“Why do you feel threatened? What are you afraid of? Why can’t you answer my questions?”
Those are rhetorical questions that leftwing activists routinely use to harass people they consider the enemy. Only this particular leftwing activist was an employee of ABC News, harassing an older man at last Sunday’s protest against the Ground Zero Mosque. The older man was holding a sign saying, “No Sharia here.” The ABC News “journalist” was seeking to provoke an incident that he could use as “news” of “intolerance.” (Note that lefties are the most intolerant people you’ll ever find, this side of Mecca. For them, “tolerance” means simply supporting the rights of them and their political allies, and suppressing their enemies’ rights.)
The ABC activist was inches away from the older man, practically touching his elbow.
The Traditional Values Coalition’s Andrea Laffety, who had just given a speech, writes,
When I challenged the man in the black shirt, asking him to tell me what media outlet he worked for, he refused to answer. He walked away.
But there was cameraman was standing nearby, watching the scene play out. When I asked, he said he worked for ABC News. I then asked if the man in the black shirt was with him. The ABC cameraman said, ‘yes.’”…
Clearly, the ABC employee’s role at the rally was to provoke a confrontation with participants so ABC News cameras could record it and then use the footage. The ABC employee was literally making news.
2 comments:
That's an interesting use of the term 'agent provacateuer.' To me at least. My understanding of the term is that it is a member of one political faction or movement pretending to be a member of another faction and in that pretend role committing acts or doing something or saying something to provoke a reaction against the group he's pretending to be part of.
And I see from the Wik (no cheating, thank you very much), that I'm right.
Here you are stretching that initial definition to say that ABC news itself is, perhaps, a subsection of a larger political faction --and I must say, I don't disagree with that take as far as it goes. But where I have a problem, is that the element of him pretending to be part of the anti-mosque/pro normal america faction is not present. You follow me?
I'm not defending the guy, I'm just saying he's a different kind of beast than an agent provocateuer.
Or maybe he's a special type of agent provocateuer --pretending to be part of an 'objective' profession with a sort of fiduciary duty to the nation, but really with a leftist ideological agenda, i.e. par for the course for major media these days. I'm suggesting we need a new term.
Hey, by the way, I wish you could tell me more about the camera man; he sounds like a regular, normal, no BS guy. I wonder how long he'll keep his job?
You're right. Mea culpa.
If I knew anything about the cameraman, I would keep it to myself. My impresion was the same as yours, which is why I hadn't quoted in my item something Lafferty had written: "The ABC cameraman also witnessed his colleague’s aggressive behavior–and did nothing to stop him."
The camerman is a professional, while the guy in the pictures is what I call a political. He's protected and privileged.
Post a Comment