After outcry, FBI releases full transcript of Orlando nightclub shooting call

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Gryphon66

Which Abrahamic sect uses the term, "Allah" to desribe their deity in modern times?

Islam.

It's Arabic for "God" derived from Aramaic.

Arab Christians use the same word for God.

Because Allah means "God."

a reply to: Gryphon66

Are you trying to imply the Omar Mateen was an Arabic Christian?

originally posted by: TechniXcality


Let me say again, The LGBT community( I don't know what the split is, and it doesn't matter, as they are American citizens who were innocent) was targeted by a professed radical Islamic man

So, let's get this straight (no pun intended): American citizens were attacked by an American citizen...

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Allah was around before Mohammad this was the god of mecca. No coincidence Mohammad chose the god of Mecca. Mecca caintained an ancient sanctuary known as the Ka'bah. Still prominent in todays religion obviously. And allah was worshipped by Mohammads father. Muhammad's own father bore the name of `Abd Allah or `Abdullah roughly slave or worshipper of Allah. Remember he was pagan and his family worshipped allah the difference is he decided to make allah the only God making the religion into monitheism.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Gryphon66

Are you trying to imply the Omar Mateen was an Arabic Christian?

Did I say that?

Nope. Arab Christians use the word "Allah" when they speak of God, because that is the word for God in Arabic.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: Gryphon66

Our security failed, period end of story, and knowing how will help us in the future and save lives.

Taking future ISIS threats seriously might help. Also it would be nice if I could monitor ISIS websites for specific threats without being put on a no fly list or losing my second amendment rights.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: Gryphon66

Our security failed, period end of story, and knowing how will help us in the future and save lives.

Taking future ISIS threats seriously might help. Also it would be nice if I could monitor ISIS websites for specific threats without being put on a no fly list or losing my second amendment rights.

How would we know the difference between you and an ISIS sympathizer?

a reply to: 200Plus

It was done to prevent glorification of the agenda. If any other wanna be home grown terrorists want to do this we don't want to be leading a cheer for them. It was made less Islamic but not to make it less about Islam it was done to prevent the battle cry from going out.
It wasn't done to remove the Islamic terrorist threat aspect of the event. Everyone knows it was that even without support from any organized group. That was his intent. It was also a hate crime because of the LGBT element.
The initial attempt at editing was because they didn't want to utter his jihadist battle cry and spread their message. The same way they don't say Islamic terrorist. They don't want to give them what they want. The extremists want every Muslim to think America hates them and that we want a religious war with Islam. If we call it a war on Islam that is what they want. We're spreading their message and enforcing the message because we're saying yes it's a religious war.
But it's not. We Americans know it's not because that freedom is the backbone of our culture. We are warring against terrorists who want people to live in fear. We are warring against them taking away peace of mind and living our lives .
If we make it about religion we feed into their plans. This is about some extremists and a deadly agenda against the west and western ideals. That's what we're fighting. Not Islam.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Ok then.

In the context in which it was used and in consideration of the person who did the actual uttering, translating it to, "God" as opposed to leaving it as, "Allah" is, in my opinion, a blatant attempt to steer attention away from radical Islam.

Tangentially.

You've been attempting to place me in to a neat little box in order to me fit to what your ideas of me are:

That's just a common cop-out for right-wingers who've been backed up against the wall of their irrational beliefs by the facts of any given matter.

And in another post in a different thread within a reply directed to me:

Here's a quick and curious question for right-wingers. ...

I think you might want to break out of your rigid way of thinking and open your mind to the possibility that if someone does not agree with you in one area that they are automatically part of a peer group you deem to be your ideological enemy.

Some of my views fall on the 'right' of the spectrum, others are what would be termed 'left.'

I assure you I, and my beliefs, are much greater than any arbitrary designation you wish to assign to us.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Mateen WAS Muslim. That's an obvious fact.

You are saying that recognizing that the word Allah is the same as the word God would have served to conceal the shooters history somehow?

Don't feel categorized. We're just talking about fairly obvious facts here.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Here are obvious facts:

Full, complete, unedited audio recordings have not been released.

The first attempt at release (of written transcripts) included full out censoring.

Omar Mateen and his father (who has personally espoused support of the Taliban) show signs of radicalization and yet pass several gateways at which he should have been stopped.

Why are we not looking at why he slipped through multiple levels of filters which are supposed to stop this exact thing?

No, instead we are bogged down in rhetorical quagmires and are pummeled with volleys of emotional mortars.

"God!"

No, "Allah"

No, "Guns are evil!"

No, "...cold dead hands."

And round and round we go because most people can't look up from what's being screamed at them from all sides to see that we are all being played.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I hadn't verified those issues. So I can't speak to their factual nature.

What is the balance you want to see struck between individual rights and the safety and security of the many? That is the fundamental question here.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: Sparkymedic

It'll be released eventually. They always are. But the delay will, of course, lead to even more suspicion.

How did we ever cope before the days of all this instant (and for the most part mostly erroneous) earlly information and the demands for it? Makes ya wonder if maybe this doesn't go to part of the problem.

