What Can We Deem Reliable?

I am sitting here writing this post thinking, "How am I to be considered a reliable source since everything I am writing is my personal opinion?" The answer is easy, it is up to the reader to verify my blog or not. The choice is yours.

There is so much fraud in the world today that it is hard to tell what truth is and what is a hoax. Then when there is truth, the internet allows us the ability of unrestricted web publishing, such as this blog. The difference is since this is a personal blog, people know that even though it may contain some truth, it remains that what is written is of my own volition and my opinion. With that said, I read an article in today's online issue of The New York Times entitled 'U.S. Suspects More Direct Threats Beyond ISIS written by Mark Mazzetti, Michael S. Schmidt, and Ben Hubbard. The article talks about the Islamic state and the new threats facing America and Europe because of this rebel group. Throughout the article, there are many sources to help back up the authors.

 The first source, is the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper, Jr. Mr. Clapper has been the director since 2010 and “serves as the principal intelligence advisor to the president,” (DNI.gov). The next source is a Bipartisan Organization, which is a non-profit organization founded in 2007, by Bob Dole, Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, and George Mitchell. The third source, Institute for the Study of War, is an organization built on helping the nation’s military through research and war studies. Finally, the last few sources come from the authors own research and eyewitness accounts of what is going on in those countries right now.

So, what is my problem then? Well, the problem I see is that even though I am able to make sure these sources were credible, it does not mean that they were not tampered with or published unbiasedly. Because the web allows unrestricted we publishing articles like this can be taken out of context and rewritten to insight war, rioting, hate, etc. Anyone can take an article off the internet, rewrite it to fit their agenda, and then publish it through sites like Wikipedia and call it true. This article shows the worry that people are facing and the threats that face Europe, and us but it also tried to instill the thought of hope that the threat is under control right now. If people were to take to the internet and publish what they want about this topic, who is to say that it would not just make the matter worse. As Americans, we have the freedom of speech, but that does not give us the right to use it in a harmful way. We are given the right and freedom to write and publish what we want all over the internet without prejudice, but in my personal opinion, there are some people who should simply keep those opinions to themselves. Then again, that is just me using my ability to publish my opinion in an open forum. :)

Here are the links I used to verify my sources from the New York Times:

http://bipartisanpolicy.org/

http://www.understandingwar.org/who-we-are

http://www.dni.gov/index.php/about/leadership/director-of-national-intelligence

In addition, the article I read:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/world/middleeast/us-sees-other-more-direct-threats-beyond-isis-.html?ref=todayspaper