Attack in Nice, France

[Channel72]

So it's looking more and more like this was a self-radicalized loner with little or no support from Islamic State, beyond "moral support". Apparently all those weapons in his truck were fake.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36801763

Outside the flat in the Route de Turin where he had been living, residents of the four-storey building described the man as a loner who never responded when they said hello. He would often be seen climbing the stairs to his first-floor flat, carrying his bike, they said.

Although the attacker had a pistol, all the other weapons found in the lorry turned out to be fake, which raises questions about the extent of support he had from jihadist groups.

Anyway...

Gee, I wonder who came into this discussion with a predetermined agenda? Perhaps invoking Islam right off the bat isn't the best way to begin an honest conversation. It certainly ended up making no sense at all when Omar Mateen's motivations were revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs.

Right. I hate all Muslim people. Trump 2016!

Because France is not only bombing them in Syria and Iraq, but France as a symbol (secularization/laïcité, its joie de vivre, freedom of speech,...) is everything religious fanatics hate.

I also think it's just that France is more convenient for them, logistically speaking, both due to geographical access and also due to the large pre-existing Muslim youth population, many of whom have legitimate social/economic grievances with French society.

[jwl]

As mentioned it's harder for Syrian-trained attackers to get into the country, but also for all the Islamophobia present in American society we don't have the de facto segregation of immigrants and their descendants that prevails in much of western Europe. An American Muslim isn't in a ghetto with all the other Muslims and facing a critical shortage of work and education. We do get radicals, obviously, but the social environment isn't nearly so ripe for breeding them in large numbers like it is in France.

I'm not familiar with how the situation is in Europe; is it that bad? State-sanctioned, or is it something that happened to become systemic over time?

It's ... still quite depressing, to say the least.

It's not really state-sanctioned, it's just something that happens because of factors like Muslims being poorer than the average European, so buy houses in cheap areas, and them wanting to buy a house nearby to a Sunni mosque.

However, in France in particular French secularism is an additional problem. It means they are not allowed to wear but was or niquibs in public, and are not allowed to wear hajabs or "conspicuous religious symbols" (in some cases including long skirts) in schools or when working in the public sector, amongst other things. Double standards make this worse, since some areas relax French secularism rules for Christians but no such exceptions are made for Muslims. This can make Muslims feel unwelcome among France, increasing segregation.

[Channel72]

There are large Muslim ethnic neighborhoods in the US, such as in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn and Deerborn, Michigan. (Although a significant percentage of people in Deerborn are actually Arab Christians.) However, there isn't the same degree of economic inequality going on that we see in Paris. Still, these American Muslim communities have come under intense scrutiny by law enforcement in terms of spying and intelligence gathering, and there's definitely a huge problem with Islamophobia. It's just that the economic disparity between these communities and the rest of society seems to be a lot worse in France.

And again, this is likely largely a result of geography. Poor Muslims emigrating from North Africa have a short journey to France, whereas any Muslims emigrating to the United States are usually, by definition, able to actually afford to get there, or (more commonly) brought over by already-established family members. This pattern of immigration is very similar to what happened with Irish/Italian/Jewish immigrants coming over in the 19th/20th century. But with France, poor North Africans from Algeria and Tunisia are able to emigrate much easier. So when you combine this economic disparity with the geographical proximity and relative ease of travel/communication between the Levant/North Africa and France, it's easy to see how we have a situation where French Muslim youth end up being easier targets for radicalization than your typical Muslim from Brooklyn.

That's not to say Muslim communities in the US are somehow immune to radicalization. Shit happens, unfortunately. It's just that so far no self-radicalized Jihadist from these neighborhoods has been successful.

[Crown]

Gee, I wonder what his motivation and/or religious affiliation was? I'm guessing Mormonism.

Gee, I wonder who came into this discussion with a predetermined agenda? Perhaps invoking Islam right off the bat isn't the best way to begin an honest conversation. It certainly ended up making no sense at all when Omar Mateen's motivations were revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs.

Could you list/summarise these motivations?

[Wild Zontargs]

Could you list/summarise these motivations?

Assuming he means "self-hating homosexual", that's looking weaker and weaker.

FBI can’t verify gay claims concerning Omar Mateen, the Orlando shooter: Reports

Federal investigators have so far been unable to corroborate claims made by individuals who say they spoke with Omar Mateen on gay dating apps before he opened fire inside an Orlando nightclub this month, officials said Thursday.

Contrary to accusations made in the aftermath of the June 12 mass shooting, investigators have failed to find any evidence indicating Mateen led a “secret gay life,” the Orlando Sentinel reported, citing law enforcement sources.

Several men have come forth in the weeks since the shooting about interactions they allegedly had with Mateen on Grindr, a gay dating app, as well as purported run-ins said to have happened previously at Pulse, the gay nightclub where the attack occurred.

After conducting more than 500 interviews since the shooting, however, authorities have so far been unable to substantiate those claims with any hard evidence, police sources told the newspaper on condition of anonymity. The Associated Press and Los Angeles Times reported similarly Thursday after speaking with officials who said they were not authorized to discussed an active investigation.

“We are not at liberty to confirm or deny specific interviews, nor the credibility of content … due to the ongoing investigation,” FBI spokeswoman Amy Pittman told the Orlando Sentinel.

But police sources said investigators scoured Mateen’s laptop, cell phone and digital footprints for clues, and they found nothing to indicates he installed gay dating apps or viewed gay pornography, the media outlets reported.

Nevertheless, individuals continue to claim the opposite, including during an interview broadcast Tuesday on Univision with a man who said he had sex with Mateen after meeting him on Grindr.

“No one is lying about him being on there,” Kevin West, a 29-year-old Pulse patron, told the L.A. Times with regards to Mateen’s supposed Grindr profile.

“The FBI obviously is trying to cover up their information,” added another nightclub regular, 23-year-old Cord Cedeno. “I can go take a lie detector test. I know for a fact Omar messaged me.”

Mateen, 29, told 911 operators in a phone call made during the shooting that he was conducting the attack in allegiance with the Islamic State terror group.

“While we know a lot more about him in terms of who he was and what he did, I do not want to definitively rule out any particular motivation here,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch told The Associated Press this week.

“It’s entirely possible that he had a singular motive. It’s entirely possible that he had a dual motive,” she added.

Forty-nine people were killed and 53 wounded as a result of the Pulse nightclub shooting.

[Grumman]

“The FBI obviously is trying to cover up their information,” added another nightclub regular, 23-year-old Cord Cedeno. “I can go take a lie detector test. I know for a fact Omar messaged me.”

Lie detector tests are pseudoscience bullshit that measure symptoms of emotional response, not deception.

We now return to your regularly scheduled thread.

[ray245]

There are large Muslim ethnic neighborhoods in the US, such as in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn and Deerborn, Michigan. (Although a significant percentage of people in Deerborn are actually Arab Christians.) However, there isn't the same degree of economic inequality going on that we see in Paris. Still, these American Muslim communities have come under intense scrutiny by law enforcement in terms of spying and intelligence gathering, and there's definitely a huge problem with Islamophobia. It's just that the economic disparity between these communities and the rest of society seems to be a lot worse in France.

And again, this is likely largely a result of geography. Poor Muslims emigrating from North Africa have a short journey to France, whereas any Muslims emigrating to the United States are usually, by definition, able to actually afford to get there, or (more commonly) brought over by already-established family members. This pattern of immigration is very similar to what happened with Irish/Italian/Jewish immigrants coming over in the 19th/20th century. But with France, poor North Africans from Algeria and Tunisia are able to emigrate much easier. So when you combine this economic disparity with the geographical proximity and relative ease of travel/communication between the Levant/North Africa and France, it's easy to see how we have a situation where French Muslim youth end up being easier targets for radicalization than your typical Muslim from Brooklyn.

That's not to say Muslim communities in the US are somehow immune to radicalization. Shit happens, unfortunately. It's just that so far no self-radicalized Jihadist from these neighborhoods has been successful.

This kind of attacks is going to reinforce and fuel the sentiment that poor, uneducated people from the third world shouldn't be allowed to immigrate to a first or more developed country.

[Dragon Angel]

It's not really state-sanctioned, it's just something that happens because of factors like Muslims being poorer than the average European, so buy houses in cheap areas, and them wanting to buy a house nearby to a Sunni mosque.

However, in France in particular French secularism is an additional problem. It means they are not allowed to wear but was or niquibs in public, and are not allowed to wear hajabs or "conspicuous religious symbols" (in some cases including long skirts) in schools or when working in the public sector, amongst other things. Double standards make this worse, since some areas relax French secularism rules for Christians but no such exceptions are made for Muslims. This can make Muslims feel unwelcome among France, increasing segregation.

Yeah ..... I can definitely understand how this form of secularism will backfire. Especially with such inconsistent ruling.

How does one even tell a long skirt is "too religious"? I mean, I'm not Muslim but looking at image searches of long skirts related to Islam, many could be easily just another fashion style not related to religion in the least. "Conspicuous religious symbols" seems just as subjective, like how black people's selfies are commonly misinterpreted as containing them flashing "gang symbols". I suppose the rules being relaxed for Christians (presumably Jews too?) means they can wear crucifixes, while Muslims are left out in the dark.

This sounds like as much of a randomly-targeted disaster as NYC's stop-and-frisk.

Could you list/summarise these motivations?

Assuming he means "self-hating homosexual", that's looking weaker and weaker.

FBI can’t verify gay claims concerning Omar Mateen, the Orlando shooter: Reports

She, actually.

That is what I was meaning yeah. It's an interesting article. I doubt there is some FBI conspiracy going on as one of them said, but at the same time I don't believe all of those who witnessed him and/or had sex with him are fabricating. The volume of that was just too large and too sudden. There are also possibilities he had been to many other places with LGBT concentrations.

I haven't ever used Jack'd or Grindr so I can't comment on how those would work, in which he allegedly had profiles on both. It's entirely possible that he'd wiped his phone or laptop, or concealed other immediately-available, digital evidence. Who knows.

As far as ISIS is concerned, there was also the CIA stating Mateen had no link to them.

I don't deny his religious beliefs may have played a part in his attack (his father's attitudes toward homosexuals seem indicative enough), but they would have as much as any other fundamentalist homophobic sect could have played in any other anti-gay attack. He was rather confused as to what group he'd have allegiance to, after all.

Right. I hate all Muslim people. Trump 2016!

There are legions of Internet randos who come to these stories on various fora and invariably always shout "RELIGION OF PEACE AM I RITE" "when will libtards get it that MUSLIMS are GOING TO KILL US" "stop apologizing for Islam!!!" "Christians would never do this", backing these up with the contents of their ass. You came across exactly like them.

There are large Muslim ethnic neighborhoods in the US, such as in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn and Deerborn, Michigan. (Although a significant percentage of people in Deerborn are actually Arab Christians.) However, there isn't the same degree of economic inequality going on that we see in Paris. Still, these American Muslim communities have come under intense scrutiny by law enforcement in terms of spying and intelligence gathering, and there's definitely a huge problem with Islamophobia. It's just that the economic disparity between these communities and the rest of society seems to be a lot worse in France.

And again, this is likely largely a result of geography. Poor Muslims emigrating from North Africa have a short journey to France, whereas any Muslims emigrating to the United States are usually, by definition, able to actually afford to get there, or (more commonly) brought over by already-established family members. This pattern of immigration is very similar to what happened with Irish/Italian/Jewish immigrants coming over in the 19th/20th century. But with France, poor North Africans from Algeria and Tunisia are able to emigrate much easier. So when you combine this economic disparity with the geographical proximity and relative ease of travel/communication between the Levant/North Africa and France, it's easy to see how we have a situation where French Muslim youth end up being easier targets for radicalization than your typical Muslim from Brooklyn.

That's not to say Muslim communities in the US are somehow immune to radicalization. Shit happens, unfortunately. It's just that so far no self-radicalized Jihadist from these neighborhoods has been successful.

This kind of attacks is going to reinforce and fuel the sentiment that poor, uneducated people from the third world shouldn't be allowed to immigrate to a first or more developed country.

I'm afraid of that also. Trumpian rhetoric, the xenophobic sentiment that was part of Brexit, it is likely going to just slope even further downhill. Right-wing fanatics will see literally any story that involves a Muslim as further "proof" immigration should be halted, and cherry-pick out everything else conveniently that shows otherwise.

[Crown]

Could you list/summarise these motivations?

Assuming he means "self-hating homosexual", that's looking weaker and weaker.

FBI can’t verify gay claims concerning Omar Mateen, the Orlando shooter: Reports

She, actually.

That is what I was meaning yeah. It's an interesting article. I doubt there is some FBI conspiracy going on as one of them said, but at the same time I don't believe all of those who witnessed him and/or had sex with him are fabricating. The volume of that was just too large and too sudden. There are also possibilities he had been to many other places with LGBT concentrations.

I haven't ever used Jack'd or Grindr so I can't comment on how those would work, in which he allegedly had profiles on both. It's entirely possible that he'd wiped his phone or laptop, or concealed other immediately-available, digital evidence. Who knows.

Well you are entitled to a healthy skepticism, I certainly have an over prescription of it, but unfortunately in this case not a single one of these claims have been verified by the FBI as credible. So since we're having an honest conversation; there are no other verified motivations that have been revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs for his actions. Correct?

[Dragon Angel]

Well you are entitled to a healthy skepticism, I certainly have an over prescription of it, but unfortunately in this case not a single one of these claims have been verified by the FBI as credible. So since we're having an honest conversation; there are no other verified motivations that have been revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs for his actions. Correct?

I don't know what you're trying to imply, seeing as the authorities themselves still have little idea on what is verified even in the article Zontargs linked.

“While we know a lot more about him in terms of who he was and what he did, I do not want to definitively rule out any particular motivation here,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch told The Associated Press this week.
“It’s entirely possible that he had a singular motive. It’s entirely possible that he had a dual motive,” she added.

It's irresponsible to point fingers to Islam as the sole cause, when the real reasons are most likely much more nuanced.

