May 19, 2003
On May 11, a piece by Toronto Star columnist Michele Landsberg appeared entitled Conspiracy crusader doubts official 9/11 version. Landsberg wrote about Canadian journalist Barrie Zwicker, who has produced a video entitled The Great Deception, which, according to Landsberg, "challenges the U.S. government’s account of what really happened on 9/11". Some of the questions that Zwicker raised were why were fighter jets not immediately deployed? Why did Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld call for a war on Iraq, and not Afghanistan, the next day? And how did the FBI come up with the names of the hijackers so quickly?
Many of these questions can be blamed on simple bureaucratic bumbling, while the U.S. government is hiding others on the grounds of national security. After describing Zwicker’s questions concerning September 11, Landsberg goes on to describe Zwicker’s background and his inquiring mind that wants to know. So far so good. One of the columnist’s more interesting articles.
Michele Landsberg concluded her column by saying, " And if you call him (Zwicker) a conspiracy theorist, call me one too, because I agree with Zwicker when he says, ‘I don’t know exactly what happened, but something smells very fishy. Even more rank-smelling is the refusal of most Canadian journalists to ask embarrassingly un-cool questions about one of the worst catastrophes of our time." These last two sentences were the subject of an editorial in the rival National Post a couple of days later.
Under the heading, Michele Landsberg loses it, the Post questioned Zwicker’s conspiracy theory, pointing out that "Whatever currency these theories once enjoyed was blown away last year by a stream of confessions and operational disclosures from captured al-Qaeda commanders." The Post finds it comical that Ms. Landsberg "presents herself and Mr. Zwicker as a pair of heroic free thinkers who ‘challenge conventional wisdom’ and stand up to the ‘rank-smelling’ censors and lackeys who guard the path to truth." The truth, says the editorial, is that others haven’t reported on it, not for lack of courage, but because they are good reporters who realize it is "an eccentric crock." The Post decides not to argue with Landsberg because "her logic circuits have been blown by a blinding hatred of the United States," and concludes their editorial wondering why the Star’s editors didn’t exercise better judgment.
The same logic that Zwicker uses, and convinces Landsberg of, is no different than that employed by other conspiracy theorists who argue that the Holocaust never happened, or that the Iraqi war was staged in a movie studio, presumably the same one where the 1969 moon landing was filmed. It is doubtful that Landsberg puts herself in the same category as those who advance other conspiracies.
Michele Landsberg should keep up the good work. Since the left wing Canadian media is awash in American bashing, at least she does it in an amusing and entertaining fashion. And while her column offers no facts that can be taken seriously, it offers good insight into how the minds of people who believe in outlandish conspiracies work. The Star editors were right to run the column.
The shoes of the fisher
Federal leadership contender Sheila Copps is one of the most left wing members of the Liberal caucus, and the most politically correct. When fellow candidate John Manley said that she was not a serious contender to be the next Prime Minister of Canada, Copps immediately cried "sexism."
The "everything is racist or sexist" member from Hamilton East’s political correctness pales in comparison to that of the CBC and other media outlets. During a recent candidates debate, Copps referred to the people who fish as "fishermen." Some time ago, the CBC and others deleted that word from on-air and print usage, replacing it with the gender-neutral term of "fishers."
Shame on you Sheila.
No wonder Toronto’s in such bad shape..