Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Thursday 15 December 2016

Post-credulous audience hears evidence of fake news broadcast by post-truth BBC

The video link provided by a commentor in the post below is a scorcher. At a UN press conference, independent Canadian journo Eva Bartlett demolishes the credibility of the fake news from Aleppo promulgated by, amongst others, the Guardian and the BBC.
"..what you hear in the corporate media, and I will name them – BBC, Guardian, the New York Times etc. – on Aleppo is also the opposite of reality"
In a devastating surgical dissection, Bartlett dismisses the BBC's main source of news in Aleppo - one man in Coventry, with an agenda, who calls himself 'Syrian Observatory for Human Rights'. She points out that there are NO international humanitarian organisations in rebel-held Aleppo and NO credible independent sources of news from there. The White Helmets are exposed as an armed partisan force funded by $100m from the US / EU / UK who fake news footage (documented) and are, I strongly suspect, a thin cover for arms shipments to the rebels and for western intelligence organisations.

There is NO evidence, she points out, that the White Helmets have ever been in rebel-held areas of Aleppo at all. Such news is fake.

Bartlett appeared before fellow international journalists, all of whom had full opportunity to question her and require evidence. She comes out as honest, sane and very credible - and the post-truth BBC and Guardian come out as shabby liars and charlatans.
"So they [the White Helmets] are not credible. The SOHR are not credible. 'Unnamed activists' are not credible. Once or twice maybe, but every time? Not credible. So your sources on the ground – you don't have them. You ask why we aren't seeing this. This relates to the other gentleman's question about why most of the corporate media are telling lies about Syria. It's because this is the agenda; if they had told the truth about Syria from the beginning, we wouldn't be here now. We wouldn't have seen so many people killed."
I commend this video. Make a coffee, take a break and play.


Cull the Badgers said...

I saw this at the time too. A brilliant take-down.

Earlier the US government spokesman John Kirby I think was attempting to refute claims of news distortion and bias - one dimensional was the phrase. He had been asked where he gets his information from, and claimed many sources, including broadcast news, NGO's and intelligence sources, but he seemed a bit uncertain about the latter. He went on to say something along the lines of 'watch CNN'. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. He is hopeless when questioned by the likes of RT. The US is ridiculous, a laughing stock, but worse a danger.

visc said...

Excellent a great post and an easy refutal for my idiot leftist aquaintances bleating on about Aleppo because they saw all their favourite "news" sites and on facebook - I have become weary of countering their crap.

Anonymous said...

Eva Bartlett comes across as transparently honest; a women of great integrity and compassion. A balanced, objective BBC would show this personal evidence in its entirety, but instead rely for their information on the egregious Doucet, and are content to propagate one-sided and highly misleading news of the Syrian conflict. It has come to a pretty pass when one can rely more on RT's reporting than on the BBC.

Anonymous said...

I am afraid that Doucet and Guerin come from the same mould. Something about the Irish. Guerin was an Irish Labour Party candidate once. They both have degrees in utter bollocks subjects.

Dave_G said...

This is confirmation of a post I made previously regarding the use of 'consensus' as fact to push a given agenda.

Even the US Government use the actual word, stating that 'the consensus is that Russia hacked the election..." !!

They're now so confident of their control over the media that they don't seem to care what the word means any more and use it "in-your-face"!

Unbelievable! - actually, for the sheeple, I should say "BElieveable" as they clearly don't care to or want to question this consensus.

Now, where else have we heard the word consensus used to push a belief?

Anonymous said...

I have been reading another account by Eva Bartlett, this time in She credibly describes the systematic theft of valuable (and heavy) plant and machinery and transporting to Turkey, with the connivance of the Turkish authorities. Of course, we have heard nothing of this from the BBC, nor of the lawsuit against Erdogan launched by the Syria Chamber of Commerce.

Anonymous said...

On Monday I made a formal complaint to the BBC about their Aleppo coverage. Waste of time.

Today the BBC are reporting (regime) snipers, firing at the evacuees streaming out of eastern Aleppo - this information provided by the SOHR, who as Eva Bartlett describes is one man in Coventry (No. 3 Acacia Avenue). He hasn't been to Syria in 20 years.

Another problem with this report is that it was transmitted before the actual evacution started. Furthermore RT is reporting 'locals deny reports of pro-Assad forces shooting at evacuees'.

The BBC's motto "Nation shall speak peace unto nation" should be changed to something from Orwell: “Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else.”


Dioclese said...

To be honest, I was wondering how come with all this shit supposedly going down in Aleppo, they were able to get such marvellously clear pictures and instant news out of a place where the communications infrastructure is shot to shit..

proglodyte said...

@ Dioclese. Strange that MSM show us barely anything to justify it being labelled the worst humanitarian crisis of the 21st century. The occasional (I suspect often stage-managed) child rescue but very few dead bodies or starving citizens.

Cascadian said...

It has to be said that no sane person would regard the output of the NYT (headed by ex-BBC honcho) BBC, Washington Post and Guardian as anywhere near credible, the reason is obvious. These "news" organizations are thoroughly infested with paleswinian operatives, the methods they use have been refined in paleswine by terrorist groups operating in Syria and still the gullible-camoron, kerry, rice, nuland, obama the kind of people who believe in windmills-can have their feelings manipulated so easily. camoron is a particularly egregious example having been led around by the samcam idiot.
I have for a longtime now used RT, sputnik and zerohedge as my news sources, are they infallible? Of course not, but still there is the sense that an adult wishing to diseminate something like the truth is in charge, which cannot be said for BBC et al.It is informative that in recent days there has been a major push to label these sources as fake news by the very same weak-minded politicians who fall for the paleswinian propaganda every time.
Eastern Aleppo shows only that ISIS terrorists are nothing more than a twelfth century death cult willing to destroy everything and everybody around them including as the journalist notes cancer and maternity hospitals.Death is what they desire, I support Russia and Syria in bringing their wish to them.

Gordon the Fence Post Tortoise said...

As something of a ME veteran - having worked in many of the countries in the region for 30+ years the lady's account has a ring of credibility for a single female traveler's account - and particularly an Arabic speaking one. I doubt that Noggie Aftenposten guy can get past a few simple pleasantries in Arabic and hasn't been to eastern Aleppo himself.

I cannot endure what I know to be profoundly dishonest steaming BS served up by BBC / Guardian / MSM .

There is something in the tone, the way the reports are scripted, worded and delivered by the corporate media that signals that what you are receiving is contrived regardless of the reality on the ground to slot into some approved stance for domestic consumption.

Remember - Obama and Clinton were instrumental in precipitating this mess - how much help did Tone provide I wonder?

DeeDee99 said...

She certainly comes across as knowledgeable and honest.

My default position with the BBC, Channel 4 "News" and Sky is to take their "news" output regading Syria (and a gread deal else) with a shovel-load of salt.

I come back to my question yesterday. Assad was running a secular state, where minority faiths were protected. Why would the USA (and the western global elite) want to get rid of him in favour of Islamists?

Anonymous said...

"I come back to my question yesterday. Assad was running a secular state, where minority faiths were protected. Why would the USA (and the western global elite) want to get rid of him in favour of Islamists?"

Why indeed? FFS they "the USA (and the western global elite)".......most certainly did not include the Israelis in that conversation.

I can only conclude that, it was a sort of 'arab spring' euphoria, remember when Dave dashed off to Libya and earlier to Egypt to join in the bonhomie and triumphal bollox of Victory in Cairo day... of liberation for all!.
God damn them, they were so full of shit, that when the Sunni natives were becoming restless in Syria, they thought,

"ah Bashar! Why the fuck not? lets get him out coz according to the WaPo and NYT, Graun'....BeebTrotskyites he's a nasty booger".

Can you see how they feed each other? An echo chamber of liberal consensus at work here - they only fucking talk to themselves, further what we get on the UK meejah are just morsels for the curs chucked from the table but these scraps are, the same maniacal bird bained pap nevertheless.

And oh yea! Seemingly forgetting their Socialist ejukashunal sojourns in Damascus [ever so conveniently] and yes Damascus could be such a jewel of the Levant, but hopefully not much like Beirut.

Bashar had to be sorted, the Saudis and the Ottoman sultan said so too and their lapdogs in Qatar, so the Sunni head choppers and headbangers brigade got what they wanted and 'they' got a war they thought but realized they couldn't preside over, more especially when the Russians intervened.

And that's the point ain't it, from Moldova, Georgia, to in the Ukraine, and in Syria - never once did these fuckwit western armchair strategists and weasel liberal Internationalist tosserati didn't figure on - the expertise and global reach and nous of a former superpower who has been finessing the west for more years than they could ever care to remember.

Against the Wahhabist menace, we've only got one friend and most definitely NOT that bunch of tossers inhabiting the Liberal America of George Soros et al. Nope and it's not our own fucking chatterati and muppet theatre in Westminster either, no our only friend is President Putin, at least he acknowledges the real threat to western civilization and more specifically Britain, have a look at what dave and tony did.............

Doomed? If not, it's gonna take some major fight back.

Anonymous said...

I thought she was pretty reasonable in this, but I realised that she's just as barking mad as a box of frogs in respect of Palestinians and those awful joooos ...

Anonymous said...

Great link to explain the current MSM malaise

Span Ows said...

I think you're all being very unfair to the BBC et al. How can they - with their paltry billions of pounds and measly thousands of staff - compete with this self-funded lady with her wicked honestly and sinister transparency?

Anonymous said...

Listening to the BBC reporting on the last of the terrorists along with their equally blood thirsty families giving interviews on the news I found a way to overcome the intense anger and irritation at the BBC fake slanted version, leading questions and unquestioning acceptance of terrorist sobbing self pitying bulshit.
Imagine that you are a visitor from Mars and that you are well aware of the terrorists deeds and past history BUT you are unaware that the BBC is pushing fake news. The whole thing then takes on a different perspective, that of a hilariously funny skit, try it

Anonymous said...


Assad was and still is, fighting the MB. And not just any old MB, but the Syrian MB, that is far more vicious then any other brand of MB. Thsis why we so many fighting fit Sunni Muslim men crash9ng into Europe.

So what is the West, particularly USA, Britain and France, doing? They are planning to give arms and ammo to al-Qaeda/MB in Syria via Sunni Arabs in the region. It was thos Mislim Brotherhood that America supported while the MB slaughtered Christians in Egypt. And when the army threw the MB out, it was Obama wqho castigated and threatened Egypt. Thus it was, that Egypt, a pro-Western country, turned to Russia for help, including arms and ammunition. This is just one aspect of Obama - a man who has statefd that he will never turn against Islam, and has proved it by supporting the MB, and its spawn, such as ISIS, al Nusra and others.

Barnabas Fund continues yo launch appeals for Christians in Syria, who are hungry and helpless amid the brutal fighting.

In the key battlegrounds, Christians in Syria are the ones that attract special attention from the Ameruca's "freedom fighters".

From Barnabas Fund The rebels make high ransom demands for the return of the captives (Christian), but in two known cases the victims’ bodies were found after the money had been paid.

Some families are now becoming so desperate that they tell the kidnappers to kill their loved one immediately rather than subjecting them to torture.

This report I know is true, for it is the standard MO of Islam. Kidnap Infidels, demand ransom by threatening to mutilate prosoners or actually mutilate them, then kill the Infidels, before or even after the ramsom demands have been met. This is, in the Islamic dogma, the sure fire way get to the Islamic paradies.

So there is torture as well. Why am I not surprised? Getting the ransom, and yet murdering the kidnapped, was standard MO in Iraq.

Yet the entire Western MSM, the ones that have lied and lied to support Hillary Clinton, state that it is Assad. The same Clinton that has been shown in the emails, that she and Obama wish had never seen the light of day, that was accepting millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars for the corrupt Clinton Foundation, from Saudi Arabia, the very nexus of the Islamic Jihad against the world.

Obama has been a catastrophe for the West. He has alienated America's allies, and appeased its enemies. He has left America weakened internationally, and domestically. Of course the left is happy, Nothing pleases them more then to see the West weakened, and hopefully defeated.

Its ironic that the roles of Russia and America have been reversed. Its Russia now that is "Christianising" and going back to its traditional Christian heritage, while the West does everything to expunge its Christian heritage.

God help us. And maybe He is.

Anonymous said...

Span Ows

Oooh you are naughty. But I like you.

So you are the much feared Alt-O.

Anonymous said...

Cull the Badgers

I almost fell of the chair when John Kirby suggested CNN as a honest source.

Anonymous said...

Dear G

The politically correct admonition is
The words "the consensus" is to be used only when referring to Climate Change scientists.

Please report to your nearest Education Clinic, with shovel.


Anonymous said...

Dioclese: To be honest, I was wondering how come with all this shit supposedly going down in Aleppo, they were able to get such marvellously clear pictures and instant news out of a place where the communications infrastructure is shot to shit..

The same way that the 7 year old girl, who does not speak English, was Tweeting in perfect English, from al Nusra controlled territory.


Anonymous said...

Dee: I come back to my question yesterday. Assad was running a secular state, where minority faiths were protected. Why would the USA (and the western global elite) want to get rid of him in favour of Islamists?

My own view is that it is about oil, and who sells it . Yes I know the old stuff.

This whole thing started when the Russians decided to build a pipeline to Europe. To America and the West, this was a threat, as it would mean that Russia would have a strangle hold on energy supplies to Europe. We saw this in operation when the Ukraine crisis was in full swing.

The way out was get a pipeline to Europe from the Arabian Gulf via Turkey, and deprive Russia of oil sales and a strategic weapon. The problem was that Iran, Iraq both Shia nations, and Syria, blocked the way. The thinking was, that it wouldn't take much to replace Assad with a Sunni Muslim brotherhood regime, allied to Saudi Arabia, and the other Gulf nations. So it was that Qatar ended up funding the whole deal. Can you imagine Qatar playing Big Power politics without an explicit nod from Obama and America?

All the hundreds of thousands dead, millions of Muslims into Europe, and mainly Germany, is the result. Germany has played a pivotal role in this. It was the EU, that is Germany really, along with America that created a crisis in Ukraine. The Russian oil valve came into play. Another pipeline was required . Presto - through Syria. Destablise Syria. Migrant crisis. Obama asked Germany to accept the migrants, as it was she who created the crisis in the first place. Merkel had no choice.

Its a conjecture. We might never know the real reasons.

Anonymous said...


Dee: I come back to my question yesterday. Assad was running a secular state, where minority faiths were protected. Why would the USA (and the western global elite) want to get rid of him in favour of Islamists?

The reply to Dee is from DP111.

Anonymous said...

DP111 writes..


Lets continue with the conjecture.

Its a game of chess.

Russia sees the move, and blocks it with a bishop and Queen to Syria.

Turkey as a NATO ally, knows the game. Erdogan wouldn't mind some of the pipeline fees, as well control of Syrian territory, and good books with Arabs states and America. So he steps into Syria. Things get complicated when Turkey shoots down a Russian fighter-bomber. Russia is not pleased, and threatens consequences. An alarmed Turkey appeals to America as a NATO member. Obama suddenly realises that his legacy will be another war in the ME, and worst of all, a direct confrontation with Russia. Moreover, Clinton and the Democrats would lose big time. He dumps Turkey.

Erdogan is now really pissed off. Nor only is the EU playing hard ball with him over EU membership, but even America has dumped him. So much for NATO he thinks. He directly and publically chastises America, Kerry and Obama. He then swallows pride and goes off to Moscow, and shakes hand with Putin. Meanwhile, he has got lots of dosh from Germany, and the migrant valve is still his to play.

Germany meanwhile has to do something about the million potential rapists in Germany. Merkel tries to get all the EU nations to share the burden. They don't see why. Merkel feels peeved, as she thinks that what she was attempting to do, was to prevent Russia holding a weapon to Europe's throat.

This is where we are at the moment, with Obama threatening all sorts of mayhem in the distant future. What does he mean by that. I believe he is referring to the wider game that is still in play.

Into this game, steps Donald Trump. He has already told the Chinese where they get off. But what game is the CIA playing. Surely they must know that Trump is not going to like their shenanigans. The CIA must also know the Great Game in play. Are they signaling to the new boss. They must be. I don't think they are that stupid as to offend the next president, specially this president.

Anonymous said...


The little girl tweeting from Aleppo, is wtill tweeting buthas left with the ISIS al Nusra.

Her parents were writing her stuff. Both of them are senior operatives with ISIS al Nusra.

Anonymous said...

It's good to hear a dissenting voice but is she unbiased ? I read she is sponsored by Russia Today and has never really criticised Assad.
The point is that she might be correct in much of what she says but her bias is angled differently ,which we are surely entitled to hear.
There are no absolutes in this conflict,save the terrible loss of life, but we are owed by the BBC and others a more balanced view of what is happening. I fear we shan't get it.