Reports of a "mass casualty" situation @ nightclub in Orlando shooting

i like making bad jokes, and even that one is too much in poor taste for me.

For sure. It's more troubling since this person is supposed to protect us from terrorists. It's the very reason he was given that weapon. :stoneface:

definitely a bad joke, but hey..9/11 jokes fester on da Internet too so this isn't immune to dark humor.

i believe da saying goes "too soon".
 
A radical christian's despicable thoughts on this mass shooting... :smh:

 
Last edited:
A radical christian's despicable thoughts on this mass shooting... :smh:



That's disgusting. There's so much in there that it's hard to even start.

Every "sodomite" is a pedophile? Riiight.

AIDS is God's punishment for being gay? Riiight.
 
Lynch: "Partial Transcript" Of Orlando 911 Calls Will Have References To Islamic Terrorism Removed


In an interview with NBC's Chuck Todd, Attorney General Loretta Lynch says that on Monday, the FBI will release edited transcripts of the 911 calls made by the Orlando nightclub shooter to the police during his rampage.

"What we're not going to do is further proclaim this man's pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda," Lynch said. "We are not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance [to the Islamic State]."


LORETTA LYNCH: What we're announcing tomorrow is that the FBI is releasing a partial transcript of the killer's calls with law enforcement, from inside the club. These are the calls with the Orlando PD negotiating team, who he was, where he was... that will be coming out tomorrow and I'll be headed to Orlando on Tuesday.

CHUCK TODD: Including the hostage negotiation part of this?

LYNCH: Yes, it will be primarily a partial transcript of his calls with the hostage negotiators.

CHUCK TODD: You say partial, what's being left out?

LYNCH: What we're not going to do is further proclaim this man's pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda.

CHUCK TODD: We're not going to hear him talk about those things?

LYNCH: We will hear him talk about some of those things, but we are not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance and that. It will not be audio, it will be a printed transcript. But it will begin to capture the back and forth between him and the negotiators, we're trying to get as much information about this investigation out as possible. As you know, because the killer is dead, we have a bit more leeway there and we will be producing that information tomorrow



What the **** is with this administration and the George Orwell ****? It's so creepy.

Red meat for conspiracy theorists.

I wonder if this is about making sure the focus is on guns or about "protecting" Muslims from backlash.

In another interview she says she says "The reason why we're going to limit these transcripts is to avoid revictimizing those who went through this horror."

I simply can't buy it

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...references_to_isis_cut_out.html#disqus_thread
 
Last edited:
Really curious as to what he really said in the portions that will be left out. I can see them not wanting ISIL to get any more credit for these massacres. Especially when there isn't much evidence that they had any hand in coordinating this attack (unless I missed something).

Really really wondering what they're really leaving out, though.
 
Last edited:
Editing out "ISIS" because you "don't want to help spread their violent propaganda" doesn't work if YOU STILL PRINT THE REST OF IT.
 
Agreed, but that's what I think the thought process is regardless of whether or not I agree with it.
 
Last edited:
Or not giving attention ****** the attention they yearn for. Akin to how sports teams don't show people running onto the court/field anymore, don't give the jackasses what they want.

You really think their reasons are so benevolent?

I have a feeling it's so they can concentrate on gun legislation and not have everyone's attention on isis. Doesn't fit the narrative they want. The guy also went to saudi arabia twice and his dad seems to have some contoversies. I don't think they want any focus on the islamic extremism part of the story.
 
But as soon as something like this happens i usually hear isis being brought up immediately . Its like they cant wait to say the word. Just doesnt add up.

That's the media not this administration. The administration only downplays **** or deflects attention.

Probably just running the clock out.
 
Last edited:
Or not giving attention ****** the attention they yearn for. Akin to how sports teams don't show people running onto the court/field anymore, don't give the jackasses what they want.

You really think their reasons are so benevolent?

I have a feeling it's so they can concentrate on gun legislation and not have everyone's attention on isis. Doesn't fit the narrative they want. The guy also went to saudi arabia twice and his dad seems to have some contoversies. I don't think they want any focus on the islamic extremism part of the story.


Kinda seems like you want the radical Islam thing to be pushed because it fits the narrative you want.
 
It's the gov't, no one knows their true intent, but none of that negates that being a possible side effect despite whatever narrative you're trying to create.
 
Kinda seems like you want the radical Islam thing to be pushed because it fits the narrative you want.

It's not a narrative if it's the truth. Either he said those things on tape or he didn't. I'm not the one on TV specifying which parts I don't want released.

I personally think it's a mixture of easy access to weaponry and islamic extremism. They are not mutually exclusive. I do NOT think this problem is purely about islamic extremism. Yet the fact that it's being purposely downplayed is troubling. And i don't buy for one second that it's only about protecting muslims from bigotry and harassment. This is a completely different situation than parsing over terminology.
 
Last edited:
Kinda seems like you want the radical Islam thing to be pushed because it fits the narrative you want.

It's not a narrative if it's the truth. Either he said those things on tape or he didn't. I'm not the one on TV specifying which parts I don't want released.

I personally think it's a mixture of easy access to weaponry and islamic extremism. They are not mutually exclusive. I do NOT think this problem is purely about islamic extremism. Yet the fact that it's being purposely downplayed is troubling. And i don't buy for one second that it's only about protecting muslims from bigotry and harassment. This is a completely different situation than parsing over terminology.

In your view, what is it about if not protecting muslims from bogotry?
 
In your view, what is it about if not protecting muslims from bogotry?

About narrowing the focus to gun control. Never let an opportunity go to waste.

And...

Further the narrtive that ISIS is being defeated. Americans don't seem to really care if they are simply losing territory when someone claiming to be part of the movement kills 50 people. Less mention of ISIS the better as far as the administration is concerned
 
Back
Top Bottom