Emperor's "Narrative" on Orlando--"nothing whatsoever to do with Islam"--takes some major hits
Immediately after a 29-year-old muslim killed 49 in Orlando, the emperor's administration determined what "the narrative"--the "official" version of the event--would be, regardless of any contrary findings.
The official line--The Narrative--was that the mass murder had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.
Anyone who knows anything about psychology and propaganda knows that after any off-the-charts event, most people will believe the first explanation they hear--no matter how many later findings totally contradict that explanation.
There are three main reasons for this: The first is simply that most people are too busy to re-visit a "black swan" event a year or so later to find out whether later findings supported or contradicted the first narrative.
A second reason is based on psychology: First impressions--no matter how wrong--are hard to shake. And as just noted, only a tiny percentage of people will bother searching for the full findings, and then trying to reconcile any contradictions with The Narrative.
This was the case when president John Kennedy was fatally shot in Dallas in 1963: The Narrative was that Oswald acted alone. The fact that there were hundreds of facts that contradicted this conclusion made no difference: The hand-picked commission charged with investigating the assassination simply ignored any witness who gave testimony that would contradict that story. Literally: the commission simply refused to call the most devastating witnesses against The Narrative.
The third reason is also psychological: Anyone who bothers doing their own research, finds the contradictions and then mentions them is considered a "conspiracy nut." The people who believed The Narrative don't want to believe any other conclusion. Thus they will insist there isn't any contradictory evidence, or that any alleged is simply wrong. They're uncomfortable discussing or debating such evidence and its meaning, because they realize (subconsciously, at least) that even the idea that their president would deceive them so hugely--and on such a vital issue--has implications that are simply too disturbing to contemplate.
The ultimate defense mechanism for these folks is "At this point what difference does it make?"
So it is with the murders in Orlando: The first narrative was that the shooter must have hated gays. Then evidence emerged that he'd been a regular at this club for 3 years. Hey, no problem: Just change the Narrative.
Next was that the killer was crazy--a conclusion most were very eager to believe. But consider this: The killer made at least 3 phone calls after killing many of his victims, in which he calmly said that he was killing for the Islamic State. Doesn't sound any crazier than any other muzz fanatic.
In a press briefing *the Monday after the killings* FBI director James Comey said that after opening fire within the club at around 2 a.m. Sunday morning, around 2:30 Mateen called 911 for the first time. but quickly hung up without saying anything. He then called back, spoke briefly with the 911 dispatcher and hung up again. The dispatcher called Mateen back, and they had a second brief conversation.
“During the calls he said he was doing this for the leader of [the Islamic State] who he named and pledged loyalty to,” Comey said. He said the gunman also expressed support for the Boston Marathon bombing, and pledged support to the leader of ISIS, by name.
Then Mateen made the call the emperor's damage-control team didn't expect:
When the killer started shooting, around 2 a.m., Matthew Gentili was manning the phones at local channel 13. His phones began to ring with people reporting hearing shots, or asking what was going on. Then around 2:45--just after the killer's 2nd 911 conversation--Gentili got a call from a man saying he was the killer.
According to Gentili the caller said “I did it for ISIS. I did it for the Islamic State.”
Yet for the rest of the week the emperor continued to say the killings had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam. And to imply that the killings were motivated by homophobia--even though one of the killer's former co-workers had already said that the killer had made homosexual advances to him, and that Mateen was well-known at the club, having been there for 3 years..
Now, there's ample evidence that Mateen was unhinged. And obviously crazy isn't limited to followers of one religion. But he was rational enough to want to make at least 3 calls to explain his support for ISIS. And while only a fraction of muslims engage in the mass shootings and beheadings and setting prisoners on fire or slowly immersing captives in acid--all of which ISIS routinely does-- the killer's methodical, un-rushed working of the phones and social media suggest a substantial rationality.
If he says he was killing for ISIS, doesn't it seem crazy for the emperor to *insist* that the killings had nothing to do with Islam?
