Truemors
Digg
del.icio.us
AddToAny
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
O’Reilly Admits "Pink Pistols" Story Exaggerated
by angryindian | July 18, 2007 at 01:02 am | 768 views | 8 comments
Why the American public still regards the neo-conservatives as the bastions of civility and morality is beyond me. But then again, one on five Americans believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth. More than 20% of Americans also believe that the world is flat.
Go figure. This goes a long way in explaining why George W. Bush and his crime family can still remain in office after all that has happened and is likely to happen under his "leadership". - The Angryindian
----------------------------------------------------------
When Bill O’Reilly of Fox News and "no spin zone" fame featured a report on "gay gangs," the umbrage GLBT people took was business as usual except for one thing: the report crossed a pro-firearms GLBT group called The Pink Pistols.CQPolitics.com reported on, and The New Yorks Times reprinted, the story, in which an O’Reilly report broadcast last month claimed that 150 "gay gangs" were assaulting people in the Washington, D.C. area.
O’Reilly’s source for the story was a Maryland security consultant, Rod Wheeler, who is also a former Washignton, D.C. police officer, according to the CQ story.
Wheeler said on the show that some of the gay gangs toted 9 mm. Glocks and referred to themsleves as "the pink pistol packing group."
The report, with sensational and lurid claims of "young girls" being "raped" and "gay gangs" running wild in the nation’s capitol, were enough to get the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) to urge its membership to demand the O’Reilly honor his "no spin zone" motto and make an on-air retraction, or else present concrete facts for the claims made on air.
The Southern Poverty Law Center also became involved, rebutting the claims made on O’Reilly’s program in a meticulus, point-by-point fashion.
But it was a group of about 10,000 gay and lesbian gun-rights enthusiasts who might have had the most impact: called The Pink Pistols, the group is a GLBT advocacy organization supporting what they view as their Second Amendment rights to bear arms.
The Pink Pistols are not happy at having the name of their organization dragged through the mud in what they see as a sensationalistic and gratuituous manner.
Bloggers picked up on the story; calls and emails flooded O’Reilly’s show; and in the end, O’Reilly took the highly unusual step (for him) of admitting that the story may have been exaggerated, although in an on-air interview with Rashad Robinson, a GLAAD spokesman, O’Reilly stuck to the general claim that, "It’s a valid story," saying that lesbian gangs had been reported as involved in violent attacks in several cities, including New York, Philadelphia, and Memphis.
However, "Is it out of control? No," said O’Reilly. "I’m not in fear of the lesbians beating me up tonight."
News Tools
July 18, 2007 at 01:02 am by angryindian, 768 views, 8 comments
Add a comment
Comments (8)
- reply
gryphonat 11:57 on July 18th, 2007
I assume you don't watch the No Spin Zone regularly, or at all, so how do you know its uncommon for Mr. O'Reilley to admit fault with one of his stories?
20% of Americans believe the world is flat and that the sun revolves around the earth? 360 million at 20%; so 72 million believe the world is flat, according to you. Find one for me. Just one.
You suffer from a common liberal disease, ignorance.
at 16:52 on July 18th, 2007
You assume wrong, gryphon, I do monitor FOX programming quite regulary. In fact, that's how I was able to track this story. And Mr. O'Reilly history only shows him admitting to errors by way of claims of "entertainmen t" rather than factual news reportage. The "No Spin Zone" is a fallacy.
As far as Flat Earth idiocy goes, here's one gentleman and here's an article Reprinted from
the Skeptical Inquirer, (Winter 1981-1982) discussing the links between Flat-Earthers and Creationists. Here's another article and yet another claiming to prove that the Earth is indeed, flat. So it isn't just according to me, is it?
Lastly, I'm not a liberal. Neo-cons fling "Liberal" around like a slur and you intended to use it in that spirit. It was uncalled for and displays not only your defensive belligerence in the face of viewpoints that you oppose, but your embarassing ignorance on what conservatism really means.
Where is Bill Buckley when the U.S. needs him?
Oh, here's one more, The Flat Earth Society Homepage. Ciao.
at 12:09 on July 18th, 2007
O'Reilly is the embodiement of the deluded and dangerous right wing loonies in the USA.
by the way gryphon, look up definitions of the word liberal as opposed to conservative and you will finally see where ignorance really lives.
- reply
gryphonat 15:35 on July 18th, 2007
thanks for making my point.
at 18:57 on July 18th, 2007
Nope, you obviously didn't get it, so let me spell it out for you. These definitions, (below) are the small 'c' and small 'l' versions of the words and do not relate to political parties. In fact neither party in the USA can either be defined as liberal nor conservative, as they have long since drifted from the meanings of those words.
conservative: 1.Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
This tendency in conservatives has historically been a non-starter as it is in the modern world and is the foundation of their ignorance and intransigence in a world that whether they like it or not is changing rapidly, and as such requires liberal thought processes and an ability to adapt to change, forward thinking, and dispensing with outlived and useless traditional views and values.
liberal: 1.a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
More adaptable and prepared for what is coming.
Unafraid to learn new things, engage with others of different backgrounds and beliefs, explore new paradigms and open their
minds. The antithesis of ignorance.
Which of these ways of being could be associated most with ignorance?
ignorance: The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed.
Exactly what conservatives are. Luddites who plug along believing that methods that never really worked in the past will, if tried again and again probably work next time. Those who believe that ignoring change will just have it go away, or that fiercely defending the status quo will somehow prevent change from occuring.
I hope this clarifies it for you, but if it doesn't, which it probably won't, it will be understood implicitly by open minded liberals who read this.
- reply
gryphonat 19:35 on July 18th, 2007
You sound like a fifth grade school boy starting a book report with: the dictionary defines.....
Since I wouldn't engage in serious debate about important topics witha 5th grader, I'll pass on you as well.
at 20:14 on July 18th, 2007
Just as I thought, too many big words for you, and you couldn't make it through the whole post. If you had ever debated anything with anyone you would know that definitions are very important and can win or lose debates for you.
Debating you would be like dueling with a blind man!
I also find it interesting that "righties" like you never have the courage to post a real picture of themselves nor any personal information. It's always a mythical beast, considerably more formidable than you likely are, or the ubiquitous and boring fluttering stars and stripes or something just as dreary and inconsequential. Why would that be now?
If you want to trade insults you had better sharpen that rather dull "blade" of yours!
at 12:11 on July 18th, 2007
Good stuff.