Mandalay Bay owners sue 1 October shooting victims. No liability for air assault via helicopter?
The new lawsuit argues that “plaintiffs have no liability of any kind to defendants”
Intellihub.com
July 17, 2018
LAS VEGAS (INTELLIHUB) — If you are a reader then you know that it is well documented that most likely there were no shots were fired from the alleged 1 October shooter Stephen Paddock’s 32nd-floor hotel room nor were the windows broken at the time of the shooting or at the time of the breach because it’s likely that a good portion of the attack was carried out from the air via helicopter. (i.e. the attack was primarily an air assault with multiple ground-based shooters) And don’t forget the body found in room 32-135 was likely not Paddock’s.
With that being said, it stands to reason that Mandalay Bay owners have filed a new lawsuit against the victims claiming that they have no liability which may be true. Is Mandalay Bay really capable of defending against a helicopter gunship attack? If so, that would mean the hotel would have to have anti-aircraft weaponry mounted on the building’s roof and exterior and employ trained mercs to operate it. How does having anti-aircraft weaponry mounted to private buildings in a major American city make sense?
The new lawsuit argues that “plaintiffs have no liability of any kind to defendants”
Not to mention, Federal Aviation Administration Freedom of Information Act Requests for radar and helicopter data from the night of 1 October were denied due to the fact that the FBI is currently investigating radar and helicopter activity in and around the venue, as reported by Intellihub in the bombshell article titled FAA FOIA request for 1 October helicopter flight radar data denied as federal cover-up of potential belt-fed gunship attack continues which shows that not only are helicopters being investigated but the investigation is being covered up altogether.
The Rest…HERE
