DOJ and FBI Release Full Transcript of Orlando 911 Call

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Mon Jun 20, 2016 at 09:47:09 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The Department of Justice and FBI reversed themselves today and released the full transcript of Omar Mateen's 911 call. The partial transcript released hours earlier omitted any reference to ISIS.

Why the change? From DOJ's statement: [More...]

"The purpose of releasing the partial transcript of the shooter's interaction with 911 operators was to provide transparency, while remaining sensitive to the interests of the surviving victims, their families, and the integrity of the ongoing investigation.

We also did not want to provide the killer or terrorist organizations with a publicity platform for hateful propaganda. Unfortunately, the unreleased portions of the transcript that named the terrorist organizations and leaders have caused an unnecessary distraction from the hard work that the FBI and our law enforcement partners have been doing to investigate this heinous crime. As much of this information had been previously reported, we have re-issued the complete transcript to include these references in order to provide the highest level of transparency possible under the circumstances."

So what did Mateen say? From the transcript:

"2:35 a.m.: Shooter contacted a 911 operator from inside Pulse. The call lasted approximately 50 seconds, the details of which are set out below:

(OD) Orlando Police Dispatcher

(OM) Omar Mateen

OD: Emergency 911, this is being recorded.

OM: In the name of God the Merciful, the beneficent [Arabic]

OD: What?

OM: Praise be to God, and prayers as well as peace be upon the prophet of God [Arabic]. I wanna let you know, I'm in Orlando and I did the shootings.

OD: What's your name?

OM: My name is I pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of the Islamic State.

OD: Ok, What's your name?

OM: I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi may God protect him [Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State.

OD: Alright, where are you at?

< Senate Rejects Gun Control Measures | Yoga Day and Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

DOJ and FBI Release Full Transcript of Orlando 911 Call | 56 comments (56 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Maybe (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by FlJoe on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 11:00:07 AM EST

because they translated the whole sentence from Arabic to English. Allah translates into God, what the hell is so nefarious about that?

That being said I think the FBI looked silly in this episode, especially as they already had released the fact that the shooter pledged allegiance to ISIS, as widely reported.

No fan of the FBI, I have serious doubts about the way they handled the Anthrax case and something still stinks about the killing of Boston bombers buddy.

That being said, I will chalk this up to "Hanlons Razor", just dumb thinking about not wanting to help the propaganda of ISIS.

Wow! (5.00 / 1) (#29)
by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 08:36:56 AM EST

Lynch now says Mateen's motive may never be known. Is this:

Willful blindness

Political correctness

Obama's preferred narrative

All of the above

You have a guy (5.00 / 3) (#31)
by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 08:52:29 AM EST

Who has a father who seems sympathize to extremism. He has made statements that indicate he might be.

You also have a guy who is a tortured homosexual. Who has also made many statements to many people about how much he hates homosexuals. He visits the bar he attacked enough that it seemed more visits than planning an attack would require and haunted other places in the world and the web that showed his confusion and conflict about his identity.

Any sane and reasonable person can see this person might have more than one reason to do what he did.

Also the statements he made about Islam more than anything showed he really didn't know that much about the subject.

Its funny to me that you get your panties in a twist when the AG says what appears to me painfully obvious. At the very least he had more than one reason. And we may never know which one it was that finally pushed him over the edge.

It would probably be much more comfortable for you to just say Islam Islam Islam, put it in you Islam Bad box and not need to think about it any more. So do that.

The rest of us know the world is not that simple.


He didn't know much about the subject (none / 0) (#35)
by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 10:05:50 AM EST

He knew enough to kill for it.


What (none / 0) (#37)
by FlJoe on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 10:36:40 AM EST

came first the chicken or the egg? This guy has a record of aberrant behavior that long predates ISIS or in fact any worldwide Jihadist movement. Are we just supposed to ignore the mental health aspect of this episode just so it can be pigeonholed into the "ISIS is coming to get us" narrative?


Yes (none / 0) (#38)
by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05:28 AM EST

We are

And that he expressed solidarity with two different groups that hate each other as well. I guess.


Omar Mateen's (none / 0) (#39)
by KeysDan on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 11:37:24 AM EST

ignorance of the disparate groups with which he held allegiance--enough to die for any one of them, was eclipsed by his knowledge of a gay club 120 miles from his home. Some are even denying that it was a gay club ("Pulse, the Hot Gay Club", as advertised). Although I do see the difficulty--it being nuanced and all.

To stem the run on tinfoil, it might be best for the wingers to take a deep breath and wait as the investigation continues. Law enforcement officials are checking on reports of Mateen's keen familiarity with gay men, including his reported association with a "friend with benefits." And, his dislike of Puerto Ricans.


: The groups he pledged to (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 11:52:21 PM EST

are virulently anti-gay.

Anyone else remember the (5.00 / 1) (#41)
by ragebot on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 12:50:21 PM EST

AG saying something like the investigation would include how the shooter got his certification (?) to be a security guard?

I can't find the link but remember reading some place or hearing on TV he had to pass a psych exam given by the GS4 security firm he worked for. The thing was the psych professional who's signature was on the exam claimed she did not sign it and was not in Florida or giving exams at the time the shooter passed the exam.

There seems to be a complicated history of GS4 and Wackenhut. I have lived in Florida most of my life and Wackenhut has never had the best reputation there; it was basically a rent a cop place with guys off the street pretending to be cops.

GS4 is a multi national that has bought up security companies all over the globe including Wackenhut. The GS4 wiki page on the company details a somewhat checkered past.

Given all the issues lots of LEOs seem to have I have to wonder if organizations like GS4 are basically staffed by folks who were LEO rejects; something the shooter was.

Looks like a double post (none / 0) (#1)
by ragebot on Mon Jun 20, 2016 at 10:45:09 PM EST

Two threads with the same topic and description of the thread.

Why did they change (none / 0) (#2)
by Redbrow on Mon Jun 20, 2016 at 10:58:32 PM EST

Allah to god?

And not a single mention of hatred or punishment for gays.

It is obvious this islamic terrorist's prime motivation was Islam/ISIS/jihad.

Or so Mateen wanted you (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Peter G on Mon Jun 20, 2016 at 11:11:45 PM EST

to think. Why do you take him at his word, as expressed in that particular call? The claim of motive may or may not be credible.


Several web sites (none / 0) (#4)
by ragebot on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 12:25:02 AM EST

are reporting there is 50 minutes of recorded phone conversations with the shooter during the incident and point out the transcripts don't seem to include the full 50 minutes.

There seems to be a lot of not just editing but simply missing parts.

The recordings themselves fit my definition of "best evidence"; not edited transcripts missing the majority of the calls.

Do you thing a judge would sustain an objection to entering the transcript(s) into evidence given that the recordings exist?

More to your point do you think a conclusion about motive can be drawn from such limited evidence?


What police or prosecutors release to the public (none / 0) (#13)
by Peter G on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 09:45:38 AM EST

is not "evidence" at all. It is PR. If a case were to come to court, only the tape itself would be evidence, not any transcription of it (which might be used as a listening aid, but not as evidence). And if a party (government or defense in a criminal case; plaintiff or defendant in a civil case) used less than all of it, the other side would be allowed to introduce as much of the rest as should, in fairness, be heard by the factfinder to understand accurately what was introduced. This is the rule for documents as it is for recordings.


Agree it is PR (none / 0) (#17)
by ragebot on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 11:34:53 AM EST

which goes to my point that an effort by DOJ/whoever seems to have been made to tinker with the prejudice vs. probative test that would be applied by a court. But my understanding is that the test does not even always apply in a preliminary hearing (it is the judges call). In terms of PR being used to taint a possible jury pool that seems moot since I doubt the shooter will face any criminal charges. I also have doubts about civil charges since he does not seem to have much in the way of assets. There have been reports he signed his house over to his brother-in-law and some claims his family may know more than they are telling about his plans. But even all the family's assets may not amount to enough to entice civil action.

Since several LEOs have said in public that the shooter used the term "Allah" the cat seems to be out of the bag and any claim that the transcripts should use the word "God" in place of "Allah" certainly lend weight to the claim that DOJ/whoever is simply trying to put out PR instead of an unedited full transcript.


: You knew it was PR bull$h$t (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by Mr Natural on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 01:40:30 PM EST

the moment your eyes saw the word, "transparent," in the (re)announcement.
Like they say, there are lies, damned lies, and Government "transparency."

Because he grew up with a Afghanistan father (none / 0) (#7)
by TrevorBolder on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 05:33:29 AM EST

Who has publicly supported the Taliban,

Only imagine what he said to his son growing up.

The Taliban is not particularly fond of Western values,

His co workers seemed to back that up

Why would you NOT take him at his word?


