While the mainstream media has not had any shortage of headlines regarding the Vegas shooting which killed over 50 people and resulted in the injury of more than 500 others, they have utterly failed to address or even attempt to address the increasing inconsistencies and anomalies of the “official narrative,” but even more egregious is their obvious attempts to push a storyline of “the shooter was a Christian white male, so why does anything else matter?
MEDIA’S WAR ON THE CHRISTIAN WHITE MALE KICKS INTO HIGH GEAR
For example, while investigators are busy telling the public they are digging to find a “motive” for why a millionaire would open fire on concertgoers, CNN blatantly headlines an article with “Why does the Las Vegas shooter’s motive even matter?” (Archive is link here)
Within the article they do provide statements from “experts in profiling mass shooters,” answering the question of why motive is important, which is to possibly prevent future events like this, but it is the top of the fold paragraphs that indicate exactly how the writer feels about the topic:
Indeed, in the week since the worst mass shooting in modern US history, there has been an intense focus on figuring out the shooter’s motivation.
But why, exactly? Paddock himself is dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Police are looking to find out if anyone knew of his plans ahead of time, but they have said he acted alone. There will be no criminal case against him. Learning his motivation won’t bring back the dead or help heal the nearly 500 wounded.
Does his motivation even matter? Why do we care so much about the motives of mass shooters?
CNN wasn’t alone, USA Today also headlined an article with “We don’t know Stephen Paddock’s motive. Does it matter?”
If it was just CNN and USA Today, this type of implication that white male “toxicity” is all the information that is really important, could be waved away, but we are starting to see a pattern, perfectly captured in an interview with Sheriff David Clarke by a panel on News One Now, that makes the MSM’s new preferred narrative even more clear.
During the panel portion of the discussion, African American panelists pile on Clarke attempting to get him to say that because Stephen Paddock was a “white male” and he killed people, this should be considered an act of domestic terrorism, with panelists asserting that if this was BLM activist Clarke would call it domestic terror or if the shooter had screamed ‘Allahu Akbar’ Clarke would call it terrorism.
Clarke maintains that until the facts are in, meaning a motive is ascertained, the Vegas massacre cannot be defined as domestic terrorism and he is correct.
The Patriot Act defines domestic terrorism as an attempt to “intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.”
That is why Clarke and others calling BLM attacks against police officers, or Antifa attacks against peaceful protesters or events, domestic terror, because their motives have been clearly stated, all of which match the legal definition of domestic terror, but without a motive for Paddock, the Vegas massacre cannot be deemed so.
35total visits,1visits today