News

Orlando Shooter’s Wife Kept Attack Hidden

According to detectives, the wife of the Orlando shooter had complete knowledge that he was “going to do something bad” right before he shot up the gay nightclub.

“I knew on Saturday when Omar left the house about 5 p.m. that this was the time that he was going to do something bad. I knew this because of the way he left and took the gun and backpack with ammunition,” she stated.

“I knew later, when I could not get ahold of him that my fears had come true and he did what he said he was going to do.”

“I was in denial and I could not believe that the father of my child was going to hurt other people.”

 


  • Babsan

    Muslim Terrorists for you folks,expected from Muslims

  • robinked

    Prosecute!

    • jackcandobutwont

      Prosecute and execute…..she is an accomplice, just as she had been at the crime scene reloading for him!!

  • jackcandobutwont

    When it comes to mooooosies, there are no moderates. There are the allah ackbar (crazy dirty footed goat humping child raping terrorist types) and those who support the allah ackbars!!

  • Big Ed

    A terrorist attacks and kills numerous people and his wife knew he intended to do something on this scale, but hid it. Her penalty is likely to be non-existent. This is the reason I believe any person who commits an act of terror, should be severely punished (they usually end up dead and this is acceptable). His/her family should also receive serious punishment, and the most humane, but serious, punishment I can think of is to deport the family to the country they left to come here. The wife knew, said nothing, and lots of people died because of her silence-her punishment should be a trip back home.

    • Terry Butts

      There has to be proof they knew about the attack. When there is proof such as this woman actually confessing to seeing him leave with the gun and ammunition after he stated what he intended to do then yes they should be held accountable as accomplices.

      We can not however just punish an entire family because one member committed such a horrific act no matter how suspicious we are about them we can only punish people when we have proof they knew about it and did nothing to prevent the crime thus making them accomplices to that crime.

      Otherwise the government could arrest entire families even ones who have not had contact for decades over just about any crime any family member is accused of just like the former English governed colonies used to do. Entire families and their property were taken at the slightest accusation of treason etc. against just one member.

      One of the biggest punishments they should impose especially on terrorists and those spouting support for them as the reason for their crime is confiscate all their money to use as aid for the surviving victims or the families of deceased victims of that persons crime.

      Remember if we start acting like the same way as the enemy in order to fight them we have become them giving them victory by default.

      • Big Ed

        Interesting that you want to play the “if we do what the enemy does we are ceding victory to them” card. Not quite apples and apples. If we were to actually begin to act like them, we would simply kill their whole family. These people have very close and tight families. When the alpha male of the group starts preparation for a jihad, the immediate family knows what is about to happen. The imam at his mosque probably also knows. What we, as a society can do is whatever the hell the law tells us we can do-and we can make the laws say we won’t stand by helplessly as these thugs kill our families. Part of the value of a law is deterrence ans for a man tight with his family, the knowledge that his actions can have a negative affect on his family might just create that deterrence.

        • Terry Butts

          If we go after them without evidence then we are doing exactly what the governments supporting terrorism have done and still do. Blame an entire group, family, race, religion, etc. for the actions of one or a few.

          “What we, as a society can do is whatever the hell the law tells us we
          can do-and we can make the laws say we won’t stand by helplessly as these thugs kill our families.”

          Exactly and until the law is changed we need proof like her confession of him telling what he was going to do and leaving with the weapon and ammunition to carry out what he stated.

          Had she picked up a phone and reported his threat and that he had left with a weapon to carry out that threat he may have been prevented from even reaching the place much less killing people.

          While we are discussing a terrorist and his crime if we start down the
          path of punishing an entire family for the actions of one it will not be
          long before even speeding or other minor crimes are used as an excuse
          to fine, jail, or otherwise punish entire families after all if an
          entire family is fined it profits the government more than if just the
          guilty one is fined and the “BELIEF” that punishing the whole family will deter criminals can be applied to any crime.

          Unfortunately today far to many politicians ignore even existing laws if it profits them or contradicts some political agenda they support.

          ” Part of the value of a law is deterrence ans for a man tight with his
          family, the knowledge that his actions can have a negative affect on his family might just create that deterrence.”

          This would only work if they had any respect for the lives of their family I doubt anyone capable of carrying out such a horrific crime especially one doing so based on a belief that those who die for those beliefs are rewarded is going to care about the aftermath for their families.

          Remember those nations murdering entire families over the crimes of one member do so because that is that nations punishment for the crime the one was accused of and they follow the belief that punishing the entire family deters others from committing crimes out of concern for their family.

          The reason our law requires proof is to prevent our government from going down this path as past governments have done.

