CNN Anchor Power-Gaffes Dallas PD Shooting Story
Jumping the shark—with flair!
Early Saturday morning, a man planted explosives outside of, and fired an automatic weapon at, the Dallas police headquarters. Fortunately no one was injured, but the ensuing chase lasted for hours and put both the police and the community in danger.
The ordeal ended in a standoff, which ended in a dead perpetrator, which has led to the requisite barrage of commentary. This wasn’t a little thing, or a “statement”-type crime. He did major damage:
Bullet holes mark where the #DallasPDShooting suspect was “on foot” shooting at the headquarters. Used automatic gun pic.twitter.com/F9dkBza4ax
— Nick Valencia (@CNNValencia) June 13, 2015
The media, of course, can always be counted upon to twist an emergency into a knot and make it a laughingstock. CNN anchor Fredricka Whitfield even went so far as to call the shooter “courageous and brave.”
Yes, really. Behold:
Newsbusters has the transcript:
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD: An operation like this, it now spans 18 miles. 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. Do you believe these are the hallmarks of more than one person involved now?
PHILIP HOLLOWAY, CNN legal analyst (clearly distancing): Well first off, I want to say the Dallas police department did an excellent job handling this situation, and we’re very fortunate that no one other than the suspect was injured. Yes, I think it’s very likely that he had at least some degree of assistance.
Holloway deserves all the credit in the world for not standing up and walking off-set. Whitfield deserves all the mockery the internet can provide.
I’ve moved past the “vomit from anger” frame of mind when it comes to media bias. You can’t stop stupid, and most outlets have stupid coming out their ears; this is more of a “dear God please make these people stop” -type frame of mind.
Officers could have died. Civilians could have died. Fredricka Whitfield could have recognized that, but instead she did a disservice to her craft by revealing just how ignorant she is about the dangers of an active shooter packing explosives and a death wish.
In 2015, it’s typical. I wish it wasn’t.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
A police officer tries to defend himself why trying to control a mob of unruly teenagers: he loses his job.
People express support for a police officer who tried to defend himself why trying to control a mob of unruly teenagers, while condemning the unruly behavior: they lose their jobs.
Somebody praises a terrorist as “courageous ans brave” on national television: fine and dandy.
This the new, “fundamentally transformed” America that was promised to us. Enjoy.
Reason #47,923 why you shouldn’t watch CNN.
“CNN anchor Fredricka Whitfield even went so far as to call the shooter “courageous and brave.””
She didn’t realize the nut job was white. Her assumption he was black screams racists profiler.
What on earth makes you imagine she was assuming anything about his race?
“Courageous and brave”?
How so? During the shooting, did he admit that he was a woman in a man’s body?
He did not use an automatic firearm, it was a semiautomatic firearm. Let’s get it right otherwise you sound like CNN
This is to be expected from one of the leading voices on the exploitation of the Trayvon Martin/Michael Brown were just innocent kids meme.
Foolhardy and tactically inept….both she and the shooter. Fortunately, the Dallas police “retired” the shooter….CNN continues to shoot itself from within. Is there something in the CNN water cooler?
What better fits The Narrative than to call one who attacks police with firearms and bombs ‘courageous and brave’?
This gal has her script down cold, and is no doubt in line for a bonus.
A raise to the prime time anchor desk.
Mindless drivel is a staple of the 24-hour news programs, particularly when there are unscripted events and breaking news. FW’s comments and framing of the crime were shocking at best.
One detail, though, Amy in your comments: “Officers could have died. Civilians could have died.” Police officers are not members of the military are are civilians. Differentiating between peace officers and the general public with the civilian/officer dichotomy feeds into the rhetoric that police officer unions use to elevate their members above mere members of the community. The law applies to police officers as it does the general public (notwithstanding laws giving special treatment to PO’s in MD, NY, and a few other blue states when they are accused of a serious crime).
The civilian/officer framing for the public/police officers seemed to dramatically increase after 9/11.
So? “Courageous and brave” is a perfectly reasonable (if redundant) description of the shooter’s likely mindset. The thing is, courage is much overrated as a virtue. The 9/11 hijackers were ‘courageous and brave’, too, and it did nothing to justify their act.
I don’t get it. Wasn’t this villain courageous and brave? Surely it took a lot of courage (perhaps Dutch) to do something like that. Any normal person would be terrified. So what’s wrong with calling it what it was? Are only good people capable of courage?!
Do you even read what you write? Read your fourth sentence – it answers the second.