It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Omar Mateen was not at the club in Orlando!

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: svetlana84
a reply to: Liquesence

They might not have an obligation to relase material. But if they want us to believe the official story - they better provide some proof.


And again: this is a fact/proof/evidence finding mission started by me.
I have no proof he was NOT there - i have no proof he WAS there.

Open investigation. I will accept any version, based on proof or evidence.


They are under no obligation to prove to *you* he was there, because there already is plenty of evidence.

There is more proof it was him than proof it wasn't; therefore, it is up to you to provide evidence, not speculation, it wasn't him.




posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut




they had confirmed the shooters identity


Based on? How did they confirm his identity?




we have no reason to believe this has no happenend


"Believe" is the word. I want to know. I want to have solid proof.
Believing is for religious people (and Bieber fans) Sorry for the pun.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
He was and he killed 49 people


Nothing like empirical evidence, eh?
Can't say as I'm much on believing the FBI's say so.
3 interviews and 2 alerts by the public and he still managed to do this with legally obtained weapons?
Should we really trust the most guilty party in letting him run free for answers?
edit on 20-6-2016 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Again:



There is more proof it was him than proof it wasn't; therefore, it is up to you to provide evidence, not speculation, it wasn't him.


So far there is no PROOF. Its "the FBI said so" you would loose every case like this in court.

And i am not speculating, i am trying to find solid proof. I am open to all versions.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: svetlana84

You mean like: I'm a beleiber?



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: svetlana84


I want to have solid proof.


You will never get solid proof unless A) you knew him and B) you were there.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: svetlana84
a reply to: chr0naut



they had confirmed the shooters identity


Based on? How did they confirm his identity?


Perhaps he was the dead guy with the guns and they looked in his wallet?



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
Mateen was shot and killed by SWAT officers (there were 11 of them engaged in the firefight) at around 5:00 PM. By 5:35, they had confirmed the shooters identity and that he was dead. There were medical and paramedic support people onsite at the first safe opportunity as there were also many injured.

The shooter was in a fire-fight with SWAT when killed. He was the one with the SIG Sauer automatic rifle and Glock semiautomatic, recovered from the body with several additional rounds of unused ammo. There is no doubt who the shooter was. To blame someone else would require that everyone else at the scene (including survivors) lie and agree on who they would blame, fabricating both evidence and accounts.

30 survivors of the attack were questioned and searched for firearms and explosives before release.

Mateen was definitely there and was the shooter.

Due process would have been to identify all the deceased at the morgue. As would autopsy of the victims if cause of death was questioned. We have no reason to believe that this had not occurred.


How did they identify him?

Did his wife or someone who knew him identify him with all those bullet holes in him

Who is telling you this?

Anything we ever know about the government is only what they want to tell us

They can tell us anything and we’d have no way of knowing whether it’s true or not



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: svetlana84


So far there is no PROOF. Its "the FBI said so" you would loose every case like this in court.


The FBI is under no obligation to release all of their evidence while the investigation is still underway. There are phone calls and eyewitness accounts.

Those are not "the FBI telling you."


And i am not speculating


Yes, you are, because YOU have no proof.

You prove it was not him.

edit on 20-6-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

You're right. They (the gov) should put his body on display and allow us to run our own DNA sampling on the remains, conduct our own investigation, and give us access to whatever we want.

Because God knows if the video from in the club is ever released it will be torn apart and inevitably deemed fake. God knows if his wife trots out and says yep, that's him alright the cries of "coercion!" and "patsy!" will be hot on her heels. God knows the 911 transcript can't simply be edited because the allegiance to ISIS makes Obama look pretty freaking bad, it HAS to be more than that.

Because CONSPIRACY dammit.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: chr0naut
Mateen was shot and killed by SWAT officers (there were 11 of them engaged in the firefight) at around 5:00 PM. By 5:35, they had confirmed the shooters identity and that he was dead. There were medical and paramedic support people onsite at the first safe opportunity as there were also many injured.

The shooter was in a fire-fight with SWAT when killed. He was the one with the SIG Sauer automatic rifle and Glock semiautomatic, recovered from the body with several additional rounds of unused ammo. There is no doubt who the shooter was. To blame someone else would require that everyone else at the scene (including survivors) lie and agree on who they would blame, fabricating both evidence and accounts.

30 survivors of the attack were questioned and searched for firearms and explosives before release.

Mateen was definitely there and was the shooter.

Due process would have been to identify all the deceased at the morgue. As would autopsy of the victims if cause of death was questioned. We have no reason to believe that this had not occurred.


How did they identify him?

Did his wife or someone who knew him identify him with all those bullet holes in him

Who is telling you this?

Anything we ever know about the government is only what they want to tell us

They can tell us anything and we’d have no way of knowing whether it’s true or not



So, some nut shoots up a gay bar and then everyone, witnesses, medics, police and FBI all collude to frame someone else?

2016 Orlando nightclub shooting From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence




You will never get solid proof unless A) you knew him and B) you were there.


i can deny both, i did not know him, i was not there. And even if i knew him, AND was there it would not necessarily mean proof. The goldenagers at the retirement home he worked at knew him - they did not have foreknowledge, nor proof.
Most of the patrons did not even see the shooters. Some probably did, but cant tell anymore.

Still no proof.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Perhaps, there was a dead guy with guns and even a magical passport.

Perhaps. - try to win a court case with "perhaps".



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6


They (the gov) should put his body on display and allow us to run our own DNA sampling on the remains,


Not good enough. They could have killed some Muslim, planted his DNA at the scene, and used him as a patsy.

#sarcasm

Unless one was personally there, saw it, and knew him, it will always be a conspiracy. And even then...

Nothing is ever good enough for some people.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
The shooter was in a fire-fight with SWAT when killed. He was the one with the SIG Sauer automatic rifle and Glock semiautomatic, recovered from the body with several additional rounds of unused ammo.


He had an automatic rifle? Any idea how expensive they are and what it takes to legally acquired a class 3 firearms license? Automatic means machine gun - you can empty a clip in 4 seconds. If true then all this yapping about gun control and banning assault rifles is meaningless because people are blaming the wrong firearm type. That type of license requires extensive background checks and the gun itself would cost at a minimum of 20 grand, probably much more.

May I ask where you quoted that info from?
edit on 20-6-2016 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: svetlana84

Dude he killed 49 people if you are going to claim anything different then show us some proof


No, it's up the officials investigating to prove he was the one and only shooter there. So far, it's just their word.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

I explained my position 3 times to you. It seems you still dont get it.

I am taking a neutral position (despite the misleading title).
Searching for proof. Not providing proof - i dont hav any - in no direction to no version of the story.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: svetlana84
a reply to: Liquesence




You will never get solid proof unless A) you knew him and B) you were there.


i can deny both, i did not know him, i was not there. And even if i knew him, AND was there it would not necessarily mean proof.

Still no proof.


Quoting myself, again:



You will never get solid proof unless A) you knew him and B) you were there.
And saw it.

Unless you were there and saw it yourself, it will always be someone telling you something that you did not witness yourself. And even if there was a clear video of it, you were not there and did not see it.



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: svetlana84


I explained my position 3 times to you. It seems you still dont get it.


No, I get it.

You are speculating. You have no proof, and you are denying all evidence that it was him in lieu of your speculation (with no proof) while claiming neutrality.

I get it.

edit on 20-6-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: svetlana84
a reply to: roadgravel

I realise, that it might not have been the best idea with the title.

Then again, i still hope that people read more than the title.

About stating a non truth: can you proof its a non truth?
Or proof that Omar was actually at the club?

Until we have either or, we don't have the truth. All we have is FBI info.


It may or may not be true but you say he wasn't and didn't show proof of truth. You even admitted to the title issue for you own post benefit.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join