International Cat Speculators Since 2006

Posts tagged ‘Covington Catholic high school’

Covington report out

It’s a short read, 4 pages. It deals with the points quickly and briefly.

I’m sure the apologies will now flood in. /sarc

More on Covington

We now know more than enough to know that Nathan Philips is not trustworthy.

This TimCast video actually isn’t about Covintongate. It was posted a few days earlier. He talks about how formerly free-speech organisations on the left are now openly advocating censorship.

But boy is the headline on point.

Finally, this is an excellent piece from the National Review, and it was quoted extensively in Instapundit today.

The Covington fiasco has proved to be a clarifying moment. And here is what has been made clear: Much of the American media is no longer engaged in journalism. It is engaged in opposition research and in what is sometimes known among political operatives as “black p.r.”—the sinister twin of ordinary public relations. As Joy Behar, as profoundly dim and tedious a person as American public life has to offer, forthrightly confessed: The hysteria and outright dishonesty surrounding the Covington students had nothing to do with them. It has to do with narrowly partisan, selfish, deeply stupid, entirely unpatriotic, childish, foot-stamping, fingers-in-the-ears, weeping, cooties-loathing, teary-eyed, tremulous, quavering, pansified, gormless, deceitful, dishonorable, and cynical politics of the lowest kind — the politics of Us and Them.

When Rush Limbaugh said he hoped Obama failed, the left when nuts. Now, they try to destroy anyone who isn’t saying the exact same thing.

And the fact that a couple of children in MAGA hats engaged in boorish behavior — which isn’t even a fact, as it turns out, but a lie constructed and wholesaled with malice aforethought — wouldn’t have told us one damn thing about Donald J. Trump, his administration, or his political supporters at large. The fact that we had a momentary national moral crisis over the (as is turns out, fictitious) actions of a couple of nobody teenagers is all the evidence anybody needs of the fundamentally hysterical and unserious times in which we live. In a sane world, nobody cares about whether a 16-year-old boy somewhere . . . smirked.

The fact that anyone ever did is crazy. The fact that I am still encountering people who think this outrage is even slightly justified is flat-out insane. It’s been a week, we know the initial outrage was based on a lie. But somehow it’s a lie people want to believe is true, even if it’s taking the side of crazy homophobic nutcase adults and against kids.

Everybody who has pretended like that smirk tells us something serious about the state of the world is a liar and a fraud. I don’t mean the people who were legitimately taken in by the deceit — especially those who have had the honor and self-respect to admit their errors and correct them — but those who willfully persist in the lie. […] I’m talking about you, editors of the New York Times. You sorry specimens are poor excuses for journalists, which, of course, we already knew. What’s more relevant here is that you are bad citizens. Trafficking in lies and distortions because you think the guy in the White House is kind of gross is unworthy of adults with responsible positions in a free society that depends on honest and functional institutions.

I like his style here. He’s abusing people, because they’re bad people. Guilty adults, who did something wrong. Something they should have known was wrong. Something that undermines the very freedom the west depends on, because if your information is tainted, how can your vote be properly informed? Heck, they’ll admit lecture on and on that fake news does this, but when they’re caught, where’s the consequences? There should be mass firings over this gross breach of ethics, where are they?

As some of you may recall, I wrote a little book called The Case against Trump. I didn’t think much of him in 2016. I don’t think much of him now. But we aren’t three tweets away from the Holocaust. Nobody seriously believes that we are, unless they are insane. Sane people who insist that the United States in 2019 is something like Germany in the 1930s are liars. They don’t really believe it. They have an investment in hysteria.

This is something that’s easy to forget. These people who talk about the end of democracy coming from Trump don’t in any way act like they’re going to be arrested for opposing him. They know, but they prefer to hyperventilate about Nazis. And they still do it months later, when Trump’s record is well established as someone who hasn’t done any of the things they were scared of.

Of course he’s done a bunch of things they disagree with. Because when Obama did those things, that as different, right?

We all have our jobs to do in a republic. Newspaper reporters are supposed to cover what’s going on in the world. I don’t know what you call people who cover what’s going on on Twitter. I have a few ideas, but I don’t think I can print them here.

Back in the day, these stupid rumours would have run into a solid firewall when they arrived at the newsroom door.

Now, they’re quickly grabbed and amplified. And we all lose as a result.

My own suspicion is that this moment of mass hysteria, like other hysterias before it, eventually must collapse under the weight of its own tediousness. But I cannot say with any confidence that I expect that to happen soon. And it will not happen at all until Americans start deciding to take on the difficult responsibilities of citizenship, which starts with acting like a goddamned grownup. Nicholas Sandmann is a 16-year-old kid — but the people who made this empty episode into a national crisis are not. They are grown adults, and answerable for their actions.

I’d love to see a fundraiser for legal action on this one. I think I’d donate a couple of hundred bucks, and encourage everyone I know to do the same. I sincerely hope that if they do, it raises hundreds of millions. Because if the media wont act ethically, they need to face the consequences.

And anyone who thinks this was ethical needs their head seen to.

Media – WE are the victims here


Just in case all that’s happened has passed you by, and you still didn’t think that the media does it’s job, Kirsten Powers is here to tell you that they are real victims of all this.


Update: you can always tell when the media doesn’t like the story.

Update 2: play stupid games win stupid prizes.

Update 3:

Media to receive lesson 2?

I’ve said to a lot of people, that the media really should have learned something from Trump’s election. Here’s a guy they told us was the devil incarnate, and he still was elected by a landslide in the electoral college. (Yes, I know about the popular vote,  I also know what that means – bupkis.)

See, over the years the bias of the media has become more and more apparent. You had the media refusing to report on Bill Clinton’s ill-doings until they were forced to. Even today, his impeachment is rarely mentioned, and it’s usually done so in terms of the Republicans being “out-to-get” him. He’s losing steam now, but only because in the #MeToo error (not a typo), people are realising that you just can’t back an accused rapist, (particularly when the victim went to the police so quickly after the crime). No, the media loved Bill Clinton.

Then you had them behind GWB after 9/11 until the left turned on him then he was literally Hitler. So much so that by the time of the 2004 election, most people could see that the media was clearly in the tank for Kerry, and those that thought otherwise probably did so because they thought that not calling Bush Hitler life on air was “helping him”.


Then we have the Obama years, when the media just fawned over Obama, even as everything fell apart. The one big example that comes to mind is the Tea Party. The media ignored massive conservcative protests until it became embarassing. They then decided that they would just call the protests racist, and even pretended they were some sort of conspiracy of nutcases and the ultra-rich Koch brothers:

Swinging left, there has been a rhetorical flight of several journo intellectuals into conspiracy, with Jane Mayer in the New Yorkerascribing the Tea Party movement’s motives and machinations to the moneyed interests of the Koch brothers, while Matt Taibbi goes even further in the October 15 issue of Rolling Stone, and claims that the Tea Party movement is being stoked by Goldman Sachs, BP, and an “assortment of nativist freaks, village idiots and Internet Hitlers,” who are all infected by the GOP with “incoherent resentment.”

On these accounts, Tea Partyism is, at best, an expression of bad faith in genuine democracy; it cannot be honestly held because it is either bought or the product of dementia.

The results? Predictable.

If journalists follow a journalistic theory of democracy, shouldn’t they be at least mildly jazzed by the Tea Party as political engagement and civic vitality of the Town Hall interrogations of politicians over health care reform?

But one doesn’t really get the feeling that they are – or that they get why people might be jazzed holding what they see as truth up to power. And this is something not entirely explicable by some of the fringe views held by Tea Partiers. Has it been that, for far too long, journalists have confused their democratic role with a Democratic role; the democratization of knowledge with the Democratization of knowledge?

As a new Gallup Poll shows, the answer for a large segment of the American public is ‘hell, yes’: 57 percent say they “have little or no trust in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly,” while 48 percent say the media are “too liberal.”

Emphasis mine.

The fact is, I can remember a single month – if that – when Obama was really suffering in the media. And that was because one of the 3 things that was going on was the fact that he’d had law enforcement go after a journalist.

Just in case you still don’t get the point, here’s some satire from The Onion, which is openly liberal mind you.

WASHINGTON—More than a week after President Barack Obama’s cold-blooded killing of a local couple, members of the American news media admitted Tuesday that they were still trying to find the best angle for covering the gruesome crime.

“I know there’s a story in there somewhere,” said Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, referring to Obama’s home invasion and execution-style slaying of Jeff and Sue Finowicz on Apr. 8. “Right now though, it’s probably best to just sit back and wait for more information to come in. After all, the only thing we know for sure is that our president senselessly murdered two unsuspecting Americans without emotion or hesitation.”

Added Meacham, “It’s not so cut and dried.”

This was most stark during election coverage. This is from 2008.

But nothing, nothing I’ve seen has matched the media bias on display in the current presidential campaign.

Republicans are justifiably foaming at the mouth over the sheer one-sidedness of the press coverage of the two candidates and their running mates. But in the last few days, even Democrats, who have been gloating over the pass — no, make that shameless support — they’ve gotten from the press, are starting to get uncomfortable as they realize that no one wins in the long run when we don’t have a free and fair press.

I was one of the first people in the traditional media to call for the firing of Dan Rather — not because of his phony story, but because he refused to admit his mistake — but, bless him, even Gunga Dan thinks the media is one-sided in this election.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not one of those people who think the media has been too hard on, say, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin, by rushing reportorial SWAT teams to her home state of Alaska to rifle through her garbage. This is the big leagues, and if she wants to suit up and take the field, then Gov. Palin better be ready to play.

No, what I object to (and I think most other Americans do as well) is the lack of equivalent hardball coverage of the other side — or worse, actively serving as attack dogs for the presidential ticket of Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Joe Biden, D-Del.

If the current polls are correct, we are about to elect as president of the United States a man who is essentially a cipher, who has left almost no paper trail, seems to have few friends (that at least will talk) and has entire years missing out of his biography.

I’d forgotten about Sarah Palin. Well, she hasn’t done herself any favours in the meantime, but back then she was the country’s most popular governer. In spite of her top level experience, and Obama’s lack thereof, she was derided as not ready for… the vice presidency. Because McCain was about to die, don’t  you know?

Needless to say, people noticed this stuff. And for all that happened to elect Trump, his grasping the anger about the media’s unashamed one-sided playing the field was one of his most masterful strokes.

But to hear the media and the left (but I repeat myself) talk about it, you’d think Trump invented the idea of being angry at the media.

Let me quote the above source again. Remember, this is 2008.

The traditional media are playing a very, very dangerous game — with their readers, with the Constitution and with their own fates.

The sheer bias in the print and television coverage of this election campaign is not just bewildering, but appalling. And over the last few months I’ve found myself slowly moving from shaking my head at the obvious one-sided reporting, to actually shouting at the screen of my television and my laptop computer.

But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I’ve begun — for the first time in my adult life — to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was “a writer,” because I couldn’t bring myself to admit to a stranger that I’m a journalist.

Remember, this is the guy who though the Sarah Palin pile-on was justified. And he’s saying that the press are playing very, very dangerous game with the country. In 2008. 

Did the press learn from this? No.

And that’s why we got Trump.

To me, Trump was a big lesson for the media. Why?

Yet again, Democrats breathlessly declare the Republican candidate a Nazi — and wonder why no one is listening.

The Republican nominee for president is a racist, sexist threat to American democracy — and this time, we really mean it.

In a nutshell, this is the Democratic argument against Donald Trump. In a wild, topsy-turvy political year, it is the one exceedingly familiar piece of the political landscape — because it is a version of the argument the Left makes against every Republican nominee.

That this line of attack is so shopworn, just when Democrats think we need it most, has led to self-reflection and regret from one of the harshest commentators on the left. The HBO host Bill Maher said the other day that “liberals made a big mistake” when they attacked George W. Bush “like he was the end of the world,” and did the same thing to Mitt Romney and John McCain.

Maher himself was a prime offender, with no hesitation about resorting to Nazi analogies (he compared Romney’s aides to Adolf Hitler’s dead-end loyalists, and Laura Bush to Hitler’s dog).

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been touring the country saying that Trump isn’t like past Republican nominees, even though they were attacked in exactly the same terms.

That’s right. The media found someone they were genuinely(ish) worried about… and discovered that they’d already described all the previous republican candidates that way.

I personally believe that the media have literally trained the right to see the “He’s a Nazi!!!” cries as the mark of a good republican candidate. 

And by that measure, Trump was the best candidate the GOP had ever put up. So he was elected.

The Trump Lesson

At this point the media should have realised their mistake. Some did. For about 5 seconds. But I don’t need to remind you what we’ve seen since – it’s been turned up to 11. It’s so bad that in effect, the media have openly colluded with Russia in undermining the USA.

Yes, you read that right. The media have colluded with the Russian agenda of de-stabilising the United States. But that’s not really the point I’m going for here.

The point is what should have happened.

What should have happened is that the press stopped the hyperbole. Stop reporting bias, and aggressively counter it. Stop printing opinion as fact. Stop putting up panels of people who are all on one side with maybe one guy on the other. (And of for the love of mike, call the police immediately if some big burly guy starts threatening the Jewish guy live on air. Nothing says “untrustworthy media” like seeing someone committing a crime openly on live TV and no one bats an eyelid.)

In short, focus on integrity. The facts and nothing but the facts. Do it calmly. Don’t pretend that the right are all extremists, and don’t pretend that “anti-“fascist thugs roaming the street beating people up are not terrorists.

Oh, who am I kidding. We all know this didn’t happen. We’ve seen the Russian investigation hysteria, and the hysteria over Brett Kavanaugh.

Remember that? The time when the Democrats shows everyone they’d say anything, do anything, slander a guy who had a well-documented history of zero scandals, to stop him being appointed to the Supreme Court. And the media enthusiastically played along, with as little as 8% of coverage being dedicated to Kavanaugh’s refutation of the suspect allegations.

And they are still at it.

Unfortunately, when it came to the unproven allegations against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, they could only feel pain for Kavanaugh’s “very credible” accusers. No one was invited on CNN to express the view that Kavanaugh’s accusers weren’t convincing in their tales of teenage debauchery, and that Kavanaugh was smeared with false charges. The “Facts First” network wasn’t really nailing down the facts on this one.

And so we arrive at today.

At the kid who smiled when attacked. The kids who were abused, and did their school chant to drown it out. The kids who were just kids, and (rightly) exited a tense situation knowing they’d not done the wrong thing, knowing they had not been taunted into making a mistake… and then discovered that didn’t matter. In spite of all their self-control, in spite of all the abuse they put up with, in spite of the horrible things said to them, they were cast as evil by a social media mob, which set about destroying them. and the media was an active, eager participant.

All because that kid was white, and wearing the president’s slogan.


Oh, and that graphic is from this morning. Literally days after we know what really happened. I initially said the truth stopped the media, but the truth is, they really still have not stopped.

This has been one of the worst cases of media malpractice in living memory. And the victims are kids!

Well, those kids are fighting back.

Robert Barnes, the lawyer representing the Covington Catholic High School kids who were smeared by the media, is warning reporters, celebrities, and others with large media platforms that they have until Friday to correct the record, or they will be sued.

Because of their sloppy reporting of what transpired in Washington, D.C., when two groups of protesters confronted a group of Catholic high school students who were waiting to catch a bus last Friday, the teens and their families have become the subjects of ongoing threats and harassment from a hateful online outrage mob.

On Fox and Friends Wednesday morning, Barnes, who is representing the families at no cost, explained that because the kids are private citizens and minors, anything someone says about them that is false can be libel, according to the law. Rather than proving malice, “all you have to prove is negligence,” he said.

So a lot of these journalists have been saying false statements about these kids, false statements about the kids that were at the Lincoln Memorial, false statements about kids that were in various photographs related to the school, slurring and libeling the entire school and all the alumni for the school, and all you have to prove is they were negligent in doing so and by this standpoint, by this point in time, it is clear that anyone who continues to lie and libel about these kids has done so illegally and can be sued for it.

Reading that report, it’s clear that this is war. The dogs are let loose. They are not going to let the magnitude of the wrong stop them, and boy does this sound aggressive.

Because what happened was wrong. It was wrong on so many levels. It’s the perfect case for a serious response, and a serious response has been a long time coming.

It’s not the first time this has been tried. Sarah Palin went after the New York Times, who slandered her on their pages, but got pushed back because the NYT argued (And I swear I’m not making this up) that they didn’t read their own newspaper. And outside that, Palin is manifestly a public person. Bit hard to argue that with some random kid from a catholic school in Kentucky.

Well, I wish them all the best in the fight. The media desperately need a slap down, and this has a chance of delivering that. From what I’ve seen, a lot of people will be behind this. I don’t usually watch Ben Shapiro live, but I happened to see him during breakfast earlier this week. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him so angry. Ever.

I really recommend watching it, because there’s so much here that I have not even touched on – like the total lack of coverage of the March for Life.

Trump’s election was the first really big slap down of the media and their increasingly open partisanship.

This has an excellent chance of being lesson 2. They have my support, 100%

Covington-gate Videos and some more thoughts

Here’s a pretty good summary video of the whole situation from a YouTuber called Independent Man. Pretty much what I’d want to make though I think it needs a slightly better conclusion – but that’s a minor grumble. He does a good job of showing what happened and how ridiculous this is.

Sargon of Akkad also has a great video, where he mocks the mob by pretending to take them seriously.

There’s a lot of stuff about this that bothers me.

They were smiling. That’s demonstrably true. A lot of people fell for the claim that they they were mocking him. That doesn’t seem to be true, but there were a lot of people there, for over an hour, so probably, at some point, at least a few were derisive of him. And let’s face it, groups of bored schoolkids (male or female) are not known for their good manners.

But it’s quite another thing to look at these kids and decide you know what they’ve been taught all their lives, what attitudes they have towards other races, and on those grounds, they should die.

On the way home I was thinking about this compared to the last thing I really got exercised about – George Zimmerman’s trial. While that was actually more one-sided than this, one thing was always in no doubt – George Zimmerman did kill Trayvon Martin. The only real question was, was it murder or self-defense.

But in this case, the initial video focused on a smiling kid and a grown man beating a drum. That’s where we started from. Then, a whole lot of people injected their biases and expectations into that and made the conclusion that the children had done wrong.

As I said above, that’s not a totally outlandish conclusion. The kids might well have been misbehaving.


But, they’re kids!
They don’t deserve to be murdered.
They don’t deserve to be derided as “KKK” and portrayed in white hoods.
They don’t deserve to be so scared to go to school that their school can’t open.
They don’t deserve to have their school attacked.
They don’t deserve to be put in a wood chipper.
They don’t deserve any of that. Even if they bullied him!
At worst, at the absolute worst, assuming all that was said about the video was true (behaviour-wise, not belief-wise) they should have been sat down in a classroom, received a stern lecture about behaving in public, told to write a letter of apology to the man they bullied, and maybe some unpleasant chores for a while. Maybe the class could have visited an Indian cultural center of some sort, and taught about that culture.
But death? Really? Really? 
I mean, why does anyone even care about this at all? In edges any protest, you’re going to have people disagreeing. It happens all the time. It’s not even a  local news story let alone a national, or global one. “Small argument breaks out after protest” – who cares?
We used to think we we going forward in our culture. I think this incident has put paid to that idea.  There’s been others of course, but this example is so start, I hope people sit up and take notice.
But they won’t.
P.S. And just for super-duper irony points, this death-threats-against-the-guy-who-didn’t-respond thing happened on Martin Luther King jr day.
You can’t make this stuff up.

No Credible Media

I don’t know what to call this, but I’ll start with the title “No Credible Media”, because it seems to me that the events of this week have really shot any remaining pretense of credibility on the part of the non-conservative media.

But the manner in which they’ve done it is jaw-dropping. Let’s review.

…but before that, why not go back a step. Because it hasn’t been a good few days.

First, the media gushed over the new Gillette ad… while everyone else knows full well that they just slashed their market share.

Then, Buzzfeed told a big lie to say that Trump was going down (isn’t he always?) and the rest of the media followed suit. Only, this time they got called out.


And in between we had the usual nonsense such as this and this.

Then we arrived at the March for Life.

Naturally, it wasn’t covered. It’s a massive march that happens every year, and you never, ever read about it in the media or see it on the news. And frankly in NZ, that’s fine – it’s a US story. But when it’s not even reported in the USA where it happened and you start to see the problem.

But that wasn’t enough, oh no.

Now we have the truly outrageous, horrible story of what Kant called radical evil. A white, male, Catholic teen who had been to the pro-life march and was wearing a MAGA hat smirked at an Indian Elder who was beating a drum in his face while clad in Native garb (but white Western eyeglasses). It took place near the Lincoln Memorial Friday just after the pro-life March.

And that’s all that happened. A kid smiled in the face of an old Indian who walked right up to him. Smiled – even smirked*. That’s what the video showed. The one I first saw was 61 seconds and that’s all they did – the boy smiled awkwardly, and the Indian chanted and banged his drum.

