McKinney vs. the Atlanta Journal Constitution, as well as the rest of M$M

[Gabi Hayes]

Here's a typical example of the way the media mischaracterize and dismiss those who, like the congresswoman, seek to find out what really happen in the aftermath of 911, people whose interest is finding out the truth

http://www.counterpunch.org/mckinney08102005.html

Your recent article ("McKinney reopens 9/11" July 23, 2005, by Bob Kemper) covering a day-long Congressional briefing on July 22 was totally misleading in claiming that it consisted of "conspiracy theories implicating president ." The actual title was ""The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later: A Citizens' Response ­ Did They Get it Right?" and not a single panelist at the event, which included 9/11 family members, former intelligence and government workers, whistleblowers and academic experts, raised any allegations that the Bush administration arranged the 9/11 attacks. The eight hours of testimony included a powerful statement from New Jersey 9/11 widow Lorie van Auken speaking for other family members about their questions that remain unanswered to date, and their frustration that no one has been held accountable at any level for what was not an "institutional failure" nor a "failure of imagination" in relation to the 9/11 attacks, but personal failures to heed multiple and explicit advance warnings of just such an event in the United States.

Your reporter has done the concerned family members and scholars present a disservice by his defamatory remarks which continue to hide from the American public the many unexplored facts and unanswered questions that mark our understanding of and response to 9/11. I hope the public and the citizens in my district in Georgia will take the opportunity to hear this new evidence through C-SPAN, Pacifica Radio, and my own website.

Certainly the dozens of panelists who spoke about post-9/11 violations of civil rights and liberties, the rise of secrecy and the hidden costs of covert operations and consolidation of intelligence, and the rise of the neoconservative view in foreign policy and a new "Pax Americana" and permanent warfare that ignore international law or the alternatives of restoring justice and peace cannot be called "conspiracy theorists" because they question the immediate response and flawed recommendations that now guide legislation and a new security paradigm.

Historians and researchers who discover glaring errors or omissions in the Commission's report, or the lack of historical framework to their comprehension of the sources of terrorism can't be called "contrarians" for unearthing facts that contradict faulty conclusions or assumptions in the official version of events.

feel free to post other examples of the way the media has been utterly complicit in sweeping the entire 911 investigation under the rug, whether it leads to LIHOP, MIHOP, or 'merely' complete and utter criminal negligence on the part of this illegal regime, the latter explanation putting the BEST possible face on the way they've handled it.

but then, this isn't anything new, I know; just very very frustrating