Orlando Nightclub Shooting

[Grinning Dragon]

As more and more information continues to surface about M...., I am getting the sense that the FBI has really dropped the ball on this.

Gun store owner: We called FBI before Orlando shooting

The FBI is claiming they were never contacted, it sounds like someone fucked up pretty badly somewhere along the line.

Makes sense they would make that claim, after all it was their alphabet group that dropped the ball on mr waste of skin.

[Australian rePublic]

Terrible tragedy

[Greed and Death]

As more and more information continues to surface about M...., I am getting the sense that the FBI has really dropped the ball on this.

Gun store owner: We called FBI before Orlando shooting

The FBI is claiming they were never contacted, it sounds like someone fucked up pretty badly somewhere along the line.

My gut feeling is the FBI person who answered said oh another Florida redneck who thinks all Arab speakers are planning terrorism no need to follow up or record even having received a call.

[Arcturus Novus]

The FBI is claiming they were never contacted, it sounds like someone fucked up pretty badly somewhere along the line.

My gut feeling is the FBI person who answered said oh another Florida redneck who thinks all Arab speakers are planning terrorism no need to follow up or record even having received a call.

That's... frighteningly believable. And sad.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

So New York born Mateen is now an IMMIGRANT and Muslims really are out to destroy the West.

Lotsa credibility there.

Forgot the "first-gen" I meant to type in there.

And no, not all muslims are out to destroy the west. Maybe only 15% or less. Most of the rest are just ambivalent bystanders.

>New-York Born
>First-Gen

You have a very curious definition of what "first generation" actually means.

[Expectareaction]

Forgot the "first-gen" I meant to type in there.

And no, not all muslims are out to destroy the west. Maybe only 15% or less. Most of the rest are just ambivalent bystanders.

>New-York Born
>First-Gen

You have a very curious definition of what "first generation" actually means.

"The term first-generation can refer to either people who were born in one country and relocated to another at a young age, or to their children born in the country they have relocated to. The term second-generation refers to children of first-generation immigrants, and thus exhibits the same ambiguity."

[Geilinor]

>New-York Born
>First-Gen

You have a very curious definition of what "first generation" actually means.

"The term first-generation can refer to either people who were born in one country and relocated to another at a young age, or to their children born in the country they have relocated to. The term second-generation refers to children of first-generation immigrants, and thus exhibits the same ambiguity."

First-generation generally refers to people who were born in another country, as I've seen it used.

[Gauthier]

My gut feeling is the FBI person who answered said oh another Florida redneck who thinks all Arab speakers are planning terrorism no need to follow up or record even having received a call.

That's... frighteningly believable. And sad.

No kidding. If that's the case the guy who took the call can look forward to a transfer to FuckMiddleofNowhere, Alaska if he's lucky. But at least he might be able to catch the Mountain Men camera crew on a lucky day.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

>New-York Born
>First-Gen

You have a very curious definition of what "first generation" actually means.

"The term first-generation can refer to either people who were born in one country and relocated to another at a young age, or to their children born in the country they have relocated to. The term second-generation refers to children of first-generation immigrants, and thus exhibits the same ambiguity."

I'd rather call him second-generation, myself.

I'm first generation, since I am an immigrant who naturalized and I've been here since a young age.

I am thinking you can technically call first generation newborns brought to America or if the mother was already pregnant with the child as they were leaving their home country. But first-generation denotes the first generation of immigrants to arrive from a country, not their children.

[Patridam]

I'd rather call him second-generation, myself.

I'm first generation, since I am an immigrant who naturalized and I've been here since a young age.

I am thinking you can technically call first generation newborns brought to America or if the mother was already pregnant with the child as they were leaving their home country. But first-generation denotes the first generation of immigrants to arrive from a country, not their children.

Your definition is correct. As was mine. I did not realize the term was so ambiguous, but I don't think by announcing your particular definition as if it were fact "but first-generation denotes..." is going to clear up the ambiguity in the definition. Although it has made me curious how long Omar's parents were in the USA before he was born in 86'.

My point was, that ISIS and other organizations and persons in the sphere of radical islam rather impressively manage to radicalize muslims within developed countries. Radicalizing someone in a muslim country and sending them to a developed place to wreak havok is one thing - but managing to radicalize people who were born here, or people who had already immigrated here years ago - that's terrifying. There's no obvious solution to prevent that sort of radicalization. Obviously, much greater integration and assimilation from the relatively segregated population of Muslim immigrants (most of whom came here themselves or are the children of people who came over) would be very helpful, but there's no easy or even legal way to force the usually gradual process by which the culture melts into the pot.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I'd rather call him second-generation, myself.

