The Orlando shooting

First topic message reminder :

Just wanted to get my facts straight, so if anyone can answer these I'd be grateful.

Did The shooter act alone?
Did The shooter have a machine gun or loads of different guns and lots of ammo?
Did The shooter first, have a set-to in front of the club, with police?
How did The shooter get into the club?
Did The shooter start shooting straight away once inside the club?

Just answer each question for me if you can as I have some questions of my own.
I want someone else to clarify this for me.
Thanks

nicko wrote:
I don't understand how he could kill 50 with a semi-auto rifle,  I think the magazine holds approx 15 rounds?   So after the mag was empty he would have to change to another, and after that another then another,  

That is saying every shot killed some one and every shot was fatal.
I don't buy it!

You can buy 10, 15 or 20 round mag's;
Tape 2 mag's together you have 40 rounds..

The main reason that military and police don't do that is because too many rounds in rapid succesion will overheat and warp the barrel, and lead to bullets spaying wildly..

It was also for the same reason that the Aussies stopped using 20 round mag's in Vietnam, and only issued 10 and 15 round mag's...

HOWEVER,  with the urban terrorists and in close and confined quarters, if they are aiming for mass random casualties, they are more likely to be spraying bullets anyway, and not particularly aiming at particular targets --  so accuracy is less important than rate of fire..

With semi-auto's and machine pistols, those psycho's could empty a couple of mag's in a few seconds, de-mag and reload in a couple of seconds.  Over a couple of hours he could easily have fired a few hundred rounds...

The trigger mechanism can be modified to make the AR14/15/16 fire more rapidly, and behave more like a machine gun, emptying a magazine in less than two seconds, if so desired.
Again, not something that military or poIice will do, as it lowers both reliability and, again, accuracy. .  But, your average terrorist won't be worried about such niceties, either...

And, then there's also the added fact that many mass murderers and terrorists don't practice much with weapons, but simply learn how to load, cock and shoot..
Meaning that rifles, pistols and normal shotguns won't be their weapons of choice.

So that an AR15, AK47, machine pistol or scattergun can be more effective if they're simply aiming for mass casualties..

Original Quill wrote:
No doubt religion is one contributor to the problem...as are many alternatives.  The genus above religion is 'ideology'.  There are many different ideological systems...religious, nationalist, racist, political, economic, etc.

Mateen seems to have had a montage of affiliations.

TOO true,  Quill..

The problem with narrow minded and dogmatic dickwits like Dodger and Tommy, is that they zero in on certain aspects of a situation, and keep stubbornly pushing their own pet agendas..

They refuse to consider that many cases are in fact multi-factorial and won't always conveniently fit into their selective little moulds.
And when Didge doesn't like what others write, he too readily screams out "apologists.." and "deflection !"
IF ONLY life were so simple..

In this case, it seems quite likely there could be multiple causes/reasons at play, e.g.
Ideology
Religion
Homophobia/hatemongering
Anti-gov't/anti-social feelings
Underlying psychoses ?  (re: his former wife's comments..)      

FAMILY Guy creator Seth MacFarlane has called for a ban on weapons following the Orlando mass shooting, writing “it’s enough to send the even (sic) cheeriest soul into a deep depression”.

Following news of the attack at Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida — the largest mass shooting in US history — MacFarlane posted a series of Tweets to his 10 million followers, calling for a ban on “automatic weapons”.

“These shootings are a regular occurrence. You don't get to be ‘shocked’ anymore unless you take action to stop them. Ban automatic weapons,” he wrote.

it seems the gun man is a loon, with possibly similar issues to the gay guy that wants euthanasia.

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/orlando-massacre-gunman-used-gay-dating-app-and-was-regular-at-pulse-nightclub/news-story/7e169317cbcfb2da21c741fa633b282a

THE gunman who killed 49 people and injured 50 in an Orlando gay nightclub used a gay dating app and his ex-wife thought he might have been secretly gay.

Omar Mateen, who is responsible for the deadliest US shooting in history, had reportedly visited the Pulse gay nightclub at least 12 times prior to the massacre.

And the above shows by ratboy wolf he simply fails to understand that Islam is a religious ideology that teaches homophobia, misogyny, hate of Jews and Christians, treates them as inferior but better than other religions, prejudice, discriminatiom.
And again we have claims that is made everytime from people who have not got a single qualification as a medical professional state it must be a mental health problem, even though there is no record of this they go off the opinion of the ex-wife.
Who was beaten by him, again something allowed in islam, which is why people like rat boy have not got the first clue what they are talking about.
When its a Far Right terrorists, there is no case at all you will hear people say mental health, yet when its an islamic extremist, then the left will come out with every excuse in the book to deny where the problem comes from.
Why is it that since religion has diminished in the west, we hace seeen progression through equality?
You have 2000 years of history to show where and why religious hate is predominant based off works that teach people to hate off absolute morals and yet two utter regrerssive clowns go out of their way to spill bullshit like a virus on this forum

Paul Ettinger wrote:And the above shows by ratboy wolf he simply fails to understand that Islam is a religious ideology that teaches homophobia, misogyny, hate of Jews and Christians, treates them as inferior but better than other religions, prejudice, discriminatiom.
And again we have claims that is made everytime from people who have not got a single qualification as a medical professional state it must be a mental health problem, even though there is no record of this they go off the opinion of the ex-wife.
Who was beaten by him, again something allowed in islam, which is why people like rat boy have not got the first clue what they are talking about.
When its a Far Right terrorists, there is no case at all you will hear people say mental health, yet when its an islamic extremist, thenb the left will come out with eveery excuse in the book to deny where the problem comes from.
Why is it that since religion has diminished in the west, we hace seeen progression through equality?
You have 2000 years of history to show where and why religious hate is predominant based off works that teach people to hate off absolute morals and yet two utter regrerssive clowns go out of their way to spill bullshit like a virus on this forum

Irony since that seems to be what you promote, just a different set.
and pretty sure eveyone says the far right terrorists are nutjobs too.