But the media were quick to jump on board.

“The behavior shown in that video is just a snapshot of what indigenous people have faced and are continuing to face,” Buffalo said.

She said she hoped it would lead to some kind of meeting with the students to provide education on issues facing Native Americans.

The videos prompted a torrent of outrage online. Actress and activist Alyssa Milano tweeted that the footage “brought me to tears,” while actor Chris Evans tweeted that the students’ actions were “appalling” and “shameful.”

Now, that’s from the NZ Herald.

I have to say, I saw this story come up on Saturday night. I had one response – “well, I guess they finally found some”. I honestly thought the media had landed a big fish – a group of racist Trump-supporting boys beating up an elderly man of colour**. So often they claimed to have found a group of pro-Trump bullies, but real instances have proven only too rare.

But as I said, my glace at the story gave me the distinct impression that the boys had tormented this poor man, taken his had, abused him to his face, sworn at him and generally thrown racist remarks.

Boy, I should have paid more attention. And I wasn’t alone.

(This one’s a funny story actually. Because he didn’t like it when people returned the sentiment.)

Of course, the pile on was completely immoral so Kathy Griffin was in like a shot.

I was looking for more, but to be honest a lot of stuff is deleted now. Including one promoting the idea of putting the kids in a wood-chipper. (But it was a joke you know)

A lot of people tried to make it about Catholics. So the Washington Post piled on that too. Because if you’re trying to kill democracy in darkness, you have to take the church too.

This guy thought it would be funny to make the kids look like KKK members. You know, because they smiled at a guy.

So what actually happened?

1. The kids are waiting for a bus.
2. Black radicals begin berating the kids. The students are called all sorts of vile names. The activists tell one black high school student that his classmates will “steal his organs.” What ITF? This goes on for over an HOUR.
3. Native American activists show up. …
5. The Native American activists, …wade in. THEY approach the kids.
6. The Native American activists start berating the kids. “You stole this land. This ain’t your land. Go back to Europe!”
7. Inexplicably, one activist, Nathan Phillips, walks up to a kid and begins banging a drum in HIS FACE. …
8. The kid, not knowing what to make of it, stands there. He smiles. [Some of the other kids think he’s on their side and start dancing to the beat]

This is all on video. All of it. But of course, it wasn’t on the video people saw first.

9. Leftists begin posting small video clips and crafting a narrative that a bunch of MAGA hat wearing teenagers mocked a Native American who was simply minding his own business. [excluding sound, removing more of the context remaining]

11. Media types post vile images. Certain blue check marks call for the kids to be shot on site.

Many of those are still online, though some have been withdrawn. Few have apologized, though some have.

13. Despite the narrative being completely debunked and rejected, leftist news organizations are still running with the story. “White MAGA hat racists assault Native American.”

Side note: NZ media coverage

Remember when it was all on video? Well, people started watching that video. And word got out quickly that the entire story was not what it seemed.

I first saw those stories on Monday Morning, around 8:30.

At 1pm, I logged into Facebook to see if the NZ news had withdrawn. The first two stories I saw were two different outlets, pushing the origional angle, and those stories were marked 3 hours old.

But let’s have a look at NZ Herald’s coverage.

20 Jan, 2019 12:15pm Native American drummer speaks on the teens who surrounded him wearing MAGA hats

20 Jan, 2019 5:25pm The Latest: Man says students wound up singing with him

20 Jan, 2019 5:45pm Students in ‘MAGA’ hats mock Native American after rally

21 Jan, 2019 8:30pm The Latest: Teen in video says he sought to calm tension

21 Jan, 2019 8:33am Mocking students ‘performed the haka’, says Native American witness

22 Jan, 2019 4:15pm 3 groups; many videos; many interpretations of DC encounter

21 Jan, 2019 4:27pm Stare-down between white teen and Native American on National Mall comes into focus

21 Jan, 2019 4:50pm Teen in confrontation with Native American: I didn’t provoke

That’s 8 stories. 3 of which were filed before the story began to fall apart.

Stuff’s coverage.

