It’s always fun to tweak Rupert Murdoch. Showbiz 411 gets in a good jab:
UPDATE– Paul Sperry responds: “Unger and Moore have their own agendas. mine aligns with the FBI WFO case agents and FCPD* detectives who say they’ll never forgive the Bush admin for throttling their investigation of leads back to Saudi Embassy and Bandar himself in McLean. they view the former POTUS as a traitor.”
Earlier this afternoon:
Shock: today’s Murdoch owned highly conservative New York Post features an opinion piece backing Michael Moore‘s Bush-Saudi claims from “Fahrenheit 911.” It’s the main story on the Post’s website with a huge photo and prominent placement. The story is also featured in a color block headline on the front page of today’s paper.
Moore must get a lot of satisfaction out of this. It’s only taken a decade for a conservative pundit writing in a conservative newspaper to endorse his movie.
Indeed, Paul Sperry’s editorial is a direct echo of a 2003 Vanity Fair story by Craig Unger, author of the book that was the underlying information for the Oscar winning movie. That book was called “House of Bush, House of Saud” and it still available for Kindle. The Vanity Fair article was called Saving the Saudis, publishing ten years ago. Here’s the link.
Today’s piece by Sperry is shocking first because he is a conservative. But second, Sperry’s piece questions why huge portions of a Congressional report about 9/11 remain redacted– blacked out–in his piece called “Inside the Saudi Cover Up.”
The story could just as easily have been called “Inside the Bush Cover Up.” It’s amazing that NY Post editor Col Allan ran it, and that Rupert Murdoch would have approved it. The Post has always mocked Michael Moore, and certainly backed George W. Bush endlessly.
For conservatives, Sperry suddenly endorsing Moore and Unger and “Fahrenheit 911″ has to be a slap in the face…
[continues at Showbiz 411]