Snopes has updated its 9/11 page, with apology to Michael Moore!

[VolcanoJen]

It appears Tom Tomorrow did indeed "out" Snopes, and it appears that our emails asking for a correction and apology to Michael Moore might have had an effect as well...

Here's the earlier GD Thread on this topic, last updated on September 5:

Did Tom Tomorrow "out" Snopes.com?

Here's the link to the Snopes "Flight of Fancy" page, last updated on September 6:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flight.htm

I'm so pleased to read Snopes' long-overdue apology to Michael Moore. They even admitted to being "vitriolic."

[disgruntella]

1. wow - good for snopes

They really did show some class with this apology.

[liberalmuse]

2. It's ironic, though...

LOL, leave it to Michael Moore to be the one responsible for making it so we question 'Snopes.com' from now on. I'm glad they apologized.

[RobertFrancisK]

3. That was very polite of him

I must say I'm impressed. Glad to see there is at least some traces of dignity on the right.

[Robb]

4. I'm not a Snopes.com fan

Barbara Mikkelson is one of the more sanctimonious jackasses on the net. And I say that as one of the other ones.

Good on her for apologizing. And bad on her for qualifying the apology in such a lengthy way.

[Paragon]

5. There's a first

Someone ask Snopes if anyone else has ever apologized to Michael after going off on a misleading tirade? I'm guessing:

"False." ;-)

[VolcanoJen]

6. Snopes now has a metatag that prohibits a Google cache...

... how interesting. Luckily, Tom Tomorrow archived the original anti-Moore venom. Here's an excerpt, since vanished forever from Snopes, of course:


BIN LADEN FAMILY ALLOWED TO FLY DURING GROUND STOPPAGE? Michael Moore was on the Daily Show on Comedy Central and alleged that when all the nation's planes were grounded for 3 days after 9/11, the Bush Administration gave permission for a private Saudi jet to visit 5 cities to pick up around 20 members of the bin Laden family, over the objections of the FBI.

Origins: This just goes to show what a little bit of fact flipped onto its side and then spewed by a public figure can do. Yes, a couple of flights arranged by the Saudi government did collect a number of Osama bin Laden's America-based relatives and whisk them to Saudi Arabia in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, but this didn't take place during the FAA-imposed ban on air travel in the US. The two flights in question took wing on September 18 and 19, days after the ban on air travel was lifted.

<snip>

Some folks play fast and loose with the facts when they've an axe to grind, however, and in Moore's case his axe is "the dastardly Republicans and how they're responsible for every ill ever visited upon the USA." In this case, inventing a bin Laden jet that secretly flew out of the country while the rest of us were barred from the skies, and peopling it with folks who were spirited out of the FBI's grasp by a U.S. president intent upon paying back some unnamed (but darkly hinted at) favor, is a handy way of reinforcing the stereotype of Republicans as callous and greedy politicians whose paramount values involve money, not people.

http://www.thismodernworld.com/

[Melsky]

7. I'm glad they appologized

I used to read snopes a lot, and sent a lot of people there. After I read what they said about Michael Moore, I stopped visiting their site. I've been using www.urbanlegends.com instead.

[Generic Other]

8. Very cool

Since I wrote to Snopes at the time and got a snotty response, I feel like it showed some character for him to retract.

I guess I have been defending Michael Moore for a long time around here.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

9. This apology is not enough.

Snopes was told many times by many people over a long period of time where it had gone wrong, and it only apologises now? And the apology is ONLY directed to Moore.

What about the readers of Snopes who were INTENTIONALLY misled into thinking that Moore was a liar? Are they not worthy of receiving an apology?

But note that the apology is quickly followed by reams of "evidence" that the vast majority of their claim was in fact correct, while the part they clearly got wrong is barely mentioned.

Also overlooked is the fact that their "evidence" for their version of events is mostly taken from spokesmen of the people claimed to be involved in the event they are debunking. Take for example this:

"We did everything that needed to be done," said John Iannarelli, a bureau spokesman. "There's nothing to indicate that any of these people had any information that could have assisted us, and no one was accorded any additional courtesies that wouldn't have been accorded anyone else."

This quote was used to prove that the Bin Ladens were questioned, and their leaving was not over the objections of the FBI. But notice something interesting. That spokesman said that "no one was accorded any additional courtesies that wouldn't have been accorded anyone else." Snopes howver, knows that this is a lie - the Bin Laden's were allowed to fly when no one else in the country was.

Does Snopes ask whether or not a spokesman who would lie about one part of the story should be trusted to tell the truth about another? Nope.

But then lets really examine what Snopes has done: they have debunked their OWN version of the story. If I remember correctly the scandal that was involved was only slightly to do with the Bin Ladens being allowed to fly when no one else was - that was merely used as evidence of the actual claim - that the US government gave a higher priority to the safety and well being of the Bin Laden family and other Saudi nationals than to their own people.

The scandal was that people linked in a VERY CLEAR way to the hijackers were rushed out of the country, while people of Arab descent who had done nothing but be Arab were rounded up and thrown in prison, some for months at a time, without lawyers, without family being notified, and were often beaten.

So much for "no one was accorded any additional courtesies that wouldn't have been accorded anyone else". Why were they not thrown in prison (and beaten) without access to a lawyer?

Hell, even Alan Dershowitz was calling for these innocent people to be tortured, yet did anyone kick up a fuss about the people MOST likely to know something being allowed to leave? Well, Michael Moore did, and what did Snopes do? They called him a liar.

There is the true scandal, not this stupid "they flew out of the country" shit that Snopes in focusing on. In fact Snopes' debunking is actually part of the case that is being made - the Bin Ladens WERE treated better than American citizens, and Snopes proves it by saying that the FBI helped them to gather, and then after perfunctory "questioning" gave them clearance to leave the US. The fact that the actual flight that left the US happened on the day the ban on flight was lifted (or few days thereafter) is TOTALLY IRELLEVANT.

In my opinion, this apology is almost as bad as the original bullshit that Snopes put up - it is STILL trying to mislead people as to the real scandal, but it is hiding behind a facade of "unbiased" journalism and critical introspection.

[Generic Other]

10. I was cutting him slack because I never heard a conservative voice

retract something before.

Everything you say is true, of course about the real issue that was ignored in arguing over the trivia. Unfortunately, that's the state of critical introspection in the US today.

[Cocoa]

12. I agree, it's only a first step

Snopes was not just vitriolic, Snopes said Moore "invented" the plane story. In fact I didn't find it particularly vitriolic and when I emailed Snopes about it I didn't mention the tone at all.

And then there is still the fact that Snopes scrubbed its original account, which a site such as Snopes should not do.

[NNN0LHI]

11. Snopes blows n/t

[jus_the_facts]

13. YEAH....

:puke: