"...The Orlando LGBT nightclub killer described himself as an “Islamic soldier” out to avenge the US war on the Islamic State, according to his phone conversations with police during the 12 June massacre..."

First topic message reminder :

"...The Orlando LGBT nightclub killer described himself as an “Islamic soldier” out to avenge the US war on the Islamic State, according to his phone conversations with police during the 12 June massacre..."

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

"tyo...a two hear [sic] old?"  Didge, you're drunk.

You see, character assaination time

For those on the forum who do not know what this means.

character assassination
noun
noun: character assassination; plural noun: character assassinations


the malicious and unjustified harming of a person's good reputation.


So why would he do this?

Simply because he wants to deflect, divert and cover up

I do not drink Quill and have not drunk any alcohol for a very long time, the fact you use this as a means to goad and stir is why there is problems on this forum

Look up the definition of "character suicide".

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


You see, character assaination time

For those on the forum who do not know what this means.

character assassination
noun
noun: character assassination; plural noun: character assassinations


the malicious and unjustified harming of a person's good reputation.


So why would he do this?

Simply because he wants to deflect, divert and cover up

I do not drink Quill and have not drunk any alcohol for a very long time, the fact you use this as a means to goad and stir is why there is problems on this forum

Look up the definition of "character suicide".

lol that was funny for you, so you do have a sense of humour

didge wrote:There is no proof of homosexuality, its hearsay and why has the wife fled Quill, after she was going to be questioned by a grand jury and this is the avenue the investigation is takning?

Everything in the news is hearsay, didge.  Hearsay is an 'out of court statement offered to prove the matter being asserted.'  The real question is, is it reliable?

You are confusing the idea of 'proven' with 'evidence'.  You demand evidence that is conclusive, but it isn't conclusive until a judge and jury say it is.  Until then, it's evidence, still open to decision.  That is true of everything you read in the news, because you do not have the capacity (judge and jury) to declare something conclusive. Evidence - all evidence - merely tends to show something. It's never conclusive until a judge and jury pass on it, and issue Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.

That's the limitation we all have to live with, using the news reports as we do.  That's why I say: If you don't like it, drop out.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


No that is your view of Islam
Now unless you can find a tardis and actually prove the Quran and Islamic works are authetic, then you are simply going off views of men and scholars on islam, which as seen differ greatly and have done sinces its genesis.
ISIS are the most closet towards literal islam there is in the Quran and hadiths.
Your point on incompetance has no relevance
You see this is what is wrong with those religious, you go off a myth and claim you follow that myth right, where other Muslims will disagree and none of you can prove your stance.
Its the disprove god exists questions.
In other words you are asking people to disporve something you cannot prove esists

Lol! You are now claiming that ISIS are a true representation of Islam.

Sorry mate - you know that's full on Smelly Bandit.

The closet to the literal view of Muhamad, yes

See deflection time

I am only going by the historical views and deeds claimed by Muhammad

Did he give sex slaves zack

Yes or no?

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:There is no proof of homosexuality, its hearsay and why has the wife fled Quill, after she was going to be questioned by a grand jury and this is the avenue the investigation is takning?

Everything in the news is hearsay, didge.  Hearsay is an 'out of court statement offered to prove the matter being asserted.'  The real question is, is it reliable?

You are confusing the idea of 'proven' with 'evidence'.  You demand evidence that is conclusive, but it isn't conclusive until a judge and jury say it is.  Until then, it's evidence, still open to decision.  That is true of everything you read in the news, because you do not have the capacity (judge and jury) to declare something conclusive.

That's the limitation we all have to live with, using the news reports as we do.  That's why I say: If you don't like it, drop out.

Again youa re talking about me and not the points

Try again

I have given you many views through out and you have either avoided answering them, diverted and character assianted me

Its not going to work

If you cannot answer then bow out

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Transcripts of police phone call with the Muslim terrorist...


All we have to say mair was anything other than mentally I'll is two fake photoshop pictures from sassquatch on the jo cox thread...


Bit of a difference don't you think!?

Funny how you're automatically discounting the fact that the Muslim guy may have a mental illness too.

As for any link to Isis, the CIA director disagrees with you. I wonder who I should believe.



https://youtu.be/fDzAUqphaXU

You are being wilfully blind to his actions and his own admissions in the police telephone recordings...

didge wrote:Again youa re talking about me and not the points

Try again

No, I'm talking about something you brought up: hearsay. You used the term inappropriately. I merely corrected you, so we might move along with the discussion.

Now we're dealing with this obfuscation.

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:Again youa re talking about me and not the points

Try again

No, I'm talking about something you brought up: hearsay.  You used the term inappropriately.  I merely corrected you, so we might move along with the discussion.

Now we're dealing with this obfuscation.  

Again why is the investigation around the wife before a grand jury of which she has now fled?
You do realise he was also a suppoorter of  hezbollah and othert extremist groups
Just because someone makes a claim, does noit mean its real, so where have not the Police stated this was the motive?
Because there is no bases for this claim
If there is, that would be the lead direction of their investigation

Again either go back and counter my points or bow out

This all stems from religious hatred

I seriously believe the whole thing is being downplayed and excused because of upcoming usa election and fear of boosting votes for trump!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:I seriously believe the whole thing is being downplayed and excused because of upcoming usa election and fear of boosting votes for trump!!!

Actually I think you are part right, as trump is also playing it up for support

didge wrote:I have given you many views through out and you have either avoided answering them, diverted and character assianted me

Its not going to work

If you cannot answer then bow out

Oh, now it's not questions...it's views. Didge you're on the defensive, and ducking. It's not working; I own you.

But ironically, you are complimenting me. You are giving me a mirror-image of my argument to you: if you can't set your hook into an idea, stop fishing. Go home.

You don't have any evidence. You just want to talk a blue streak, hoping to lose us in some clouds. The news this morning suggests that this is all about a gay love affair, gone afoul because someone has AIDS.

It has nothing to do with Islam. Islam may be in the background, because like Christianity, it's believers tend to be homophobic. But that has nothing to do with doctrine. On that basis, your argument is a bust.

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:I have given you many views through out and you have either avoided answering them, diverted and character assianted me

Its not going to work

If you cannot answer then bow out

Oh, now it's not questions...it's views.  Didge you're on the defensive, and ducking.  It's not working; I own you.

But ironically, you are complimenting me.  You are giving me a mirror-image of my argument to you: if you can't set your hook into an idea, stop fishing.  Go home.

You don't have any evidence.  You just want to talk a blue streak, hoping to lose us in some clouds.  The news this morning suggests that this is all about a gay love affair, gone afoul because someone has AIDS.

It has nothing to do with Islam.  Islam may be in the background, because like Christianity, it's believers tend to be homophobic.  But that has nothing to do with doctrine.  On that basis, your argument is a bust.

Still talking about me

The news can suggest many things, its what the Police are investigating what matters

Try again or bow out

last chance

Is trump 'playing it up'...or just telling the truth...!?


Isnt it wrong for others to be trying to hide the truth from the public...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:I seriously believe the whole thing is being downplayed and excused because of upcoming usa election and fear of boosting votes for trump!!!

Nobody takes Trump seriously enough to be a threat. He can't even raise funds. He has $1.3-million banked as of May 31st, and nothing coming in. HRC is spending about $30-million a month, with $42-million presently in the bank.

Trump can't answer. What's to boost???

Tommy Monk wrote:Is trump 'playing it up'...or just telling the truth...!?


Isnt it wrong for others to be trying to hide the truth from the public...!?

No he is playing it up as you cannot hold the whole Muslim community accounatble for the actions of islamists.
And we should be supporting the Muslims who are progressive and secularist.
Trump wants to demonize all Muslims and is as bad as the left when they demonize all israeli's and Jews.
You deal with the islamist problem from within by back the progressive Muslims, not ostracizing all Muslims.

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

I can call myself Ironman. It doesn't make me one of the Avengers.

I'd be careful playing this card Tommy. Jo Cox's killer saw himself as some sort of white soldier.

Transcripts of police phone call with the Muslim terrorist...

Are inconclusive.  He can't even make up his mind to which he is swearing allegiance...ISIS or the man.  Given his homosexual tendencies, this might be important.

I think you are pointing up his confusion, which would lend credence to the thesis that he was mad.

The police have said that he didn't have an homosexual tendencies now....so that wasn't true either. Apparently.

How can you claim trump is 'playing it up' if he is just telling the truth about this, against (what appears to be) a deliberate stream of media and authority led misinformation about this...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:
How can you claim trump is 'playing it up' if he is just telling the truth about this, against (what appears to be) a deliberate stream of media and authority led misinformation about this...!?

Is he telling the truth or pandering off fear, just as religious people do.
Yes we need to start talking about problems in islam, that is a fact, but not classing all to be feared of.
We need to look rightly and class Trump politics in the same light as islamist politics, as they are both neo conservative religious political groups. You will always have those on either side play off this as Trump has as well, there is no denying this and you would have to have a screw loose to want Trump in, when his views are more in tune with islamism,. than anything else, just a different religious book they follow.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Are inconclusive.  He can't even make up his mind to which he is swearing allegiance...ISIS or the man.  Given his homosexual tendencies, this might be important.

I think you are pointing up his confusion, which would lend credence to the thesis that he was mad.

The police have said that he didn't have an homosexual tendencies now....so that wasn't true either. Apparently.

The Orlando police have their own sins to answer for. Why did it take them 5-hours? Were they unprepared?

Given the news that has broken this morning, Mateen was distraught over being exposed to AIDS from gay lovers:

Omar Mateen’s ‘gay lover’ claims nightclub massacre was revenge attack after man he had threesome with revealed he had AIDS

A MAN claiming to be the lover of Orlando gunman Omar Mateen said the massacre was revenge after he found out he had slept with an HIV-positive man.

The Latino man, named only as Miguel, says that Mateen was furious when he realised a man he had a threesome with carried the disease.

According to the lover, the experience turned the gunman against Puerto Ricans and he felt the need for revenge.

The Hispanic man, who met up with Mateen about 20 times, came forward to Univision to tell his side of the story.

He said: “The thing that makes me want to tell the truth is that he didn’t do it for terrorism.

“In my opinion he did it for revenge.”

The furious gunman took an HIV test, which came up negative, but thought that too little time had passed for the test to be accurate.

The pair met up regularly at a hotel in Orlando, Florida.

Miguel described the future murderer as “adorable”, “sweet” and that he “loved to be cuddled… loved to be embraced.”

The channel has reported that police have CCTV tapes from the hotel.

But to start with, Miguel said that Mateen did not tell him that he had a wife and child.

The Hispanic man found out after he tried to take a selfie with Mateen in bed and the gunman got angry.

Apologising, Mateen admitted that his wife knew about his gay rendezvous.

Miguel said that Mateen described Islam as “a beautiful religion in which everyone is welcome - gays, trans, bisexuals, heteros, everyone.”

But the gunman, who Miguel believed to be disgusted with his own sexuality, felt rejected and isolated by the Hispanic community.

Miguel said: “He hated Puerto Rican gays for all the bad stuff they did.”

“Pulse is where he felt used, rejected.

“He was always there and he was there because he liked Latinos and he was attracted to dark skin. But sadly, from what he told me, he felt used.

“He felt anger, a lot of anger towards Puerto Ricans.”

Miguel has already been interviewed by the FBI and is being interrogated by federal forces.

The man’s identity was hidden with a prosthetic mask and his voice was altered.

That is twice you have posted that without a link, but I do not accuse as you do of plagerism, just interested to see the source

Again the media will have many views on this but again this is not the avenue the Police are investigating.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Are inconclusive.  He can't even make up his mind to which he is swearing allegiance...ISIS or the man.  Given his homosexual tendencies, this might be important.

I think you are pointing up his confusion, which would lend credence to the thesis that he was mad.

The police have said that he didn't have an homosexual tendencies now....so that wasn't true either. Apparently.

Also... to answer the other part of quills waffle... he declared himself as "an islamic soldier"... he declared he was acting on behalf of isis... he declared allegiance to "Abu Bakr al Baghdadi of the Islamic State"...



Here's some more of what he said...


Omar Mateen swore allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi at least twice during a 911 call the night of his attack on a LGBT nightclub in Orlando, Florida.

Mateen made or received several calls during the massacre at Pulse nightclub, where he killed 49 people and wounded dozens more on June 12.

The Department of Justice and the FBI released a transcript of one of his 911 calls earlier today. The call lasted “approximately 50 seconds” and was made at 2:35 a.m.

“My name is [sic] I pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi of the Islamic State,” Mateen told the 911 operator.

The operator then asked: “Ok, What’s your name?”

“I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi may God protect him [Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State,” Mateen responded.

Before the DOJ and FBI jointly released the transcript, the FBI published its own redacted version. However, the FBI omitted any mention of Baghdadi and the Islamic State in its text. This move proved to be controversial, leading the DOJ and FBI to publish a more complete transcript later in the day.

The screen shot below shows the transcript as it was initially presented to the public.

Excerpts from Omar Mateen's 911 Call

Mateen was quite obviously referring to Baghdadi and the Islamic State. In fact, US officials acknowledged Mateen’s stated allegiance the day after his heinous assault.

At a press briefing on June 13, for instance, FBI Director James Comey indicated that Mateen had made his loyalty to Baghdadi known. During his “calls” the night of the attack, Comey told reporters, Mateen “said he was doing this for the leader of ISIL, who he named and pledged loyalty to.” ISIL (or the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) is the US government’s preferred acronym for the Islamic State.

President Obama also mentioned Mateen’s loyalty oath during a statement on June 14. The president said Mateen was inspired by propaganda produced by the Islamic State and that he offered his fealty to it.

Mateen “took in extremist information and propaganda over the Internet,” according to Obama. The president then cited the Islamic State’s repeated calls to attack in the West, explaining that Mateen “absorbed some of that and during his killing spree…pledged allegiance to ISIL.”

Therefore, the FBI’s initial redactions were pointless, regardless of the bureau’s motivations for omitting key words. Both Comey and Obama already explained to the public that Mateen had sworn allegiance to Baghdadi and the Islamic State.

Other references to the Islamic State

According to a timeline released by the FBI, Mateen made several other references to the Islamic State during three calls with the Orlando Police Department’s Crisis Negotiation Team. The calls began at 2:48 a.m. on June 12, just 13 minutes after the 911 call mentioned above. The last one ended just before 3:30 in the morning.

“In these calls, the shooter, who identified himself as an Islamic soldier, told the crisis negotiator that he was the person who pledged his allegiance to [omitted], and told the negotiator to tell America to stop bombing Syria and Iraq and that is why he was ‘out here right now,'” the FBI’s timeline reads.

Iraq and Syria are home to the Islamic State’s so-called “caliphate.”

