Monday, June 20, 2016

The Redacted (and later Un-Redcated) 911 Transcripts And What They Mean

The original reason for this post was the DOJ deciding to only release a sanitized, Muslim friendly version of the 911 calls made by Omar Mateen while he was murdering U.S. citizens. Before I could finish this post the "Justice" Department blinked and released the entire, unredacted transcript. I think a lot of people see that as a win for the good guys. It isn't. They didn't agree to release the unedited Muslim friendly transcripts because it was the right thing to do, they did it because of the social media firestorm. It is like a kid getting caught doing something wrong and being forced to say they are sorry. They aren't sorry for what they did, they are sorry they got caught. They also did it with full knowledge that when they try something once that creates outrage, each successive time it generates less outrage and eventually people just accept it. This is not the last time they will do something like this. Let me make this crystal clear.

What is outrageous is not what the DOJ did. It is what the DOJ wanted to do and still wants to do.

Let me paint the picture here. We have a fairly unusual look into the mindset of a mass murderer while in the act. A phone call where he lays out for anyone and everyone why he was doing what he was doing. Calling 911 is smart on his part and for his purposes since all of their calls are recorded. In other words he wanted to have a permanent record of his motivation for shooting up a nightclub full of homosexuals. Part of what he said and the DOJ tried to redact was this:

“I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi may God protect him [in Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State,” Mateen says on the new transcript.

Now usually after a mass shooting where the shooter is killed, or even when he is not, the standard line is that his motivation was unclear. We search social media, email, talk to friends and relatives, all to get a picture of why he did what he did. With Orlando we have Mateen himself telling us what his motivation was. He saw himself as a soldier of jihad. Here is a little more fro Fox:

According to the Justice Department report, Mateen said twice during the 911 call and at least once during later negotiations that he pledged ISIS or al-Baghdadi. Investigators said he spoke to negotiators in three different calls at 2:48 a.m., 3:03 a.m. and 3:24 a.m. The longest call was the second at 16 minutes. The third call, at three minutes, was the shortest. The first call lasted nine minutes.

"As the killer made these statements, he did so in a chilling, calm and deliberate manner," Assistant Special Agent in Charge Ron Hopper said during a Monday morning news conference.

During one call, Mateen told negotiators that the U.S. should stop bombing Syria and Iraq -- the countries with regions that comprise ISIS' so-called caliphate. He said the bombings were why he was "out here right now."

The attacks by the U.S. on the forces of ISIS are why he was "out here right now". Seriously. He just tells us why he was there, no need for a guessing game. This was a direct retaliation, at least in his twisted mind, for U.S. attacks on ISIS. You bomb us, I shoot a bunch of you. All part of jihad. ISIS seemed pleased by his actions. So the Department of "Justice" decided to revise history, to flat out change the facts by omitting the most critical data, so that the event which is historically verifiable changes from what it was to what they want it to be. 

Of course we are inundated with people claiming that the real culprits in the Orlando shooting are white, Republican, Christians even though the shooter was not white nor Republican nor a Christian. It is the fault of those scary "assault rifles" that make New York journalists soil themselves in fear.

Imagine this fictitious scenario:

A white guy from Iowa goes to a Jewish synagogue during their meetings, driving an F-350 pick-up truck complete with an NRA sticker and a "Make America Great" bumper sticker. He bursts in and bars the door and starts shooting. The guy is wearing a Donald Trump hat and has a cross around his neck. In his wallet is an NRA lifetime member card. While he is shooting he pauses and calls 911. He identifies himself as a Christian and a white supremacist. He proclaims his devotion to Donald Trump and says he is killing these Jews because they are Christ killers and secretly control the government, He kills around 50 Jews, men and women and children and of course is using an AR-15. He is later shot in a rescue attempt by the police. 

Does anyone seriously believe that the government and media alike would not only include the 'Christian' statements made when they release the transcripts of the 911 calls but actually would emphasize them and play them up? Unlike the Orlando shooting which places the media in a pickle because it pits two favored groups, Muslims and homosexuals, against one another with nary a white guy to blame, in the fake scenario above you have a mass media journalist's dream come true. You can be sure that even if Trump went online to denounce these actions 5 seconds after they happened, the media would paint it as Trump hesitating to distance himself from the shooter.

See, to the "elite" people of this country, those that think they are so smart and well read and nuanced, something as simple as the difference between the two largest monotheistic religions in the world, encompassing billions of people, either completely escapes them or that they willfully ignore out of sheer bigotry. Islam and Christianity, when it comes to violent extremism, are not even in the same conversation. One is rightly looked at as a source of most to virtually all of the major religious extremism in the world and the other is an incredibly peaceful religion. 

The reason Islam is specially deserving of specific attention while other religions are not is simple. While there may be a few crackpots who say they are Christian while engaging in terrorist activities, it is a tiny fraction of a fraction of the professing population, Christians and non-Christian religious types alike and it is universally condemned by Christian leaders. There are no Christians with a significant audience (like more than 5 people) that advocates for violence in the name of Christianity. Heck if anything we are entirely too passive, especially when it comes to false teachers in the church.  Militant Islam on the other hand has wide ranging and reaching large groups like Al Qaeda, controls or significantly impacts dozens of nations from Iran to Somalia to Pakistan to Afghanistan and Indonesia. It has significant national support, very significant academic and intellectual support, a record of violence and of course millions of Muslims who subscribe to the idea of justifiable religious violence. So yeah, the two, Christianity and Islam, don't even belong in the same conversation. Being a radical Christian means loving your enemy. Being a radical Muslim means bravely blowing up unarmed people. 

Keep alert people. This wasn't the last time the government will try to change the details of a politically charged event. When it comes to making a political statement, the truth is irrelevant. Only the narrative matters. 

Post a Comment