Talk:Thierry Meyssan

Person non-grata in the US

The article mentions that Meyssan has been "alledgedly declared persona non-grata" in the US. While I understand that the alledgedly makes it clear that it is not a "fact," i believe a citation to be needed because the source of the allegation is an important piece of information in and of itself. Meyssan himself is a conspiracy theorist who apparently is now in hiding believing that the US is paying France to kill him or something along these lines... If he is the source of the allegation that he is persona non-grata in the US, that has vastly different implications than if the source is say an anonymous source from the US governement. (maybe a State Department official not authorized to speak with the press) The first would imply that it is part of his conspiracy theory and that his status as persona non-grata would be related to say, an alleged governement coverup. While the second would imply that the US government simply is not enchanted with foreigners who accuse it of mass murder, terrorism etc which would be somewhat understandable.PrometheeFeu (talk) 23:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

its ironic that you ask for a citation on one issue, while making an uncited unsubstantiated claim about him benig in hiding from assassins! Jalusbrian (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know who the biggest loser is-- this guy, or the fools who believe him. He's as big an idiot as Le Pen and the fools on the far right.

well theres no prize for guessing you (a nameless nobody) are a even bigger mistake..Is that the best you have: that hes a 'loser'? Jalusbrian (talk) 23:21, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It describes this delusional creep pretty accurately, no? ANK 70.106.174.119 (talk) 22:21, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

More or less, I wouldn't put it on those terms "creep", he has an agenda and the article makes that abundantly clear. But there is no need to step even further and discredit him outrightly, if we examine the Libyan issue, NATO did go outside of the UN guidelines, the involvement of outside special forces is abundant and clearly Tripoli didn't fall to the rebels. Having said that this clearly shows that a campaign of excessive manipulation of public opinion did take place.

On the other issues that he states an opinion we all are free to think for ourselves, and people that makes us examine stuff from other angles are valuable, especially if they are transparent about their position. I still don't buy the 9/11 official story and report (that goes a bit deeper than what is was officially reported). Building 7 and the interests surrounding the information lost in it seems to me an indication that all is not as what the media and the official report made public. --79.168.6.93 (talk) 10:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)