Its not about bias All is biased journo/doc There is a problem of whether the parasite in the state is working thru them Gibney yes ... ball i dont have that information if it is stated only because of wikileaks shit then no Gibney because of the shit way he treated manning but other reasons as well On Feb 16, 2016 10:41 PM, "juan" wrote:

On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 08:30:59 -0500 Michael Best wrote:

...

If being "gov-friendly" is by itself enough to cast suspicion of bias,

Being gov't friendly doesn't cast any SUSPICION. It means you ARE outright biased.

...

then the same should be assumed of all "gov-unfriendly" outlets.

I would quibble that being 'biased' against an organization composed of criminal shitbags (your government) isn't really 'bias', rather it's the outcome of accurate judgment.

...

That's why it's important to look at the data. The source shouldn't be ignored, but analysis shouldn't begin and end with that.

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

See also non-contradiction. See also morality.

J.

...

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 8:22 AM, John Young wrote:

...

Maybe, maybe more cyberwar milking pretense.

Gibney is a gov-friendly outlet. So is James Ball.

At 08:04 AM 2/16/2016, you wrote:

...

<

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/us-hacked-into-irans-critical-civilian-inf...

...

...

...

...

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/us-hacked-into-irans-critical-civilian-inf...

...