14:15, Jan 20 2019 Students in ‘MAGA’ hats mock and jeer at Native Americans at rally …

11:31, Jan 21 2019 Students at US rally who mocked Native Americans also did the haka

13:54, Jan 21 2019 Videos show what really happened in confrontation between US …

05:00, Jan 22 2019 The smirking schoolboy and the hardly-a-haka |

07:51, Jan 22 2019 Teen in US stare-down with Native American speaks |

(Undated?) What happened at US rally? |

I may analyse these further at a later date. Interestingly, I was unable to find anything on TVNZ’s search function.

Student’s Statement

Nick Sandmann, the student in the center of the hate mob, released this statement. This post is pretty long, so I’m not including it all here. But you can read the entire thing on the link.

I am the student in the video who was confronted by the Native American protestor. I arrived at the Lincoln Memorial at 4:30 p.m. I was told to be there by 5:30 p.m., when our busses were due to leave Washington for the trip back to Kentucky. We had been attending the March for Life rally, and then had split up into small groups to do sightseeing.

I’ve been told by some people that the boys did wrong by not walking away. The problem was, they were meeting there. They had nowhere to go where these crazy people would not follow them.

I believed that by remaining motionless and calm, I was helping to diffuse the situation. I realized everyone had cameras and that perhaps a group of adults was trying to provoke a group of teenagers into a larger conflict. I said a silent prayer that the situation would not get out of hand.
During the period of the drumming, a member of the protestor’s entourage began yelling at a fellow student that we “stole our land” and that we should “go back to Europe.” I heard one of my fellow students begin to respond. I motioned to my classmate and tried to get him to stop engaging with the protestor, as I was still in the mindset that we needed to calm down tensions.
I never felt like I was blocking the Native American protestor. He did not make any attempt to go around me. It was clear to me that he had singled me out for a confrontation, although I am not sure why.
The engagement ended when one of our teachers told me the busses had arrived and it was time to go. I obeyed my teacher and simply walked to the busses. At that moment, I thought I had diffused the situation by remaining calm, and I was thankful nothing physical had occurred.
I never understood why either of the two groups of protestors were engaging with us, or exactly what they were protesting at the Lincoln Memorial. We were simply there to meet a bus, not become central players in a media spectacle. This is the first time in my life I’ve ever encountered any sort of public protest, let alone this kind of confrontation or demonstration.


So what we have are some young boys who were aproached by some crazy cultists, and then a native american activist stepped in and used the chaos to… well, act strangely.

This was then picked up by activists, and the media, edited and cast as some sort of mean nasty bullying.

And an online rage mob ensured. A mob that took in large parts of the media, and even many conservatives. Then, a counter-narrative was published, with the complete video, which showed the boys to be the victims, not the aggressors.

This one has really gotten under my skin. I’ve seen some pretty bizare statements.

  • “If my kids did that I’d…” – so if your kid stood and smiled when provoked, you’d disown them?!?
  • “The kids should have moved away – that’s the christian thing” – no, actually it’s not. The group was too large, and there actually wasn’t that much concern at the time. Remember, they were approached. They thought they’d managed to avoid a confrontation, because they had.
  • “KKK” – whatever.
  • “The Native American went in to calm down the situation” – from the first Herald link above ” said he felt threatened by the teens and that they suddenly swarmed around him” I guess he changed his tune when the video came out and that was a proven lie.

I have a real problem this this. This was one of the nastiest mobs we’ve ever seen. And it wasn’t against bullies. It wasn’t even against adults. At it’s core, it was against a kid who smiled at a weird, hypocritical nutcase activist with brown skin. And it was 100% egged on by the media, and reporters. They took sides early, a position that is only emphasised by the complete lack of reporting on the original, massive protest.

I can’t emphasise how much the media have screwed up at this point. But that’s another day I guess.  I’m going to do more posts, because this one has become something of a hot mess. But I want this stake in the ground to start with.

Some thoughts to end on.

First, twitter has not acquitted itself well. But that’s not new.

(George Zimmerman would like to have a conversation with you, Tim.)

Second, the crazy cultists got away with far more than the high school kids did, and their identities are still mostly unknown and unexposed.

* I’m not the greatest at reading emotions, but it always seems to me that the difference between a smile and a smirk is the opinion of the observer.

** Words cannot express how stupid it is that “coloured” has come back “in”, having been derided as racist most of my life. But I need to express the idea so I’m forced to use it.

More reading: Radical evil, and the online lynching of a kid from Kentucky

When the Press Sees Red

Tag Cloud