Absurdly biased blog warrior, and Fox News loud mouth, Michelle Malkin, is trying to smear underdog Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul by claiming he is a key figure in the 9/11 Truth Movement "cesspool".
Ron Paul was the only Republican of note to vote against the Iraq War, and he's been paying for it ever since. During the recent three hour live TV debate between Republican presidential hopefuls, Paul outraged former New York mayor, Rudy Guiliani, when he repeated conclusions reached by the 9/11 Commission and the CIA for why Al Qaeda terrorists attacked the United States in 2001 :
They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East [for years]. I think [Ronald] Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics.He clearly states that he believes Islamists attacked the United States on 9/11.
What annoys the Malkins of America, and so confused Rudy Guiliani, was that Paul stated on live TV the most obvious reason why Islamists wanted to attack America, a reason spelled out numerous times by Osama Bin Laden himself, and backed up by a cavalcade of Middle East, intelligence, terrorism and military experts.
The truth was too much for Guiliani to handle. He broke into the next question from the moderator to attack Paul :
- That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11.
But Paul's explanation was also the conclusion reached by the 9/11 Commission and the CIA.
Paul countered Guiliani with this :
I believe the CIA is correct when it warns us about blowback. We overthrew the Iranian government in 1953 and their taking the hostages was the reaction. This dynamic persists and we ignore it at our risk. They’re not attacking us because we’re rich and free, they’re attacking us because we’re over thereMichelle Malkin went on Fox News after the debate and agreed with the host that Ron Paul had claimed the Bush administration was behind the 9/11 attacks, and that he had allied himself with the "insane" 9/11 truth movement.
Paul didn't do any such thing. He didn't even come close to blaming Bush for 9/11. Malkin knew this, and didn't care. Ron Paul had to be smeared for speaking the truth, and for earlier daring to raise questions about the many holes in the 'official story' of what happened on 9/11 when he was asked in a public forum for his thoughts about why so many Americans don't believe President Bush's version of the events.
A few days later, as expected, as is the routine, Malkin sort of apologised for her many errors about what Ron Paul did and did not say during the debate, but she did it on her blog, not on the far more popular Fox News.
But as usual, Malkin's apology was loaded with further accusations, and vague allegations of more Trutherism from Ron Paul.
As is typical with Malkin, she barely floats an apology when she has clearly made a big mistake, and smeared someone, and then continues the "I'm not saying he is, but.." fiasco with a series of video clips that only further prove how wrong she was in the first place. She bets on the fact that most of her readership won't bother watching all the video clips she puts up, but that they will take what she says as evidence enough.
Malkin doesn't like correcting the misinformation she peddles as truth. In fact, most of the time she refuses make corrections full stop. Just one example? Malkin allowed her site to feature a claim, written as fact, that Muslims "rioted on Cronulla Beach in 2005." It's complete fabrication, a vast distortion of the truth, but Malkin refused to remove the lie, even after it was pointed out to her numerous times, and it still sits there, proudly in her archives. She left this lie in place because it's what she wants to believe, not what is the truth.
story continues below
More blogs by Darryl Mason
Read the latest stories from Your New Reality
Read the latest stories from The Fourth World War
Read the latest stories from The Last Days Of President Bush
Read the latest stories from The Orstrahyun
Read the latest stories from Planet Of Strange Things
Malkin wasn't finished with Ron Paul. No, the "Trutherism" smears were just the beginning.
Incredibly, Malkin used her purposeful twisting of Ron Paul's words to mount a campaign to have Paul barred from future Republican debates, and she did it on Fox News :
Ron Paul really has no business being on stage as a legitimate representative of Republicans, because the 9/11 truth virus is something that infects only a very small proportion of people that would identify themselves as conservative or Republican. And as you say, John, this is far more prevalent, this strain of 9/11 truth virus, on the left, and in much of the mainstream of the Democratic Party as that Rasmussen poll showed.Malkin failed to point out that the very same poll she cites also showed that millions of Republicans apparently believe the very same thing : that President Bush knew the 9/11 attacks were coming.
Of course, Malkin doesn't actually bother to explain why so many millions of Americans have such vivid doubts about the events of 9/11, and whether or not the Bush administration knew the attacks were coming. Instead, she dismisses them all, hardcore 9/11 Truthers and the just plain curious alike, as being "absolutely rabid, and...impervious to reason or logic."
When asked on Fox News if she ever visits any of the tens of thousands of website, blogs and discussion boards focusing on the events of 9/11, and raising fundamental questions about what happened, Malkin replied, "I try not to spend too much time in these cesspools."
Not only did Malkin completely distort what Ron Paul said about the 9/11 attacks during the debate, she then wanted him censored, removed from future debates, for something she made up!
The Republican Party has now decided to ignore Malkin's outrageous demands that Paul be silenced and barred from future debates.
Michelle Malkin cites the following as one example of Ron Paul's supposedly 9/11 Truther sympathies :
"...we see the investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on."But Michelle Malkin agreed with exactly this kind of statement back in 2005, when she repeatedly questioned why key information had been left out of the 9/11 Commission Report regarding 'Able Danger'.
Question the still unexplained mysteries of 9/11, and Malkin says you are dwelling in "the unhinged fever swamps"
Attacking anyone who questions the 'official story', Malkin believes, is "a necessary antidote to counteract the vile and poisonous effects of Trutherines".
Malkin has turned her attacks on anyone who dares to question the 'official story' of the 9/11 attacks into her own mini-industry.
It doesn't matter to Malkin if the questioners are the more paranoid-minded conspiracy theorists, or the far more credible 9/11 widows who successfully pressured the Bush administration into setting up the so-called 9/11 Commission in the first place, or the firefighters who regularly slam former New York mayor, Rudy Guiliani (who actually had firefighters arrested for trying to recover the bodies of their friends at Ground Zero), and who is now running for the 2008 presidential elections as a Republican candidate.
Malkin is clearly pushing the Guiliani cart. And she will do anything she can to destroy the growing credibility, and popularity, of Ron Paul. God forbid that a Republican presidential candidate actually talk about the reality of the Iraq War, instead of pumping the propaganda swill that Malkin regurgitates on her site on a near daily basis.
But here's the punch
Michelle Malkin was one of the first "9/11 Truthers".
It was her many, valid questions raised in a March, 2002, column that inspired any number of people to dig deeper into the mysteries of 9/11.
The column in question saw Malkin chewing through many of the very same questions that are now being raised by the people she attacks and spews hatred against and tries to smear as "unhinged".
Here's her column from March 2002, six months after the 9/11 attacks :
What really happened on United Airlines Flight 93? As the Philadelphia Daily News reported back in November, many folks in Shanksville, Pa., where the hijacked Boeing 757 crashed, believe the plane was shot down. Eyewitnesses reported seeing a small, unmarked jet flying overhead immediately after impact; others are convinced they heard the piercing sound of a missile. A federal flight controller told The Telegraph of Nashua, N.H., that an F-16 had indeed been in "hot pursuit" of Flight 93 until it hit the ground. One of the 911calls from a passenger on the flight indicated that there was an explosion aboard the plane. The FBI immediately confiscated the tape.
The eight-mile-wide debris field seems to bolster claims of an on-board explosion. So did the discovery of a one-ton chunk of the plane's engine far from the rest of the crash site - which some say points to evidence that a heat-seeking missile targeted the flight. Then there's the eight-minute gap from the time all cell phone calls from the plane ceased and the time it crashed.
Although both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered, not a single scrap about what was on the black boxes has been officially released. This despite the government's otherwise routine release of such information. (Recall that after American Airlines Flight 587 crashed in New York last November, the feds released detailed information from one of the black boxes within less than two days.)
The feds insist on keeping all the Flight 11 data secret because disclosing such information might "interfere with enforcement proceedings." Against whom? All the hijack culprits are dead.
What really happened on American Airlines Flight 11? Did one of the hijackers have a gun on board? Was it planted before the flight took off, or was it smuggled on?
Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, formerly of Investor's Business Daily and now with Worldnetdaily.com, scooped the mainstream press by exposing a high-level, internal report from the Federal Aviation Administration. It detailed the alleged shooting of Flight 11 passenger Daniel Lewin by hijacker Satam Al Suqami.
