Here’s a question that nettles newspaper editors: How far out do comments by a reader have to be to be considered unfit for general consumption? The answer, usually, is pretty far out.
A recent letter-to-the-editor published in Stars and Stripes provides a case study. Published on Sept. 11, of all days, it questioned conventional and most would say totally proven accounts of the 2001 terrorist attack at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. "Either God helped these terrorists or a powerful military force collaborated," was the explosive finale to the letter from James Carrethers of Kaiserslautern, Germany. The military force, by implication, was America’s. One of his points: "That our Air Force couldn’t find any of the four hijacked planes was a miracle."
I admit to having been perplexed at seeing the letter. Others questioned it too. Was it an example of free speech, just as published letters espousing other controversial theories – creationism is one – are such examples? Or was it over the top?
"I personally find it repulsive," said Executive Editor Robb Grindstaff. But he added: "I’d say let our readers set the record straight with their responses." That was prophetic. On a single day, Sept. 18, Stripes printed five letters responding to the conspiracy theorist.
Surprisingly, to me, only one of them complained about Stripes’ decision to print the letter. "Publishing [the letter] without an idiocy disclaimer makes the editors look like idiots. Shame on you!" wrote Maj. Charles Randall, from Balad Air Base, Iraq. He expanded the jabbing: "Stars and Stripes has long been out of touch with its readership, seen by the pro-homosexual and anti-war bias. Publishing this tripe on 9/11 shows your true colors." (In truth, there was some second-guessing among the editors about having printed the letter on the very anniversary of the attack.)
The other letters all concentrated on taking the conspiracy argument to task. "As a member of the armed services, I find it hard to believe that our government or any other for that matter, would be capable of such tragic events without something being leaked somewhere," wrote Petty Officer 2nd Class Joseph R. Vincent, from Brussels, Belgium.
Another writer, Spc. Daniel Glass of Joint Base Balad, Iraq, attacked the insinuation that the Air Force was complicit. "As for the Air Force response," he wrote, "he is assuming that the planes were armed, allowed to break the sound barrier, and magically able to be up in the air and near a rogue airliner in 10 minutes of the plane dropping off the scope."
What I found interesting was the support the letter-writers expressed for the concept of freedom of speech. Brian Auten of Mannheim, Germany, wrote: "These theories will always run amok, but the older I get, I find them highly offensive. Although, it makes me love the First Amendment even more." And Vincent said that while he could not let the Carrethers letter go unanswered, he thought it was "great" that the letter writer "had his free speech."
Stripes’ editorial director, Terry Leonard, put it more forcefully: "It is not free speech if you are not free to espouse the absurd and objectionable."
And while it is difficult for a newspaper to choose to whom it offers free speech, it should be noted that in this case the controversial letter came from a member of the community served by this paper. A similar letter coming from some unassociated, geographic left field, in my opinion, would be better consigned to the boiling pot of the blogoshere.
9/11 Facts That Most American’s Are Unaware of
9/11 Facts That Most American’s Are Unaware of
* WTC building 7 was not hit by a plane but still managed to collapse on 9/11. This has raised a lot of questions. According to the official NIST report, the 47 story building collapsed due to a new phenomenon dubbed “thermal expansion” caused by fires on a few floors. If this is the case why have other steel buildings such as The Madrid Spain Tower burned for much longer and not collapsed?
*Most Americans believe Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks. Too most Americans surprise, Bin Laden has never been charged with the 9/11 attacks. When asked why, the FBI’s Chief of Investigative Publicity said “The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
* In 2004 Condoleeza Rice told the 9/11 Commission in a sworn statement that “no one could have imagined them taking a plane and slamming it into a building”. Rewind a few years to May of 2001. By presidential order, Dick Cheney was given direct control of all war game operations in the US. Coincidentally, one of the war games that NORAD was conducting on 9/11 was a hijacked plane that would crash into the WTC. If the idea of terrorists flying a plane into a building was unimaginable, then why was NORAD simulating that exact scenario the same day it managed to happen not once, but three times?
*Pools of molten steel were found at the remains of all three collapsed buildings. An independent investigation lead by Professor Steven Jones discovered that the molten steel was caused by a modified version of thermite called thermate. Thermate is a patented formula mainly used to cut through tank armor. After seven years the government has not given a reason for the existence of the thermate.