Let it sink in where? That was a lie, we were lied to there by those in power both here and in the US. It's nothing like the topic here ...Nothing. It's just pointless whataboutism.

onnor Betts, the Dayton, Ohio mass shooter, was a self-described “leftist,” who wrote that he would happily vote for Democrat Elizabeth Warren, praised Satan, was upset about the 2016 presidential election results, and added, “I want socialism, and i’ll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding.”

Betts’ Twitter profile read, “he/him / anime fan / metalhead / leftist / i’m going to hell and i’m not coming back.” One tweet on his page read, “Off to Midnight Mass. At least the songs are good. #athiestsonchristmas.” The page handle? I am the spookster. On one selfie, he included the hashtags, “#selfie4satan #HailSatan @SatanTweeting.” On the date of Republican Sen. John McCain’s death, he wrote, “***** John McCain.” He also liked tweets referencing the El Paso mass shooting in the hours before Dayton.

Twitter has now suspended the Twitter page, removing it. It was up for several hours after the mass shooting. (odd)

https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/conno...-social-media/

https://media.breitbart.com/media/20...r-677x1024.jpg


https://media.breitbart.com/media/20...r-717x1024.jpg

Something tells me that this shooting will play second fiddle to the El Paso one in the media, if that's the case.

I'm fairly certain the main stream media won't put the blame for this mentally ill murderer at the hands of Warren, as they put the blame on Trump for the mentally ill murderer in El Paso.

The difference being Warren does not incite hatred while the orange abomination does. He's not fat, he's full of hate. And it is expelled through his mouth.

I'm so tired of people enabling terrorism by refusing to call it what it is. The guy is a terrorist, every right wing extremist that picks up a gun and shoots people for his ideals is a terrorist. His previous vile actions do not change the fact that he is a terrorist and he committed mass murder to create terror.

Trump has, time and time again, used extreme language and rhetoric and you only have to watch videos of the crowds at his events to see the effect that his words have on racists and extreme elements. It empowers them, it makes them feel validated. He is a leader and one with a cult-like following, when he tells people that mexican immigrants are racists, when he makes them out to be vermin or that the media is the enemy (not long after which, a US news channel was attacked btw), when he doubles down on racist attitudes and responds to criticism by hosting more rallies to incense his followers further he is telling them that their hatred is okay, they are taking his words as a call to action, as permission to commit atrocities.

Every other president and world leader as a whole knows to consider their words carefully, most leaders won't speak unless they know exactly what they are going to say and Trump is proof of why. A leader's words can inspire people to kill when they speak carelessly.

Ah ....so killers can be influenced by the left but not the right?
As I said earlier of course there are those who kill indiscriminatly.
That does not take away from the links the El paso and garlic festival killers had to right wing extremism as they expressed it themselves on 8chan prior to the attacks.

"Trump has, time and time again, used extreme language and rhetoric"

this from a poster who regularly, until called out, was posting that the US president was a child rapist so forgive me if i cant take you too seriously on that point above

Shouldn't posts be about the subject and not other posters? Asking for a friend.

You’d think so wouldn’t you? :think:

Typical deflection and whataboutism

Trump is a rapist, he raped Ivana and he has a long friendship with Epstein and a long list of accusations against him including a sealed case from a child he raped, he himself has talked about grabbing women by their 'pussies'. He is an abuser yet you still love him and make excuses for him. It's gross. Now that your little diversion tactic has flopped, why don't you call a spade a spade and refer to these shooters for what they are, terrorists?

The outrage mob have spent the last 3 years making up stories to try and remove him, if there was any proof he was a rapist, they would have had him by now. The fact he's still president tells us they have nothing on him but made up bull.

It's typical right wing mentality.

If they even get a sniff that there's someone else to blame for one of these attacks they'll try to change the focus to that attack because obviously having two out of three mass shootings in the space of a week committed by a right wing terrorist doesn't matter if it's hinted the third isn't motivated by right wing extremism. Those two attacks don't matter because right wingers are typically incapable of being critical of anything relating to the right wing. I remember reading an article about a study earlier on in which the study found that if a republican spoke about climate change, other republicans would be inclined to believe it but would disbelieve the same message if it came from a democrat while democrats typically believe factual findings regardless of the source.

The right wing are largely incapable of policing itself and criticising the elements that need to be criticised while people on the left are more typically likely to hold other left leaning people responsible for their actions.

How very naive and idealistic of you but sadly that's not how the real world works.

But then again, what does Trump being a rapist have to do with Trump's words inspring bloodshed? Typical deflection that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

It's completely callous considering what the subject is about.

Everything that doesn't suit your narrative is a typical deflection to you.

Is this really an argument you feel is valid? The child that claimed (credibly) she was raped by him, also said it was Trump and Epstein, and we now know that's been given even more credibility with recent news events regarding Epstein and Trumps private parties.

We can look closer to home with saville; power forces people into silence, and Trumps army of litigators can easily shut people down, as does the ability to pay people to stay quiet - which incidentally, he is currently an unindicted co-conspirator on a case where his partner is currently in prison for paying people to keep quiet.

If we learned anything from Mueller, it's that a sitting president can't be charged with a crime, so that argument falls away rather weakly when held up to any kind of scrutiny.

Oooh I get it, you don't understand what deflection means.

By all means, carry on along with LT with your attempts to deflect criticism of Trump by driving this discussion off topic but the rest of us will stick to discussing the issue from now on.

Nobody in the media was questioning Saville while he was alive, they all knew though. Maybe that's why he got away with it. Whereas the media have accusd investigated and hounded Trump every single day since he said "I'm running for President." The day before that, they didn't care about him.

You're blaming Donald Trump for some mentally ill nutcase shooting up a mall in El Paso. That's the story here.

People most definitely were questioning saville though? You mean to say, that if you or I were eligible to run for president, our private lives wouldn't instantly face more scrutiny the day after we declared?

It's not a Trump phenomenon; Obama was hounded as a Kenyan Muslim by pepe the frog loving, 4chan, far right weirdo's, who pretended Hillary had dementia and was minutes from death. The media haven't accused Trump, it was accusers and his own words that put him under further investigation. If anything, the media were a bit derelict in their investigations of Trump because he was a ratings, and money winner for them.

Argue your case if you can, dont go personal please

An oversimplification that doesn't reflect reality in order to protect your favourite orange mushroom.

At least two attacks in the past week have been a result of right wing terrorism with both attackers citing Trump's words, actions and/or presidency as inspiration.

As I said before, pretty much every leader is considerate with their words, they do not speak out of turn, they think before they speak or tweet or make a statement and that's because their words have power.

Trump has a fanatical fanbase, it's cult-like and so when he's tweeting hatred like a teenager without a care in the world then the crazies will listen and use his words as justification.

It is a FACT that right wing terrorism is now the most common form of terrorism in America and it's a FACT that the rate of attacks have increased since 2016 when Trump has taken office. Extremists listen to Trump's rhetoric and they believe it's permission and validation to take action.

It's quite undeniable but Trump's supporters can always be relied on to try to deny reality for what it is.

I'll do what I want. I ain't scared of James and Josy. They ban me for no reason anyway. So I may as well give them something to ban me for.

So don't tell me what to do, If I want to do it, I will.

From the manifesto:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EBNLE2aW...g&name=900x900

Trump tweets today:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EBNLE2ZX...g&name=900x900

It's the same language and phrasing but people will try to find a way to deny it.