The media are absolutely working together to push specific political viewpoints. This specific manifesto being blocked fits perfectly with the openly stated political goals of the majority of media in the US.

They are released very quickly if they fit the desired political narrative, just look at the buffalo shooter and how quickly every major news article dove into his manifesto as soon as they got their hands on it. If and when it can be used to promote a specific view it is released, if it doesn’t promote the correct view it sits for a while until they can figure out how to spin it or the hype dies down and if it hurts the desired view it is blocked like this one.

I would also suggest that you never speak or write any of these assholes’ real names. The notoriety is what they seek and every time a stranger mentions them by name they get their wish.

How is this different from any other shooting where there is a manifesto left behind? This is nothing new and it is very common that they are released very shortly after the shooting.

This law doesn’t make those places gun free, it just makes it so that only criminals are armed in those places.

Cool, so your entire post was calling out the bot for not including a word that doesn’t appear anywhere in the article and isn’t correct for describing what is stated in the article. Got it. Not really sure what you’re getting at here, are you mad at the bot for not lying to make it fit your views on the conflict? 300 isn’t the “unintended” figure, it is the total figure. It’s also an average for a wildly varying number across the last several months. Any way you look at it though it doesn’t represent only “unintended” deaths because that is literally not what the article says.

Yeah, the article doesn’t specify 300 civilian deaths, it’s all encompassing. Casualties also includes injuries, not just deaths.

Where does it say 300 “unintended” casualties a day? The only reference I can find in the article is an average of 300 a day total.