Omar Mateen was not at the club in Orlando!

All I have seen is he had the semi auto version. if it was full auto, it would be suppressed IMO because it doesn't play into gun control.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: svetlana84

I hear what you're saying, and i agree with the question. What needs to be clarified here is that Svetlana is not required to prove Mateen wasn't there. But rather the burden of proof should be on the media, the FBI, the local police or any agency who is asserting that the official version is true. Their integrity should be at stake.

The fact that we do not have the right to get those questions answered is the issue at hand.

84I agree with you and sverlana in the sense that some crazy things just are not adding up. Where is Mateen's body now? How did he die? self inflicted or by swat team. They say in the news that the scene is being cleaned and the vacinity is now open to the public. Oh yeah, how many bullets were shot? how many casings found? one, two or more guns used? what about the guy who held the door closed so no one could get out? Then you have a BLM idiot stealing the microphone during a memorial for lgbt community to say she was scared of all the white people. You can't make this crap up......

What a mess this whole investigation has been. DOJ Lynch, mouthpiece for weak Obama......now the FBI being so incompetent.....makes me wonder, this whole thing has been a big distraction to keep people's attention off of or from something else that is happening. I know that sounds like a conspiracy....but this is ATS. Bottom line, something seems way off, something is amiss. I do not know what it is, but I could think of a number of things. I'll stop here...don't want to get on a tangent.

MODs: I don t know why this thread has been moved to LOL.

It s a fact finding mission, nothing to do with LOL.

If the title is the problem, i gladly change it. (if i can do that)
Let s change it to:

"Was Omar Mateen really at the club? The search for proof"

And move the thread back to where it was.

Thanks in advance, svetlana

a reply to: roadgravel

I stated several times: I have no proof. For no version of the story.
No proof of him beimg there, nor proof of him not being there.

That's the whole reason of the thread: to find proof.

It just cant be that we swallow everything from the FBI without proof, after the proved their incompetencies over and over again.

The FBI has a horse in the race, they failed to prevent the shooting from happening.
So why just blindly trust them?

originally posted by: svetlana84
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".

Nope, this is fairly cut-and-dried. The perp was apprehended in the act. Shot and killed.

The police have not spoken out for 2 reasons:

1 The authorities don't make killers famous because it leads to of copycat killers (unfortunately, freedom of the press means that they can publish whatever they want and the MSM is usually irresponsible).

2 You actually prejudice the legal case if you reveal details before it goes to court. The jury must be impartial, basing their decision entirely upon evidence, not on hearsay and media hype.

Those are two good reasons for the police to withhold evidence from the general public until after all court proceedings have completed, as is happening here.

What would be the possible motive behind replacing a guilty murderer with someone else?

How would they get everyone's evidence to agree. Did they have a training session for the police, FBI, medics and the nightclub goers that survived?

If you were one of the nightclub goers that survived, would you have turned up knowing that there was going to be a mass shooting there and prepared with your story of an alternate shooter? Even if they were coerced into providing false witness after the fact, how could the authorities know that there would be no honest people there or that the stories would gel together under legal cross-examination?

originally posted by: Asktheanimals

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?

The shooter was an armed security guard and had a license for the guns, according to Wikipedia. They were both semi-automatic, I got that wrong.

I was quoting from Wikipedia as this is just another American mass shooting to me. I am not American.

I am only reliant on what I recall of the news reports and used the Wikipedia page to check the facts of my recollection.

a reply to: svetlana84

So why just blindly trust them?

I never said I blindly trust them. I fact I have mentioned I tend to have doubts about their facts at times.

Once again, it was simply about the title. It's obvious much hasn't been released. I think we all know it.

a reply to: chr0naut

1. the killers name and pictures are all over the news. The only way the media could get that info was either FBI or Law enforcement. so that point is moot.

2. There will be no court case. The guy is dead. (i am aware that i brought the court up, this is the level of proof i d like tohave, even if there is no court case).

And I dont want to go into speculations of motive and the other questions you asked.

I want to see proof, that the guy really was at the club. I just dont buy the "FBI said so".

a reply to: svetlana84

Here's a little something I just found at the FBI website:

[3:24 a.m.]...The shooter continued, stating, “There is some vehicle outside that has some bombs, just to let you know. You people are gonna get it, and I’m gonna ignite it if they try to do anything stupid.”

And then:

4:29 a.m.: As victims were being rescued, they told OPD the shooter said he was going to put four vests with bombs on victims within 15 minutes.

(An immediate search of the shooter’s vehicle on scene and inside Pulse ultimately revealed no vest or improvised explosive device.)

Source: Investigative Update Regarding Pulse Nightclub Shooting

Did they find a vehicle -- Mateen's vehicle -- in the parking lot with bombs? Maybe that's partly how they identified him?

originally posted by: svetlana84
a reply to: chr0naut

1. the killers name and pictures are all over the news. The only way the media could get that info was either FBI or Law enforcement. so that point is moot.

2. There will be no court case. The guy is dead. (i am aware that i brought the court up, this is the level of proof i d like tohave, even if there is no court case).

