NY Times ISIS experts does a 180, thinks Vegas slaughter might be ISIS after all

Rukmini Callimachi, New York Times ISIS correspondent is having second thoughts about the Islamic State’s involvement in the Las Vegas attack. It appears increasingly to point in that direction and it would be a stunning indictment of the FBI’s nonchalant dismissal of their claims. Knowing what we know about the FBI’s involvement in the Garland Texas jihad attacks and the Boston plot to behead me, the kindest thing I can say about them is , they cannot be trusted.

Even NYT’s @rcallimachi reconsidering possible veracity of ISIS claim re: Paddock. Here’s her explanation https://t.co/hEMUc7epeK pic.twitter.com/zNZQ4BnlQV

— Andrew Bostom (@andrewbostom) October 5, 2017

On Twitter, the New York Times ISIS reporter, is having second thoughts:

After ISIS claimed Vegas, I was waiting for them to release Naba, their weekly newsletter, to see if anything new emerged. Naba is out:

Under a picture of the Mandalay Bay drenched in blood they rehash the attack. New info: They are now claiming shooter converted 6 mos ago. Below is the @siteintelgroup translation. ISIS earlier said shooter converted “months ago.” Now they’re saying it was 6 mos specifically.

No proof is provided, but ISIS has rarely claimed attacks that were not by either their members or sympathizers. ISIS members meanwhile are pointing out that after ISIS downed Metrojet over Sinai, no one believed them:

In their chatrooms, they are claiming that the West and the media is leading a cover-up in order to hide the “martyrdom” of their brother

I don’t take ISIS’ claim at face value. And so far, 0 evidence tying this attack to ISIS has emerged.
But here’s why I disagree with those rejecting it out of hand. I’ve been covering ISIS since 2014 and since then I have kept a timeline

Everytime ISIS claimed an attack in West, I jotted it down. Month later, I’ve gone back over list & annotated what investigation found

My list is not complete but of the more than 50 cases I have annotated, I could only find 3 false claims.

Yes, the group frequently exaggerates death tolls & yes, they inflate & distort details, but the crux of the claim is typically correct

The thing to understand is ISIS considers an attack to be their handiwork if the attacker is sent by them or if he is inspired by them.

The reason I don’t buy argument that they are now opportunistically claiming attacks to deflect from battlefield losses is as follows

Remember the Thalys train shouting? They never claimed it. Attacker shared a hotel room with Abdlehamid Abaaoud, leader of Paris attack

Remember the attack on the Jewish Museum in Brussels? Attacker was 1 of ISIS’ jailers who held European hostages. Yet they never claimed

Do you remember the devastating attack on the Istanbul airport last year? Investigation determined it was ISIS. Again they did not claim

And 1 day before Vegas on Saturday, a guy who’d placed ISIS flag on his car’s dashboard used it to ram police. Did ISIS claim it? Nope

Does this mean ISIS had a role in Vegas? There is as yet 0 evidence of that. My point: This group has been more right than its been wrong
Given ISIS’ insistence, I’m with @AmarAmarasingam: Have any reporters asked Paddock’s brother and other family members if he converted?