Mateen’s claim to be an “Islamic soldier” was likely a reference to the Islamic State too. Indeed, one of the group’s propaganda arms called Mateen a “soldier of the caliphate” within days of the attack. However, this does not mean that Mateen had any operational ties to the organization. The Islamic State has used the word “soldier” to describe both formal members and individual jihadists who act in its name.

It also appears from the FBI’s summary that Mateen mentioned his allegiance to Baghdadi during his calls with the crisis negotiation team. (The timeline omitted Baghdadi’s name after the words “pledged his allegiance to.”)




Also...


But Mateen may have also professed his loyalty to Baghdadi on Facebook.

Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican who chairs the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, sent a letter to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg on June 15. In the letter, which was first reported by Fox News, Senator Johnson referred to several Facebook posts that have been attributed to Mateen.

“America and Russia stop bombing the Islamic state..I pledge my alliance [sic] to abu bakr al Baghdadi..may Allah accept me,” Mateen apparently wrote in one post on June 12, either during or shortly before the attack.

Another Facebook post purportedly reads: “The real Muslims will never accept the filthy ways of the west“ and “You kill innocent women and children by doing us airstrikes..now taste the Islamic state vengeance.” In what is believed to be his final post, Mateen threatened: “In the next few days you will see attacks from the Islamic state in the usa.”

According to Senator Johnson, his staff also “learned that in May 2016, Mateen used Facebook to search for information on the San Bernardino terrorists,” who acted in the Islamic State’s name. And, on June 4, Mateen entered the search words “Baghdadi Speech” on Facebook.

Therefore, the available evidence indicates that Mateen mentioned his loyalty to Baghdadi at least four times the night of the attack. Mateen pledged bay’ah (oath of allegiance) to Baghdadi twice during a 911 call, mentioned it at least once during his conversations with the crisis negotiation team, and also swore bay’ah in a post on Facebook.



http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2016/06/orlando-terrorist-swore-allegiance-to-islamic-states-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi.php

By Mohammed A. Malik June 20
Mohammed A. Malik is an entrepreneur in Port St. Lucie, Florida.


Donald Trump believes American Muslims are hiding something. “They know what’s going on. They know that [Omar Mateen] was bad,” he said after the Orlando massacre. “They have to cooperate with law enforcement and turn in the people who they know are bad. … But you know what? They didn’t turn them in. And you know what? We had death and destruction.”

This is a common idea in the United States. It’s also a lie. First, Muslims like me can’t see into the hearts of other worshipers. (Do you know the hidden depths of everyone in your community?) Second, Trump is wrong that we don’t speak up when we’re able.

I know this firsthand: I was the one who told the FBI about Omar Mateen.
I met Omar for the first time in 2006 at an iftar meal at my brother-in-law’s house. As the women, including his mother and sisters, chatted in the living room, I sat with the men on the patio and got to know him and his father. Omar broke his Ramadan fast with a protein shake. He was quiet — then and always — and let his dad do the talking.

I’d seen them before at the oldest mosque in the area, the Islamic Center of Fort Pierce. We have a lot of immigrants in our community. They grew up in other countries, often with different sensibilities. A few don’t understand American culture, and they struggle to connect with their American-born or American-raised kids.

I came here from Pakistan in 1979 when I was 6 years old, grew up in Queens (like Omar) and Fort Lauderdale, went through the American education system, and assimilated well. So I was able to make better inroads with young people in our community, including that introverted teenager I met at the iftar. I tried to stay in touch with the younger generation, acting as a mentor when I could.

I saw Omar from time to time over the next decade, and we developed a relationship because most of the other Muslim kids in his age group went elsewhere for college, and he stayed behind. We mostly spoke over the phone or texted with one another a half-dozen times per year. We talked about the lack of social programs at the mosque, especially for teens and young adults like him. I often played pranks on him. Once, around 2009, I attached LED lights to the tires of his car, so when he drove the wheels glowed neon. He laughed when he figured it out a few days later.

Soon after Omar married and moved to his own home, he began to come to the mosque more often. Then he went on a religious trip to Saudi Arabia. There was nothing to indicate that he had a dark side, even when he and his first wife divorced.

But as news reports this week have made clear, Omar did have a dark outlook on life. Partly, he was upset at what he saw as racism in the United States – against Muslims and others. When he worked as a security guard at the St. Lucie County Courthouse, he told me visitors often made nasty or bigoted remarks to him about Islam. He overheard people saying ugly things about African Americans, too. Since Sept. 11, I’ve thought the only way to answer Islamophobia was to be polite and kind; the best way to counter all the negativity people were seeing on TV about Islam was by showing them the opposite. I urged Omar to volunteer and help people in need – Muslim or otherwise (charity is a pillar of Islam). He agreed, but was always very worked up about this injustice.

Then, during the summer of 2014, something traumatic happened for our community. A boy from our local mosque, Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha, was 22 when he became the first American-born suicide bomber, driving a truck full of explosives into a government office in Syria. He’d traveled there and joined a group affiliated with al-Qaeda, the previous year. We had all known Moner; he was jovial and easygoing, the opposite of Omar. According to a posthumous video released that summer, he had clearly self-radicalized – and had also done so by listening to the lectures of Anwar al-Awlaki, the charismatic Yemen-based imam who helped radicalize several Muslims, including the Fort Hood shooter. Everyone in the area was shocked and upset. We hate violence and were horrified that one of our number could have killed so many. (After an earlier training mission to Syria, he’d tried to recruit a few Florida friends to the cause. They told the FBI about him.)

Immediately after Moner’s attack, news reports said that American officials didn’t know anything about him; I read that they were looking for people to give them some background. So I called the FBI and offered to tell investigators a bit about the young man. It wasn’t much – we hadn’t been close – but I’m an American Muslim, and I wanted to do my part. I didn’t want another act like that to happen. I didn’t want more innocent people to die. Agents asked me if there were any other local kids who might resort to violence in the name of Islam. No names sprang to mind.

After my talk with the FBI, I spoke to people in the Islamic community, including Omar, about Moner’s attack. I wondered how he could have radicalized. Both Omar and I attended the same mosque as Moner, and the imam never taught hate or radicalism. That’s when Omar told me he had been watching videos of Awlaki, too, which immediately raised red flags for me. He told me the videos were very powerful.

After speaking with Omar, I contacted the FBI again to let them know that Omar had been watching Awlaki’s tapes. He hadn’t committed any acts of violence and wasn’t planning any, as far as I knew. And I thought he probably wouldn’t, because he didn’t fit the profile: He already had a second wife and a son. But it was something agents should keep their eyes on. I never heard from them about Omar again, but apparently they did their job: They looked into him and, finding nothing to go on, they closed the file.

Omar and I continued to have infrequent conversations over the next few years. I last saw him at a dinner at his father’s house in January. We talked about the presidential election and debated our views of the candidates that were running – he liked Hillary Clinton and I liked Bernie Sanders. This banter continued through texts and phone calls for several months. My last conversation with Omar was by phone in mid-May. He called me while he was at the beach with his son to tell me about a vacation he’d taken with his father to Orlando the previous weekend. He’d been impressed by the local mosque.

What happened next is well-known. We’re still in shock. We’re totally against what he did, and we feel the deepest sadness for the victims and their families. If you don’t agree with someone, you don’t have the right to kill them. We are taught to be kind to all of God’s creation. Islam is very strict about killing: Even in war – to say nothing of peace – you cannot harm women, children, the elderly, the sick, clergymen, or even plants. You can’t mutilate dead bodies. You can’t destroy buildings, especially churches or temples. You can’t force anyone to accept Islam. “If anyone slew one person, it would be as if he killed the whole of humanity,” says the Koran.

