Washington Post Trashes Two American Heroes Who Stopped a Mass Shooter


American Gun News highlighted a Washington Post — WaPo — article that brings to light the damaging propaganda coming from a dishonest mainstream newspaper, especially when it comes to our 2nd Amendment. As American Gun News writes, WaPo hates American heroes, and that is not hyperbole on their part.

WaPo, a popular propaganda rag, took the story of two heroes who stopped a mass shooter in Oklahoma and suggested it was a story of three killers.

The newspaper falsely claims they are an impartial mainstream news outlet while, in reality, they are propagandizing stories to fit in line with their agenda. That’s what they did in the case of the two heroes, Carlos Nazario and Bryan Whittle. The two men coordinated an attack on a gunman who walked into a diner in Oklahoma City shooting the trapped employees and patrons.

Nazario and Whittle never met each other before but quickly and easily coordinated their attack on the gunman, wounding him, stopping him after he already shot three innocent people. The gunman later died from his wounds.

All three gunshot victims survived thanks to these two heroes with guns. Their actions were legal and heroic in every state in the union.

In comes The Washington Post! WaPo, irrational in their hatred of guns, saw this as an unnecessary shooting of a gunman who died needlessly because the two heroes didn’t wait for police.


The title of the article is “There Were Three Shooters”. As disgraceful as that is, the story gets worse, far worse. The next line, the tagline, read “Two Oklahoma citizens killed an active shooter, and it’s not as simple as it sounds.”

That is a lie. It was simple, as simple as it sounds. The article falsely claims the police came within one minute and the heroes acted needlessly. That too is a lie. Police didn’t arrive in a minute.

The proof that the two heroes acted needfully is in the fact that they took the gunman down before the police were on the scene. It would not have taken the killer very long to shoot more people. They shot three before these two men got their guns out.

The article then says something American Gun News aptly describes as “unforgivable”. It claims that the shooter didn’t deserve to die because none of his victims died.

The Post seems to think that a mass shooter who gets foiled in his attempt to kill as many people as possible isn’t as bad as a murderer who is actually successful. The Post says that the shooter’s crimes did not warrant the death penalty, thus the true crime in all of this was that his life was cut short by vigilantes, American Gun News writes.

The moral equivalence is not unusual for extremists with an agenda who are willing to manipulate the populace to their will. It’s still criminally unacceptable for a newspaper claiming objectivity.

American Gun News concludes:

This is the most insidious and dangerous level of propaganda. The left hates guns and the autonomy they provide so much that they will insinuate that saving lives is somehow worse than being a mass shooter.

Anger. Outrage. None of it is enough. There are two courses to take. First, we must make sure the Washington Post never receives another dime of revenue ever again. If you think this is the worst they can do, you don’t understand the climate of the situation.

Second, we have to stay active. Above all, don’t allow these charlatans to sway the impending elections. Vote in 2nd Amendment supporters and keep America safe. If we do any less, we hand control of our country over to these monsters.

They are correct. The left is coming for our 2nd Amendment in every way they can. Lying and manipulation is what our so-called mainstream media now does routinely. If we give up our right to self-defense, we will be helpless before these irrational foes.

The title of the article is “There Were Three Shooters.”

h/t Jon Thompson




0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

1 Comment
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tim Fuller
Tim Fuller
5 years ago

The 2nd Amendment rights should never be used to safeguard WaPo’s 1st Amendment rights.