Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet United States Communications Earth Network Networking Privacy Security News Technology

FBI Director Comey: 'Highly Confident' Orlando Shooter Radicalized Through Internet (cbsnews.com) 404

An anonymous reader writes from a report via CBS News: FBI Director James Comey echoed President Obama's statement that he does not think the Orlando shooting was a plot directed from outside of the U.S. "So far, we see no indication that this was a plot directed from outside the United States and we see no indication that he was part of any kind of network," Comey told reporters. The intelligence community, Comey said, is "highly confident that this killer was radicalized at least in part through the internet." CBS News reports: "The FBI first became aware of the shooter, Omar Mateen, in May 2013 when he was working as a contract security guard and he made statements that were 'inflammatory and contradictory,' Comey said. Mateen told his co-workers at the time that he had family connections to al Qaeda and that he was a member of Hezbollah. Comey pointed out that Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, is a 'bitter enemy' of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to which he pledged loyalty in 911 calls as the attack unfolded early Sunday morning." According to CNN, at least 50 people were killed inside Pulse, a gay nightclub, marking the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FBI Director Comey: 'Highly Confident' Orlando Shooter Radicalized Through Internet

Comments Filter:
  • by turkeydance ( 1266624 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @06:32PM (#52310835)
    don't blame the messenger
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Because no other ideological streams produce mass murdering terrorists. Oh wait, there's Tim Mcveigh, Hans Anders Breivik, and apparently a lone nut job James Howell, who has, according to reports, far right sympathies and was, fortunately, arrested before he could produce two attacks on the LGBT community in one weekend.

      There are no lack of ideologically-driven lunatics out there who pick a group, whether that's gays, leftists, government employees, or whomever, and decide they must die in some greater cau

      • by Wootery ( 1087023 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @06:45PM (#52310911)

        And yet it remains that Islam is way the most prominent ideology behind this kind of thing.

        And I think it should be mentioned that the people most often victimized by Islamic terrorists are their fellow Muslims.

        Right. So? This has precisely zero bearing on the question of whether Islam as a religion is a factor in Islamic terrorism.

        Or were you somehow trying to tell turkeydance not to demonise Muslims (which they never did anyway)?

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          There is no question. There's a claim that Islam is especially prone to producing terrorists. Lots of ideologies produce violent terrorists. Many of the US's terrorist acts have been the acts of homegrown terrorists, often anti-government extreme anarchist types.

          That's like claiming Ireland is more prone to producing terrorists because of the IRA and Protestant militias. It's a logical fallacy.

          • by amiga3D ( 567632 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @08:41PM (#52311697)

            Radical Islam is a problem. People that justify the worst barbarism in the name of some ideology are a problem and Radical Islam does this. Sure, they aren't the only nutcases around but they're by far the biggest group and they have a huge fan base that cheers them on. Until people stop pussy footing around the subject we will never deal with it. I pretty much despise the gay culture. Not gays themselves but the culture that you get when they congregate. That said, I just avoid them. It would never occur to me to kill them or even to wish them dead. I am appalled at what happened in Orlando and feel bad for these people's families. I'd never wish this kind of shit on anyone. Some so called Christians think it's okay to persecute and kill gay people but I and the vast majority of Christians reject and repudiate that view. God says to love everyone and that only HE is the judge. Then we get to Islam which has a more aggressive anti-gay policy. It's stoning in their own land and open season everywhere else. I know most of the Islamic people in the US aren't radical but a lot of them are, way too many. Depressingly it seems to be the younger ones who don't remember how shitty it was under Sharia in the old country because their parents fled that insanity. It seems the young Islamic generation has decided to rebel against their elders by becoming just as insane as the people the older generation fled from. I don't know if anything can stop a war but importing more Islamic fundamentalists to the US will certainly increase the chances greatly. I know that the more this type of thing in Orlando happens here it's only a matter of time before people get fed up and retaliate. It's all too likely it'll be against a Mosque or some such place.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by quantaman ( 517394 )

          And yet it remains that Islam is way the most prominent ideology behind this kind of thing.

          And I think it should be mentioned that the people most often victimized by Islamic terrorists are their fellow Muslims.

          Right. So? This has precisely zero bearing on the question of whether Islam as a religion is a factor in Islamic terrorism.

          Or were you somehow trying to tell turkeydance not to demonise Muslims (which they never did anyway)?

