http://www.911blogger.com/node/7218

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrcFA9 ... ogger%2Ecom%2Fnode%2F7218

Fox News' Hannity & Colmes delivers yet another hit piece on the 9/11 truth movement, this time denouncing Charlie Sheen, who is set to narrate Loose Change in association with billionaire Mark Cuban. Notice how they attack him on a personal level and then talk about the fact that they attacked him on a personal level, without actually discussing any of the issues he raises!

To be fair, Colmes presents a balanced counter-argument and mentions the fact that Alex Jones is a conservative, so this isn't a left/right issue.

Blev faktiskt positivt överraskad av Colmes attityd.

Det är så patetiskt, det enda de som stöder den officiella historien kan göra är att gasta om att alla som inte tror på den paranoida al-Qaida historien är idioter, sprider nazipropaganda, har marsmänniskor i garderoben osv, så jävla löjligt, spring era jävla ynkryggar, ni har inte ett skit att komma med förutom lögner och förvanskningar.

Sanningen är på ingång.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/7240

There was yet another great segment for liberals on Hannity & Colmes Friday night, March 23, 2007. Alan Colmes and News Hounds top dog and radio talk show host Leslie Marshall provided the perfect response to attacks from Sean Hannity and Michael Reagan against Charlie Sheen over his narration in a “9/11 conspiracy” film.

Marshall and Colmes confronted Hannity and Reagan for attacking Sheen with personal insults rather than debating the issues at hand. Neither Hannity nor Reagan had a counterargument, other than to level more attacks at Sheen and the left.

The result, in my view, was that Hannity and Reagan were exposed as thuggish oafs while Marshall and Colmes sounded the voices of reason. With video.

Hannity, during a teaser at the beginning of the program said,“The hopelessly confused actor is going to narrate a film full of his wild-eyed conspiracy theories.” Can you imagine Alan Colmes saying before a segment about, say, Ann Coulter, “The hopelessly malicious columnist will offer more of her crackpot theories in an upcoming book?” I can’t. On FOX News, the conservatives do the attacking, often while complaining about the rhetoric of the left.

At the beginning of the actual discussion, Hannity played a clip of Sheen calmly talking about why he doesn’t believe the official explanation of 9/11. Hannity said, “That was Charlie Sheen, ranting like a lunatic.”

Reagan didn’t waste a moment getting in a slur of his own. “The apple does not fall far from the very tree at all, with Martin Sheen being his father.”

In synch with the conservatives, the screen chyron read, “CHARLIE SHEEN’S 9/11 CONSPIRACY RANT HEADED TO THE BIG SCREEN.”

Reagan added, without explaining how he “knew,” that jihadists will use the film to blame the Jews. Comment: Why don’t more liberals laugh at conservative attempts to intimidate them? What could take the wind out of a bully’s sails more?

Marshall said, “Last time I checked, we’re all Americans here… I don’t think someone’s an idiot if they disagree with you or me, Sean…. I don’t think Sheen’s an idiot for expressing his mind.” Responding to Hannity’s ridicule of conspiracy theorists, she added, “Last time I checked, there are a lot of people today in Dallas standing on a grassy knoll, still disputing the single-bullet theory and Arlen Specter is still in office.”

During Colmes’ turn, he said to Reagan, “Look, the fact of the matter is, I don’t agree with Charlie Sheen. But, you know, your way of dealing with it though is to ‘Let’s denounce Charlie Sheen. Let’s denounce Martin Sheen…’ rather than actually debate the issue and talk about just what’s going on here. You want to make it personal and go after the individual.”

Reagan answered, “You’re out of your mind to debate that.”

Colmes continued, “You’re missing my point. My point is, you take free speech, which we all agree we all have, and you meet that with other free speech... That’s the way free speech works… You choose to make it a personal attack on the individual rather than deal with what the individual is saying, which you can easily refute.”

Reagan had no answer to that, apparently. So he widened his field of attack. “People who support that also are giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”

“Stop with the aid and comfort to the enemy,” Colmes told him. “Michael, can we believe everything the government tells us?”

Reagan stopped in his tracks. “What kind of a question is that, Alan?”

“A good one!” Colmes fired back. “I’m trying to get beyond the idiot-calling and actually have a conversation with you, if that’s possible. We’ve already established that you think he’s an idiot. That’s your level of debate. Do you think the government would ever lie to us?”

But Reagan didn’t seem to have anything else to say beyond attacking the left. “Don’t make the issue other than what it is. It is Charlie Sheen, Mark Cuban supporting Charlie Sheen and putting this out so the left can have an orgasm…”

Marshall jumped in. “The only person having an orgasm here, Michael, are the right, attacking the Sheens – Charlie and his father – attacking any conspiracy theory, actually attacking any one individual on a personal level – I agree with Alan – rather than just ‘let’s sit down and talk.’ …One of the things that I know is that you can only learn more if you hear every side and every opinion.”

Reagan, stymied again, responded with yet more invective. He said scornfully, “Charlie is a wonderful human being, just a wonderful guy…”

Hannity broke in to end the discussion. Waggling his bullyboy pen, he declared, without offering any evidence, “He has free speech but I gotta tell you something. This will be used by America’s enemies as propaganda.” Comment: Unlike, say, an invasion of a Middle East country on false pretenses?

För mig verkar det som om Hannity och Colmes spelar bad cop - good cop
och Colmes verkar vara den goda av dom två. Han ställer relevanta
frågor till Reagan i slutet men får inga konkreta svar. Som vanligt när
sådana som denne Reagan ska ha rätt så kastar de skit på personen
i fråga och inte debatterar frågan i sig.

Sen tycker jag ju Leslie Marshall intar en mycket seriös och insiktsfull
position och vad gör Hannity, jo han matar på med dumma kommentarer
och smutskastning.

Fin avslutning av Hannity - This will be used by the enemies as propaganda

De spelar två feta idioter, sådana som neo-cons gillar och lyssna på. De kan bestämt påstå att Saddam hade massförstörelsevapen och låg bakom 9/11 men kan inte peka ut Irak på en karta.