stormee and tommy have as easily been trained to hate. you give religon far more credit thasn it deserves, we can easily use patriotism and nationalism in combination with fear to build an group of mindless hatefilled meat sacks.

and this muderer in orlando clearly feared gays or being gay himself,
fear leads mindless hate

veya_victaous wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:And the above shows by ratboy wolf he simply fails to understand that Islam is a religious ideology that teaches homophobia, misogyny, hate of Jews and Christians, treates them as inferior but better than other religions, prejudice, discriminatiom.
And again we have claims that is made everytime from people who have not got a single qualification as a medical professional state it must be a mental health problem, even though there is no record of this they go off the opinion of the ex-wife.
Who was beaten by him, again something allowed in islam, which is why people like rat boy have not got the first clue what they are talking about.
When its a Far Right terrorists, there is no case at all you will hear people say mental health, yet when its an islamic extremist, thenb the left will come out with eveery excuse in the book to deny where the problem comes from.
Why is it that since religion has diminished in the west, we hace seeen progression through equality?
You have 2000 years of history to show where and why religious hate is predominant based off works that teach people to hate off absolute morals and yet two utter regrerssive clowns go out of their way to spill bullshit like a virus on this forum

Irony since that seems to be what you promote, just a different set.      
and pretty sure eveyone says the far right terrorists are nutjobs too.      

stormee and tommy have as easily been trained to hate. you give religon far more credit thasn it deserves, we can easily use patriotism and nationalism in combination with fear to build an group of mindless hatefilled meat sacks.

and this muderer in orlando clearly feared gays or being gay himself,
fear leads mindless hate

This poster is on ignore for abusing his position and changing my password like a child, does the left motto of deflect, divert and cover up, and talks all he can about posters ignoring the facts.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:



No i am proving you wrong, by the fact 1.5 billion people believe allah exist, which is what matters.
It does not matter whether you or I think he does not exist.
It matters to those who believe they will suffer an eternity unless they follow some made up commands in a book.
Again none of us can prove a God exists or not, can you?
Again what the fuck do you fail to understand how and why throughout the Muslim world we see imans preach to act against Homosexuals, Jews, the west etc?

Again, people don't need religion to be bigoted -- any more than they need religion to be good. Since religions are invented by people, the inventors of religions put those beliefs in there, so they, the inventors, must have already believed them.

If you remove religion from the equation, people are still going to be bigots. They'll find something else to justify their beliefs, and they will go on trying to prove to the rest of us that they're right and teaching their beliefs to anyone who will listen. Just like other people would still be decent people without religion.

A good way to illustrate this is to look at the doctrine of white supremacy as if it was a religion. White supremacists often don't rely on religious teachings to justify their beliefs. Instead, they invent fake "scientific" reasons to justify their beliefs.

If you think about it, dreaming up a fake scientific reason to hate black people is the same thing as dreaming up a fake god that hates black people.

You forgot to mention that people who are religious can be good too. You don't need to be an atheist to be "good". Just saying ...

Yes it seems the guy is a loon and he told enough people he was hated the gays.

Funny that, these loons always leave a nice tidy and convenient trail.

People use the loon card as a cop out. He was a homophobic ideologue.

But what are you suggesting eddie?

Eilzel wrote:People use the loon card as a cop out. He was a homophobic ideologue.

But what are you suggesting eddie?

You have to be a bit of loon to shoot all those people instead of just ranting about gay people down the pub or whatever.

Eilzel wrote:People use the loon card as a cop out. He was a homophobic ideologue.

But what are you suggesting eddie?

Hey les,

Theres more to it im afraid.

It just doesn't add up for me.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Eilzel wrote:People use the loon card as a cop out. He was a homophobic ideologue.

But what are you suggesting eddie?

Hey les,

Theres more to it im afraid.

It just doesn't add up for me.

Me neither. It's like a plot of a really obvious film.

They can't make their minds up either just to confuse the people's minds.
First he's definitely a Muslim swearing allegiance to Islam and now he's done it becasue he's a closet gay.

Hey Sexy, long time no "see" how you doing?

Nicko do you think this guy acted alone?
I still cannot see how he had enough ammo - and the media isn't forthcoming with any details

Please read this:

http://www.dangerandplay.com/2016/06/12/there-was-more-than-one-shooter-at-pulse-in-orlando/

Then there's the guy who decides to hold an exit door shut from the outside and explains his rather weird reason why:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/13/orlando-shooting-witness-explains-why-he-held-clubs-door-shut-during-escape-video/

eddie wrote:They can't make their minds up either just to confuse the people's minds.
First he's definitely a Muslim swearing allegiance to Islam and now he's done it becasue he's a closet gay.

Have we heard his 911 call yet?

Miffs2 wrote:

eddie wrote:They can't make their minds up either just to confuse the people's minds.
First he's definitely a Muslim swearing allegiance to Islam and now he's done it becasue he's a closet gay.

Have we heard his 911 call yet?

Not that I know off but I haven't googled it.

Everyone is an expert lol

It has been 2 days, and you expect a full coherent narrative of what happened or start suggesting conspiracy is afoot.

He may be all that is being said. A closeted homosexual Muslim whose identity crisis may have pushed him to the brink. There may have been a final trigger but we'll probably never know. It really isn't an unlikely scenario at all. And a pledge of allegience to IS is par for the course for a Muslim idealogue who has resolved to kill and probably die doing so. Whether it was true or not it is unsurprising.

Of course maybe some of it is hear say, again its only been two days, and people lap up any and every detail of stories like this, so news providers publish it, however minor- because guess what? That's how they make money.

eddie wrote:Then there's the guy who decides to hold an exit door shut from the outside and explains his rather weird reason why:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/13/orlando-shooting-witness-explains-why-he-held-clubs-door-shut-during-escape-video/

Would still like to know why this guy thought he was up to?
A shooter in the loose and people escape out of an exit door into an alley, he decides to "hold the door shut" to stop the shooter following him but diesnt let go when he hears fellow clobbers on the other side tryin to get out.

Anyone else understand this?

