Untitled Document
Taking a Closer Look at the Stories Ignored by the Corporate Media
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact

NEWS
All News
9-11
Corporatism
Disaster in New Orleans
Economics
Environment
Globalization
Government / The Elite
Human Rights
International Affairs
Iraq War
London Bombing
Media
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism
Miscellaneous

COMMENTARY
All Commentaries
9-11
CIA
Corporatism
Economics
Government / The Elite
Imperialism
Iraq War
Media
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism

SEARCH/ARCHIVES
Advanced Search
View the Archives

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly

9-11 -
-

Chronicle Forced To Issue Retraction On 9/11 Hit Piece

Posted in the database on Thursday, April 20th, 2006 @ 17:05:42 MST (2227 views)
by Paul Joseph Watson    PrisonPlanet.com  

Untitled Document

Encounters massive backlash from alternative media

Yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle 9/11 hit piece by Cinnamon Stillwell has encountered massive backlash from the alternative truth community after it cynically dismissed legitimate concerns about 9/11 and labeled anyone who voiced them as anti-semitic extremists.

In a new development this morning, the paper was forced to issue a retraction following Cinnamon Stillwell's outright falsehood that the "whole country witnessed the horrific sight of planes flying into the....Pentagon," a glaring error first highlighted by this website on Wednesday morning.

The statement reads,

"Cinnamon Stillwell's column Wednesday on SFGate originally stated that images of the plane that struck the Pentagon had been seen by the American public. No such images have been made public."

Chalk up another victory for the 9/11 Truth Movement! If Stillwell can't even get this right, what other piles of horse manure has her shoddy research led her into?

After this website first issued a rebuttal to the piece yesterday morning several other noted cyber patriots have followed suit.

Mike Rivero of WhatReallyHappened.com, one of the websites cited in the original hit piece, encouraged readers to e mail Stillwell and issued a three point challenge based on smoking guns of which Stillwell carefully avoided discussion in her smear attack.

"In her article dissing blogs that question the official story of 9-11, Ms. Stillwell obviously picked examples from the blogs that she found most easy to dismiss and ridicule. Equally obviously she stayed away from any facts that really do call into question the official story of 9-11," wrote Rivero.

"How did the United States Secret Service Protective Detail, know they did not need to immediately move the President? How did they know they did not need to toss him into his bomb-proof limo and start driving in any direction to foil a possible inbound?"

"How did the United States Secret Service Protective Detail know that by leaving the President where he was, they were not making targets of all those students and teachers?"

"How did the United States Secret Service Protective Detail KNOW FOR A FACT THAT PRESIDENT BUSH WAS NOT A TARGET THAT DAY?"

Prolific blogger Kurt Nimmo said the piece was the most ignorant and slanted he had ever read and said it was akin to "crib notes to the nine eleven whitewash commission version."

Nimmo responded to Stillwell's claim that the government would never harm its own people to further an agenda by citing the anniversary of the Waco siege, in which 74 men women and children were massacred at the behest of Bill Clinton and Janet Reno.

"It is said Koresh burned his own family and followers to death and the FBI had nothing to do with it. And yet the FBI admits firing “potentially flammable devices” into the Davidian “compound,” actually parish living quarters and a church (called Mount Carmel Center). CNN reported this. PBS Frontline reported the fact the BATF fired the first shots at Waco and that Janet Reno, AG under the “liberal” Bill Clinton, gave the order to use CS gas against the men, women, and children at Mount Carmel. The use of CS gas is illegal under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention (enacted the same year as the Waco massacre)," wrote Nimmo.

In addition, Nimmo took apart Stillwell's contention that cell phone recordings from the passengers somehow prove the government is telling the truth about the entire day's events.

"Once again, if you bothered to do any research instead of simply parroting official lies, Ms. Stillwell, you would discover that, in 2001, it was all but impossible to make cell phone calls from an airliner clipping along at 500 miles per hour above 25,000 feet. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, “it was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations… From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops,” and yet the 911 Commission points to the clarity and detail of these telephone conversations. How is that possible, Ms. Stillwell? It seems you will believe any nonsense the government hands out," said Nimmo.

After visiting Stillwell's website, it becomes apparent that she was a former liberal who suddenly switched sides and became a "conservative" after September 11. Before 9/11 she was writing articles about "lifestyle pieces," which probably translates as dieting and home decor.

In reality Stillwell is a Neo-Lib, someone who has fused the lefty zeal for big government and control domestically with the hijacked right's creed of the expansionist empire. This is why she is in a love fest with the Bush administration and pledged her undying allegiance to the Fuehrer in the moments after planes started crashing into buildings.

Stillwell is a victim of the "post-9/11 mentality," a form of cognitive illness whereby the sufferer abandons any compass of common sense and devotes their vocal chords and keyboard to demanding more people in the Middle East get bombed and more liberties perish at home.

Stillwell (pictured below) is a shining example of why a corrupt government would carry out terror on its own people. As soon as the towers crumbled, she changed her entire thought process and handed over her unquestioning loyalty to whomever offered protection. She is the answer to her own question about why a government would kill to further its own agenda.

She runs a Yahoo Newsgroup called the 9/11 Neocons that boasts a massive 74 members (compared to 6798 members at the Infowars Newsgroup). The group is described as "a place for former lefties mugged by reality on September 11," which is strange because Stillwell's reality world is a place where "the whole country" saw a plane fly into the Pentagon.

That world cannot be anywhere else than cloud cuckoo land because a video tape of a plane flying into the Pentagon has never been publicly released.

We were told a plane flew into the Pentagon and that is the essence of Stillwell's reality - it is a place were reality is defined as whatever the government tells us is true.

If Stillwell had been around in the 17th century would she have also persecuted Galileo for saying the Earth revolved around the Sun? After all, the authorities said the Earth was the center of the universe.

The authorities said Al-Qaeda were responsible for 9/11, doesn't that make it true?

In Stillwell's world evidence is secondary to official proclamation and in defending the orthodoxy she seeks to protect her precious perch on the Neo-Lib, Neo-Con peanut gallery.

_____________________________

From the San Francisco Chronicle

It is the policy of The Chronicle to promptly correct errors of fact and to promptly clarify potentially confusing statements. The policy applies to all newsroom employees.

Errors, whether brought to our attention by readers or staff members, will be corrected quickly and in a straightforward manner.

It will be considered unprofessional conduct and a breach of duty if employees are notified of possible errors but fail to respond. Correcting errors and clarifying ambiguous information is a virtue and an admirable practice.

Significant corrections are noted on the corrections page for seven days and the archived copy of the article will be annotated. Please send requests for corrections to feedback@sfgate.com.

Cinnamon Stillwell's column Wednesday on SFGate originally stated that images of the plane that struck the Pentagon had been seen by the American public. No such images have been made public. (4/19)

__________________

Cinnamon Stillwell's Article that appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle on April 19, 2006

The Truth About 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

With the upcoming release of the film "United 93," the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, have returned to the fore of public consciousness. While for many Americans such painful memories remain forever seared in their minds, for a small but vocal minority the Sept. 11 attacks have taken on a mythical character. These are the Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists.

If Web sites such as whatreallyhappened.com, 911truth.org and scholarsfor911truth.org (among countless others) are any indication, the Sept. 11 conspiracists have become a movement in their own right. Despite a host of differences, they share the belief that the widely accepted version of what happened on Sept. 11 is merely a front for a shadowy plot to fool the American people.

Rather than accept that Islamic terrorists flew planes into buildings and slaughtered innocents in the name of a fanatical ideology, the Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists believe the perpetrators included members of their own government -- that somehow the Bush administration, with the collusion of the Pentagon, was either behind the attacks or simply allowed them to happen in order to institute a quasi-police state.

Whatever one's criticisms of the administration and its approach to the war on terrorism, one would have to be awfully cynical to believe that it would kill or allow thousands (at the least) of Americans to die, simply to accumulate additional powers. But even if one assumes the government acted purely in its own interests, why on earth would it risk weakening the economy and creating instability for the foreseeable future? Not exactly a winning formula for the so-called ruling classes.

Flying in the Face of Common Sense

Undaunted by such appeals to common sense, Sept. 11 conspiracists point to gaps in what we know or widely repeated falsehoods as proof positive that the attacks were not what they seemed. To hear them tell it, United Flight 93 was not brought down by the heroism of everyday Americans but was shot down by U.S. fighter pilots. Similarly, the conspiracists insist that airplanes couldn't have taken down the World Trade Center towers or the nearby 7 WTC building, but that controlled demolitions accounted for their collapse. Then there's the theory that the Pentagon was hit not with an airplane but by a missile.

Never mind that the whole country witnessed the horrific sight of planes flying into the World Trade Center, the immediate aftermath of the Pentagon attack and eventually heard the heartrending cell phone calls and cockpit recordings from Flight 93. Or that many studies on the twin towers have concluded that jet fuel combined with incredible levels of heat were to blame for their collapse. Or that 7 WTC sustained much more fire damage in the attack than initially reported. Or that there's no possible way to predict exactly how such a chaotic scenario will play out.

The true believers continue to insist that our minds must have deceived us.

French left-wing activist and author Thierry Meyssan has made a career out of such claims. In his books "L'Effroyable Imposture" (The Big Lie) and "Le Pentegate," Meyssan takes great pains to present an alternative scenario for American Airlines Flight 77 and the attack on the Pentagon. Pointing to the seeming disappearance of the airplane after it plowed into the building and the small amount of resulting debris, Meyssan posits that the U.S. government used some variation on a truck bomb, a smaller airplane or a missile to hit the Pentagon. In other words, the government attacked itself.

Meyssan never does explain fully what happened to the 64 passengers who died aboard Flight 77, despite the positive forensic identification at the crash site. Media commentator Barbara Olsen was just one of several passengers who made cell phone calls to loved ones reporting that the plane had been hijacked. No doubt the families of the victims would be thrilled to hear that their relatives didn't really perish that day, but are being hidden in a CIA safe house somewhere.

Blaming the Jews

Yet another myth popular with the Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists is a belief in the involvement of the Israeli government and, by extension, the ever useful "international Jewish conspiracy."

Based on a Jerusalem Post article describing the Israeli government's attempts to account for its citizens in the area of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon when the attacks occurred, a conspiracy involving "4,000 Jews" was born. According to the adherents of this theory, the Mossad (Israeli intelligence agency) forewarned these Jews about the attacks, and so they were able to escape harm. Such rumors again arose after the bombings in the London subway last year. It seems that whatever happens in the world, there are people who will lay the blame at the feet of the Jews.

In the Muslim world, conspiracies involving the dastardly "Zionists" are a dime a dozen. But up until Sept. 11, in the West they were mostly the province of neo-Nazi groups. A brief look at any of the Sept. 11 conspiracy Web sites indicates that things have changed. In fact, a belief in the exaggerated power of pro-Israel Jews in the United States seems to have reached a much wider audience in the wake of Sept. 11.

Hence, the recent report authored by Harvard University's Stephen M. Walt and the University of Chicago's John J. Mearsheimer on the alleged influence of the "Israel lobby " over American politics. As Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has pointed out, the information in the report could have been culled from any number of neo-Nazi or Islamist Web sites.

Even if one doesn't subscribe to the "blame the Jews" angle of Sept. 11 conspiracy theories, any foray into such territory inevitably leads in that direction. That's the problem with dipping one's toes into the waters of conspiracy theories. One might just sink to its bottomless depths.

It's not as if there's a shortage of sources debunking Sept. 11 conspiracy theories. PBS aired programs that examined both the building of the World Trade Center and its collapse. The State Department put out a series of detailed reports directly addressing various Sept. 11 conspiracy theories. Popular Mechanics published an eminently useful article last year that went down the list of every conceivable Sept. 11 conspiracy talking point -- and debunked them all. Author and Skeptic magazine publisher Michael Shermer also touched on the matter in an article for Scientific American. Then there's the small matter of al Qaeda having admitted several times to perpetrating the Sept. 11 attacks.

The Paranoid Style

It would be comforting to think that such information would have an impact on the Sept. 11 conspiracists -- but, alas, true believers are rarely moved by facts that contradict their preconceived notions.

Historian Richard Hofstadter encapsulated this political strain with his 1965 essay "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." As Hofstadter puts it, "I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the qualities of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind."

While Hofstadter ascribes such beliefs to the political fringes, Sept. 11 kicked the trend into high gear, and the "paranoid style" has become much more prevalent in the years since. Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists now include politicians such as Cynthia McKinney, actors such as Charlie Sheen, professors, journalists and documentarians.

