New York Times Warning: Trust Authorities on Boston Bombing, or You’re Nuts By Russ Baker on May 31, 2013

New York Times Warning: Trust Authorities on Boston Bombing, or You’re Nuts
By Russ Baker on May 31, 2013

Like most of the corporate media, the New York Times has been largely AWOL from investigations of disturbing events like the Boston bombing, 9/11, and Bush’s misleading the public into war. But it’s right out there on the front lines fighting against those who ask questions.. And the fighting is dirty.

A huge story can set off alarm bells everywhere, but somehow, with ever increasing frequency, we note the silence of the mainstream media. Having avoided doing its job, it then protects its flank by denigrating those who call for inquiries.

This Is Your Brain on CT

A recent example is this Times article: “Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories.” It is illustrated with a Victorian diagram of the brain, updated to show the conspiracy theorist’s brain–with a flying saucer inside. The message is unmistakable: if you believe in any conspiracy (i.e., organized but deliberately hidden effort or operation) at all, you also believe in flying saucers carrying little green men.

The article reinforces this implication.

Full Article Here:

Thanks Russ & Joe

I like this quote from the article:

"In order to understand who is a crazy conspiracy theorist, you first have to understand which theories are crazy, and which are valid—and that requires a knowledge of current events and history apparently beyond the ken of the likes of Koerth-Baker."

*I also was able to get my comment onto the NY Times earlier this week.

He exposes today's censoring "mainstream jounalism"

I like Russ Baker's humor with his sarcastic tidbit:

..."Her (a mainstream journalist) assumption is that, in a country perennially employing tens of thousands of top-secret covert operatives, homicide-trained assassins and “special forces” enthusiasts, no one has any reason to suspect that any event involving some kind of death or mayhem was ever engineered on an organized basis."

The NY Times goes so far to

The NY Times goes so far to misrepresent a crime scene (Forum Restaurant, second bomb site):

Here's the original URL:

1) There were far more injured people lying or sitting on the sidewalk

2) There were numerous injured people inside the restaurant, blown inside by the blast

3) The glass of the Forum entrance door was shattered

4) The little tree at the roadside is missing

All these omissions are highly relevant for the determination of the epicenter of the second bomb and for the question for the prepetrators. Here are some photos from the seconds and minutes after the second blast;

Read also this here: