Post: #1

Breitbart Wrote:CNN anchor Fredricka Whitfield called the attack on Dallas Police Headquarters “very courageous and brave” on Saturday’s “CNN Newsroom.”

Whitfield, while discussing the shooting with legal analyst Philip Holloway, said, “It was very courageous and brave, if not crazy as well, to open fire on the police headquarters, and now you have this scene, this standoff. So you believe these are the hallmarks of more than one person’s involvement?”

Holloway’s smile visibly drooped when Whitfield praised the would-be cop killer.

“Well, first off, I will say that the Dallas police department did an excellent job handling this situation, and no one other than the suspect was injured,” he said. “Yes, I think it’s very likely he had some degree of assistance. These bombs that detonated immediately when the robot made contact with them, that suggests there might be some level of sophistication that may go beyond what this person is capable of.”

Shortly after midnight on Friday in Dallas, what police described as an “armored van” parked in front of police headquarters — and opened fire. Police Chief David Brown identified the suspect as a white man, who furiously ranted to a 911 dispatcher he had been accused of engaging in terrorist activities in the past. Police believe that the suspect fired from several positions in the van to make it appear several shooters were firing upon the station.

http://www.aol.com/article/2015/06/14/cn.../21195596/

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/06/1...and-brave/

Post: #2

CNN isn't even trying to hide their disdain for police anymore. Is this attack daring, requiring a certain amount of bravery? Sure. However, it's not something that should be said as a news anchor. It opens the door for copycats. Oh wait, never mind. More attacks on cops mean more ratings. Who gives a damn about promoting human decency when there is money to be made? I just spent a good portion of my night in handcuffs. Even I wouldn't say something so stupid.

Post: #3

Disgusting.

Post: #4

Absolutely reprehensible. She should be fired immediately.

Post: #5

They hate cops and typically hate guns but as soon as they're in danger they call the men with the guns to come save them.

Post: #6

(06-14-2015 12:19 PM)Aenigmarius Wrote:  Absolutely reprehensible. She should be fired immediately.

Disagree. Firing her would send the message that the system isn't as the_skeeze described. "Well, we're not at all profiting by promoting violence against police. And we proved it by firing that anchor chick who misbehaved."

Firing her just allows the system to remain as it is.

What needs to happen is that the system stops being like that.

Post: #7

(06-14-2015 01:17 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

(06-14-2015 12:19 PM)Aenigmarius Wrote:  Absolutely reprehensible. She should be fired immediately.

Disagree. Firing her would send the message that the system isn't as the_skeeze described. "Well, we're not at all profiting by promoting violence against police. And we proved it by firing that anchor chick who misbehaved."

Firing her just allows the system to remain as it is.

What needs to happen is that the system stops being like that.

She should be forced to go on nightly ride-alongs with Atlanta PD in the worst parts of town for a couple weeks.

In fact, anyone who dislikes the police should do this to at least get a better understanding of the job rather than comment out of ignorance. A lot of police departments offer this if you call and ask.

Post: #8

After looking at the clip, I think that this may have been a situation where she just chose the wrong words. From the flow of the sentence and the context, it seems that she may have meant "reckless" or "desperate" rather than commendably "brave."

I could be wrong on this. But I don't get the sense that she was intending to endorse violence on police.

Most of these TV anchors are not very articulate or intelligent. They're good at reading teleprompters and looking good for the camera, but between their ears is nothing but mush.

If she actually did mean to endorse a murderous attack like this, then of course she should be removed from her position.

But I think she just was babbling and let her words get out of control. Things like that do happen sometimes.

She should be given a chance to explain what she meant.

Post: #9

She just didn't read the teleprompter. I agree with QC that she was being a ditz and not choosing her words right

Post: #10

Just another case of a stupid woman... nothing to see here.

Post: #11

She should be fired immediately. Police officers are stupid as fuck and really she's taking advantage of their downsydrome.

Fuck the police- At least the 90% who finished their high school papers and then got a copper badge instead of a garbage man position.

Post: #12

(06-14-2015 01:43 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  Most of these TV anchors are not very articulate or intelligent. They're good at reading teleprompters and looking good for the camera, but between their ears is nothing but mush.

This.

Edit: Problem just becomes that people forget how it all works, and they start to think they are really special and their opinions matter. They are just cogs in a machine, stick with the teleprompter, try not to think - less embarrassment for all. There is that blonde chick with the very square jaw who was speaking to that one woman who was saying things like maybe women shouldn't drink so much, etc. That blonde is equally an idiot.

Post: #13

Whilst I don't agree with her sentiment (or at least her words if she didn't mean it), I don't think we're that far off it being a reasonable sentiment.

The police are not good guys, they are simply enforcers of the law. They chose to be. And half of those laws are bad. The police are not keepers of the peace, in many cases they are deliberate disruptors of the peace.

If they, and the legislatures that write the laws they must enforce, keep going down the road of drug wars, civil forfeiture, no-knock warrants, inland checkpoints, and victimless crimes generally, we may well arrive at the point where attacks on the police occupy the same moral position as the French Resistance.

