Fake News Has Consequences

On Sunday, Red State posted an article about the terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, on Sunday. The article noted that the attack took place hours after CNN, the Associated Press, Fox News, and other news outlets reported a fake story about Israeli soldiers massacring Gazans at an aid distribution center. The story simply was not true. I doubt that story alone was enough to inspire a terrorist who probably already had planned his attack, but how many future terrorists will it inspire before it is totally renounced as ‘fake news?’

The article reports:

Israel supporters marching at a memorial walk for the hostages still being held by Hamas were attacked with Molotov cocktails on Sunday, according to multiple reports. Videos of the aftermath are already circulating, and an alleged assailant is in custody.

…While officials from Boulder, a notoriously left-wing city, urged people not to jump to conclusions, there is no doubt what the motive was. The attacker can be seen saying, “This will end when Palestine is free,” in this  video.

The terrorist has missed the point–Palestine (which has never actually been a country) needs to be free of Hamas. Since that is not possible, the people of the Gaza Strip need to be relocated to a place where they can live in peace. If you look at a map of the Middle East, you realize that the Arab countries have a lot of land and that Israel has a very small amount of land. Logically, if you want a country of Palestine, it could easily be given a small piece of Arab land to live happily every after. The reason that has never happened is that as long as there is no official Palestinian state and the ‘refugees’ have no home, the Arabs can use that as an issue in their fight to eliminate Israel.

The article concludes:

This is what happens when national and international press outlets run with an obviously fake blood libel fed to them by Hamas. Just like the two murdered Israeli embassy workers in mid-May, there are consequences to riling up deranged lunatics who want a “global intifada.” 

The Media Is Telling You What To Believe

On Monday, Newsbusters posted an article about the media reporting after a tragedy involving a gun.

The article reports:

In the aftermath of the tragic shooting in Boulder, the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) network evening and morning shows sinisterly depicted Republicans, conservatives and gun owners as a “wall of opposition” and “resistance” to “common sense” gun control measures that would save lives. 

In just four days (March 23 through March 26) of coverage, the networks filled their morning show and evening programs with statements favoring gun control over gun rights by a ratio of roughly 14 to 1.

It’s become commonplace for the networks to quickly seize on a mass shooting to champion the Left’s longstanding anti-gun agenda. After the December 2012 killings in a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school, NewsBusters found the networks slanted their coverage 8-to-1 in favor of the gun control agenda.

In the wake of the 2016 mass shooting in an Orlando nightclub, the spin was an equally-lopsided 8-to-1. TV coverage of the killings in Las Vegas in 2017 was slanted five-to-one against gun rights, while in the wake of the February 2018 shootings at Parkland High School the networks tilted 11-to-1 in favor of anti-gun activists.

And after the 2019 shootings in El Paso, Texas, the networks tilted an even more lopsided 17-to-1 to the Left.

The article summarizes the numbers:

MRC analysts reviewed all statements that took a position on overall gun policy by anchors, reporters, guests and soundbites, beginning with the morning of March 23 (the morning after the Boulder shooting) through the morning of March 26, and found time spent arguing in favor of more gun control (36 minutes, 11 seconds) overwhelmed time devoted to supporting gun rights (2 minutes and 31 seconds.)  

How are Americans supposed to get a fair picture of any issue when our media is so lopsided? This is ridiculous.

None of the laws currently proposed by Democrats in Congress to ‘save lives’ would have been relevant in most of the shootings that have occurred in America in recent years. Limiting the rights of law-abiding gun owners does nothing to prevent criminals from obtaining guns and using them. Has it occurred to anyone in Congress that criminals do not follow laws?