          The problem with blaming "Islam" is there's a ton of people who consider themselves followers of "Islam" who have virtually nothing in common with this guy.

          It's like blaming Christians when someone shoots an abortion doctor. There's Christians who regularly call for the murder of abortion doctors, there's others who don't call for murder but think it's fine, and there's Christians who are solidly pro-choice.

          Should Christians be subject to extra monitoring? Are one group of Christians the real Christians and

          • The fact is that certain groups are very heavily monitored. The more extreme Christian Identity sects and various other white supremacist churches are constantly monitored by the FBI, and along with groups of survivalists, white supremacists, anti-government anarchists, and the like, are often viewed as being groups who are most likely to produce homegrown terrorists. The Norwegian mass murderer, Hans Breivik, was a Scandinavian version of that sort of white supremacism.

          • It's like blaming Christians when someone shoots an abortion doctor.

            Not really, no. A truly terrifying proportion [pewforum.org] of Muslims hold insane, dangerous, beliefs. [channel4.com]

            Islam is absolutely not the equivalent of Christianity.

        • And yet it remains that Islam is way the most prominent ideology behind this kind of thing.

          Only if you're not including time as a metric for your data.
          Every religion has their kill 'em all phase, it just so happens we are living in the Islamic one right now. It doesn't mean that the others aren't as equally ridiculous.

        • And yet it remains that Islam is way the most prominent ideology behind this kind of thing.

          Islam is just the flavour of the day for terrorists - in the past and in other regions of the world it was any of a number of other excuses for venting your desire for hurting other people around you: Fascism, Communism, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism - even football, of all things. As the shooting in Orlando demonstrates, terrorism doesn't start with "I am a Muslim, therefore I feel compelled to go and kill indiscriminately" - it is the other way around. You start with the hate, the desire to kill an

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I don't even think it was an act of terrorism. The piece of shit who did the shooting only "pledged allegiance" to ISIS after he had already started murdering, which tells me he was pathetically trying to justify his actions. The real motivation is far simpler: he was a homophobe. Homophobes are people who hate gays because they feel enticed by them and are trying to convince themselves that they aren't gay.

      • I don't even think it was an act of terrorism. The piece of shit who did the shooting only "pledged allegiance" to ISIS after he had already started murdering, which tells me he was pathetically trying to justify his actions. The real motivation is far simpler: he was a homophobe. Homophobes are people who hate gays because they feel enticed by them and are trying to convince themselves that they aren't gay.

        Odd news coming out... He reportedly frequented the club and used a gay-hookup app, though maybe that was just his way of casing the place. But a guy playing dead in the bathroom where he was holding hostages said he let the Blacks in the room go, because he didn't "have a problem with them". And though he pledged allegiance to ISIS, he also pledged allegiance to a couple of other groups that are at daggers-drawn with ISIS.

        And, like a number of other Muslim terrorists we've heard about, he drank alcohol w

      • The call to 911 is standard ISIS procedure. They literally instruct those who will be carrying out attacks like this to proceed in exactly that manner. You call up the emergency number, profess publicly your allegiance to ISIS. It is in the ISIS SOPs... Also, the guy was gay. He'd spent weeks in that club before. He was part of a culture and religion that caused him to hate himself. The story is a gay member of ISIS kills lots of other gay people and himself to buy his way into heaven.
  • Along with every other idea anyone has.
  • In other news (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @06:43PM (#52310895) Journal
    Slashdot poster "Fuzzyfuzzyfungus" highly confident that FBI director Jame Comey doesn't appear to know a goddamn thing about the guy his agency investigated at least twice; but knows to blame the 'internet' thing that damn kids are always getting terrorist propaganda and strong encryption from.
  • by agm ( 467017 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @06:49PM (#52310949)

    It really does. The Abrahamic religions are barbaric. Let's stop passing these dangerous superstitions onto successive generations.

    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      The Soviet Union showed you don't need religion to justify mass evil, merely dogma, ANY dogma.

      It's essentially a variation of: "Having X in place is so very very important that we have to kill lots of people to get X."

      • by agm ( 467017 )

        A belief system that promotes intolerance and commands you harm other people should not be cherished. Such belief systems should be ridiculed, not protected. It's these nutty superstitions that have seen the subjugation of women for thousands of years. That's half the population that are negatively impacted by these myths. Enough is enough. It needs to stop.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by markdavis ( 642305 )

      >It really does. The Abrahamic religions are barbaric. Let's stop passing these dangerous superstitions onto successive generations."

      Sorry, but this is just wrong. There are quite a few religions that do a lot of good for people and society. It is just that some people are radical and/or even use the name of the religion without even really understanding it.

      Let's take Christianity for example. Please tell me what is so poisonous, barbaric, and dangerous about Jesus' teachings. You do realize that bei

      • All that hippie stuff in the New Testament is obviously ancient marketing bullshit. More than half of it was written by Dark Age impostors taking on the names of apostles.
      • You do realize that being a Christian means believing in and following Jesus' teachings

        Is that one of those "no true Scotsman" things? If someone hates gay people, then they aren't a Christian? Because it seems like there are a lot of Christians who have problems following the teachings of Jesus. Take, for example, all of those people who decided to refuse services to gay people, and the people who support those people, and the people who were opposed to the SCOTUS decision on gay marriage. How do any of those things relate to the teachings of Jesus? They want to claim that they can't se

      • by agm ( 467017 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @08:38PM (#52311677)

        Jesus specifically said he was not replacing the old laws. Not a jot or a tiddle. So you have to add in there the bits about not eating shellfish, wearing mixed thread garments and homosexuality. You have to add in the parts condoning slavery. Not even the New Testament speaks against slavery, it only tells you how you should treat your slaves.

        It's only in the New Testament that the idea of an eternity of hell for not believing is introduced. Is this moral? NO! It it not. "Love me or burn forever" is not a moral teaching.

        Feel free to only cherry pick the acceptable messages in the Bible, but don't pretend the other commands and laws are not there. You are commanded to kill your neighbour for working on the sabbath? Do you? Of course not, because your morality is better than that in the Bible.

        Christianity if nothing like Buddhism. The teachings of Christianity as evidenced in the Bible *are* barbaric. Slavery. Torture. Stonings. The subjugation of women. "No thought for the morrow" is a ridiculous notion.

        Don't paint Christianity as being a benign and loving belief system. It isn't, and it never was. If you think it is then it shows you have not read the Bible or you are so selective in the parts you follow as to make you guilty of not doing the things it commands you to do.

        Am I anti-religion? Damn right I am, and the recent tragedy reveals one of the reasons why.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by markdavis ( 642305 )

          >"Jesus specifically said he was not replacing the old laws. Not a jot or a tiddle".

          Oh really, so his sacrifice didn't replace the old sacrifices? I am afraid it is not that simple.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

          >"Don't paint Christianity as being a benign and loving belief system. It isn't, and it never was.

          I said the teachings of Jesus. I am no theologian, but I can read and understand what he was reported to have said and done. And benign and loving is exactly what he preached.

          >"So you have

          • by agm ( 467017 )

            >"So you have to add in there the bits about not eating shellfish, wearing mixed thread garments and homosexuality."

            Old testament, not Jesus' teachings.

            >"It's only in the New Testament that the idea of an eternity of hell for not believing is introduced. Is this moral? NO! It it not. "Love me or burn forever" is not a moral teaching."

            Nope. Jesus never said anything about hell- that is an invention of others.

            http://www.godsplanforall.com/... [godsplanforall.com]

            >"The teachings of Christianity as evidenced in the Bible *are* barbaric. Slavery. Torture. Stonings. The subjugation of women [...] You are commanded to kill your neighbour for working on the sabbath?"

            Nope again- Jesus never taught any of that. I think you are still stuck on the old testament.

            It's all very confusing. Isn't Jesus and God the same thing? Didn't this god command those things in the old testament? This god is not supposed to change it's mind on things. It's all very schizophrenic.

            I take the more reasoned approach: none of it is real. it's all poppycock. It needs to go the way of alchemy and phrenology. In the meantime I maintain the opinion that Christianity is an immortal belief system.

        • by Empiric ( 675968 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @11:47PM (#52312619)

          It is you who are "cherry-picking", and compounding it with cherry-picking the interpretation you feel is worst.

          Jesus said not a "jot or tiddle" would "pass away" until "all was fulfilled". And that he came to fulfill it. Therefore, the Old Covenant was superseded by he New Covenant when he did so, via substitutionary atonement on the cross, that is, when "it is finished". You can claim your view is the mainstream on representing Christianity, but that is merely your inaccurate claim.

