Florida Night Club Shooting - at least 20 dead - impact on US elections?

I think your issue here is that you are confusing what you might do at those clubs with what the evidence shows. There is no evidence whatsoever that he was "cruising for men", and like I've pointed out to you before, there is a history of targets being cased for years before finally being attacked so the fact that he cased the place for years doesn't mean that he was doing any different.

Also, him flat out saying what his motive was is fully supported by tons of information about his ties to extremism. You are still trying to dismiss them in favor of your dreamed up scenario....and it's pretty weird.

 

1) Yeah, this is a message board. So you should read the messages. Why you would say something like I thought it was a crime for gays to use apps is unquestionably puzzling if you read the whole thread and my discussion with Bobby.

When you inject yourself into conversations without context, you look like a fool.

This happens again and again.

1) I respond to Nook saying "I am not sure what else you possibly need to know what his motives/opinions are." with Stopping at "he's an Islamic extremist, that's the only thing that matters" is simplistic
2) You say "Strawman. Nobody said that."
3) I literally was responding to somebody who said that!
4) Pointed it out to you.
5) Radio silence.

Now in this case, you're jumping on the word motive when I was pointing out that the dude says incoherent things period, so anything he states as his motive should be suspect--as implying I think gays using apps is a crime?

You're bad with subtext ATW, but you're even worse with s**tty accusations about what other people are thinking.

 

The difference between me and you Bobby, is I'm bringing up new facts. I've said several times he is an Islamic extremist. But he's also gay and has a deep connection with the venue he attacked. And he supports Hezbollah and ISIS. You're the one denying the latter two for some strange reason. I HAVE NEVER DENIED THE FORMER.

I am pointing out this isn't the kind of simple-minded "ISIS WAR ON AMERICA, THE OTHERS ARE COMING TO KILL US" narrative some people want to pull.

It's important because some people, like Trump, will pull this and use it to enact policy without stopping to think twice about fact or reason.

 

dude, you think I'm mad because I'm swearing at you?

LOL.

quit trippin dawg. you could never anger me, you cute little cherub filled with discomfort and insecurity

If you want to continue the discussion about the killer, I do suggest you read posts. Picking up after your lack of reading gets to be a chore after a while.

 

He cased Disneyland too, so I suspect his motive was to cruise for mouse hole.

 

Sure, whatever, Neil Strauss XD.

If you want to end the discussion, so be it. Have a good day

^ This is why you get into pissfights with other posters, ATW, not your thinly researched posts. Was just looking out for you. But, you know, I know how you Trump types take constructive criticism

 

The difference between the two of us when it comes to this issue is that I am interested in relevant facts and you are oddly obsessed with the shooter's sexual preference.

There's no actual evidence that he was secretly gay, and even if some true evidence comes out, it's still not relevant to this case in any way.

I'm looking at things the FBI has said about him, things he's said himself, things his wife has said, things his father has said and you are focusing on TMZ nonsense.

His links to extremism are incredibly solid and well supported with facts, yet you seem to think all of that is undermined by a co-worker claiming that he told him he was a member of Hezbollah 3 years ago? Brilliant work Holmes.

 

Um, no actual evidence except for a phone submitted to the FBI, and several credible eyewitnesses.

Don't be thick Bobby, knowing that he frequented this venue for three years as a client is relevant to parsing out why he attacked it. How is that irrelevant to an investigation?

 

I've spelled this out to you a few times already kiddo yet you somehow seem to miss it every time. In the past there have been several instances of terror targets that have been watched and cased for years before the actual attack. Him going to that club is not evidence of homosexuality, him having an app on his phone is not evidence of homosexuality. Both of those things can easily be explained as being part of his preparation for attack.....but of course that won't work for your narrative so you dreamed up something else.

I've also pointed out to you several times that even if he was a closet homosexual, that information is irrelevant because there is no link between homosexuality and terrorism. There IS a link between radical Islam and terrorism so the fact that he was a radicalized Muslim is the only relevant factor no matter what his sexual status. He could be gay, straight or something in between and it's the radicalization that would make him consider terrorism.

He might prefer Pepsi over Coca-Cola and that information wouldn't suggest terrorism either, so there would be no reason to fixate on it.

 

If you read my posts in the thread as this is a message board and not a private 1-to-1 chat you might have a better idea of what I think about that scenario. I have always said this was influenced by Islamic extremism.

But yeah, way to call me patronizing of a person who was so incoherent he was gay and attacked a venue he patronized frequently as a client.

You people can't seem to sit well with facts, for some damn reason. It took Bobby quite a while to admit that he likely frequented this establishment as a client for years before the attack. Thank god you're not investigators if you don't think that's worth following up on.

 

So you're saying I am contriving theories--and your theory is that him asking his policeman buddy out on a date, sending messages to gay men on an app, and frequenting the nightclub was a 3-year plan to research gay people and how they'd react to an AR-15?



I'm presenting facts. And the facts have many credible witnesses saying that he was 1) gay 2) a frequent visitor to the venue. That's intensely relevant to any possible investigation! Yes, if you're a client of an establishment and you take a gun to it, saying "oh, he was there just to "research"" shouldn't stop any sane mind from looking further. You're the one who wants to dismiss these facts because ???. Having a simple story is good enough?

 

Here, let me let you infer that from my postings in the thread before "my agitated rambling", you've gotten quite good at it. After all, if you can infer that I think gay people using apps is a crime, I can't wait to see what you spout off next!

Yes, I do want all gay people to die. Why wasn't I clearer about that?

 

As has been done with other attacks, you case a place over a long period of time in order to find out tendencies and how quickly people respond to incidents (like him being drunk and belligerent or pulling a knife on someone) and the force they respond with. You also case the place for a long time to determine the best time and date to attack in order to do the most damage. Also if you are looking for a potential target, wouldn't you want to ask gay men where they'd go on a date? Ask someone out and see their suggestion, use a gay app to see what they'd say. If most of them say one particular club, you have your target. At that point you begin to case the place and prepare your attack.

We know that he was a radicalized Muslim that went to a mosque that taught that homosexuals were to be killed....I mean that's motive in and of itself. Him being gay straight or something between is irrelevant once you know that information. On top of all of that you are dismissing the guy's own comments, his father's comments, his wife's comments, and the conclusions of the FBI agents that investigated him years ago for your theory.

Stop being such a rookie.

 

Sure, why not cast aspersions on me while you're at it.

You're a great mind-reader aren't you? I self-hate, I think gays using apps are a crime, and I take drugs while writing. Trifecta. whoo. You can tell why I'd roll over in glee to engage with your questions, especially when your original way of inserting yourself into this conversation clearly showed you don't read anything written here.

As you have said, this is a message board, so carry on--but I'd like to point out that I have never alluded to anything in your personal life and neither do I care.