Not like we can learn much more anyway... It's times like these I'd really love technology to temporarily resurrect the dead.

[Balrog]

There are large Muslim ethnic neighborhoods in the US, such as in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn and Deerborn, Michigan. (Although a significant percentage of people in Deerborn are actually Arab Christians.).

It's Dearborn, not Deerborn. Ain't no deer running around in that neck of the woods.

[ray245]

I'm afraid of that also. Trumpian rhetoric, the xenophobic sentiment that was part of Brexit, it is likely going to just slope even further downhill. Right-wing fanatics will see literally any story that involves a Muslim as further "proof" immigration should be halted, and cherry-pick out everything else conveniently that shows otherwise.

The sad thing is there is no powerful arguments that could resonate among people and calm things down. All the people who keep emphasising on improving the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims community have no idea how to actually achieve this either.

[Crown]

Well you are entitled to a healthy skepticism, I certainly have an over prescription of it, but unfortunately in this case not a single one of these claims have been verified by the FBI as credible. So since we're having an honest conversation; there are no other verified motivations that have been revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs for his actions. Correct?

I don't know what you're trying to imply, seeing as the authorities themselves still have little idea on what is verified even in the article Zontargs linked.

I return to my first post;

Gee, I wonder what his motivation and/or religious affiliation was? I'm guessing Mormonism.

Gee, I wonder who came into this discussion with a predetermined agenda? Perhaps invoking Islam right off the bat isn't the best way to begin an honest conversation. It certainly ended up making no sense at all when Omar Mateen's motivations were revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs.

Could you list/summarise these motivations?

What has been revealed? Can you list/summarise these motivations? I appreciate that we're now discussing an issue that someone answered on your behalf and you might not have been alluding to at all. If this is what you were alluding to, then please explain to me how completely un-substantiated hearsay media reports which the FBI cannot verify qualifies as something we should accept as revealed truths if we're having an honest conversation.

“While we know a lot more about him in terms of who he was and what he did, I do not want to definitively rule out any particular motivation here,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch told The Associated Press this week.
“It’s entirely possible that he had a singular motive. It’s entirely possible that he had a dual motive,” she added.

It's irresponsible to point fingers to Islam as the sole cause, when the real reasons are most likely much more nuanced.

Not like we can learn much more anyway... It's times like these I'd really love technology to temporarily resurrect the dead.

It gives us the next best thing, we can snoop on their past movements and online histories, from the LA Times.

In seeking to verify the reports [of a closeted homosexual lifestyle - Crown], federal agents have culled Mateen's electronic devices, including a laptop computer and cellphone, as well as electronic communications of those who made the claims, law enforcement officials said.

So far, they have found no photographs, no text messages, no smartphone apps, no gay pornography and no cell-tower location data to suggest that Mateen — who was twice married to women and had a young son — conducted a secret gay life, the officials said.

The FBI is continuing to explore Mateen’s past, but investigators now believe the men who made the claims are not credible, or confused Mateen with someone else.

[Dragon Angel]

What has been revealed? Can you list/summarise these motivations? I appreciate that we're now discussing an issue that someone answered on your behalf and you might not have been alluding to at all. If this is what you were alluding to, then please explain to me how completely un-substantiated hearsay media reports which the FBI cannot verify qualifies as something we should accept as revealed truths if we're having an honest conversation.

Did you ignore what I told you about what the CIA said? As his potential links to ISIS were nonexistent, and as everything else about him is literally as "hearsay" as what witnesses have claimed, then it seems like you're just semantically picking apart my language when you and everyone else who has followed this event know what I meant.

Yes, I was talking about his possible internalized homophobia and self-hatred. Religion could be and has been used thousands of times in the past to cover up homophobia while being homosexual. I put "hearsay" in quotes there because as his claims to being a soldier of ISIS were proven to be unfounded, then it casts doubt as well on whether fighting for Allah's jihad was his primary cause. Like closeted Republican lawmakers being revealed to have fuckbuddies in the dark, Islam could just as well be used as a coverup. There is plenty of reasonable doubt on the Islamic connection.

That Zontargs made a guess as to my answer also has literally no bearing on what my response to you would've been, unless you're attempting to speculate I came in intentionally being dishonest. I also was not aware of the development mentioned in the articles both of you have given until tonight.

It gives us the next best thing, we can snoop on their past movements and online histories, from the LA Times.

In seeking to verify the reports [of a closeted homosexual lifestyle - Crown], federal agents have culled Mateen's electronic devices, including a laptop computer and cellphone, as well as electronic communications of those who made the claims, law enforcement officials said.

So far, they have found no photographs, no text messages, no smartphone apps, no gay pornography and no cell-tower location data to suggest that Mateen — who was twice married to women and had a young son — conducted a secret gay life, the officials said.

The FBI is continuing to explore Mateen’s past, but investigators now believe the men who made the claims are not credible, or confused Mateen with someone else.

The next best thing != the definitive cause. Speculation is still speculation. Even the authorities are not definitively telling you that's it.

Also in the same article:

It is possible that Mateen might have had communications on cellphones or other electronic equipment that have not been recovered by investigators in the wake of the shooting.

...

Kevin West, 29, a Navy veteran and Pulse regular, said Mateen messaged him on Jack’d and also said he recognized him entering the club on the night of the shooting. After the attack, West turned his phone and app passwords over to police and FBI investigators. He said Mateen didn’t reveal his name, but he recognized him from the photo Mateen had posted on the app, which matched one of the gunman released after the shooting.

On Thursday, he dismissed federal investigators’ doubts.

“No one is lying about him being on there,” West said of the gay apps, adding that “once you have the app and delete your profile, it’s gone.”

If it's true that deleting one's Grindr profile deletes all history, then it is definitely possible that unless there is some leftover on the server, it'd be impossible to prove he had a profile. Twitter operates similarly; tweets, direct messages, even the direct links (jpeg/png/mp4) to picture files are gone from the servers. All that's left is the numeric user ID, which is marked as unusable.

Deleting the Grindr or whatever else gay social network apps or factory-resetting the phone would also leave no trace of it having been there. (the former it may be possible to recover a history if given access to the underlying file system, if the uninstall process left files like configuration data on the phone--I'm unfamiliar with exactly how Android/iOS removes app data, but I believe at least in Android's case everything is pretty much gone)

[Crown]

What has been revealed? Can you list/summarise these motivations? I appreciate that we're now discussing an issue that someone answered on your behalf and you might not have been alluding to at all. If this is what you were alluding to, then please explain to me how completely un-substantiated hearsay media reports which the FBI cannot verify qualifies as something we should accept as revealed truths if we're having an honest conversation.

Did you ignore what I told you about what the CIA said? As his potential links to ISIS were nonexistent, and as everything else about him is literally as "hearsay" as what witnesses have claimed, then it seems like you're just semantically picking apart my language when you and everyone else who has followed this event know what I meant.

What does his self identification as an ISIS militant have to do with anything?

Yes, I was talking about his possible internalized homophobia and self-hatred. Religion could be and has been used thousands of times in the past to cover up homophobia while being homosexual. I put "hearsay" in quotes there because as his claims to being a soldier of ISIS were proven to be unfounded, then it casts doubt as well on whether fighting for Allah's jihad was his primary cause. Like closeted Republican lawmakers being revealed to have fuckbuddies in the dark, Islam could just as well be used as a coverup. There is plenty of reasonable doubt on the Islamic connection.

The fact that he self identified as an ISIS militant isn't hearsay; it's in the recordings. ISIS have also long encouraged those living among the west to engage in lone-wolf terrorism (where ironies of ironies it was even suggested that running over a non-believer with your car would be an act showing support to the cause). But all this is a smokescreen; even at the time it was posited there was some internal homophobia self-hatred at play; it isn't a new theory.

That Zontargs made a guess as to my answer also has literally no bearing on what my response to you would've been, unless you're attempting to speculate I came in intentionally being dishonest. I also was not aware of the development mentioned in the articles both of you have given until tonight.

Which is why I asked YOU to clarify exactly what YOU meant. Can you do this? Try to be succinct and not emote like a weeping child - it would be appreciated.

If Zontargs guesses correctly, then could we agree that you were misinformed at the time of your post then and that now it turns out no new revelations have been revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs"?

This is important because I don't fucking know if you're capable of being an honest conversationalist. No not because you made a mistake, but because you literally replied with "well I don't think there's an FBI conspiracy but something fishy is going on because a lot of people are claiming they were fucking him so ..." And as I replied straight away; you're entitled to be a cynic, but we're not bound by your cynicism when setting what can reasonably termed 'an honest conversation'.

The next best thing != the definitive cause. Speculation is still speculation. Even the authorities are not definitively telling you that's it.

You understand how burden of proof works right? What am I saying! Demonstrably you don't. Someone makes claim A. The onus is on them to prove it, not on someone else to disprove it (you can't prove a negative).

Some people have claimed they've been banging Omar. They've presented zero evidence to substantiate their claims. The FBI has interviewed them, has had access to their electronic equipment and Omar's equipment and have found the claims and witnesses to be non-credible.

If it's true that deleting one's Grindr profile deletes all history, then it is definitely possible that unless there is some leftover on the server, it'd be impossible to prove he had a profile. Twitter operates similarly; tweets, direct messages, even the direct links (jpeg/png/mp4) to picture files are gone from the servers. All that's left is the numeric user ID, which is marked as unusable.

Deleting the Grindr or whatever else gay social network apps or factory-resetting the phone would also leave no trace of it having been there. (the former it may be possible to recover a history if given access to the underlying file system, if the uninstall process left files like configuration data on the phone--I'm unfamiliar with exactly how Android/iOS removes app data, but I believe at least in Android's case everything is pretty much gone)

Yeah that's all great, you might want to inform the FBI who obviously don't know how to electronically snoop.

[Dragon Angel]

What does his self identification as an ISIS militant have to do with anything?

The fact that he self identified as an ISIS militant isn't hearsay; it's in the recordings. ISIS have also long encouraged those living among the west to engage in lone-wolf terrorism (where ironies of ironies it was even suggested that running over a non-believer with your car would be an act showing support to the cause). But all this is a smokescreen; even at the time it was posited there was some internal homophobia self-hatred at play; it isn't a new theory.

Yes, he can say that he is an ISIS militant all he wants, but the CIA has literally gone on record stating there was literally no connection, random ISIS propaganda he may have found aside. Stop ignoring this.

You're also picking at semantics again. When the shooting occurred, we had talking heads and random right wingers like Trump already exclaiming Islam and the Islamic state were the sole purpose of these attacks. It was later revealed--by witnesses--that Mateen had frequented the club, and/or he'd used gay social networks, and/or he had LGBT friends and visited LGBT social gatherings in years prior. These revealed (the sense that I am using the word in, pay attention) witness accounts are looking dubious from what the FBI is seeing thus far.

I posit since these investigations are incomplete, we still have room to believe there are people who are telling the truth. However, I also posit since investigators will not be clear as to him having a singular or double motivation, even they do not know for sure what exactly motivated him to shoot up the nightclub. You have your guesses, I have my guesses. According to your standard, guesses to his motivation being centrally Islamic are just as specious as guesses to his motivation being homophobic self-hatred.

Which is why I asked YOU to clarify exactly what YOU meant. Can you do this? Try to be succinct and not emote like a weeping child - it would be appreciated.

Oh fuck off with that. If I'm emoting like a child, then you're just attempting to get a rise out of me and trolling. Save your smarmy-ass "Everything I talk is verified fact and all you're talking is little itty bitty feels" for someone else. Your lacking capability to read is not my problem.

If Zontargs guesses correctly, then could we agree that you were misinformed at the time of your post then and that now it turns out no new revelations have been revealed to extend much beyond his religious beliefs"?

Again with the semantics pulling. Apologies if I wasn't clear enough earlier; I would've thought people would remotely understand the context like Zontargs did, but I suppose some are too caught up with trying to start a pompous firestorm.

Sure, if agreeing according to your personal definition of "revelations" will cease your massive ego and bring this discussion back to current events, then why the fuck not. Have your victory.

This is important because I don't fucking know if you're capable of being an honest conversationalist. No not because you made a mistake, but because you literally replied with "well I don't think there's an FBI conspiracy but something fishy is going on because a lot of people are claiming they were fucking him so ..." And as I replied straight away; you're entitled to be a cynic, but we're not bound by your cynicism when setting what can reasonably termed 'an honest conversation'.

You realize you are just as guilty trying to get me into an argument to concede that Islam is his central motivation, when even investigators aren't saying that for certain? You are just as baselessly guessing as I am. None of us are bound to your moral certainty that looking to Islam as his murderous motivation is the right way to go, either. Have a rest with it.

You understand how burden of proof works right? What am I saying! Demonstrably you don't. Someone makes claim A. The onus is on them to prove it, not on someone else to disprove it (you can't prove a negative).

Some people have claimed they've been banging Omar. They've presented zero evidence to substantiate their claims. The FBI has interviewed them, has had access to their electronic equipment and Omar's equipment and have found the claims and witnesses to be non-credible.

Yes, and I have acknowledged already that I found the article interesting and am taking it into consideration. While also saying I have personal reservations still, noting them and explaining my reasoning as given within what I linked.

Why are we still arguing this?
Is the concept of civilly "agreeing to disagree" without a massive nuclear explosion alien to you?
What else would you like, oh good sir?
Would you like me to grovel before your feet and beg you for forgiveness while I'm at it?

Christ, you are insufferable.

Yeah that's all great, you might want to inform the FBI who obviously don't know how to electronically snoop.

Prove the FBI's exact methodology and process in every single detail you can muster or fuck off please.

[Channel72]

The fact that he self identified as an ISIS militant isn't hearsay; it's in the recordings. ISIS have also long encouraged those living among the west to engage in lone-wolf terrorism (where ironies of ironies it was even suggested that running over a non-believer with your car would be an act showing support to the cause). But all this is a smokescreen; even at the time it was posited there was some internal homophobia self-hatred at play; it isn't a new theory.

Yes, he can say that he is an ISIS militant all he wants, but the CIA has literally gone on record stating there was literally no connection, random ISIS propaganda he may have found aside.

Regarding Omar Mateen's precise motivations.... really, who cares at this point? The guy was an incoherent, angry mess. Obviously he had no direct connection or logistical support from Islamic State - nobody is claiming otherwise. It's the same deal as with the San Bernadino attack - self radicalized idiots who spent too much time watching ISIS propaganda videos online.

Can other motivations beyond pure religious extremism also haved been at work here? Sure, humans are fucking complex organisms. But Islamic State is an online propaganda machine that is literally encouraging people all over the world to do exactly what Omar Mateen and the San Bernadino shooters have done. They are trying to crowd source Jihad, for fuck's sake. It's the same shit Al Qaeda had been trying to do, and in fact "crowd sourced" Jihad was an element of Al Qaeda's overall strategy to bring down the US economy back in the 2000s, before IS became all the rage. And both Omar Mateen and the San Bernadino shooters are known to have consumed IS propaganda online. The FBI has even publicly stated they are "highly confident" that both Omar and the San Bernadino shooters were (at least partly) radicalized over the Internet.

So we can basically take the "self-hating gay" theory and decapitate it with Occam's Razor. Or at best, append it as a possible secondary emotional motivation.

So the question is, would Omar Mateen have done this if Islamic State online propaganda didn't exist? The answer is who the fuck knows, but probably not. If Islamic State (or some equivalent) didn't exist, it's likely Omar Mateen would just have been an angry asshole who fucked up all his relationships. It's impossible to say, because there's a huge overlap between "regular crazy people" and people who are attracted to Jihad. But Jihadist propaganda certainly provides a much clearer focus, direction and purpose for "regular crazy people" than would otherwise have manifested as definitive violent actions.

And you know it's not just fucking Muslims who are susceptible to radicalization by Jihadist propaganda. An American Catholic Hispanic from Long Island, New York, Bryant Neal Vinas, traveled to Waziristan, joined Al Qaeda, and then plotted to blow up New York, Penn Station, before he was arrested by the FBI. It's just that it's likely a lot easier to radicalize someone who was raised Muslim, because in that case you're playing off common emotional allegiances and shared experiences to engender a radicalized outlook.

[Dragon Angel]

Regarding Omar Mateen's precise motivations.... really, who cares at this point? The guy was an incoherent, angry mess. Obviously he had no direct connection or logistical support from Islamic State - nobody is claiming otherwise. It's the same deal as with the San Bernadino attack - self radicalized idiots who spent too much time watching ISIS propaganda videos online.

I honestly don't now; I mentioned him as an example that I thought would've at worst been taken into a small side discussion and later dropped. That was apparently naive of me.

I would love to just drop this and move on.

Can other motivations beyond pure religious extremism also haved been at work here? Sure, humans are fucking complex organisms. But Islamic State is an online propaganda machine that is literally encouraging people all over the world to do exactly what Omar Mateen and the San Bernadino shooters have done. They are trying to crowd source Jihad, for fuck's sake. It's the same shit Al Qaeda had been trying to do, and in fact "crowd sourced" Jihad was an element of Al Qaeda's overall strategy to bring down the US economy back in the 2000s, before IS became all the rage. And both Omar Mateen and the San Bernadino shooters are known to have consumed IS propaganda online. The FBI has even publicly stated they are "highly confident" that both Omar and the San Bernadino shooters were (at least partly) radicalized over the Internet.

So we can basically take the "self-hating gay" theory and decapitate it with Occam's Razor. Or at best, append it as a possible secondary emotional motivation.

So the question is, would Omar Mateen have done this if Islamic State online propaganda didn't exist? The answer is who the fuck knows, but probably not. If Islamic State (or some equivalent) didn't exist, it's likely Omar Mateen would just have been an angry asshole who fucked up all his relationships. It's impossible to say, because there's a huge overlap between "regular crazy people" and people who are attracted to Jihad. But Jihadist propaganda certainly provides a much clearer focus, direction and purpose for "regular crazy people" than would otherwise have manifested as definitive violent actions.

We can at least agree on "fuck ISIS and their message", then. I happen to be on the side of the vast majority of non-fundamentalist Muslims in their opinion of, and I paraphrase, let ISIS die by scaphism.

It's just the blanket pointing toward Islam as a whole that pisses me off, which you may or may not have intended to imply and if the case is not, I apologize for my remark.

And you know it's not just fucking Muslims who are susceptible to radicalization by Jihadist propaganda. An American Catholic Hispanic from Long Island, New York, Bryant Neal Vinas, traveled to Waziristan, joined Al Qaeda, and then plotted to blow up New York, Penn Station, before he was arrested by the FBI. It's just that it's likely a lot easier to radicalize someone who was raised Muslim, because in that case you're playing off common emotional allegiances and shared experiences to engender a radicalized outlook.

