Scarborough Unleashes Attack Dogs On Walters Over O'Donnell 9/11 Comments
Latest 9/11 truth hit piece has anyone with half a brain kicking in the TV in disgust
Steve Watson

Friday, March 22, 2007  

Last night MSNBC's Joe Scarborough devoted a whole segment to attacking veteran journalist, and co-presenter of ABC's The View, Barbara Walters over Rosie O'Donnell's now public stance that 9/11 was an inside job.

In a vicious and vitriolic hit piece, Scarborough enlisted two of his core simpering yes men to attack Walters for "defending Rosie's radical rants" when Walters has merely stated several times on The View that Rosie O'Donnell is entitled to her opinion.

The segment, cheaply entitled "The sad demise of Barbara Walters" once again betrayed the fact that on the subject of 9/11 the establishment media, and the baseless debunkers, will not and cannot challenge the facts and choose every time to resort to child like name calling and character assassination.

Although labeling O'Donnell's comments as "unhinged ravings", Scarborough and his right hand men do not debate or counter what she is actually saying but instead choose to attack and attempt to end the career of an elderly woman who was reporting meaningful and insightful news items while they were still in college.

Watch the video (you may need a sick bag)


Such hypocritical and cowardly journalism is made all the worse by the fact that Walters is of the old school true form of media that commands a level of respect that Scarborough and his ilk can only dream about being able to achieve. They know they never will and so they have cast away any moral base they ever had in favour of unrivalled success as the kingpins of biased and uninformed "news opinion".

Scarborough, along with his buddies Matthew Felling, media director for the Centre of Media and Public Affairs, and MSNBC media analyst Steve Adubato were seen to engage in a ten minute back patting session which no one could have seriously taken as any form of debate.

The highlights of their ignorance are condensed as follows:

The Internet leader in activist media - Prison Planet.tv. Thousands of special reports, videos, MP3's, interviews, conferences, speeches, events, documentary films, books and more - all for just 15 cents a day! Click here to subscribe! Find out the true story behind government sponsored terror, 7/7, Gladio and 9/11, get Terror Storm!

Claim - Scarborough states that Rosie O'Donnell "misstating facts left and right" suggested that alleged 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is innocent and also that O'Donnell "compared Christianity to radical Islam". Scarborough proceeds to show video of O'Donnell questioning torture and the degradation of human rights, advocating the impeachment of Bush, and then throws in a clip taken out of context where O'Donnell imitates an Asian accent.

Reality- At no point did O'Donnell suggest KSM was innocent, she merely suggested the KSM "confession" was unreliable, a sentiment echoed by all corners of the media. O'Donnell actually said that radical right wing Christianity, such as the kind George Bush promulgates, is as dangerous as radical Islam. Other attack pieces such as that of Fox News' John Gibson have resorted to the same baseless slur, we begin to see a pattern emerging.

Claim - Scarborough and friends accuse Barbara Walters of allowing Rosie O'Donnell to cover 9/11 truth as she is "hungry for relevance". They then agree that Walters has sunk to a new low and is finished.

Reality - The View has gained 600,0000 new viewers since O'Donnell took the helm. Scarborough et al even go on to admit this and then have the gall to say Walters is finished? Who is really "hungry for relevance"? Walters creating her own booming and successful new audience or Scarborough losing viewers by the thousands and resorting to attacking the success of others?

Claim - Smiley faced yes man Matthew Felling states that 9/11 skepticism is akin to believing "Fillings in your teeth are a mind numbing government plot against you". Scarborough then insinuates that all 9/11 skeptics such as O'Donnell are "siding with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed". The other analyst states that "you should challenge someone on that stuff, not just say its their point of view you should go after them like crazy".

Reality - Challenging someone on a topic you do not agree with them on should not amount to insulting them and comparing them to lunatics and terrorists. The only reason one would do this is if one did not have any basis of fact to challenge and debate with. Has there ever been a TV or newspaper hit piece on the 9/11 truth movement that doesn't heavily lean on ad hominem insults along with bias and misleading emotional rhetoric? You will never see it. See yesterday's O'Reilly hit piece for the same stench of BS.

Claim - Scarborough attacks Walters for soft balling "the dictator" Hugo Chavez when she recently interviewed him and shows two clips of her being polite to Chavez. the MSNBC analyst goes on to bemoan Walters saying she could have asked Chavez about "all sorts of things he has done against the United States".

Reality - Hugo Chavez is not a dictator, he has been unanimously voted into power by the people of Venezuela three times and his popularity has increased exponentially. Whilst the CIA reportedly continues to operate covertly inside Venezuela in attempts to oust Chavez, no evidence has emerged to suggest Chavez has done anything to the US other than bad mouth its President who's approval rating is at an all time low and has twice relied on a huge team of spin masters and lawyers to become President.

The sickening attack piece ends with smily repeater Mattthew Felling, media director for the Centre of Media and Public Affairs, stating of Walters "I don't think she's losing control I think she's sold her soul to the ratings".

On its website, CMPA claims to be politically neutral: "The Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) is a nonpartisan research and educational organization which conducts scientific studies of the news and entertainment media."

For someone in Felling's position, one in which he is supposed to stand as a neutral mediator, to engage in such a blatantly one sided piece of propaganda and then suggest that a veteran like Barbara Walters has sold her soul is truly the reason the word 'hypocrite' was scribed.

Anyone who performs a cursory online search for the CMPA will recognize that although it claims to be politically neutral, it is anything but. President Robert Lichter is a paid consultant to Fox News and a former fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, a right wing think tank commonly recognized as a center base for many neo-conservatives. Funding comes almost exclusively from right wing foundations and according to investigations by Salon.com, "the seed money for [the] center was solicited by the likes of Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson".

Very balanced.

In a similar fashion to O'Reilly's assurance that Charlie Sheen's career will end if he pursues 9/11 truth, Scarborough and his baby boys suggest it is "an embarrassment to see someone like Walters end her career like this because it is going to end like this". These neocon lap dog fools really and truly believe that they speak for the majority of Americans and that they "know this country" when they make such declarations. Wake up call - reading an auto cue 8 hours a day and telling people what to think does not make you a "man of the people".

This Scarborough attack piece is the latest cringe inducing example in a smattering of hit jobs that have emerged since O'Donnell's public 9/11 skepticism and the new angle on the Charlie Sheen story have broken. All such pieces have once again been notable only for their 3rd grade level research and kindergarten name calling.

We will continue to bring you the facts and the informed analysis, they will continue to bring you the tripe and the empty headed baseless junk that you have come to expect from your mainstream establishment apologists.




INFOWARS.net          Copyright 2001-2007 Alex Jones          All rights reserved.