          “When the alpha male of the group starts preparation for a jihad, the
          immediate family knows what is about to happen. The imam at his mosque probably also knows.”

          While we can assume this it is not always the case that is another reason our laws require that we have proof before we prosecute those who commit crimes and their accomplices.

          The issue is we have prosecutors playing politics instead of enforcing the existing laws we already passed to deal with such situations.

          As I recall in the past they did prosecute people who KNEW of certain crimes and did not report them as accomplices the same as if they drove the getaway car etc. but today they seem more worried about offending foreign nations and certain political activists than protecting the citizens of this nation.

          One of the major differences between the terrorists beliefs and What most Americans believe is respect and caring for ones family no one who cares about their family is going to murder a member of that family for disobeying them or BEING TO AMERICAN as has happened in the past.

          • Big Ed

            I guess we’re just screwed. You leftists want us to maximize the number of potential terrorists we bring into the country, but can only punish the actual killer when the act of terrorism is committed. This conveniently keeps the balance of the family available for additional murders, when the time is right. There was a time when the answer was “see something, say something”, but the terrorist’s guardians (CAIR) didn’t like being watched so closely, so we stopped watching. When the killings occurred in San Bernardino, neighbors said they saw things going on at the terrorists house late at night, but were afraid they would get in trouble for false accusations if they said something. So they ignored it. The terrorist’s mother babysat the children while munitions were delivered to the garage-mom saw nothing-so thirteen people had to die. We lost two good terrorists there, so we seem to have a need to replace them. We’re screwed-now, but after enough people are killed there will likely be an event that balances it out. And, it won’t be legal.

          • Terry Butts

            LEFTISTS are the ones wanting prosecution and conviction based on ACCUSATIONS with no evidence.

            As I stated the EXISTING laws have been ignored to placate groups like (CAIR) that is the problem we can not fix that problem by IGNORING the US CONSTITUTION and punishing entire groups of people based on RACE, RELIGION, POLITICAL VIEWS etc. there must be evidence to use in DUE PROCESS of law to prosecute them.

            Leftists would love to have the law changed to punish entire families or even GROUPS of people without evidence on the notion it would stop/deter crime.

            That is after all the entire ideology behind attempts to abolish the first, second and fourth amendments. The bogus claim from “leftists” that CRIME would end if only the government could CENSOR speech, CONTROL religion, ABOLISH the right to keep and bear arms and search everyone randomly without legal cause.

            obama and hillary actually APOLOGIZED to terrorists that murdered US citizens on the excuse they were offended by some video (most of us would never have heard of) because our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS prevented them from censoring the video.

            Remember that one LEFTIST actually stated he wanted to “DRAG EVERY GUN OWNER TO DEATH BEHIND A PICKUP” blaming ALL legal gun owners for a recent crime that a person ILLEGALLY according to existing restrictions possessing a weapon committed once again spouting the false doctrine that if everyone else just gave up their right to protect themselves and freedom that the criminals would suddenly toss away, stop making, stop smuggling in, and stop stealing the weapons they ILLEGALLY use to commit crimes.

            As I stated in my previous post SHE CONFESSED to having heard him state his plans to kill people and witnessed him leaving with the weapon and ammunition to carry out his threat and did nothing.

            In many states THAT IS ALREADY A CRIME they have prosecuted others in the past for having less knowledge of similar crimes and not calling the authorities to report them.

            http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/failure-to-report-a-crime.html

            https://www.wklaw.com/knowing-about-a-crime-and-not-saying-anything/

            As I stated the problem is not that there is no law to prosecute such things it is that prosecutors are more interested in playing politics than in protecting the people. New laws are not needed when simply enforcing the existing ones would stop or at least hinder a lot of these crimes.

            For example if the GOVERNMENT would stop ignoring its own laws and start reporting ineligible people to the background check system they REQUIRE all gun sales be run through.

            There have been at least two crimes where the shooter was not legally allowed under existing laws to possess a gun but got one because the GOVERNMENT did not follow its own rules and comply with the law reporting their ineligibility to the background check system.

    • Cookie Vranish

      Nope, just kill the family! All of them!

  • Cookie Vranish

    We never had this type of trouble before we were stupid enough to let those Muslims into our country!

    • Doris Will

      WE did’t let them, they were delivered behind our backs.

  • Deplorable Irredeemable Susan

    Why did she not call the authorities?
    Look at her smiling picture. That speaks volumes.
    How do we know she wasn’t the planner all along?
    Arrest that entire family, send them to Gitmo for a lifetime.
    Investigate the mosque that they attend, as well.