NOT A JOKE: Media Blaming the TRUCK, not the TERRORIST, For Attack in France!

[Pogo]

Paul Joseph Watson - July 15, 2016 1615 Comments



Media Blames Truck, Not Terrorists or Islam, For Nice Attack

"Leftist media outlets reacted to the devastating attack in Nice not by blaming Islam or even terrorists, but by suggesting that an inanimate object – the truck – was responsible for the carnage.

Instead of pointing the finger at Islamists, CNN, CBC and the New York Times all published headlines that served to hide the true nature of the attack.

CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.

Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver."

-----

No use of the word 'Islamic Extremist', 'Radical Islam', 'ISIS', or even 'terrorist'.
No mention of 'terrorism' or 'terrorist' at all (for example, 'Terrorist Attack - Rams Truck Into Crowd killing 84') - Just 'TRUCK Rams Crow'.

So how long before we see Liberals demanding legislation be passed regarding TRUCKS or demanding Semis be labeled as 'ASAULT Trucks'?

"Given that the truck alone, and not the ideology that radicalized the terrorist who used one as a weapon, is to blame for the massacre in Nice, the solution to stop further violence is simple; Ban deadly assault trucks."

Dear easyt65
Isn't this because when the news was first reported,
people didn't have information on which people committed the attack? All they knew was a truck hit the crowd, so that's all they could state.

Even after stories get published with more information, because of legal liability, the news media have to be careful to state phrases like "alleged suspects" and CAN'T go around calling people terrorists unless they want to risk getting sued.

Apparently he doesn't know what an adjective is. Which is what "truck" is in the phrase "truck attack".

God forbid he should encounter the phrase "surprise attack". I bet he's off right now feverishly working up a thread about how the 1941 media tried to report that "surprise", and not "Japan", attacked Pearl Harbor.

Intellectual sloth --- it's what's for dinner around here.

 

[easyt65]

Paul Joseph Watson - July 15, 2016 1615 Comments



Media Blames Truck, Not Terrorists or Islam, For Nice Attack

"Leftist media outlets reacted to the devastating attack in Nice not by blaming Islam or even terrorists, but by suggesting that an inanimate object – the truck – was responsible for the carnage.

Instead of pointing the finger at Islamists, CNN, CBC and the New York Times all published headlines that served to hide the true nature of the attack.

CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.

Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver."

-----

No use of the word 'Islamic Extremist', 'Radical Islam', 'ISIS', or even 'terrorist'.
No mention of 'terrorism' or 'terrorist' at all (for example, 'Terrorist Attack - Rams Truck Into Crowd killing 84') - Just 'TRUCK Rams Crow'.

So how long before we see Liberals demanding legislation be passed regarding TRUCKS or demanding Semis be labeled as 'ASAULT Trucks'?

"Given that the truck alone, and not the ideology that radicalized the terrorist who used one as a weapon, is to blame for the massacre in Nice, the solution to stop further violence is simple; Ban deadly assault trucks."

Dear easyt65
Isn't this because when the news was first reported,
people didn't have information on which people committed the attack? All they knew was a truck hit the crowd, so that's all they could state.

Even after stories get published with more information, because of legal liability, the news media have to be careful to state phrases like "alleged suspects" and CAN'T go around calling people terrorists unless they want to risk getting sued.

Nice try, but no. Try again...this time with a link proving your opinion.

 

[Pogo]

Paul Joseph Watson - July 15, 2016 1615 Comments



Media Blames Truck, Not Terrorists or Islam, For Nice Attack

"Leftist media outlets reacted to the devastating attack in Nice not by blaming Islam or even terrorists, but by suggesting that an inanimate object – the truck – was responsible for the carnage.

Instead of pointing the finger at Islamists, CNN, CBC and the New York Times all published headlines that served to hide the true nature of the attack.

CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.

Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver."

-----

No use of the word 'Islamic Extremist', 'Radical Islam', 'ISIS', or even 'terrorist'.
No mention of 'terrorism' or 'terrorist' at all (for example, 'Terrorist Attack - Rams Truck Into Crowd killing 84') - Just 'TRUCK Rams Crow'.

So how long before we see Liberals demanding legislation be passed regarding TRUCKS or demanding Semis be labeled as 'ASAULT Trucks'?

"Given that the truck alone, and not the ideology that radicalized the terrorist who used one as a weapon, is to blame for the massacre in Nice, the solution to stop further violence is simple; Ban deadly assault trucks."

Dear easyt65
Isn't this because when the news was first reported,
people didn't have information on which people committed the attack? All they knew was a truck hit the crowd, so that's all they could state.

Even after stories get published with more information, because of legal liability, the news media have to be careful to state phrases like "alleged suspects" and CAN'T go around calling people terrorists unless they want to risk getting sued.

Nice try, but no. Try again...this time with a link proving your opinion.

You don't "prove" opinions, Ricky Retardo --- you prove facts. Or else you claim things as facts and then fail to prove them.

Like you did with this ridiculous thread that you copied without vetting from Alex Freaking Jones of all creatures.

 

[emilynghiem]

Paul Joseph Watson - July 15, 2016 1615 Comments



Media Blames Truck, Not Terrorists or Islam, For Nice Attack

"Leftist media outlets reacted to the devastating attack in Nice not by blaming Islam or even terrorists, but by suggesting that an inanimate object – the truck – was responsible for the carnage.

Instead of pointing the finger at Islamists, CNN, CBC and the New York Times all published headlines that served to hide the true nature of the attack.

CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.

Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver."

-----

No use of the word 'Islamic Extremist', 'Radical Islam', 'ISIS', or even 'terrorist'.
No mention of 'terrorism' or 'terrorist' at all (for example, 'Terrorist Attack - Rams Truck Into Crowd killing 84') - Just 'TRUCK Rams Crow'.

So how long before we see Liberals demanding legislation be passed regarding TRUCKS or demanding Semis be labeled as 'ASAULT Trucks'?

"Given that the truck alone, and not the ideology that radicalized the terrorist who used one as a weapon, is to blame for the massacre in Nice, the solution to stop further violence is simple; Ban deadly assault trucks."

Dear easyt65
Isn't this because when the news was first reported,
people didn't have information on which people committed the attack? All they knew was a truck hit the crowd, so that's all they could state.

Even after stories get published with more information, because of legal liability, the news media have to be careful to state phrases like "alleged suspects" and CAN'T go around calling people terrorists unless they want to risk getting sued.

Nice try, but no. Try again...this time with a link proving your opinion.

Okay easyt65 AFTER IT WAS CONFIRMED
then news stories started announcing the truck driver's identity:
Attack in Nice: Driver of truck identified as 31-year-old Tunisia native - CNN.com

^ So here is proof that the media identify the driver as a person ^

 

[Jackson]

Kinda like republicans blaming Hillary, and not the terrorists for Benghazi.

Maybe if Hillary had recalled the ambassador in Libya as the other countries did, or AT LEAST provided protection to the ambassador and his sparse number of men, the scandal could be avoided.

She didn't even stay with the live streaming events as they were displayed at the State Department. SHE WENT HOME! Obama retired to his quarters!

 

[Jackson]

Obama: Damn Trucks! Can't trust them!

 

[TheOldSchool]

Kinda like republicans blaming Hillary, and not the terrorists for Benghazi.

Maybe if Hillary had recalled the ambassador in Libya as the other countries did, or AT LEAST provided protection to the ambassador and his sparse number of men, the scandal could be avoided.

She didn't even stay with the live streaming events as they were displayed at the State Department. SHE WENT HOME! Obama retired to his quarters!

He went there of his own accord and against advice. That is not disputed.

 

[Jackson]

Kinda like republicans blaming Hillary, and not the terrorists for Benghazi.

Maybe if Hillary had recalled the ambassador in Libya as the other countries did, or AT LEAST provided protection to the ambassador and his sparse number of men, the scandal could be avoided.

She didn't even stay with the live streaming events as they were displayed at the State Department. SHE WENT HOME! Obama retired to his quarters!

He went there of his own accord and against advice. That is not disputed.

So, don't recall him and refuse help when teams were ready to save them? And I don't believe he went without the call from the state dept. That isn't how the state department is supposed to work.

And Clinton had "his back" by taking intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal who WAS NOT supposed to be in communication with the SD. SHe paid for him ($10,000 a month) from the Clinton Foundation after Obama told her he was not to be used by the SD. She is such a shit.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Kinda like republicans blaming Hillary, and not the terrorists for Benghazi.

Maybe if Hillary had recalled the ambassador in Libya as the other countries did, or AT LEAST provided protection to the ambassador and his sparse number of men, the scandal could be avoided.

She didn't even stay with the live streaming events as they were displayed at the State Department. SHE WENT HOME! Obama retired to his quarters!

He went there of his own accord and against advice. That is not disputed.

So, don't recall him and refuse help when teams were ready to save them? And I don't believe he went without the call from the state dept. That isn't how the state department is supposed to work.

And Clinton had "his back" by taking intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal who WAS NOT supposed to be in communication with the SD. SHe paid for him ($10,000 a month) from the Clinton Foundation after Obama told her he was not to be used by the SD. She is such a shit.

So, don't recall him and refuse help when teams were ready to save them? They were dead long before any help could arrive. Even Trey Gowdy admitted it. Benghazi Chairman Contradicts Fox Report, Admits Military Could Not Have Saved Lives In Benghazi Attack And I don't believe he went without the call from the state dept. That isn't how the state department is supposed to work. He went despite warnings, and he chose the personnel he would take. That is not disputed.

And Clinton had "his back" by taking intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal who WAS NOT supposed to be in communication with the SD. Now you are venturing into wild speculation. SHe paid for him ($10,000 a month) from the Clinton Foundation after Obama told her he was not to be used by the SD. He was their employee. You typically pay your employees. You don't even know what you should be mad about when it comes to Blumenthal. That was nothing more than crazy reaching by Gowdy after he realized there was nothing to this witch hunt. She is such a shit. Opinion, of course.

 

[Jackson]

Kinda like republicans blaming Hillary, and not the terrorists for Benghazi.

Maybe if Hillary had recalled the ambassador in Libya as the other countries did, or AT LEAST provided protection to the ambassador and his sparse number of men, the scandal could be avoided.

She didn't even stay with the live streaming events as they were displayed at the State Department. SHE WENT HOME! Obama retired to his quarters!

He went there of his own accord and against advice. That is not disputed.

So, don't recall him and refuse help when teams were ready to save them? And I don't believe he went without the call from the state dept. That isn't how the state department is supposed to work.

And Clinton had "his back" by taking intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal who WAS NOT supposed to be in communication with the SD. SHe paid for him ($10,000 a month) from the Clinton Foundation after Obama told her he was not to be used by the SD. She is such a shit.

So, don't recall him and refuse help when teams were ready to save them? They were dead long before any help could arrive. Even Trey Gowdy admitted it. Benghazi Chairman Contradicts Fox Report, Admits Military Could Not Have Saved Lives In Benghazi Attack And I don't believe he went without the call from the state dept. That isn't how the state department is supposed to work. He went despite warnings, and he chose the personnel he would take. That is not disputed.

And Clinton had "his back" by taking intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal who WAS NOT supposed to be in communication with the SD. Now you are venturing into wild speculation. SHe paid for him ($10,000 a month) from the Clinton Foundation after Obama told her he was not to be used by the SD. He was their employee. You typically pay your employees. You don't even know what you should be mad about when it comes to Blumenthal. That was nothing more than crazy reaching by Gowdy after he realized there was nothing to this witch hunt. She is such a shit. Opinion, of course.

That attack went on for hours. There was time to get some help there. Show me the link where the State Department refused to let him go.

Obama did not like Blumenthal. He didn't want him working for the SD. Tough Shit. Clinton was going to get her way. Instead of being paid by the gov't, she paid him with Charity Money!

 

[TheOldSchool]

Kinda like republicans blaming Hillary, and not the terrorists for Benghazi.

Maybe if Hillary had recalled the ambassador in Libya as the other countries did, or AT LEAST provided protection to the ambassador and his sparse number of men, the scandal could be avoided.

She didn't even stay with the live streaming events as they were displayed at the State Department. SHE WENT HOME! Obama retired to his quarters!

He went there of his own accord and against advice. That is not disputed.

So, don't recall him and refuse help when teams were ready to save them? And I don't believe he went without the call from the state dept. That isn't how the state department is supposed to work.

And Clinton had "his back" by taking intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal who WAS NOT supposed to be in communication with the SD. SHe paid for him ($10,000 a month) from the Clinton Foundation after Obama told her he was not to be used by the SD. She is such a shit.

So, don't recall him and refuse help when teams were ready to save them? They were dead long before any help could arrive. Even Trey Gowdy admitted it. Benghazi Chairman Contradicts Fox Report, Admits Military Could Not Have Saved Lives In Benghazi Attack And I don't believe he went without the call from the state dept. That isn't how the state department is supposed to work. He went despite warnings, and he chose the personnel he would take. That is not disputed.

And Clinton had "his back" by taking intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal who WAS NOT supposed to be in communication with the SD. Now you are venturing into wild speculation. SHe paid for him ($10,000 a month) from the Clinton Foundation after Obama told her he was not to be used by the SD. He was their employee. You typically pay your employees. You don't even know what you should be mad about when it comes to Blumenthal. That was nothing more than crazy reaching by Gowdy after he realized there was nothing to this witch hunt. She is such a shit. Opinion, of course.

That attack went on for hours. There was time to get some help there. Show me the link where the State Department refused to let him go.

Obama did not like Blumenthal. He didn't want him working for the SD. Tough Shit. Clinton was going to get her way. Instead of being paid by the gov't, she paid him with Charity Money!

They were dead early on. There was no time to get help there that wouldn't have resulted in more deaths. Blumenthal's conspiratorial connection is a figment of your delusional imagination.

8 investigations. 1 whose sole purpose was to convict Hillary even if there was no evidence, and even that failed. It's over. Try a new tactic. Or go pound sand. I'm done with this thread.

Chris Stevens' sister: Don't blame Clinton for Benghazi
Ambassador Chris Stevens’s Friends Are Tired of This Benghazi Nonsense

 

[JoeMoma]

Was it an assault truck?

Yes it was. A small truck like the Chevy S10 I have would not had inflicted as much damage as that big ol' assault truck.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I guess when talking about 9/11, any mention of 'airplanes' should be removed. Hmm.

The planes didn't attack anyone

the truck didn't attack anyone

 

[Skull Pilot]

Was it an assault truck?

It wasn't scary and black so no

 

[Mac1958]

Paul Joseph Watson - July 15, 2016 1615 Comments



Media Blames Truck, Not Terrorists or Islam, For Nice Attack

"Leftist media outlets reacted to the devastating attack in Nice not by blaming Islam or even terrorists, but by suggesting that an inanimate object – the truck – was responsible for the carnage.

Instead of pointing the finger at Islamists, CNN, CBC and the New York Times all published headlines that served to hide the true nature of the attack.

CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.

Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver."

-----

No use of the word 'Islamic Extremist', 'Radical Islam', 'ISIS', or even 'terrorist'.
No mention of 'terrorism' or 'terrorist' at all (for example, 'Terrorist Attack - Rams Truck Into Crowd killing 84') - Just 'TRUCK Rams Crow'.

So how long before we see Liberals demanding legislation be passed regarding TRUCKS or demanding Semis be labeled as 'ASAULT Trucks'?

"Given that the truck alone, and not the ideology that radicalized the terrorist who used one as a weapon, is to blame for the massacre in Nice, the solution to stop further violence is simple; Ban deadly assault trucks."

.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Kinda like republicans blaming Hillary, and not the terrorists for Benghazi.

Don't you know it was the video... Shit for brains
Lol

Shit for brains

exactly

 

[depotoo]

ISIS has.

Has any organization claimed responsibility yet? We're all assuming it was ISIS, but it's kind of lo tech for them, isn't it. Also, any ideas why he had fake guns and grenades in the back of the truck?
Do you suppose he was a lone wolf nutcase who self-radicalized? Still a terrorist, but he sounds kinda flaky.

 

[depotoo]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/17/world/europe/isis-nice-france-attack.html
Yes, it has. Note they are just now reporting it, yet France reported it yesterday.

Has any organization claimed responsibility yet? We're all assuming it was ISIS, but it's kind of lo tech for them, isn't it. Also, any ideas why he had fake guns and grenades in the back of the truck?
Do you suppose he was a lone wolf nutcase who self-radicalized? Still a terrorist, but he sounds kinda flaky.

no organization has taken credit, he belongs to no known mosque.

right now any speculation of motivation is just that.

 

[depotoo]

So, next time there is major car accident that kills a family caused by a fellow drunk as a skunk, it is ok for the headline ro read "car kills family". Got it.

Paul Joseph Watson - July 15, 2016 1615 Comments



Media Blames Truck, Not Terrorists or Islam, For Nice Attack

"Leftist media outlets reacted to the devastating attack in Nice not by blaming Islam or even terrorists, but by suggesting that an inanimate object – the truck – was responsible for the carnage.

Instead of pointing the finger at Islamists, CNN, CBC and the New York Times all published headlines that served to hide the true nature of the attack.

CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.

Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver."

-----

No use of the word 'Islamic Extremist', 'Radical Islam', 'ISIS', or even 'terrorist'.
No mention of 'terrorism' or 'terrorist' at all (for example, 'Terrorist Attack - Rams Truck Into Crowd killing 84') - Just 'TRUCK Rams Crow'.

So how long before we see Liberals demanding legislation be passed regarding TRUCKS or demanding Semis be labeled as 'ASAULT Trucks'?

"Given that the truck alone, and not the ideology that radicalized the terrorist who used one as a weapon, is to blame for the massacre in Nice, the solution to stop further violence is simple; Ban deadly assault trucks."

Dear easyt65
Isn't this because when the news was first reported,
people didn't have information on which people committed the attack? All they knew was a truck hit the crowd, so that's all they could state.

Even after stories get published with more information, because of legal liability, the news media have to be careful to state phrases like "alleged suspects" and CAN'T go around calling people terrorists unless they want to risk getting sued.

Apparently he doesn't know what an adjective is. Which is what "truck" is in the phrase "truck attack".

God forbid he should encounter the phrase "surprise attack". I bet he's off right now feverishly working up a thread about how the 1941 media tried to report that "surprise", and not "Japan", attacked Pearl Harbor.

Intellectual sloth --- it's what's for dinner around here.

 

[emilynghiem]

So, next time there is major car accident that kills a family caused by a fellow drunk as a skunk, it is ok for the headline ro read "car kills family". Got it.

Paul Joseph Watson - July 15, 2016 1615 Comments



Media Blames Truck, Not Terrorists or Islam, For Nice Attack

"Leftist media outlets reacted to the devastating attack in Nice not by blaming Islam or even terrorists, but by suggesting that an inanimate object – the truck – was responsible for the carnage.

Instead of pointing the finger at Islamists, CNN, CBC and the New York Times all published headlines that served to hide the true nature of the attack.

CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.

Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver."

-----

No use of the word 'Islamic Extremist', 'Radical Islam', 'ISIS', or even 'terrorist'.
No mention of 'terrorism' or 'terrorist' at all (for example, 'Terrorist Attack - Rams Truck Into Crowd killing 84') - Just 'TRUCK Rams Crow'.

So how long before we see Liberals demanding legislation be passed regarding TRUCKS or demanding Semis be labeled as 'ASAULT Trucks'?

"Given that the truck alone, and not the ideology that radicalized the terrorist who used one as a weapon, is to blame for the massacre in Nice, the solution to stop further violence is simple; Ban deadly assault trucks."

Dear easyt65
Isn't this because when the news was first reported,
people didn't have information on which people committed the attack? All they knew was a truck hit the crowd, so that's all they could state.

Even after stories get published with more information, because of legal liability, the news media have to be careful to state phrases like "alleged suspects" and CAN'T go around calling people terrorists unless they want to risk getting sued.

Apparently he doesn't know what an adjective is. Which is what "truck" is in the phrase "truck attack".

God forbid he should encounter the phrase "surprise attack". I bet he's off right now feverishly working up a thread about how the 1941 media tried to report that "surprise", and not "Japan", attacked Pearl Harbor.

Intellectual sloth --- it's what's for dinner around here.

If they don't have information yet, they can use wording like family killed in car accident because they don't know the cause yet or the identity of the drivers.

We are talking about ONLINE sources that are competing for viewers even BEFORE reports or ID are fully confirmed.

So they will use whatever headlines they can, even with no information or very little to go by, to get ratings and clicks .

Sad this sensationalizes tragedy but all these sources online are vying for hits on Google which means ad revenue

If we don't like it, then we can go resort to leftwing or rightwing radio or other sites to get news that way. But that also means waiting for more details to be confirmed .

depotoo I don't like this either. I'd like to put together a team of reliable news and history checkers left and right, to review and correct stories so ppl can get the straight information. If there was a reliable source, ppl would go there and the nonsense would be reduced if ppl no longer fell for the ad click bait.