Do you care about the truth? Look at your thread. This is your thread. So what's the tattoo?
Allen TX mall shooting; 5 dead. MAGAtardness TBD
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
The family requested a translator. Looks like a Hispanic.
I speak nothing but the truth. I don't buy the WSJ version but there are white supremacist Mexicans:
White supremacist links, come on. So what's the tattoo? A simple question and you can't answer it.I speak nothing but the truth. I don't buy the WSJ version but there are white supremacist Mexicans:
I'm not your maid. Look it up. I also said I don't buy it (yet), I'm telling you what those paid to report are finding.
This was you to my post. There's a good chance my post was correct.
I mean what you posted is what the media does. Leaves out information.
The tattoo was in plain sight. Wouldn't you think an obvious question for the 'paid media' be: "There was a tattoo on the suspects hand. What was the tattoo. What does the tattoo appear to represent?"
If you look at the WSJ article posted, the article states "links to white-supremacist ideology."
That is how the media reported on the story.
Why?
What does the media do.
The tattoo was in plain sight. Wouldn't you think an obvious question for the 'paid media' be: "There was a tattoo on the suspects hand. What was the tattoo. What does the tattoo appear to represent?"
If you look at the WSJ article posted, the article states "links to white-supremacist ideology."
That is how the media reported on the story.
Why?
What does the media do.
Why would the media report and speculate on a tattoo? Hundreds of millions of people have tattoos, the majority meaning nothing. The media is not there to entertain conspiracies.
If this dude's been watching too much Nick Fuentes (a bona fide white supremacist Mexican American), then it's relevant.
He shot dead several people. The media can report on his gang tattoo.
The "paid-media" entertained the conspiracy that the suspect had "white-supremacist ideologies." The WSJ offered no explanation for the unsubstantiated claim in the article.
All the while, the WSJ had no report or information on his gang tattoo that was out in broad daylight. The WSJ could not even identify the suspect while writing the article.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-...yle-rifle-in-attack-4ec74709?mod=hp_lead_pos9
How did our "paid-media" make the giant leap from a "while-supremacist" to a hispanic male with a gang tattoo?
Last edited: