The most recent and prevalent story of leftist outrage is, of course, the supposed confrontation by Catholic male students and a supposed Native American Elder. We have heard all of the false tales of how the boys surrounded him, taunting and frightening the man. Since the young man in the photo (above) chose not to confront the man in any way – he did not touch him, move towards him, talk to him – the only complaint that could be made against him is that he ‘smirked’. Twitter is overrun with tweets about that disgusting smirker.
You may have read that there is such a thing as a Facecrime, as described by George Orwell in his novel, 1984. That is true.
It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself – anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.
If you watch the entire video of the incident, you will see that the young man did not ‘smirk’ during the entire time. He did smile at the man, though, as you can see in most of the photos of the ‘smirk’.
William Jacobson (Legal Insurrection) wrote about a similar incident he experienced in 2014 at Cornell University. He first describes the tactic:
The recent interaction in DC between high school students (one in particular) and an older activist who is Native American reminded me of a warning I once received from a colleague as to how I needed to prepare myself if I ever was in a hostile crowd or confronted.
A classic leftist/occupy activist tactic, I was warned, was to confront a target and immediately start screaming that the target was being aggressive even though that was not true.
Unsuspecting people in the vicinity would not start recording the incident until there was this commotion. The videographers accompanying the provocateur also would edit the video to start when the provocateur started screaming. The target, not knowing what was about to happen, would not be prepared for it, and might even take the bait, such as in pushing the person away physically.
Regardless of what the target did or didn’t do, you would have video of the innocent target being portrayed as the aggressor, and the provocateur portrayed as the victim.
Next, Professor Jacobson tells what happened to him:
After an Ithaca activist and campus members of Students for Justice in Palestine disrupted the assembly meeting, I went into the vestibule of the building with my cell phone camera in hand. The main aggressor then pulled this stunt on me, falsely screaming that I put my camera in her face (the video shows otherwise). She also shouted “back away from me” even though I had not moved an inch. Another SJP activist, who is still active in campus anti-Israel politics, approached me and told me to stop filming even though I had every right to film in a public space.
If I didn’t have my video, it would be my word against theirs as to who was being aggressive, and their video alone would be the documentary evidence.
He goes on to describe another, similar, incident:
That same tactic was used against pro-Israel students at Cornell later in 2014 by the same Ithaca activist and other SJP students, as I documented in Cornell Pro-Israel students taunted: “F**k You Zionist scums”.
Look how the provocateur got inches from a pro-Israel student’s face, and started screaming “don’t touch me, don’t touch me” even though she was the aggressor and had not been touched. She then taunted the target to hit her, “slap me, do it, do it.” She also made a spitting sound (not clear if she actually spit) in the target’s face. The targeted student had the composure not to take the bait.
Click on the link to see the videos he describes. Professor Jacobson’s summary of the DC incident last Friday:
The student had the composure to do nothing but stand there. He didn’t take the bait, and that was the right decision. Of course, that student now is being accused of showing white privilege by not reacting.
Only because there was more complete video did the media narrative of the student as the aggressor change.
There is nothing new under the sun when it comes to leftist activist tactics. Getting in someone’s face and then playing victim for the cameras is one of the oldest tricks in the book.
And even with extensive video of the incident – hours of it – there are many who are still doubling down on the story that the students surrounded and harassed the poor old Native American ‘Elder’.
This man has done similar things before. He lives in my home state of Michigan, and made the news four years ago for confronting Eastern Michigan University students on their own property, then calling the police to complain about how he was assaulted by one of the students. By his account, the students had been mocking Indians, with face paint and feathers in their hair, so he said he could not let that kind of behavior go without chastising them. He was just innocently taking a walk past their house. Of course, there was nothing to see by the time the police arrived. You can read (and watch video) about that HERE. By the way, the EMU mascot used to be the Huron (Native American), but was forced to change it to the Eagle.
This same man traveled to North Dakota to protest the Keystone XL pipeline. In fact, he gained a lot of notoriety there, and was written about in such publications as Vogue, and Yahoo News. Here he is in a photo from the Billings Gazette.
The point is, this man is a practiced activist, and is FULLY AWARE of what he did. It was planned, recorded by his friends, and a clip put out there for the media to see. The media fell for it completely. I’m sure they were all only too happy to do so; that is, until other video which was more extensive and complete surfaced to show that it was all a sham.