posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 01:18 PM
reply to post by ExPostFacto
I think you all need to go back and read what ATS said about this. They thought the letter was well written and I don't recall ANYONE from ATS staff
having issues with the facts. Some posters pointed out a couple of minor discrepancies (like OBL not on the FBI's most wanted list).
The focus was on the way the information was presented. Like it or not, disclaimer or not, it was presented as being a factual interview for 90
minutes. This whole business of not getting access to the server to add the disclaimer is bunk.
If I'm Alex Jones and I'm putting my name out there and want to ensure that this information was noted as being ficticious, I would ENSURE that this
info was made as plain as day right off the bat. Why bury the disclaimer at the bottom of the page? So, a reader who doesn't know any better will
read the article under the pretense that it actually happened. Then they get to the bottom of the page and if they look closely, they will see the
If he put the disclaimer at the top, I guarantee you that this article would get a pass and not nearly as much attention. This, my friends, is slight
of hand, deception, trickery. It is meant to fool you into thinking one thing only to cry, "GOTCHA" at the end.
And the whole setup with the video and stating that he would release bits of info before his show. This was a setup and there was intent. He made that
clear in his video. What sense would it make to cry that this is the BIGGEST story in the last 14 years that he's been reporting and then post an
article with a disclaimer? Who would believe this? He didn't say that this is the BIGGEST FICTICIOUS STORY that he's done in the past 14 years.
Do you comprehend now?