D.C Sniper Propaganda


PDA






hillbilly
December 4, 2003, 02:12 PM
Does anyone remember the propaganda surrounding the DC sniper case before the capture of the two slimeballs???

Does anyone recall how the antis were using it as a soap box for more gun control, and still do?

Does anyone remember how the officials assured us over and over that it was not Islamic terrorism?

Does anyone remember how the shooter was predicted to be an unstable caucasian gun nut?

Does anyone remember how after Mohammed was captured, authorities said that the shootings were all an elaborate plan to get at Mohammed's ex-wife, and not Islamic terrorism at all?

Well, uh, look at what CNN is reporting....


http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/04/sprj.dcsp.malvo.trial/index.html


Here's an excerpt:

Still other drawings depict Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and terrorist kingpin Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden is labeled, "Servant of Allah."

"I, Lee, will die for the revolution, jihad," Malvo wrote.

Some of the sketches depict Lee in court. One has the legend, "Another day of pretend justice."

At least two sketches portray Muhammad.

If you enjoyed reading about "D.C Sniper Propaganda" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
El Tejon
December 4, 2003, 03:43 PM
Your point being?

So he's a nutball. That's what we who work daily among the mad dogs predicted here at THR.

He had drawings of UBL or kindly Uncle Saddam. Common for mad dogs to be drawn to fellow mad men.

And, class, what did Patrick Purdy have carved into the stock of his Type 56??? Does that make him a "terrorist" or just another mad dog that should have been put down long ago?:rolleyes:

Photos and drawing of whom were introduced during the Sadler case??? Nutty or "terrorist"? :rolleyes:

Zundfolge
December 4, 2003, 04:14 PM
The point is that the real motivation behind the DC Sniper shootings is exactly the same as the motivation behind the attacks of 9/11 but the media insists on pretending they are not (IMHO its because the mainstream media supports the cause of the 9/11 hijackers).

This isn't so much about the DC Snipers, this is about those who run major newspapers and television news.

Frohickey
December 4, 2003, 04:17 PM
...and after J. A. Muhammad and J.L. Malvo were caught with a Bushmaster rifle, the anti-gunnies wanted to redo the assault weapon ban...

never mind the fact that they could have done the killings with a single shot!!!

gun-fucious
December 4, 2003, 04:43 PM
The army seemed fairly convinced that Muhammad fraged his unit in DStorm1

alot of pain could have been avoided, if he was already in Leavenworth

After the company went to Saudi Arabia, and a week before it pushed into Iraq for the ground phase of the Gulf War, soldiers in a 20-man tent leapt off their cots when someone threw a thermite grenade that exploded. Bullets from ammunition pouches were zinging around the tent. The grenade, which burns at 4,000 degrees and can melt steel, started a fire that was lapping at cots and rucksacks, consuming boots and canteens. Muhammad stood over the fire throwing sand on it. Other soldiers stomped the fire out.

The Criminal Investigations Division was called. Rick Martin, then a captain who was the unit's executive officer, recalled that the grenade pin was traced to Muhammad, and the grenade had been lobbed across the tent from the direction of his cot.

"The problem was, we couldn't prove it," said Col. Steve Robinette, the unit commander.

Nevertheless, Muhammad was taken away in handcuffs and was not with his company in Iraq.

"After the grenade, we had to guard him," Reckler said. "We did not want his platoon people shooting him in the middle of the night."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A11949-2003Oct11&notFound=true

Waitone
December 4, 2003, 04:59 PM
Dogs bark

Cats hork up hairballs

Snakes wiggle

Governments lie.

Pray tell what is so hard to understand.

Cosmoline
December 4, 2003, 05:04 PM
It baffles me. Why go to all the time and trouble gearing up for a war on terror, then refuse to acknowledge a terrorist act when it actually happens? I would have expected these guys to get shipped to Gitmo, but for some reason everyone from the press to the pentagon seems determined to lable this as a regular garden variety crime with no political overtones. I really can't figure it out.

N3rday
December 4, 2003, 05:33 PM
Ah yes, young Malvo...

I like how all the news stories are inconsistent with each other.

For example, I heard on the news he was using a "high-powered sniper rifle".