Indeed, adherents often point to the presence of so many well-educated and otherwise rational people in their ranks as proof of the validity of their claims. But delusional thinking has never been confined to the realm of the uneducated.

The underlying factors likely have more to do with psychology. Indeed, it is often said that conspiracy theories are born out of a sense of powerlessness. In the wake of Sept. 11 and the emergence of the nihilistic threat of Islamic terrorism, feelings of impotence and vulnerability were all too natural. All Americans were affected by such fears. But instead of facing the daunting truth, the Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists chose the path of denial.

Immersed in a political belief system in which the United States (and Israel) is always the bad guy and never the victim, adherents refuse to give credence to any development that does not fit this narrative. So rather than blaming the perpetrators, they fall back on familiar demons. After all, an enemy one can grapple with is much more appealing than the unknown. Such beliefs offer the tantalizing possibility that there's an explanation for a reality that all too often seems incomprehensible.

I encounter this kind of thinking in the form of feverish e-mails from readers insisting that if I just "knew the truth" I too would understand what's behind it all. And no doubt I'll receive more than a few in response to this column. But I've looked into the abyss and I have yet to see or hear anything to validate such fantasies.

Then again, I could be part of the conspiracy, too.

Cinnamon Stillwell is a San Francisco writer. She can be reached at cinnamonstillwell@yahoo.com

___________________________

From Another Day in the Empire
Kurt Nimmo

Email to Cinnamon Stillwell

Cinnamon Stillwell, after reading your lengthy nine eleven article in the San Francisco Chronicle, I was three paragraphs into a blog entry determined to point out the fallacies of your argument—more accurately described as an ill-informed slander piece—but decided instead to write this email to you directly.

I must be honest, Ms. Stillwell. I do not believe I have ever read a more ignorant and slanted piece on nine eleven—and I have read hundreds. I consider your piece akin to crib notes to the nine eleven whitewash commission version. Please take that as a compliment.

“Rather than accept that Islamic terrorists flew planes into buildings and slaughtered innocents in the name of a fanatical ideology, the Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists believe the perpetrators included members of their own government—that somehow the Bush administration, with the collusion of the Pentagon, was either behind the attacks or simply allowed them to happen in order to institute a quasi-police state,” you write. “Whatever one’s criticisms of the administration and its approach to the war on terrorism, one would have to be awfully cynical to believe that it would kill or allow thousands (at the least) of Americans to die, simply to accumulate additional powers. But even if one assumes the government acted purely in its own interests, why on earth would it risk weakening the economy and creating instability for the foreseeable future? Not exactly a winning formula for the so-called ruling classes.”

I am surprised by your naiveté—well, not exactly, since you describe yourself as a liberal turned conservative, the latter now actually a cover for neocons and wanna-be neocons (real conservatives, such as Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, are alarmed and horrified by what neocons, calling themselves conservatives, are doing to this country—he also does not buy the official version, as your brand of “conservative” does).

First and foremost, you may want to enter the phrase “Operation Northwoods” in your Google search engine. Operation Northwoods was a plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1963 to launch terror attacks against U.S. soldiers and citizens and blame it on Cuba as a pretext to invade the communist nation. Lucky for us, Robert McNamara and Kennedy turned this insane plan down. But it reveals the capacity and willingness of the government and the military to murder its own citizens.

As I write this, we are marking the anniversary of the murder of David Koresh and his followers in Waco, Texas. It is said Koresh burned his own family and followers to death and the FBI had nothing to do with it. And yet the FBI admits firing “potentially flammable devices” into the Davidian “compound,” actually parish living quarters and a church (called Mount Carmel Center). CNN reported this. PBS Frontline reported the fact the BATF fired the first shots at Waco and that Janet Reno, AG under the “liberal” Bill Clinton, gave the order to use CS gas against the men, women, and children at Mount Carmel. The use of CS gas is illegal under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention (enacted the same year as the Waco massacre).

As you can see, Ms. Stillwell, our government has killed its own citizens. Of course, such incidents pale in comparison to the mass murder our government has inflicted on Iraqi civilians.

“Never mind that the whole country witnessed the horrific sight of planes flying into the World Trade Center, the immediate aftermath of the Pentagon attack and eventually heard the heartrending cell phone calls and cockpit recordings from Flight 93,” you write. “Or that many studies on the twin towers have concluded that jet fuel combined with incredible levels of heat were to blame for their collapse. Or that 7 WTC sustained much more fire damage in the attack than initially reported. Or that there’s no possible way to predict exactly how such a chaotic scenario will play out.”