And I dont want to go into speculations of motive and the other questions you asked.

I want to see proof, that the guy really was at the club. I just dont buy the "FBI said so".

It wasn't just the FBI who said so.

According to the Wikipedia page, Mateen made several calls to 911, stating that he was the shooter and outlining his reasons. He also called News 13 of Orlando and stated that he was the shooter in English then he continued in rapid Arabic. The station's managing editor traced the 'phone number and confirmed that it was from Mateen's mobile.

The whole incident started soon after 2:00 AM and continued 'till about 5:30 AM. In those three and a half hours, about 100 officers from Orlando Police Department and Orange County Sheriff's Office Deputies, OPD SWAT, FBI agents, three fire brigades, paramedics and a crisis negotiator assembled. This is not to mention the news crews trying to out-scoop each other.

The paramedics would have been granted entry very soon after the FBI had secured the club, as there were people bleeding out in there.

Read the account in Wikipedia and think through the evidence, the timings and the data.

originally posted by: svetlana84

MODs: I don t know why this thread has been moved to LOL.

It s a fact finding mission, nothing to do with LOL.

If the title is the problem, i gladly change it. (if i can do that)
Let s change it to:

"Was Omar Mateen really at the club? The search for proof"

And move the thread back to where it was.

Thanks in advance, svetlana

Because your thread title is a declarative sentence and you said you had no proof to support it.

Ergo, a ludicrous online lie.

originally posted by: Liquesence
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.

As succinct a summation as possible.

That, and your response to my comment. Two for two, amigo.

a reply to: svetlana84
a reply to: chr0naut

After reading chr0naut's post, I checked out the Wikipedia page for the shooting, and sure enough found this reference:

At 2:45 a.m., Mateen called News 13 of Orlando and said, "I am the shooter." He then claimed his attack for ISIL and began speaking rapidly in Arabic. The TV station's managing editor matched the incoming phone number to Mateen.

And at the News 13 of Orlando link:

"I'm the shooter. It's me. I am the shooter," the person on the other end said. Gentili said he didn't know what to say. The caller then started to say he committed the shooting for the Islamic State (militant group). "He did it for ISIS, and he started speaking Arabic," Gentili said of the early morning phone call... Agents won't confirm whether Gentili spoke to the gunman, but News 13's managing editor was able to research the phone number from which the call came, and it matched to Omar Mateen.

No specific mention that Mateen gave his name to the reporter, but according to another New s 13 article, he did give his name to the 911 dispatcher:

In the partial transcript, the FBI said it intentionally omitted the name of the shooter and the group to whom he pledged allegiance. "Part of the redacting is meant to not give credence to individuals who have done terrorist acts in the past," Hopper said.

-----------------------

And so in regards to my previous post about the vehicle with explosives, if they already knew his name, I'm sure they could have easily found any vehicles registered in his name, and then find it in the parking lot.

a reply to: Shamrock6

please read mor than the title.
i repeated it over and over again, its about fact/proof finding.

even if the title is misleading.
plus i have presented exactly the same amount of proof like the FBI: zero

a reply to: Boadicea

first of all wikipedia... ahem.

anyways, the next clue comes from the media.
we dint have the audio of this. so no proof.

the mobile phone number? i dont know hiw this works in the US, where i live i can buy any sim card with no registration whatsoever (burner phones).

why would the media know Mateens number?

Even if they had his number, that would be evidence, that SOMEONE used his phone.
Still no proof it was really him.

News 13:

I'm the shooter. It's me. I am the shooter," the person on the other end said.

Note: no name mentionend.

And the last point: the car: according to media he rented a van. so this was a rental, not registered in his name.

a reply to: svetlana84

No argument with any of your response.

I meant to point out that since this is Wikipedia, that it is of course the official story... the officially approved story. Since I had followed the source links, I shared for informational purposes only -- not as proof of anything.

But I also should have pointed out that this was addressing how he was ID'd by authorities -- not regarding proof that he was the actual gunman, which would technically require DNA testing or dental record matches. (ETA: My bad... I meant ballistics testing or other forensic testing. I deleted another sentence about DNA testing and dental record matches not wanting to go too far off topic -- or thought I deleted it!)

I did not know that about the rental van, so thanks for that info!

a reply to: svetlana84

And you were told on page one to supply proof.

By a mod.

And ignored it.

Pretty sure blatantly misleading thread titles is against the T&C. Admitting you did it intentionally doesn't really help your cause.

a reply to: svetlana84

The selfie girl was inside and was one of the victims who were killed.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

You're not surprised that I didn't get that you were talking about evidence to arrest and convict someone who's dead.
You're talking about bringing charges and saying How in hell do we expect prosecution to get a conviction but what you're really doing is describing due process? Because it sure sounded like you thought there was going to be a trial.

a reply to: Shamrock6

the ludicrous online lie goes both ways:

Unless the FBI delivers proof of their version i assume their version of the story is a
ludicrous online lie.

they should have all the material, the should deliver proof.

I cant see why i as a laymen, ATS member should uphold higher standards than the state funded FBI.

Right now the score in the proof delivery game svetlana vs FBI is 0:0