And thank you for making light of the deaths of at least five people and the wounding and many others.
Please show where I make "light of the deaths of at least five people", etc. If you can point out specific words and phrases, I will immediately apologize. If you cannot point to anything, then you need to apologize for making false accusations.
Your first response was to project your own hostility toward someone you don’t like and an institution you don’t like.
Who is this person I don't like? What is this institution I don't like? Please, name specifics. Also, please share how you know how I feel about this "someone" or this "institution."
I didn't say anything about any particular person or institution. I simply took issue with this anonymously written "news article." In my view, once the reporter had written that no motive was known, that should have ended the article. Everything else in the article--the Pulse nightclub, some fundie in Idaho, other shootings in Colorado, your shoe size--was completely irrelevant. Writing as though there was some connection is pure speculation on the part of the author. As far as I'm concerned the only reason for the author to include all of that is to attempt to build a Narrative.
We are a nation. What is preached in Texas (or even in Minnesota) can easily affect Colorado or where you live.
It can. Now what evidence did the reporter give that demonstrated that the shooter in Colorado had ever listened to or had any other interaction with preaching in Texas, Minnesota, Idaho, or Massachusetts?
Because the thesis of the reporter's article was not that what was said in Idaho "affect[ed] Colorado" but that it affected this specific shooter. But what if this shooter had never heard or paid attention to what was preached in Texas, Minnesota, Idaho, or anywhere else? Then what affect would this have on him?
One might as well argue that since the shooter in the Gabbie Giffords case had written screeds about how punctuation was an attempt at mind control, then reporters and editors at the New York Times were responsible for that shooting. It makes as much sense.
(Kieth Edwards, a member of the Lincoln Project, has blamed the person behind the Twitter handle "Libs of TikTok" although there is no evidence that the shooter has even heard of it let alone was influenced by it. This is the same type of argument.)
People died. But they did give you a chance to post your usual complaints.
I 'usually complain' about poorly written AP articles? Please demonstrate this.
If anything, the article you posted did exactly what you accuse me of. It took a horrible tragedy and then proceeded to "post [the reporter's] usual complaints" without any evidence that they had any connection with the shooter. S/he used the fact that "people died" (actually, people were murdered in cold blood) as a pretext to build a Narrative, thus trivializing the deaths and wounds of many.
And, by posting the article, you did the same. You, not me, are the one who used the murder of innocents to post your usual complaints.
