When Conspiracy Theories Go Wrong: Las Vegas Edition

[FIVR]

But honestly, do you really attach any credibility to statements by ISIS?

ISIS has a vested interest in not claiming random attacks because they will lose credibility if they just claim everything and are proven wrong. They have historically only claimed attacks that were conducted by them. The only possible exception is the phillipenes casino attack and are you really going to trust Phillipino authorities, especially after one of their largest cities was taken over by ISIS? The phillipino authorities under duterte are less trustworthy than ISIS

I actually don't think that Paddock was ISIS, but I definitely think that ISIS didn't claim that attack after watching it happen in the news. Paddock probably contacted them himself over Telegram to use them to obscure his true motives (whatever they were).


The truth is that nobody knows why Paddock did it because the police are either incompetent or covering up the real reason.

 

[woolfe9998]

Hilarious. A conspiracy retard like yourself calling out other conspiracy retards. Moron, ISIS did claim responsibility for the attack in Niger.

Now, punch yourself in the face for being so stupid. Yeah, Paddock was with ISIS and you have zero proof other than being stupid enough to believe ISIS. You believe ISIS and that makes you an idiot.

I'm often not a fan of FIVR, but he's correct here. ISIS has not claimed responsibility for the attack.

http://www.newsweek.com/what-we-know-deadly-niger-ambush-linked-isis-694384

Lengthy discussion here, but this is the salient point:

Neither ISIS nor Al-Qaeda have claimed the attack.

It's hardly a conspiracy theory to claim that the Trump administration is making a false claim of ISIS responsibility. It would be a lot more bizarre to claim that there's anything this administration is not lying about.

 

[woolfe9998]

The truth is that nobody knows why Paddock did it because the police are either incompetent or covering up the real reason.

Or simply because Paddock intentionally left behind no evidence of his motives. He evidently removed the harddrive from the laptop he had in his hotel room. Perhaps he took perverse pleasure in the notion that people would be debating his motives for years, with no one ever really knowing the true motive. This motive could be something as simple as him being a pathological narcissist who'd rather be remembered for killing people than for nothing at all. Which is pretty close to there being no rationally discernible motive.

 

[FIVR]

Or simply because Paddock intentionally left behind no evidence of his motives. He evidently removed the harddrive from the laptop he had in his hotel room. Perhaps he took perverse pleasure in the notion that people would be debating his motives for years, with no one ever really knowing the true motive. This motive could be something as simple as him being a pathological narcissist who'd rather be remembered for killing people than for nothing at all. Which is pretty close to there being no rationally discernible motive.

I file that under police incompetence because there is always evidence. Nobody lives in a vacuum and this man had a girlfriend and a life. He was not some Ted Kaczynski living alone in the montana wilderness... he was a professional video poker player. His very job required that he spend thousands and thousands of hours under surveillance at casinos.

Somebody knows why he did this, and isn't saying something. There is just too much evidence left over for it to be a total mystery.

 

[woolfe9998]

I file that under police incompetence because there is always evidence. Nobody lives in a vacuum and this man had a girlfriend and a life. He was not some Ted Kaczynski living alone in the montana wilderness... he was a professional video poker player. His very job required that he spend thousands and thousands of hours under surveillance at casinos.

Somebody knows why he did this, and isn't saying something. There is just too much evidence left over for it to be a total mystery.

Yes, and they've interviewed scads of people who knew him. They all either do not know or claim not to know. This is common. How many times have people who knew a murderer claimed that so far as they knew, the person was totally peaceful and that they are shocked by what happened? This is true not only of mass murderers but also serial killers. It's more the rule than the exception.

More importantly, why do you suppose authorities are covering up his motives? You claim to not buy into conspiracy theories, but that right there is a conspiracy theory. It suggests that the real reason for this attack is being concealed by the state. So what is your theory of the true motive for this attack?

 

[FIVR]

Yes, and they've interviewed scads of people who knew him. They all either do not know or claim not to know. This is common. How many times have people who knew a murderer claimed that so far as they knew, the person was totally peaceful and that they are shocked by what happened? This is true not only of mass murderers but also serial killers. It's more the rule than the exception.

More importantly, why do you suppose authorities are covering up his motives? You claim to not buy into conspiracy theories, but that right there is a conspiracy theory. It suggests that the real reason for this attack is being concealed by the state. So what is your theory of the true motive for this attack?

Why do authorities ever coverup the real reasons for these kinds of attacks? Usually because they had fair warning and their own incompetence resulted in them taking no action. That is almost always the real reason for a coverup.

I don't believe the government was involved or any of that crap, but at this point I'm leaning towards a combination of local law enforcement incompetence and FBI foreknowledge of the danger this man posed.

 

[Zaap]

Good, I'm glad you agree that Tucker Carlson is among the "dregs of humunity."

https://www.salon.com/2017/10/26/tu...nspiracy-theories-on-las-vegas-mass-shooting/

And the National Review, no less:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/452771/las-vegas-shooting-still-very-very-strange

Not to mention some conservative posters on this very discussion forum. Including in this very thread.

Where do you suppose these "anonymous jerkoffs" are getting their ideas from? Probably from sources like those discussed above, and also from places like Infowars, which has millions of readers, the vast majority of them conservative.

Try reading next time so you don't make an idiot of yourself. The 'conspiracies' the OP mentioned and the source (wankers on YouTube) are in the link he posted.

And only a complete idiot claims conspiracy theories are only a 'right wing' thing. You can shove that dumb assertion straight up your ass next to 9/11 (no plane hit the pentagon! Bush staged it!) "The vast right wing conspiracy!" Boo hoo that downed queen Hillary, the CIA faked videos of people being killed by al qeada, Katrina, The Russians! The Nazis! and a million more you're ilk have been whining about ceaselessly for years.

 

[woolfe9998]

Try reading next time so you don't make an idiot of yourself. The 'conspiracies' the OP mentioned and the source (wankers on YouTube) are in the link he posted.

It doesn't matter that the OP linked to wankers on youtube. The point of my post is that it isn't just wankers on youtube, a fact which I have proven, and to which you haven't bothered to even respond. I cited examples of Tucker Carlson, the National Review, and of course, Infowars. Where do you think these "wankers" are getting their ideas from? Wankers will wank, but they're never the ultimate source of the ideas they espouse.

And only a complete idiot claims conspiracy theories are only a 'right wing' thing.

You can shove that dumb assertion straight up your ass next to 9/11 (no plane hit the pentagon! Bush staged it!) "The vast right wing conspiracy!" Boo hoo that downed queen Hillary, the CIA faked videos of people being killed by al qeada, Katrina, The Russians! The Nazis! and a million more you're ilk have been whining about ceaselessly for years.

And only a liar would try to claim that I wrote anything like what you said in the underlined text. Please quote where I said this, or admit your straw mannery.

 

[woolfe9998]

Why do authorities ever coverup the real reasons for these kinds of attacks? Usually because they had fair warning and their own incompetence resulted in them taking no action. That is almost always the real reason for a coverup.

I don't believe the government was involved or any of that crap, but at this point I'm leaning towards a combination of local law enforcement incompetence and FBI foreknowledge of the danger this man posed.

I'll give credence to that when I see any real evidence of such a cover-up. Until then, it's just noise. That's how a true skeptic of conspiracy theories thinks.

 

[brandonbull]

They do. It's why Trump is President. Plus, the pro-Trump media are the primary purveyors of these conspiracy theories, especially Infowars.

Maybe if Clinton had got out and campaigned instead of having the Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy created, she might have won.

 

[Vic]

Maybe if Clinton had got out and campaigned instead of having the Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy created, she might have won.

Maybe if you could address an issue without having to divert to something irrelevant about Clinton, people wouldn't believe that you're a blithering idiot.

 

[brandonbull]

Maybe if you could address an issue without having to divert to something irrelevant about Clinton, people wouldn't believe that you're a blithering idiot.

You do understand the role Clinton and the DNC had in creating the "dossier" used to as a base for Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy? So, it looks like Clinton and the DNC are purveyors of conspiracy theories and it is starting to go wrong for them.

 

[Jhhnn]

Maybe if you could address an issue without having to divert to something irrelevant about Clinton, people wouldn't believe that you're a blithering idiot.

Hillary hate is a truly debilitating state of mind. It can prevent higher mental functions entirely.

 

[Jhhnn]

You do understand the role Clinton and the DNC had in creating the "dossier" used to as a base for Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy? So, it looks like Clinton and the DNC are purveyors of conspiracy theories and it is starting to go wrong for them.

That doesn't mean it isn't true, does it?

Trump did say that he fired Comey over the investigation, thus triggering the appointment of Mueller as Special Counsel.

Ther's plenty of evidence that the Russians meddled in the election on behalf of Trump outside of the Steele dossier. Not that you're capable of noticing.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Given the history of his father I'd suspect that this was more of a McVeigh motive behind this attack.

There is no evidence what so ever that he had any contacts with either ISIS or ANY other extremist organisation of any kind.

 

[J.Wilkins]

You do understand the role Clinton and the DNC had in creating the "dossier" used to as a base for Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy? So, it looks like Clinton and the DNC are purveyors of conspiracy theories and it is starting to go wrong for them.

Well, you answered his question.... You can't have a discussion on anything without diverting to Clinton.

 

[Vic]

You do understand the role Clinton and the DNC had in creating the "dossier" used to as a base for Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy? So, it looks like Clinton and the DNC are purveyors of conspiracy theories and it is starting to go wrong for them.

I understand that this is irrelevant to this discussion, and that the only reason you're even bringing it up to distract attention from the fact that Alex Jones is yet again spreading lies and encouraging his listeners to attack innocent people, who were victimized by a horrific event.
Which begs the question, why are you try to apologize for Alex Jones? Probably because you're one of his supporters and approve of what they're doing. Or even out there yourself attacking the victims of Las Vegas, Orlando, Sandy Hook, etc.

 

[Vic]

That doesn't mean it isn't true, does it?

Trump did say that he fired Comey over the investigation, thus triggering the appointment of Mueller as Special Counsel.

Ther's plenty of evidence that the Russians meddled in the election on behalf of Trump outside of the Steele dossier. Not that you're capable of noticing.

Don't feed the troll.

 

[Zaap]

It doesn't matter that the OP linked to wankers on youtube.

Lol yes because you started the thread and my post was clearly in response to you...

Oh wait. No you didn't, and no it wasn't. And you're too dumb apparently to know how a forum works. Now read the OP link then shut up. You doubled down on stupid. Try hard not to tripple down.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Lol yes because you started the thread and my post was clearly in response to you...

Oh wait. No you didn't, and no it wasn't. And you're too dumb apparently to know how a forum works. Now read the OP link then shut up. You doubled down on stupid. Try hard not to tripple down.

What the hell?

 

[Zaap]

^ did someone have a sock puppet fail?

That would explain a lot!

 

[J.Wilkins]

^ did someone have a sock puppet fail?

That would explain a lot!

You can't really use that with me given that I'm reported for opposing antifa as well as your Nazi group and have been declared anti-American by Wolfe several times for daring to have opinions on America while not being a citizen.

You need to dig deeper for your conspiracies, conspiratard, go watch Alex Jones and learn the ropes, child.

 

[woolfe9998]

Lol yes because you started the thread and my post was clearly in response to you...

Oh wait. No you didn't, and no it wasn't. And you're too dumb apparently to know how a forum works. Now read the OP link then shut up. You doubled down on stupid. Try hard not to tripple down.

I understand how this forum works perfectly well. The OP links to the aforementioned youtube wankers, and you say, in effect, who cares about a bunch of youtube wankers, to which I respond, with evidence, that it isn't just a bunch of wankers, and that these wankers are getting their ideas from identifiable and publicly known sources, a fact which should have been obvious even without the links I supplied since random internet fools get these ideas from sources. I fail to see how my response, which was directly relevant to your post, was in any way a violation of forum rules or decorum. It was, rather, directly on point to what you had posted. Let's be clear: your response to the OP would have been reasonable if the only source of these theories were youtube wankers, but they weren't. And further, you should have surmised this because it's illogical to surmise otherwise. Your response since has consisted entirely of irrelevant ad hominem and straw mannery.

Will you now admit that, regardless of what evidence the OP chose to include in his post, it has been established by now that it isn't just a bunch of random people on youtube who are espousing these theories? Or do I need to google up more links to conservative websites who are peddling these theories? I guaranty I'll find them if you really I think I need to bother.

 

[woolfe9998]

You can't really use that with me given that I'm reported for opposing antifa as well as your Nazi group and have been declared anti-American by Wolfe several times for daring to have opinions on America while not being a citizen.

Not for merely having opinions, and you know that.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Not for merely having opinions, and you know that.

Yeah, for pointing out the propaganda that everyone in the US is taught in school and believes until adulthoodl and how it's false. Which was the very point. But this is not the discussion of this thread and I wouldn't have brought it up in the first place if Zaap didn't think you and me were buddy buddy on everything.