          Noting that, the OT laws and cultural specifications went a very long way to maintaining a culturally-distinct surviving society under extremely negative conditions. Virtually all other cultures from that time period have ceased to exist. Perhaps, if nothing else, you can acknowledge that these specification have been very effective in a Darwinian or "meme" sense? We'll leave aside the fact that per the only thing you have to judge with, evolution, you have no supportable basis to object to anything. You object to religious norms because of... assimilated religion norms, which you misapply. Your worldview has nothing.

          But then, while we're having anachronistic fun with impossible alternate economic and social structures, do you think people living around 0 B.C. should have been entitled to 401k plans, too?

    • by ADRA ( 37398 )

      Yeah, so your final solution is castratrion or mass graves?

      • by agm ( 467017 )

        I want there to be less superstition in the world and you equate that with castration and genocide? Really?

        The way to get people to favour reason over superstition is with a secular government and secular education. But more importantly by ridiculing ridiculous ideas. Reasonable people shouldn't pander to someone else's belief in unicorns, goblins or gods. Ridiculous ideas should be ridiculed. Note: I didn't same we should ridicule people, only the nutty ideas they may have. People deserve respect, ideas do

  • Even without the Internet, this guy could've simply attended a talk by an imam [youtube.com]:

    killing gays according to Islamic law should be done "out of compassion"

    (This sort of bigoted hatred is Ok, but arguing that sayers of such stuff should be carefully watched would get you banned from Facebook [breitbart.com], Twitter [breitbart.com], and Reddit [dailycaller.com].)

    FBI Director James Comey echoed President Obama's statement that he does not think the Orlando shooting was a plot directed from outside of the U.S.

    At least, he is not blaming an anti-Islam movie by some weirdo [cbsnews.com]...

    • by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @07:15PM (#52311147) Journal

      It might have escaped your notice, but a certain holy book beloved of Jews, Christians and Muslims has this rather interesting passage:

      "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
      Leviticus 20:13

      • by mi ( 197448 )

        It might have escaped your notice, but a certain holy book beloved of Jews, Christians and Muslims has this rather interesting passage: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Leviticus 20:13

        And which Christian priest or Rabby has recently radicalized a young follower with it?..

        • I'd say there are a large number of Evangelicals, Mormons and Catholics out there who have expended enormous amounts of energy to block same-sex marriage, and in some cases to actively pursue agendas to deprive homosexuals of civil rights protections and even full enjoyment of civil liberties.

          Yes, not as spectacular as shooting them up in a nightclub, but the message is pretty clear "God hates fags". I guess that it's some sort of advancement that most of these groups don't want to actually kill them, but t

      • And anyone with even the simplest understand of the Bible understands that this is Mosaic Law, which A: was only given to the Jews for their society, and B: Christians are not under.
      • This is true but I don't know what your point is. Our culture has a similarly bad aspect to it so we can't call out another culture's absolutely horrible aspect?

      • by J053 ( 673094 )

        And they conveniently ignore this one:

        ‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death."
        Leviticus 20:10

    • by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @08:05PM (#52311485)

      Even without the Internet, this guy could've simply attended a talk by an imam [youtube.com]:

      killing gays according to Islamic law should be done "out of compassion"

      (This sort of bigoted hatred is Ok, but arguing that sayers of such stuff should be carefully watched would get you banned from Facebook [breitbart.com], Twitter [breitbart.com], and Reddit [dailycaller.com].)

      FBI Director James Comey echoed President Obama's statement that he does not think the Orlando shooting was a plot directed from outside of the U.S.

      At least, he is not blaming an anti-Islam movie by some weirdo [cbsnews.com]...

      I know, this stuff is crazy [patheos.com].

      The good news is that there’s 50 less pedophiles in this world, because, you know, these homosexuals are a bunch of disgusting perverts and pedophiles.

      [...]

      But these people all should have been killed, anyway, but they should have been killed through the proper channels, as in they should have been executed by a righteous government that would have tried them, convicted them, and saw them executed.

      [...]

      That’s what the Bible says, plain and simple.

      Oh wait, wrong religion.

      Because the crazy imam calling for the killing of gays is totally representative of Islam.

      But the crazy pastor calling for the killing of gays is just some nut who has nothing to do with Christianity.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    The Orlando Police are going to be dogged by the 3 hour delay. The FBI decided that they need to get in front of the public first so they can get forgotten first.

    Legitimately and eventually, the Orlando police will have to answer the question, why they wait 3 hours. They are tasked with protecting the public. So, here we have a situation where they (officers could be killed) risk life. And they sat back until some huge amount of force was assembled. Meanwhile the victims, and these are not hostages, but

    • Actually they did, no cop entered columbine until after both killers had shot themselves. People bled out. One group of students took it on themselves to carry out a teacher that was bleeding out, saving him.

      They were supposed to have changed cop training after that. Apparently not in Florida.

    • We're seeing the differences between two hard-set protocols.

      Before Columbine, the standard protocol for an active shooter was to wait for force to arrive and organize before storming the building. After realizing how that protocol led to more deaths they changed the protocol to immediately enter and engage the active shooter.

      In Orlando the police confirmed that they went from an active shooter to a hostage situation and changed the engagement protocol.

      The protocol for dealing with hostage situations is stil

    • Actually, after the initial shoot-out with the bouncer and two cops, it turned into a hostage situation. He holed up in the bathroom with some hostages, then came out shooting when the cops broke in to the building.

      If he had spent 3 hours executing people, everyone in the building would have been dead.

  • Even though law enforcement had insufficient evidence to hold him, he was almost certainly suspicious enough to have his Internet/phone usage and weapons purchases spied on.

    • by guruevi ( 827432 )

      The only reason they had investigated him was because they spied on him. Either way, I don't think anyone should be spied upon remotely, just charge them with a crime or don't. And if you are convinced he is going to do something bad, put a tail on him and then when he approaches the night club guns blazing, shoot him down.

      • So far as I understand it, he first came to the FBI's attention after he apparently made some intemperate pro-terrorist statements at work, and someone called the FBI on him.

  • AFAIK, the FBI is still waiting to obtain and decrypt all of the shooters electronic devices. Comey's announcement comes after Obama confidently saying the same thing only this morning. I would not normally expect such a proclamation THE FIRST WORKDAY AFTER THE EVENT. Normally an exhaustive forensic effort would result in some bureaucratic report being generated about a year from now.
  • This is nuts. He was apparently interviewed and investigated previously, probably monitored too. Yet he could still buy a weapon and go on a spree. Why is there surveillance again? Now the story implies that more surveillance is required on the internet. Its not working, so stop the surveillance.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13, 2016 @07:27PM (#52311229)

    Countries where people don't have such free access to the Internet don't have these kinds of incidents.
    Time for to enact controls on this dangerous assault medium.
    No one really needs access to that much Internet.
    What's up with these web nuts and their weird pastimes anyway?
    Isn't it worth it if we can save just one life?
    Our cities are bathed in blood and these Internet companies are profiting from it.
    The First Amendment mentioned freedom of "the press". There are no printing presses used to make the Internet.
    We just want to register and track Internet users.
    And subject them to background checks before they can go online.
    And prevent them from using dangerous tools like "encryption" to hide their usage.
    We've got to close the WiFi loophole that lets people access the Internet without a background check.
    Who could argue with these common sense measures?
    If you don't agree with this, you have blood on your hands.

  • by Vermonter ( 2683811 ) on Monday June 13, 2016 @07:44PM (#52311351)
    We need common sense internet laws. I mean, why does a person even need a 50 Mbps internet connection? You don't need that much bandwidth unless you are planning on breaking the law. If the internet had been better regulated, this man would have never been radicalized.
  • ...also administered by way of the internet.. a little bit of Bloom County [facebook.com]

    Do maximize your browser to get this in full size.

    Rarely has the dandelion patch been needed as much as these past couple of days.. and this year... and so far, this whole $!@#ing century. I'm so glad Bloom County is back. It was a long dry spell without it. It's only gotten better with age.

    I wish I could say the same about the world.

  • and its called the Internet.

  • Saying it was the internet is like saying it was over the telephone or a pen pal in the 70's and 80's. Of course it was over the internet but what part. I've seen some articles that say he had a grinder account and was a regular at that club. The clueless noobs they have in charge at the FBI just need fade out and blow away.

Perfection is acheived only on the point of collapse. - C. N. Parkinson

Working...