Newspaper editor questions whether pro-aborts are to blame for misspelled pro-abortion graffiti
Somewhere between 7p on June 14 and 7p on June 15, vandals sprayed the following graffiti on the home of Dubuque, IA, pro-lifer Allen Troupe (click to enlarge):
They were most likely incited by this sign in a window of Troupe’s home…
Somewhere between 7p on June 14 and 7p on June 15, vandals sprayed the following graffiti on the home of Dubuque, IA, pro-lifer Allen Troupe (click to enlarge):
They were most likely incited by this sign in a window of Troupe’s home…
Troupe filed a police report and anticipated the same level of fair and balanced media coverage one would expect were pro-life graffiti to appear on the home of an abortion proponent – i.e., lots.
But not only did the local rag, the Dubuque Telegraph Herald, fail to post a story, it failed to even mention the police report in its daily police blotter. Editorial staff either considered the incident too slight or too unhelpful to their pro-abortion bias.
So Troupe emailed DTH editor Brian Cooper, and here was Cooper’s response:
“Wouldn’t you think a bona fide pro-choice vandal would know how to spell abortion?”
The overriding conclusion to draw from Cooper’s rhetorical question is that “bona fide” pro-aborts can’t be stupid.
There are thus 3 conspiracy theories Cooper was implying:
1. The vandal spray painting the misspelled graffiti was in actuality a covert but stupid pro-lifer.
2. The vandal spray painting the misspelled graffiti was in actuality a covert pro-lifer attempting to make pro-aborts look stupid.
2. The vandal spray painting the misspelled graffiti was not pro-life or pro-abortion at all but just a simple street vandal who wanted people to think s/he was pro-abortion.
In fact, I could only surmise Conspiracy Theories #1 and 2 until Cooper (pictured right) told me #3 by phone this morning.
“I’m not surprised you can’t think of any other conclusion,” he said, since I had identified myself as a pro-life blogger. “Not everyone is fervently pro-choice or pro-life. This could have been someone who doesn’t have any opinion on it and wanted to vandalize but seem that someone else was doing it.”
Well that makes total sense. A vandal into graffiti purely for the joy of it, uninvolved in the abortion battle either way, would know enough to connect a sign opposing Planned Parenthood with “aboration” and “baby killers” and decide to spray paint about it to somehow implicate pro-aborts because… Well, again, I can only come up with the fact the graffiti vandal was either #1 or #2.
The Telegraph Herald finally posted a story about the vandalism on June 23, but catch the headline:
Troupe “believes” the graffiti on his home was tied to his abortion opposition, but that may not be true? The story’s 1st sentence reiterated the point:
Police are investigating a vandalism case involving a man who believes his house was targeted due to his opposition to Planned Parenthood and abortion.
So Troupe could have been in actuality drawing wild conclusions or hallucinating?
These journalists are either utterly biased or totally void of common sense and simple intelligence.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
well I think Mr. Cooper was trifling with you Jill.
Either he’s a complete idiot (which might be theory #1) or he’s a proabortion supporter (theory #2) as most media types are or he favors proaborts vandalising the homes of prolifers (theory #3).
ahh, I’m thinking #1 takes precedence.
One thing is for certain — the graffiti vandal is a student enrolled in the public school system.
Won’t this be considered a “hate crime” ?
Just asking…
I think the vandal is probably a Catholic who has had an abortion/supported an abortion and then had a Freudian slip while out vandalizing and trying to rationalize their evil. (Adoration vs. Aboration).
The editor’s comment shows how utterly inane he is.
Wouldn’t a pro-abort know how to spell abortion?
So ideology drives literacy? Really? REALLY?
It seems some graffiti artists write on homes, while others write editorials in newspapers. Neither, it seems, are the brightest candles on the altar.
“A vandal into graffiti purely for the joy of it, uninvolved in the abortion battle either way, would know enough to connect a sign opposing Planned Parenthood with “aboration” and “baby killers” and decide to spray paint about it to somehow implicate pro-aborts because… Well, again, I can only come up with the fact the graffiti vandal was either #1 or #2.”
not only that but to pick THIS man’s house out of everyone elses and graffiti it? yup I”m still with my theory #1.
oh and just so you know for the next time RSD, hate crimes can’t be committed AGAINST Christians or prolifers, only BY them. ;)
My mistake, Angel…;-)
Of course it’s not a hate crime…its just a “prank” by over zealous abortion supporters and the prolifers home/ wall that was currently available….riiiight.
I’d agree with Ashley here. Pro-aborts would stay away from the term “baby-killer” at all costs. Plus it doen’t make any sense in context. Probably the work of some young kid who can’t spell and just wants to annoy people on both sides.
It’s hard to understand why the Dubuque Telegraph Herald didn’t feel this story was worthy of their police blotter. This is NEWS, people! If they had put it in the paper, someone may have found the vandals.
I think a handwriting analysis is in order. There were two different cans of spray paint, so perhaps there were two culprits…
Your very charitable Lori Pieper to pro-aborts…
A young punk can be a pro-abort too.
The vandals may not have had any opinion on abortion either way. Any idiot could have spray painted this just to stir up controversy and debate and then laugh themselves stupid. Like the guys who made the crop circles in England then laughed themselves stupid as people analyzed, debated, meditated, and theorized.
If someone had spraypainted “Stop Aboration” on the side of the local Planned Parenthood I doubt if Brian would have asked PP “Wouldn’t you think a bona fide anti-abortion vandal would know how to spell abortion?” Nor would he have suggested the person was a covert Pro-choicer who was either stupid or intending to make the anti-abort crowd look bad. Instead, they would have had a front page story, with pictures, the next day, not a week & 1/2 later.
The fact that the sign in fromt on says that PP is bad for DBQ & makes no mention of abortion etc tells me that the person(s) had to at least know something about the debate & use of the term “baby killer” in the context of that debate.
& I am sure that I am NOT “drawing wild conclusions or hallucinating”!
I’m with Ashley and Mary, I think it’s just somebody trying to stir up trouble.
I think it’s an idiot who obviously had a public school education where he not only did not learn how to spell but was indoctrinated by the socialistic theory being bandied about that somehow murdering babies in utero lowers infant mortality rates (didn’t we just have that article on here?)
The fact that any of you would think that a
pro-lifer was responsible for this is insulting. As Executive Director of Dubuque County Right to Life, I was shocked when Al Troupe told me what happened. I was horrified when I saw the photos. But I was beside myself with the lack of interest/coverage that was in the Telegraph Herald.
Had this occurred to Planned Parenthood, or a supporter of Planned Parenthood, the coverage would have been greater, probably on the front page (not with the obituaries), and with quotes from PP, the Dubuque police, and maybe even the FBI. There may have even been a reference to that stupid Homeland Security report about us being extremists.
Thank you Jill for letting the folks see another example of violence against pro-lifers.