HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Lynch: Authorities to rel...

Sun Jun 19, 2016, 09:49 PM

Lynch: Authorities to release limited transcripts of calls with Orlando shooter

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN)Attorney General Loretta Lynch said Sunday that law enforcement will release limited transcripts Monday from the three phone calls that Orlando shooter Omar Mateen had with police.

"They will talk about what he told law enforcement on the ground as the events were unfolding," Lynch told CNN's Dana Bash on "State of the Union."

The Justice Department says the FBI and Orlando authorities, in coordination with the U.S. Attorney's office, are expected on Monday to release a limited transcript of conversations Mateen had with authorities during the shooting as well as a timeline.

"He talked about his pledges of allegiance to a terrorist group. He talked about his motivations for why he was claiming at that time he was committing this horrific act. He talked about American policy in some ways," Lynch said. In one of the call he pledged allegiance to ISIS, authorities have said.
"The reason why we're going to limit these transcripts is to avoid re-victimizing those people that went through this horror. But it will contain the substance of his conversations," she said.

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/19/politics/orlando-shooting-transcripts/



Guess we will really know what happened or his motivation. Her reason for not releasing the complete transcript seems strange. Why wouldn't the victims want to know the whole story?

66 replies, 5140 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 66 replies Author Time Post
Reply Lynch: Authorities to release limited transcripts of calls with Orlando shooter (Original post)
Jesus Malverde Jun 2016 OP
philosslayer Jun 2016 #1
greytdemocrat Jun 2016 #23
uhnope Jun 2016 #35
Darb Jun 2016 #63
MosheFeingold Jun 2016 #27
librarylu Jun 2016 #2
uhnope Jun 2016 #6
oberliner Jun 2016 #11
uhnope Jun 2016 #51
oberliner Jun 2016 #52
Mosby Jun 2016 #54
oberliner Jun 2016 #55
librarylu Jun 2016 #16
Silver_Witch Jun 2016 #3
uhnope Jun 2016 #7
Silver_Witch Jun 2016 #59
uhnope Jun 2016 #60
philosslayer Jun 2016 #17
Jesus Malverde Jun 2016 #22
Silver_Witch Jun 2016 #58
Feeling the Bern Jun 2016 #4
uhnope Jun 2016 #8
uhnope Jun 2016 #5
CJCRANE Jun 2016 #9
Demit Jun 2016 #10
oberliner Jun 2016 #12
Jesus Malverde Jun 2016 #13
Demit Jun 2016 #14
mahatmakanejeeves Jun 2016 #18
uhnope Jun 2016 #20
mahatmakanejeeves Jun 2016 #21
uhnope Jun 2016 #25
B2G Jun 2016 #28
oberliner Jun 2016 #30
CJCRANE Jun 2016 #40
B2G Jun 2016 #15
Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #36
B2G Jun 2016 #37
pintobean Jun 2016 #38
Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #39
Darb Jun 2016 #64
Crepuscular Jun 2016 #19
Demit Jun 2016 #24
B2G Jun 2016 #29
Demit Jun 2016 #31
B2G Jun 2016 #33
Crepuscular Jun 2016 #32
Demit Jun 2016 #47
Crepuscular Jun 2016 #49
Demit Jun 2016 #62
Crepuscular Jun 2016 #66
DustyJoe Jun 2016 #26
uhnope Jun 2016 #34
MosheFeingold Jun 2016 #41
uhnope Jun 2016 #42
MosheFeingold Jun 2016 #45
uhnope Jun 2016 #50
DustyJoe Jun 2016 #43
uhnope Jun 2016 #44
oberliner Jun 2016 #57
Darb Jun 2016 #65
B2G Jun 2016 #46
melman Jun 2016 #48
King_David Jun 2016 #53
Mosby Jun 2016 #56
melman Jun 2016 #61

Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Jun 19, 2016, 09:54 PM

1. This is a wise decision

 

There is no need to take the rantings of a mad man and turn them into ammunition for Islamophobic fanatics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:48 AM

23. Brother

Some here on DU are willing to go to any
lengths to ignore the truth as long as it
validates what the administration is feeding us
on this tragic shooting. Shameful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to greytdemocrat (Reply #23)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:53 AM

35. what truth is that?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to greytdemocrat (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 08:55 AM

63. Wow, that was a huge

 

pantload. How ever did you pass that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:05 AM

27. Baloney

It feeds into the narrative that Democrats are soft on terror (or worse, complicit).

