Breaking: North Korea claims nuclear weapons

Sorry, I am not a Jehova's Witness

 

Convinced you of what? That had nothing to do with the point I was making.

Out of a life for speaking the truth? Are you from Venezuela or Russia? Because if you're an American, I'd have to say that you don't know what you're talking about.

Maybe you'll realize that America has a very free press (even compared to other first-world countries) once you finish 8th grade.

 

Reporters and journalists for mainstream publications don't really have a say in what is published or what they write, since it must all go through the editor who decides what will and won't be published. If it goes against what the owner of that publication, as well as those who fund that publication want, it won't be published.

If something is published that goes against what those who fund these publications want, they will lose this funding.

There is no truly free press in America, aside from a handful of independent sources, like American Free Press.

Mainstream media is very much controlled. Anyone who thinks othewise is naive.

 

My father has a few friends who are reporters or contributors to major newspapers, and I've never gotten the impression that they've been intimidated by their superiors when it comes to an article or opinion column (although I've never directly asked any of them). Other than basic rules of journalistic integrity, reporters for most newspapers and news stations are pretty much free to cover stories however they want. There are a few exceptions (liberals might find it difficult to land a job at FOX News), but in general reporters are free to cover the stories as they see fit.

There are some differences between America's press and that of other nations. For example, in America, reporters try not to insert their personal opinion into stories they're covering unless it's an opinion column. In most European countries, reporters make no secret of their personal biases. Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages...but basic honesty is the rule for journalists in almost every democratic country. To accuse all journalists of being "paid liars", or to claim that they'll find themselves out of work (or even dead) if they print the truth is absurd.

 

The people who fund these publications generally want to make money, which involves printing the truth (exceptions: the internet tabloids you read, which cater to a very specific market of idiots). If the Wall Street Journal or Washington Post was regularly caught printing false stories, they'd quickly lose credibility and make less money. Think of how big the scandals at CBS and the New York Times were...their credibility was seriously damaged by single individuals, and both had to scramble to regain their reputation. With so much competition, it's impossible for any media to churn out false or misleading stories on a regular basis without being called on it.

 

Which "internet tabloids" do you think I get my information from?

 

Now back to the Main Event: Breaking: North Korea claims nuclear weapons

 

Ever hear of Gary Webb? He was an investigative reporter who wrote about everyhting that he could back up. He commited 'suicide' with two bullet wounds to the head, that was according to the first report. Later on, I beleive a couple of days, They released the report, saying that it was only one bullet. This was in America. See for yourself:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/11744167p-12630255c.html

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/121304_gary_webb.shtml

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2004/141204webbmurdered.htm

http://www.newsfrombabylon.com/index.php?q=node/4764

And for some articles by Webb that may have warranted Gary Webb's 'suicide':

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/october96/crack_contra_11-1.html

http://www.newsreview.com/issues/sacto/2004-10-14/cover.asp

Feel free to note the dates that all those articles came out.

Now, I've provided you with proof that people do find themselves dead in america, in the present time, for speaking the truth. Please, show me a reporter/politician/ etc. from Russia who has been murdered by somebody, in Russia, after communism, for speaking the truth. Just curious...

 

Oh yeah, and for the conspiracy theory part of it, some think he was killed in order that his new book wouldn't be written.

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4897

 

And what makes you think he didn't commit suicide? Do you have any evidence otherwise? And if you do, can you implicate someone in his murder and show that it was related to his stories?

If not, it sounds to me like you're just running your mouth.

Anyone can kill themselves whenever they feel like it. You don't have to be a truth-speaking reporter to shoot yourself in the head.

Umm, ok... But what does that have to do with anything? Stop trying to change the subject.

http://www.highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?docid=1P1:73029987&refid=ink_pubnews&skeyword=&teaser=

http://www.russiaontrial.org/freedom/index.cfm

 

Yeah, but like I said, it seems like something that would be disregarded by most as a conspiracy 'theory',

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4897

In reply to other stuff you said:
He had multiple bullet wounds to the head...(http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2004/151204deathconfirmed.htm) According to what I've read, and I can't say this is fact, but assuming it is, first, the report was that he shot himself in the head, actually the face, I think, twice. Then, the report said he shot him self once, then, later on, once again, it said twice. Please, explain to me how you can shoot yourself in the face twice.

And thanks for the articles, like I said, I was just curious...

 

Automatic weapon, hand stays on the trigger after the first bullet has left the gun... unless you know the details of the shots (trajectory etc) then you cannot make a claim either way about how it happened - maybe the first shot didn't kill him - only blew off his chin or something.

Using your logic why would you shoot someone in the face twice? Especially if you were trying to make it look like suicide.

There is also the possibility that the two bullet report is just plain wrong. Even honest journalists get things wrong from time to time!

Is it possible to believe a report when you have no idea of the journalists agenda?

If someone read a story stating something about an organisation, only to find later that the journalist had some kind of link to another, competitive organisation how would that effect the credibility of the writing?

Generally over here, you'll find that the journalists (well, usually not the journalists, but the publications they are writing for), have clear biases - but they do write stories from the other point of view from time to time - the fact that they do this, despite their clear bias makes it seem to me, more credible.

TheStoon

 

Interesting. I hadn't heard about this. Not to sound like I'm letting North Korea off the hook (I don't know if they were involved or not), but I thought A.Q. Khan had been undeniably linked to this?

 

The Jews Have Nuclear Bombs Too Who Cares .

 

Anyone hear that North Korea would interpt any trade sanctions placed against them as An Act of war? Supposedly thats one of th U.S.'s solutions for getting them to stop developing/testing.

Which country is fuller of B.S.?

 

the u.s. did that to japan, and then japan attacked pearl harbour..

those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.