Sorry, but that seems illogical. If the transcripts are released, why noy the actual audio?

911 tapes are released quickly ALL the time. Take the audio for the kid who was eaten by the gator at Disney for instance. Just days after this event. Full audio already released!

Granted, that wasn't a criminal investigation, but there really isn't a GOOD reason to not release the audio for the Pulse club...other than for keeping real evidence away from the discriminating public ear.

Also, where is the CCTV? I assume that should come out in the next couple of weeks....but probably just stills that look like they are filmed with a potato.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Lol

We're just talking about fairly obvious facts here.

And now you don't want to talk about facts?

Not even to dispute my (unsourced) claims?

Go verify or debunk and get back to me.

I've got links for everything I stated, btw.

In a free society there will always be risks.

A completely safe society is not free just as a completely free society is not safe.

A balance was struck a bit over 200 years ago and those ideas were put forth and accepted within certain documents. They became the foundations of our society.

I am reminded of a document which predates the constitution by a small interval and I think certain passages bear remembering:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

We might be facing the duty spoken of in that excerpt. Will we have the mettle those people in that far removed time showed?

everybody all better now ?

a reply to: Sillyolme

That makes makes perfect sense.

I bet next time some fanatic shoots up a PP clinic the headline will be "Allah told me to save the children".

You know, just to keep him from spreading his evil Christian message.

I won't hold my breath.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Why would I dispute your claims if they're factual?

As to the rest ... I don't disagree per se.

originally posted by: 200Plus
a reply to: Sillyolme

That makes makes perfect sense.

I bet next time some fanatic shoots up a PP clinic the headline will be "Allah told me to save the children".

You know, just to keep him from spreading his evil Christian message.

I won't hold my breath.

This seems illogical. IF the speaker is American they would say "God told me to save the children."

If the fanatic were an Arabic speaker they might use "Allah" as that is the Arabic word for God, I'm not sure about the rest of the phrase in Arabic, but Google translate offers it as "Qal Allah li li'iinqadh al'atfal."

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Sillyolme

Not the same God.
Christians believe Christ is God. Muslims and Jews do not.
So changing Allah to God in the transcript is a big deal.

Keep putting it out there tho it will stick with those who don't know the difference.

Technically, Christians believe all sorts of things, but most believe that God is Three Persons, Father Son and Holy Ghost.

The English word "God" and the Arabic word "Allah" are exactly synonymous in meaning.

Umm actually no not all of us beleive he is three persons. God is the father. His seprate person. Jesus is the son,and hi sown person. and the holy ghost is its own entity. When you hear of trinity its The Three of them working together as one unit and not actually 3 in one.

Allah means"the god" but God means God.

Notice that I said "most.' The two largest Christian denominations are the Roman Catholics (who came up with the 3-in-1 idea) and the Southern Baptists who haven't bothered to come up with anything new. I was not speaking to your personal interpretation of the mythology, obviously.

I'm also not going to debate the meaning of words. The word "Allah" is exactly equal to "God," semantically and linguistically. Your personal beliefs don't change that fact.

Well thats cool man. And I am a southern baptist but im a little more edumucated so to speak lol. i asked one time whats th e difference between us and catholics? I think the answer is confession.

And about Allah.. they didnt start using that until after they became a relgion and borrowed heavily from abrahamic relgions to write their version. Which would make it a blasphemy by changing the words in effect right?

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Sillyolme

Not the same God.
Christians believe Christ is God. Muslims and Jews do not.
So changing Allah to God in the transcript is a big deal.

Keep putting it out there tho it will stick with those who don't know the difference.

Technically, Christians believe all sorts of things, but most believe that God is Three Persons, Father Son and Holy Ghost.

The English word "God" and the Arabic word "Allah" are exactly synonymous in meaning.

Umm actually no not all of us beleive he is three persons. God is the father. His seprate person. Jesus is the son,and hi sown person. and the holy ghost is its own entity. When you hear of trinity its The Three of them working together as one unit and not actually 3 in one.

Allah means"the god" but God means God.

Notice that I said "most.' The two largest Christian denominations are the Roman Catholics (who came up with the 3-in-1 idea) and the Southern Baptists who haven't bothered to come up with anything new. I was not speaking to your personal interpretation of the mythology, obviously.

I'm also not going to debate the meaning of words. The word "Allah" is exactly equal to "God," semantically and linguistically. Your personal beliefs don't change that fact.

Well thats cool man. And I am a southern baptist but im a little more edumucated so to speak lol. i asked one time whats th e difference between us and catholics? I think the answer is confession.

And about Allah.. they didnt start using that until after they became a relgion and borrowed heavily from abrahamic relgions to write their version. Which would make it a blasphemy by changing the words in effect right?

Not an Islamic history expert, but my understanding is that Islam arose from basically three sources: Judaism took root in Yemen, Christianity was prevalent in and around the Persian gulf, and the Arab tribesmen had their own ancient polytheistic systems. Muhammad created a religious and political system consolidated many of these beliefs (or transcribed the Koran from the Angel Gabriel if you buy the official story) ... and the rest is history.