The FBI’s handling of recent terror investigations is raising eyebrows, especially in light of how evidence was managed—or seemingly staged—at the homes of two high-profile suspects. Comparing the New Orleans Bourbon Street terrorist Shamsud-Din Jabbar to the Las Vegas Cybertruck bomber, public skepticism is growing over the agency’s methods.
Jabbar, responsible for the New Year’s Day attack that killed 14 people and injured dozens, left behind an alleged treasure trove of evidence. Photos and videos from his Houston home show chemicals, wires, and even a prayer rug, all conveniently left behind for journalists to document hours before the FBI arrived to secure the scene.
As investigative journalist Jennie Taer noted in her coverage, this kind of access to an active terror investigation is virtually unheard of. “It’s mind-boggling,” Taer said in her video report, which shows what appear to be key items left untouched. Pundits online are questioning the logic of the FBI’s approach, with many suggesting the evidence display feels “a little too perfect.”
Over in Las Vegas, the Cybertruck bomber’s evidence list includes gas canisters and firework mortars. While FBI officials confirmed the materials were collected and analyzed, online commentators couldn’t help but mock the stark differences in presentation. “Which FBI field office staged it better?” one commenter asked sarcastically, adding that both scenes seem designed to feed a narrative.
EXCLUSIVE TOUR of the NOLA terrorists home—-
where we found a bomb-making station and a Quran open to a chilling passage about martyrdom @nyposthttps://t.co/LKV7npCOE5 pic.twitter.com/a1znIURjyM
— Jennie Taer 🎗️ (@JennieSTaer) January 2, 2025
The publication reporting on Jabbar’s case also delved into his personal life, revealing financial hardships caused by two divorces. Critics questioned why such details were emphasized so quickly, suggesting they were meant to distract from deeper issues, like how the FBI seemingly overlooked critical security protocols.
Recent investigations into two high-profile terrorist attacks—the Bourbon Street terrorist Shamsud-Din Jabbar and the Las Vegas Cybertruck bomber—have brought to light the FBI’s handling of evidence. But instead of inspiring confidence, the public is left questioning the agency’s protocols after photos of detailed evidence lists surfaced, sparking a heated debate online.
Evidence Lists in Question
The photos circulating on social media reveal meticulously itemized evidence from both cases:
Bourbon Street Terrorist Evidence List:
Chemicals: Several containers marked as “volatile materials,” including ammonium nitrate and acetone.
Prayer rug: Noted as being “in plain view.”
Electrical components: Wiring and a timer described as “potential bomb-making materials.”
ISIS flag: Reported to be prominently displayed near a desk.
Journals and manifestos: Labeled as “ideological writings.”
Cybertruck Bomber Evidence List:
Fireworks: Described as “commercial-grade mortar fireworks.”
Gasoline canisters: Multiple containers marked as “flammable/explosive.”
Protective gear: Gloves and masks, listed as “evidence of preparation.”
Digital devices: A laptop and phone, listed for forensic examination.
Which FBI field office did a better staging job?
Public Reaction
Social media exploded with commentary. One user wrote, “They left all that evidence lying around for photos, yet we’re supposed to trust their process? This is why people are losing faith.” Another quipped, “Jabbar’s scene looks like a high school science project—how convenient for the cameras.”
As questions swirl about whether these incidents were mishandled or even staged, the FBI has yet to address public concerns. The glaring inconsistencies and the media’s access to supposed terror-related materials will only fuel conspiracy theories about the agency’s transparency—or lack thereof.
Disclaimer: This article reflects opinions shared by commenters and pundits. The views expressed here are for discussion and analysis purposes and do not constitute definitive conclusions about the FBI’s actions.
