Thats not it at, fucking, all. Lets assume ISIS were its own thing for a moment (its not, but lets play a game) and actually was pushing an is|amic (fuck word filters) agenda and wants their rule over the entire world, their religion, their beliefs, etc, and wants all those who dont follow to be punished until submission, or out right killed.
Why would they attack these venues? It has nothing to do with "not allowing us to enjoy ourselves," it has to do with instilling fear. Because fear is power. Fear has two reactions in the human mind, fight, or flight. Either you stand up and fight back with all your might, or you flee, either way the goal is to save yourself from death, its a basic human instinct for self preservation.
ISIS, in their hubris, believes that attacking the west will have no "fight back" effects. That it will not cause us to attack them in full force, because they view us as cowards who will simply flee, the cucks who get punched and then try to snivel and apologize their way out of getting hit again. Naturally they do get hit again, and again, and again, but they never fight back, and eventually they submit or flee. Thats what they see us all as, and see all of us doing. And they have every right to think that way based on their history with us. They attack, we have tepid responses, we talk big, then we all hide behind our military who hide behind rules and superior weapons to fight back. Either way, its still hiding and not fighting directly in open war as in ages passed. And our responses are weaker each time, we have grown accustomed to these attacks from them, there are even sympathizers who make excuses for them and call them the victims and blame us for their actions (a warped version of stockholmes).
Meanwhile, they continue to draw in converts. My mother was actually talking to me about all this and when the topic of isis claiming responsibility came up, she put it this way (paraphrased) "they dont seem to claim responsibility for things they didnt have at least some link to, and I think they do it for a reason, because if they claimed responsibility for everything then people would stop believing them a threat and instead just a bunch of tryhards trying to claim responsibility for every bad thing that happens to us… but if they only claim what they are actually linked to in some way, then they have credibility, they're telling the truth, and the media/government are trying to hide it or cover it up… it makes people believe them, and disbelieve our institutions, which makes them question a lot more and start to sympathize with them because 'hey at least they're honest with me' which can get them converts." And thats exactly whats been happening.
So, I think the truth is that ISIS (mossad naturally) is in fact linked to this in some way. The question is entirely "how are they linked?" Was it like the supposed FBIkun said and paddock was an fbi agent running guns to them ala fast and furious? Was he an actual convert to their cause? Was he some programed sleeper that was triggered? Was he a stooge setup by mossad (err, ISIS) to do this or take the fall for it, thus isis/mossad link?
Dunno… maybe time will tell. But I suspect the fbi and cia will cover up their trails as ineptly as usual, leaving just enough of a trail to show us the truth, but in a way that normies will call us tinfoil for believing. gives me conniptions
