Let’s follow the bouncing ball on this one as it takes some unpredictable rebounds.
On Friday, PandoDaily’s Mark Ames revealed that Pierre Omidyar, the billionaire funding Glenn Greenwald’s new journalistic effort, First Look, had helped fund efforts to bolster the opposition groups in Ukraine responsible for ousting President Viktor Yanukovych. Ames wondered about Greenwald and documentarian Laura Poitras, two people with access to the full cache of Snowden documents, working for a billionaire who was using his money to affect global politics.
On Saturday, Greenwald fired back, ridiculing Ames for suggesting that Greenwald wouldn’t act completely independently as a journalist, regardless of who was writing his paychecks. In fact, he said, he didn’t even particularly care about Omidyar’s political activities: “Prior to creating The Intercept with Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill, I did not research Omidyar’s political views or donations.”
On Monday, PandoDaily’s Paul Carr pointed out that in 2007, Greenwald had a very different attitude about the political ambitions of media owners when he lambasted The Politico because its president and CEO was a longtime Reaganite. Wrote Greenwald then: “There is nothing wrong per se with hard-core political operatives running a news organization. Long-time Republican strategist Roger Ailes oversees Fox News, of course. But it seems rather self-evident that a news organization run by someone with such clear-cut political biases ought to have a hard time holding itself out as some sort of politically unbiased source of news.” (Emphasis ours.)
Then, Tuesday morning, Greenwald seemed to be addressing this squabble when he celebrated RT anchor Abby Martin for her views on Putin’s invasion of Crimea.
This story, which is currently visible from the home page of The New York Times, is accepting comments, which currently are running five to one anti-truth. The NY Times has an enormous readership, so please get over there and post some educational comments!
Ahmadinejad Calls 9/11 ‘A Big Fabrication’
By ROBERT MACKEY
Perhaps concerned that his repeated suggestions that the Holocaust might not have happened have become less shocking over time, Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad upped the ante on Saturday, telling intelligence officials in Tehran that the destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 was staged.
July 4, 2008
Two Subplots in Guantánamo’s Long Legal Story
By WILLIAM GLABERSON
The long legal story of the Bush administration’s effort to prosecute detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, now has two fast-moving subplots. Either one could soon write something of a final chapter.
One plot will proceed in a federal courthouse in Washington, where lawyers for a detainee filed papers on Thursday seeking an injunction that, if granted, could be the death knell for the Bush administration’s military commissions at Guantánamo.
The other will play out in a makeshift courtroom overlooking Guantánamo Bay itself, where military prosecutors are pressing ahead with plans for what, later this month, would be the first of the trials the administration has been seeking for nearly seven years.
Either one could be decisive.
“This is a critical moment for the proceedings,” said Joanne Mariner, a lawyer at Human Rights Watch.
NY Times: We'll devote two reporters and hundreds of words to disprove survivor's tale, but not one word on lies of Bush, Cheney
Today the NY Times ran an extensive article+debunking+the+story+of+Tania+Head, who claims to be a survivor of the 78th floor of the South Tower.
The Times devoted two reporters and hundreds of words to this story.
They have not devoted a single word to the demonstrable lies of George+W.+Bush's+survivor's+tale.
They have not said a word about Dick+Cheney's+whereabouts+on+9/11.
They seem unconcerned that NORAD+generals+perjured+themselves+before+the+9/11+Commission.
These are incontrovertible facts. There is no controversy here. The implications of these facts are potentially profound. The absence of media inquiry is profoundly criminal. The publication of Tania Head's indiscretion instead is an indictment of corporate media priorities.
The front page of the NY Times this morning has a story about a survivor from the South Tower, Tania Head, whose story is starting to raise red flags.
As a matter of history, Ms. Head’s account made her one of only 19 survivors who had been at or above the point of impact when the planes hit. As a matter of emotion, her story deeply moved audiences like college students to whom she spoke and visitors at ground zero, where she has long led tours for the Tribute W.T.C. Visitor Center for visitors including Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and former Gov. George E. Pataki.
“What I witnessed there I will never forget,” she told a gathering at Baruch College at a memorial event in 2006. “It was a lot of death and destruction, but I also saw hope.”
Much of Ms. Head’s account was posted on the Web site of the World Trade Center Survivors’ Network, a nonprofit organization for which she served as president and as point person for corporate donations.
But no part of her story, it turns out, has been verified.
NY Times Attempts To Debunk 9/11 Truth; Fails Miserably
More mainstream coverage, more ignorance of the facts
Infowars.net | May 17, 2007
In a report detailing Rosie O'Donnell's confirmed plans to have 9/11 truthers debate the attacks on The View before she leaves in June, The New York Times has responded by penning an extremely poor attack piece ( http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/16/rosie-odonnells-911-question/ ) which cites previous shoddy debunking efforts while completely ignoring key evidence often referred to by the many scientific experts, ex government officials, whistleblowers and truthers in general that have declared the event an inside job.
Skipping over the fact that some guys in a cave in Afghanistan were able to coordinate a total stand down of US air defenses, and completely ignoring the mountains of evidence of prior knowledge, the Times makes four main points in an effort to debunk solely the controlled demolition aspect of the 9/11 truth movement's assertions.
Here are those points with our counter points...
You have to sign up for a free account before viewing this page at the NY Times. Thanks to Action for sending this in:
Faced with an angry minority of people who believe the Sept. 11 attacks were part of a shadowy and sprawling plot run by Americans, separate reports were published this week by the State Department and a federal science agency insisting that the catastrophes were caused by hijackers who used commercial airliners as weapons.
The official narrative of the attacks has been attacked as little more than a cover story by an assortment of radio hosts, academics, amateur filmmakers and others who have spread their arguments on the Internet and cable television in America and abroad. As a motive, they suggest that the Bush administration wanted to use the attacks to justify military action in the Middle East.
Most elaborately, they propose that the collapse of the World Trade Center was actually caused by explosive charges secretly planted in the buildings, rather than by the destructive force of the airliners that thundered into the towers and set them ablaze.