Orlando Shooting "Revenge", not Terrorism

So we are to anecdotal evidence from this guy on Univision. This is disturbing, not only did the guy say he did it in the name of Isis, he pledged alliance to the current ISIS leader. Secondly, the wife was and is an accomplice. Thirdly, taking this guy at his word is humorous at best because there have been tons of people here have refused to accept confessions of people who said they had gay affairs with Obama. All one has to do is Google "obama gay past/lovers" and you will see all the people who came forward. So I am very confused why this mans homosexual account is believed, but the ones who had sex with Obama are not accepted.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes I know the groups are in conflict with each other. Which is why I think he was just shouting out the names of various terrorist groups he hoped to impress with his act of terror.

I don't think he was in any of these groups, but I do think Islam is at the root of this. Now if you choose to believe Islam had zero to do with this..that is fine, but the story in this article didn't even come close to proving that.

You might as well accept the fact that we'll never truly know 100% why he did what he did. You also might as well accept a majority of people will believe Islam played at least some part in this.

Doesn't mean it can't be multiple reasons, but just Islam seems like a stretch.

So since you believe this mans testimony.

Then we must also believe this mans detailed account of Obamas homosexual past with his lover.

YouTube video

What does Obama's sex life have to do with the Orlando shooter? Seems like you're trying to derail.

On the contrary, it just goes to show the double standard. Do you believe Obama is a homosexual after this mans detailed accounts of Obamas sexual and illicit drug abuse?

Originally posted by Robtard
As I said above, I have no problem labeling "Islamic terrorism" when it actually is. Just looking less and less with this guy the more info that is learned.

Doesn't mean it can't be multiple reasons, but just Islam seem like a stretch.

With your last line you at least seem to acknowledge Islam most likely did play some part in this, but some people want to just stick their heads in the sand and pretend it didn't factor in at all. I'm sure his homosexuality played some part. Actually scratch that, we have no evidence he was even homosexual. So I should say that his bi-sexuality probably played a part. IMO it was not simply just "dude wanted revenge because he thought he might of had aids".

Would you agree with me if I said that normally when a muslim murders a bunch of people 9 times out of 10 their religion played some part?

Originally posted by BlackJackal
On the contrary, it just goes to show the double standard. Do you believe Obama is a homosexual after this mans detailed accounts of Obamas sexual and illicit drug abuse?

I believe you are the brain trust here, you accept one evidence as fact of homosexuality and dismiss the other as non carving. So why do you care about this mans sexuality but not the presidents? Since you have to resort to ad hominem insults, I kindly accept your concession that you cannot form a reasonable counter arguement. You also saying its off topic means nothing. Just because you deem something off topic does not make it so. I am comparing two different homosexual stories and how you easily swallow one, and dismiss the other.

Originally posted by Surtur
With your last line you at least seem to acknowledge Islam most likely did play some part in this, but some people want to just stick their heads in the sand and pretend it didn't factor in at all. I'm sure his homosexuality played some part. Actually scratch that, we have no evidence he was even homosexual. So I should say that his bi-sexuality probably played a part. IMO it was not simply just "dude wanted revenge because he thought he might of had aids".

Would you agree with me if I said that normally when a muslim murders a bunch of people 9 times out of 10 their religion played some part?

Well sure, revulsion of homosexuality seems to usually stem from religion and this man was a Muslim. Would be careless to ignore. But as noted, the more and more that comes out, it leads to believe that Islam wasn't the main and in the very least not sole cause.

We do have decent evidence he was gay (or at least bi), he used apps targeted at finding gay male sex partners and he apparently texted pictures of his penis to other men. Sure, not 100% "he's gay!, but to ignore the pieces would be as foolish in ignoring his religion.

Honestly, it just seems like you're making up numbers. I really can't verify or deny that.

Originally posted by BlackJackal
I believe you are the brain trust here, you accept one evidence as fact of homosexuality and dismiss the other as non carving. So why do you care about this mans sexuality but not the presidents? Since you have to resort to ad hominem insults, I kindly accept your concession that you cannot form a reasonable counter arguement. You also saying its off topic means nothing. Just because you deem something off topic does not make it so. I am comparing two different homosexual stories and how you easily swallow one, and dismiss the other.

