just a gubmint subsidiary framed as a private company? One wouldn't think the demand for such bloody theatrics was so great. Oh wait: Newtown...Boston Marathon...Vegas.... To be clear, no one is claiming that in operations like this people don't actually get shot or die (which necessarily evokes very uncomfortable questions AND answers of companies like this, and of events as in Newtown, and especially in Vegas and the Boston Marathon.)
Oh wait: Newtown...Boston Marathon...Vegas.... You just can't stop, can you? I suppose that is the defining characteristic of an Internet kook.
You couldn't bring yourself to read the post and examine the Crisis Cast company outfit and how it helps you learn how the process works? TC, you are in a state of clinical acute denial. I feel bad for you. Really. I'm sorry to bust your bubble. Your safe paradigm of reality just doesn't exist. You're going to have to eventually put down your cup of hot cocoa and put on your Big-Boy pants.
going to have to eventually put down your cup of hot cocoa and put on your Big-Boy pants TC, you are in a state of clinical acute denial. I feel bad for you. Really. Sheep are gonna sheeple, regardless of circumstances....
I do understand why and how people are immersed in a state of cognitive dissonance. I get it. It's "safer." I can only theorize that maybe the psychological realization that the goob is actually fronting beddy beddy bad men might spiral deniers of the truth into a form of PTSD. Moreover, the Truth destroys some of the traditional "heroes" of youth: GOVERNMENT. PRESIDENTS. SENATORS. THE "GOOD GUYS" WHO PROTECT US. Turns out that most of these former "heroes" are rancid. "GOOD GUYS" and Patriots still very much exist; The problem is the agendae of theirs and our overlord elites. They must destroy the system and start all over again. The disturbing revelations of the elites future plan and how they've managed to undermine the taken-for-granted safety of the past is why embracing nostalgia is so big these days. As is escapism. The days of yore before the internet represented the last true days of bliss. One either discovered the dark truth by delving into deep research, via newsletters or books. These days, EVERYONE can't help but be bombarded by bad news. Victims. And an epidemic of the deranged. After all, the PsyOp requires the sheeple live in a constant state of fear, loathing, and paranoia (and for good reason, unfortunately.) Once upon a time no so long ago, many of these people were locked up at sanitariums. No longer is that the case. Most of us would have preferred to remain in a safe bubble, in a past state of ignorant bliss. Life was much simpler NOT knowing the truth. But as close observers of the culture and seekers of truth it's just not possible these days.
Ah, you are so brave. I suppose you have to have compensatory beliefs to explain away why your kook lifestyle drives everyone away from you other than your fellow-kooks.
kook lifestyle Anyone who posts as many articles from the Weekly Standard as you do, is a kO0k!
True dat. Great observation. NeoCon Bill Kristol is an anti-MAGA Dem-Globalist (R) -- has ALWAYS been. As was his daddy. Considering Kristol's open contempt for and of Donald Trump (for NOT being a pro-war globalist-occultist elite), EVERY Weekly Standard article should be regarded as PROPAGANDA.
Fred Barnes writes there and was a co-founder with Kristol. Barnes and Pat Buchanan are the two biggest old-school journalists who support Trump strongly and both did pretty early in the 2016 primary season. The rest of WS, admittedly, mostly laughs at Trump except when he's pro-Israel and anti-Iran (which he is all the time) or appoints more stellar judges to sail through the now-streamlined Senate confirmation process. You could say that Barnes is an outlier or the "house nationalist" for Trump (like a "house liberal" at the WSJ opinion pages) but Barnes was pro-Trump and Kristol was anti-Trump. And Kristol is now mostly retired other than his podcadsts and stepped down as editor of WS. And Barnes is still writing and podcasting away. This idea that WS is always anti-Trump is overblown. Even if most their articles seem to have the tone of "well even that idiot Trump managed to do some good today..." even if Trump does major deregulation or names another 6-10 stellar federal judges. So no one should fool themselves over the general slant of the WS either. They mostly don't like Trump unless he does exactly what they've advocated for years and which no other GOP pol(s) have managed to do, despite many years in office. It's a little odd to have to contend with elements of the conservative press that is so critical of a president of their party. I don't know exactly what else they want him to do. Admittedly, I get why they clutch at their pearls every time Trump makes a poorly-considered remark or those tweets that really give them the vapors. But discarding what Trump says as unimportant, just look at the things Trump has done. What 2016 GOP candidate could really have been more conservative in policy and key appointments as Trump? I've said it a dozen times: even Ted Cruz and Rand Paul would not conceivably be any more conservative than Trump. And probably no more successful in policy or conservative appointments. But they would be a lot more tactful about it.
