MSM conceals Christopher Dorner’s “ideology”

[Doc91678]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

 

[Lakhota]

Another retread?

 

[ABikerSailor]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

I'm wondering why he would hate LaPierre or the NRA? Aren't those the people that fought for his 2nd Ammendment rights so that he could take and shoot innocent people because he was pissed?

If he really hated the NRA, why is he using guns?

 

[aaronleland]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

I'm wondering why he would hate LaPierre or the NRA? Aren't those the people that fought for his 2nd Ammendment rights so that he could take and shoot innocent people because he was pissed?

If he really hated the NRA, why is he using guns?

I love guns and the 2nd amendment, but hate Wayne LaPierre and the NRA. They are nothing more than an opportunistic political lobby.

 

[LeftofLeft]

The liberal biased media majority gets egg in their face on this one. They tried to use a tragedy in Tuscon to hurt conservatives. When you have deranged killers terrorizing, trying to map them to George Bush, Sara Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Barack Obama, Chris Matthews, or the NRA is irrelevant. Let this be a lesson to the agenda-driven media and politicos.

 

[tyroneweaver]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

I'm wondering why he would hate LaPierre or the NRA? Aren't those the people that fought for his 2nd Ammendment rights so that he could take and shoot innocent people because he was pissed?

If he really hated the NRA, why is he using guns?

I love guns and the 2nd amendment, but hate Wayne LaPierre and the NRA. They are nothing more than an opportunistic political lobby.

that's rather a stupid statement. the nra fights hard to protect your gun rights.

 

[NYcarbineer]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

So the author of the above nonsense thinks publishing manifestos is wrong,

but he's complaining that this one isn't being published (which btw is not true).

That's irrational.

 

[OODA_Loop]

I'm wondering why he would hate LaPierre or the NRA? Aren't those the people that fought for his 2nd Ammendment rights so that he could take and shoot innocent people because he was pissed?

If he really hated the NRA, why is he using guns?

Reality clashes with emotional deductions.

Again.

 

[Truthmatters]

This man made it VERY clear why he is killing people.

IT IS NOT NATIONAL POLITICS.

He is killing cops because of LADP corruption.

The man is insane.


Is likely suffeing PTSD from his war experiences and cop job.



The democractic party does not promote the idea of doing violence because they didnt win elections now do they?


It was the republican party doing things like declaring "second amendment remedies" to not winning elections and throwing bricks in windows, cutting gas lines and screaming about COLD DEAD HANDS.


when all of that was going down in the republican party it didnt stop until Gabby Giffords got a bullet to the head and a beautiful 9 year old girl lay bleeding out in a grocery store parking lot.


Your republican party is the one who calls for violence.

The dems dont do that do they.

 

[Truthmatters]

Oh and BTW we won the elections.


why would we be angry about losing.

that is your side remember

 

[editec]

Motive matters.

 

[Esmeralda]

This man made it VERY clear why he is killing people.

IT IS NOT NATIONAL POLITICS.

He is killing cops because of LADP corruption.

The man is insane.


Is likely suffeing PTSD from his war experiences and cop job.



The democractic party does not promote the idea of doing violence because they didnt win elections now do they?


It was the republican party doing things like declaring "second amendment remedies" to not winning elections and throwing bricks in windows, cutting gas lines and screaming about COLD DEAD HANDS.


when all of that was going down in the republican party it didnt stop until Gabby Giffords got a bullet to the head and a beautiful 9 year old girl lay bleeding out in a grocery store parking lot.


Your republican party is the one who calls for violence.

The dems dont do that do they.

Excellent post.

 

[Truthmatters]

now this thread will die

 

[NYcarbineer]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

I'm wondering why he would hate LaPierre or the NRA? Aren't those the people that fought for his 2nd Ammendment rights so that he could take and shoot innocent people because he was pissed?

If he really hated the NRA, why is he using guns?

So the NRA is fighting to arm people like this?

 

[ABikerSailor]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

I'm wondering why he would hate LaPierre or the NRA? Aren't those the people that fought for his 2nd Ammendment rights so that he could take and shoot innocent people because he was pissed?

If he really hated the NRA, why is he using guns?

So the NRA is fighting to arm people like this?

A background check may have been able to uncover stuff like this as he was fired from the LAPD 4 years ago.

However.................the NRA spokesperson LaPierre is saying that now there should be no background check for any gun purchase.

 

[Lakhota]

Charlie Sheen Pleads with Christopher Dorner ... CALL ME!!! | TMZ.com

 

[Clementine]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

So the author of the above nonsense thinks publishing manifestos is wrong,

but he's complaining that this one isn't being published (which btw is not true).

That's irrational.

He's pointing out that the media generally runs with this stuff, as if it is important, and only when it doesn't suit their agenda do they realize how damaging it can be, and for no good reason.

They don't want to put themselves in a negative light by revealing the whole truth. If they hadn't tried so hard to wrap other whackos around Repubs necks in the past, they could release this info and people would just see a deranged man. However, they have gone so far in the past to use stuff like this as a weapon and now they don't want to be the ones who get hurt.

It's all their fault for playing games in the past and trying to put an entire party on the defense for the actions of a few crazies. They've seen the damage it can do when it's spun just right and now that they've convinced some people that watching certain news or following certain politicians can make a person go whacko, they don't want their own ploy to come home to roost.

That is worth pointing out. And once people are onto this, how can they possibly trust the media that have been dishing it out for years?

 

[NYcarbineer]

By Paul Mirengoff
February 8, 2013



I have long considered it ridiculous to report the political/social ravings of deranged murderers like Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter. The salient point about these people is their derangement, not its ideological manifestation (ideology actually being too serious a word in these cases). And publicizing the ideological manifestation gives the lunatic a forum he doesn’t deserve.

I’ve also believed that the publication by journalists of the political ravings of murderers is opportunistic. That is, biased journalists seek political advantage by trying (often in the most attenuated way) to connect the ravings with right-wing thinking.

Confirmation of my latter thesis can be found in the handling of Christopher Dorner’s rambling manifesto in which he purports to explain himself. Dorner, it turns out, is a fan of President Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Colin Powell, Piers Morgan, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Soledad O’Brien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Vieira, Tavis Smiley, Anderson Cooper, and Ellen DeGeneres. Meanwhile, he reviles the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, believing that the latter’s advocacy warrants the death of his family before his eyes.

But, as Charles Cooke points out, “in the combined 3,240 words of the lead stories from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press, there is no mention whatsoever of the political contents of Dorner’s screed.” To be sure, they all mention the manifesto, but not what’s in it, even in New York Times’ specific post about the document...

**snip**

Continue reading: -->
MSM conceals Christopher Dorner?s ?ideology? | Power Line

So the author of the above nonsense thinks publishing manifestos is wrong,

but he's complaining that this one isn't being published (which btw is not true).

That's irrational.

He's pointing out that the media generally runs with this stuff, as if it is important, and only when it doesn't suit their agenda do they realize how damaging it can be, and for no good reason.

They don't want to put themselves in a negative light by revealing the whole truth. If they hadn't tried so hard to wrap other whackos around Repubs necks in the past, they could release this info and people would just see a deranged man. However, they have gone so far in the past to use stuff like this as a weapon and now they don't want to be the ones who get hurt.

It's all their fault for playing games in the past and trying to put an entire party on the defense for the actions of a few crazies. They've seen the damage it can do when it's spun just right and now that they've convinced some people that watching certain news or following certain politicians can make a person go whacko, they don't want their own ploy to come home to roost.

That is worth pointing out. And once people are onto this, how can they possibly trust the media that have been dishing it out for years?

It took me approximately 15 seconds to find the full text of the manifesto from google to yahoo news which had a direct link to it.

This is a standard lie that pops up on a regular basis from the rightwing propaganda machine, i.e.,

that the MSM is hiding some story or something about some story.

It is almost invariably nonsense.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm wondering why he would hate LaPierre or the NRA? Aren't those the people that fought for his 2nd Ammendment rights so that he could take and shoot innocent people because he was pissed?

If he really hated the NRA, why is he using guns?

So the NRA is fighting to arm people like this?

A background check may have been able to uncover stuff like this as he was fired from the LAPD 4 years ago.

However.................the NRA spokesperson LaPierre is saying that now there should be no background check for any gun purchase.

And the NRA's new opposition to all background checks would give easy access to guns to all sorts of the kind of people who end up shooting cops.