> gMoney wrote: > But for every 2 that get caught, the concern is "how many more get through > undetected?" >
Well, if we use your logic, let's define "the media" and then ask how many they get right vs. wrong. My contention is the percentage of intentional fraud would be minuscule and the percentage of errors negligible. That is, the broad majority of all media is fairly accurate and, when there is an error or fraud, it's not of major events, just minor outcomes. Put another way, Is there really doubt that Israel is bombing Beirut? No. Is there doubt that those bombs create smoke? No. Is there doubt that those bombs kill people? No. Is there doubt that those dead people are innocents? No. So while this may be staged, it's just an example of something that has actually happened, but is just not in this photo. I guess I find it slightly disingenuous to say "this photo shows a fake dead guy and even though there are real dead guys, this one isn't" It's not as if they're claiming the Martians are invading, just trying to show the world what's happening and maybe not getting any decent opportunity so they're taking "journalistic license". Yeah, I don't want fake photos, but I don't see any major conspiracy here either. And I feel comfortable that there are lots of people watching. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:212842 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
