July 20, 2012

"Colorado theater shooting suspect was neuroscience Ph.D student."

At the University of Colorado-Denver.
[James] Holmes is suspected of walking into an Aurora theater's midnight showing of "Dark Knight Rises" wearing a gas mask and bullet proof vest and shooting at least 54 people. Twelve are reported dead.
There's a photo of the 24-year-old man at the link. He looks ordinary. Smirking... but it's the kind of smirk I associate with the character Jim on "The Office."

ADDED: Breitbart reports:
According to New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, James Holmes, 24, the alleged perpetrator of the mass murder at the Aurora, Colorado theater showing of The Dark Knight Rises, claimed he was “The Joker” during the shooting. “We have some information, most of it is public,” said Kelly. “It clearly looks like a deranged individual. He had his hair painted red, he said he was ‘The Joker,’ obviously the ‘enemy’ of Batman.”...

Health Ledger’s portrayal of Batman arch-nemesis The Joker in the last installment of the Batman saga, The Dark Knight, won him a posthumous Oscar. The Joker was focused in that film on destroying Gotham City through chaos and mass murder; he also rigged buildings with booby traps in order to achieve that end.

235 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 235 of 235
chickelit said...

bagoh20 said...
Is this relatively new for Presidents to give a national address on such a thing.

Obama's remarks were made at the beginning of (yet another) planned fundraiser...that's why his quieting of his enthused supporters looked so stupid.

bagoh20 said...

Dammit Lem! That should have been me. I never should have let you cut in line. Next time, I won't fall for the old "I just have two words, I'll be quick."

bagoh20 said...

Chickelit, Your avitar just made me think of a sequel to "Human Centipede".

garage mahal said...

Third, since when did smearing become an acceptable tactic Mr. Dirty Sanchez? If your "it's a shirts vs. skin world" comment means something akin to "all's fair in politics" I say no, it's not.

I meant we're highly polarized and tribal.

I just find it a bit amusing that all the bile you read thrown at POTUS on this blog every single day, that you seem to be taking a stand against smears?

chickelit said...

bagoh20 said...
Chickelit, Your avitar just made me think of a sequel to "Human Centipede".

Oh, the anality!

That's just sick and wrong, bagoh20

yashu said...

garage, I ask again, in case you missed it-- can you think of any smears against Democrats propagated by the MSM (not random blog commenters, but the MSM) in living memory?

Particularly smears having to do with a massacre.

chickelit said...

@garage: You're saying I should do a better job playing devil's advocate for the other team? At least I'm not promulgating smears.

Ahem

(cf. Walker)

Lem said...

You know, I bet you the MSM will not make too much of the bit of news that Holmes could not find work... unemployed.

You know if a republican was in the WH with a steady high unemployment rate, like we been having... the MSM would be all over it.

garage mahal said...

garage, I ask again, in case you missed it-- can you think of any smears against Democrats propagated by the MSM (not random blog commenters, but the MSM) in living memory?

Fox slimes Democrats around the clock.

yashu said...

Fox slimes Democrats around the clock.

garage, please give me a specific example.

Particularly one proportional to the smears involved in the cases of the Loughner and Holmes massacres.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Is this relatively new for Presidents to give a national address on such a thing.

I made a similar remark in another thread.

WHY? is the President suddenly chiming in when the rest of Colorado and much of the South West and Texas has been burning up for days and weeks and he didn't seem to notice or think it important enough to comment on.

Tornadoes devastate flyover cities and not a peep from the White House.

BUT.....suddenly he must make a big deal out of this when it isn't national news or a federal issue.

Well........except I expect it to be yet another run up to trying to take away our 2nd ammendment rights and institute more gun control. They failed miserably with Fast and Furious. This tragedy gives them another opportunity to take advantage of dead bodies in their quest to disarm us.

Because a crazy person obtained guns and ammo, possibly illegally (we don't know) legal and law abiding people should be deprived of the right to protect themselves. Criminals will ALWAYS find a way to be armed.

If there had been some concealed carry in the audience of the theater, the carnage would have been stopped much MUCH sooner.

Mark my words.....the left is going to try to go all out on this one like they did with the Gibbs shooting to push draconian gun control.

THIS is why Obama is suddenly interested. Not about the people. It is all him all the time and his agenda.

wyo sis said...

24 hour news cycle?

garage mahal said...

yashu
Fox did 42 segments in the past 2 days of edited remarks smearing the president about his remarks on small business. That's the thing though, the right doesn't consider Bretibart deceptive editing like that a smear.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I meant the Giffords shooting by Loughner.

Doh!

wyo sis said...

I don't know why this is getting so much attention, but I know it hit me in the gut. It's a visceral thing. Kids, entertainment, the particular deliberate nature of it. Something I can't articulate, but it's one of those moments when everything seems to come to a stop.

wyo sis said...

The first time I heard Obama's speech I heard the lead up to the specific comment in context and it was not deceptively edited. It's what he said and what he meant.

city said...

.thanks for sharing

yashu said...

Fox did 42 segments in the past 2 days of edited remarks smearing the president about his remarks on small business.

Segments based on a direct quotation from Obama. Perhaps the interpretation of that direct quotation, in context, might be arguable... like the interpretation of "I'm not concerned about the very poor"? Or the interpretation of SEC filings that led the Obama campaign to accuse Romney of felony?

I'm not talking about election year politics. I'm talking about massacres, bloodbaths, in which innocent people were slaughtered, and the MSM has directly blamed a political party-- accusations which, it turned out, were absolutely false.

There is no symmetry, no moral equivalence here. Do you disagree?

garage mahal said...

Yashu
I promise to be honest if you'll stop beating around the bush and tell me exactly what and who you are talking about. Palin?

chickelit said...

@garage: Why don't you at least try to answer yashu's question? It's an honest one. You value honesty don't you?

@DBQ: I think you're right about what's going to happen in the coming weeks.

yashu said...

garage,

I'm talking about the ABC Good Morning America broadcast which I quoted at 7:03pm on this thread, and I'll quote again below:

Here is the exchange between ABC News chief investigator Brian Ross and host George Stephanopoulos about apparent suspect James Holmes:

Stephanolpoulos: I’m going to go to Brian Ross. You’ve been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.

Ross: There’s a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea party site as well, talking about him joining the Tea Party last year. Now, we don’t know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it’s Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.

Stephanolpoulos: Okay, we’ll keep looking at that. Brian Ross, thanks very much.


And the MSM accusations directed toward Palin and the Tea Party after the Loughner/ Gifford incident. I don't have those links to hand, but I can guarantee those MSM incriminations (e.g. a NYT Krugman editorial, Chris Matthews on MSNBC, and more) occurred, which directly charged Sarah Palin and the Tea Party of culpability for the Arizona massacre.

PatCA said...

wyo sis,

There's nothing to prevent misuse of any law except the knowledge and care of family, friends and law enforcement and judges. Are not some innocent people arrest for all sort of crimes? Should we then stop all arrests until we catch someone red handed? That's an absurd conclusion and flies in the face of psychiatric knowledge today.

Right now moral vanity and PC is stopping us from requiring schizophrenics to get treatment or spend time in a hospital. When you go through the experience yourself, you can condescend to others who worry about patients as well as the public.

garage mahal said...

I'll give you Brian Ross, obviously. But he did retract and apologize fairly quickly at least.

garage mahal said...

But, no excuse whatsoever for Ross to speculate on national TV about something he was unsure of. If he did get canned it wouldn't bother me a bit.

wyo sis said...

Sorry PatCA,
I'm advocating for common sense. I hope requiring a standard for putting someone away isn't too much to ask. We can have a middle road. If that's your position then I agree with you.
If you want to simply put people away because they don't act "normal" that's another thing entirely. Locking people up for what they might do to themselves or to others is an extreme response just as refusing to recognize real problems. If there is evidence of real harmful potential then we have a different issue.

yashu said...

garage,

I'm glad that you acknowledge, to the extent that you have, the egregious malfeasance of the MSM in this case.

But I still think you're too complacent about "retraction" and "apology" making everything all right. Despite any retractions and apologies, the fact of the matter is that the MSM has propagated a connection, an association, between the most horribly violent national events of the last 2 years, and a party that-- as it turns out-- has nothing at all to do with them.

Even if Americans are "consciously" aware of those retractions, corrections, clarificatons, nevertheless that impression/ associaton was ineffaceably made by supposedly respectable MSM journalists. "Fake but accurate": even though there isn't a single solitary instance of violence connected with the Tea Party, in the popular imagination the Tea Party is now directly associated with the two most horrific American massacres in recent history.

As we all know from Freud, even if you're "consciously" aware of a distinction/ negation/ qualification, an association still retains a great deal of subconscious power. When polling is done about national sentiment toward the "Tea Party", you don't think this kind of thing has an effect?

It doesn't matter what Ross or ABC might now retract. The fact remains that a supposedly respectable institutional organ of American journalism has propagated to the American people the impression that a Tea Partier-- just by virtue of being a Tea Partier-- is likely, apt, plausible, and to be suspected of the most horrible of acts.

It's worth revisiting, now, the MSM response to Loughner/ Gifford. I would like to have those links to hand. In each case, and all the more so in conjunction with the present case, what the MSM has done-- induced only by political bias-- is absolutely despicable.

shiloh said...

Nixon used tv to say he wasn't a crook lol.

Coincidentally, Ford used tv to say our longgg national nightmare is/was over after he pardoned Nixon.

And so it goes as our long national nightmare continues.

>

Cue the conservative robotic, ad nauseam Obama snark ...

Fen said...

Garage: The only smears you seem to take exception to are against Republicans. It is a shirts against skins world we live in.

Standard Libtard Dynamics: Garage must pretend everyone is a douchebag just justify his behaving like one.

Fen said...

I'll give you Brian Ross, obviously. But he did retract and apologize fairly quickly at least.

He was ordered to.

So he could keep his job.

So he can do it again next time there is a Jared Loughner or Trayvon Martin.

Michael K said...

"garage, can you think of any smears against Democrats propagated by the MSM in living memory?

Particularly smears having to do with a massacre."

I think the last one was the conspiracy theory that Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor in advance.

Can't think of any since then. I;m sure garage has a list.

PatCA said...

Common sense and standards do exist. Look up Laura's Law. But we use neither common sense or the law that exists because we will be used by "advocates."

So, with that I'll sign off.

a psychiatrist who learned from veterans said...

@bagoh20 Well President Kennedy didn't comment on Charles Whitman, the guy who killed was it 12 people from the Tower in Austin. By the way he'd seen a psychiatrist at the Student Health Center who had the all time dumbest assessment of somebody or public pronouncement by a psychiatrist. It beats out the comment from Wisconsin that the Professor brought out last week and that statement had to be read to be imagined. But I digress. It's a national story; everybody following anything today has reacted to it. Obama had a nice statement which, for me, reminded me that we, including him, are all Americans. Personally I thought that Romney's statement was better, 'remember how much we love one another,' because the action was so narcissistic, and the statement emphasized not going there where the example of the shooter led. But back to Kennedy, back then it was maybe, WTF, these things hadn't seem to happen, Texas, maybe it's Texas?, it's too aberrant to try for a response.

wyo sis said...

Pat
I get it. I do. But you can't lock up people for what they might do. You have to have a better reason than that.

jr565 said...

traditional guy wrote:
He looked for answers in Fantasy Delusions (a/k/a super heroes) and was won over by the super evil force portrayed in the villain in Dark Knight Rises. He became that force.Whether Holmes was OWS or Democrat or Republican is not the point.


Not to delve into the mind of a crazy person, but who he identifies with might suggest his leanings. The Joker was an anarchist, most republicans are considered authoritarian by most liberals. So, a conservative would hardly identify with The Joker. That would suggest he's either a liberal or a libertarian (yes, some libertarianism is two steps shy of anarchism).
Then again, he most likely is schizophrenic or has some mental defect, so thinking there is a clear line between who he identifies with and rationality may be an assumption that shouldn't even be addressed. Trying to figure out why this guy did this may be like figuring out why Son of Sam thought his dog was telling him to kill.

Snakeman said...

The shooter was obviously a reptile in that he killed in cold blood and ruined everyone's party, killing kids and children and way too many people.
banning guns won't help as shooting people is already illegal and if someone wants to break the law this way, they won't hesitate to get an illegal gun.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 235 of 235   Newer› Newest»