Post: #14

I am not for violence against random police. I am not for violence against random people of any kind. I think this man was wrong, and he should not have done what he did. However, someone on this forum needs to find the interview with his father and post the video( I am incapable of doing so with my computer). Short version- Had his son taken away because of a bullshit domestic violence charge by his ex, put his trust in the court system and its "fairness"(guess how that worked out), dealt with an unsympathetic judge on several occasions, could not get a job due to the domestic violence charge. One thing really stood out that his father said- "where can a troubled white man get assistance in this society when he is having a crisis?"(Do not turn this into a race thread, I am black and this still resonated with me). I have a feeling this guy was a working stiff who loved his kid, got with a destructive woman, had his reality shattered and lashed out. He was having his world , his identity(as a provider for his children) decimated by a system he felt was slanted against him, by no fault of his own (in his perception) and had a violent reaction to an undeserved persecution (in his mind, he did nothing wrong). His angry threats prior to his violent act, his telegraphing of his violent intent prior to his action, and the threats he made to the judge are indicative of a man at wits end and who truly believed he was in the right.

If there was free mental health counseling, and reasonable family courts with fair judges I think it is possible none of this would have occurred. Ultimately he committed an act of futility attacking people who had no relation to his situation that were undeserving of his violent actions. Those police officers did not deserve to be assaulted,and he did not deserve to toil in despair with no recourse. Everything that happened was preventable with common sense, compassion, and reasonable laws.

Post: #15

When social justice buzzwords run amuck.

Post: #16

She's been socially shamed enough to come forward with saying she misspoke. It's not much and not even an apology. I'm sure it's not even sincere, but at least she had to feel some slight humiliation so many on the opposite end of the political spectrum, and, dare I say opposite gender, have to go through when something "insensitive" is said.

It may have been an accident, but given her pinko leftist views I wholeheartedly believe it was a Freudian slip and she meant every word.

Post: #17

I don't think all police are bad. We hear about the shit that goes wrong and gets caught on some cell phone. If the laws are bad elect better politicians, etc.

But I think is an overreach to say police are not good guys. That seems to imply all cops are not good guys.

Post: #18

(06-15-2015 09:21 AM)Spectrumwalker Wrote:  She's been socially shamed enough to come forward with saying she misspoke. It's not much and not even an apology. I'm sure it's not even sincere, but at least she had to feel some slight humiliation so many on the opposite end of the political spectrum, and, dare I say opposite gender, have to go through when something "insensitive" is said.

It may have been an accident, but given her pinko leftist views I wholeheartedly believe it was a Freudian slip and she means every word.

Does she usually have that much head movement when speaking? Better than a noob boxer. It seems more like the head movement when someone is being snarky.

Post: #19

Yeah - it's possible that it was misspoken, but a general hate towards the police can be true too with her, because most liberal leftist think that the overarching all-controlling Big Brother state is their friend and the cops are just overstepping boundaries on their own. While the reality is that most cops would be good protectors of the people if their bloody neo-fascist 1984-style system did not nudge and force them into becoming a militarized internal standing army. Respect the cops - hate the system and the string-pullers above.

Otherwise this comes to mind:

Post: #20

I think there was no malice here. It was an absent-minded faux pas.

Why is she being absent-minded? Because she's 50-years-old, yet has 2-year-old twins.

I'm guessing these kids were spawned by some sort of unnatural means. When you do things nature never intended, you tend to get stressed. 50-year-olds are not supposed to have 2-year-old children; they're supposed to have 2-year-old grandchildren.

When my mother was 50, I was 26 and had already met my future wife. At 50, my mother wasn't worried about my daycacre and wiping my butt. She was whooping it up with her real estate friends, going to parties, and attending baseball games galore -- as she should have been.

On top of all that, a lot of these kids born by IVF to older women have medical issues. The American media does not cover this, but the UK does, and you can read about it here. If her kids have any health issues, I'd say that's a pretty good reason for her to be forgetful on the air.

She's spent her life as a pretty respected reporter. This is the only reason I can come up with to explain her making a mistake of this magnitude.

Photos of her twins are hard to come by, but I located one someone scanned on Facebook:
   

Post: #21

The twins are a dead giveway to IVF and fertility aided means. A 50 year old woman is counting lottery luck to have one child, let alone twins.

Post: #22

From wiki

Quote:Whitfield is married to John Glenn who was formerly the Director of Photography at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. She gave birth to a son in January 2005. She gave birth to fraternal twins in November 2012, daughter Nola Amanda Glenn and son Gilbert James Glenn.

Isn't that the case usually in IVF twins that they are not the same gender?

Post: #23

^It means they aren't monozygotic (identical) twins. As in they were from more than one fertilized ova. Identical twins split off from the same ova. Yes, this is often the telltale sign of some type of fertility therapy.

Post: #24

1000% believe she mean courageous and brave. There's no sincerity in her apology, she's pissed she's forced to say anything about it. She probably sees things like this as the new Selma march. Hell, she should be commended as brave for reporting it in a positive light.

Also, no one else has a problem with her vocal fry?