Now that The Narrative has been so badly damaged, the propaganda chiefs are pivoting, changing it to "He was 'self-radicalized.' If his murder of 49 unarmed Americans wasn't actually *ordered by ISIS,* the argument went, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with Islam.
So nothing at all to worry about, citizen.
You're being led by people who put the welfare of Muslims before yours. People whose top priority is importing 100,000 muslim "refugees" *per year* for the next two years. And that's their words, not mine.
If you think president Hillary will stop that program you're an idiot. Like most liberal pols, Hillary's constant trait--other than lying--is "virtue signalling" to her fellow progressives: demonstrating to them that she's totally politically correct.
Sweden's pols have done the same thing. Sweden is now the rape capital of the world--virtually all committed by immigrants, who laugh at how the Swedish government constantly makes excuses for their ghastly, brutal attacks, and routinely sentences them to 100 hours of community service for even the most horrible rapes of young Swedish girls.
"How ridiculous, citizen! That couldn't possibly ever happen here, citizen! Cuz our federal gummint enforces our laws totally evenhandedly, without regard to whether the perp is an illegal immigrant."
Oh wait...the emperor has already ignored bona fide immigration law, refusing to deport hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, letting 'em stay in the U.S. indefinitely with no penalty and no threat of deportation. Because he and his fellow Democrat congreswhores are lookin' out for Americans, ya know?
But don't worry, citizen, cuz he promises you that all the illegal immigrants and "refugees" are thoroughly, thoroughly "vetted," to make sure they don't support terrorism.
Oh wait...they're not vetting ANY illegals. If you make it to the U.S, that's all you need. And the so-called vetting of tens of thousands of Syrian muslims they're bringing in and settling in small towns across the country consists of asking "Are you a terrorist? No? In that case welcome to the U.S."
Finally, just for fun here's a thought experiment: If any president--not just the Dems' Precioussss emperor, but anyone--was trying to destroy the U.S. as we've known it, what would they do different from what Obama has done?
The official line--The Narrative--was that the mass murder had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.
"Oooh, wait--the 911 dispatchers are telling us the guy called between after he killed the first group, claiming he did it for ISIS, and pledging loyalty to that group's leader. If those tapes are released it could be a problem for us."And that would have worked--except the killer also called a local TV station and said the same thing. So now what? No problem. Just change the Narrative.
"Hey, not a problem. We'll just demand that the city turn the tapes over to us 'to further the investigation.' No one will ever be able to prove he said anything!"
Anyone who knows anything about psychology and propaganda knows that after any off-the-charts event, most people will believe the first explanation they hear--no matter how many later findings totally contradict that explanation.
There are three main reasons for this: The first is simply that most people are too busy to re-visit a "black swan" event a year or so later to find out whether later findings supported or contradicted the first narrative.
A second reason is based on psychology: First impressions--no matter how wrong--are hard to shake. And as just noted, only a tiny percentage of people will bother searching for the full findings, and then trying to reconcile any contradictions with The Narrative.
This was the case when president John Kennedy was fatally shot in Dallas in 1963: The Narrative was that Oswald acted alone. The fact that there were hundreds of facts that contradicted this conclusion made no difference: The hand-picked commission charged with investigating the assassination simply ignored any witness who gave testimony that would contradict that story. Literally: the commission simply refused to call the most devastating witnesses against The Narrative.
The third reason is also psychological: Anyone who bothers doing their own research, finds the contradictions and then mentions them is considered a "conspiracy nut." The people who believed The Narrative don't want to believe any other conclusion. Thus they will insist there isn't any contradictory evidence, or that any alleged is simply wrong. They're uncomfortable discussing or debating such evidence and its meaning, because they realize (subconsciously, at least) that even the idea that their president would deceive them so hugely--and on such a vital issue--has implications that are simply too disturbing to contemplate.
The ultimate defense mechanism for these folks is "At this point what difference does it make?"
So it is with the murders in Orlando: The first narrative was that the shooter must have hated gays. Then evidence emerged that he'd been a regular at this club for 3 years. Hey, no problem: Just change the Narrative.
Next was that the killer was crazy--a conclusion most were very eager to believe. But consider this: The killer made at least 3 phone calls after killing many of his victims, in which he calmly said that he was killing for the Islamic State. Doesn't sound any crazier than any other muzz fanatic.
In a press briefing *the Monday after the killings* FBI director James Comey said that after opening fire within the club at around 2 a.m. Sunday morning, around 2:30 Mateen called 911 for the first time. but quickly hung up without saying anything. He then called back, spoke briefly with the 911 dispatcher and hung up again. The dispatcher called Mateen back, and they had a second brief conversation.
“During the calls he said he was doing this for the leader of [the Islamic State] who he named and pledged loyalty to,” Comey said. He said the gunman also expressed support for the Boston Marathon bombing, and pledged support to the leader of ISIS, by name.
Then Mateen made the call the emperor's damage-control team didn't expect:
When the killer started shooting, around 2 a.m., Matthew Gentili was manning the phones at local channel 13. His phones began to ring with people reporting hearing shots, or asking what was going on. Then around 2:45--just after the killer's 2nd 911 conversation--Gentili got a call from a man saying he was the killer.
According to Gentili the caller said “I did it for ISIS. I did it for the Islamic State.”
Yet for the rest of the week the emperor continued to say the killings had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam. And to imply that the killings were motivated by homophobia--even though one of the killer's former co-workers had already said that the killer had made homosexual advances to him, and that Mateen was well-known at the club, having been there for 3 years..
Now, there's ample evidence that Mateen was unhinged. And obviously crazy isn't limited to followers of one religion. But he was rational enough to want to make at least 3 calls to explain his support for ISIS. And while only a fraction of muslims engage in the mass shootings and beheadings and setting prisoners on fire or slowly immersing captives in acid--all of which ISIS routinely does-- the killer's methodical, un-rushed working of the phones and social media suggest a substantial rationality.
If he says he was killing for ISIS, doesn't it seem crazy for the emperor to *insist* that the killings had nothing to do with Islam?
Now that The Narrative has been so badly damaged, the propaganda chiefs are pivoting, changing it to "He was 'self-radicalized.' If his murder of 49 unarmed Americans wasn't actually *ordered by ISIS,* the argument went, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with Islam.
So nothing at all to worry about, citizen.
You're being led by people who put the welfare of Muslims before yours. People whose top priority is importing 100,000 muslim "refugees" *per year* for the next two years. And that's their words, not mine.
If you think president Hillary will stop that program you're an idiot. Like most liberal pols, Hillary's constant trait--other than lying--is "virtue signalling" to her fellow progressives: demonstrating to them that she's totally politically correct.
Sweden's pols have done the same thing. Sweden is now the rape capital of the world--virtually all committed by immigrants, who laugh at how the Swedish government constantly makes excuses for their ghastly, brutal attacks, and routinely sentences them to 100 hours of community service for even the most horrible rapes of young Swedish girls.
"How ridiculous, citizen! That couldn't possibly ever happen here, citizen! Cuz our federal gummint enforces our laws totally evenhandedly, without regard to whether the perp is an illegal immigrant."
Oh wait...the emperor has already ignored bona fide immigration law, refusing to deport hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, letting 'em stay in the U.S. indefinitely with no penalty and no threat of deportation. Because he and his fellow Democrat congreswhores are lookin' out for Americans, ya know?
But don't worry, citizen, cuz he promises you that all the illegal immigrants and "refugees" are thoroughly, thoroughly "vetted," to make sure they don't support terrorism.
Oh wait...they're not vetting ANY illegals. If you make it to the U.S, that's all you need. And the so-called vetting of tens of thousands of Syrian muslims they're bringing in and settling in small towns across the country consists of asking "Are you a terrorist? No? In that case welcome to the U.S."
Finally, just for fun here's a thought experiment: If any president--not just the Dems' Precioussss emperor, but anyone--was trying to destroy the U.S. as we've known it, what would they do different from what Obama has done?
posted by SF at
2:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home