I had told the FBI about Omar because my community, and Muslims generally, have nothing to hide. I love this country, like most Muslims that I know. I don’t agree with every government policy (I think there’s too much money in politics, for instance), but I’m proud to be an American. I vote. I volunteer. I teach my children to treat all people kindly. Our families came here because it is full of opportunity – a place where getting a job is about what you know, not who you know. It’s a better country to raise children than someplace where the electricity is out for 18 hours a day, where politicians are totally corrupt, or where the leader is a dictator.

But there’s so much suspicion of Islam here. The local paper published an unsigned editorial called “Leave our peaceful Muslim neighbors alone,” and the comments were full of hateful lies – that the Boston bombers had visited the area, that the Sept. 11 bombers came from here, that we were a hotbed of violent ideology. None of this is true. Donald Trump didn’t create these attitudes, but he plays on them and amplifies them.

I am not the first American Muslim to report on someone; people who do that simply don’t like to announce themselves in to the media. For my part, I’m not looking for personal accolades. I’m just tired of negative rhetoric and ignorant comments about my faith. Trump’s assertions about our community – that we have the ability to help our country but have simply declined to do so – are tragic, ugly and wrong.

[Editor’s note: A federal law enforcement official confirmed the author’s cooperation to The Washington Post.]



https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/06/20/i-reported-omar-mateen-to-the-fbi-trump-is-wrong-that-Muslims-dont-do-our-part/

Didge wrote:That is twice you have posted that without a link, but I do not accuse as you do of plagerism, just interested to see the source

No, there was a link on the other one. I didn't seen the need for it again. But, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pulse-shooter-omar-mateen-revenge-alleged-ex-lover-article-1.2682856

Mateen's friend is quite specific:

Daily News wrote:Omar Mateen, the deranged Muslim shooter behind the massacre, held a grudge against Latino men he met at the popular gay club because he felt used by them, the man told the network. “I’ve cried like you have no idea. But the thing that makes me want to tell the truth is that he didn’t do it for terrorism,” the man told Univision Noticias anchor Maria Elena Salinas in an exclusive interview on Tuesday. “In my opinion he did it for revenge.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pulse-shooter-omar-mateen-revenge-alleged-ex-lover-article-1.2682856

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:That is twice you have posted that without a link, but I do not accuse as you do of plagerism, just interested to see the source

No, there was a link on the other one.  I didn't seen the need for it again.  But, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pulse-shooter-omar-mateen-revenge-alleged-ex-lover-article-1.2682856

So its like i said something not confirmed by the FBI

Is it?

So unless the FBI confirm he was gay, which i think is a massive red herring and was just part of his ploy and plot to get to know the community in order to carry out the attack.
You do relaise its very conceivable this man was fooled into thinking he was gay.
From one of his friends who seems very open about his views, its very much the fact he grew up in a very religious atmosphere and was indoctrinated with extreme Islam online
So we are back to religion again

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No, there was a link on the other one.  I didn't seen the need for it again.  But, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pulse-shooter-omar-mateen-revenge-alleged-ex-lover-article-1.2682856

So its like i said something not confirmed by the FBI

Is it?

So unless the FBI confirm he was gay, which i think is a massive red herring and was just part of his ploy and plot to get to know the community in order to carry out the attack.
You do relaise its very conceivable this man was fooled into thinking he was gay.
From one of his friends who seems very open about his views, its very much the fact he grew up in a very religious atmosphere and was indoctrinated with extreme Islam online
So we are back to religion again

The guy is not with the FBI. He was one of Mateen's gay lovers. As such, I'd say he was much closer to the source than the FBI.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


So its like i said something not confirmed by the FBI

Is it?

So unless the FBI confirm he was gay, which i think is a massive red herring and was just part of his ploy and plot to get to know the community in order to carry out the attack.
You do relaise its very conceivable this man was fooled into thinking he was gay.
From one of his friends who seems very open about his views, its very much the fact he grew up in a very religious atmosphere and was indoctrinated with extreme Islam online
So we are back to religion again

The guy is not with the FBI.  He was one of Mateen's gay lovers.  As such, I'd say he was much closer to the source than the FBI.

No see my previous article I posted by his friend

The claim to be a lover is hearsy and very much unlikely as one of his own Muslim friends has stated he reported him to the FBI.
Why would he do that if not concerned he had been radicvalized?
See previous article

didge wrote:So we are back to religion again

Mateen's gay lover, Miguel, did not say anything about religion. Puerto Ricans tend to be Catholic, so the lovers probably did not have religious discussions.

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:So we are back to religion again

Mateen's gay lover, Miguel, did not say anything about religion.  Puerto Ricans tend to be Catholic, so the lovers probably did not have religious discussions.

Then you are being blind as per usual

Why would this person lie here, being a Muslim and his childhood friend?




By Mohammed A. Malik June 20
Mohammed A. Malik is an entrepreneur in Port St. Lucie, Florida.


Donald Trump believes American Muslims are hiding something. “They know what’s going on. They know that [Omar Mateen] was bad,” he said after the Orlando massacre. “They have to cooperate with law enforcement and turn in the people who they know are bad. … But you know what? They didn’t turn them in. And you know what? We had death and destruction.”

This is a common idea in the United States. It’s also a lie. First, Muslims like me can’t see into the hearts of other worshipers. (Do you know the hidden depths of everyone in your community?) Second, Trump is wrong that we don’t speak up when we’re able.

I know this firsthand: I was the one who told the FBI about Omar Mateen.
I met Omar for the first time in 2006 at an iftar meal at my brother-in-law’s house. As the women, including his mother and sisters, chatted in the living room, I sat with the men on the patio and got to know him and his father. Omar broke his Ramadan fast with a protein shake. He was quiet — then and always — and let his dad do the talking.

I’d seen them before at the oldest mosque in the area, the Islamic Center of Fort Pierce. We have a lot of immigrants in our community. They grew up in other countries, often with different sensibilities. A few don’t understand American culture, and they struggle to connect with their American-born or American-raised kids.

I came here from Pakistan in 1979 when I was 6 years old, grew up in Queens (like Omar) and Fort Lauderdale, went through the American education system, and assimilated well. So I was able to make better inroads with young people in our community, including that introverted teenager I met at the iftar. I tried to stay in touch with the younger generation, acting as a mentor when I could.

I saw Omar from time to time over the next decade, and we developed a relationship because most of the other Muslim kids in his age group went elsewhere for college, and he stayed behind. We mostly spoke over the phone or texted with one another a half-dozen times per year. We talked about the lack of social programs at the mosque, especially for teens and young adults like him. I often played pranks on him. Once, around 2009, I attached LED lights to the tires of his car, so when he drove the wheels glowed neon. He laughed when he figured it out a few days later.

Soon after Omar married and moved to his own home, he began to come to the mosque more often. Then he went on a religious trip to Saudi Arabia. There was nothing to indicate that he had a dark side, even when he and his first wife divorced.

But as news reports this week have made clear, Omar did have a dark outlook on life. Partly, he was upset at what he saw as racism in the United States – against Muslims and others. When he worked as a security guard at the St. Lucie County Courthouse, he told me visitors often made nasty or bigoted remarks to him about Islam. He overheard people saying ugly things about African Americans, too. Since Sept. 11, I’ve thought the only way to answer Islamophobia was to be polite and kind; the best way to counter all the negativity people were seeing on TV about Islam was by showing them the opposite. I urged Omar to volunteer and help people in need – Muslim or otherwise (charity is a pillar of Islam). He agreed, but was always very worked up about this injustice.

Then, during the summer of 2014, something traumatic happened for our community. A boy from our local mosque, Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha, was 22 when he became the first American-born suicide bomber, driving a truck full of explosives into a government office in Syria. He’d traveled there and joined a group affiliated with al-Qaeda, the previous year. We had all known Moner; he was jovial and easygoing, the opposite of Omar. According to a posthumous video released that summer, he had clearly self-radicalized – and had also done so by listening to the lectures of Anwar al-Awlaki, the charismatic Yemen-based imam who helped radicalize several Muslims, including the Fort Hood shooter. Everyone in the area was shocked and upset. We hate violence and were horrified that one of our number could have killed so many. (After an earlier training mission to Syria, he’d tried to recruit a few Florida friends to the cause. They told the FBI about him.)

Immediately after Moner’s attack, news reports said that American officials didn’t know anything about him; I read that they were looking for people to give them some background. So I called the FBI and offered to tell investigators a bit about the young man. It wasn’t much – we hadn’t been close – but I’m an American Muslim, and I wanted to do my part. I didn’t want another act like that to happen. I didn’t want more innocent people to die. Agents asked me if there were any other local kids who might resort to violence in the name of Islam. No names sprang to mind.

After my talk with the FBI, I spoke to people in the Islamic community, including Omar, about Moner’s attack. I wondered how he could have radicalized. Both Omar and I attended the same mosque as Moner, and the imam never taught hate or radicalism. That’s when Omar told me he had been watching videos of Awlaki, too, which immediately raised red flags for me. He told me the videos were very powerful.

After speaking with Omar, I contacted the FBI again to let them know that Omar had been watching Awlaki’s tapes. He hadn’t committed any acts of violence and wasn’t planning any, as far as I knew. And I thought he probably wouldn’t, because he didn’t fit the profile: He already had a second wife and a son. But it was something agents should keep their eyes on. I never heard from them about Omar again, but apparently they did their job: They looked into him and, finding nothing to go on, they closed the file.

Omar and I continued to have infrequent conversations over the next few years. I last saw him at a dinner at his father’s house in January. We talked about the presidential election and debated our views of the candidates that were running – he liked Hillary Clinton and I liked Bernie Sanders. This banter continued through texts and phone calls for several months. My last conversation with Omar was by phone in mid-May. He called me while he was at the beach with his son to tell me about a vacation he’d taken with his father to Orlando the previous weekend. He’d been impressed by the local mosque.

What happened next is well-known. We’re still in shock. We’re totally against what he did, and we feel the deepest sadness for the victims and their families. If you don’t agree with someone, you don’t have the right to kill them. We are taught to be kind to all of God’s creation. Islam is very strict about killing: Even in war – to say nothing of peace – you cannot harm women, children, the elderly, the sick, clergymen, or even plants. You can’t mutilate dead bodies. You can’t destroy buildings, especially churches or temples. You can’t force anyone to accept Islam. “If anyone slew one person, it would be as if he killed the whole of humanity,” says the Koran.

I had told the FBI about Omar because my community, and Muslims generally, have nothing to hide. I love this country, like most Muslims that I know. I don’t agree with every government policy (I think there’s too much money in politics, for instance), but I’m proud to be an American. I vote. I volunteer. I teach my children to treat all people kindly. Our families came here because it is full of opportunity – a place where getting a job is about what you know, not who you know. It’s a better country to raise children than someplace where the electricity is out for 18 hours a day, where politicians are totally corrupt, or where the leader is a dictator.

But there’s so much suspicion of Islam here. The local paper published an unsigned editorial called “Leave our peaceful Muslim neighbors alone,” and the comments were full of hateful lies – that the Boston bombers had visited the area, that the Sept. 11 bombers came from here, that we were a hotbed of violent ideology. None of this is true. Donald Trump didn’t create these attitudes, but he plays on them and amplifies them.

I am not the first American Muslim to report on someone; people who do that simply don’t like to announce themselves in to the media. For my part, I’m not looking for personal accolades. I’m just tired of negative rhetoric and ignorant comments about my faith. Trump’s assertions about our community – that we have the ability to help our country but have simply declined to do so – are tragic, ugly and wrong.

[Editor’s note: A federal law enforcement official confirmed the author’s cooperation to The Washington Post.]



https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/06/20/i-reported-omar-mateen-to-the-fbi-trump-is-wrong-that-Muslims-dont-do-our-part/

didge wrote:The claim to be a lover is hearsy and very much unlikely as one of his own Muslim friends has stated he reported him to the FBI.

All news is hearsay. The question is, is it reliable?

I would tend to believe his gay lover over "Muslim friends". He probably didn't have much in common with Muslims if he was gay, so they would not know him that well.

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:The claim to be a lover is hearsy and very much unlikely as one of his own Muslim friends has stated he reported him to the FBI.

All news is hearsay.  The question is, is it reliable?

I would tend to believe his gay lover over "Muslim friends".  He probably didn't have much in common with Muslims if he was gay, so they would not know him that well.

The above has been verified by the FBI
The FBI has not verified he is gay
So you tell me, why would the Muslim lie abaout his extremism and radicalisation?
So you want to place homosexuality as the cause and not radical islam

I am sure many homosexuals will be horriied at your apologism and trying to lay blame on this which makes zero sense on being angry at a gay community, as that makes zero sense if he had a lover, it then conflicts logically

didge wrote:Then you are being blind as per usual

Why would this person lie here, being a Muslim and his childhood friend?

I don't think he lied.  He was quite specific when he said:

Mohammad Malik wrote:Omar and I continued to have infrequent conversations over the next few years.

He was not a life-long friend.  He only met Mateen in 2006

Mohammad Malik wrote:I met Omar for the first time in 2006 at an iftar meal at my brother-in-law’s house.

It sounds like your Mr. Malik had only a nodding acquaintance with Mateen.  Family and religious occasions, and such.

I think we've gotten much closer to the source by speaking with Mateen's gay lover.

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:Then you are being blind as per usual

Why would this person lie here, being a Muslim and his childhood friend?

I don't think he lied.  He was quite specific when he said:

Mohammad Malik wrote:Omar and I continued to have infrequent conversations over the next few years.

He was not a life-long friend.  He only met Mateen in 2006

Mohammad Malik wrote:I met Omar for the first time in 2006 at an iftar meal at my brother-in-law’s house.

It sounds like your Mr. Malik had only a nodding acquaintance with Mateen.  Family and religious occasions, and such.

I think we've gotten much closer to the source by speaking with Mateen's gay lover.

And yet you are ignoring the FBI has not stated he is gay and that they havce verified my witness, which you keep ignoring.
Its not just him but others in the Muslim community can verify his extreme views, as did his first ex-wife.
Not only that he never stated to the Police in thre seige he was angered at the gay community shunning him
He stated his alliegence was to ISIS. Which further speels the death of your views
So all roads lead to ISIS and islam
You can keep going off some hearsay account, where as i will stick to one, where he as a Muslim is admitting he was radicalized

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

All news is hearsay.  The question is, is it reliable?

I would tend to believe his gay lover over "Muslim friends".  He probably didn't have much in common with Muslims if he was gay, so they would not know him that well.

The above has been verified by the FBI
The FBI has not verified he is gay
So you tell me, why would the Muslim lie abaout his extremism and radicalisation?

The FBI is an observer just like the rest of us. Besides, there are reasons why they wouldn't fully disclose everything to you. They are an investigatory agency, not your gossip mate.

didge wrote:So you want to place homosexuality as the cause and not radical islam

I am sure many homosexuals will be horriied at your apologism and trying to lay blame on this which makes zero sense on being angry at a gay community, as that makes zero sense if he had a lover, it then conflicts logically

It's not my choice, didge. It is what it is. This is the kind of confusion you come up with when you don't follow the discussion. We are trying to ferret out the reasons for his activities, not our "wants". Your narcissistic perspective sees truth only as what you "want".

That said, the association with evil is yours, not mine. I think many homosexuals would not be horrified to learn that, as with any community, their are bad guys in the mix. Pulse clientele is a bar culture, after all. They went there because it was a gay bar. He targeted the place because it was a gay bar. It's not that homosexuals are necessarily evil; it's that his experience led him to evil. Homosexuals were the victims, after all.

Original Quill wrote:

The FBI is an observer just like the rest of us.  Besides, there are reasons why they wouldn't fully disclose everything to you.  They are an investigatory agency, not your gossip mate. It's not my choice, didge.  It is what it is.  This is the kind of confusion you come up with when you don't follow the discussion.  We are trying to ferret out the reasons for his activities, not our "wants".  Your narcissistic perspective sees truth only as what you "want".

That said, the association with evil is yours, not mine.  I think many homosexuals would not be horrified to learn that, as with any community, their are bad guys in the mix.  Pulse clientele is a bar culture, after all.  They went there because it was a gay bar.  He targeted the place because it was a gay bar.  It's not that homosexuals are necessarily evil; it's that his experience led him to evil.  Homosexuals were the victims, after all.

So the FBI investigating this and the leading people in the know are not experts to you and never solve crimes I guess but to be discarded and to take the unverified view of some nobody?
Can we have that as your finest example of how criminology is studied please?

It is your choice that you a e seeking to deflect blame on now the homosexual comminity for the justification of this attack, based on an illogical view that he was shunned, even though to you, he had gay lovers. If he had gay lovers, then how is he being shunned? You see that makes zero sense and the only sense would be around some caste honour issue within the family. Now as seen he did grow up in a very religious community and if gay the only reason would be due to shame as to why he would have murdered so many homosexuaals to make an extreme point to his family, based on their views of homosexuality in Islam. You have heard of the caste system and honour killings and shame?

Again thopugh the Police are not going down this avenue of questioning as its simply bollocks.
What they do know for a fact is he has been reported before and they sadly bought his lie that he said things in anger. We know that others in the Muslim community can verify his extreme views and that they even rbought this to the attention of the FBI themselves. What I class as the majority decent Muslims

At no point have I stated anything in regards to evil, that is your words not mine. i speak of an ideology that teaches a view that its a righteous act to execute those who commit a homosexual act. This has been the case for 2,500 years in all 3 Abrahamic religions. In Christianity and Judaism, most believers are secularised, but in places like the US, you still have many neo conservative evangicals, who would not shed a tear over this attack. The same problem on a grander scale is islamism, again a neo conservative religious political body. So you can continue based on your hearsay claim not backed by the FBI or who have in no way verified he was gay and that its more likley this man was used so the killer could get close to the gay community. In order so he could plan out his attack

didge wrote:So all roads lead to ISIS and islam
You can keep going off some hearsay account, where as i will stick to one, where he as a Muslim is admitting he was radicalized

It sounds like even you don't believe your Muslim theory. Your theory is made up of 'what ifs' and 'suppositions', and some unqualified love for the 'FBI verification'. Given his own predilections, it sounds like the gay issue was much more important to him and motivated him to do this shooting.

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:So all roads lead to ISIS and islam
You can keep going off some hearsay account, where as i will stick to one, where he as a Muslim is admitting he was radicalized

It sounds like even you don't believe your Muslim theory.  Your theory is made up of 'what ifs' and 'suppositions', and some unqualified love for the 'FBI verification'.   Given his own predilections, it sounds like the gay issue was much more important to him and motivated him to do this shooting.

Talking about me again and not the points

I am 100% behind my reasoning

My reasoning is based on 1400 years of history of islam and a further 2000 years of Christian histoiry and 2500 years of jewish history.
Are you saying there is no case for any religious persecution of homosexuals throughout the last couple of thousand years?

didge wrote:So the FBI investigating this and the leading people in the know are not experts to you and never solve crimes I guess but to be discarded adn to take the unverified view of some nobody?

Experts are people who, through education or experience, have special knowledge and skills.

The discussion we are having does not require experts. We are dealing with facts. Percipient witnesses provide us with facts.

Your emphasis on 'experts' and people with specialized skills shows you are just trying to impress. Such things turn your head, don't they.

Well, it may surprise you to learn that it's not all glory and cheers; a lot of it is plain old fact gathering. The FBI can gather facts, but so can you or I...or the newspaper reporters that we rely on.

BTW, since when have you talked to an FBI agent? What the FBI has to say comes to you from the news, doesn't it? I thought you said that newspapers are hearsay.

Actually, you can't prove the FBI has any opinion, can you?

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:So the FBI investigating this and the leading people in the know are not experts to you and never solve crimes I guess but to be discarded adn to take the unverified view of some nobody?

Actually, you can't prove the FBI has any opinion, can you?

I going to do what you do and delete everything

You need to go back and address all my points, as i am bored with you doing a copout to my point

I can prove what the leading points are being investigated on and the evidence that has led them to this

last chance to answer my points, or you are going to be dumped from this debate as you do this everytime ignoring well reasoned arguments.

In fact i am quite appalled as i guess other will be at your poor reasoning trying to blame the gay community for bringing this on themselves, as you are claiming to make the case they shunned him

My points again..


So the FBI investigating this and the leading people in the know are not experts to you and never solve crimes I guess but to be discarded and to take the unverified view of some nobody?
Can we have that as your finest example of how criminology is studied please?

It is your choice that you a e seeking to deflect blame on now the homosexual comminity for the justification of this attack, based on an illogical view that he was shunned, even though to you, he had gay lovers. If he had gay lovers, then how is he being shunned? You see that makes zero sense and the only sense would be around some caste honour issue within the family. Now as seen he did grow up in a very religious community and if gay the only reason would be due to shame as to why he would have murdered so many homosexuaals to make an extreme point to his family, based on their views of homosexuality in Islam. You have heard of the caste system and honour killings and shame?

Again thopugh the Police are not going down this avenue of questioning as its simply bollocks.
What they do know for a fact is he has been reported before and they sadly bought his lie that he said things in anger. We know that others in the Muslim community can verify his extreme views and that they even rbought this to the attention of the FBI themselves. What I class as the majority decent Muslims

At no point have I stated anything in regards to evil, that is your words not mine. i speak of an ideology that teaches a view that its a righteous act to execute those who commit a homosexual act. This has been the case for 2,500 years in all 3 Abrahamic religions. In Christianity and Judaism, most believers are secularised, but in places like the US, you still have many neo conservative evangicals, who would not shed a tear over this attack. The same problem on a grander scale is islamism, again a neo conservative religious political body. So you can continue based on your hearsay claim not backed by the FBI or who have in no way verified he was gay and that its more likley this man was used so the killer could get close to the gay community. In order so he could plan out his attack


last chance

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It sounds like even you don't believe your Muslim theory.  Your theory is made up of 'what ifs' and 'suppositions', and some unqualified love for the 'FBI verification'.   Given his own predilections, it sounds like the gay issue was much more important to him and motivated him to do this shooting.

Talking about me again and not the points

I am 100% behind my reasoning

My reasoning is based on 1400 years of history of islam and a further 2000 years of Christian histoiry and 2500 years of jewish history.
Are you saying there is no case for any religious persecution of homosexuals throughout the last couple of thousand years?

Hahaha...  No, didge.  Seems to me you are doing all the talking about yourself: Little Big Man Chief Historian, with certificates in religious gay bars and lesbian Judaism.  Whatever...you cease to make sense.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:

Talking about me again and not the points

I am 100% behind my reasoning

My reasoning is based on 1400 years of history of islam and a further 2000 years of Christian histoiry and 2500 years of jewish history.
Are you saying there is no case for any religious persecution of homosexuals throughout the last couple of thousand years?

Hahaha...  No, didge.  Seems to me you are doing all the talking about yourself: Little Big Man Chief Historian, with certificates in religious gay bars and Judaism.  Whatever...you cease to make sense.

And we are back to talking about me

Checkmate and i didn that 12 moves ago

the more you do this, the more i will continue to show up your shortcomings

I shall now await others who do not invent things as you constantly do

didge wrote:the more you do this, the more i will continue to show up your shortcomings

Which is all you can do.  You have no research skills that you've shown here.  You have no reason that you've shown.  Your entire narcissistic plan is to compete personally, not add to the discussion.

Your lack of facts; your lack of reasoning; your lack of argument...means only one thing.  I'm bored.  Bye.

Original Quill wrote:

didge wrote:the more you do this, the more i will continue to show up your shortcomings

Which is all you can do.  You have no research skills that you've shown here.  You have no reason that you've shown.  Your entire narcissistic plan is to compete personally, not add to the discussion.

Your lack of facts; your lack of reasoning; your lack of argument...means only one thing.  I'm bored.  Bye.  

And again talking about me

The left motto again lol

I am happy what I reasoned and as seen you just talked about me accused me of being a drunk and just have character assasination as your only weapon to debate with.
Shame really

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Which is all you can do.  You have no research skills that you've shown here.  You have no reason that you've shown.  Your entire narcissistic plan is to compete personally, not add to the discussion.

Your lack of facts; your lack of reasoning; your lack of argument...means only one thing.  I'm bored.  Bye.  

And again talking about me

The left motto again lol

I am happy what I reasoned and as seen you just talked about me accused me of being a drunk and just have character assasination as your only weapon to debate with.
Shame really

Not exactly about you. It's more about your argument:

didge wrote:You have no research skills that you've shown here.  You have no reason that you've shown.  Your entire narcissistic plan is to compete personally, not add to the discussion.

It's a fine like, I admit. But when someone has nothing, and you say 'you have nothing', are you talking about him, or are you talking about his contribution?

We were supposed to be discussing this rationally. What you had to say became irrational. Is it my fault if I must point that out.

Go back to school or start reading again. I don't know how to get you to start thinking. Good luck...and that's not personal.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:

And again talking about me

The left motto again lol

I am happy what I reasoned and as seen you just talked about me accused me of being a drunk and just have character assasination as your only weapon to debate with.
Shame really

Not exactly about you.  It's more about your argument:

didge wrote:You have no research skills that you've shown here.  You have no reason that you've shown.  Your entire narcissistic plan is to compete personally, not add to the discussion.

It's a fine like, I admit.  But when someone has nothing, and you say 'you have nothing', are you talking about him, or are you talking about his contribution?

We were supposed to be discussing this rationally.  What you had to say became irrational.  Is it my fault if I must point that out.

Go back to school or start reading again.  I don't know how to get you to start thinking.  Good luck...and that's not personal.

And again talking about me

What can i say, that is your continual failing Quill

I reasoned my points

You constantly avoid them, then go on about me

I am happy as usual with the outcome

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:

The police have said that he didn't have an homosexual tendencies now....so that wasn't true either. Apparently.

Also... to answer the other part of quills waffle... he declared himself as "an islamic soldier"... he declared he was acting on behalf of isis... he declared allegiance to "Abu Bakr al Baghdadi of the Islamic State"...



Here's some more of what he said...


Omar Mateen swore allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi at least twice during a 911 call the night of his attack on a LGBT nightclub in Orlando, Florida.

Mateen made or received several calls during the massacre at Pulse nightclub, where he killed 49 people and wounded dozens more on June 12.

The Department of Justice and the FBI released a transcript of one of his 911 calls earlier today. The call lasted “approximately 50 seconds” and was made at 2:35 a.m.

“My name is [sic] I pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi of the Islamic State,” Mateen told the 911 operator.

The operator then asked: “Ok, What’s your name?”

“I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi may God protect him [Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State,” Mateen responded.

Before the DOJ and FBI jointly released the transcript, the FBI published its own redacted version. However, the FBI omitted any mention of Baghdadi and the Islamic State in its text. This move proved to be controversial, leading the DOJ and FBI to publish a more complete transcript later in the day.

The screen shot below shows the transcript as it was initially presented to the public.

Excerpts from Omar Mateen's 911 Call

Mateen was quite obviously referring to Baghdadi and the Islamic State. In fact, US officials acknowledged Mateen’s stated allegiance the day after his heinous assault.

At a press briefing on June 13, for instance, FBI Director James Comey indicated that Mateen had made his loyalty to Baghdadi known. During his “calls” the night of the attack, Comey told reporters, Mateen “said he was doing this for the leader of ISIL, who he named and pledged loyalty to.” ISIL (or the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) is the US government’s preferred acronym for the Islamic State.

President Obama also mentioned Mateen’s loyalty oath during a statement on June 14. The president said Mateen was inspired by propaganda produced by the Islamic State and that he offered his fealty to it.

Mateen “took in extremist information and propaganda over the Internet,” according to Obama. The president then cited the Islamic State’s repeated calls to attack in the West, explaining that Mateen “absorbed some of that and during his killing spree…pledged allegiance to ISIL.”

Therefore, the FBI’s initial redactions were pointless, regardless of the bureau’s motivations for omitting key words. Both Comey and Obama already explained to the public that Mateen had sworn allegiance to Baghdadi and the Islamic State.

Other references to the Islamic State

According to a timeline released by the FBI, Mateen made several other references to the Islamic State during three calls with the Orlando Police Department’s Crisis Negotiation Team. The calls began at 2:48 a.m. on June 12, just 13 minutes after the 911 call mentioned above. The last one ended just before 3:30 in the morning.

“In these calls, the shooter, who identified himself as an Islamic soldier, told the crisis negotiator that he was the person who pledged his allegiance to [omitted], and told the negotiator to tell America to stop bombing Syria and Iraq and that is why he was ‘out here right now,'” the FBI’s timeline reads.

Iraq and Syria are home to the Islamic State’s so-called “caliphate.”

Mateen’s claim to be an “Islamic soldier” was likely a reference to the Islamic State too. Indeed, one of the group’s propaganda arms called Mateen a “soldier of the caliphate” within days of the attack. However, this does not mean that Mateen had any operational ties to the organization. The Islamic State has used the word “soldier” to describe both formal members and individual jihadists who act in its name.

It also appears from the FBI’s summary that Mateen mentioned his allegiance to Baghdadi during his calls with the crisis negotiation team. (The timeline omitted Baghdadi’s name after the words “pledged his allegiance to.”)




Also...


But Mateen may have also professed his loyalty to Baghdadi on Facebook.

Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican who chairs the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, sent a letter to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg on June 15. In the letter, which was first reported by Fox News, Senator Johnson referred to several Facebook posts that have been attributed to Mateen.

