Radical Islam and Terror Attacks in America

Mass Murder: Omar Mateen

The Orlando nightclub shooter Omar Mateen committed mass murder in 2016 when he attacked a gay nightclub in the state of Florida. Although the club was known as a gay club, the attack was motivated not out of hatred for homosexuals but rather in protest of the death of Abu Waheeb, an Islamic militant. Mateen had become a radicalized Muslim and viewed his attack on the club as a righteous act of killing—an act of vengeance against an unjust nation that he believed was persecuting the people of Islam in the Middle East (Doornbos, 2016). Up to that point, Mateen had no criminal background, although he did have behavioral issues in school and a history of engaging in physical altercations (Jacobo, 2016). He had become radicalized to embrace militant Islam over the Internet and he viewed the War on Terror as a war on innocent Muslims in the Middle East. The attack on the nightclub was his revenge (Greenwald & Hussein, 2018). It was somewhat of a random attack, as Mateen had not plotted his murder very carefully but was simply looking for a populated target at the time he decided to take action. A security guard by day, Mateen became a cold-blooded killer that night in 2016. In fact, in the 911 call he made after the shooting, he stated plainly, “You have to tell America to stop bombing Syria and Iraq. They are killing a lot of innocent people” (Doornbos, 2016). Mateen himself killed 49 and wounded dozens more before pledging his allegiance to the Islamic State as police reported (Elmasry & el-Nawawy, 2019).

Mateen had become socially withdrawn from friends and family leading up to the attack. His wife did not know what he was going to do, however, and in reference to the night of the attack she testified that he only spent some time driving from one club to another trying to decide which to open fire on (Greenwald & Hussein, 2018). In high school he had been expelled for fighting in class, but charges of violence were dropped following an arrest. He later attended a school for teens with behavioral issues. More fights and suspensions followed, however.

His work as a security guard for G4S Secure Solutions in Florida was not without incident. His tenure was not without incident. He accused coworkers of making racist comments to him and he countered that he would have al-Qaeda kill the family of a sheriff’s deputy (McRoberts, 2016). Thus, aggression and hostility in Mateen continued into adulthood and coincided with what he believed were personal attacks on his ethnicity and religious beliefs. For these threats, Mateen was transferred to a different work location. He was not fired or condemned, and the community that used G4S services later debated whether the company was at fault for not alerting authorities about Mateen’s behavior or whether the company should have done a more thorough psychological screening of Mateen before hiring him (McRoberts, 2016). However, the company was possibly deceptive in giving the reasons for Mateen’s reassignment—instead of referring to his threats made to coworkers the company simply stated that “the reasons for the reassignment were that Mateen was residing in the Port St. Lucie area, had an excellent work history and attendance record” (McRoberts, 2016). This position was adopted probably to avoid accountability for what Mateen did. However, it was clear that Mateen was reassigned only after he made threats to coworkers.

Mateen used a 9mm Glock and a semi-automatic rifle to commit the murders at the club. He selected the club because it had a lot of people in it; his killing was a statement killing, a protest killing, an act of retribution for the policies of the United States government that he viewed as immoral (Greenwald & Hussein, 2018). He had no real modus operandi, because as his wife testified his decision to attack was not based on anything other than his allegiance to the Islamic State and his desire to kill as many people as he could in one go. It was for him a suicide mission. The weapons he chose were simply selected to maximize his lethal ambition.

Some critics argued that Mateen was really a closeted homosexual and that his shooting of a gay nightclub was the result of repressed sexual desires, but there is no evidence to support this claim: Mateen was happily married with a wife and child; his motivation was not sexual frustration but rather political frustration (Greenwald & Hussein, 2018). It just so happened that the club he chose to attack was a gay nightclub and many of the victims identified as homosexual.

The result of the attack was that Mateen engaged in a standoff with police for several hours before a shoot-out began and he was killed. He had no intention of going peacefully; his goal was to please Allah by striking at the infidel, according to his own beliefs. He simply viewed his goal being to take as many lives as he could. The attack can therefore be assessed as blowback for the War on Terror.

What resulted from the attack was more public outcry from citizens and lawmakers regarding gun violence. Gun law restrictions are a big issue for the Biden Administration, but usually they are not big issues for Republican administrations. However, there is also the problem of psychological screening and identifying red flags before attacks like this occur. There is also the issue of being able to become radicalized over the Internet. Since 2016, Big Tech companies like Facebook and Twitter have been more proactive in monitoring their platforms and removing posters who violate their community guidelines.

Really, Mateen was not much different from Timothy McVeigh, who targeted innocent people in Oklahoma City in order to carry out revenge for what he believed to be bad policy on the part of the United States government. Both attacks were politically-motivated in this sense, and both targeted innocent civilians. The only difference is that Mateen’s attack also was motivated by radical Islamic beliefs. He identified with a terrorist organization and saw himself as a follower of the Islamic State. This should have been a warning in and of itself, which is why his wife was later charged with aiding and abetting his attack on the nightclub, as she knew of his leanings and beliefs.

The mass murder committed by Mateen was, therefore, the result of a troubled personality with a history of personal conflicts at school and at work—but no criminal record—having reached a point in his beliefs where he saw no other way forward but to engage in physical violence. He had a lot of aggression and hostility and viewed himself and his people as victims of racism and political hatred. He wanted to stick up for himself and the innocent Muslims in the Middle East who were dying as a result of the US War on Terror. However, he chose a violent, terroristic method of defending himself and his people. His history of violence shows that he had behavioral issues, and the comments he made at his workplace showed that he aligned with a terrorist organization in the Middle East—but there is no record that the FBI was ever alerted. His workplace downplayed threats of violence and kept him on payroll, choosing to transfer him to a new station rather than release him after he threatened the family of a coworker. His own wife never alerted authorities about his tendencies. It seems no one around him really anticipated that he would become a mass murderer, but there were plenty of red flags showing warnings.