In his Under The Hammer column in this week's Rhinoceros Times (a Greensboro, NC weekly newspaper, article not online), editor John Hammer regurgitates as serious the intellectually bankrupt idea that "[P]eople who might cause problems for the Clintons have had a habit of dying in unusual circumstances."Hammer proceeds to offer his "evidence." It requires his readers to suspend their good judgment and abandon all reason. Why Hammer perpetually expects his readers to be so naive, I don't know. It seems rather contemptuous of his audience, as if he must be thinking to himself, "My readers are dumb enough to buy this crap."
First on Hammer's list is the suicide of Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster. Hammer writes "[W]hen a top White House official dies of a gunshot wound, you would expect there to be a full autopsy and there was not." Hammer is quite simply wrong about this. A full autopsy was performed. Doubt it? Read this exhaustive investigation into Foster's death. The investigation was conducted by Kenneth Starr, yes that Ken Starr. It concludes that Foster's death was a suicide. To believe otherwise, is to ignore the empirical evidence and assume that Clinton nemesis Starr was in on "it."
Next up, Hammer turns to the plane crash in which former Secretary of Commerce Ron Borwn died along with 34 other people. Hammer describes the crash as "bizarre," although he doesn't explain why the crash was bizarre. In truth, although Hammer incorrectly writes that the crash occurred on a "relatively clear day," the cause of the crash was an improperly executed instrument landing -- tragic, but not bizarre. Hammer reminds us that Brown had a wound in his head that looked like a gunshot wound. He fails to tell us that an examination of Brown's skull by military officials "revealed no bullet, no bone fragments, no metal fragments and, even more telling, no exit wound."
Finally, Hammer offers former White House intern Mary Mahoney who was murdered in a botched robbery. The perpetrator, who was also "accused in the shooting homicide of a security guard in 1993, the attempted murder of a police officer, and four armed robberies" confessed to Mahoney's murder, plead guilty and received a life sentence without the possibility of parole while not once attempting to mitigate his punishment by claiming to be a Clinton operative.
Hammer also incorrectly asserts that victim Mahoney was "going to go public with her story of sexual harassment at the White House." There is zero substantiation of this. Prior to the Monica Lewinsky scandal breaking, Newsweek writer Mike Isikoff hinted that a White House staffer with the initial "M" was about to talk about her affair with Clinton. The "M" was Monica, not Mahoney. Doubt it? Ask Hammer how he "knows" that Mahoney was about to go public.
Snopes has a thorough examination of the distortions, misdirection, fabrications and just plain wrong assertions that people must resort to in order to put forth, as Hammer did, these tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.
If you suspect that your readers are unwilling or incapable of critical thinking, you may think you have an audience for these kinds of conspiracies. Since that seems to be where Hammer is coming from, maybe next week he will write about People With Connections To The Bush Dynasty Who Met With Suspicious And Untimely Deaths.
You might find an explanation to his process when you read about how he edits in the Yes Weekly piece this week about the libel case the Rhino faces.
ReplyDeleteRoch, I don't know how anyone could believe Clinton was behind any of these things because we all know that only George W. Bush is guilty of such conspiracies.
ReplyDeleteEXACTLY SAM!!!! Read the last link of my post -- it is quite shocking the number of people connected to the Bush dynasty who have died under suspicious circumstances.
ReplyDeleteExcellent job! It is becoming the majority voice that the Hammers and their little paper is not to be trusted for the truth. It used to have a place in our community but ever since the arrival of YES! Weekly they have become more and more reckless and more and more irrational in their publication. Their original success came from creating and or causing problems taking the extra steps to find half empty glasses and obnoxiously screaming as to why it has to be that way. Less we forget, they swore up and down and blasted it week after week that a downtown ball park would NEVER NEVER WORK!! Hey John and Willie... you think it's working yet?? Their ego has gotten the best of them both and like all big egos... that will bring them down.. This court trial is going to be so exciting and I can't wait to read the stories week and week in YES! Weekly.
ReplyDeleteSam, Roch's point is pretty obvious that such wild-eyed charges of conspiracy are idiotic no matter whom they're directed at. I despise Bush far more than I despise Bill or even Hillary, but I think the "9/11 was an inside job" meme is promulgated by idiots and loonies. For that matter, I don't even trust most of the people who claim that we invaded Iraq to make Haliburton rich; I think the war was a near-criminal folly, but I don't doubt Bush's sincerity in waging it.
ReplyDeleteI've come to loathe Hillary over the course of this campaign and have lost the respect I used to have for Bill, but Hammer's bullshit is bullshit, and since Hammer is the editor of a prominent local publication who happens to have this particularly virulent bug up his ass, saying so doesn't require one to say anything about the equally idiotic anti-Bush conspiracy theories.
As for Anonymous's comment, despite my reservations about Hammer, I can't crow with glee about the lawsuit. As for YES! Weekly, Jordan Green's friendship with Lorraine Aherne doesn't exactly make him the best person to fact-check Hammer and Bledsoe.
Green knows Aherne, Green knows Hammer..And what does any of that have to do with the price of tea in China? NOTHING.. Green found the facts and reported on them... Bledsoe HAD the facts and opted to over-look them. When our own Sheriff BJ Barnes said we can find nothing wrong..When key witnesses stepped forward and say, "Hey Jerry.....your source is wrong... if you print this you are lieing." It makes you wonder. It the same-old, same-old slick willy & john hammer sensationalize story trick that THIS TIME... has got them in a serious mess. They are a broken record..
ReplyDeleteIn my humble opinion, I think the Rhino serves an important function in our community. Yes, I agree that they sometimes look to stir up controversy, but I also think they speak truth to power on important occasions. It is precisely because of that that I despise seeing them stoop to a level to which they needn't stoop. It damages their credibility.
ReplyDeleteThe Rhino is destroying our city and has never seemed to really support anything and anyone. They are teh chicken little of newspapers. The sky is falling, the city is burning, things are soooo bad. Things could ALWAYS be worse. It's all you look at it and I think things are pretty damn good..around here. New businesses are opening, new homes are being built.
ReplyDeleteI love greensboro and am proud to be here. The Rhino depresses you and after you read it you wanna shoot yourself for living here.. Take your heads out of the sand and use your own eyes...not John hammers blurry prospective... He's a character... like Ann Coulture... a joke..
The Rhinoceros Times website is updated weekly, one day after the print edition is published. The entire Under the Hammer column from the May 29 issue can be read online at http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-i-2008-05-29-179572.112113_Under_the_Hammer_52908.html
ReplyDelete