He called 911 while he was mowing down the victims and claimed he was doing it for ISIS. Until that time he said nothing and ISIS didn't claim responsibility for HIS actions until after he had claimed to be doing the killing for him. His own father has said he wasn't overly religious and just hated gay people and blacks. At to his mental well being: he didn't pass the profile for entry to the police academy, his first wife said he was nuts, his online bride said he was crazy, his coworkers have said he was crazy and a loner and some were afraid to work with him or be around him. So to me it sounds like the guy might of been a wackaloon who's string snapped a while ago.
that is correctly
he stated he was mowing them down as per his allegiance to isis.
until that time he did say things, and the feds even watched him and engaged him, but nothing came of it.
he certainly was on their radar.
indeed isis accepted responsibility for the attack after it occurred.
yes
so,...
im curious
what duck is that again?
his own father....
you do understand those not overtly religious can and very often do experience a conversion either to their former faith or another.
regardless what his father states
(and fathers along with ex wives really should be taken with a grain of salt...)
so the evidence you have for this guy being mentally ill is
his ex wife said he was crazy, his co workers said he was a loner and crazy, and some were afraid to work around him
yet
non of them went to the authorities did they?
is this like isis claiming responsibility after the fact?
mmmm
think it through.....
the fbi met with him, watched him...
they did not come to the same conclusion did they?
i find it interesting people will believe this guy "just hated gays and blacks" and was a wahakaloon....
or anything really
rather then a cold blooded dedicated killer for his cause....
i guess to many its a consolation to only view this as a whacaloon job...
the other idea certainly is far far far more scary...
ive asked you a fair bit of questions you've ignored. (which is expected)
but one though i guess needs to be asked again
in regarding first things.
we do agree that this was an act of terrorism
right?