Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Saturday, April 7, 2012

Sharpton headed to Oklahoma? Three Blacks killed in Tulsa; Police searching for White Male

If there is one thing that might turn Al Sharpton's attention away from the Trayvon Martin shooting and on to something else, this very well could be it.

From KJCT 8, via Sipsey Street:
Three people were killed and two were injured Friday in four shootings in north Tulsa, Okla., and police are searching for a lone suspected gunman, they said.

Tulsa police spokesman Capt. Jonathan Brooks said investigators were looking into whether the shootings may have been possible hate crimes.

"We're not absolutely certain, but a hate crime is a possibility. And we'll go with where the investigation leads us," he said.

All of the victims are black. The suspected shooter is a white male and is believed to be traveling in a white truck, said Brooks.
Tragically, this is the kind of thing that could give nefarious opportunists their Kristallnacht moment.

Sipsey Street's Vanderboegh relays an interesting Neo-Nazi connection to Tulsa via a man named Dennis Mahon - a guy McVeigh used to run with.

CNN has video report. The man you hear being interviewed is Jack Henderson of the Tulsa City Council:

Reuters reports on Zimmerman taking voice stress test; all but neglects that he passed it

The Trayvon Martin case has morphed from a story about a black youth being murdered in cold blood by an older white male into an all-out referendum on the mainstream media for its gross and collective misconduct. Now we've learned that George Zimmerman was given a voice stress test shortly after the shooting. However, if you read the Reuters article written by Stephanie Rabiner, the story is handled with egregious bias. Though it's not on the same level as what happened with the selective editing of Zimmerman's 911 call at NBC, it's clearly in the same spirit.

Here is the Reuters headline:

Naturally, after reading the headline, your next question would be, "Well, did he pass it?"

Here is what Rabiner reported in the next two paragraphs:
Did you know that, on the night of Trayvon Martin's death, Sanford police gave George Zimmerman a voice stress test?

They did, and the results probably contributed to his release.
In Journalism, there is a commonly understood rule (though Reuters seems more interested in avoiding it when following that rule conflicts with their agenda). It says that the most important news item is in the headline, with the first paragraph picking up on the headline and giving you the most important detail not communicated by the headline. It can be argued that there are three important aspects to this particular story. The first is that Zimmerman was issued a voice stress test; the second is the results; and the third is the viability of the test itself.

Rabiner avoided mentioning the results in the headline as well as in the very first paragraph. In fact, the first paragraph is completely irrelevant to the story! By the time she even gets to the issue of the results, she does so while implying that the police relied on those results when making the decision not to arrest Zimmerman.

The article then goes on to essentially discredit the voice stress test by citing a Justice Department study that says it's virtually useless:
Expert opinion is mixed, but a study commissioned by the Justice Department suggests that a voice stress test is "no better than flipping a coin."
Uh, would that be the racially biased Eric Holder-led Justice Department? Wow. Does anyone think that would be in there if Zimmerman had failed the test?

Now, go back to the beginning of the article where it says that police may have released Zimmerman based, in part, on his passing the test. Is this not a slap at the Sanford police for being so incompetent as to release Zimmerman based on a discredited test? Reuters is editorializing with these subtle inferences and is basically doing what NBC was caught doing, though in a more nuanced way.

Again, the top two relevant facts about this story are Zimmerman taking the test and Zimmerman passing the test. Rabiner doesn't mention the results until the last paragraph and only after she has attempted to discredit the viability of the test itself:
George Zimmerman's voice stress test came out clean, according to attorney Hal Uhrig. If the Sanford Police Department is willing to spend more than $10,000 on the product, then it probably trusts its results. And those results probably corroborated what officers initially saw at the scene.
Reuters knows that the least read paragraph of any story is the last one. That's why it placed the most relevant, fair paragraph penned by Rabiner at the very end of the story.

Here is how a headline and first paragraph might look if the story was written by an objective news source:
Zimmerman reportedly passed Voice Stress Test administered by Police

The attorney for George Zimmerman says that his client passed a voice stress test administered by police on the night of Trayvon Martin's death but the viability of such a test is a subject of debate.
Every important aspect to the story is covered, no sides are taken, and the reader may or may not decide to read further.

Unfortunately, the firing of a "seasoned producer" at NBC hasn't done much for the toxic mainstream media culture. It's like removing one fire ant from a pile.

Got Amdro?

h/t GWP

'Seasoned producer' fired by NBC over Zimmerman 911 edit; will not release name

The good news is that someone was fired at NBC news over the blatantly irresponsible decision to selectively edit the recording of George Zimmerman's 911 call to make him appear racist. The bad news is that NBC is refusing to name the person (something tells me we'll find out) and this act alone doesn't do anything about the insidiously dishonest and corrupt culture that exists within the mainstream media; it only further validates what clear-thinking people already know.

Via the New York Times:
NBC News has fired a producer who was involved in the production of a misleading segment about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida.

The person was fired on Thursday, according to two people with direct knowledge of the disciplinary action who declined to be identified discussing internal company matters. They also declined to name the fired producer. A spokeswoman for NBC News declined to comment.

The action came in the wake of an internal investigation by NBC News into the production of the segment, which strung together audio clips in such a way that made George Zimmerman’s shooting of Mr. Martin sound racially motivated. Ever since the Feb. 26 shooting, there has been a continuing debate about whether race was a factor in the incident.

The segment in question was shown on the “Today” show on March 27. It included audio of Mr. Zimmerman saying, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”

But Mr. Zimmerman’s comments had been taken grossly out of context by NBC. On the phone with a 911 dispatcher, he actually said of Mr. Martin, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” Then the dispatcher asked, “O.K., and this guy — is he white, black or Hispanic?” Only then did Mr. Zimmerman say, “He looks black.”
This is a perfect example of it not being ok to yell, "FIRE" in a crowded theater. It is equivalent to pouring gasoline on an already growing fire and calling attention to it while blaming someone else. It is nothing short of despicable.

The New York Times piece ends thusly:
The people with direct knowledge of the firing characterized the misleading edit as a mistake, not a purposeful act.
To that I have one question: If NewsBusters hadn't discovered the edit and someone at NBC had, would the same disciplinary actions have taken place?

Let me answer that: NO

I already posted this video once, last week, but in light of these revelations, I thought it would be worth posting again. It is 20 years old but explains quite a bit about what we're seeing in the media. Al Sharpton explains how he manipulates the media but pay particularly close attention to his former colleague, Perry McKinnon at the 4:30 mark about the antics of Sharpton being very dangerous.

Via Breitbart:

White House tells Darrell Issa to go pound sand - will not let Kevin O'Reilly talk

This is a follow-up post to one from yesterday, about the White House's failure to meet the deadline for a request from Rep. Darrell Issa and Sen. Charles Grassley to speak with former White House employee, Kevin O'Reilly. The Oversight Committee wants to talk with O'Reilly - who is currently working in Iraq - about his conversations with former ATF SAC William Newell when he was a member of the National Security Staff (NSS) The April 4th deadline came and went but the White House actually did respond on April 5th and invoked Executive Privilege.

Here is the relevant excerpt from the letter sent to Issa and Grassley on behalf of the White House:
In light of the important Executive Branch confidentiality interests and institutional prerogatives implicated by your request, including those of NSS, and in the absence of any evidence that suggests that Mr. O'Reilly had any involvement in "Operation Fast and Furious" or was aware of the existence of any inappropriate investigative tactics, there is an insufficient basis to support the request to interview Mr. O'Reilly.
Really? Before agreeing or disagreeing, check out this exchange between Oversight Committee member, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and Newell from July 26, 2011 and then re-read that excerpt from the White House letter again.

For more on the White House's refusal to allow the Oversight Committee to interview O'Reilly, committee member Jason Chaffetz interviewed with Fox News Channel's Megyn Kelly. The long and short of this is the White House really has no right to invoke this privilege. There is no legal basis for it, which implicates the administration in the cover-up.

Via Daily Caller:
Utah Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz told the Fox News Channel’s Megyn Kelly on Friday that although a key White House witness in the ill-fated Operation Fast and Furious gun-walking program is willing to testify about what he knows, the Obama administration won’t let him appear before Congress.

White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler sent a letter Thursday to Republican lawmakers Rep. Darrell Issa and Sen. Chuck Grassley, refusing their request to speak with Kevin O’Reilly, a former National Security staff member whose emails place him in the middle of the unfolding scandal. Issa and Grassley had written to Ruemmler on March 28, asking the White House to step aside and let O’Reilly talk to investigators.
Here is video of the exchange between Kelly and Chaffetz:

Here is a copy of the letter from White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler to Issa and Grassley:

Apr-05-2012 WH Counsel reply on O'Reilly Interview
Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive