Anyway Ron Paul and Giuliani went head-to-head (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDND5tcUFoI) and Ron Paul cited the official 9/11 Commission Report and apparently Rudy had not read it (either that or he was lying to get a cheap clap from the South Carolina crowd). Rudy called Ron Paul out and in perhaps the most heated moment I've seen in politics, Ron Paul did not back down. Boy does this man have mountains of integrity.
So anyway the Fox News reporters are picked up in the heated argument between the two and Michelle Malkin (here's a funny video of her, you'd think with her budget she'd be able to afford better editing- http://libertyguys.org/home/detail.asp?ArtID=1562) decided she'd sacrifice truth for a quick defamation against Paul. She decided she'd accuse Ron Paul of being part of the 9/11 "Truth" movement (read: those people who think the government did it all...). Here's the clip:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/170507smearjob.htm
When she decided to do this, you can imagine how irritated Paul's supporters became. Here's the email I sent to her:
While I am usually an avid Fox News viewer, I have noticed recently that the bias your channel possesses has become a bit too blunt and blatant. I always expect a bit of bias from my news channels but in the last few days it seems like Fox News has become desperate to discredit Representative Ron Paul. What's sad is that I, until recently, was a Giuliani supporter! Unfortunately I decided a long time ago that TRUTH is of a higher priority than the small bickering of bipartisanship.Well apparently she got the point of all our emails and here's what she wrote on her blog later:
With that said, when watching your channel try to rationalize Ron Paul doing well in your polls and then subsequently twisting his words (almost to the point of illegality) it seems like you guys have reached a point where even the average viewer can see the partisanship bleeding out of their TV.
As for TRUTH... Ron Paul is not part of the 9/11 "Truth" Movement. He has met with some groups before but has always been careful about his words and thus that is why you will not find any direct quotes condemning him as a believer in the movement. Ron Paul and 9/11 "Truth" Movement only have 1 variable in common, discomfort at the idea of a very large and overbearing government. Even in the debate Ron Paul referenced the official 9/11 Commission Report which specifically stated that bombing in Iraq and occupation in Saudi Arabia, among other factors, led to Al Qaeda and Bin Laden's decision to attack the United States of America. He cited a legitimate source and did not say one thing about the government "bringing the buildings down" or anything even remotely close. What is more staggering, and made me switch away from Giuliani support is that APPARENTLY Giuliani has not read the 9/11 Commission Report. THE MAYOR OF NYC AT THE TIME HAS NOT READ THE OFFICIAL REPORT REG
ARDING THE EVENT THAT KILLED THOUSANDS OF HIS CONSTITUENTS. He referred to the reference to the report as something he's "never heard before" and "absurd". Either he's a blatant liar or just plain ignorant (and therefore disrespectful of his citizens), and in both cases my resolve has been solidified.
I do not know much about this Ron Paul but after Giuliani's slip-up and your apparent *fear* of him... I think I will give him a look.
I understand Fox News has to pull ratings but in the end the news channel with the most integrity will be the only one standing.
Sincerely,
Me
My Location
American Citizen
First, some corrections: Last week, on John Gibson's Fox News Channel show, "The Big Story," I was asked to comment on 9/11 conspiracy theorists and Ron Paul. Here's the video. In the segment, I referred to "Students and Scholars for Truth." The accurate name of the group I was referring to is "Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth." (There's a separate group called "Scholars for 9/11 Truth," which I've blogged about previously.) I also stated that Paul appeared on campus with Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth. This is incorrect. The incident I was referring to was an exchange that took place at a campaign house party, not during an on-campus joint appearance, as I mistakenly stated. I regret the errors and am forwarding this post to The Big Story producers so that they can air these corrections if they wish to do so.So she backed off a bit but then later in her blog goes on to basically accuse Ron Paul of being a "Truther". While Ron Paul HAS met with conspiracy theorists, that does not mean he automatically sympathizes with them. Sure there are pictures of Rumsfield meeting with Saddam Hussein back in the day but certainly that doesn't make Rumsfield a delusional Iraqi dictator, does it? I'm sure many officials met with Osama bin Laden back when they were fighting the Soviets (and we were helping them) but that doesn't mean our administration consisted of a bunch of Mujahadeens, does it? Anyway I wrote her another email:
Dear Miss Malkin,
While I applaud you for editing your statements regarding Ron Paul and the "9/11 Truth Movement" (or whatever on Earth people want to call it), I'm still a bit bothered by what seems to be biased reporting. Sure Ron Paul has met with some of these groups but similarly many of our top officials have met with mediocre entities in the past (we all have seen the picture of Rumsfield shaking hands with Hussein, and lord know how many officials met with Osama bin Laden back when they were fighting the Soviets) but just because these people meet each other does not mean the completely agree with one another. As I said before, the only real place that these "scholars" (I'm a scholar and think their concerns are a bit of rubbish) and Ron Paul have in common is suspicion of the government.
Please be careful when attempting to put words into the mouths of people who haven't said exactly what you are implying they say. When Ron Paul says he wants a better investigation that does NOT mean he thinks our administration conducted 9/11... he's just saying that the government has covered things up in the past and there is nothing wrong with looking deeper into the event that changed the whole United States foreign policy. Nixon tried to cover up Watergate, we had the Dreyfus affair back in the day, Roman Catholic sex-abuse cases of recent years, the Iran-Contra affair, and recently the Plane affair scandal and Gonzalez firings (emails were "deleted"? How convenient...). This is to talk of our country alone, certainly most other countries have it a lot worse.
To deny that government occasionally cover things up is to blindly trust whatever government is in place. I bet if the Liberals were in the White House when 9/11 happened that you would be singing a different tune. Ron Paul does not have blind faith toward any government, regardless of party, and his suspicions of government activity is a common theme throughout the American public.
In closing I would just like to say that while I know you like the GOP in control of the government (nothing wrong with that), that you should be careful not to become too biased during your reporting. Your bias COULD help the GOP out, don't get me wrong, but in the end year down the road when we are old and fragile there will be nothing left but your legacy. You have the choice to pick between a biased reporter who, on a short timescale, helped the GOP to (keep) power or you could be a fearless reporter and author who always questioned what was spoon-fed to her and helped this nation be the best and most efficient that it could be.
Sincerely,
Me
PS: I apologize that some Ron Paul supporters have been classless with their emails. His supporters are very passionate and you have to remember that every group has its extremists. Cheers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsZ_Ep2HZiI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNjkiT-7vd0
Put 'em together and what do ya got? Hickery dickery dock...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSk4SUpWVuY&mode=related&search=
In the words of Dane Cook, "it's funny because it's so true".
No comments:
Post a Comment