Reuters admits appeasing terrorists

So basically, Reuters was lying to it's audience.

It lied about what it was doing (in fact,
censoring it's reports, rather than presenting
an honest, open set of information
with integrity). Why it was doing it (craven
intimidation, not beliefs or objectivity).
And of course, lying in the content that it
was presenting. In addition, they clearly
became accomplices of the terrorists.

Not a great recommendation for using it as a
trustworthy source for critical information.

Posted by: at Sep 22, 2004 12:15:20 AM

Agreed - Reuters however is not well known in Canada, and has lost much of it's credibility in
recent years. The CBC Newsnetwork is much worse,
to the point where I have stopped watching CBC
television, eliminated Radio 1 and only focus on
CBC Radio 2 for classic music access - the CBC should, as I have written many times, be sold off
and a REAL public broadcasting network created.
Regards
Jack MacLeod
Moncton NB E1E 3M4
21 September 2004

Posted by: Jack MacLeod at Sep 22, 2004 12:21:40 AM

I believe the Asper family (CanWest Global) have expressed an interest in acquiring the CBC. This would, of course, give them pretty much a media monopoly in Canada. Israelis, and other colonialists, would thereby be saved the horror of being exposed to conflicting points of view. This supposes that the Aspers have the only voice but what if another private owner was not persuaded of the virtues of ethnic-cleansing? Perhaps, being of Scots descent, he might feel that Culloden and the Highland Clearances were not good examples of civilized behaviour. Fortunately for us all the internet is the new message and the age of bigotted media barons (as well as state information organs you'll be happy to know) is rapidly coming to an end. In the meantime you should 'be careful what you wish for . . . you might just get it'.

Posted by: at Sep 22, 2004 6:12:12 PM

Mr./Ms No-name. Media monopoly in Canada? This is a country where the information police (CRTC) will not permit Fox News but gave the green light to the terrorist network- Al-Jazeerah!.
I wish the "Asper family" the best of luck with their alleged intention to acquire CBC. At this point it is fair to say that no one watches Canadian news. Sadly for you however, you are right in the internet blogs are replacing the liberal mainstream media as a source of news. It's just that with the recent Rathergate affair, it is the conservative blogs who are coming out the winners.

Posted by: T.A Tiger at Sep 23, 2004 4:08:40 PM

Sadly for us all the "conservatives" appear to be winning. Sadly for the workers whose jobs are being sent off-shore while their schools, hospitals, health and pension benefits are eroded as their taxes are increased. Sad for the nations whose resources are being plundered at an ever greater rate while, in return, they are offered lowest-wage sweat-jobs (as available). Sad even for Israel because very few Jews who work to create and sustain it will become rich or even well-to-do. How many jobs in Israel have gone to non-Jewish imported workers (including from the "occupied territories")? How many have been "out-sourced" to other countries? The 'Conservative' financial supporters of Israel (and their various political fronts) did not become uber rich by being sentimental. War has always been profitable - but not for the foot soldiers. Ariel Sharon has personally done very well out of an intifada he started. How well have you done?

Posted by: anon at Sep 23, 2004 5:09:18 PM

Calling Israelis "colonialists" is such a bigoted statement. If Israeli's are colonialists, then so are the canadians and Americans who "took" the land from the native inhabitants. In fact, the Israelis are less colonial since they had legitimate claims to the land and had been living there for centruies (even millenia), while the americans have been here for a few centuries only. Why doesn't our canadian colonialist give his land back to the natives?

Posted by: anon at Sep 23, 2004 6:11:02 PM

One dictionary definition of colonialism is "exploitation of backward or weak peoples" and yes you are quite right about the former British 'Colonies'. There is nothing bigoted however about applying the term to Israel - it's simply a statement of fact. The issue of legal entitlement I have no opinion on. You might take the matter up with the World Court.

Posted by: at Sep 24, 2004 4:56:26 AM

No newes in the world historic behavior. The little and local interests prevail the real world humanitarian issues.
Actually is a problem for global citizens like sportsmen and musicians. They want to go and to act everywhere and they know that those "freedom warriors" can trap and punish them. In fact, most of us are little human beeings and we sacrifice the great ideals in face of the daily existence issues.

Posted by: mike lavi at Sep 25, 2004 10:43:49 AM