DOJ Rushed To Link Orlando Shooter To ISIS, Now Plans To Redact What He Said During 911 Call For... Reasons

from the huh? dept

The FBI/DOJ had no problem rushing out claims last week that Omar Mateen, the guy who killed 49 people in a rampage at a club in Orlando last weekend, had "pledged allegiance" to ISIS. James Comey delivered remarks that said as much last Monday:
It is also not entirely clear at this point just what terrorist group he aspired to support; although, he made clear his affinity, at the time of the attack, for ISIL, and generally, leading up to the attack, for radical Islamist groups. He made 911 calls from the club, during the attack, at about 2:30 in the morning, Sunday morning. There were three different calls. He called and he hung up. He called again and spoke briefly with the dispatcher, and then he hung up, and then the dispatcher called him back again and they spoke briefly. There were three total calls.

During the calls he said he was doing this for the leader of ISIL, who he named and pledged loyalty to, but he also appeared to claim solidarity with the perpetrators of the Boston Marathon bombing, and solidarity with a Florida man who died as a suicide bomber in Syria for al Nusra Front, a group in conflict with Islamic State. The bombers at the Boston Marathon and the suicide bomber from Florida were not inspired by ISIL, which adds a little bit to the confusion about his motives.
By now, it's pretty clear that the link to terrorism is basically non-existent, and that he fits the profile of a "typical mass shooter" rather than someone doing this for ISIS or any other terrorist reasons. As Marcy Wheeler points out, this also may explain why even though the FBI had checked out Mateen twice, including using the FBI's infamous "confidential informants" who often push people to join them in made up terrorist plots, they decided he wasn't a threat. It appears that Mateen didn't give any indication that he was really into aligning himself with ISIS or any other terrorist group, and Wheeler wonders if the FBI cared that he might do other damage, since they're so focused just on terrorism these days.

Instead, it appears, the FBI assessed Mateen for one and only one thing: whether his bogus claims of ties to terrorist organizations were real. There have been a slew of articles, such as this one or this one, wondering why the FBI didn’t “identify” Mateen as a “real” terrorist in its two investigations of him. But it appears the FBI was assessing only whether he was likely to commit violence because of–and with the support of–an Islamic terrorist group. It appears they weren’t assessing whether he was, like the overwhelming majority of men who commit mass shootings in this country, really screwed up, expressing it in violent ways, and seeking attention with such actions.

It is true that Islamic extremists want to attack this country. It is also true that far, far more Americans die when men carry out mass killings because they’re fucked up and begging for attention. If you’re Muslim, the easiest way to get attention right now is to say that word, “ISIS,” because it’s a guarantee law enforcement and politicians will give that killing more due then they might give the next disturbed mass shooter.

Of course, now that the DOJ seems to be realizing that this wasn't based on any connection to middle east groups, it seems to want to bury the issue. Attorney General Loretta Lynch has declared that when the transcript of Mateen's 911 calls are released, they're going to redact his claims to be doing it for ISIS for [reasons].

LORETTA LYNCH:

Yes, I’ll be going to Orlando on Tuesday to continue my briefings in the case. Actually though what we are announcing tomorrow is that the F.B.I. is releasing a partial transcript of the killer’s calls with law enforcement from inside the club. These are the calls with the Orlando P.D. negotiating team who were trying to ascertain who he was, where he was, and why he was doing this, all the while the rescue operations were continuing. That’ll be coming out tomorrow and I’ll be headed to Orlando on Tuesday.

CHUCK TODD:

Including the hostage negotiation part of this?

LORETTA LYNCH:

Yes. It will be primarily a partial transcript of his calls with the hostage negotiators.

CHUCK TODD:

You say partial. What’s being left out?

LORETTA LYNCH:

Well, what we’re not going to do is further proclaim this individual’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups and further his propaganda.

CHUCK TODD:

So we’re not going to hear him talk about those things?

LORETTA LYNCH:

We will hear him talk about some of those things, but we’re not going to hear him make his ascertains of allegiance and that. This will not be audio. This will be a printed transcript. But it will begin to capture the back and forth between him and the negotiators. We’re trying to get as much information about this investigation out as possible. As you know, because the killer is dead, we have a bit more leeway there. And so we will be producing that information tomorrow.

Marcy Wheeler again points out how absolutely ridiculous this is, including the idea that releasing such statements would "re-victimize" people. That makes absolutely no sense:
If releasing these claims of affiliation would “revictimize” the victims, then releasing them in the first place served to victimize them. So the much better approach would be the release the full transcripts and admit the Department fucked up, both in its assessment of a potential mass killer, and in rushing to blame ISIS in the first place. Not to mention that this will just feed conspiracy theories.

If DOJ fucked up — and the claim this could revictimize people is tacit admission it seriously fucked up — then admit that and make it right. Pay the political consequences of admitting that our obsessive focus on terrorism has distracted us from the more general, and therefore more lethal, problem with mass killings. Don’t try to pretend there’s a good reason for suppressing the very same claims you made a big deal of a week ago.

If DOJ now believes the claims served to do nothing more than give Mateen’s rampage more attention — and it was a key part of generating that attention — then it needs to come clean.
And, of course, as everyone knows, redacting such information is only calling more attention to it, and almost certainly feeding into the typical plot lines of conspiracy theorists. Why not just release the full transcripts (as required under Florida's public records laws) and with it a full explanation for why the claims of being associated with various groups (many of which are in conflict with each other) make no sense. That is, why not try to calm down the kneejerk reaction the DOJ set off in the first place?
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: doj, fbi, isis, omar mateen, redactions, streisand effect


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Thread


  • identicon
    kallethen, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:01am

    That is, why not try to calm down the kneejerk reaction the DOJ set off in the first place?

    Because they WANT the reaction.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:04am

    "Why not just release the full transcripts (as required under Florida's public records laws)"

    They want people to believe this is about terrorist organizations. Leaving information out will fuel the fires and make it easier to take away more of our Constitutional rights.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:05am

    There's only one way to make America great again. And it's not with the bozos responsible for this staying in charge.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:09am

    These spy agencies are nothing but a useless waste of money.

    A: They're obviously clueless.

    The fact that they claimed he was linked to a terrorist organization when he wasn't shows they are simply guessing at this point and are therefore clueless. They have no idea who is part of a terrorist organization and who isn't beyond just guesswork.

    B: If he was linked to a terrorist organization they are clearly too clueless to stop their plans.

    We give these guys a ton of money and huge latitude to invade our privacy and they keep asking for more yet they still haven't stopped a single legitimate terrorist beyond their own terrorists that they set up to be entrapped. On top of that they are clearly clueless.

    The solution is not to throw any more money at the problem it's to cut their budgets and fire whoever is in charge and replace them with someone that's willing to do their job and isn't lazy wasting government money doing nothing.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:26am

    Why does it matter if there was a direct link?

    Whether he had any direct link or inspiration from ISIS or was just a lone wolf acting on his own; the fact that he claimed it was for ISIS is not in dispute. So why try to edit history? I will tell you why, it doesn't fit their narrative.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 12:19pm

      Re: Why does it matter if there was a direct link?

      I think an important point the article makes is that whether he was from ISIS or not, claimed to have been from ISIS or not, is irrelevant. He shot and killed many people and the government, a government we spend tons of money funding their 'intelligence', failed to stop it for whatever reason.

      Whether a terrorist group was responsible for the shooting or whether it was a crazy independent makes no difference at all, the end result is people died and the government didn't stop it partly due to their carelessness. That's unacceptable.

      That they ignored this potential threat ahead of time because he wasn't part of a 'terrorist' group is not acceptable.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      John Fenderson (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 12:28pm

      Re: Why does it matter if there was a direct link?

