From Victor Thorn & Lisa Guliani

We should be very wary of Greg Szymanski for the following reasons:

1) He actually FAKED an interview with Morgan Reynolds.

According to Mr. Reynolds: "In June [2005] Syzmanski made up a fake interview with me by taking sentences from my June 9 article, albeit lifted accurately, written as if in conversation while claiming that he interviewed me by telephone from my A&M office, a bald lie. That caused some problems because "unfriendlies" claimed I lied about having an A&M office rather than writer Syzmanski. He pursued me and apologized privately, but not publicly. He claimed credit for getting the mainstream to look at my article. So I understand that his stuff cannot be relied on without corroboration elsewhere."

Why would Szymanski so needlessly lie about something this simple; and more importantly, what else is he lying about? This is the same type of dishonest behavior that created huge mainstream media scandals with Jayson Blair (New York Times) and Stephen Glass (The New Republic). Should alternative media figures like Greg Szymanski be LYING like they do? We think this is abominable.

2) He promoted in a big way the "Bush-Cheney Indicted" story which was patently false. Bush and Cheney are still not indicted, so where is his retraction?

3) He pushed the Chicago MI-5 subway shooting fallacy which was patently false. Where is his retraction?

4) He supported (either directly or indirectly) the "Barbara Olson Arrested" story which was nothing but a hoax. Where is his retraction?

5) At the fourth anniversary of 9-11, he covered the 9-11 Mafia Gatekeeper angle (where they corraled people AWAY from the epicenter of this disaster with a wild goose chase through the streets of Manhattan), while refusing to touch the REAL story, which were protesters at Ground Zero. Even The Village Voice (a pseudo-mainstream publication) covered this event with our 14-foot 9-11 WORLD TRADE CENTER CONTROLLED DEMOLITION banner, while Szymanski deliberately dropped the ball, even after talking to us at Ground Zero and the United Nations. Why wouldn't he - someone supposedly on our side - report on this story? Very pathetic.

6) He ran with Captain May's "Imminent Nuclear Attack in Texas City, Tx." It never happened, yet he blurted in his headline that it was IMMINENT. How much more of this National Enquirer style 'journalism' are we supposed to tolerate?

7) He is a strong supporter of known disinfo specialists, sensationalists, and totally discredited figures such as Tom Flocco and Sherman Skolnick.

===========================

From Michael Langston

Greg,

I find it kind of odd that you would raise troubling "questions" about Professor Steven E. Jones in your recent article, yet apparently you choose NOT to question truly questionable individuals such as "Captain" Eric May, whom you failed to "question" in this manner when you had him as a guest on your show. Didn't his prediction of imminent nuclear attack announced on your program turn out to be totally false?

Why is it then that Professor Jones, who has done more for the cause of 9-11 Truth than anyone I can remember since Morgan Reynolds and David Ray Griffin, why is it that HE deserves to be "questioned" as a possible "government plant" yet "Captain" Eric May apparently does not?

Greg Szymanski Raises Questions About Steven E. Jones

Greg Szymanski Interviews Dr. Jonathan Reed Nelson

Greg Szymanski Interviews Captain "Ed Dames" May

Isn't there some sort of double standard at work here?

If anyone deserves to be "questioned" and regarded with suspicion, it is YOU, Greg Szymanski, and such obvious phonies as "Captain" Eric May.