Mr. Obama, Please explain.... (Afghanistan, terror, FBI, claim)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The point that was being made, just after the shooting, is that it is not clear to which group if any the shooter had allegiance, because he had expressed support for groups that were opposed to each other. Anyone seriously a member of one of those groups would not be expressing support for the other.
Because we can't be sure which group if any that he belonged to does not mean he was not motivated by his warped religious beliefs.
That's my contention. He was the typical type to be inspired by ISIS propaganda. It's what we've been warned about for a few years now. As an American, he may have been cherry picking different points of all the various groups without knowing the internal conflicts groups had with each other because of territorialism or power struggles.
Trayvon was another homophobe who attacked George Zimmerman because he thought he was gay. That is exactly what he told his girlfriend on the phone.
Maybe because he didn't know why some weird guy kept following him. Why wouldn't he think it might be some psycho rapist or killer? Zimmerman wasn't wearing a police uniform.
He was a repressed homosexual whose religious upbringing meant he had a lot of unhealthy self-hatred that boiled over and drove him to commit senseless violence. He's not going to say he did it because he was disgusted with himself and took it out on a bunch of gay people if he has issues with his sexuality, he's going to look for a motivation that he can feel good about.
That hypothesis fails unless you think Disney is full of gays? He did scope out Disney as a potential target as well as the club.
Club was a way softer target that he apparently knew more about including that it only had one entrance/exit.
The only way the "hate crime" theory stands up is if you consider hating all non-muslims as a hate crime and not terror.
He said ISIL; and claims Omar Mateen was a "Home Grown Extremist". That is the evasive mentality leading our country....
What exactly is evasive about that?
The shooter claimed his actions were inspired by ISIS during the 911 call - I see no reason to doubt his sincerity. The shooter was also demonstrably a natural American citizen, which would also make him "home grown".
He did it because to make jihad during Ramadan gives automatic forgiveness of sins. His dad has made pro-Taliban comments. Maybe you should look up the atrocities of the Taliban to see what that means. Oh, and while your at it, look up the proclivities of Afghani men for dancing boys. His proclivities aren't all that unusual.
His dad was pro-Taliban the son claimed he was doing this because of ISIS, one has nothing to do with the other. The Taliban is an enemy of ISIS.
The shooter claimed his actions were inspired by ISIS during the 911 call - I see no reason to doubt his sincerity. The shooter was also demonstrably a natural American citizen, which would also make him "home grown".
Where is the conundrum?
Because in the same phone conversations he also indicated support for a group that has been attacking ISIS.
How the heck can you say "there's no evidence that the Orlando shooting was ISIS related?
How much more does one need, the shooter himself said it was and ISIS said it was. What do you need, to find an engraved invitation to the ISIS gay party slaying get together?
And THIS is what's leading our country, how could we go wrong???
Look Obama works for "Them". Not for the interests of the citizens of this country. The same is true for the European leaders like Merkel. They're traitors and are aiding and abetting the enemy. If our civilization had not been taken over by the same illuminist families that funded Marx, Communism, and the Russian Revolution among other crimes then these people would be tried and executed for treason.
Of course if that was the case they would never be in power to begin with.
Semantics. ISIS DIRECTS/DIRECTED followers to do just what this guy did. Did they call him up and say "hey Omar, go to the club tonight and shoot it up"? Probably not. Did they send him a text saying "Hey bro, there's a gay get together tomorrow night and here's the address, take care of 'em"? I'd bet not.
Did they direct all their followers to hit targets of opportunity and repeatedly post films of killing gays?
Why yes, yes they did.
No it isn't semantics. If you have any understanding of the issue, ISIS has operatives that they place and direct from abroad. In addition, they instruct followers to commit an act of terror from where they live and then claim the act for ISIS. It is not semantics. In the first instance, ISIS plans and executes an attack via a funded operative placed in our country. In the second (ORLANDO) scenario, a citizen of the USA committed an act unbeknownst to ISIS but pledged allegiance to ISIS while in the process of committing the event. Read it real slow, and see if you still think it's SEMANTICS...LOL
In the ban all Muslim meme that you are pushing, this is where your semantics argument just looks stupid. Regan allowed Mateen's parents to immigrate to this country, so Obama played no part. Mateen wasn't a foreign Muslim. He was an American citizen. He was also just one of many, many, American citizens who have committed mass shootings with a gun. Shockingly, many of them were neither Muslim or immigrants. I know you are struggling with the verbiage, but a ban on a religion doesn't address our problem. In truth, it would not have stopped any of the mass shootings in this country. That's right--not one. Of course, to you its just semantics.
No it isn't semantics. If you have any understanding of the issue, ISIS has operatives that they place and direct from abroad. In addition, they instruct followers to commit an act of terror from where they live and then claim the act for ISIS. It is not semantics. In the first instance, ISIS plans and executes an attack via a funded operative placed in our country. In the second (ORLANDO) scenario, a citizen of the USA committed an act unbeknownst to ISIS but pledged allegiance to ISIS while in the process of committing the event. Read it real slow, and see if you still think it's SEMANTICS...LOL
In the ban all Muslim meme that you are pushing, this is where your semantics argument just looks stupid. Regan allowed Mateen's parents to immigrate to this country, so Obama played no part. Mateen wasn't a foreign Muslim. He was an American citizen. He was also just one of many, many, American citizens who have committed mass shootings with a gun. Shockingly, many of them were neither Muslim or immigrants. I know you are struggling with the verbiage, but a ban on a religion doesn't address our problem. In truth, it would not have stopped any of the mass shootings in this country. That's right--not one. Of course, to you its just semantics.
Get out of here with your logic and reason!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