He said he thought they might be clubbers, and his intention was obviously to protect the people in the alleyway, if he opened and let the gun man through he would have killed them all. Whether he was right or wrong, it isn't hard to understand his choice.

Eilzel wrote:He said he thought they might be clubbers, and his intention was obviously to protect the people in the alleyway, if he opened and let the gun man through he would have killed them all. Whether he was right or wrong, it isn't hard to understand his choice.

He locked them in.
He was wrong. He was selfish. Or he's lying.
He could've flung open the door and ran - letting all the people out.

And did he think a closed door would keep a gunman out when he has bullets?

I think his story is weird and he only came up with it becasue a witness - a man trying to get out of said door, said live on a TV interview that someone was Holding the door shut.
The TV interview was cut abruptly at the point of him saying that....why?

Then this guy comes forward and says it was him.

I think ill'l wait for a few days see what comes up before making further comments.

nicko wrote:I think ill'l wait for a few days see what comes up before making further comments.

Yes that's a good point Nicko but my point is that sometimes "a few days" gives the media/others time to tidy up and fill in our blanks with more stories.

I'm only questioning what makes me scratch my head.

Which is everything apparently. You decide he is selfish because you refuse to see how someone else could think any other way. Again, we cannot know every detail of a story, and there will be conflicted reports. But I see where you are going with this, and why you would question everything then post a stort with Trump linking Obama to this, of all people.

Eilzel wrote:Which is everything apparently. You decide he is selfish because you refuse to see how someone else could think any other way. Again, we cannot know every detail of a story, and there will be conflicted reports. But I see where you are going with this, and why you would question everything then post a stort with Trump linking Obama to this, of all people.

It came up on my news feed. I posted a story about Hilary the other day.

Les I'm sorry if I query things and that upsets you, but why wouldn't you query things?
Why do you believe the first thing you hear or see? And when something makes no sense why brush it aside and make up your own answers?

I hear the stories - some make sense and leave no questions, others don't, and sometimes those that leave questions will eventually have an answer that makes sense but some never do.

I'm sorry if you all get told "this is A!" I will wait and see if it's A or even if it remotely resembles an A before I take it as gospel.

Hmmm, as amazing as this might be ...your news links are the same links and scrolling daily bilge that rolls across everyone's FB/media/internet page; what captures your attention and what others blow off as pure BS/rumor/gossip is just subjective

But the chasm between rumor/gossip and what you think is gospel/truth is deep and wide!

  

eddie wrote:They can't make their minds up either just to confuse the people's minds.
First he's definitely a Muslim swearing allegiance to Islam and now he's done it becasue he's a closet gay.

There's always a substantial margin of the media that want's to see a connection of anything to the Islamic religion. It could be a story about a flower show, and if there is such a thing as a Sunni daffodil, it's be in tomorrow's headlines.

There are nutters out there who sop this stuff up. And, well....it sells news papers.

4EVER2 wrote:Hmmm, as amazing as this might be ...your news links are the same links and scrolling daily bilge that rolls across everyone's FB/media/internet page; what captures your attention and what others blow off as pure BS/rumor/gossip is just subjective

But the chasm between rumor/gossip and what you think is gospel/truth is deep and wide!

  

Yes. In your opnion.

eddie wrote:Then there's the guy who decides to hold an exit door shut from the outside and explains his rather weird reason why:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/13/orlando-shooting-witness-explains-why-he-held-clubs-door-shut-during-escape-video/

I was goign to say digusting cowardice, but seems he had a reason in trying to stop a trample

“My goal was making sure my best friend and these people had space cause panic and chaos was not allowing everyone to get through there, so I pulled in that door,” said Burbano. “It was only about 10 seconds, fifteen seconds it seemed like. I felt like that was enough time … and people make there way through and then there was a gaping hole in the fence that someone busted through and people figured out another route.”

No Eds, your condescending 'you believe what they tell you' is unconvincing.

I acknowledge that we do not know the full story and not everything makes sense yet. You go further, you start from the position of 'everything they tell me is a lie unless you read it from an obscure news source.

Just like Aurora and Sandy Hook you waited the least amount of time to go from the usual condemnation and symapthy to trying to spin this into a government conspiracy. For you every single major gun attack is the same. And you lool for slight anomalies in a fresh story to start questioning everything about it- while uncritically posting conspiracies about it (uncritically is very important to note there). You condescendingly say 'you believe everything', when in fact sensible approaches take on board everything but appreciate the whole picture becomes clearer in time.

Everything isn't a conspiracy fgs.

I have no idea what Aurora is and I posted about sandy hook AGES afterwards. Get you facts straight Les. Tut tut.

And I haven't said I didn't believe this story - yet - my questions were genuine questions and some of them haven't been answer at all.

Just becasue this has hit home for you in a heartfelt and personal way, don't make shit up les, ok?

Edit : just looked up "Aurora" and gather it's the movie theatre shooting?
I have a vague recollection of that and I'm pretty sure I didn't make much of it, it was back in 2012 and I wasn't even on forums much if at all as my daughter was six months old.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Eilzel wrote:People use the loon card as a cop out. He was a homophobic ideologue.

But what are you suggesting eddie?

Hey les,

Theres more to it im afraid.

It just doesn't add up for me.

What isn't adding up for you?
For me it's about the bullets, ammunition and time scale, as well as the fact it has emerged that he wasn't just well-known to the FBI but he was very well-known to the FBI (did they take their eye off him? Why?) and that the first part of the story was that he was in a stand -off with the police (three officers) and yet he still managed to get into the club (with no one following him?!) and start shooting over hundred bullets at top speed, within minutes. Then there's the guy who was holding the door shut (we only know him because he 'came forward' after a lot of witnesses said someone had been holding an exit door to an alley shut: his reason was so flimsy as to be unbelievable.

So yes, I question what doesn't make sense to me.

The exact moment I heard the news i was stunned like everyone and upset: that's when the media throw words at you like "Isis" and "terrorist" and "dead bodies" then later tbey add other stuff  in and some of those words discredit the first lot of words.

As the day wore on and there was mention of only one gun man I thought "no way could one man have done that" I was confused and thought I'd got it all wrong. Which is what the news does to most people: makes them confused because conflicting stories come out, they throw phrases at you and they fire words around like bullets and you scratch your head and later you put it down to "a lot happening and media confusion etc"
But it's not. Not always.


It's always been that way for me. People think I've recently been brainwashed by conspiracy stories - they mean "an alternate option to the official option" (AOTTOO - I just made it up) but that's not so. I've never explained that the news has often, the older I've gotten, made me ask others "But didn't they just say that?" And they'll go "Yes....but....I dunno... I suppose there's alot of confusion there..?" (Or other reasons).

And I think; Yes, that must be it.

But for various reasons, that never seems to be the case because after, when the official stories come out, I am none the wiser and more confused.

Sorry, not Aurora, I meant the more recent shooting last year, Charlston I believe. So I made an error, it wasn't making shit up.

And both that and SH you spun into conspiracies, not that long after the fact. You say you are 'just asking questions', but the way you do it is telling. You throw out massive doubt and call people who were possibly trying to save lives 'liars' and 'selfish' without knowing the whole story. Again you do this while simultaneously posting a suggestion by Donald Trump linking Obama, and yet in that post you DO NOT question the suggestion at all- presumably because you put more stock in that because it confirms your starting position that authority is always behind everything. I could be wrong on you being uncritical of the Trump suggestion, but as yet you give no reason to believe that is the case.

Then as a defense everytime its, 'I'm just asking questions' 'sorry if you believe everything you are told. The former seems true only of what is reported in the mainstream, the latter is just wrong.

Sexy- what do you think then? He is unquestionably homophobic, even if gay himself. Homophobia must have further roots and is certainly a belief usually held among a belief system.

This is not the first shooting in the US. It is news only because so many were killed (125 people have been killed in shootings in the US since Orlando according to something I read on FB). There are a few anomalies I'll grant but as I've said before the news will report literallt anything in order to retain viewers so naturally it is filled with misinformation among the facts.

eddie wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Hey les,

Theres more to it im afraid.

It just doesn't add up for me.

What isn't adding up for you?
For me it's about the bullets, ammunition and time scale, as well as the fact it has emerged that he wasn't just well-known to the FBI but he was very well-known to the FBI (did they take their eye off him? Why?) and that the first part of the  story was that he was in a stand -off with the police (three officers) and yet he still managed to get into the club (with no one following him?!) and start shooting over hundred bullets at top speed, within minutes. Then there's the guy who was holding the door shut (we only know him because he 'came forward' after a lot of witnesses said someone had been holding an exit door to an alley shut: his reason was so flimsy as to be unbelievable.

So yes, I question what doesn't make sense to me.

The exact moment I heard the news i was stunned like everyone and upset: that's when the media throw words at you like "Isis" and "terrorist" and "dead bodies" then later tbey add other stuff  in and some of those words discredit the first lot of words.

As the day wore on and there was mention of only one gun man I thought "no way could one man have done that" I was confused and thought I'd got it all wrong. Which is what the news does to most people: makes them confused because conflicting stories come out, they throw phrases at you and they fire words around like bullets and you scratch your head and later you put it down to "a lot happening and media confusion etc"
But it's not. Not always.


It's always been that way for me. People think I've recently been brainwashed by conspiracy stories - they mean "an alternate option to the official option" (AOTTOO - I just made it up) but that's not so. I've never explained that the news has often, the older I've gotten, made me ask others "But didn't they just say that?" And they'll go "Yes....but....I dunno... I suppose there's alot of confusion there..?" (Or other reasons).

And I think; Yes, that must be it.

But for various reasons, that never seems to be the case because after, when the official stories come out, I am none the wiser and more confused.

You are obviously paying attention eddie...

Tommy, HOW does a lone shooter, who is in a stand-off with three policemen get into a club without being seen/followed by the police??

Whatever way I look at it, it makes no sense.

He gets in to the club whilst the police are already outside - does he lock the door after him? Why can't they follow him? He's already shooting within minutes and yet they stand outside waiting to "speak to him"?

Look it's either terribly terribly bad reporting (by lots of different news people?!) or its lies, or.....?

I don't understand why no one else questions anything???

Les you're too upset and taken this way too personally.

I am asking questions Les, that make no sense to me.
Sorry if that makes me annoying.

And yes, I put Jo lots of trump stuff as I like discussing him. I like to discuss unsolved crimes too.

I don't accept the first thing I'm told.
Quill calls that "a knee-jerk reaction"

Ok, so let's follow your questioning amd try to work out what did happen, since the given story is unbelievable for you.

What do you suppose is the truth?

Why do you think the shooter killed all those people?
Why did he choose a gay bar?
Why did a guy hold the door shut?

From listening and reading about this atrocity I would like to know how he could kill and wound all those people in the time he was there without some one tackling him. Did all those people stand around and wait to be shot?

eddie wrote:Tommy, HOW does a lone shooter, who is in a stand-off with three policemen get into a club without being seen/followed by the police??

Whatever way I look at it, it makes no sense.

He gets in to the club whilst the police are already outside - does he lock the door after him? Why can't they follow him? He's already shooting within minutes and yet they stand outside waiting to "speak to him"?

Look it's either terribly terribly bad reporting (by lots of different news people?!) or its lies, or.....?

I don't understand why no one else questions anything???

who is in a stand-off with three policemen get into a club without being seen/followed by the police??

a) Madeen is dressed for his part in this scenario ...he's just neglected to let the police in on his EVIL plan; see that's what the twisted F'd up sicko's do ...they plan and then they keep it a secret and they carry out their evil plans and then the police react - then the tactical teams are called in = SWAT or FBI or CIA or NSA or all 3 if the specific need applies
b) police engaged the 'unknown' and he was attired in the proper military dress code for body protection - hand gun - military grade AR15 ...the police only had their standard issue 'Kevlar chest protection' and hand guns - shot guns in the trunks of their police cruiser
c) Madeen is standing within easy access to the door of the 'PULSE' night club ...do the police know his 'PLAN' ...
d) once inside do the police know if there are more of his kind waiting inside '?' - how many patrons are still in the club '?' ...so they do as they are trained numerous times - they stand down and allow their commanding officer to call in BACK UP = SWAT tactical team trained for just such extreme hazardous such duty  ...and they have the military grade weapons - the proper attire - the full body protective type clothing that the police do not

Perhaps you don't know what the inside of our night clubs here in America look like or how large an area that the law enforcement had to work around and how many patrons that could be in there - public places have a 'MAX' capacity limitation per square footage for each club size ...the police wouldn't necessarily know that right away.
Here's a couple of examples of what a standard night club with a band might resemble at that time of night - right after the 'last call for alcohol' went out to the patrons.
   

He gets in to the club whilst the police are already outside - does he lock the door after him? Why can't they follow him? He's already shooting within minutes and yet they stand outside waiting to "speak to him"?

Once the SWAT arrives and the negotiators are able to establish a link with this 'UNKNOWN'; since he's texting his wife - in contact with a local media guy - he called 911 and they were able to make a link to the SWAT negotiator. 

Lacking the training and years of chaos that follows the 'reasoning that you'd prefer' ...the number of collateral damage {aka dead patrons - dead trained SWAT & Police officials} they've learned to engage the crazies in some type of dialogue and figure out what it will take to DIFFUSE the situation instead of busting through the doors - guns blazing - running right into a ambush - possible bomb carrying F'n nut job and that's why they {the people trained to do what they do} react the way that they did.

And as I stated ...the law enforcement had 'NO IDEA' if there was already another gunmen inside - how many weapons they might have on them and the POLICE just do not do that.  That's what the SWAT is trained to do - they have the military armament - the military attire - the military grade weapons - the flash bombs - the smoke bombs - the training that all of these type of situations need.

Look it's either terribly terribly bad reporting (by lots of different news people?!) or its lies, or.....?

Just imagine that in this single area that there are in this general area; 4 news papers - 8 radio stations - 5 local TV stations - and all sorts of free lance bloggers and general local lookey-loos that just live to rush towards chaos instead of staying home!  And none of those numbers include the 'Free Lance' humans that are trolling the radio airways just waiting for the 'hot topic' alarms to rush over so they can sell their photo's/videos and quotes to any major news source wanting their by-line for the best image during the activity.  Yes, indeed ...loads of chaos and all while the emergency responders - the fire department - the SWAT - the FBI - the hospital ambulance are trying to evacuate the wounded.

And you want: firm - absolute - answers to your questions RIGHT NOW? 
Obviously to the American's ...we live these incidents of mass shootings to such degree that while we are shocked and ill but know that the story line and ALL OF THOSE GRAPHIC details will be coming ...they just take time as with the investigation to sort out.

It's not always easy to be patient about such horrors ...but this is what we've grown accustomed too ...the story is a work in progress and this 'EVIL MADEEN' had months planning this event, the time it takes to unravel it all won't happen in 'MY' preferred time frame or yours ...it will be a work in progress for weeks. But it will be compiled and retold many times!

nicko wrote:From listening and reading about this atrocity I would like to know how he could kill and wound all those people in the time he was there without some one tackling him.   Did all those people stand around and wait to be shot?

Then you haven't been reading why the number of 'VICTIMS' that were gunned down right inside the door - bled out so quickly - the panic for those that ran into the back bathrooms - the hero's that pulled people off of the stages - the number of humans died/dying from multiple shots as he talked on his phone and walked around the interior ...but  

I'm always curious as to what humans assume they'd do when faced with an 'UNKNOWN' that was coming at them in the dark/loud night club and they were slightly buzzed from drinking and the volume of music thumping off the walls that suddenly changed over to terror/screams and blood every where and the smell of gun shots ...just how many of those panic/fanatic humans would know WTF to do?

SERIOUSLY ...and if in Chump-Trumps insanity ...let's arm a few of those buzzed up humans and let them shoot at Medeem {whose dressed for battle} take him on --- "right between the eyes" ...as Chump-Trump spewed --- Ya, big dumb ass crazy 'Cheeto Jesus' that only happens in the MOVIES!

Eilzel wrote:Ok, so let's follow your questioning amd try to work out what did happen, since the given story is unbelievable for you.

What do you suppose is the truth?

Why do you think the shooter killed all those people?
Why did he choose a gay bar?
Why did a guy hold the door shut?

I don't know?!'
That's for the police isn't it?
The police should investigate that.

That's my point.

Thanks 4ever, for taking the time to actually listen to what I was asking.

Some of what you say is possible but not probable.
If a guy turns up armed and is involved with a stand off with 3 officers - now does he get into the door of the club?
Are you telling me the officers stood and watched him walk in?

eddie wrote:Thanks 4ever, for taking the time to actually listen to what I was asking.

Some of what you say is possible but not probable.
If a guy turns up armed and is involved with a stand off with 3 officers - now does he get into the door of the club?
Are you telling me the officers stood and watched him walk in?

His position and his body armor kept him from being hit and going DOWN when the police were firing upon/at him ...so yes, as I kept posting what he had on --- he came ready and dressed for MILITARY action, the police only have their 'Kevlar chest protection vests' that's it. 

So Makeen pulls open the door to that busy night club and walks in and starts firing ...
I've explained the reasons and rational of why the 'police' don't do tactical work and once that 'UNKNOWN' assailant entered the building where there were a goodly number of humans - the SWAT vehicles were already in route ...local police are not equipped to handle such enter building and take down a 'UNKNOWN(s)' with his military grade weapons on him.


But so many of those same officers put their very lives on the line; ignoring the blood borne protocol of protection and gloves to aide in moving/transporting/rescuing as many of those fleeing wounded as they could --- HIV/AIDS is still a problem that can be transmitted with open blood flow contact.  And none of those police gave it a 2nd thought ...they just went in and helped move people ASAP.

My son was a bouncer at a college club off the campus of Missouri State, and I was absolutely horrified about his method of earning extra money doing that job. 