Because the topic is the Orlando shooter and his sexuality could have played a part in the massacre. ie, it's on topic.

But please, continue to yell "Obama is gay!" while touching yourself.

I guess it's to hard for simple minded people to understand why he could possibly be using those apps. Did you ever possibly think in that "large brain" of yours he could have used it to target people? Like could that have possibly be out of the scope to kill people?

You take all this circumstantial and anecdotal evidence as fact, while dismissing the claims about Obama homosexual past.

Originally posted by Robtard
Well sure, revulsion of homosexuality seems to usually stem from religion and this man was a Muslim. Would be careless to ignore. But as noted, the more and more that comes out, it leads to believe that Islam wasn't the main and in the very least not sole cause.

We do have decent evidence he was gay (or at least bi), he used apps targeted at finding gay male sex partners and he apparently texted pictures of his penis to other men. Sure, not 100% "he's gay!, but to ignore the pieces would be as foolish in ignoring his religion.

Honestly, it just seems like you're making up numbers. I really can't verify or deny that.

I did make up that number, I wasn't trying to say that was the specific number just that IMO a majority of the time religion plays a part, so let me rephrase: do you think a majority of the time when a muslim goes on a murder spree that religion played a role? I'm not asking you to verify it, I don't want you to say it's 100% fact, I'm asking for your opinion.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because the topic is the Orlando shooter and his sexuality could have played a part in the massacre. ie, it's on topic.

But please, continue to yell "Obama is gay!" while touching yourself.

I would advise you to keep yelling "Omar is gay!" While doing the same.

Originally posted by Surtur
I did make up that number, I wasn't trying to say that was the specific number just that IMO a majority of the time religion plays a part, so let me rephrase: do you think a majority of the time when a muslim goes on a murder spree that religion played a role? I'm not asking you to verify it, I don't want you to say it's 100% fact, I'm asking for your opinion.

But how many Muslims murder say their wives, a hated co-worker, in robbing someone, revenge etc that we don't hear about because they're small local stories where religion could have played no part?

Please continue to keep yelling "Omar is gay" while touching yourself, dude.

Originally posted by Robtard
The ones we hear about likely.

But how many Muslims murder say their wives, a hated co-worker, in robbing someone, revenge etc that we don't hear about because they're small local stories where religion could have played no part?

Yeah but those examples you just used aren't killing spree's though. I have found that terrorists usually prefer to attack in a way that they kill multiple victims as opposed to just a specific person who wronged them.

I suppose one could argue we don't hear about these stories because it doesn't fit into a certain narrative, but then that is nothing new IMO. It's the same reason the media rarely reports on stories where guns save lives, etc. So if you're saying the media is bias I would agree 100%. They have incredible bias on a variety of subjects.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yeah but those examples you just used aren't killing spree's though. I have found that terrorists usually prefer to attack in a way that they kill multiple victims as opposed to just a specific person who wronged them.

I suppose one could argue we don't hear about these stories because it doesn't fit into a certain narrative, but then that is nothing new IMO. It's the same reason the media rarely reports on stories where guns save lives, etc. So if you're saying the media is bias I would agree 100%. They have incredible bias on a variety of subjects.

So more than two?

Not really saying "media bias", just smaller stories, especially overseas don't make national news here.

But sure, 9/11, San Bernadino, Paris attacks etc, all Islamic terrorism. Never argued otherwise.

Yes, I think when it tends to be many victims, especially victims the person doesn't even really know..it's usually religion playing a part.

So no confirmations of him being homosexual other then a debunked media source, who was caught staging shots and runs a deep left political agenda. We also have no confirmation of this "source" is even telling the truth. Yet people are going to accept it as facts.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, I think when it tends to be many victims, especially victims the person doesn't even really know..it's usually religion playing a part.

And by "religion" I assume you mean "Islam"?