Once again, if you bothered to do any research instead of simply parroting official lies, Ms. Stillwell, you would discover that, in 2001, it was all but impossible to make cell phone calls from an airliner clipping along at 500 miles per hour above 25,000 feet. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, “it was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations… From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops,” and yet the 911 Commission points to the clarity and detail of these telephone conversations. How is that possible, Ms. Stillwell? It seems you will believe any nonsense the government hands out.

But where you really show off your astounding ignorance is in the little matter of jet fuel and steel. Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel components used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers, is baffled. to say the least, over this outrageous and—I don’t know how else to characterize it—immensely stupid assertion. “This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did soften or melt, I’m sure we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers,” Ryan wrote to Frank Gayle of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. “I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F.” And yet jet fuel burns at 1500 degrees. Not even “conspiracists” are able to change the laws of physics, Ms. Stillwell, although in the upside down world of the neocons, where Karl Rove dictates reality, kerosene melts just about anything, including Kryptonite.

“French left-wing activist and author Thierry Meyssan has made a career out of such claims. In his books ‘L’Effroyable Imposture’ (The Big Lie) and ‘Le Pentegate,’ Meyssan takes great pains to present an alternative scenario for American Airlines Flight 77 and the attack on the Pentagon. Pointing to the seeming disappearance of the airplane after it plowed into the building and the small amount of resulting debris, Meyssan posits that the U.S. government used some variation on a truck bomb, a smaller airplane or a missile to hit the Pentagon. In other words, the government attacked itself.”

Never mind what the “left-wing activist” Thierry Meyssan claims—how do you, Ms. Stillwell, explain a huge jet airliner disappearing inside a sixteen foot hole, strewing no debris, luggage, seats, or bodies, and leaving the front lawn of the Pentagon as pristine as a putting green? Instead of explaining this, you seem more interested in making Meyssan out as a deluded “conspiracist.” But then that seems to be the purpose of your entire article—to make all of us who have questions out to be wild-eyed conspiracy nuts. Facts do not seem to interest you because you are going for the throat.

I’ll leave alone your mention of antisemitism. It is simply too absurd to cover in any detail. All I will say is you can really tell somebody is desperate to defame and belittle when they drag out the old antisemitism canard.

Of course, there are other fallacies you mention, and cite as if gospel truth (in particular about flight 93 and Pennsylvania) but this email is already far too long.

Suffice it to say, as a “conservative” (or neocon), you have managed to create yet another flaccid hit piece, excoriating honest people as kooks and anti-Semites. I am not really surprised the San Francisco Chronicle has deemed it appropriate to publish your half-baked screed—but then that is how the corporate media earns its livelihood, selling government propaganda and unfairly characterizing Americans with questions about what really happened on nine eleven as nut cases essentially doing little more than falling “back on familiar demons,” sort of like a schizophrenic sans medication.

It may work in the short run, Ms. Stillwell. But in the long run the truth about nine eleven will come out.

Dare I speculate you will be writing about gardening for the San Francisco Chronicle when that time finally arrives?

____________________

Chronicle Hit Piece Says "Whole Country" Saw Plane Hit Pentagon!

So show us the video!

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | Updated April 20 2006

A San Francisco Chronicle hit piece which purports to tell 'the truth about 9/11 conspiracy theories' dismisses questions about what happened at the Pentagon by saying that the whole country witnessed the site of a plane flying into the building. The only problem with that statement is that nobody outside of the FBI has seen anything fly into the Pentagon save a few grainy frames from a security camera which the Pentagon doesn't even validate.

Cinnamon Stillwell's feeble scribe follows the same tired old 101 rules for demonization, bias references and racist tarring.

"Whatever one's criticisms of the administration and its approach to the war on terrorism, one would have to be awfully cynical to believe that it would kill or allow thousands (at the least) of Americans to die, simply to accumulate additional powers," chunters Stillwell.

It's the familiar 'they'd never do that' bunkum.

Has Stillwell ever read a history book? Who killed over 200 million people in the last century alone? It wasn't Al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden's long lost relatives. It was governments all over the world because that is what governments and oligarchs do, they kill to further their own agendas.