According to the document, which was later obtained by the Washington Post, USA Today, and others, an onboard flight attendant reported in a phone call that "one bullet was reported to have been fired" during the flight, killing Lewin before the plane crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center. FAA officials dismissed the leaked memo as a draft and claimed that the very specific report of gunfire - including the names of the victim, shooter, and their precise seat numbers -- was an editing error.
Just a typo, huh?
Malkin also used that March 2002 to stir up conspiracy theories about one Katherine Smith. Malkin asks : Who murdered Katherine Smith, and why?"
Smith was the Tennessee state license examiner who had been implicated last month in a phony ID scam involving a group of shady Middle Eastern men from New York City. Investigators say there are "connections" between the ring and the Sept. 11 terrorists; one of them had a repair pass in his possession that gave him access to the lower levels of the World Trade Center basement. It was dated Sept. 5.
A day before Smith was to appear in court over the matter, she died in a bizarre and fiery crash inside a car registered to one of her Middle Eastern co-defendants.
This week, the Tennessee Highway Patrol concluded definitively that her "death was not the result of the crash itself. Her death was by other means." Is this the vengeful work of al Qaeda killers still on the loose?
As mentioned above, back in August, 2005, Malkin wrote at length about the many unanswered, and valid, questions resulting from a thorough reading of the 9/11 Commission Report.
She also hinted towards a conspiracy of silence existing over key information excluded from the 9/11 Commission report that exposed important facts about the terrorists responsible for 9/11, and who in the American government and intelligence agencies knew what about them in the months leading up to the attacks.
So what happened? Why did one of the first "9/11 Truthers" become so afraid to challenge the 'official story'?
When did Malkin decide she was no longer interested in the many unanswered questions surrounding the 9/11 attacks and the Al Qaeda terrorists involved? And why?
Of course, Malkin wasn't alone back then, six months after the event, asking such important questions.
Many of the people who lost friends and family members through the 9/11 attacks were also asking the same kind of questions, and back then the Bush administration was refusing to even think about holding a proper investigation into how and why the attacks occurred.
The 9/11 Commission only became a reality after a sustained campaign of public pressure by a group of wives of firefighters, policemen and Port Authority workers who were killed on 9/11.
When the commission hearings began, the Bush administration repeatedly refused to hand over key documents that, when made public, exposed a series of warnings they received in advance of the attacks. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney also refused to testify under oath to the commission, and no transcription of their testimony was ever made public.
Malkin stopped asking questions about 9/11 towards the end of 2005, around the same time she started popping up to spew venom on Fox News. So over-the-top is her propaganda that even Bill O'Reilly was taken aback when Malkin called San Francisco "a hate filled city".
Now Malkin attacks, and tries to destroy, anyone who continues what she helped to start back in 2002, regarding the unexplained mysteries of the 9/11 events.
Even when that person is someone like Ron Paul, a fellow Republican, a true old-school conservative, and the only presidential hopeful who is stirring up interest amongst young Americans on the internet.
It is interesting to note that Malkin is now regularly called on by Fox News to attack the "9/11 Truthers" and spread vile slander against anyone who thinks there is yet more truth to be learned about the attacks.
Malkin, like many other prominent NeoCon-aligned mainstream media stooges, is clearly starting to panic now that hundreds of engineers, scientists, mechanics, pilots and some very famous Americans, like Ron Paul, Charlie Sheen, Rosie O'Donnell and Bruce Willis are raising questions about the 'official story' of what happened that day, back in September 2001.
The pertinent question is why Malkin is so nervous about the so-called "9/11 Truth Movement" and why she wants to stop Americans from questioning their own government and holding them to account. Or even finding out if they need to be held to account.
Malkin Backs Conspiracy Theory Of A Link Between Saddam Hussein And 9/11
Malkin The Conspiracy Theorist : Claims This Attack With A Heavy Death Toll Was An Inside Job
Malkin Slanders Ron Paul On Fox News By Claiming Paul "Allied" Himself With 9/11 Truthers