I have wishes that so many of the conditions that can breed for radicalization, like France's overreach of secularism and the West's general screwing with the Middle East, could finally be stopped so we don't end up making the problem even worse. Ultimately, the radicalized people are at fault, but humans do tend to be idiots and fall in with whatever strongmen can give the most convincing "solutions". When one perceives their people to be terrorized and these strongmen propose to them a way out of that, and possibly an afterlife to reward their efforts, the animal enters the fray, and they only see red from then on.

[Crown]

Regarding Omar Mateen's precise motivations.... really, who cares at this point? The guy was an incoherent, angry mess. Obviously he had no direct connection or logistical support from Islamic State - nobody is claiming otherwise. It's the same deal as with the San Bernadino attack - self radicalized idiots who spent too much time watching ISIS propaganda videos online.

I honestly don't now; I mentioned him as an example that I thought would've at worst been taken into a small side discussion and later dropped. That was apparently naive of me.

I would love to just drop this and move on.

Done.

[jwl]

It's not really state-sanctioned, it's just something that happens because of factors like Muslims being poorer than the average European, so buy houses in cheap areas, and them wanting to buy a house nearby to a Sunni mosque.

However, in France in particular French secularism is an additional problem. It means they are not allowed to wear but was or niquibs in public, and are not allowed to wear hajabs or "conspicuous religious symbols" (in some cases including long skirts) in schools or when working in the public sector, amongst other things. Double standards make this worse, since some areas relax French secularism rules for Christians but no such exceptions are made for Muslims. This can make Muslims feel unwelcome among France, increasing segregation.

Yeah ..... I can definitely understand how this form of secularism will backfire. Especially with such inconsistent ruling.

How does one even tell a long skirt is "too religious"? I mean, I'm not Muslim but looking at image searches of long skirts related to Islam, many could be easily just another fashion style not related to religion in the least. "Conspicuous religious symbols" seems just as subjective, like how black people's selfies are commonly misinterpreted as containing them flashing "gang symbols". I suppose the rules being relaxed for Christians (presumably Jews too?) means they can wear crucifixes, while Muslims are left out in the dark.

This sounds like as much of a randomly-targeted disaster as NYC's stop-and-frisk.

"Large" crucifixes are not allowed, but "small" ones are (same with stars if David re: Jews), that's why it talks about "conspicuous" religious clothing.

The original skirt that set this off was this:
(but she took off the hajab before going into school), but this set off a series of other cases of Muslims with long skirts being sent home. Note that this only amounted to two hundred or so cases, it is not universal across the country.

[jwl]

Also, apperently the attacker, according to the people who knew him: smoked, drank alcohol, ate pork, took drugs, didn't observe Ramadan (which is one of the five pillars of Islam), and only started going to the mosque regularly last April.

[loomer]

No surprise there. A lot of radicalized people of any stripe lack full understanding or obedience to their religion or ideology's tenets. They have a vague understanding that people exploit or which they use as a cover for other reasons they feel angry and alone.

[jwl]

Well his he doesn't observe Ramadan, is islam really "his religion"? Are you a Muslim if you don't attempt to adhere to the five pillars of Islam?

[Elheru Aran]

Well his he doesn't observe Ramadan, is islam really "his religion"? Are you a Muslim if you don't attempt to adhere to the five pillars of Islam?

Same way a Jew who eats bacon is still a Jew. Same way a Southern Baptist who drinks a six-pack of beer on the weekend is still a Baptist. It's as much a cultural thing as it is a faith thing. If you pinned them down and asked them directly, they might have to confess that they aren't very good Jews, Baptists, or in this guy's case Muslim, but they would still consider themselves to be part of that group.

[jwl]

Well his he doesn't observe Ramadan, is islam really "his religion"? Are you a Muslim if you don't attempt to adhere to the five pillars of Islam?

Same way a Jew who eats bacon is still a Jew. Same way a Southern Baptist who drinks a six-pack of beer on the weekend is still a Baptist. It's as much a cultural thing as it is a faith thing. If you pinned them down and asked them directly, they might have to confess that they aren't very good Jews, Baptists, or in this guy's case Muslim, but they would still consider themselves to be part of that group.

Well dietary restrictions aren't really a fundamental part of Judaism and non-drinking of alcohol isn't really a fundamental part of Baptist-ism. The five pillars are the fundamental part of Islam. You could say that a Muslim who doesn't attempt to follow the five pillars is more like a Baptist who baptises babies or a trinitarian Jew.

Messianic Jews, for example, may consider themselves Jews, but I think it is perfectly legitimate to say they are christains and you can't be both.