Those clubs do hire big beefy imposing men to work those bouncer jobs - they prefer someone that has had police/reserve police type training but those bouncers are not armed - not in those private clubs. 
The only section of those clubs that are light up are the bar area's that they mix drinks/make change and the restrooms ...the rest of the areas are lit by 'mood lighting' ...there is recent footage coming out from the 'PULSE' security camera's but the FBI are still processing them and it may take some time.

4EVER2 wrote:

nicko wrote:From listening and reading about this atrocity I would like to know how he could kill and wound all those people in the time he was there without some one tackling him.   Did all those people stand around and wait to be shot?

Then you haven't been reading why the number of 'VICTIMS' that were gunned down right inside the door - bled out so quickly - the panic for those that ran into the back bathrooms - the hero's that pulled people off of the stages - the number of humans died/dying from multiple shots as he talked on his phone and walked around the interior ...but  

I'm always curious as to what humans assume they'd do when faced with an 'UNKNOWN' that was coming at them in the dark/loud night club and they were slightly buzzed from drinking and the volume of music thumping off the walls that suddenly changed over to terror/screams and blood every where and the smell of gun shots ...just how many of those panic/fanatic humans would know WTF to do?

SERIOUSLY ...and if in Chump-Trumps insanity ...let's arm a few of those buzzed up humans and let them shoot at Medeem {whose dressed for battle} take him on --- "right between the eyes" ...as Chump-Trump spewed --- Ya, big dumb ass crazy 'Cheeto Jesus' that only happens in the MOVIES!

Who drinks in a club these days?

eddie wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Hey les,

Theres more to it im afraid.

It just doesn't add up for me.

What isn't adding up for you?
For me it's about the bullets, ammunition and time scale, as well as the fact it has emerged that he wasn't just well-known to the FBI but he was very well-known to the FBI (did they take their eye off him? Why?) and that the first part of the  story was that he was in a stand -off with the police (three officers) and yet he still managed to get into the club (with no one following him?!) and start shooting over hundred bullets at top speed, within minutes. Then there's the guy who was holding the door shut (we only know him because he 'came forward' after a lot of witnesses said someone had been holding an exit door to an alley shut: his reason was so flimsy as to be unbelievable.

So yes, I question what doesn't make sense to me.

The exact moment I heard the news i was stunned like everyone and upset: that's when the media throw words at you like "Isis" and "terrorist" and "dead bodies" then later tbey add other stuff  in and some of those words discredit the first lot of words.

As the day wore on and there was mention of only one gun man I thought "no way could one man have done that" I was confused and thought I'd got it all wrong. Which is what the news does to most people: makes them confused because conflicting stories come out, they throw phrases at you and they fire words around like bullets and you scratch your head and later you put it down to "a lot happening and media confusion etc"
But it's not. Not always.


It's always been that way for me. People think I've recently been brainwashed by conspiracy stories - they mean "an alternate option to the official option" (AOTTOO - I just made it up) but that's not so. I've never explained that the news has often, the older I've gotten, made me ask others "But didn't they just say that?" And they'll go "Yes....but....I dunno... I suppose there's alot of confusion there..?" (Or other reasons).

And I think; Yes, that must be it.

But for various reasons, that never seems to be the case because after, when the official stories come out, I am none the wiser and more confused.

.

Okay so Eddie again questions something she simply cannot comprehend.
That is understandable and the reason is because she feels that clearly one person is not capable I guess of killing of many people in such an attack, even though history is littered with such attacks. One of the most famous lobe terrorist attacks was by Anders Brevik.  I am yet to see her question that terrorist attack.  In the space of one day he planted a bomb that killed 8 people and wounded over 200. He then shot and killed 69 and wounded 110. This was just one person.

So lets get to the first point of what Eddie finds that no way could one man could pull this off. Even as already has happened far more were killed and injured by a Far Right Terrorist. Why Eddie does not understand. Is because she simply does not understand the capability of weapons. The semi-automatic rifle, in testing can fire 700 rounds per minute. In reality, an amateur, can fire off 5 magazines of 30 bullets within 2 minutes, easily, if not more. We are talking about a crowded night club, with 320 people inside. Where he killed and wounded most of the victims within the first couple of minutes. With people so massed together in a club, it would have been like shooting fish in barrel.  You question how someone armed with guns is able to get into a building?

Who is going to stop him? The Police were not already outside, an non-uniformed Police officer was. You see, if you get your facts wrong, this is where all else leads also to being wrong. He saw the gunmen and a gunfire commenced. He was already by the nightclub, so its not difficult for him to have then entered, as I doubt any bouncer is going to challenge someone armed with an assault rifle about their id. Let alone the Officer being outgunned. You see Eddie, it is you creating and inventing things that simple are easily explained, because you do not want to accept the truth and reality of the fact there is religious extremist killers out there.

These assault rifles can penetrate Police body armour. Now imagine what such a weapon can do in such a confined space with many people? No doubt bullets went through some of the victims wounding others. They are that powerful. Its most likely as well some people could have been killed or injured within the crossfire with the Police, but again most were killed or injured within the first couple of minutes when her entered the club. This is backed up by the witnesses.

Which brings me to the next point? So Eddies starting position, is based off a lack of understanding. Which is not her fault.  Which though sadly then leads to questioning other aspects which have no relevance. As they are being based off this lack of understanding. This happens with many conspiracy theories. Where people simply fail to understand something, then their mind takes over and creates issues with aspects that are not issues at all. So its easy to see how so many would have been killed and wounded within just 120 seconds.

So the biggest problem with any view that this is a conspiracy is the320 people in the club itself. 49 were killed and 53 wounded, of which a couple were the Police. At every turn, what Eddie is sadly doing is either ignoring or avoiding the testimonies of the wounded or those uninjured. They all state one lone gunman. Now unless she thinks they are all inn on this. How on earth could you then get 320 people to be all a part of this, as they would have to be? If the view is all those who survived are lying. As that would have to be what is being claimed here. I mean, the only outlandish thing I can think of is. That they found 320 suicidal people and stated, they have a way, some of them will get their wish, but it’s a bit of a lottery and that some will be uninjured and some wounded. You then would have the problem. Of those not being killed, then spilling the beans on the whole operation. Of course it could also be lizard men, or robots or any other ridiculous views as to why.

You see, when you break down the basic facts. It’s very simple to see what happened. If people go off conflicting accounts in the media. Then they simply fail to understand that this happens not only in terrorist attacks, but riots, murders, muggings etc. The reality is and again Eddie is not to blame. She simply does not understand the capability of guns. If she did, I doubt this would then have led to her to question conflicting reports, which are irrelevant. All that is relevant, are the testimonies of those involved in the incident. Not what the media reports itself.




I next turn to the points made about the killer himself. Which again a fine example of the media going off people who knew him, as to why this may have occurred. One a possible accomplise. His second wife, an ethnic Palestinian. Who is going to be investigated by a grand jury.
Now the view from the left to excuse any religious root cause to this. Is that he was a closet gay.

Okay, lets go along with these hypothesis. If he was Gay and if we are led to believ his father kept having a go at him for being gay. Combined from the culture they come from. One of shame and honour. Where the father clearly taught his son homosexuality is a sin and will be punished by their deity. To then possible have a ife also admonish him over being homosexual. Could have led to him being so shamed by the family.

This led to him committing the most extreme murder of homosexuals. The culture of honour could have led to him to forfeit his life, but believeing that by committing this act, he would prove his was not gay. That would be the only real plausible explanation for him them targeting homosexuals, if he was gay himself. Which the root cause is religion and culture. That views homosexuality is criminal. To have been growing up then by parents who reject you because of who you are, could of possible led to this. If of course we go along with this hypoethsis..

I do not buy this at all. The FBI did investigate him. Where he did make loud threats about what he was going to do to homosexuals, Jews etc. The matter was only dropped as he was able to convince the FBI he only said this in anger. Though to me, if someone hates Jews and Homosexuals with that much anger in a liberal nation. Alarm bells should at least start to sound. Easy to say in hindsight. You then have the problem how this is not some minority view either held by Muslim throughout the world.

The sad reality is a majority hold views that are anti-homosexual and Jewish based on what is taught in Mosques, schools, family memebers ect. There is no denying this. Yet the left will look to excuse this problem. Well I once believed two Muslims on here and then how wrong I was to be in error. One of them reacted with such anger to gay marriage. To then where both believe one nation and only one nation should not exist in the world.  They both boke the trust I had in them. Which proved to me, how they place their religion over everything else. So why would 2 British Muslims. One of Afghanistan ethnicity and the other Yemeni/Indian ethnicity. Deny the right for the only Jewish nation in the world to exist? I mena neither have got it in them to commit violence, but each is corrupted by hate against the israeli's, where they use zionism. Wrongly thinking this does not make them racist and xenophobic, because the vast majority of Jews are zionists.

Because of the teachings in their faith. Which makes them believe that the Muslim Arabs. Who are not indigenous to the area. (Who were former conquerors and colonialists, as their genesis is in the Arabian Peninsula). Who do have a right to self-determination and a nation. As they have “rights of long standing prescience”. That the majority are descendants of immigrants themselves to the area over the last 150 years. Where some will though descend back to the time of the colonisation by the Arabs and even former Jews and Christians who converted. Should supersede the Jews who are indigenous to the area.  It shows the extent of indoctrination in the Muslim world, where Muslims are being killed in the tens of thousands each year by Muslim extremists as secondary to their hate of Israel. There is something very fundamentally wrong with that and shows the sham claim on Palestinian deaths in conflicts started by the likes of Hamas and the PLO, is to use their deaths. As a means to delegitimize Israeli’s. What is worse some on the left champion this.

Even their own Quran emphatically states the area belongs to the Jews. They ignore that Palestinians started this conflict and have continued this conflict, because they refuse to except the right of Israel to exist, just as they do not accept the right of Israel to exist. Its easily proven, just by to British Muslims, with no other connection, but their faith that has them also claim the Jews have no right to a nation. These are supposedly two progressive Muslims as well. I believe in a two state solution. So why is it they are more vocal over this conflict. Than they are over Muslims killing Muslims in Syria, Yemen, Iraq civil wars at the moment? Because they have been brought up to look down on Jews and blame Jews.

Through narratives of hate, that seeks to delegitimize Jews. That is all the evidence you need to understand the problem in the Muslim world. One of which we need to back real progressives to tackle the narratives of hate and conspiracies that are fuelling Muslim hatred of the West and Jews. People simply do not understand the ethos of the religious mentality.

I mean imagine that some white Germans and Russians constantly argued that Poland should not exist, (which is what both Stalin and Hitler both agreed on). Where they constantly delegitimized Poland and the Polish people, with the one sole intent that the world would come to view this nation with so much hate, they would rendered it defenceless. Where on the border of Poland, they are surrounded by hostile nations.  Just waiting for this to happen. Just so they could could invade and repeat history. Would the left be championing such a cause, as they do now with those who constantly try to deligitimize Israel and its people. Where they blatantly ignore the aggressors have constantly been the Aarb states? Peace will come when the world stops pandering to Muslim anti-Semitism and hate. The Muslims by this one act championing a two state solutioin, would go miles to improving Muslim relations in the world. It would see Muslims as advocates of peace in a conflict where they are known to deny the existence of a people to a home.

Like I have said, the religion is engineered to react to any challenge and through violence. Which is evident as its geared to use violence through jihad and martyrdom, based off a fear of punishment in the afterlife. That plays on the insecurities of people over death. Its this insecurities combined with a hateful narrative that can so easily corrupt vunerable Muslims. The west once went through the same problems, where the Church tried to prevent progression and of losing its control and power. We are seeing the same in the Islamic world, where after the Arab Spring. It is this more than anything that has made some islamists, again play off a fear invented that the west is out to destroy islam. They are denying any progression and using the most extreme violence, hate promoted to achieve this aim.

Now you would think as happens in many societies, that it is from the younger generations that we have seen where progression happens best. Since the Arab spring. Islamists though have realised that it is the Muslim youth who they must target with indoctrination and narratives of hate based on fear, islamophobia  etc, as a recruiting drive to stem western influence. Its working so well. That we are seeing where many young Muslims were growing up progressive. Instead we are now seeing the opposite in some Muslim majority countries and now even in the west where there is now a society within a society of Muslims. The left simply fail to understand the root cause and again look again at progressive Muslims like Maajid Nawaz. He arguses that its not against islam to be homosexual. But where is the support for him? Instead, he is seen as a white puppet and many Muslims are against him, but why?

See his views on the religion below on homosexuality which is progressive. Maybe someone can tell me what is wrong with that and why many Muslims are not supporting his views about homosexuality in Islam?

Islam and homosexuality wrote:
It is true that many early Muslim scholars condemned homosexuality, and cited scripture to justify their position. But the themes of love and sexuality have been debated and discussed by Muslim theologians and artists for centuries. The word “homosexuality” is not even used in the Quran. In fact, it did not exist in the Arabic language. The modern Muslim conclusion that homosexuality is “unnatural” is therefore not based on anything in scripture.

The Quranic story of the prophet Lot is often invoked by religious-conservative Muslims to denounce homosexuals. But even here, there has been debate. A renowned traditional authority on the Quran, al-Kisa’i al-Kufi, took the view that the story of Lot referred to heterosexual men who raped other men.

The chapter of al-Nur (Quran 24:31) specifically recognizes “men who are not in need of women.” As the context of the passage shows, these are men who are not attracted to women. They may have been gay or asexual, but, by definition, they were not heterosexual men. They are also not judged or condemned anywhere in the Quran. The Prophet’s own example shows that he accepted men living around him who were called “Mukhannath,” seen to be “acting like women.”

This subtle early recognition grew to a point where it was open within the courts of various caliphs in the Muslim Golden Age. Abu Nuwas (756-814) was one of the greatest classical Arab poets. He flourished during the start of the Abbasid era Golden Age (750-1258), based in Baghdad.

As was normal during this period, sexual roles were only imagined in terms of active and passive participants, not as gay or straight sex, and what we would today describe as homosexuality was clear and present in this society.

Biographies of the bohemian Abu Nuwas recount his many sexual relationships with women and teenage boys, especially under the patronage of Caliph al-Amin (809-13), with whom Abu Nuwas shared many experiences. One of Abu Nuwas’s most famous compilations of poetry is known as Ghazal. In it, he celebrates his love for 15-year-old teenagers (khumasi), young men in military training or even those who have started growing facial hair (muaddir). In his “Love in Bloom,” Abu Nuwas describes his bond with a male lover as an “unbreakable rope.”

Many other excellent classical Muslim poets wrote in homoerotic tones, including the Persian Ibn Dawud (868-909), Andalusian Ibn Quzman (1080-1160), and the Arab Sicilian Ibn Hamdis (1053-1133). Lovemaking manuals are also to be found, such as The Perfumed Garden (al-Rawd al-Atir fi Nuzhat al-Khatir) by the Tunisian Shaiykh Muhammad ibn Umar al-Nafwazi, between 1410 and 1434, and The Book of Respective Merits of Maids and Young Men (Kitab Mafaharat al-Jawari wa al-Ghilman) by the prolific al-Jahiz (777-869).

Later on still, Omar Khayyam (d. 1126) set the tone for sexuality in his Quartets (Ruba’iyyat), and Sa’di of Shiraz (1184-1291) graphically discusses his love of young men. Most famous of them all, Jalal al-Din Rumi (1207-1273) passionately writes about his deep affection for the wandering mystic Shams al-Din Tabriz, leading many modern academics to conclude that he must have been deeply in love with him.

But as prudish Victorian values spread from Europe to the Middle East through colonialism, and as 19th century neo-fundamentalist Wahhabism began to take hold in the Arabian peninsula, and as 20th century Islamism gained ground, spreading from Egypt around the globe, censorship, misogyny and homophobia began to spread among Muslims worldwide.

The best example of the way in which Muslim attitudes to sex have gone backwards is found in the Arabian fantasy A Thousand and One Nights. Keen to read a version of this masterpiece in its original Arabic, I once excitedly rushed to purchase a copy from an Egyptian bazaar. Imagine my disbelief when I came home to find “family version” stamped on the inside. The famed court of the late Abbasid Caliph Harun al-Rashid, where this story was originally related, was able to tolerate the racier parts of this classic Arabic tale while parts of modern Egypt apparently could not.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/13/why-does-gay-sex-scare-modern-Muslims-it-didn-t-in-the-golden-age.html

That is what people need to ask themselves as to why they would be against someone progressive and for liberal values. As even again one of the Muslims on here is against him. That is telling in itself. I put this down again to the indoctrination and fear placed around islamophobia on the religion itself that is driving this by Islamists. I want to see progression and for islam to become as other religions into the 21st century, so what you need to ask is why many on the left and Muslims themselves are not backing them. I never changed my views because of Sam Harris. I changed them because of the views I have heard from Muslims and read on here that made me appalled at their stance. I do not blame them. I blame those who have corrupted them.

Sorry if I have side tracked, buts its to show the extent and root cause of the problem, and its not a new problem either, as its happened before where religions look to defend their control. As that is what mainly religions are about.
Control.

Now unlike Quill and co who can only attempt character assassination of me. I am not doing the same to the two resident Muslims, but using and citing their views as evidence to the extent of the problem. The problem with Quill is that he generally gets his facts wrong and why his reasoning makes next to no sense. Where as I use factual reasoning for my points. Though am happy if he wishes to continue to character assassinate me, as that just proves that is all he is capable of when debating me.

So take it or leave my views, but that is the extent of the fear from the left, that they are afraid to speak out in fear of being classed bigots. I say this based on the forum thread, where simply its often the case , they lack an understanding of facts, which is ironic after a couple of them stating this. Like I say, if the facts are wrong from the start point, the reasoning that follows is immediately flawed based off a falsehood.