Because I prefer to consider all the evidence (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Peter G on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 09:49:08 AM EST

before jumping to a conclusion that fits my prejudices. As for the father, as we all know, many young people adopt their parents' political and/or religious views, while many others rebel against their upbringing -- or simply develop their own opinions through education or other influences -- and adopt very different views.


I found it very odd (none / 0) (#24)
by TrevorBolder on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 07:22:13 PM EST

before jumping to a conclusion that fits my prejudices

That Democrats and the media immediately went after this as a gun control or gay violence issue,

When the immediate evidence , in the shooters own words, was a ISIS disciple.

It sounded like Democrat politicians and the press jumped to conclusions and thus displayed their prejudices


I believe the word you are looking for (none / 0) (#25)
by Peter G on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 07:37:19 PM EST

is "Democratic" politicians, not "Democrat."


: Either or (none / 0) (#26)
by TrevorBolder on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 07:39:47 PM EST

Still couldn't figure out why they jumped like they did

Exceot, maybe not (none / 0) (#27)
by jbindc on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 07:55:46 PM EST

Since he "pledged allegiance" to two separate groups who hate each other.


He pledged allegiance to (none / 0) (#28)
by TrevorBolder on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 08:03:53 PM EST

Groups that want to blow up the USA

I got his drift, he doesn't like Western values,

You are reaching,

Unless real evidence shows up otherwise

But there hasn't so far, so I still can't figure the rush to blame gun control and a hate crime against gays.

It just makes the Administration look foolish,

Oh , and Lynch hinting it might have been some anti Latin bias was just too far over the top.

Go with what it appears to be , until you have conclusive evidence otherwise.


You are kidding right? (5.00 / 2) (#36)
by ruffian on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 10:28:02 AM EST

It was known by Sunday AM that he drove 100 miles from home to shoot up a particular bar, one that happens to be a gay bar. And he did so with an assault style weapon (please spare me the lecture on the technical details of what makes one gun an assault weapon and another not. You know what I am talking about).

Anti-gay gun violence is what it appears to be to me. Committed by a psychopath who's stated words in the final hours may or may not be reliable. His actions are the most reliable evidence.


Why? (none / 0) (#30)
by jbindc on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 08:42:42 AM EST

You don't have "conclusive evidence" but you are feeling free to make definitive conclusions.


Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by FlJoe on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 09:57:49 AM EST

lets not jump to conclusions, unless it's a conclusion that fits the preferred narrative.


Lol (none / 0) (#43)
by TrevorBolder on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 05:41:23 PM EST

Conclusive evidence, lol.
Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan, Do you understand the words coming out of my mouth?

You avoid everything the shooter said.

He reportedly scoped out Disneyworld , but although that would be a great terrorist target, the odds for success were much lower. Cameras, armed security, and how to get the weapons on site.
He chose a site he was very familiar with, limited access and egress, a perfect killing zone.

I only laugh when the media and Democrats immediately jumped on gun laws and gay violence,
Excuse me, the most obvious cause was coming from the shooters mouth. ISIS.
His father from Afghanistan is pro Taliban.

It might very well be he had ulterior motives, but that is NOT what you lead with. Unless the FBI comes up with concrete evidence showing otherwise, this was a terrorist attack.


I don't (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by FlJoe on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 04:10:40 PM EST

think anybody from Obama on down dismissed the Jihadist connection from the get go, many of the original signs sure pointed that direction.

Upon further review it appears some of the signs point to other factors, factors that are ignored at our own peril.

You, IMO idiotically, want to insist that

the most obvious cause was coming from the shooters mouth.

Do you really think we should make our judgements and analysis soley based on the words of a madman?

It's pretty clear that this episode was a nexus of Jihadism, mental health and guns, just as Colorado springs was a nexus of anti-choice rhetoric, mental health and guns, Newtown family dysfunction, mental health and guns, Charleston racism, mental health and guns.

Do you see a pattern here?


They did lead with 'this is a terrorist attack' (none / 0) (#44)
by ruffian on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 06:19:49 PM EST

It is the further investigation of his mental state and lack of Islamic terrorist ties that is casting doubt on that.

If hatred of gays was not part of his motivation why didn't he find a restaurant near his home to shoot up? Why a dance club at 2 am?


100 miles away from home (none / 0) (#45)
by ruffian on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 06:20:27 PM EST

: Where he had been (none / 0) (#53)
by jbindc on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 03:02:56 PM EST

On several occasions, including, earlier that evening.