Does a 5.56 mm ar-15 sound like a 'high-powered' 'sniper rifle' to you?
Considering the only lower military caliber i have heard of for a rifle lower than that is 5.45, it would seem like that would be a LOW-powered rifle. Just me...

I don't consider anything under .30 caliber as high powered, nor do I see any rifle whose maximum effective range is 500 yards or less as a 'sniper rifle'

El Tejon
December 4, 2003, 05:42 PM
N, yes, it is a centerfire cartridge hence the designation.

Cos, no doubt the media leftists want the terrorists to win; however, it is not uncommon for unstable individuals to cloak their madness in "politics". For example, Patrick Purdy--was he a terrorist via his carved motivation or a mad dog cloaking himself in another's cause?

I am hesitant to go about applying the "terrorist" label with such a broad brush. Occupational hazard perhaps?:D

greyhound
December 4, 2003, 05:56 PM
I too agree that the media doesn't want to touch the possible Islam connection with a ten foot pole, but might it also be that this twisted kid is just trying to thumb his nose at us all by spouting anti-US views as opposed to being a dedicated jihadi?

Anyone that would go around shooting innocent strangers definitely has a lot of hate in him.

Cosmoline
December 4, 2003, 06:13 PM
Claiming this isn't terrorism is like claiming the Arab man's knife attack on El-Al in LA wasn't terrorism. We have given up our common sense in the name of pollitical correctness. These guys held an entire region in terror for weeks for political and private reasons and were both followers of the enemy camp. What more do you want?

bogie
December 4, 2003, 06:47 PM
So, who wants to bet that the lowlife up around Columbus is a Jihadist?

greyhound
December 4, 2003, 06:55 PM
Seems to me that the media has decided that to be deemed a terrorist, a direct connection to Al Queda must be proven.

The backpedaling to 9/10/01 continues....

cracked butt
December 4, 2003, 07:01 PM
So, who wants to bet that the lowlife up around Columbus is a Jihadist?

Exactly what I was thinking as I read this thread. The DC snipers were on every channel 24/7 until they were captured. I really think alot of the media were deflated when they found out that the perps were not white Christian males. I doubt that they will set themselves up for the same level of disappointment with what has been going on in Ohio.

On the other hand I could have their motivations completely wrong. Ohio is one of those states somewhere near the middle of the country that most NewYorkers have never been to, don't care about, or think that is not inhabited by human beings.:rolleyes:

hillbilly
December 4, 2003, 09:38 PM
Some other folks have already made my point on this thread.

My point is exactly that even though acts of Islamic terror happen inside our country, the major news media will never, ever, ever call it such.

Even the government, for some reason, is loath to admit that these acts are what they patently are......Terror attacks done by Islamic fundamentalists and their allies.

When the July 4th attack on the El Al airline counter in LAX, the FBI yelled the loudest that it was not terrorism, no way it could be terrorism, could never be construed as terrorism.....until about a year later when they quietly put a little story out saying oh yeah, well, that kind of sort of was terrorism.

Same with the D.C. snipers. The media and the government hollering that they aren't terrorists, but mass murderers bent on some grandiose mission of intimidating Muhammad's wife.....

hillbilly

XLMiguel
December 5, 2003, 11:53 AM
Were they terrorists? Absolutely, positively. Were they Islamists? Maybe.

My personal take on it is that they're a couple of disgruntled black punks who wanted to hit back at 'racist' American society, and the radical Islamic BS is just one more rationale/excuse for their actions. Muhammad, in particular was a looser who needed 'the revolution' to validate and romanticize his actions Malvo grew up in Jamaice, which is 90% black, then he found himself in the uS, where he was a minority, and he didn't like it much. And kids are suckers for 'revolutions', and I'm sure Muhammad used that to maximum effect.

Malvo's defense is using all his jailhouse renderings as part of a mental illness/brain-washing/insanity defense strategy. Remember, they also wanted $10 million bucks, not entirely consistent with 'pure' Islamist ideology. They're still basically just a couple of vicious terrorist punks who need to meet their Maker sooner than later. I don't know that their brand of terrorism matters all that much.

If you enjoyed reading about "D.C Sniper Propaganda" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!