>>1372100>Of course it was intentionalY'never know. Coulda been some unintended fuckup.
It seems survivable, if implimented slightly differently, so the fact the driver persihed too raises questionability to intent.
>>1372105Also have to question 'terrorism'. Filled with fireworks is gonna get attention but it's unlikely to feature in the top 10 scaryiest things experienced for most folk. Sure, the self execution points strongly to 'fuckweasle' but if wanted terror you'd be trying to harm more people ... You'd pick a time when the place is packed. Mow a few down on the way through. You'd get the car inside the building where the lithium fumes can concentrate better, and where the flames might cause damage. You'd wrap them tubs o propane/butane/whatever in steel cable, pinning screws and or nails to the exterior to maximise casualties. You'd also not pick somewhere like trump tower, you'd hit somewhere with tactical significance. You'd also unlikely be acting alone.
A trump fan, a touch more deluded than the average example, pissed at being sold down the river, wanting to make a statement.... I can see that more than 'terrorism' ....
>>1372112I can see this - but the vehicular angle is all wrong, to my eye. You also have to question the initial ignition. If that went off going up a kerb or whatever then they're lucky driving in traffic didn't do it. I can accept they're a dipshit and had a poorly set timer, or had detonators in place and primed before starting ... But from what I've seen it'd take manual igntion... As in, light fuse, that chains the rest.
>>1372120>Musk bribed someone to make it look like a bomb instead of an accident.What of all the other fires? There was definitely things in there that wasn't batteries. I agree there's a lot that doesn't make "sense" - but then again, it doesn't *have* to. Not to someone capable of logical thought at least - just the deranged mind that concocted the scheme.
