Did your media tell you this about the Sandy Hook shooter?

Or did they just use the story as a tool to take away your 2nd Amendment rights?  If you haven’t heard about this then you need to expand your media horizons.

The same question applies about all the false teachers who, like ghouls, milked this tragedy the same way they did with Trayvon Martin’s death.  Will they tell the whole story, or will they ignore the parts that don’t fit with their narrative?

Via Disturbing: Adam Lanza PC Contained Info on “Rights of Pedophiles, Movie About Man/Boy Love, Instant Messages Concerning Homosexual Fantasies”

Well, this will probably be the last you ever hear about Adam Lanza from the mainstream media.

The state’s attorney report on the horrific murders at  the Sandy Hook Elementary School by shooter Adam Lanza found no “conclusive motive” for his actions but did document unsettling facts about the 20-year-old killer, including computer files he kept on the rights of pedophiles, a movie about man/boy love, instant messages concerning “homosexual fantasies,” numerous mass murder documents, and a computer game entitled “School Shooting.”In “School Shooting,” an amateur computer game, “the player controls a character who enters a school and shoots at students,” reads an Investigation Report (DPS-302-E) that is among the 1,000-plus pages comprising the state’s attorney report on the shootings.

Lanza, after shooting his mother Nancy Lanza at home on the morning of Dec. 14, 2012, drove to the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and shot and killed 20 children and six adults, and then shot himself.  (Full report, text and images here.  Summary report here.)

Guess we need to ban movies about man/boy love, huh?

Hat tip: The Other McCain

 

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Did your media tell you this about the Sandy Hook shooter?”

    1. Huh? Where did you get that? I am highlighting the ridiculous media bias that uses tragedies like the Sandy Hook shooting to take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens and how they hide anything that reflects negatively on the LGBTQX alphabet soup of sexual perversions.

      Like

      1. So you don’t think the killer’s background was newsworthy?

        Do you think the media “might” have mentioned his background if he had been a member of a Bible-believing church?

        Like

  1. A person’s sexuality in and of itself is not newsworthy unless it’s pertinent to the crime. People don’t generally kill because they’re heterosexual, or because they’re gay. They kill for other reasons.
    The paedophilia thing, on the other hand, should have been mentioned if it’s true because it goes to a troubled and disturbed history.

    Like

    1. But once some psychiatric association declassifies pedophilia the same way they did for gays then you’ll change your story. After all, if the “experts” deem that pedos were born that way, can’t change, feels natural and get their feelings hurt if people criticize them then it will be de-classified as well. It is happening for pedophilia and bestiality already.

      Like

      1. LOL you don’t need to answer the question on your level of education. It’s becoming obvious. If you don’t understand the difference between consensual adult sexual relations and paedophilia, you obviously didn’t make into secondaty education.

        Like

    2. The point eMatters raised about consent is a good one. Don’t be surprised if the age of consent/for consensual relationships keeps getting lowered & lowered, claiming that “modern scientific discoveries” justify such decisions.
      Your last attempt at some kind of “clever” ad hominem argument reveals the unseriousness of your view.

      Like

      1. That has never happened. If anything the age of consent gets raised. If you study history you’ll find the age of consent 100 years ago was much lower than it is today.

        As we’ve developed into a more civilized society where children are no longer forced to work and now remain in their parents’ care until early adulthood, that period of care has only received more protections.

        Like

      2. It is noteworthy that pinkagendist ignored the argument and made an irrelevant point. No one debated that there are laws on the age of consent or that they have changed. The issue is the practical application.

        Kids need protection — from other kids and from gay icons like this — http://www.gcmwatch.com/10757/prominent-white-homosexual-activist-exposed-as-a-racist-gay-pedophile .

        It is also noteworthy that pinkagendist makes ad hominem appeals to level of education when his C.V. consists of credits as a porn actor.

        Like

  2. Yeah, you got me. I never made it out of junior high. Don’t tell my employer, who pays me generously as a corporate executive!

    What you don’t understand is the logic used to justify “LGBTQX rights” applies to pedophiles as well. Apparently you are just a hater! And an illogical one at that: How does consent play into this? Do you oppose the rights of 15 yr. olds to consent to sex with other 15 year olds? If not, then why can’t they consent to sex with older people?

    Note: Pedophilia is a perversion. I’m just highlighting your inconsistencies.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s