You can't make shit not smell by calling it a rose.

What this is about is the billions of dollars the Saudis pump into our political system -- most notably starting (or at least getting really pronounced) with W. Bush, but continuing on to this day --AND the economic blackmail the Saudis have by threatening to dump 750 billion in US Treasuries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Jun 19, 2016, 10:00 PM

2. Why not?

She stated the reason; they don't want to spread his propaganda. We know the gist of it already - he supported groups that are opposed to each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librarylu (Reply #2)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:56 AM

6. no that's not what she said.

 

She said it was to spare the hundreds of mourners. The calls were made during the massacre. Could be some very disturbing things on the audio, disturbing to the surviving family members

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 07:57 AM

11. She has actually specifically said they will take out his pledging allegiance to ISIS

 

That part, in particular, will be removed from the transcript.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 06:10 PM

51. you are right, Oberliner

 

and that was weird that the AG said that.

Apparently the transcript now released is unedited. Is that right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #51)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 06:16 PM

52. Yes, they have released an unedited transcript

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #52)


Response to Mosby (Reply #54)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 08:08 PM

55. Minimally

 

And doesn't Allah in Arabic translate to God?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:03 AM

16. According to two news stories I've read

that's what she said about what's being left out of the transcript. "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]."

It's on the video here (one word is different; she said "individual's":

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/06/19/lynch_partial_transcript_of_orlando_911_calls_will_have_references_to_isis_cut_out.html

They're releasing a partial transript, not the audio. Sorry for the confusion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Jun 19, 2016, 10:02 PM

3. They are doing this to promote the "terrorist" angle

 

Last edited Tue Jun 21, 2016, 01:19 AM - Edit history (1)

Rather than the religious zealotry of his family. This man was an American born and raised. Covering his hatred with some half-ass ISIS allegiance is crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #3)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:59 AM

7. where do you get this nonsense

 

you think Lynch is micromanaging the recordings to serve some evil agenda?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #7)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 01:21 AM

59. I think Lynch is editing the tapes.

 

No idea if her plan is evil or not. It is to promote the idea that it is terrorist plot so they can clamp down more. That is what I believe!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #59)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 02:47 AM

60. most of the speculation on this thread was the opposite

 

most thought that the plan was to minimize the terrorism angle.

In the end, the transcript was unedited. So poof goes Lynch's evil plan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #3)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:05 AM

17. You're referring to this guy as an angel?

 

Am I reading this right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #17)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:35 AM

22. Pretty obvious they meant angle....nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #17)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 01:18 AM

58. Oh for fucks sake it was a typo.

 

Spare me the rod please sir!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 02:21 AM

4. Sorry, Loretta. Redacted crap leads me to believe you're hiding something. It's not like the US or

 

State governments have always been 100% honest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Feeling the Bern (Reply #4)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 04:02 AM

8. and what would she be hiding, pray tell

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:53 AM

5. are you actually conspiracy theorizing on this

 

is there no limit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #5)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 04:55 AM

9. What would you say if the Bush administration did this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CJCRANE (Reply #9)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 06:47 AM

10. Did what, limit the transcript of conversations taped during the shooting?

 

Maybe there are shootings caught on tape, and they're editing them out? Maybe they're editing out people screaming, or begging for their lives?

You know, sometimes you just have to trust the people in charge, that their motives aren't always to hide things from you.

Besides, the story says "the FBI and Orlando authorities, in coordination with the U.S. Attorney's office, are expected on Monday to release a limited transcript of conversations Mateen had with authorities during the shooting as well as a timeline." So, local authorities too. That would be a mighty big, and really kind of not believable, coverup, if that's what you're suggesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 07:58 AM

12. Lynch said the transcripts will not include Mateen's pledge of allegiance to ISIS.

 

"What we're not going to do is further this man's propaganda," she told NBC's "Meet the Press." "We're not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance."

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/national/fbi-releasing-partial-transcript-omar-mateens-call/nrjdw/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 07:59 AM

13. Read the article.

The only thing they are releasing is a written transcript.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Reply #13)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 08:23 AM

14. I always read articles.

 

Transcripts, by definition, take words that were spoken and put them into written form. Use your imagination of what might have been audible on that tape that would turn your stomach to see written down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:07 AM

18. "... sometimes you just have to trust the people in charge...."

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

I know some people want to see a conspiracy in everything, and that's just who's finding a conspiracy in this.

Rudolph Giuliani and John Bolton are upset? How can I go on?

Still, what good does it do for the DOJ to tell us what's in the transcripts and then say, "but you can't hear it"?

DOJ to scrub Islam references from transcripts of Orlando terrorist's calls to police

Published June 20, 2016

The Department of Justice is scrubbing references of radical Muslim beliefs from the transcripts of calls Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen made to police during his massacre, Attorney General Loretta Lynch said Sunday.

A partial transcript of the conversations between authorities and Mateen, who killed 49 and wounded 53 in the June 12 attack at a Florida gay nightclub, is set to be released on Monday. But Lynch, who appeared on numerous Sunday talk shows, said the transcripts will not include Mateen's oath of loyalty to ISIS or any other religious justification for the attack.

“What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda,” Lynch told NBC. “We are not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance {to the Islamic State}.”

Critics blasted the move by the administration, which has rejected branding terrorist acts as motivated by radical Islam and has sought to paint the Orlando attack as a gun control issue. ... "This is not just a simple wording issue," Ric Grenell, a Fox News contributor and former aide to UN Ambassador John Bolton told Fox and Friends Monday morning. "The fact that Loretta Lynch is somehow redacting the specific enemy that is being called out here is a PR move."

Fortunately, due to the secretive nature of the interwebs, the complete transcript - or what is purported to be the complete transcript - will never see the light of day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mahatmakanejeeves (Reply #18)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:16 AM

20. and just what would that conspiracy be, please?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #20)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:21 AM

21. I don't know. Why can't we just hear the recordings? NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mahatmakanejeeves (Reply #21)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 10:20 AM

25. because dying screams of victims would revisit the horror on the families, for one.

 

When a pedophile is arrested with kiddie porn, is it a cover up conspiracy when the kiddie porn is not released to the public? Do you want that released too?

WTF.

What possible conspiracy are you imagining?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #25)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:19 AM

28. These references are being redacted from the WRITTEN transcripts

 

Don't write <insert scream>.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #25)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:33 AM

30. "Dying screams of victims" are not what she said would be redacted

 

She said his pledge to ISIS and other similar remarks would be removed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 12:58 PM

40. Britney Spears, is that you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 08:51 AM

15. This is complete and utter horseshit

 

And makes this administration look like total idiots or worse.

This is censorship, plain and simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B2G (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 12:11 PM

36. 'Total idiots or worse'--What do you mean by that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #36)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 12:15 PM

37. Idiots because it won't lesson the pain one iota, or

 

worse because they're trying to rewrite history.

I leave it to you to decide which it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B2G (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 12:24 PM

38. Just served on the jury for this



On Mon Jun 20, 2016, 12:19 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

This is complete and utter horseshit
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1494885

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

The phrase "or worse" implies that the Administration is somehow complicit in this. Disgusting, and below the standards of DU. Should be removed.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jun 20, 2016, 12:24 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I think this might be the last jury under the old system! And the post deserves a hide.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The alertist is a bit extreme. B2G just might have something there.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This alert is complete and utter horseshit
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Who appointed you the 'standards' czar?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #38)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 12:54 PM

39. I wasn't the alerter.

And contrary to others I actually was not the alerter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B2G (Reply #15)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 08:57 AM

64. Nearly the weakest sauce I have ever seen.

 

Try again. Back to the stove for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:09 AM

19. Very troubling

Whether accurate or not, it leaves the impression that the Government is selectively editing the transcript to fit the narrative that they want be imprinted on the minds of Americans. If a Republican administration was editing out derogatory references about gays, to pump up the Radical Islam angle, this forum would be losing it's shit.

How about they just release the transcript verbatim and allow everyone to draw their own conclusions? I don't need the government deciding for me what is or is not relevant to the story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crepuscular (Reply #19)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 10:16 AM

24. The AG is telling you explicitly what they are editing out. There's no mystery to it.

 

And people in authority make decisions all the time, about what gets made public. Judges presiding over trials, for example, make decisions on what the jury may or may not see, because some things are just too inflammatory.

Why can't we just see the dead bodies? Why don't they show us all the blood? Because it's not really necessary for you to know what happened. You know there were bodies in all sorts of awful states, and you heard people talk about all the blood. The authorities aren't releasing the photos that doubtless they took at the scene. That's a kind of "editing" too. Are you troubled by that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #24)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:21 AM

29. Very poor analogy. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B2G (Reply #29)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:35 AM

31. Lol. Is the nt to emphasize that your point is so excellent you don't even have to make one?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #31)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:40 AM

33. My point was made

 

Not showing bullet ridden bodies is not even close to being the same as glossing over motive.

Don't be obtuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #24)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:37 AM

32. ...

No, the AG is not telling us Exactly what is being edited out, only a vague reference to the subject of the content being edited. You are also ignoring the fact that 99% of those who eventually read the transcript won't be aware of the fact that it was edited or what the material that was edited was referring to.

Again, no useful purpose is served by editing this transcript. In order to accurately record history, primary material is vital, not material that has been edited by an un-elected individual, who is doing what "they" perceive is "good".

As far as photo's, etc., yes I'm equally troubled by those not being released. An image is worth a thousand words.
Photo's of the scarred backs of slaves, or the victims of Auschwitz or a naked Vietnamese girl who was burned with napalm are horrific, yet are also powerful images that offer perspective to following generations. There are all sorts of horrific pictures in the public domain, while I have no problem waiting a while until this incident is not as fresh in peoples memories, at some point the photos should be released so that the heinous nature of this event won't be ignored or diminished by those in future years. I'm an adult, I don't need the government deciding what I should or should not see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crepuscular (Reply #32)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:35 PM

47. The primary material (the tapes) still exists.

 

Has the AG said she will erase these tapes? No.

The names of the groups the killer pledged allegiance to have been widely reported. Are newspaper stories being scrubbed of this information? No. Is Google being pressured to drop links to these stories? No.

So the information is out there and readily available: the killer named three groups he claimed to be affiliated with but wasn't familiar enough with to know that two of them are actually fighting each other. He was confused, but that fact would be lost on casual American readers. They'd probably assume that naming three terrorist groups as his BFFs just meant he was super duper committed, instead of just blowing smoke. There's too much hatred in this country at a simmer already. Mob mentalities don't take time to examine inconsistencies. We have a growing mob mentality in this country, and its leader is Trump. The AG is trying to tamp it down, not feed it with raw information that could invite faulty conclusions.

It's a judgment call, but I think it's a good one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #47)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 04:50 PM

49. Your response

highlights the very problem that results from selective editing or censorship of information that should be public.

I and other adults don't need you or the government to tell me what the gunmans motivations were. You say he was confused and in a condescending manner indicate that "casual american readers" would not understand that "fact". It's not a fact, it's an opinion, an interpretation, one which may or may not have any basis in reality.

The administration clearly wants to direct impressions of this event a certain direction and are furnishing a narrative that supports those impressions. In blunt terms, that is called spin.

Release the transcript verbatim and let the public draw their own conclusions. Doing anything less simply fuels conspiracy fantasies and undermines the credibility of the government.

I'll pass on half baked interpretations and finally spun narratives, just provide the source material and leave the analysis up to the individual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crepuscular (Reply #49)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 08:06 AM

62. The information already is public.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #62)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 09:20 AM

66. ...

It is now that wiser heads decided that it was a stupid, moronic gesture to edit the transcripts prior to releasing them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 10:49 AM

26. Too Late

Government attempting to stuff the cat back in the bag that got out just after the shooting.

This isn't 1984 and we don't need Orwells 'Truth Censors' out in force to change history for us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DustyJoe (Reply #26)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:50 AM

34. what cat is that?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #34)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 01:20 PM

41. The cat

Self-identified as an Islamic soldier who was killing people in the name of Islam in retribution for bomb strikes in Syria.

