XENOPHONZ opened this issue on Mar 04, 2008 · 57 posts
XENOPHONZ posted Thu, 06 March 2008 at 6:07 PM
Oh, if the publisher's press release can be believed -- and you have to be careful to put words like "if" and "appears" into pretty much any statement which cites information provided as factual by this particular publisher -- then there most definitely were active conspirators who were going along with the writer's falsified story. If certain individuals actually did misrepresent themselves to her literary agent as being the writer's foster siblings -- and they fell in line with a story which has since been determined to be a total fabrication -- then those persons were active participants in the lie.
Quote - You claim the NYT was bias blinded. If true, she didn't have to show them much
That's true. She didn't have to show them much. So they must have had a reason for believing her. 
If it's this easy to fool the NYT's -- and apparently it is -- then I have a nice bridge, conveniently located in their own home city, which I'd like to sell to them. :biggrin: