Donate SIGN UP

La Vegas Shooter Radicalized?

Avatar Image
Khandro | 16:24 Fri 06th Oct 2017 | News
162 Answers
'Las Vegas authorities now acknowledge mass murderer Stephen Paddock may have been “radicalized” before his bloody rampage Sunday at the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival but they won’t say what species of radicalism the shooter may have embraced.'
So said the sheriff but wouldn't elaborate.
Gravatar

Answers

61 to 80 of 162rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Khandro

No, sorry - but the Manchester and Paris attacks don’t add weight to this being an Islamic attack.

You would need to weigh those against the history of mass shootings in the U.S.

There are...lots and lots and lots and lots.

Regarding this point:

//We can’t count on the pathologically incurious, politically correct mainstream media to bother asking them.//

Actually, we can. That’s because amongst professional news agencies and media outlets there are plenty that have a right wing non-PC narrative.

I’ve had a look around FrontPageNews. It presents news items written to appeal to those who want the world confirmed to their political views. It is not balanced. It is basically the alt-right version of the Morning Star.
That doesn't seem to leave any room for the middle ground of "a reasonable assessment of the evidence available to date suggests that perhaps this man was not radicalised by Muslims" though. Granted there isn't much evidence available yet, and I am sure that as more comes available people's views will change accordingly -- but still, there is a difference between speculating, which is mere guesswork, and offering a position based on available information.

Historically the US has always had a problem with guns -- it's not something that's somehow modern, or uniquely associated with ISIS-inspired terrorism. To assume that it must be that, and then to offer the rather bogus reason for this as "ISIS says so", is... well, intellectually lazy, I suppose.
// We can’t count on the pathologically incurious, politically correct mainstream media to bother asking them. //

The mainstream media can only report on what is and isn't known. The authorities have NOT confirmed ISIS claims, and that is all they can accurately report. Anything else is pointless. No mainstream media have said this is DEFINITELY NOT ISIS because it is still a remote possibility. Likewise responsible media outlets are not reporting it MAY be a ISIS terrorist attack either. Only the alt right fake news sites are peddling thatwith no proof.
‘there is a difference between speculating, which is mere guesswork, and offering a position based on available information. ’

That goes for every question in News, Jim.
There is a possibility of an nra nut or “angry fired postman syndrome” but my money is on isis or another Islamic group.

One thing we can all agree on is that terrorists globally will be rubbing their hands in glee at this latest attack on innocent lives.
I don't agree.
naomi24

No, speculation is not pointless. This is a discussion based on what we know and what common sense tells us.

Common sense tells me that I cannot trust ISIS in their claim that this is down to one of their ‘soldiers’.

Common sense tells me that this case is different to every other terrorist attack in recent memory in that even after four days the police and FBI can’t find any links to Paddock and any extremist Islamic group.

What we are discussing here is the likelihood. It’s a valid discussion.
SP, //It’s a valid discussion.//

Okay, you can argue the odds if you like, but at the end of it none of you will be any the wiser.
SP...common sense at 09:05....something that is sadly lacking sometime here on AB.
I don't think anyone can be certain one way or another, but there are signs that point more towards it *not* being ISIS-inspired, no?

I mean, at this point I would be surprised if it turned out that Paddock had been radicalised, but not totally shocked, if that makes sense. Between the two certainties there is more than just speculation. I wouldn't want to place a figure on it, but at this point it doesn't seem to me that the question is equivalent to a coin toss, at least.
naomi24

Yes we will. We will learn what is the opinion of others. We may not get a definitive answer as to what Paddock’s motives were, but it shouldn’t stop us from discussing it.

This is why Marilyn’s death is still discussed.

This is why there is still discussion about the shooting of JFK.

We have a natural curiosity about news stories and like to hear the opinions of others.
Mikey at 09:12, who are you talking about?
I am agreeing with what SP has said at 09:05. Obvious I would have thought ?
SP, yes I know all that - and I've given my opinion in this case. It is, however, like everyone else's only an opinion because despite the ping-ponging from one side to the other, none of us know so getting wound up over it is pointless.
Mikey, //Obvious I would have thought ? //

Not really. The implication in your post is that other people are devoid of the common sense that you think SP possesses and I just wondered who they might be?
If there was an Islamic terrorist element to this, I think we would have been told by now.
Trump and his right wing administration would pounce on it with glee, and the rhetoric coming out of the Whitehouse would be cranked up.
The fact that that is not happening, looks like there is no ISIS involvement.
I agree Gromit....part of that Common Sense I keep on about.

Will someone please wake me up when a smoking Islamic gun has been found in Las Vegas please !
Mikey, as far as I can see there's only one poster here who really thinks this might have been influenced by Islam. Go back to sleep.
naomi24

The common sense bit is when you look at this attack and compare it to every other attack over the past five years.

Sure it’s possible that Paddock was radicalised, but it’s highly improbable based on his age, background, lack of political and religious affiliations, and the fact that after four days the FBI and local police can offer no evidence that he’d been radicalised. It’s EXTREMELY unlikely that someone could hide this with our online lives right now.

Of course, if it IS proved that he was indeed a jahidist*. I will happily eat my words.













(*it won’t)
That’s a good point from it, it could just be a homegrown nuttard Who is more difficult to monitor than the hydra that is the dangerous chapters of Islam

61 to 80 of 162rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

La Vegas Shooter Radicalized?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.