Given his father's connections with the Taliban, his long links with some notable ISIS member (e.g., the American who was the worst suicide bomber in Syrian history), his links with various radical Imans, and his repeated professions of doing things to advance Islamist movement, I think we all know what this cat is.

It's a stupid Bush-era idea to tiptoe around the fact that there is a cancerous disease infecting a large portion of Islam.

It's far past time to declare war on ISIS and use war powers to restrict certain political organizations that masquerade as Muslim organizations/religions, just as we restricted "German Homeland" groups during WWII.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MosheFeingold (Reply #41)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 01:55 PM

42. a very RW, Trump-like message. Are you getting that from Breitbart?

 

links to all your assertions, please.

So, you are calling for what--mass surveillance of all American Muslims? Rounding them up? What, exactly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #42)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:06 PM

45. How silly

First, the childish "links to all your assertions."

Please. The facts stated are available to anyone who is an apt reader of this very website, and neither are they controversial, nor disputed. Silliness like that reveals you as a non-serious poster.

Second, the strawman "you are calling for what--mass surveillance of all American Muslims? Rounding them up?" that can neither be found nor even implied in my post.

There is a grave and significant group of fascists that use the religion of Islam as cover and inspiration. There is no more need to mass spy on Muslims that there was to mass spy on US citizens of German origin in WWII. What one does look at is the internet hate mongers. The radical Imans that want to murder gays, Jews, and subjugate women. Those who proclaim ISIS is a caliphate.

We did much the same in WWII with German groups --- there was an American Nazi party that was banned, various German Bund groups came under investigation, etc. A fair number were imprisoned.

Just as we have now, we had claims of "unfair" and what-we-now-call "profiling." But the SCOTUS was very clear, when there is a Declaration of War, certain things (like gatherings of Nazis in the USA during WWII) are forbidden and can be quashed.

That way, the hate groups masquerading as mosques can be closed, the agents of ISIS arrested, etc.

This was FDR's idea, btw, the original Progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MosheFeingold (Reply #45)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 06:06 PM

50. sorry, no

 

link to your assertions please. That's a basic rule of the Internet.

Do you actually think that the FBI is not already totally overwhelmingly keeping track of terrorism in the USA? Do you really think "agents of Isis arrested" is not already happening? Do you really think that US law enforcement is just being timid and constrained at this point? And that "hate groups masquerading as mosques" are not already totally swamped by rigorous FBI attention?

Which mosques do you want to close, exactly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #34)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 02:32 PM

43. kitty obvious

the first news reports after police pressers and statements within hours of the shootings that the shooting was islamic terrorism, that cat. AG trying to get the kitty back in the bag now by removing/altering transcripts is useless, but good political theater showing how some in power like herself can and will manipulate the truth. 49 sets of spouses, parents, siblings deserve the truth, so do the 50+ injured by this scum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DustyJoe (Reply #43)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 02:50 PM

44. now that the transcripts are released, do you still think this is somehow

 

the AG "showing how some in power like herself can and will manipulate the truth"? http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/orlando-shooting-transcripts-fbi-1.3643109

You claim that the AG is trying to change the perception of the shooter, but you yourself admit that the media has already been deluged with implications that it was connected with Islamic terrorism. Do you actually think her editing will make that difference, and is the goal, even though it would obviously be a foolhardy goal at this point?

You sound a lot like the folks yelling "Benghazi" and "Obama birth certificate", frankly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #44)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:23 PM

57. Are you surprised that "dying screams of victims" were not what was redacted?

 

You seemed to think that was what was being omitted in your earlier posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DustyJoe (Reply #43)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 08:58 AM

65. You missed the point, curiously,

 

just like the Pubes do, every time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:23 PM

46. Just saw they released the unredacted transcripts

 

The heat must have been unbearable.

Good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:44 PM

48. transcript

Last edited Mon Jun 20, 2016, 06:34 PM - Edit history (1)

[img] [/img]



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to melman (Reply #48)

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 06:32 PM

53. Sounds pretty clear to me. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to melman (Reply #48)


Response to Mosby (Reply #56)

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 06:58 AM

61. Agreed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread