Shattered Glass

reviewed December 1, 2004

Somehow I missed both the original story which broke in 1998 and this Billy Ray movie that was released in 2003.* Never being a reader of The New Republic (TNR), a magazine traditionally leftist but now much more neocon, jew Stephen Glass was not a name at all familiar to me.* However, after reading Alex Linder’s excellent review on VNN, I eagerly rented the DVD and was well rewarded.* Alex used his review as more or less of a springboard for his thoughts about archetypical jews and especially about those plying their crafts in the media they so dominate.

“Shattered Glass,” of course, refers to the broken career of the pathological liar Stephen Glass, who fabricated at least 24 of the 41 stories he wrote for TNR between 1995 and 1998.* This movie, which feels much more like a drama than a documentary, is somewhat unique among caper movies, because we do not feel any empathy here with the jew deceiver.* In films such as “The Great Imposter” and “Catch Me If You Can” we tend to root for the rogue to get away with his deceptions, because he is clever and basically not hurting anyone.* Stephen Glass, however, nearly destroyed the careers of many people, people who had misplaced their trust in him.* He also nearly caused the magazine to fold and most certainly did much to erode the credibility of a profession already on shaky ground.

The performances in this film are uniformly excellent, with Hayden Christensen – although not a jew in real life – perfectly portraying the alternating arrogance, ingratiation, and ultimately phony contrition so typical of the race.* His face shows no sense of shame as he looks directly into his editor’s eyes as he tells the most outrageous and bald-faced lies to cover his previous lies.* What is more incredible is how he was able to fool so many people for so long, especially his editors and colleagues at a major American opinion journal.* But, as we have seen in the more recent Jayson Blair case with the New York Times, this gullibility can infect publications much bigger than TNR.* As a matter of fact, I was sort of stunned to read during the film’s opening credits that TNR had a writing and editorial staff of only 15 and that their median age was only 26 – incredibly small and youthful for a national journal self-promoted as “the official in-flight magazine of Air Force One, read by all the movers and shakers in D.C.”* Glass at 24 was the youngest and he was already an associate editor.

Yes, part of this gullibility can be pinned on ideological bias, the willingness to believe anything that supports one’s preconceived ideas, such as Glass’s fake reporting of drunken orgies at a Young Republican convention.* But there is also, I believe, another point that this movie’s director wishes to make:*that is about trust.* Fact checking, as this movie so well demonstrates, is not an exact science, and there is a certain point where journalists rely on a mutual trust, an Aryan value that the jew exploits to his advantage.* Jews can ingratiate themselves to fellow workers and customers when it benefits them, and Glass was a master of flattery.* Whenever a friend tries to tell me how nice certain jews are, I usually reply that of course jews will be nice to you if you have something they want.* It's either your money or your personal services, never your genuine friendship.

Glass’s adversary, newly appointed editor Charles “Chuck” Lane, is equally well-played by Peter Sarsgaard.* Initially loyal to and trusting of his employee, Lane is nevertheless dogged in pursuit of the truth and his strong suspicions.* In all fairness, however, Lane himself credits the uncovering of this scam to journalistic rival Forbes Online’s Adam Penenberg (sounds jewish), who did the initial investigation of the “Hacker” story.* Lane is a straight shooter who wants to establish the facts beyond any reasonable doubt, and so he gives Glass enough rope to hang himself.* Incredibly, though, he is never able to extract a complete confession as is his goal.* No, in the end Glass impersonates the victim and even “apologizes,” but never admits to moral guilt.* His response when caught red-handed is to whine and make excuses – even threaten suicide – and ultimately “go into therapy” for five years.* Typically jewish response.

I would strongly recommend renting the DVD version of this film, because it has Steve Croft’s very revealing 60 Minutes interview with the real Stephen Glass and Chuck Lane.* There is also some excellent commentary by both writer/director Ray and Lane himself, who actually assisted in the production of the film.* Lane is not nearly as Aryan-looking as Sarsgaard in the film, and the thought crossed my mind that he himself could possibly be jewish.* (I couldn’t verify his ethnicity, but after all, noted attorney and JFK assassination investigator Mark Lane is a jew as was a veteran character actor also named Charles Lane.)* Nevertheless, Lane sounds as straightforwardly Aryan on the DVD commentary as was his character in the film.* Glass, in person, is just as much of a weasel – if not more so with his kinky black hair – than the slimy, slippery jew portrayed by Christensen.

I also learned from the 60 Minutes interview that Glass, far from facing serious criminal charges and impoverishing civil liability suits, has actually fallen into this sordid sewer and come up smelling like a rose -- as only a jew could do, I might add.* Although he is no longer working in journalism, we are told that he has finished law school and passed the bar exam (although there is some question if he will be allowed to practice law).* He has also recently published a novel, The Fabulist, based on his own prevaricating career, and reportedly received a six-figure advance for this book.* What chutzpah!*

So that, I’m afraid, is “the rest of the story.”

RICH BROOKS