When Josh first came to see me, I told him that while he was doing a story on me, I would be doing a story on him. He still has enough integrity left to admit this, I truly believe. The tone of my response to his latest Wired article has been judged as imbalanced and unkind by many of the readers – especially my attitude of ridicule. But at some point, there is simply no other appropriate response.
In my humble opinion, the press, I truly believe, controls world events as much as, or perhaps more, than the the world’s ostensible leaders. The press is the conduit for our world views, our judgments, our multitudinous opinions and our loves and hates. A press that is taken in by evidence of non-existent weapons of mass destructions, for example, is more responsible for the decimation of the target country than the leaders who mislead the press. The leaders are merely pursuing their own goals and can be expected to prevaricate. The press, on the other hand, in a perfect world, is not expected to go along with prevarication. Yet it consistently does. A cynical person might point out that the press takes in an order of magnitude more money in times of war than in times of peace. No-one really wants to buy magazines that profile bake sales and peacetime pursuits. We all want to read about death and destruction. But I don’t insist, and this is really not my central point in any case. Just so you have an idea of my placement of the press in my world view of interesting things.
By now you will have hopefully read the transcript of Anthony Rhaburn’s first recording, and at least listened to his devastating second recording. And you have read the letter in “The Letter” and seen the photos of the unfolding story of the letter. These are a tiny fragment of the evidence that I gave to Josh as a reason for my apparent paranoia. At no point in his story were any of these things mentioned. Instead photos of me carrying a shotgun while half-naked appeared everywhere. If you truly believe that I wander my property half naked while carrying a shotgun, well, then I have no hope of reaching you. If you do believe that magazine photographers ask subjects to pose in extraordinary ways, and further believe that polite people accomodate reasonable requests (could you take off your shirt? — Uh, Ok. Would you hold this gun? — Uh, sure), then we may have a common ground for continuing.
This blog is as much the story of Josh Davis, Jeff Wise and the mass of press of a similar ilk, as it is the story of a corrupt government. What may appear on the surface to be grace and objectivity, with governemnts and people alike, is not always what lies beneath.
I will be unfolding this story over the next few months, weaving my required response to unforseen, unfolding events, with, I hope, a coherent story of corruption in its purest form.
Three of my friends are still being held in prison on trumped up charges. They are:
They were charged and have been imprisoned because three legally licensed firearms were found in the incorrect rooms on my property (stretching the law to the extreme). I would ask you to please email the following and demand their release:
November 23, 2012 at 5:04 am
So let me get this straight, the right journalist would be more inclined to expose corruption in Belize than John’s nipples?
November 22, 2012 at 7:15 pm
So, the media controls the world and it is biased. You then try to recruit a journalist to write a story to your specifications with the purpose of exposing corruption in Belize and embarassing the governement. Doesn’t that make you part of the problem and not the solution? Your lifestyle and the people you surround yourself with make it unlikely that any other story would be written by Josh. He appears to be one of the few people you could not control or fire and so you resent him. It is beyond naive to think you could invite him into a world of teenage hookers, gangsters, guns, and money and not have this outcome. He is reporting what he observed and you failed to control him. You are used to people cow-towing and accepting bribes to do your bidding. Clearly you chose the wrong journalist.
November 22, 2012 at 2:38 pm
Obviously I knew this. I counted on it.
November 22, 2012 at 2:10 pm
As intelligent as you are, you were unable to imagine that a reporter might use those photos to portray you in a negative way? I agree that the reporter probably didn’t think any of the other details would sell website hits. But still you agreed to feed into the reporter’s sensationalized perspective.
In a similar way, I wonder why you chose to stay in Belize despite all of these things against you, to surround yourself with violent people (your security guards), etc. It seems the only ones who feel sorry for you don’t hold you responsible for those choices.
November 22, 2012 at 1:41 pm
I cannot believe you posed with a gun in front of him. Even if it was so because he asked for it, stupid thing the one you did
November 22, 2012 at 12:50 pm
That Wise guy needs pay back. He has a lot to answer for. I hope that when this business in Belize is sorted that you can find a way to generously pay the Wise Guy back. Good Luck John I hope it all works out for you.
November 22, 2012 at 11:59 am
Hear, hear! The media certainly influences everything in this world and most of it is biased. And the weak minded sheep absolutely succumb to it every time. Mehhhhh!
November 22, 2012 at 11:46 am
I agree with your assessment of the media, and its getting worse not better. I’ve practiced criminal law for over 20 years, so I’ve had numerous occasions to read the press and later read reports or read actual transcripts to find the truth ignored.
More specific in the area of criminal defense, I have had clients make headlines when they were accused of wrong-doing, but when later it was discovered they were not guilty, the media failed to report the dismissal of charges at all. Nothing.
November 22, 2012 at 8:40 am
*their … duh
November 22, 2012 at 8:39 am
It seems everyone is just regurgitating Jeff and Josh’s opinions without actually doing there job … they are in it for the clicks and eyeballs that sell ads.
November 22, 2012 at 7:11 am
I also read an equally terrible story on vice.com, mostly quoting gizmodo. The truth is (you can see it in the demand for tabloids) no one wants to read about how happy someone else is, or the good they are doing/trying to do. The masses crave physical, mental and emotional destruction. It’s what sells, and it’s thus what’s written and – if need be – twisted and fabricated. In general all you can do is ignore it and try to prove otherwise by doing what you’re doing. I love reading this blog and I find the stories of the culture, the corruption and what the women in particular have to endure extremely informative and raising awareness of the situation is the only way to help. Someone who makes their career writing tabloid-esque articles isn’t worth an honorable mention, even if you’re their favourite subject.
November 22, 2012 at 7:08 am
Your story has captivated me and I started a blog to keep track of the story. To be honest I do not know what to believe but am open and working on finding the truth.
I am not a reporter… I like you do not trust the mass media… and would love to chat.
Do you have the photo of Goldy and Jeff Wise?
November 22, 2012 at 7:08 am
I agree with you. You my dear sir have been painted with such a biased brush. Josh Davis has portrayed you as an unhinged druggie while also claiming to be your confidante. The profession of journalist, while once a noble career, has now become little better than a mouthpiece for whoever they happen to serve.
Scandal and sensationalism is the order of the day and what sells rather than true investigative journalism and ethics. I had at one time considered a career in journalism so I know what i am talking about.
There are still some journalists who are ethical and objective though they are few and far between. I enjoyed hearing about you quizzing them about their knowledge of current events in Belize before granting an interview. Well played sir, well played.
November 22, 2012 at 6:51 am
In the case of Wise, (his first name escapes me at the moment), there was a snide tone to all his pieces about you over there at Gizmodo, that seemed to be well outside the bounds of the traditional journalistic detachment feigned in mainline periodicals of the past. So, it seemed as if he was exploiting the supposed freedom of the new internet media to completely dispense with even a pro forma pretense of objectivity. I am not going to bother hunting of quotes of his, though I could. So it was easy for me to believe that there was something personal behind the prevailing tone of schadenfreude in his articles about you. It seems there must have been truth to what you said was behind it all, as to my knowledge he has written no articles on you since. And yet there he was, on Good Morning America, or Today, or whatever it was I was watching, being interviewed as if he was just some detached objective truth-seeker.
November 22, 2012 at 6:49 am