Did not know Paddock was the only exception to this. I'm skeptical he was, and it clearly was a bad decision from I.S. to claim him given what a high profile this massacre had and how it overshadowed so much else of whst they said. But the fact that we still don't know the real motive, assuming he even had one beyond chasing hedonistic thrills, is deeply troubling, and means we can't necessarily dismiss the claim that he was out of hand, even though it certainly does seem unlikely.
Bedides, it's not like either the Obama or Trump administrations would've been interested in delving down this rabbit hole. Maybe I'm being overly conspiratorial, but Obama pretended Fort Hood was a case of workplace violence and that the Pulse Massacre was an anti-gay hatecrime; and outside the rightoid bubble, he succeeded so well at changing the narrative, nobody even noticed that's what he did. And Trump would hardly want to claim the worst Islamist attack on the U.S. mainland since 9/11 happened on his watch if he could avoid it.
"The fact that we still don't know the real motive [for the Las Vegas massacre] ... is deeply troubling, and means we can't necessarily dismiss the [IS] claim ... out of hand, even though it certainly does seem unlikely", is exactly where I am with this. I had not thought of a possible Trump dimension to not looking too closely. Who knows. There's just too little information available to have any really concrete views.
Should add: I wouldn't want to say Las Vegas is the *only* instance of a false IS claim. I can't think of another, and I followed reasonably closely at the time and since, but it is possible there was another one or two in the 2017-19 period. The general point holds, though, even at the local level, with propaganda directed at audiences in Iraq, Syria, and other active theatres.
Did not know Paddock was the only exception to this. I'm skeptical he was, and it clearly was a bad decision from I.S. to claim him given what a high profile this massacre had and how it overshadowed so much else of whst they said. But the fact that we still don't know the real motive, assuming he even had one beyond chasing hedonistic thrills, is deeply troubling, and means we can't necessarily dismiss the claim that he was out of hand, even though it certainly does seem unlikely.
Bedides, it's not like either the Obama or Trump administrations would've been interested in delving down this rabbit hole. Maybe I'm being overly conspiratorial, but Obama pretended Fort Hood was a case of workplace violence and that the Pulse Massacre was an anti-gay hatecrime; and outside the rightoid bubble, he succeeded so well at changing the narrative, nobody even noticed that's what he did. And Trump would hardly want to claim the worst Islamist attack on the U.S. mainland since 9/11 happened on his watch if he could avoid it.
"The fact that we still don't know the real motive [for the Las Vegas massacre] ... is deeply troubling, and means we can't necessarily dismiss the [IS] claim ... out of hand, even though it certainly does seem unlikely", is exactly where I am with this. I had not thought of a possible Trump dimension to not looking too closely. Who knows. There's just too little information available to have any really concrete views.
Should add: I wouldn't want to say Las Vegas is the *only* instance of a false IS claim. I can't think of another, and I followed reasonably closely at the time and since, but it is possible there was another one or two in the 2017-19 period. The general point holds, though, even at the local level, with propaganda directed at audiences in Iraq, Syria, and other active theatres.