• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI: No evidence the Orlando killer was gay or used gay apps

The FBI looks into everything. They've already said there is *NO* evidence that the gay theory was true whatsoever.

That's false, the FBI said no such thing, "unnamed sources" did.
 
Other than people coming forward and claiming that they had sex with him.

Even if he was gay, there is no evidence that his sexual orientation was the cause of his actions. He already stated the cause in his 911 call.
 
The FBI looks into everything. They've already said there is *NO* evidence that the gay theory was true whatsoever.

That isn't actually what the article said, and it's quoting anonymous sources so I'm not sure if there is more out there.

"FBI investigators so far have not turned up persuasive evidence"

"But the officials say the FBI, which has conducted about 500 interviews and is reviewing evidence collected from Mateen's phone, has not found concrete evidence to corroborate such accounts nearly two weeks into the investigation. They also cautioned that the investigation is ongoing and that nothing has formally been ruled out."

Who knows, but the article at least is written wishy washy enough that the FBI could have at least some "evidence" that he was gay or had gay tendencies, but can't prove it yet.
 
Even if he was gay, there is no evidence that his sexual orientation was the cause of his actions. He already stated the cause in his 911 call.

And yet there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that his call about ISIS was simply a front to hide his self-revulsion about being gay. He also at other times pledged loyalty to Hezbollah, a group diametrically opposed to ISIS and at war with them, and, more importantly, he did this during Ramadan where his sin of being gay could be washed away in the eyes of other Muslims if he went out a martyr.

Just because he said something doesn't make it necessarily so.
 
That isn't actually what the article said, and it's quoting anonymous sources so I'm not sure if there is more out there.

"FBI investigators so far have not turned up persuasive evidence"

"But the officials say the FBI, which has conducted about 500 interviews and is reviewing evidence collected from Mateen's phone, has not found concrete evidence to corroborate such accounts nearly two weeks into the investigation. They also cautioned that the investigation is ongoing and that nothing has formally been ruled out."

Who knows, but the article at least is written wishy washy enough that the FBI could have at least some "evidence" that he was gay or had gay tendencies, but can't prove it yet.

SHHHHHHH!!!!! You're going to ruin the manufacturer outrage and false narrative!
 
So the man was a good, peace-loving Muslim? Doesn't that mess up the leftwing narrative?

Oh you mean the narrative that doesn't exist except in the small minds of right wing nuts?
 
And yet there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that his call about ISIS was simply a front to hide his self-revulsion about being gay. He also at other times pledged loyalty to Hezbollah, a group diametrically opposed to ISIS and at war with them, and, more importantly, he did this during Ramadan where his sin of being gay could be washed away in the eyes of other Muslims if he went out a martyr.

Just because he said something doesn't make it necessarily so.

And even if that's the case, why was he repulsed at being gay? Religion maybe?
 
Open Letter to Whomever

I do not care if he was gay or just garden variety terrorist. At this point i say invade Iraq again, topple these people so we can keep this cycle rolling with whoever replaces this group as things War mongers want to scare us with. But all you people shouting Radical Islam, remember in ten more years when criticising whoever (prob Hillary) for a long war nobody can afford, with a people only oppressed by those you fear (because its not like ISIS infrastructure will survive our invasion). And its not like we will just go their and Intend to start killing civilians, but somehow we always do. Just remember, you people cried til we invaded, and whatever group we create by removing this one is on your "but Radical Islam needs to end" shouting head. News flash it wont if you keep telling believers of Islam their religion is evil, their people are medieval, and infer the only people affected is the richest nation on this planet. And now that it does, thats when something should be done. That is why these people hate us, and why they can screw with the minds of our own Citizens. Because all they have to do is get us yelling about their faith and culture, and we do the recruiting for them.

And although I hate to identify with liberals, when someone shouts some ignorant thing about Islam. And a liberal gives a devil's advocate response about Chritianity being no different. They are not blaming Christianity, they are trying to show you your being hypocritcal, and making the problem worse. As well as show the Irony of a follower of Christ, who never seems to turn the other cheek. Even though this tactic never works, mostly because someone ignorant enough to spew the hate of Islam can't tell a Devil's Advocate response. So liberals stop using that tactic, your only making it worse. Because no matter how well you argue, some bible thumper is going to pull a line out of context from one of your posts and misrepresent your argument after you've said your piece. (And commenting on their poor tactics will get your post reported). Ensuring a long line of qouted idiocy bringing you back to defend a position you wouldn't condone in others. Because they don't operate in abstract thought like most liberals. And just don't get it.

So let's go ahead and invade, get rid of these threats. Show people that buy into warmongering propaganda, that once again the head of the snake will just grow back everytime. And thank us for making more of their people hate Americans in the process. Because another war is where this leads. And thinking domestic policy that breaks freedom of religion is the answer is just Un-American.

Respect the religion of Islam, hold to our on ideals, and wait for capitalism to do our dirty work. Every generation our culture saturates more of the world, in a peaceful way. This saturation really pisses terrorists off. Because they can't stop it, and they don't understand it. Every generation of people is becoming less religious, less strict in interpreting the words of 2000 year old middle eastern shepards. We are winning by such a wide margin, it would be surprising if there were no terrorists at all.

In a battle of cultures, the one who hates is the one who will lose. Look at civil rights, Ghandi, and Jesus whose message arguably contributed the most to the fall of Westrm Rome. So call your congressman, and tellem to go to war again. And again with the next group. Hopefully, you or your children will catch on one day.

In the meantime, I and every other capitalist will make obscene profits from this war you think we need. Because war is what makes the Conservative no-tax economy stay afloat til a liberal takes the political hit fixing it in the post war downturn and ends up making bad policy to punish the people filling Conservatives war chests. Thus furthering the cycle, luckily we have a world full of brown people (that we screwed to some degree) to scare our population with. Coincidentally, those brown people have resources we wouldn't mind having. But that's neither here nor there.
 
Oh you mean the narrative that doesn't exist except in the small minds of right wing nuts?

You missed the sarcasm, but the narrative is Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. Yet here we have another "PEACEFUL" Muslim shooting 50 people.
 
Omar Mateen was also bipolar.

His father, a fundamentalist Muslim and Taliban supporter, spoke frequently about homosexuality being stone-to-death worthy.

Omar Mateen kept his homosexuality closeted from his father.

Omar Mateen's wife "encouraged" Omar to "take action".

Omar Mateen's low self-image and coming at a time when he was rising from the depressed to the manic stage, the most likely time to commit suicide for a bipolar sufferer ..

.. All of this factors into the cause of the terrible event.

It's not good to make politics of this.

Just because a fundamentalist religious reference played a role, that does not make it "terrorism".

For it to be terrorism, an organization that advocates and practices mass killing of innocents to make a statement must have had a direct hand in this.

Simply approving of it or being spoken of positively by the perpetrator does not mean such an organization was truly involved.

It appears Mateen acted independently of such an organization.

But let's let the investigation unfold.

And be reverent toward the victims.
 
For it to be terrorism, an organization that advocates and practices mass killing of innocents to make a statement must have had a direct hand in this..

Wrong.

Definition of terrorism: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal

It doesn't have to be caused by a group. An individual can be a terrorist.

Try again.
 
Wrong.

Definition of terrorism: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal

It doesn't have to be caused by a group. An individual can be a terrorist.

Try again.

Well, it still isn't an act of ISIS terrorism without ISIS being involved.

Let's suppose that Mateen didn't mention ISIS. Let's say he blamed the attack on the KKK. He attacked the gay nightclub because he pledged allegiance to the KKK.

Would his pledge alone draw a necessary relationship to the KKK ?
 
Of course, I never said that, the religious right and the liberal left are just two sides of the same coin and the farther to the extremes they become, the more identical they are.

This is just a very clear example of the left doing everything in their power not to place the blame on radical Islam. Here's a guy that calls 911 and pledges his allegiance to ISIS, who flat out says "here's why I'm doing it" and the left are falling all over themselves to find other explanations.

And actually, you do find lots of atheists on the right, it's estimated that 20% of atheists are conservatives, but the GOP isn't conservative and neither is the religious right, but lots of people think that's what conservatism is.

no, you are conflating the 'liberal left' with democrats, very few of whom are liberal. It's true that democrats are desperately trying to avoid mention of islam, for political reasons, but that has nothing to do with most liberals, whose views you won't find in the media

i think we can agree atheism is not represented by either party. According to the religious landscape study, only 30% of atheists identify as democrats

i believe you yourself lamented how rare conservative atheism is. That 20% seems to be "unaffiliated." The closest i found in polls show 14% as straight up atheist. Anyway, i just find it odd that you make this accusation of liberals when the vast majority of atheists are liberal
 
Well, it still isn't an act of ISIS terrorism without ISIS being involved.

Let's suppose that Mateen didn't mention ISIS. Let's say he blamed the attack on the KKK. He attacked the gay nightclub because he pledged allegiance to the KKK.

Would his pledge alone draw a necessary relationship to the KKK ?

If he watched as much KKK propaganda as he did of ISIS jihad insanity prior to the attack, if he grew up with a racist parent who instilled white supremacy to the extent he celebrated the charleston massacre the way he did the 9/11 attacks, yes

it's their ideology and if they don't want to be complicit, they can drop it
 
That's false, the FBI said no such thing, "unnamed sources" did.

well ya know, if an unnamed source said it and I need it to be said well then, proof enough :lamo

those damn lefties need to be put back in their place, even if I don't have a clue about what they really believe

and people wonder why Trump is popular
 
Omar Mateen was also bipolar.

His father, a fundamentalist Muslim and Taliban supporter, spoke frequently about homosexuality being stone-to-death worthy.

Omar Mateen kept his homosexuality closeted from his father.

Omar Mateen's wife "encouraged" Omar to "take action".

Omar Mateen's low self-image and coming at a time when he was rising from the depressed to the manic stage, the most likely time to commit suicide for a bipolar sufferer ..

.. All of this factors into the cause of the terrible event.

It's not good to make politics of this.

Just because a fundamentalist religious reference played a role, that does not make it "terrorism".

For it to be terrorism, an organization that advocates and practices mass killing of innocents to make a statement must have had a direct hand in this.

Simply approving of it or being spoken of positively by the perpetrator does not mean such an organization was truly involved.

It appears Mateen acted independently of such an organization.

But let's let the investigation unfold.

And be reverent toward the victims.

You are completely off from what terrorism is, terrorism is using violence and fear to bring social or political change, and is not limited to whether it was done for a group or an individual.
 
Actually no. Conservatives want him to be a Muslim and a terrorist. If he was some Muslim guy that was struggling with his sexuality it would destroy their narrative.

Liberals interestingly enough have the opposite motivation. They need the person to be troubled with his sexuality and gay to distract from the fact that he was a Muslim that attacked gays.

This is dumb conflating liberalism with democrats again, who simply don't want to lose millions of muslim votes thru donald trump's purges, which will be made easier if the public starts demanding it. Of course, they risk losing millions of gay votes as well so their strategy is entirely gun focused

No matter what it's a hate crime driven by religious fundamentalist. Whether he's gay has little to no bearing on that
 
Back
Top Bottom