I'm first generation, since I am an immigrant who naturalized and I've been here since a young age.

I am thinking you can technically call first generation newborns brought to America or if the mother was already pregnant with the child as they were leaving their home country. But first-generation denotes the first generation of immigrants to arrive from a country, not their children.

Your definition is correct. As was mine. I did not realize the term was so ambiguous, but I don't think by announcing your particular definition as if it were fact "but first-generation denotes..." is going to clear up the ambiguity in the definition. Although it has made me curious how long Omar's parents were in the USA before he was born in 86'.

My point was, that ISIS and other organizations and persons in the sphere of radical islam rather impressively manage to radicalize muslims within developed countries. Radicalizing someone in a muslim country and sending them to a developed place to wreak havok is one thing - but managing to radicalize people who were born here, or people who had already immigrated here years ago - that's terrifying. There's no obvious solution to prevent that sort of radicalization. Obviously, much greater integration and assimilation from the relatively segregated population of Muslim immigrants (most of whom came here themselves or are the children of people who came over) would be very helpful, but there's no easy or even legal way to force the usually gradual process by which the culture melts into the pot.

True, and that is an issue.

You have two problems at work here, both directly unsolvable without making unconstitutional decisions which would lead us down a dark path:

The first problem is their particular roots within Islam. I mean, I am not saying, by any stretch of the imagination, that Islam is at fault. But doctrines like Salafism and Wahhabism are a big issue. However, we can't really prohibit the free exercise of a religion until their religion intersects with the laws in this country (for instance, we wouldn't let someone claim they are priests of Moloch and sacrifice their children, as that would be downright criminal anyways, regardless of whether he is a follower of Moloch or not, but we can't stop them from believing in Moloch).

The second problem involves the internet. Many people believe many stupid shit nowadays because of the internet, not despite the internet. So you could censor the internet, but that'd be an infringement of freedom of speech not a lot of people would feel uncomfortable setting a precedent.

So it is difficult to force these things, the best thing to do is educate children from a young age that these things are wrong, but that's a community issue, and not a government issue.

[Grinning Dragon]

Looks like it wanted some sort of fame and go out in blaze of glory along with a shout out to daesh. I am a firm believer that the media should refrain from plastering their pictures, life story, etc and deny them their 15 minutes of fame. These type of monsters don't deserve the attention, and instead should have their name dragged through the mud.
Orlando gunman searched social media for news of his killing spree

WASHINGTON — Shortly before he was shot and killed by police, the gunman in Sunday’s mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla., searched on social media for news of his murderous rampage, according to the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

Apparently using a smartphone, M.... searched Facebook for “Pulse Orlando” and “shooting,” committee staff learned after uncovering five Facebook accounts they believe gunman M... had used.

[Jamzmania]

Your definition is correct. As was mine. I did not realize the term was so ambiguous, but I don't think by announcing your particular definition as if it were fact "but first-generation denotes..." is going to clear up the ambiguity in the definition. Although it has made me curious how long Omar's parents were in the USA before he was born in 86'.

My point was, that ISIS and other organizations and persons in the sphere of radical islam rather impressively manage to radicalize muslims within developed countries. Radicalizing someone in a muslim country and sending them to a developed place to wreak havok is one thing - but managing to radicalize people who were born here, or people who had already immigrated here years ago - that's terrifying. There's no obvious solution to prevent that sort of radicalization. Obviously, much greater integration and assimilation from the relatively segregated population of Muslim immigrants (most of whom came here themselves or are the children of people who came over) would be very helpful, but there's no easy or even legal way to force the usually gradual process by which the culture melts into the pot.

True, and that is an issue.

You have two problems at work here, both directly unsolvable without making unconstitutional decisions which would lead us down a dark path:

The first problem is their particular roots within Islam. I mean, I am not saying, by any stretch of the imagination, that Islam is at fault. But doctrines like Salafism and Wahhabism are a big issue. However, we can't really prohibit the free exercise of a religion until their religion intersects with the laws in this country (for instance, we wouldn't let someone claim they are priests of Moloch and sacrifice their children, as that would be downright criminal anyways, regardless of whether he is a follower of Moloch or not, but we can't stop them from believing in Moloch).

The second problem involves the internet. Many people believe many stupid shit nowadays because of the internet, not despite the internet. So you could censor the internet, but that'd be an infringement of freedom of speech not a lot of people would feel uncomfortable setting a precedent.

So it is difficult to force these things, the best thing to do is educate children from a young age that these things are wrong, but that's a community issue, and not a government issue.

You don't think that Islam is at fault when it comes to Muslims carrying out Islamic practices?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You don't think that Islam is at fault when it comes to Muslims carrying out Islamic practices?

Like I said, while I don't think all of Islam is at fault, there definitely are denominations within Islam are at fault.

It's like saying I don't blame all Christians for the stupid shit I hear protestants talk in America, but I do blame American Protestantism for the stupid shit American Protestants talk in America.

[Jamzmania]

You don't think that Islam is at fault when it comes to Muslims carrying out Islamic practices?

Like I said, while I don't think all of Islam is at fault, there definitely are denominations within Islam are at fault.

It's like saying I don't blame all Christians for the stupid shit I hear protestants talk in America, but I do blame American Protestantism for the stupid shit American Protestants talk in America.

There's a difference between blaming all Muslims and blaming Islam the religion.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Like I said, while I don't think all of Islam is at fault, there definitely are denominations within Islam are at fault.

It's like saying I don't blame all Christians for the stupid shit I hear protestants talk in America, but I do blame American Protestantism for the stupid shit American Protestants talk in America.

There's a difference between blaming all Muslims and blaming Islam the religion.

There's also a difference between blaming Christianity and blaming, say, American Protestantism.

While American Protestantism narrows down which kind of people I am talking about to a more debatable level, blaming all of Christianity would be disingenuous and just plain wrong.

Same with Islam, blaming all of Islam would be disingenuous and plain wrong, but blaming certain sects within Islam is debatable.

[Patridam]

True, and that is an issue.

You have two problems at work here, both directly unsolvable without making unconstitutional decisions which would lead us down a dark path:

The first problem is their particular roots within Islam. I mean, I am not saying, by any stretch of the imagination, that Islam is at fault. But doctrines like Salafism and Wahhabism are a big issue. However, we can't really prohibit the free exercise of a religion until their religion intersects with the laws in this country (for instance, we wouldn't let someone claim they are priests of Moloch and sacrifice their children, as that would be downright criminal anyways, regardless of whether he is a follower of Moloch or not, but we can't stop them from believing in Moloch).

The second problem involves the internet. Many people believe many stupid shit nowadays because of the internet, not despite the internet. So you could censor the internet, but that'd be an infringement of freedom of speech not a lot of people would feel uncomfortable setting a precedent.

So it is difficult to force these things, the best thing to do is educate children from a young age that these things are wrong, but that's a community issue, and not a government issue.

You don't think that Islam is at fault when it comes to Muslims carrying out Islamic practices?

Well, I can't speak for him, but I don't know if the teachings of Islam are inherently at fault. The Quran is certainly more violent and bigoted in its teachings than the new testament... but looking into it, it's not a whole lot worse than the old testament. Judaism, taught by the old testament, would have just as many terrorists as Islam does if it was just the teachings at fault. The problem may not be with Islam itself, but with Muslims. Problems with radical Muslims either taking some of the Quran way too seriously or exploiting it as an excuse to wage war. Problems with moderate Muslims doing nothing to stop radical neighbors and family members from committing atrocities. And problems (admittedly less central ones) with liberal Muslims focusing their efforts on fighting conservative politicians they perceive to be attacking all of Islam by defending their faith in its entirety and downplaying radicals rather than trying to actually stop the problems (radicals committing terrorism and enforcing bigotry; moderates remaining grossly negligent in their ambivalence) in their communities.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You don't think that Islam is at fault when it comes to Muslims carrying out Islamic practices?

Well, I can't speak for him, but I don't know if the teachings of Islam are inherently at fault. The Quran is certainly more violent and bigoted in its teachings than the new testament... but looking into it, it's not a whole lot worse than the old testament. Judaism, taught by the old testament, would have just as many terrorists as Islam does if it was just the teachings at fault. The problem may not be with Islam itself, but with Muslims. Problems with radical Muslims either taking some of the Quran way too seriously or exploiting it as an excuse to wage war. Problems with moderate Muslims doing nothing to stop radical neighbors and family members from committing atrocities. And problems (admittedly less central ones) with liberal Muslims focusing their efforts on fighting conservative politicians they perceive to be attacking all of Islam by defending their faith in its entirety and downplaying radicals rather than trying to actually stop the problems (radicals committing terrorism and enforcing bigotry; moderates remaining grossly negligent in their ambivalence) in their communities.

^^ This.

[Jamzmania]

You don't think that Islam is at fault when it comes to Muslims carrying out Islamic practices?

Well, I can't speak for him, but I don't know if the teachings of Islam are inherently at fault. The Quran is certainly more violent and bigoted in its teachings than the new testament... but looking into it, it's not a whole lot worse than the old testament. Judaism, taught by the old testament, would have just as many terrorists as Islam does if it was just the teachings at fault. The problem may not be with Islam itself, but with Muslims. Problems with radical Muslims either taking some of the Quran way too seriously or exploiting it as an excuse to wage war. Problems with moderate Muslims doing nothing to stop radical neighbors and family members from committing atrocities. And problems (admittedly less central ones) with liberal Muslims focusing their efforts on fighting conservative politicians they perceive to be attacking all of Islam by defending their faith in its entirety and downplaying radicals rather than trying to actually stop the problems (radicals committing terrorism and enforcing bigotry; moderates remaining grossly negligent in their ambivalence) in their communities.

If the Old Testament were as bad as the Quran, you'd think there would be more Jewish terrorist attacks, considering how oppressed the Jews have been throughout history and today. Why is there no worldwide Jewish holy war? I think the lack thereof would be proof that the Old Testament is not nearly as horrible as the Quran, which actively commands and encourages this violence.

No, the problem is the religion itself which perpetuates this violence. There are certainly many Muslims which do not carry out the commands of Allah and Mohammed, but the fact remains that the Quran and Hadith remain to encourage many a Muslim to terror.

[Roski]

Well, I can't speak for him, but I don't know if the teachings of Islam are inherently at fault. The Quran is certainly more violent and bigoted in its teachings than the new testament... but looking into it, it's not a whole lot worse than the old testament. Judaism, taught by the old testament, would have just as many terrorists as Islam does if it was just the teachings at fault. The problem may not be with Islam itself, but with Muslims. Problems with radical Muslims either taking some of the Quran way too seriously or exploiting it as an excuse to wage war. Problems with moderate Muslims doing nothing to stop radical neighbors and family members from committing atrocities. And problems (admittedly less central ones) with liberal Muslims focusing their efforts on fighting conservative politicians they perceive to be attacking all of Islam by defending their faith in its entirety and downplaying radicals rather than trying to actually stop the problems (radicals committing terrorism and enforcing bigotry; moderates remaining grossly negligent in their ambivalence) in their communities.

If the Old Testament were as bad as the Quran, you'd think there would be more Jewish terrorist attacks, considering how oppressed the Jews have been throughout history and today. Why is there no worldwide Jewish holy war? I think the lack thereof would be proof that the Old Testament is not nearly as horrible as the Quran, which actively commands and encourages this violence.

No, the problem is the religion itself which perpetuates this violence. There are certainly many Muslims which do not carry out the commands of Allah and Mohammed, but the fact remains that the Quran and Hadith remain to encourage many a Muslim to terror.

Maybe its because the fucking muslims aren't actually using the fucking quran to justify their attacks. DId you ever think about that?

Dueteronimy or however the fuck you spell it. Check it out. See for yourself.

Radical "Islam" is not islamic, it is using the name islamic in the same fucking fashion the KKK used "Christian"

[Gauthier]

If the Old Testament were as bad as the Quran, you'd think there would be more Jewish terrorist attacks, considering how oppressed the Jews have been throughout history and today. Why is there no worldwide Jewish holy war? I think the lack thereof would be proof that the Old Testament is not nearly as horrible as the Quran, which actively commands and encourages this violence.

No, the problem is the religion itself which perpetuates this violence. There are certainly many Muslims which do not carry out the commands of Allah and Mohammed, but the fact remains that the Quran and Hadith remain to encourage many a Muslim to terror.

Maybe its because the fucking muslims aren't actually using the fucking quran to justify their attacks. DId you ever think about that?

Dueteronimy or however the fuck you spell it. Check it out. See for yourself.

Radical "Islam" is not islamic, it is using the name islamic in the same fucking fashion the KKK used "Christian"

It's also giving Omar Mateen more dignity and credit than he deserves to assume he was a dedicated jihadi. The unstable fuck was not only a nitroglycerin martini as his history from childhood on shows, he knew jack shit about the players in the Jihadi League plus he was a self-hating closet dweller who was a customer at Pulse for three years getting piss drunk and an avid Grindr user. The fact that he pledged allegiance to Daesh and Hezbollah over a last-second 911 call while trapped in the john by the SWAT team screams "ATTENTION WHORE".

[The Alma Mater]

Maybe its because the fucking muslims aren't actually using the fucking quran to justify their attacks. DId you ever think about that?

Except that they do.
However, the problem is indeed one of mentality - not of the book as such.
Jews, when confronted with a problem, will tend to go "how terrible, what can I do"
Muslims. when confronted with a problem, will tend to go "how terrible, who can I blame".

Of course, If muslims were more focussed on solving problems, regardless of who they think deserves blame, they would be ruling the world by now.
So perhaps it is good this way.

[Patridam]

Well, I can't speak for him, but I don't know if the teachings of Islam are inherently at fault. The Quran is certainly more violent and bigoted in its teachings than the new testament... but looking into it, it's not a whole lot worse than the old testament. Judaism, taught by the old testament, would have just as many terrorists as Islam does if it was just the teachings at fault. The problem may not be with Islam itself, but with Muslims. Problems with radical Muslims either taking some of the Quran way too seriously or exploiting it as an excuse to wage war. Problems with moderate Muslims doing nothing to stop radical neighbors and family members from committing atrocities. And problems (admittedly less central ones) with liberal Muslims focusing their efforts on fighting conservative politicians they perceive to be attacking all of Islam by defending their faith in its entirety and downplaying radicals rather than trying to actually stop the problems (radicals committing terrorism and enforcing bigotry; moderates remaining grossly negligent in their ambivalence) in their communities.

If the Old Testament were as bad as the Quran, you'd think there would be more Jewish terrorist attacks, considering how oppressed the Jews have been throughout history and today. Why is there no worldwide Jewish holy war? I think the lack thereof would be proof that the Old Testament is not nearly as horrible as the Quran, which actively commands and encourages this violence.

Look, I'm not going to try and fight you on whether it's the teachings of the religion or themselves or just the followers of the religion, but I do want to question your logic a bit.

I said that, via my observations of the portions of the old testament and the Quran, that there are certainly differences but I don't know if I can say that one is more violent than the other. In some ways they are comparable - both condone, no, encourage the killing of homosexuals. Now, I made those observations, and then saw that Jewish terrorism is nowhere near the problem that Muslim terrorism is. The conclusion I made from there is that if the teachings of islam aren't much worse than judaism, the problem must be coming from some other source, e.g. Muslims themselves and their inaction/lack of personal accountability.

You made the observation that there is no Jewish terrorism on the scale of Muslim terrorism, a correct one and the same as me. But then you used that observation to jump directly to "the teachings of Islam must be inherently at fault here." That's correlation but no proof of causation. In fact, you tried to disprove my observations with said loose correlation. I don't think you can prove that the difference in terrorist violence between Muslims and Jews can be *proven* to have been caused by the teachings of Islam and not some other reason.

[Roski]

Maybe its because the fucking muslims aren't actually using the fucking quran to justify their attacks. DId you ever think about that?

Except that they do.
However, the problem is indeed one of mentality - not of the book as such.
Jews, when confronted with a problem, will tend to go "how terrible, how can I help"
Muslims. when confronted with a problem, will tend to go "how terrible, who can I blame".

Of course, If muslims were more focussed on solving problems, regardless of who they think deserves blame, they would be ruling the world by now.
So perhaps it is good this way.

Gonna need quite a few sources for this here.

[Minzerland]

Except that they do.
However, the problem is indeed one of mentality - not of the book as such.
Jews, when confronted with a problem, will tend to go "how terrible, how can I help"
Muslims. when confronted with a problem, will tend to go "how terrible, who can I blame".

Of course, If muslims were more focussed on solving problems, regardless of who they think deserves blame, they would be ruling the world by now.
So perhaps it is good this way.

Gonna need quite a few sources for this here.

Anecdotes are sources.