Trutheriness and Ron Paul (Michelle Malkin) [Ron Paul Says The Darnedest Things!]

Michelle Malkin ^ | May 19, 2007 | Michelle Malkin

[George W. Bush]

We’ll see. Obviously, you’re worried or you wouldn’t spend time obsessing over Ron Paul.

[dirtboy]

We’ll see. Obviously, you’re worried or you wouldn’t spend time obsessing over Ron Paul.

Worried? Hardly. More like he and his cult following present a target-rich environment and I'm a sucker for an unfair internet fight. Especially when the targets in question contain a large number of anti-war 9-11 truthers, both of which are worthy of all the scorn I can dump on them, and then some.

[dirtboy]

We’ll see. Obviously, you’re worried or you wouldn’t spend time obsessing over Ron Paul.

Worried? Hardly. More like he and his cult following present a target-rich environment and I'm a sucker for an unfair internet fight. Especially when the targets in question contain a large number of anti-war 9-11 truthers, both of which are worthy of all the scorn I can dump on them, and then some.

[WhiteGuy]

I have asked about a dozen or so times for this comment to be explained and all I get is a bunch of he-denied-it nonsense.

Have you contacted his campaign and asked them?

If so, what was their reply?

If not....

I'll bet that if you are sincere about wanting an answer, they will be pleased to provide one.

please be sure to let us know what you find out!

[George W. Bush]

From my own #255. It is Malkin who is the verifiable Truther, not Ron Paul.

---

The wildly funny part of Malkin accusing Ron Paul of "Trutheriness" is that she herself has written in agreement with the most notorious 9/11 Truther sites:

That's right. Unlike Ron Paul who she seeks to vilify, Michelle Malkin has herself written Truther conspiracy material and published it widely, something Ron Paul has never done.

---

Let's examine what she wrote in just one single article on 3/8/2002: Jewish World Review, Michelle Malkin - Just Wondering

"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."

Now we compare to the primary Truther site, flight93crash.com: The Real Story of Flight 93. And we can see clearly that all of Malkin's Flight 93 conspiracy/coverup theory agrees with the Truthers.

---

Back to JWR where Michelle asks:

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? ... 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?

Now to a Truther site, whatreallyhappened.com: American Airlines Flight 11, Reexamined where we find again the same material about Flight 93 from above as well as the same material on the "suppressed" memo and the transcript of the reports of shootings on board Flight 11 which Malkin seems to have copied from these Truthers.

---

Back to JWR for Michelle's next Truther tidbit:

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.

And we then compare this to one of the biggest Truther sites out there: 911review.org: Katherine Smith 9/11 Encyclopedia where we find the same exact material.

---

If being a Truther consists of believing the government caused 9/11 directly or that it conspired to cover up the most vital facts about 9/11 from the public, then by any measure Michelle Malkin is a published Truther writer. While not accusing the government of directly causing 9/11, she uses the standard Trutherisms about government coverup and suppression.

There is nothing in anything Ron Paul has said or written that is even remotely comparable to Michelle's little romp through Trutherdom.

---

Malkin, like Monbiot, wrote moonbat Truther articles but now pretends to never have written such things and hysterically attacks Ron Paul with false articles and statements, hoping to conceal her own past. This is why she keeps coming up on these threads. The Paul-bashers like to quote her little attacks on RP but never her later disavowals and apologies for her false "reporting".

[dirtboy]

Y’all are pathetic. MM is asking minor questions about the details on Flight 93 and Flight 11. She never claims a government conspiracy.

[George W. Bush]

She never claims a government conspiracy.

Obviously she did. She wrote tens times more Trutherism in that one article than Ron Paul has ever said or written. Ron Paul's remarks when the topic comes up are very similar to the 9/11 Commission report because that is the source he relies on primarily along with Michael Schuerre, the former head of CIA's Bin Laden unit who wrote a book about it and now lectures.

[Lovebloggers]

....and that changes what Paul said how exactly?

[Lovebloggers]

OMG I totally don’t care about what the official nonsense line is from his campaign — he denied it remember? (cough cough). I just want his sheep to explain how that statement is representative of the demigod they make him out to be.

Things are better with the Democrats in charge of oversight..... Pelosi, Reid, Murtha....

...the spin cycle is complete.

[George W. Bush]

Congressional oversight normally does not exist if Congress is held by the same party as the president.

It's not exactly earthshaking to observe. You may have noticed very little oversight from Congress of Clinton in his first two years. Then the GOP House got elected and things changed.

Divided government is normally the rule in American history. It's part of checks and balances, something the Founders apparently approved of because they provided so much opportunity for it.

[Lovebloggers]

Wow, that textbook rhetoric really doesn’t apply to Pelosi et al now does it?

But if you sleep better at night with them in charge (and more disturbingly feel that the far left leanings of our present majority leaders is keeping things in check somehow), then that is all anyone needs to know about the mindset of those who support Ron Paul.

What is amusing about this though, is that it totally escapes you that this far left majority will be the very “check” system that denies the good doctor from bringing one item on his platform/campaign finances to fruition.

[Lovebloggers]

finances=promises. Did not edit before posting. My apologies.

[George W. Bush]

Wow, that textbook rhetoric really doesn’t apply to Pelosi et al now does it?

If we win the House and/or Senate back in '08 and Hitlery wins the WH, you might think a bit more highly of congressional oversight.

I get so tired of people whose principles of government change depending on who holds a particular office. My own positions are as consistent as I can make them. And if we'd had just a bit more congressional oversight in the 2001-2006 period, we'd probably still hold the House and/or Senate.

[WhiteGuy]

I just want his sheep to explain

Yeah, not surprising. And, increasingly typical, no interest in the truth. Thanks for being honest about your motives.

[Lovebloggers]

Well that is not going to happen is it? It will take a few more election cycles for the Republicans to win back the house and senate (so thanks again to the “real” conservatives who stayed home whining how their party abandoned them).

My principles of government are the same no matter who gets into office. Politics is dirty business. Politicians lie. That includes your man Paul by the way.

The only way to get anything done in this country is through political compromise. Ronnie Reagan excelled at that. You think your man Paul is going to get the support to get any of his campaign promises done? He trusts Democrats more than he does his own party, so yeah — not seeing any support there, nevermind his ideas are so far removed from reality that are pure fantasy. Outside of cut and run the Democrats will be shunning him also.

You may be on board 100% with Pelosi and her ilk (and by that I mean the far left) with the WoT, but please take off your beer googles to the rest of it. Democrats overseeing any type of investigation is pure political fodder and posturing and nothing more. But Paul feels they would get to the bottom of what “really” happened on 9/11 (whatever the hell that means), and that in itself is disturbing to the core.

[Lovebloggers]

So sad you actually think Paul speaks the truth. Grow up already.

[I see my hands]

Hmm, now that you mention it..

[AliVeritas]

You just have to hear it:

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/08/20/audio-ron-pauls-radio-buddy-melts-down-over-neocons/

[Artemis Webb]

tag line update

[tiledood]

Well said.