How many American soldiers has this administration allowed to die in order to accumulate additional powers in shaping the Middle East?

How many American citizens was the government prepared to kill when the Pentagon wrote that a terror campaign waged by the US government on its own people would enable "casualty lists in US newspapers," that "would cause a helpful wave of indignation."

In their own declassified documents, the US government saying dead Americans will help them accumulate power.

Stillwell obviously afforded more time to sunning herself on the west coast than reading the declassified Operation Northwoods documents before penning her diatribe.

The Popular Mechanics hit piece, a Holy Bible for defenders of the government conspiracy theory written by Michael Chertoff's cousin (no conflict of interest there), is again referenced.

"We assembled a team of reporters and researchers, including professional fact checkers and the editors of PM, and methodically analyzed all 16 conspiracy claims," boasted PM.

What actually happened was that PM set up a straw man case and ascribed arguments to 9/11 skeptics that were not even embraced by the 9/11 truth movement, thereby creating a straw man argument and then demolishing it.

We had first-hand knowledge of the shoddiness of the so-called 'fact checkers' that PM employed, who to us sounded like junior high tea boys and employed a technique of selecting years old articles written by other people that we had syndicated on our website, and holding them aloft claiming they were the sum of our 9/11 smoking gun evidence.

The hit piece made several glaringly fraudulent statements of purported 'fact' - like the lie that there had only been one intercept of errant aircraft before 9/11. This is a claim debunked even by one of Popular Mechanic's own cited "experts," Maj. Douglas Martin, who stated that there were, "67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001."

"Never mind that the whole country witnessed the horrific sight of planes flying into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon," says Stillwell.

The whole country witnessed a plane flying into the Pentagon? Does Stillwell have access to footage of whatever happened at the Pentagon seized by the FBI on 9/11? Because the "whole country" certainly doesn't and that means Stillwell just brazenly lied.

She also frequently references the State Department website as if it's an independent source. The government could not possibly be involved because they deny they were! If our law courts followed this insane logic then we would have a 100% acquittal rate!

Furthermore, the State Department previously claimed that China's sale of human organs from executed political prisoners was an "urban myth"! An urban myth! I presume the sun coming up this morning, cars on the highway and birds singing also never happened. In a BBC article released just today the prestigious British Transplantation Society condemns the practice of human organ harvesting from executed prisoners. Numerous other international medical and human rights organizations have done the same.

The State Department is not independent and it has been caught propagating blatant misinformation again and again. To hold it up as an authority disproving 9/11 evidence is proof that Stillwell hasn't done her own research and is relying on these widely debunked sacred cows of the tin-foil hat wearing government conspiracy theory believing crowd.

Continuing to sing from the boot-licking hymn book, Stillwell echoes Besty Hart and Mark Kermode by regurgitating the 'we all fear chaos and Muslims' pablum to try and psychologically explain away questions about 9/11. This method is very useful because a) it gives Stillwell more time to top up her tan due to b) her not having to actually research for herself any of our points of evidence.

Ironic therefore it is that Stillwell, with her 'government would never harm us' garbage, gets to hide under the bed sheets and suck her thumb because the evil is far far away, while accusing others of cowardice in facing the truth.

The truth about 9/11 and how it has changed the lens of historical perspective, much to the chagrin of Stillwell and her establishment mouthpiece comrades, is that the accidental view of history is finally on its way out and the conspiratorial view of history is in vogue. When a government incessantly lies as if it's going out of fashion and the media collaborates in broadcasting that deception like a loyal puppy dog, the people have no choice but to turn to those of us who actually try to do what umpteen years of journalism school seems to bypass these days, and that is tell the truth.

Newspaper sales are dwindling as the alternative Internet media flourishes. That is why Stillwell and her ilk are desperately trying to patch up the gaping wounds of the orthodoxy by churning out these cookie-cutter hit pieces.

We will continue to blow them out of the water and we would encourage all our readers to politely point Stillwell in the direction of the truth by e mailing her with their comments.



Go to Original Article >>>

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Looking Glass News. Click the disclaimer link below for more information.
Email: editor@lookingglassnews.org.

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly




Untitled Document
Disclaimer
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact
Copyright 2005 Looking Glass News.