There’s an email re-circulating that claims to be from an American Airlines pilot, Captain John Maniscalco, and is titled, “You Worry Me”. You can read one version at Infidels Are Cool. (h/t Jawa)
In the comments, someone notes Snopes has marked the status of the email as “Undetermined.” I decided to see how Snopes could possibly have come to that conclusion since the essay is obviously opinion and not one claiming actual occurrences based on facts that can be verified or debunked.
As is typical of email and the internet, there are apparently several versions. Naturally, Snopes chose to put on display as the “Example” one that has had additional language added by who knows who as it was passed via email from person to person. The email essay Snopes quotes ends up sounding more like a hateful rant than someone expressing heartfelt angst, and asking legitimate questions of the Arab-American community in general. Snopes’ version is one I have never personally seen until now, not that that makes a difference one way or the other. However, there are a few other subtle aspects of Snopes’ “investigation” that are very telling.
First, they claim the origin (original author) of the email remains “murky”. They further claim their attempts “to verify whether its real author is an American Airlines pilot and/or someone named John Maniscalco have so far led only to dead ends” even though they were in fact able to verify through the FAA Registry the existence of a pilot by the name of John Maniscalco. That’s it? No follow-up? Did they attempt to locate and contact Mr. Maniscalco? Snopes doesn’t say. Perhaps the name John Maniscalco is too common. You know, like John Smith.
In addition, Snopes states [emphasis mine]:
“… but this item was also printed in a less vitriolic form in the Hyattsville, Maryland, Gazette (under the title “An open letter to my Arab-Muslim neighbors”) on 12 October 2001 and credited to a Kevin Daly of Beltsville. Newspaper publication of a piece as a letter to the editor is not a reliable indicator of true authorship, …”
Really? October 12, 2001? That was published in a legitimate newspaper only one month and one day after the 9/11 attacks? Note that Snopes says the essay was first collected via email in 2002. That is, at minimum, two months and 19 days AFTER Mr. Daly’s essay appeared in the Gazette, if you assume Snopes collected the circulating email on January 1, 2002. Logically, it would appear Mr. Daly is more than likely the original author. If Snopes really wanted to “verify” the original author, wouldn’t they want to try to contact Mr. Daly or the Gazette? Did they? Only Snopes knows for sure since they never tell us one way or the other. Instead, Snopes launches into myriad explanations of who the author is in the form of it “might have been” this, or “might be” that, all of which is nothing more than meaningless speculation designed to obfuscate the lack of actual investigation on their part. I ask you, would contacting either one really have been that hard?
In my opinion, the reason Snopes’ attempts to verify the original author of this essay led to “dead ends” is because Snopes’ wanted it to. By claiming the origin of the essay remains “murky”, and using words like “vitriolic” and “apocryphal”, they hope to cause you to view the essay in an unfavorable light. To classify the original essay itself as “True”, based on Mr. Daly’s October 12, 2001 published letter to the editor, would only lend legitimacy to it, and help to point out the obvious elephant in the room many people are still willing to ignore nearly six years after 9/11. Snopes’ liberal bias would never allow them to do that. Instead, they attempt to discredit Mr. Daly’s reasonable essay by using an obviously altered essay as the “Example”, and then claiming its original authorship is in question. Finally, they use it as a forum to, in their typical liberal, finger-wagging fashion, lecture us on the evils of such thinking. (See last two paragraphs.)
I’ve told many of you before that Snopes has a strong liberal bias. This is further proof. Like the MSM, anything you read at Snopes must be read with thoughtful scrutiny; the whole thing, and not just their declaration of the status as “True”, “False”, “Undetermined”, etc.
Once you get past the contortions of Snopes’ article , the most important question you should ask yourself is whether it really matters who wrote the original essay? I don’t think it does. Someone is expressing what a majority of Americans became concerned about after 9/11, and continue to be concerned about today.
Sweet article!! Should be circulated.
I WILL FORWARD THE LETTER AS I HAVE READ IT………BECAUSE I FEEL THE SAME WAY……….I WILL WILLING TO GIVE UP FOUR YEARS OF MY LIFE TO DEFEND THIS NATION IF CALLED TO……..1964 TO 1968…DO YOU RECALL THE VIETNAM WAY…….
Typical conservatard bull
Gee, Mack. Did you come up with that stellar response all by yourself, or did you consult your relatives and give it a few days before publishing?
Liberals seem to lie and not believe anything. This why I c hose not to be liberal. I was liberal for about 20 years.. I was so stupid I believed everything they said. It was Obama that enlightened me. No, I didn’t vote for him. What gave it away was the Pastor Wright. I thought how could someone go to that church of hate and think Obama was great. I did a lot of research. I found my place in the world. I am happy that I question everything. I don’t believe all Conservative Politicians. Like Ted Cruz, he is miserable liar. I did like him at first. Oy, one has to be very careful and not believe everything people say. It was easier to be niave. However, I like the facts better now… even if they hurt me. I have googled a lot of things and I usually see snopes at the top saying false or not identified. Thank you, I feel the same way about Snopes.
It’s undetermined as to the original source.
SNOPES has blown a tremendous opportunity to be the voice for truth. Shame be upon you for NOT standing up for “TRUTH’..
The only thing that SNOPES is referring to by “Undetermined” is the source of the article! You seem to be going way beyond reason to attempt to discredit SNOPES. In so doing, you claim a liberal bias. David and Barbara Mikkelson run SNOPES. Funny thing is that you are making an ass out of yourself since David last registered and voted Republican, and Barbara is Canadian with no interest in US politics! SNOPES is popularly considered to be the number 1 source for Internet debunking or verification, and even the number 2 source, Truth or Fiction, highly praises SNOPES on its accuracy and thoroughness. I think you need to go back to your web and catch some flies for dinner, spidermommy! You surely don’t have the intelligence or the authority to challenge the results of SNOPES research!!!
Trying to understand how you know how David voted (unless you were in the booth with him, all you can do is guess or what take on faith what he says he did), and how being from Canada “with no interest in US politics” (again, how do you know she has no interest???) eliminates the possibility of liberalism? It seems you are going way beyond reason to attempt to discredit the author.
Due to the fact that the Mikkelsons have been under attack by both liberals and conservatives ever since they started SNOPES, they have been interviewed in an attempt to reveal their political preference. The statements I made were a result of those interviews.
Well said Lee, and by the way , Shoot me if I ever add “tard” to the end of a word (Mack) or ever utter the word “sheeple”.
I still enjoy reading this letter! But I also agree, Snopes is inaccurate and unreliable. How they have gained a reputation for confirming truth, is perplexing!
I agree. I used to think Snopes was reliable. Double checking their references v mine I think they distort their information to suit their agenda. I no longer use it. In my opinion the Snope agenda is liberal, maybe even very liberal. They can’t help their bias just as I can’t help reading everything from conservative to liberal but none of my sources masquerade as a vetting source for Truth.
I would ask anyone who attacks SNOPES as being untruthful and biased to cite specific examples.
And what evidence do you present to back up your allegations, Susan? I have done extensive research to either disprove or validate the reports by SNOPES, and my determination is that they are to be commended for their thoroughness of research and reporting without bias. I’ll never understand the willingness of people to discredit SNOPES without taking the time to do their own research or to have any credible proof to back up their allegations. (Somebody else said so, so it must be true!)
Dear Lee,
This piece is an opinion piece. If you disagree with an opinion it is your right to do so. Opinions are often based on experience and certainly the history the author relates is accurate. Frankly, I have been aggressed by a Muslim woman in her “habit” because I asked her control her son in a store when he was tearing items out of their packages and throwing them on the floor and she was was watching and smiling. In the parking lot of that store she waited for me and attempted to run me over with her car. I and others filed suit and she was deported within 2 weeks. Too bad we don’t do that more often..
Gwenie, it’s more than an “opinion” when you impugn someone’s character or motives. SNOPES has been a successful business for 20 years and unless they have proof enough to take a definitive stand either pro or con, they will defer to “undetermined” or “unverifiable” until better proof is available. David Mikkelson has said that the site receives more complaints of liberal bias than conservative bias, but insists that the same debunking standards are applied to all political urban legends. FactCheck reviewed a sample of Snopes’ responses to political rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama, and found them to be free from bias in all cases. FactCheck noted that Barbara Mikkelson was a Canadian citizen (and thus unable to vote in US elections) and David Mikkelson was an independent who was once registered as a Republican. “You’d be hard-pressed to find two more apolitical people,” David Mikkelson told them.
I also believe that mesothelioma is a scarce form of cancers that is often found in those people previously exposed to asbestos. Cancerous cells form inside the mesothelium, which is a shielding lining that covers most of the body’s organs. These cells commonly form inside the lining of your lungs, tummy, or the sac which actually encircles one’s heart. Thanks for discussing your ideas.
Hi you should try posting your ad on topdollarclassifieds.ca its free to post and it is now the fastest growing classifieds in North America.With local posting areas in your town and city’s in over 23 country’s in North America. We get on average about 100,000 people a day coming to our site and more check us out at http://topdollarclassifieds.ca
There was nothing dishonest in there.
False accusation by someone who can’t use his real name: Spidermommy ???
So all you folks take as gospel what ‘someone’, who calls themselves “spidermommy” (for some reason) blogs…He poses criticism and questions toward Snopes by doing just what he accuses them of doing: not working hard enough to find the whole story.
Well, ‘Spidermommy’, if it’s so damn easy to get answers, What are the answers to the questions you claim Snopes ignored?
Perhaps John Maniscalco was fired for writing such a horrid letter. He should be. There is a lot of problems with homeland security screening the same passengers over and over and over again — it really does not good but harass people. Meanwhile we are terrorized by white “Christians” shooting people in a church in Charleston, SC and killing people in a medical clinic in Colorado Springs. Spreading this letter spreads hatred. I don’t think the letter was really written by an airline pilot at all.
The author of this article should just post what Snopes actually said instead of try to paraphrase things. I give the link below. Snopes didn’t argue about the opinions expressed in the letter and even said that could not be “proven” because its only opinion. What they could say, however, is whether the letter really was written by the pilot mentioned, whether that pilot even exists, and what the origin of the letter is. That’s what is unproven. They found a very similar letter was written years prior and attributed to a different pilot and has circulated the internet for years in different forms. All of that sounds suspicious and could likely mean it was written by someone who made up the story to make a point and sound more credible about by claiming if was written by someone in authority. This is a common tactic – I’ve seen it before in other contexts. That was what Snopes examined. Therefore, the author of this article is unfair in criticizing Snopes. Everyone read the actual article here and think for yourselves: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/soapbox/worryme.asp
Snopes should always be questioned. Numerous articles (and no I am not going to list them all, but I’ve been in the PC world for 30 years) are questionable. It is always subtle. Here’s what the owner/originator of Snopes states, ” Mikkelson says. “But ‘facts’ are almost meaningless,” he argues, “without being put into some kind of context.”
And when “you” put something into context, you alone, then the charges of bias will arise… the reason (while I disagree with the theme) that ‘facts are useless’ is that many young people have lost the ability to deduce. I use other research to verify articles that I find questionable. I don’t want someone else putting things into ‘context’ for me. Do you?
While I fully concur with spidermommy’s last two paragraphs, I also fully agree with Lee’s entire rebuttal of SM’s criticism of Snopes. One cannot be human and totally unbiased, but he Mikkelson’s have attained, for many years, a high standard in their attempt to get at the truth.
I declare I have no connection to the Mikkelson’s nor to Snopes other than being a long time reader.