Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Craddock's picture is not being shown by establishment media and there is no mention of his race. Obviously this would not be the case if he was white, and the shootings fit the white-man-bad narrative.
I saw his face and knew his race within hours.
You need better eyes or a better TV. It was all over the place.
Yep, don't get the media going when it's a White cop shooting a black man. "White cop, black man" will be in bold print in the head lines. When Philando Castille was shot by an Native cop, Crickets. The race of a perp or a cop only matters to the Leftist media when it fits their narrative.
Yep, don't get the media going when it's a White cop shooting a black man. "White cop, black man" will be in bold print in the head lines. When Philando Castille was shot by an Native cop, Crickets. The race of a perp or a cop only matters to the Leftist media when it fits their narrative.
Lol...as if you didn’t support the cop that got off in the Philando Castile case.
I've said often and for a long time that one solution to help slow down the number of mass shootings (and I suppose other violent acts) was to erase the perp from history. Never say his name or show his picture again and that the news media should be in the forefront of doing this. I've had responses that that would violate freedom of the press and the public's right to know which I disagree with.
That said - there has been no description nor picture of the alleged shooter - by any mainstream press - which on the face of it is good. I have seen pictures from 3rd rate web sites that show him as being black but I don't know for sure that that is true and not a false narrative.
So my question, is this erasing of the alleged shooter's information intentional or is it because of the (possible) race of the shooter? Do you think that when something like this happens again (which it undoubtably will) will the same selected coverage will occur? Has the press finally come to the realization that they are actually glorifying the criminals, thus causing copycat or 'me too' actions? I looked up the last 4 or 5 mass shooters and all their pictures are readily available from all sorts of sites.
The only reason I'm bringing up the possible race of the shooter is because of the possible coincidence in the timing of this press enlightenment - I really don't want the discussion to veer in other directions.
So it`s the 1st amendment that`s responsible for these mass shootings and not the 2nd?
I've said often and for a long time that one solution to help slow down the number of mass shootings (and I suppose other violent acts) was to erase the perp from history. Never say his name or show his picture again and that the news media should be in the forefront of doing this. I've had responses that that would violate freedom of the press and the public's right to know which I disagree with.
That said - there has been no description nor picture of the alleged shooter - by any mainstream press - which on the face of it is good. I have seen pictures from 3rd rate web sites that show him as being black but I don't know for sure that that is true and not a false narrative.
So my question, is this erasing of the alleged shooter's information intentional or is it because of the (possible) race of the shooter? Do you think that when something like this happens again (which it undoubtably will) will the same selected coverage will occur? Has the press finally come to the realization that they are actually glorifying the criminals, thus causing copycat or 'me too' actions? I looked up the last 4 or 5 mass shooters and all their pictures are readily available from all sorts of sites.
The only reason I'm bringing up the possible race of the shooter is because of the possible coincidence in the timing of this press enlightenment - I really don't want the discussion to veer in other directions.
If the dude was white, you bet his race would have been plastered all over MSM, and they would still be talking about him, right now, his background, and if he voted Republican, you would never hear the end of it.
The white man bad narrative seems only to exist in the minds of those who feel they have a special privilege as a white male. Not all white males, but those who are threatened by equality. Like it or not, we are leveling the playing field in America. Some folks seem to have gotten it into their heads that “equality” and “special privilege” mean exactly the same thing.
Never before has an entire group of people( white men) enjoyed more power and special privilege for so long a time. No one is asking or demanding that males be oppressed. Groups are asking for and have been obtaining equal footing. Asking for and achieving equality does not entail taking rights or privileges from white males. Only in the heads of those who fear losing dominance. Equality is no fun to hoarders of privilege.
Your complaint and whine of being discriminated against, by being forced to stop discriminating against other groups, just reveals your feelings of owed privilege and special status. When privilege is all you’ve ever known, the absence of privilege feels, to some, like oppression. Hence we have the paranoid "white man bad whine" that is being nauseatingly nurtured.
The absence of privilege is not oppression - it’s equality. And equality and oppression are mutually exclusive. There is no "white man bad" crusade...
Are you suggesting that The Dark Enlightenment is white?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
