Last edited Tue Jun 4, 2013, 06:32 AM - Edit history (1)
....for a well-deserved, thorough thrashing.
"
Koerth-Baker's) 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."
"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. Without such knowledge, you’re in no position to assess whether a perceived conspiracy might be real or not. Example: if you don’t know that John Wilkes Booth had accomplices in the death of Abraham Lincoln, you would judge as bonkers a statement that at least one American president was in fact killed by a conspiracy. It is not clear whether Koerth-Baker is truly ignorant of these issues—or just wants to help the New York Times keep you ignorant."
"But there is another group, to which we proudly belong: people who live in the real world and are not blind to nuance, people who don’t buy what the kook machines have to sell, but also recognize that the establishment media (compromised by, among other things, its financial dependency on the corporate elites) can’t be trusted to get to the real bottom of things."
To which I too proudly belong.
http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/05/31/new-york-times-warning-trust-authorities-on-boston-bombing-or-youre-nuts/
Edit history
= new reply since forum marked as read