Orlando / Pulse Mass Shooting Thread

[MacCruiskeen]

POTUS was here in Orlando yesterday. He actually seemed to be disuading people from a terrorist angle. FBI Chief Comey has said there's no clear terrorist angle, that Mateen is a mixed bag of nuttery. None of the pols here on the scene have been pushing a "terrorists did it" agenda. Everything has been focused on the hate crime aspect.

Soooooo, maybe postpone the false flag freak out until there's an actual false flag campaign?

What crap you talk. The first thing the cops did was to tell the entire fucking world that Omar Mateen called them mid-attack to pledge his undying fealty to ISIS! You think they're going to just walk that back?

FBI Chief Comey has said there's no clear terrorist angle, that Mateen is a mixed bag of nuttery.

Ah well, if FBI Chief Comey said that, then it must be true, right? And if FBI Chief Comey says a) that Omar Mateen dunnit and b) that Omar Mateen is a complex lunatic, then we must also bow down and accept all that as gospel truth too, right? Case closed, you think?

Like hell.

[PufPuf93]

Evidently Allegedly there are security videos from the Pulse nightclub that show Omar Mateen a blurred, unidentifiable figure firing the assault rifle within the nightclub and allegedly the videos are in the hands of federal investigators (one would assume FBI and/or CIA).

Fixed that for you.

In any case, those are videos that no mere mortal will ever be allowed to see, just as we will never see any proof of those alleged text messages. (It's so convenient when the Designated Bad Guy is safely dead and therefore silent. It obviates the need for even a show-trial. And it's so inconvenient when his wife is still alive and well and refusing to stick to the script.)

You are correct about the "allegedly" - note I did type "allegedely" (sp) on post upthread.

But check this out. If true, this is a game changer and the family is involved.

I have been thinking Omar wanted to fuck over his wife and father as much as possible as one aim of the atrocity and suicide.


2 months before his murder spree, Mateen signed his house over to his Brother-in-law

for $100. Mateen's wife, Noor, was one of the witnesses.

<snip>


On April 5, Mateen signed a Quit Claim Deed transferring his ownership in a Port St. Lucie residence to his sister and brother-in-law, Mustafa and Sabrina Abasin. They paid him $100 for the home according to city records.

One of the individuals who signed off as a witness to this sudden transfer was Noor Salman, Mateen's wife. The other witness was Mateen's sister Miriam 'Mary' Seddique.

Three weeks after signing his deed over to his brother-in-law, Mateen took a trip to Walt Disney World to scout out possible sites for the attack according to law enforcement officials.

He also brought Salman with him for that trip.


The Port St. Lucie home that Mateen, 29, gave to the Abasins is worth approximately $165,000, and he owns a third of the property. So it is unclear why Mateen would be willing to sign it over so suddenly and for no money.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4BryrzVah
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[MacCruiskeen]

I have been thinking Omar wanted to fuck over his wife and father as much as possible as one aim of the atrocity and suicide.

You never tire of this stuff, do you? This amateur long-distance psychological analysis. You have a strong fictionalizing impulse. You should consider writing "news" reports for CNN, or cheap thrillers. (Same thing, really.)

I have been thinking Omar was in fact a closet Otherkin who had lifelong serious issues after the early death of his hamster. I am hoping to pitch this idea to a TV-drama scriptwriter or a CNN "news" editor. (Same thing, really.).

[Nordic]

Suicidal people often give away their belongings.

[MacCruiskeen]

I've seen no indication whatsoever that he was suicidal, and no evidence whatsoever to suggest that he was.

[Nordic]

I've seen no indication whatsoever that he was suicidal, and no evidence whatsoever to suggest that he was.

So he could have been.

[brekin]

Evidently Allegedly there are security videos from the Pulse nightclub that show Omar Mateen a blurred, unidentifiable figure firing the assault rifle within the nightclub and allegedly the videos are in the hands of federal investigators (one would assume FBI and/or CIA).

Fixed that for you.

In any case, those are videos that no mere mortal will ever be allowed to see, just as we will never see any proof of those alleged text messages. (It's so convenient when the Designated Bad Guy is safely dead. And so inconvenient when his wife is still alive and well and refusing to stick to the script.)

Mac, I'm trying to figure out the alternate theory you are putting forward.

Are you saying this and similar incidents are carried out instead by an elite death squad instead of the dead suspect(s)?
In this case, if there were something like 200-300 people at the club, wouldn't that be hard to pull off, especially as the dead shooter was a frequent regular at the club and some survivors have come forward saying he was so? (Also, even as a cover story, wouldn't that be counter productive and muddle all the Radical Islamic Terrorist angle?) And, if this person wasn't the shooter, how did he end up there? Was he just having his usual cocktail at his favorite gay bar which he loved even though he was a known gay bigot by all his friends and family? Did he get executed and then guns thrown in his hands? If the rampage went on for something like three hours how did the elite death squad exit, cover their tracks, get witnesses to be hush hush, etc. There's just too many loose ends that strain credulity.

If someone wanted to pull off that scenario it would make more sense for the patsy to be in the club and a large bomb go off, which then would then be easier to manage the narrative. But with a mass shooting and 49 people killed and many injured, someone did the shooting. But if you think he wasn't the shooter, who was? And what happen to him (them) that did the shooting? If it was a single alternate shooter they run the risk of being restrained or compromised and if it is a 2-3 person team then it would be nearly impossible to not be blown with so many people and video security. I think what is throwing you is that you seem to want the numerous survivors to say, (more than incredibly presumptuously considering the circumstances they are experiencing at the time and after.) "Yes, it definitely was him! And look, I took this video on my phone as he was trying to kill me which proves it!", when for them and most people it is a given, and as such, isn't worth exploring except for the more deeply conspiratorially minded. As such, the onus is on you then to say what you think actually happened, and not just what things you think are being reported that aren't true or seem fishy to you.

You don't like the official narrative, ok. What happened then?

[MacCruiskeen]

I've seen no indication whatsoever that he was suicidal, and no evidence whatsoever to suggest that he was.

So he could have been.

? I don't get your point.

[PufPuf93]

I have been thinking Omar wanted to fuck over his wife and father as much as possible as one aim of the atrocity and suicide.

You never tire of this stuff, do you? This amateur long-distance psychological analysis. You have a strong fictionalizing impulse. You should consider writing "news" reports for CNN, or cheap thrillers. (Same thing, really.)

I have been thinking Omar was in fact a closet Otherkin who had lifelong serious issues after the early death of his hamster. I am hoping to pitch this idea to a TV-drama scriptwriter or a CNN "news" editor. (Same thing, really.).

Sorry, I did not realize that I was that irritating.

My motive has been to try to find Omar's motive.

Admittedly, I am somewhat resistant to going immediately to radical Islamic terrorism as a default.

So Omar Mateen as a suicide looking how to pee most strongly in everyone's cornflakes and get the most attention seems reasonable.

In that last post you may note that I did a pivot in that the family did have fore knowledge of Mateen's plans.

I don't trust much I read in the "news" at least as far as the surface impression.

Media is prone to sensationalize and support the ptb and the ptb look for (or manufacture) a narrative for their own ends.

Isn't that part of what happens at RI? Building narratives that make sense?

You have kind of made a comment on my psychology.

Why do you think Omar did what he did or do you believe that this was a staged event in total?

Peace please.

[MacCruiskeen]

[quote="brekin » Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:34 pm"Mac, I'm trying to figure out the alternate theory you are putting forward.[/quote]

None. I am detailing the torrent of lies, insinuation and innuendo that is being used to "convict" a conveniently dead man posthumously.

You don't like the official narrative, ok. What happened then?

No, brekin. I won't submit to the fictionalizing impulse. There is far too much of that going on here already.

To state the obvious: One need not produce the actual culprit (X) in order to demonstrate that the case against another accused person (Y, deceased) is exceptionally weak. Why is this so hard to understand? Has the time-honoured legal principle of the burden of proof really been forgotten completely?

[chump]

Sometimes he looked around him, horrified by the weight of it all, the career of paper. He sits in the data spew of hundreds of lives. There's no end in sight... Let's call a meeting to analyze the blur. Let's devote our lives to understanding this moment, separating the elements of each crowded second. We'll build theories that gleam like jaded idols, intriguing systems of assumption.... We will follow the bullet trajectories backward to the lives that occupy the shadows, actual men. There is much here [in the] aberration of the heartland of the real.

Don DeLillo, Libra, 1988

ABERRATION in the HEARTLAND of the REAL: The Secret Lives of Timothy McVeigh

[PufPuf93]

To state the obvious: One need not produce the actual culprit (X) in order to demonstrate that the case against another accused person (Y, deceased) is exceptionally weak. Why is this so hard to understand? Has the time-honoured legal principle of the burden of proof really been forgotten completely?

As of now, Omar Mateen's father, wife, ex-wife, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, several old friends, and several acquaintances from the LGBT and / or bar scenes have been interviewed where they appear to have no doubt that Omar Mateen was the shooter in the Pulse night club and dead, X = Y. These are people I have watched in videos.

I would like to know more about the security firm where Nomar was employed and what he was doing.

There is no video provided in the media of a dead Omar nor a shooting Omar.

What is interesting and questionable is whether Omar acted alone or with others - even others in the club - (family or agents of some sort). It appears now that some in the family at the very least should have had a strong clue. Also recent history of the FBI and counterterrorism is that the FBI has often seeded and assisted terror plots and then busted the individuals prior to planned events. Omar had to know he would likely die or for all intents and purposes his normal life cease by stepping into a club and starting to shoot people. Maybe it was not Omar in the club but this seems unlikely. Maybe Omar was coerced into the action. I don't think the case against Omar being the shooter and dead is weak.

Whatever in fact happened, the media and ptb are wont to sensationalize and use the tragedy to serve the motives and agendas of a complex set of status quos.

I am most interested in whether Omar was a loner or who and what combined to this end.

[FourthBase]

Christ, Mister Reality FourthBase, you are even worse than I thought! You believe everything your Authorities tell you! 9/11, 7/7, San Bernardino, Orlando - Evil Suicidal Muzzlims dunnit, every time, all on their own and willingly! You know this, because [cue drumroll]... you saw it on the telly. Reality = TV.-

Deranged false horseshit.

What a self-deflating windbag you are. You do realise you've just outed yourself, not for the first time, but most embarrassingly? It's long been clear that you are a powerworshipping anti-Muslim bigot -- a fascist, in fact. But you now make it unambiguously clear that you are also completely impervious to evidence or argument, and completely indifferent to truth, reality and justice -- or rather that you are actively hostile to all three. It's good to understand this because it saves time. There is no point in even trying to reason with you. That's useful to know.

This thread has been a learning experience, all right. So thanks, FourthBase, for putting all of your, er, knowledge on the record for us. Whenever you bloviate about Islamic Suicide Terror or about anything else at all, I will remember the Talking Anus in that Burroughs book and remind myself that you too are merely doing what you can.

Try not posting worthless crap next time.

[brekin]

[quote="brekin » Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:34 pm"Mac, I'm trying to figure out the alternate theory you are putting forward.

None. I am detailing the torrent of lies, insinuation and innuendo that is being used to "convict" a conveniently dead man posthumously.

You don't like the official narrative, ok. What happened then?

No, brekin. I won't submit to the fictionalizing impulse. There is far too much of that going on here already.

To state the obvious: One need not produce the actual culprit (X) in order to demonstrate that the case against another accused person (Y, deceased) is exceptionally weak. Why is this so hard to understand? Has the time-honoured legal principle of the burden of proof really been forgotten completely?

But Mac, you are saying over and over again that these shootings are fulfilling someones agenda and that is why you are suspicious of the standard narrative. Isn't that the crux of your distrust of the standard narratives? It isn't a question really whether X committed it or why going on here, but why X would be set up to be shown that he did to fulfill Y's agenda. I mean, you aren't saying some other shooters are doing these and then escaping before law enforcement gets there and its all a case of mistaken identity, shoddy police work and just grabbing the usual suspects. There is a conspiracy, right?

These aren't happening spontaneously, someone is benefitting you say, no? The media, law enforcement, federal investigators, politicians, eyewitnesses, etc. are all providing information attempting to fill the burden of proof. All you are doing is shooting holes in the evidence and never stating ultimately why it is wrong, only how it could possibly be wrong and not good enough. And it doesn't seem that you don't think the evidence is not just good enough, you often seem to be saying it is tainted, fabricated and distorted- that it can't be considered because those ultimately responsible for the shootings are the same ones fabricating and distorting the evidence.

So we are in a situation where you won't make claims to who you think is is really responsible for the shootings, only that those who are, it seems you are implying, are also creating the shootings,the subsequent cover up and the control of information related to the cover ups?

"Allegedly"

[MacCruiskeen]

you seem to want the numerous survivors to say, (more than incredibly presumptuously considering the circumstances they are experiencing at the time and after.) "Yes, it definitely was him! And look, I took this video on my phone as he was trying to kill me which proves it!",

Oh please. Stop telling me what I seem to want and just attend to what I am in fact requesting (repeatedly), because that request is very, very easy to understand:

Show me one (1) surviving eyewitness who has given ANY physical description of the shooter.

when for them and most people it is a given [????], and as such, isn't worth exploring except for the more deeply conspiratorially minded.

What is a given? That Omar Mateen dunnit? Ffs... Now I really have to add another request:

Show me one (1) surviving eyewitness who has said that he recognised the shooter as Omar Mateen.

I'd appreciate answers to both requests, brekin (or anyone else). And if you, too, cannot produce the eyewitness accounts I request, then I'd appreciate you openly acknowledging that too.

To the best of my knowledge, not one of the hundreds of survivors has ever even vaguely described the shooter's stature / skin-colour / attire / face etc. (was he masked?), much less positively identified that shooter as the club regular Omar Mateen. But correct me if I'm wrong.

Meanwhile, PufPuf93 claims to have seen some bombshell evidence:

As of now, Omar Mateen's father, wife, ex-wife, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, several old friends, and several acquaintances from the LGBT and / or bar scenes have been interviewed where they appear to have no doubt that Omar Mateen was the shooter in the Pulse night club and dead, X = Y. These are people I have watched in videos.

You mean they saw the shooter and identified him as Omar Mateen? Wow. Provide links to those alleged videos where they allegedly do so.