Three guilty in airline bomb plot
but that he heard on NPR, yesterday, that they had not been found guilty of actually trying to bomb planes. When you actually read the article you find that three (of eight) men were convicted of conspiracy to murder, but "the jury could not reach a verdict on their charges of endangering an aircraft." The jury failed to reach any verdict on four of the eight men, and the eighth man was found not guilty on all counts. (At least the British clear some of the suspects and admit it!) But you have to actually read the article to find out that the headline is a lie, and how many Americans actually read beyond the headlines?
The liquids restrictions on planes in the U.S. which I (and all flyers) have been dealing with for the past two years was instituted based on this case. So; CNN - liberally biased, as one of my coworkers claims? You be the judge.
From:
no subject
Can I fly with deodorant/sunblock/mosquito stuff again now?
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From: (Anonymous)
no subject
still amazes me
LTA
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Most of the time... :-S
But yes, I know what you mean. My Dad's a journalist, and I have childhood memories of him being really pissed off at certain headlines/writeups because they did basically the same as what you describe...and then he'd explain it point-by-point to us kids as to how the exaggerations/implications/bias had been implemented.
[sigh] I should've gone into media. [Actually, the reason I didn't was probably because I've seen what happens to idealistic journos. ;-) ]
Seriously, bad journalism makes the little baby Jesus want to stick forks in his eyes. So I hold, anyhow.