Barnes and Pat Buchanan are the two biggest old-school journalists who support Trump strongly and both did pretty early in the 2016 primary season. The rest of WS, admittedly, mostly laughs at Trump except when he's pro-Israel and anti-Iran (which he is all the time) or appoints more stellar judges to sail through the now-streamlined Senate confirmation process. I can agree largely with your above assessment. In days past, Barnes was unashamedly uber-conservative. Not so much in later years. His work at times is ambiguously conservative, without the conviction of years past. Barnes' main problem is his credibility as a matter of his direct ties to Kristol, and presumed Final Word of Kristol on content. If Kristol regards Trump not only as an "Enemy" but THE Enemy, it is impossible for Fred Barnes to publish what he truly believes, given Kristol's globalist-slant. Paddy Buch is more of a contributor to TWS intended to give the publication some much needed weight from a conservative perspective. Yes. The WS by and large ridicule Trump and his MAGA pledge while undermining him. Thus how is a reader concerned for and with the truth of any given matter supposed to dismiss the truth? Especially given The Weekly Standard's obvious "Make Globalism Great Agenda" and their sabotaging of onald Trump so that he and his MAGA don't gain enough steam and momentum to win the 2020 election?
You accepted as being: aahol.
#84. To: buckeroo (#83)
(?)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#5. To: Tooconservative (#2)
The hard drive might have been removed well before the massacre. To monitor his video cameras and do casual web browsing, he could do it all with a Linux LiveCD or memory stick.
#7. To: Liberator (#5)
#11. To: Tooconservative, Liberator (#7)
disassembling laptops and removing their hard drives and reassembling them takes some time. Even someone who is fast would take at least a half hour, I think.
#22. To: hondo68, Tooconservative, Liberator (#11)
What with government incompetence and all, it took the FBI/Fusion Center team two weeks or so to "lose" the hard drive.
#23. To: nolu chan (#22)
It took the FBI very little time to find the hard drive. It took them weeks to decide it had to be "lost."
#40. To: Tooconservative (#23)
(Edited)
And you base this on what evidence (other than sheer conjecture)?
Processing and Handling Digital Evidence You must maintain the integrity of digital evidence in the lab as you do when collecting it in the field. Your first task is to preserve the disk data. If you have a suspect computer that hasn't been copied with an imaging tool, you must crete a copy. When you do, be sure to make the suspect drive read only (typically by write-blocking device), and document this step.
#41. To: nolu chan (#40)
(Edited)
Then they work off the mirror image. Bill Nelson, Amelia Phillips, and Christopher Steuart, Guide to Computer Forensics and Investigations, Fourth Edition, Curse Technology, Cengage Learning, 2010, page 174,
#50. To: Tooconservative, nolu chan, Deckard, tpaine, buckeroo, hondo68, Pinguinite, A K A Stone, Stoner, Vicomte13, redleghunter (#41)
And you think that proves that the FBI made the hard drive disappear deliberately.
#52. To: Liberator (#50)
COULD IT BE that this "Crisis Management" outfit is actually just a gubmint subsidiary framed as a private company? One wouldn't think the demand for such bloody theatrics was so great.
#53. To: Tooconservative (#52)
You just can't stop, can you?
#54. To: Liberator, Deep State shills, tater, yukon, Tooconservative, Robert Paulsen, BorisY (#53)
#55. To: hondo68, Tooconservative, Vicomte13, tpaine, nolu chan, RLKK (#54)
Sheep are gonna sheeple, regardless of circumstances....
#56. To: Liberator (#55)
I do understand why and how people are immersed in a state of cognitive dissonance. I get it. It's "safer."
#57. To: Tooconservative, Kristol Kook, Liberator, *Neo-Lib Chickenhawk Wars* (#56)
#68. To: hondo68, Tooconservative (#57)
Anyone who posts as many articles from the Weekly Standard as you do, is a kO0k!
#73. To: Liberator (#68)
Considering Kristol's open contempt for and of Donald Trump (for NOT being a pro-war globalist-occultist elite), EVERY Weekly Standard article should be regarded as PROPAGANDA.
#74. To: Tooconservative (#73)
(Edited)
Fred Barnes writes there and was a co-founder with Kristol.
#83. To: Liberator (#74)
an agree largely with your above assessment.
Replies to Comment # 83.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 83.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]