      It matters because if there was no real link between him and a terrorist organization, then talking about the terrorist organization is just a red herring that would not only distract from the actual problem, but will encourage overreaction that could make the overall situation worse than it has to be.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 12:45pm

        Re: Re: Why does it matter if there was a direct link?

        Why would re-writing history ever be a good thing. If we accept that a transcript of an actual event can be changed then at some point they will be changed and we will not be told. There is no good reason to make a change like this. Most likely there is an agenda behind the change.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          John Fenderson (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:22pm

          Re: Re: Re: Why does it matter if there was a direct link?

          Re-writing history is never a good thing unless the written history is wrong and needs correction. While it's possible that's what the intention is here, there's little indication of it. I think it's a mistake to jump to conclusions, particularly when talking about a topic as emotionally loaded as this.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 2:11pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Why does it matter if there was a direct link?

            Your logic is what allows history to be rewritten.

            "unless is its wrong and needs correction"

            Like everything else, it's all in the eye of the beholder. Everyone has their own set of facts. History is rewritten all the damn time.

            Humanity has never been and never will be good with the truth. We hate its fucking guts!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              John Fenderson (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 6:18am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why does it matter if there was a direct link?

              "it's all in the eye of the beholder. Everyone has their own set of facts."

              Not entirely. Despite your assertion, there is such a thing as objective fact (nobody "has their own set of facts", but people often have their own set of mistaken beliefs that they treat as facts).

              There are times when objective fact can be proven and which require that the recorded history be corrected. They may be relatively rare, but it does happen. When it happens, that's a legitimate reason to correct the recorded history -- and that correction is important.

              That's my only point. Yes, if you take my stance to a silly extreme, it's a bad thing. However, the same is true if I take your stance to a silly extreme: if recorded history cannot ever be corrected, then we are doomed to never know what our history is and cannot learn any lessons from it.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    AnonCow, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:31am

    I do this in the name of mentally ill sociopaths everywhere!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    SpaceLifeForm, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:38am

    Written transcript?

    The audio would be way better and
    even that would not be trustable.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 3:54pm

      Re: Written transcript?

      Even if they released the audio now, conspiracy theorists will say the delay was necessary to create the "real" tape.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ottermaton (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:39am

    Safe spaces

    Marcy Wheeler again points out how absolutely ridiculous this is, including the idea that releasing such statements would "re-victimize" people. That makes absolutely no sense:
    This makes perfect sense in this SJW world where everyone needs to hide in their safe spaces from every-one/thing lest someone be "triggered" by some imaginary sleight.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:42am

    Withing a day of the shooting, based on only the news reports I heard, it seemed very clear to me that this was a messed up guy who what using "Terrorism" as an excuse to commit his shooting. If the Terrorism did exist he would have used some other reason to justify the attack to himself.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 12:56pm

      Re:

      it seemed very clear to me that this was a messed up guy

      Funny isn't it - how many "messed up guys" turn out to have allegiance to Islam.

      Moslems are around 1% of the US population so only 1 in every hundred attacks ought to be by Moslems. So there ought to have been 300 mass shootings by others in the last year.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 12:03pm

    He was twice investigated by the FBI for ties to terrorism. He claimed allegiance to ISIS and its leader by name during the attack on the phone to 911. He also attended a mosque with a suicide bomber for ISIS who attacked overseas. I don't see the "it's pretty clear that the link to terrorism is basically non-existent".

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:33pm

      Re:

      guilt by associations is not valid proof. That is just a coincedence. You need far more accurate evidence to [rove he is linked than by what someone says or which church they belong to.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 2:16pm

        Re: Re:

        guilt by associations is not valid proof. That is just a coincedence. You need far more accurate evidence to [rove he is linked than by what someone says or which church they belong to.

        Was that meant to be sarcastic?

        If you are serious then it sounds like it would be really difficult to convince you of anything.

        Bear in mind that an organisational link is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about a common inspiration.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JMT (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 6:12pm

      Re:

      "He was twice investigated by the FBI for ties to terrorism."

      And twice they found nothing.

      "He claimed allegiance to ISIS and its leader by name during the attack on the phone to 911."

      Literally anybody can do that, it means nothing without actual evidence of a genuine connection, like communication records. I could just as easily claim allegiance to the Nazi party and Hitler, but few would take me seriously.

      "He also attended a mosque with a suicide bomber for ISIS who attacked overseas."

      Being in a building with someone is again a very weak connection unless there's also evidence he communicated and plotted with this other person. Lots of other people would have attended the same mosque. Are you branding them probable terrorists too?

      It's entirely possible he was just an extremely messed up, anti-gay, attention-seeking nutjob. In the absence of any evidence of an actual ISIS connection, this seems more likely.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 7:04pm

      Re:

      > He also attended a mosque with a suicide bomber for ISIS who attacked overseas.

      That is outright false. The guy was a suicide bomber for Jabhat al-Nusra. Al-Nusra is the al-Qaeda franchaise in Syria. ISIS and and al-Nusra effing hate each other and have fought each other in Syria.

      In fact Mateen was just as ignorant of "radical islam" as you, he mixed up the different factions because his knowledge was completely superficial. He probably got it all from reading conspiracy websites and watching fox news.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Agonistes (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 12:05pm

    I have a feeling that the unedited 911 call may possibly have some specific information he uttered that some think might cause a huge countrywide panic and the biggest gun-buying spree the world has ever known.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      John Fenderson (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 12:30pm

      Re:

      If they're releasing the full transcript as they claim, then this is a moot speculation.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 9:27am

        Re: Re:

        "Actually though what we are announcing tomorrow is that the F.B.I. is releasing a partial transcript of the killer’s calls with law enforcement from inside the club."

        Sounds like they're not releasing the full transcript.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      CynicalChris (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 5:44pm

      Re:

      I'm just curious. I don't know about gun laws in different US States, but is there any information on how many people at this shooting location (or any other) were armed?

      There is always a media storm about how if more people were armed, this wouldn't have happened, but there never seems to be any information about whether anyone at the location was armed.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 6:51pm

        Re: Re:

        Gun laws in Florida track with much of the country in this respect:
        Place serving or selling alcohol (club,bar, liquor store, maybe even a gas station with beer) = no guns (usually with an exemption for cops and other LEO, even off duty)

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          CynicalChris (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 7:14pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          So, even if every second, law abiding, citizen was carrying a gun, the offender wouldn't be "opposed" by gun carrying "good guys" on premises serving or selling alcohol. Aren't there always declarations that the mass shooting could have been prevented if there were "good guys" carrying guns around?

          Sounds like a "loophole" for the "bad guys" and the "good guys" who say that the answer is more guns!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:28pm

    I had heard mateen was an informant, which was why the FBI basically ignored what he was doing despite being under surveillance.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    afn29129 (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:28pm

    It's a lie. It's an official lie.

    Which was what the Ministry of Truth was responsible for wasn't it. George Orwell, 1984.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    bbf459, 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:34pm

    Orlando Shootings were a Hoax a Fake

    Proof that the Orlando shootings were a hoax:

    Use of green screen technologies. See the reflection in the crisis actor's glasses here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG9mD3LOKXo

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:39pm

    Just when you thought the shit couldn't get any deeper, Hillary 2016.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    zerosaves (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:42pm

    I like how your link to confirm "link to terrorism is basically non-existent" is to NPR, the biggest government propaganda mouthpiece they have. I'm sure everything they report to true!

    Now that the FBI has released in full, he clearly states he in fact did it inspired by ISIS and pledged to their leader, are you going to retract this ridiculous article's statements?

    Or are you still blind to the threat RADICAL (read: not all NOT ALL!) Islamists are to the LGBT in the world. They are condemned to death in their countries, not sure why its a stretch to believe they would want them dead here also.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 9:35am

      Re:

      Now that the FBI has released in full, he clearly states he in fact did it inspired by ISIS and pledged to their leader, are you going to retract this ridiculous article's statements?

      He claimed he did it because of ISIS, but that doesn't mean there was any actual connection.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Selimt (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:49pm

    >it's pretty clear that the link to terrorism is basically non-existent

    Really? So his statement was:
    "I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi may God protect him [in Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State"

    and we know that the link to terrorism was non-existent?
    Is anyone expecting to find an official ISIS membership card before saying, yes, it is terrorism?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 2:53pm

      Re:

      If Some Asshole shoots up a fast-food joint, and before they do it they pledge allegiance to 'The US government and it's military', does that mean that there was a link to the US government and military?

      Simply making a statement does not a link make, if they want to claim that there was a link to a specific group rather than just Some Asshole who killed a bunch of people they'd need to present some evidence beyond just one phone call and statement of allegiance, otherwise you could have people jaywalking and robbing liquor stores 'for ISIS'.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 3:44pm

        Re: Re:

        If Some Asshole shoots up a fast-food joint, and before they do it they pledge allegiance to 'The US government and it's military', does that mean that there was a link to the US government and military?


        If the US government is on record commanding people to shoot up fast food joints then yes it does.

        The point is that the US government has made no such request - Whereas ISIS- and for that matter Islamic scripture - have commanded death to gays - and many superficially moderate muslims in the west appear to agree.

        See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlqXgXwzkPg
        sequence from about 1 minute 50.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 4:28pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          If that's all it takes then the bar has been set absurdly low for 'ties to terrorist groups'. A single statement is enough to turn something from Some Asshole shooting up a place to a terrorist related event?

          Before statement, Some Asshole.
          After statement, Some Terroristic Asshole.

          People are dead and personally I don't feel like handing that pack of assholes yet another victory by adding the actions of this asshole to their 'wins'. They commit more than enough atrocities on their own without crediting them with the actions of anyone that mentions them before, during or after they flip their lid.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 21 Jun 2016 @ 8:02am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Depends what you mean by "ties".

            If you mean that this event was somehow organised, funded, prepared or facilitated by the terrorist group then no it wasn't.

            If you mean inspired directly by then possibly yes.

            If you mean inspired indirectly or with similar inspiration to ISIS then I'd say pretty definitely yes.

            y I don't feel like handing that pack of assholes yet another victory

            And I don't feel like providing their ideology with cover.

            These kind of attacks should force muslims to to think seriously and either move to a version of their faith, such as the Ahmadis, who have found a robust way to repudiate the violent teachings or leave it altogether.

            Either of these outcomes would reduce the probability of future attacks.

            Denying the Sunni Islamic motivation allows life to continue as usual.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              John Fenderson (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 10:27am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              "If you mean that this event was somehow organised, funded, prepared or facilitated by the terrorist group then no it wasn't."

              Yes, this is precisely what "ties" means. Someone just being sympathetic and acting independently (and I'm not convinced that's what happened here) is not having "ties".

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JMT (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 6:23pm

      Re:

      "Is anyone expecting to find an official ISIS membership card before saying, yes, it is terrorism?"

      If by "membership card" you mean actual evidence of communication with and support from ISIS, the yes that's exactly what's required. All he basically said was "I like this guy!" Taking that on its own as proof of anything would be stupid.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 1:54pm

    Yep, no direct ties to terrorism. I mean "typical mass shooters" normally scope out their targets with their wives and sell their houses for $10 to their family months before their rampage.

    Most "typical mass shooters" also hit the FBI list a couple times as well as having corporations like Disney call the cops due to their creepiness.

    Most "typical mass shooters" have ties to suicide bombers in other countries as well as pledging allegiance to terrorist groups while they are in the act of slaughtering innocent people.

    Other than that, good article Mike...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      zerosaves (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 2:18pm

      Re:

      I like how liberals are trying to make this incident into a gun problem, like crazy radical nuts have never made homemade bombs (OKC '95 anyone?) or used arson to kill before. If he had no gun, I'm he wouldn't have hated gays enough to try and kill them. Yes, that's it. It wasn't his perverted views on religion, it was the gun.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Richard (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 2:28pm

        Re: Re:

        We have a saying in our family:

        "Just because Ben Johnson is on drugs it doesn't mean that Carl Lewis isn't an a**hole*"

        You know it is perfectly possible that the religious thing is an issue we need to deal with AND the US also needs better gun control. They are not mutually exclusive.

        *Disclaimer Carl Lewis is actually a good guy - but you get the point.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 2:53pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Have a well written piece by Larry Correia on why gun control is lunacy: http://monsterhunternation.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

          I also suggest reading "More Guns, Less crime" by John Lott, which lays out exactly what the title says.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 21 Jun 2016 @ 4:35am

          Re: Re: Re:

          You know it is perfectly possible that the religious thing is an issue we need to deal with AND the US also needs better gun control. They are not mutually exclusive.


          While that could be true and debatable regarding gun control, doesn't negate the fact that they current admin would love to bury the link to terrorism, which they tried to do.

          Funny how this article goes on to berate the government for selling fear to the masses when it was the media that started with the terrorist reporting. The Obama admin would love for us to believe this is a gun control problem and not Radical Islam, which they tell us daily is not a threat and we are all safe and fluffy, protected by them, the US Government.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Richard (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 7:06am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            While that could be true and debatable regarding gun control, doesn't negate the fact that they current admin would love to bury the link to terrorism, which they tried to do.

            That was - sort of - my point really. I don't see the two things as mutually exclusive

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 9:48pm

      Re:

      > sell their houses for $10 to their family

      I dunno about mass shooters but playing games with property within an extended family is really common. There are all kinds of reasons to do it, tax avoidance, unofficial loans between family members (reportedly all his sisters are doctors) shielding assets from a potential divorce, etc. Maybe he was going to come out and divorce his wife and he wanted to keep the house for himself. He took his wife to the club as a weird way to see how she would react to his gayness. And then his lover dumped him so he lost his shit and killed his boyfriend and everyone else.

      Its just too easy to put your own pre-determined narrative onto isolated facts. Kinda like how all those nationalists and NSA apologists point to him being in Russia as proof that he was working for the Russians.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 2:43pm

    Sellers of aluminum foil once again send hearty thanks to the government

    So they're willing to release the written transcript, but not the actual audio. Yeah, I'm sure there's no possible way that will be use by the more conspiracy minded to claim that they're re-writing what was said for their own political benefit, adding a little here, removing a little there...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 4:21pm

      Re: Sellers of aluminum foil once again send hearty thanks to the government

      I wonder when the market for couture foil hats will explode? Got to be anytime now. Will style apply only to foil hats made for women, or will men appreciate an artistically crafted hat? Will the self made tin foil hat go by the wayside, causing the foil industry to rewrite their marketing plans for a new audience, manufacturers vs fanatics...um...ah...do it yourselfers!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Personanongrata, 20 Jun 2016 @ 5:22pm

    Idiots Rule!

    DOJ Rushed To Link Orlando Shooter To ISIS, Now Plans To Redact What He Said During 911 Call For... Reasons

    If there is nothing to hide simply play the unadulterated/uncensored audio and be done with it.