“America and Russia stop bombing the Islamic state..I pledge my alliance [sic] to abu bakr al Baghdadi..may Allah accept me,” Mateen apparently wrote in one post on June 12, either during or shortly before the attack.

Another Facebook post purportedly reads: “The real Muslims will never accept the filthy ways of the west“ and “You kill innocent women and children by doing us airstrikes..now taste the Islamic state vengeance.” In what is believed to be his final post, Mateen threatened: “In the next few days you will see attacks from the Islamic state in the usa.”

According to Senator Johnson, his staff also “learned that in May 2016, Mateen used Facebook to search for information on the San Bernardino terrorists,” who acted in the Islamic State’s name. And, on June 4, Mateen entered the search words “Baghdadi Speech” on Facebook.

Therefore, the available evidence indicates that Mateen mentioned his loyalty to Baghdadi at least four times the night of the attack. Mateen pledged bay’ah (oath of allegiance) to Baghdadi twice during a 911 call, mentioned it at least once during his conversations with the crisis negotiation team, and also swore bay’ah in a post on Facebook.



http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2016/06/orlando-terrorist-swore-allegiance-to-islamic-states-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi.php

What he actually said...

Original Quill wrote:Mateen's friend is quite specific:

Daily News wrote:Omar Mateen, the deranged Muslim shooter behind the massacre, held a grudge against Latino men he met at the popular gay club because he felt used by them, the man told the network. “I’ve cried like you have no idea. But the thing that makes me want to tell the truth is that he didn’t do it for terrorism,” the man told Univision Noticias anchor Maria Elena Salinas in an exclusive interview on Tuesday. “In my opinion he did it for revenge.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pulse-shooter-omar-mateen-revenge-alleged-ex-lover-article-1.2682856

Do you think that the man hidden in the disguise {telling how he was Mateen's Porta Rican Lover} resembles this guy that supposedly had informed/turned Mateen into the FBI > 

Omar Mateen didn't always fit the profile of a would-be radicalized killer, a friend told NBC News.
In 2014, American-born Mateen was remarried to a second wife and had a new son — and his friend, Mohammad Malik, had never heard him express extremist views or say anything homophobic.                                
But after a young man who went to their Florida mosque was killed in a suicide bombing in Syria that year, one thing did trouble Malik: Mateen said he was listening to recordings of Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical Islamic cleric killed by a U.S. drone strike in Yemen three years earlier. The suicide bomber, Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha, had said in videos before he was killed that al-Awlaki inspired him. 

Mohammed Malik. NBC News

"It threw up a red flag for me," Malik told NBC News on Tuesday. "I asked him what he thought of them and he said they were very powerful, which raised a red flag even more for me."
Malik dialed the FBI. Agents investigated, but later determined that Mateen — who had been the focus of another probe the year before for "inflammatory" comments to co-workers — was not a threat. 

That was the last time that Malik had thought about Mateen's potential terrorist ties, until June 12 — when the 29-year-old slaughtered 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando and pledged allegiance to ISIS in a 911 call amid the rampage.
 
Malik, 43, revealed in a Washington Post essay on Monday how he tried to tip off the FBI about his friend, whom he had first met in 2006 at a family dinner and would stay in touch mostly through texts and phone calls.
"My hope and guess is that (the FBI) did the best job that they could (investigating him)," Malik added.
His observations of Mateen add another layer to a man whom co-workers said fostered a "toxic" work environment and was prone to expressing racist views against blacks and sexist views against women.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/orlando-nightclub-massacre/friend-who-told-fbi-about-orlando-shooter-omar-mateen-saw-n596496

I may be suffering from an over-reactive since of acquired suspicious layering of BS & intrigue but the number of players crawling out from the depths of this storyline is just growing in leaps & bounds, by the nanosecond!

4EVA wrote:Do you think that the man hidden in the disguise {telling how he was Mateen's Porta Rican Lover} resembles this guy that supposedly had informed/turned Mateen into the FBI

Well, it's natural for the press to delve into Mateen's life to find associates.  Whether or not they are friends, or which are closer, is not for us...or even them, to say.

It sounds as if Malik saw Mateen only infrequently, and knew him only remotely.  The gay friend, Miguel, seems to have known him sexually, and was privy to his gay lifestyle.  Now, Mateen didn't go to a firing range or some remote canyon for his shooting.  He went to the same gay night club from which Miguel knew him.  Given the two links - gay lifestyle and gay bar - and the fact that Mateen shot up the gay bar - I would tend to say that Miguel knew Mateen better, and for sure, knew something about what caused Mateen to explode.

Someone who was a family friend of his father's, whom he saw only every 4 - 5 years, would not be someone with which he would share a lot of intimate details.  Nor, without someone close offering it as fact, do I see any reason to invent a connection between the two.

Original Quill wrote:

4EVA wrote:Do you think that the man hidden in the disguise {telling how he was Mateen's Porta Rican Lover} resembles this guy that supposedly had informed/turned Mateen into the FBI

Well, it's natural for the press to delve into Mateen's life to find associates.  Whether or not they are friends, or which are closer, is not for us...or even them, to say.

It sounds as if Malik saw Mateen only infrequently, and knew him only remotely.  The gay friend, Miguel, seems to have known him sexually, and was privy to his gay lifestyle.  Now, Mateen didn't go to a firing range or some remote canyon for his shooting.  He went to the same gay night club from which Miguel knew him.  Given the two links - gay lifestyle and gay bar - and the fact that Mateen shot up the gay bar - I would tend to say that Miguel knew Mateen better, and for sure, knew something about what caused Mateen to explode.

Someone who was a family friend of his father's, whom he saw only every 4 - 5 years, would not be someone with which he would share a lot of intimate details.  Nor, without someone close offering it as fact, do I see any reason to invent a connection between the two.

That shows you cannot read as they stayed in contact all the time via phone and text.
Are you saying I do not know my mother now, as I have not seen her this year even though I phone once a week
You see its that kind of nonsense that you invent to make the most outlandish claims that have zero bearing and he did shop him into the FBI, which nobody has given him credit over. Sadly the FBI no doubt in fear of claims to racism, believed the terrorist bullshit story about just being angry.
Again you continue to invent things because you do not want to here the facts.
Its not even just this witness and the worst part is now a poster thinks he looks like the gay lover?

PMSL

All you have to do is followw the trail here

The Muslim community, not just this one person stated the issues with his extremism.
He was brought beofre the FBI because of his extremist views.
He is known to have watched extremism information.
He at no point blamed the homosexuality community foir shunning him but stated his loyalty to ISIS.
You are as seen clutching at straws and again even worse looking to place blame on the homosxual community, when this all stem s from religion and is even backed up by Muslims themselves against such terrorism.

You have one unverified homosexual who is looking to make a name for himself who no doubt may have known the terrorist but there is zero evidence they were lovers. If anything he was just an asset used to collate information to plan his operation against the club

You also know the gay witness is also a complete liar as he said this of Islam:



The man added: "He said the Muslim religion is a beautiful, beautiful religion, where everything is about love. Everybody is welcome. Gay, trans, bisexual... everybody.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/omar-mateens-gay-lover-claims-orlando-shooting-was-revenge-again/


Now we know his motivation to come forward and tell porkie pies, just some wet lefty lookiing to distance blame from Islam and the above proves it, as islam does not welcome gays, trans and bisexuals. Holy crap on a cracker. You see when you research you can see what real motivation people have for lying