Originally posted by rich23
My point is, ultimately, that despite a lack of any evidence to suggest a malicious intent, ATS is labelling Jones a hoaxer. And then mounting
a campaign against him.
Perhaps the wording of the messaging may have been improved upon, but the intent was clear, making the point that the interview was not real... at a
time when many still believed it was.
If the faux-interview was accidentally posted without the disclaimer, we'd have heard a reasonable explanation by now... and I'd sit down to a plate
Instead, we had a day of build-up where Alex announced a major event, his most-important in fact, was coming in the battle against tyranny, and
everyone should check InfoWars.com in the morning. If it was so major and important, should there have been:
1) greater care in the posting of the complete piece written by Mr. Sheen?
2) swift response and apologies for accidentally omitting the disclaimer?
3) a disclaimer at the top, indicating the "open letter" nature of the "interview?"
Instead, we had something written in a very deceptive style (with situational commentary), with a disclaimer added well-after publication and at the
very-bottom. (Faux-interviews are valid op-ed technique, but journalist integrity/ethics have always dictated revealing it as such in the opening
paragraph or elsewhere in the body.)
It's unfortunate that the style of delivery is overshadowing an otherwise interesting development in the 9/11 conspiracy arena. Someone of Mr.
Sheen's stature can do much... and teamed with Mr. Jones, may actually result in some outcomes for which we may be pleased.
I've sent several emails today to various contacts to see if I can speak directly with Mr. Jones, by phone or email, in an effort to get his side of
the story. Hopefully, we can discover that a series of unfortunate stumbles resulted in an apparent deception... if so, as I've said, I'll gladly
dine on crow.
[edit on 9-9-2009 by SkepticOverlord]