The bulletin warned that Thompson's killing may be used as "messaging and propaganda" to share the techniques and tactics for targeting other health care companies.
Before we knew anything about him, it was just as plausible that he killed the CEO for authorizing payments for abortion. It wasn’t clear it had anything to do with wealth in the beginning
People made an assumption that turned out to be correct, why do you want so badly to make a case for something we know isn’t true now? By your same logic, for all we knew on day one, he shot him because he didn’t like the color of his pants. Prove to me that it couldn’t be feasible on day one.
I’m sorry, that’s not the problem. The original complaint was that the media would NOT reach a conclusion. I am defending the refusal to jump to conclusions.
People can speculate, but saying “why didn’t the news diagnose the problem from the beginning?” is an asinine question.
Before we knew anything about him, it was just as plausible that he killed the CEO for authorizing payments for abortion. It wasn’t clear it had anything to do with wealth in the beginning
But was it really?
No, not really.
it was plausible… i am not sure why jeffw trying to make this equally weighted
…meanwhile, back here on Earth:
That’s cute and all. What evidence did you have on day 1?
Only if you ignore what was carved into the bullets…
IDK man his FUCKING MANIFESTO was pretty clear that he was super pissed off at Healthcare CEOs for fucking the people day in, day out.
I don’t agree with the guy, but his first sentence is literally “before we knew anything about him”. Pretty sure that includes his manifesto…
The manifesto that we got the day of the shooting? Care to share that one with me? I’ve only seen the current one
The bullet casings make it pretty damn clear. If you didn’t know what it was about then that’s because you weren’t paying attention.
Circumstantial evidence made it damn clear!
Jesus it’s like nobody has ever read a crime thriller in their life. This is like chapter 1 misdirection
.world mods really are the worst aren’t they?
Insults are fun and all, but nobody seems able to show me coherent evidence as to why there was definitive proof on day 1
People made an assumption that turned out to be correct, why do you want so badly to make a case for something we know isn’t true now? By your same logic, for all we knew on day one, he shot him because he didn’t like the color of his pants. Prove to me that it couldn’t be feasible on day one.
I’m sorry, that’s not the problem. The original complaint was that the media would NOT reach a conclusion. I am defending the refusal to jump to conclusions.
People can speculate, but saying “why didn’t the news diagnose the problem from the beginning?” is an asinine question.
deleted by creator