It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Shooters in Colorado School Were Transgender, Trump-Hating, Democrats Who Love Obama

page: 4
77
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2019 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

Do you have any factual evidence of there not being any factual evidence?

SMFH. Sometimes I wonder what reality is like for some people.
edit on 9-5-2019 by BoscoMoney because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 9 2019 @ 03:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: DBCowboy

So you're happy they weren't right wing mentalist, though the hoop-jumping to paint them as democrats is glaring.

When an unambiguous right wing fool shoots up a place, suddenly 'there are crazies from both sides'


Sure 2 teens were staunch democrats that's why they wanted to kill people and Obama just for kicks


But you dont have right wingers on TV telling people to resist.
Telling them to not Make trump supporters feel unsafe.

Same thing as when that guy shot Republicans at a softball game

Same thing antifa work for, antifa are Democrat voters who physically attack Republicans and Patriots.

What Republican group organizes, dresses in body armor and attacks people when protesting.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 03:42 AM
link   
When I heard about this, but then saw very limited media coverage, I knew the shooters were not going to be useful to the media and were probably liberals.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 03:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
What I find ironic about this incident is, it was all over the local news last night, and even on the national news...UNTIL...it was determined there was a transgender and a trump-hating democrat involved...THEN...the story just vanished from the media altogether! This morning, there was nothing about it, like it never happened!!

Why is this??????

Note - That's a rhetorical question...we all know why this is!!

Answer: Left wing media bias and TDS!!


I've starred loads of replies in this thread including this 👍🏻

But I have an (easy) question if I may? to anyone really..

I'm rubbish at politics, but from reading this thread I am learning that the left controls (most of?) the MSM?
If this is the case, how did they manage to monopolise it? Is there no right wing MSM outlets at all? Also where can I find neutral (ish) news?

Sorry for 5th grade question, and many thanks in advance.

FA



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Dbl sorry
edit on 9-5-2019 by FinallyAwake because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 05:18 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

What a couple of sickos



A friend of both of them wrote on Instagram that Devon “did not do what he did because he’s liberal or to make a statement. He did it due to internal struggles. They’re both struggling with mental health issues and this is a time for awareness. Alec did not do this because he’s trans, but had people supported him in the way that he needed and deserved, he would not have struggled so much that he got pushed over the edge.” The friend also wrote that they didn’t allegedly act because of hate for others but rather “hate in themselves” and called for more support for LGBT youth. She added that they did a “horrible thing.”



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: FinallyAwake





Sorry for 5th grade question


I understand your writing the other OP but your question is excellent. I also wonder about or MSM and who controls it. We hear everything from deep State, See Eye Eh, Sorry ous and on and on and on. I am beginning to think that remnants of the 3rd Reich have regrouped and have conjoined with their connections in the Middle East. Look up WWII and read about who they were in alliance with. then follow the propaganda here and see who the MSM attacks and who gets a pass.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 05:32 AM
link   
People "hoop jumping" to point out that these were democrats does not conflict with the "there are crazies on both sides" statement

The MSM hypocrisy is very flustrating and everyone should wonder why the difference in reporting occurs. Additionally, when this occurs it is merely an attempt to reveal the political bias in the media those sanctimonious folk who claim to be the bastion of freedom and truth



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 05:32 AM
link   
People "hoop jumping" to point out that these were democrats does not conflict with the "there are crazies on both sides" statement

The MSM hypocrisy is very flustrating and everyone should wonder why the difference in reporting occurs. Additionally, when this occurs it is merely an attempt to reveal the political bias in the media those sanctimonious folk who claim to be the bastion of freedom and truth



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 05:32 AM
link   
People "hoop jumping" to point out that these were democrats does not conflict with the "there are crazies on both sides" statement

The MSM hypocrisy is very flustrating and everyone should wonder why the difference in reporting occurs. Additionally, when this occurs it is merely an attempt to reveal the political bias in the media those sanctimonious folk who claim to be the bastion of freedom and truth



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 05:41 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

If this one instance proves a dangerous, unhinged, Left then what does it mean when the majority of terror attacks committed in the US are done by far Right extremists?

Don't get me wrong, these perpetrators should be condemned for what they did and there is never any good reason to turn a gun on an innocent. But the double standard of this site is infuriating. When someone on the Right commits an atrocity they are in no way representative of the Right. When someone on the Left commits an atrocity this site acts like everyone on the Left needs to be rounded up in camps.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 05:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: BoscoMoney
a reply to: uncommitted

Do you have any factual evidence of there not being any factual evidence?

SMFH. Sometimes I wonder what reality is like for some people.


What kind of question is that? And you question my reality???

The source is a right wing gutter rag that isn't posting any factual evidence - it's quite a normal thing to do in the real world to question if this constitutes proof of anything or if it's just feeding the bias of the stupid who aren't bothered about reality.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: FinallyAwake

Actually not a 5th grade question at all. In fact, it's an important question which people need to understand if anything is ever done to correct it (somewhat). The answer is quite complicated actually, so I'll try to hit some of the highlights. A person could write entire books on the subject and still not cover it completely.

First, much of the "press" always leaned somewhat left, and there was good reason for this...in the beginning. Not all, but a good portion. The underpinning of "news" relied on the 1st Amendment of free speech, and was a mechanism to prevent government tyranny. It was an unofficial check and balance of the common man. It kept government from going out of control without an opposing voice. This was a good thing...again, in the beginning (of this country).

For every left leaning media voice there was a right leaning one, and people could look at both sides of an issue and make up their own minds. Over time though people realized that information was power, and those with wealth and status wanted more wealth and status. Controlling information helped them achieve this. Even up to this point there was still 'balance' and no particular slant across all of the media because these types of people existed on both the left and the right. This quasi balance existed all the way up until the 1960's when the US government really did go out of control with things like the Viet Nam conflict. This resulted in the first real test of the 1st Amendment since the formation of the country in 1776; the whole peace/love/hippy movement. The government response to this was to become more secretive, and this led to the real parting of the ways between the right and the left. The left was now exploiting all the socialistic programs of government and the right stood in opposition to this. Politicians on the left pandered to these ideals, and politician on the right pandered to conservative ideals, but the divide between right and left only increased.

You have to keep in mind, America was still a world leader in production of goods and agriculture during this time. But the left embraced more than just the hippy movement, they also embraced the blue collar working man (the average 8-5 factory worker, etc.). This garnered tremendous power for the left. The right, from the left's perspective, embraced the white collar status and up from there. The divide between right and left only grew greater.

During this time countries like China were still in the dark ages on the world production stage. But then in the late 70's foreign influence in the production world began to creep into the US. This was stemmed for a while in the early 80's, but then US dominance in the world GDP continued to decline (and has really ever since). Politicians on both sides continued to pander to the ever increasing divide between right and left.

This led all the way up to the birth of the Internet to the masses in the 90's. Prior to this the Internet had been an obscure medium used mostly by academia. With the creation of the WWW there was a paradigm shift in the way people got their information. Here's where the right really dropped the ball. The right wrongly assumed what was now called the "mainstream media" or MSM (as opposed to the 'alternate media') was dead for the most part and believed the Internet would counteract this.

The entertainment industry, traditionally a left leaning segment of society, embraced not only the Internet but traditional media as well. While the right wasn't paying attention, the big entertainment conglomerates started gobbling up media as a whole. This started with entertainment, but soon crept into news and every other form of media. The right wasn't paying attention and lost control of the media...thinking it was dead or nearly so.

Then in the 2000's the MSM became increasingly 'weaponized'. It was no longer just about 'entertainment', but increasingly more about indoctrination of left leaning values. It was a major coup de tat for the left. The right wasn't done tripping over itself though. With the advent of networks like FOX, the right thought they had restored balance, but in reality FOX was just an illusion of this. The right still sat and did nothing, and the left eventually gained complete control of the media. Eventually, the weaponized media would be used as a very effective political tool for the left, and the right was left flat footed.

To unwind all of this will not be easy, if even possible. But it's important people understand how this all happened.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 07:06 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

and high on shrooms too.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: DBCowboy

and high on shrooms too.


I know this is the mud-pit, but you could at least TRY to add something constructive to the conversation.

I find nothing surprising in the media converge of this event. What doesn't further the MSM agenda, doesn't get covered or loses coverage so rapidly as to amount to the same thing. But this could be said of anyone with any agenda. Who in the right mind would purposefully point out things that contradict the narrative they are trying to convey?



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 07:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: spacedoubt
Glad the Trumptastics find humor in this.
Pathetic.


No, it's not humorous at all, in fact it gives credence to something nobody wants to admit, gender dysphoria is a mental and emotional health issue that MAY lead to other more deadly behavior. Thus it should be treated by modern civilization, not encouraged and endorsed by it. If the wrong approach is taken by mental health professionals bad things can and will happen. They already are, look at the suicide rate with that group.

Dysphoria

is a profound state of unease or dissatisfaction. In a psychiatric context, dysphoria may accompany depression, anxiety, or agitation. Common reactions to dysphoria include emotional distress; in some cases, even physical distress.

Every other type of Dysphoria will be treated properly exempt the "gender" type, this is not healthy for modern society.
I am convenienced that in 100 years people will look back on this time and think what where those early 21st century people thinking, when they did that.



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: DBCowboy

If this one instance proves a dangerous, unhinged, Left then what does it mean when the majority of terror attacks committed in the US are done by far Right extremists?


Do you have any proof of this besides media hype?



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 07:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: FinallyAwake

Actually not a 5th grade question at all. In fact, it's an important question which people need to understand if anything is ever done to correct it (somewhat). The answer is quite complicated actually, so I'll try to hit some of the highlights. A person could write entire books on the subject and still not cover it completely.

First, much of the "press" always leaned somewhat left, and there was good reason for this...in the beginning. Not all, but a good portion. The underpinning of "news" relied on the 1st Amendment of free speech, and was a mechanism to prevent government tyranny. It was an unofficial check and balance of the common man. It kept government from going out of control without an opposing voice. This was a good thing...again, in the beginning (of this country).

For every left leaning media voice there was a right leaning one, and people could look at both sides of an issue and make up their own minds. Over time though people realized that information was power, and those with wealth and status wanted more wealth and status. Controlling information helped them achieve this. Even up to this point there was still 'balance' and no particular slant across all of the media because these types of people existed on both the left and the right. This quasi balance existed all the way up until the 1960's when the US government really did go out of control with things like the Viet Nam conflict. This resulted in the first real test of the 1st Amendment since the formation of the country in 1776; the whole peace/love/hippy movement. The government response to this was to become more secretive, and this led to the real parting of the ways between the right and the left. The left was now exploiting all the socialistic programs of government and the right stood in opposition to this. Politicians on the left pandered to these ideals, and politician on the right pandered to conservative ideals, but the divide between right and left only increased.

You have to keep in mind, America was still a world leader in production of goods and agriculture during this time. But the left embraced more than just the hippy movement, they also embraced the blue collar working man (the average 8-5 factory worker, etc.). This garnered tremendous power for the left. The right, from the left's perspective, embraced the white collar status and up from there. The divide between right and left only grew greater.

During this time countries like China were still in the dark ages on the world production stage. But then in the late 70's foreign influence in the production world began to creep into the US. This was stemmed for a while in the early 80's, but then US dominance in the world GDP continued to decline (and has really ever since). Politicians on both sides continued to pander to the ever increasing divide between right and left.

This led all the way up to the birth of the Internet to the masses in the 90's. Prior to this the Internet had been an obscure medium used mostly by academia. With the creation of the WWW there was a paradigm shift in the way people got their information. Here's where the right really dropped the ball. The right wrongly assumed what was now called the "mainstream media" or MSM (as opposed to the 'alternate media') was dead for the most part and believed the Internet would counteract this.

The entertainment industry, traditionally a left leaning segment of society, embraced not only the Internet but traditional media as well. While the right wasn't paying attention, the big entertainment conglomerates started gobbling up media as a whole. This started with entertainment, but soon crept into news and every other form of media. The right wasn't paying attention and lost control of the media...thinking it was dead or nearly so.

Then in the 2000's the MSM became increasingly 'weaponized'. It was no longer just about 'entertainment', but increasingly more about indoctrination of left leaning values. It was a major coup de tat for the left. The right wasn't done tripping over itself though. With the advent of networks like FOX, the right thought they had restored balance, but in reality FOX was just an illusion of this. The right still sat and did nothing, and the left eventually gained complete control of the media. Eventually, the weaponized media would be used as a very effective political tool for the left, and the right was left flat footed.

To unwind all of this will not be easy, if even possible. But it's important people understand how this all happened.



This was a great reply, I understand now how difficult it is to answer. I didn't know half of this 👍🏻 👍🏻 👍🏻



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

Does a report published by the Trump administration count as media hype? If I remember correctly Appendix 2 is where all the terror attacks are listed.

COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM



posted on May, 9 2019 @ 08:29 AM
link   
OP, don't mean to be a spoilsport, but any mainstream outlets mention that one of the shooters was "transgender"?



new topics

top topics



 
77
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join