Yes, and (none / 0) (#55)
by KeysDan on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 03:34:20 PM EST

"Gay Days" at DisneyWorld were May 31 to June 6, 2016.


It is too inconvenient (none / 0) (#9)
by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 08:30:46 AM EST

To take him at his word.


Allah to God (none / 0) (#10)
by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 08:36:03 AM EST

Is the title of A.G. not enough for Lynch? She must see herself as Protector of the Faith.


Yeah, I don't get it. (none / 0) (#11)
by leftwig on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 08:43:41 AM EST

Why did they change Allah to God?

This seems particularly odd to me. Fair enough if you want to educate people on the translation of the statement made, but why wouldn't you include the original Arabic statement, then in brackets, provide the translation?


It is curious, (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by KeysDan on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 11:02:37 AM EST

but it seems unnecessary to attribute anything to it other than someone's attempt at English translation for clarity. God is an English word, not so widely used in the Middle East in the times of Bible writing (e.g. Yahweh). While there is some differences and controversies rooted in theologies, as to the relationships of God of Islam (Allah), God of Abraham and, hence, God of Scripture, God is a reasonable translation from Arabic.


Fails the smell test (none / 0) (#18)
by leftwig on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 12:22:41 PM EST

Again, no issue with providing a translation for those that might not understand the words spoken by Omar, but if you are releasing a transcript, then release the words as spoken with subtext for translation. Not doing so shows an agenda (like was done with Bergdahls quotes at the WH). "God" and "Allah" are not interchangeable in our language today.

Christians in the US would not refer to their God by the name "Allah". The sacred text of Muslims differs from those of Christians and Jews with different commands coming from their deity. While I do believe the origins of the god these three religions worship started with a reference to the same god, they clearly do not worship the same god today. We aren't talking a minor modification to a word in a different language (like if a Hispanic use the word "Dios"). We are talking fundamental differences in the god that is worshiped in each of religion.


Allah is god, god is allah. (5.00 / 1) (#32)
by Chuck0 on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 09:07:40 AM EST

The god of Abraham is the god of the Jews. The god of Abraham is the god of Islam. The god of Abraham is the if Jesus. One deity, three sects or religions. Any religious scholar will back this up. I'm a hardcore atheist and I know these things. But then, I've found, in my experience, many atheists are far more knowledgeable about religion than the people who claim to practice it.


Maybe its because you are athiest that you don't (5.00 / 1) (#40)
by leftwig on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 12:33:01 PM EST

know that Christians worship a triune God (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) which neither Jews nor Muslims recognize and provides a clear separation for what they believe about their God.

Islam was a religion born out of the knowledge of the Jewish, pre-Christ God, but diverged greatly with the emergence of the prophet Elijah Muhammed (around 600 AD). Arabs at the time were mostly polytheistic, but with the advance of Jewish and Christian religions in the area, chose to develop their own monotheistic religion. Christians, Jews and Muslims recognize different texts (and tenets) as being from God but the beliefs vary so much that its clear that their beliefs don't come from the same.

Saying Muslims and Christians worship the same God would be akin to saying the same of a cult that uses the Bible as a scriptural basis for a reference to the God of Abraham but chooses to follow additional commands/beliefs from a "new prophet". You would not recognize said group as worshiping the same God. They recognize and worship something different.


: All People Who Say They Worship One God (none / 0) (#42)
by RickyJim on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 02:46:53 PM EST

worship the same God. They might differ in what properties this unique God has, however. None can give a satisfactory (to me) answer to the question of how they know what they are asserting about God.

Amen to that (none / 0) (#33)
by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 09:11:49 AM EST

Brother


Fails the smell test? (none / 0) (#19)
by KeysDan on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 12:56:15 PM EST

Maybe it depends on what you have been smelling lately. And, perhaps, other senses, such as vision, so as to unearth an agenda lurking in the transcript.

As recognized, there are differences in theologies, including the provenance of the moon gods in Islam (the crescent moon). Your interpretation is not without any controversy. While Christians would not refer to their God as Allah, Muslims may refer to Allah as God of Islam. However, in my view, their is less here than meets your eye: a matter of translation.


It (none / 0) (#20)
by FlJoe on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 01:06:35 PM EST

is my understanding that Arabic Christians speaking refer to God as Allah.


: Was Omar an Arabic Christian? (none / 0) (#21)
by leftwig on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 01:47:49 PM EST

Its my understanding he was an American Muslim.
Was the translation being provided in English to Arabic Christians? Again, translating the spanish "Dios" to the english "God" would be an accurate translation. Translating Allah to God is not and trying to conflate the two as interchangeable in our language without providing the original text is intellectually dishonest.

If the transcript provided had used (none / 0) (#22)
by leftwig on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 01:50:38 PM EST

"God of Islam" in place of Allah instead of simply "God", I don't think there would be much controversy or need to question motive. Alas, the administration chose not to, why?


To be politically correct (none / 0) (#49)
by Mr Natural on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 02:17:13 PM EST

In other words, "bull$h$t management."

This entire thread has the feel of abstraction, of people struggling to explain something with which they're barely acquainted on a personal, or should I say, interpersonal, level.

The assertion (and agreement here) that Christianity's God is any more than superficially equivalent to Islam's Allah is misinformed.


you are aware that Jesus (none / 0) (#50)
by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 02:22:29 PM EST

appears in the Koran as a prophet?


Trivial b/s (none / 0) (#51)
by Mr Natural on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 02:39:58 PM EST

really (none / 0) (#52)
by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 02:47:41 PM EST

well it doesnt fit yer meme if thats what you mean. are you familiar with the term monotheism?

As monotheistic religions, sharing common ancestors, belief in divinely given written scriptures, and common rituals and practices, such as regular prayer and charity; valuing pilgrimage and sharing many common holy places; promising that behavior will receive its proper rewards and punishments in the future, on earth and in an afterlife; balancing and integrating strands of mysticism, legalism, and pious devotion; the three religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam would appear to be naturally suited to co-existence and even to mutual reinforcement. And indeed at times, notably in Spain, during much, but not all, of the period from about 750 to about 1250, the three faiths coexisted and gladly learned from one another. But such warm, reciprocally beneficial coexistence has been the exception rather than the rule.

"monotheism?" that's the similarity? (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by Mr Natural on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 03:28:28 PM EST

Mainstream American Christians worship two gods, Daddy G and Kid Jesus. Catholics have a freakin' triumvirate.

Islam's Tawhid allows only one, a unitary, non Father-of-anything God. Human beings are merely creations.

The FBI should stick to facts instead of pandering. The translation was politically correct b/s.


Yes, monotheism (none / 0) (#57)
by KeysDan on Thu Jun 23, 2016 at 04:33:07 PM EST

is the similarity. The theology of mainstream Christians is the belief in the mystery of the Trinity, a label meant to summarize passages in the Bible (not specifically mentioned in scripture) as to One God, three persons. While your position seems to separate mainstream Christians from Catholics, Catholics do consider themselves Christians--some Christian faiths may not reciprocate.

The Koran does specifically deny the Trinity, and Maimonides believed that the Trinity diluted monotheism. Jehovah's Witness also rejects the Trinity. However, despite the theologic differences regarding the Trinity, Christianity, Judaism and Islam believe in one God-- are monotheist religions.


: So how does rattling on about monotheism, (none / 0) (#58)
by Mr Natural on Sun Jun 26, 2016 at 10:26:31 AM EST

"mysteries," and assertions of trivial and superficial similarities or congruences explain the FBI's deliberately Bowdlerized translation?
People make their own gods. Some want their gods to love. Some want their gods to hate.

Exactly. (5.00 / 2) (#23)
by Towanda on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 03:17:17 PM EST

The relevant rule is to use the exact wording and then put the translation -- to English -- in brackets.

The FBI must have failed English Comp 101.


: i feel i need to (5.00 / 1) (#46)
by linea on Wed Jun 22, 2016 at 11:25:42 PM EST

agree with the critics. There is an generic arabic word for "a god" and it's not a synonym for the proper name Allah ( like Jehovah as a proper name for some religious groups).
A moslem would say in English, "Moslems believe in Allah and his prophet Mohammed." It's simply dishonest and decietfull to "fake translate" Allah to God. the only reason to do so would a overt decision to befuddle.

Remember (none / 0) (#5)
by Redbrow on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 02:52:38 AM EST

when Trayvon Martin attacked George Zimmerman?

That also happened in the Orlando area.

That 911 call recording was released immediately.

Why the blatant double,standard?

: Because this is (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by TrevorBolder on Tue Jun 21, 2016 at 05:29:25 AM EST

The Federal Government stomping all over this
They have a narrative to protect,
As opposed to releasing the full tapes