    Jane's Addiction Idiots Rule

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie3NinwlX6A&feature=related

    I got a lie, fat fuckin' lie 'bout a law idiots obey
    They made it easy, cheaters have their way
    You hi di ho, you're livin' on your knees


    Forget the rule
    Oh, oh oh oh, idiots rule
    Forget the rule
    Oh, oh oh oh, idiots rule


    Now there's a time but I say none like now
    Men, there's a time where idiots are bound
    If there's a pole planted in your back
    Then you're a fixture, you're no man


    Forget the rule
    Oh, oh oh oh, idiots rule
    Forget the rule
    Oh, oh oh oh, idiots rule


    C'mon, kiss you, motherfucker
    Fuckin', suckin', take it


    Idiot, idiots rule
    Idiot, idiots rule
    You idiot, idiots rule, yeah


    You know that man you hate?
    You look more like him every day
    Hi di hos


    Too good shoe won't save your soul, yeah ha
    Idiots rule, idiots rule
    Idiots rule, oh, yeah

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 6:28pm

    I saw a talking head on TV who was an expert after the attack, and while I thought his assessment that the wife was totally involved deeply (something being questioned now as it has come out that she has mental issues limiting her understanding) he made a very interesting point that I'm hoping one of our Muslim readers might be able to shed light onto.

    The claim was made that someone who martyrs himself during Ramadan is forgiven for everything.
    Given the emerging fact pattern of behavior and his fathers "dislike" of homosexuals, could it be that he pushed himself to be a mans man to hide the fact he liked men?
    This would explain pursuing being a police officer, the security guard (positions of authority that are often unchallenged and shielded from actions) to remove questions people might have had. It has become clear from other interviews that he 'creeped out' people he was interested in because he was socially awkward.

    It could be that he was deeply conflicted, and finally felt pushed far enough and then decided that he could find forgiveness in committing a horrific act that he thought would secure him forgiveness?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 20 Jun 2016 @ 7:22pm

    > The claim was made that someone who martyrs himself during Ramadan is forgiven for everything.

    That's basically a loaded question. If you ask the violent fundies then they'll say dying for the cause is a golden ticket into the pearly gates no matter when you die. If you ask the normal people they'll tell you killing innocent people means you are consigned to hell no matter when you did it.

    Did the guy pick some random justification in his environment for his actions? It seems likely that he did. But for an unstable person nearly anything is a potential fixation. Its like arguing that video games make people into cold-blooded killers -- sure somebody who already had a problem with reality might fixate on a video game (or a book, remember the catcher-in-the-rye conspiracy theory?) But the connection is all in the head of the killer, not something that a mentally stable person would consider meaningful.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That Anonymous Coward (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 2:13pm

      Re:

      While the question is loaded, and I am not trying to justify the actions. I'm trying to understand the mindset.

      If you have someone committed to inflicting harm, there is very little that can be done by society to stop them. But if he was really gay and torn by his emotions & the pressure from his family I think we all could agree that there isn't much help out there for people. Mental health issues have a huge stigma, his desire to be a cop means that seeking assistance could harm his career.

      The violent fundamentalists say all sorts of good things will happen to their followers, but they aren't so good that the leaders pursue doing them. They are preying on people, which is a common tactic used in all sorts of things (you don't have to be a violent fundie for it to work).

      I have doubts that he was a committed terrorist out to destroy America because he was radicalized, I think he boxed himself into a corner of pressures and did something stupid to escape having to deal with them. He murdered people and we would all be better served by demanding people stop trying to make terrorism the magical catch all and consider that as a society we are failing to provide help to people before something tragic happens.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    sam1am (profile), 20 Jun 2016 @ 11:08pm

    Here's the thing nobody seems to realize: when Mateen was interviewed by the FBI he was neither a terrorist or a criminal. Interviews can't find you guilty of future atrocities. Before we call for the government to tighten it's grip even more, let's stop and think about what we are asking for and whether or not it would have helped.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Jun 2016 @ 3:06am

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Jun 2016 @ 6:41am

    This is just the Obama Administration and the DOJ desperately trying to disassociate this event from Islam and Islamic terrorism. They really want to bill this as another purely domestic mass shooting like sandy hook, or as a hate crime like the Charleston church shooting. Those types of tragedies are much easier to exploit for their own domestic and political agendas (gun-control, extra rights for protected groups, and banning the confederate flag, ect).

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 10:22am

      Re:

      Those types of tragedies are much easier to exploit for their own domestic and political agendas (gun-control, extra rights for protected groups, and banning the confederate flag, ect).

      You're saying the government is less interested in exploiting terrorism for their political agenda? That's... an interesting viewpoint.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Jun 2016 @ 8:05am

    Imagine the ENORMOUS UPROAR that would ensure if every time some "Christian" bombed an abortion clinic, the Prez/media/etc talked about "Christian terrorism," or if the media, in response to way over the top actions by Israeli security forces called that "Jewish terrorism."

    Banning weapons people use to protect themselves is not the answer. Neither are one-sided, hypocritical, cherry-picked branding of one religion but not others. What must happen is that adults everywhere need to unabashedly condemn RELIGIOUS DOGMA, period, for the ridiculous nonsense that it is, and say, "Grow up and let go of the fairy tales."

    And for Pete's sake, don't let children anywhere near this nonsense.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 21 Jun 2016 @ 12:31pm

      Re:

      Imagine the ENORMOUS UPROAR that would ensure if every time some "Christian" bombed an abortion clinic, the Prez/media/etc talked about "Christian terrorism,"

      Opposition to abortion is not an exclusively Christian - or even religious opinion. So being an "anti-abortion terrorist" does not make you a "Christian Terrorist".

      Also it's fairly easy to refute any claim these people might make that they are following the New Testament - because the New Testament has no violent verses to support them.

      The Koran on the other hand has plenty of support for terrorism. Go look at the red and purple text here:
      http://www.koran-at-a-glance.com/

      Mohammed himself said "I have been made victorious through terror."

      Or look at the worldwide statistics of Islamic terror here:
      http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        That Anonymous Coward (profile), 21 Jun 2016 @ 2:32pm

        Re: Re:

        And yet every single time someone with brown skin does something wrong the first words are terrorism. Terrorism is used all the time because they assume all brown people are Muslims, and all follow the small sects who espouse violence.

        While there are non-Christians who oppose abortion, the only ones bombing clinics & murdering Doctors seem to be Christian. But the word terrorist isn't used because somehow causing fear in people, murdering them over your ideology doesn't apply if you worship the 'right' god.

        There was a Christian Terrorist who was responsible for deaths & bombings... and the good Christian people of his community helped him hide from law enforcement. They decided their faith required them to assist in the murder of people who didn't hold their beliefs. I guess the big difference was they weren't brown.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ruby, 23 Jun 2016 @ 2:50pm

    Because it's free publicity for ISIS

    Here's the think, he did make statements suggesting he was doing this for ISIS.

    It's been determined these were not true statements, but he did still say those things.

    Even though the alliance is false though, the audio from the underacted calls, now that they've been released, will almost certainly end up in future ISIS lone-wolf recruitment propaganda.

    Whether you think the public hearing the full calls is worth handing that tool to ISIS or not, it's not surprising the DOJ would be hesitant there.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Jun 2016 @ 11:44pm

    The FBI has reported that the man who came forward and said he had hooked up with the shooter for 2 months, the people who encountered him on various hookup apps, and saw him in person were all mistaken. O_O He was married twice and had kids so it couldn't be.... cause there aren't hundreds of married men who sneak off to have sex with male partners. There aren't married men who after the kids are grown leave the wife because they can't live the lie anymore.

    Something interesting that came out of the interview with the alleged 2 month hook up guy was that the shooter had hooked up with someone, had unprotected sex, and then was informed his partner was HIV+.

    One does wonder if in the rush to make it terrorism they skipped over some other possibilities. One would be curious if they did an HIV test on the shooter. Imagine someone torn between the ideals of his father & his feelings who suffered the ultimate betrayal from the community where he wanted to belong. His father finding out he was HIV+ would not go over very well, and the extremist view of if you do it during the holy month you get absolved of everything would end any discussions about him.

    But lots of eye witnesses and an alleged lover, are all wrong the the FBI pushing a terrorism narrative motivates people more.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
.

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.