Evidence of fakery in BBC “Saving Syria’s Children” is now undeniable

Evidence of fakery in BBC “Saving Syria’s Children” is now undeniable

By Catte | OffGuardian | June 14, 2017

For nearly two years now we have been following the dedicated work of Robert Stuart in exposing the possible fabrications behind the infamous BBC Panorama documentary “Savin Syria’s Children.” On June 11 he gave a public presentation summarising his work to date, which is also available as a PDF. As an overview of the evidence in the case, it is well worth reading. You can download it HERE. And below are some of the highlights.

First a brief reminder of the back story:

On August 29 2013, as the UK Parliament was about to vote on possible military action against the Assad government in Syria, the BBC’s 10 o’clock news aired a segment titled Syria crisis: Incendiary bomb victims ‘like the walking dead’ in which it was claimed a Syrian fighter jet had dropped an incendiary bomb containing a “napalm-type” substance on the playground of the Urm al-Kubra school near Aleppo. The BBC claimed its own team “inside Syria filming for [the documentary series]Panorama” had been witnesses to the victims arriving at the Atareb hospital, and it aired a segment of footage showing incoming casualties.This footage later formed the basis for the documentary “Saving Syria’s Children.”

The discrepancies and other problems surrounding this footage and the BBC documentary are legion. We have documented some of them here and here and here, and Robert Stuart’s blog offers a detailed database that puts it beyond doubt the BBC has not been entirely honest about the origins of and motives behind this film.

Stuart’s PDF highlights some additional areas of interest:

The reality of the alleged injuries

The injuries visible in the BBC footage have been questioned by medical professionals:

Can our readers see any sign of injury on this – thankfully – healthy-seeming little baby, let alone ’80% burns”?

Number and identity of victims

In a real event the number of victims, their names, backgrounds and photos should be reasonably consistent. Wide disparities would be hard to reconcile with something happening in the real world. Especially so in this case, given the people giving us the figures were allegedly there on the scene either treating the victims hands-on or filming it begin done. You’d expect a pretty clear and definite report on the numbers treated in the quite small Atareb hospital. But this doesn’t seem to be the case:

How is it that Dr Ahsan, who was right on scene, first claimed there were “25” victims, but in a later interview almost doubled the number to “40”, while Ian Pannell claimed there were “30” victims treated at Atareb that day, and Rola Hallam’s Hand in Hand For Syria website trumped them all, claiming “50” of the victims were brought to Atareb?

Did neither Dr Ahsan nor Ian Pannell, nor the Hand In Hand for Syria website make any effort to obtain a definitive account of the numbers they treated? Were they just grabbing figures at random?

Chronology

It ought to be possible, in today’s interconnected age, to determine when an event occurred with a maximum disparity of – say – one or two hours if the event occurred in a remote rural location and much less if it was in an urban setting with numerous witnesses. Of course some variation in the accounts of those present is to be expected, because humans are fallible and the events themselves are traumatic and confusing. But even so there is a minimal standard of consistency we need to demand.

Yet look at the huge disparity of timings offered up about this event:

The fact that different sources can place the alleged attack on the Url al-Kubra school as much as six hours apart is very hard to reconcile with any form of veridical reality.

Let’s remember there was a BBC camera crew right there to record these events. Even allowing for shock and confusion, we might expect Ian Pannell, the producer, and his award-winning cameraman, Darren Conway to pin down the timing pretty firmly. But Pannell says the events happened at “around 5:30”. Conway says “I don’t know, it was somewhere between 3 and 5.”

I don’t know”? “It was somewhere between...”? “Around 5:30”? This isn’t quite the stringent attention to detail we might expect from professionals in a war zone. Surely they can pin it down a bit closer than that? How come Pannell has ended up thinking it was at least two and a half hours later than the earliest time given by Conway? Didn’t they discuss the timing with one another after the event? Don’t they have phones or watches? Doesn’t any of their footage have a time code?

Dr Saleyah Ahsan

Dr Saleyah Ahsan, one of the two British medical personnel to appear in the Panorama documentary, and filmed attending to the alleged victims, is a former British Army captain, trained at the elite Sandhurst military academy, who served in Bosnia and went out to Libya to “support the revolution”, before staying on to give medical service to the “fighters” (presumably the NATO-backed “rebels”).

I’m sure we can all agree this is definitely not the profile of someone in Military Intelligence.

Interestingly, her ex-CO now runs medical simulation training exercises, as Saleyah herself revealed in passing when she was sent to cover the exercises by BBC Newsnight

The below images are of FAKE INJURIES provided by professional medical simulation firms. You might argue they look more convincing than anything seen on the BBC Panorama program.

Dr Rola Hallam & her shadowy dad

Saleyah’s connections are as curious as those of the other British doctor present during the filming of alleged casualties at the Atareb hospital, Dr Rola Hallam, executive on the board of the Hand in Hand For Syria charity, and whose father Dr Mousa al-Kurdi, may or may not be connected with the self-styled “Syrian National Council”, a supporter of the terrorists/“rebels” and a barely-concealed front for western-backed interests in Syria. He certainly seems to be no friend of the current Syrian president.

We say “may or may not be connected with the SNC”, because Rola Hallam is on record denying her father is a member of the SNC, while her colleague seems to be of a different opinion:

These women clearly need to work harder at co-ordinating their narrative.

* * *

The evidence for some form of fakery here is now undeniable. Not only are some of the major players shown to be previously involved in pro-western regime change narratives and/or politically active in the bid to unseat Assad, but the footage taken by the BBC itself shows clear signs of being less than real. The alleged injuries look questionable, not simply to lay people but to medical professionals. The narrative is inconsistent, the timing extremely convenient for the pro-west, pro-NATO agenda.

What does this mean in a wider context? If the BBC and elements of the British medical profession have – as seems highly possible – colluded to produce fake news of a fake event, how should we view other such convenient narratives involving alleged loss of life, implicating acknowledged enemies of the West, and seeming to justify more wars of intervention, more surveillance, more curbs on our freedom? What if an event were to happen in future in – say – Berlin, New York, London, Melbourne that has all the same hallmarks of questionable-seeming injuries, vague timelines, vague or poorly sourced victim-lists, and a seemingly pre-prepared perp that plugs right in to the west’s current hate-list or perpetual war agenda?

How parochial or racist is it for us to to assume fakery is a priori impossible when the victims are mostly white and have Facebook pages?

Imaginary Interior of Saydnaya Now Has Imaginary Crematorium – US State Department

Global Research, May 17, 2017
OffGuardian 16 May 2017

Remember “Saydnaya Military Prison”? It was the subject of enormous media attention a while back on the basis of a “report” from Amnesty International that turned out to have been fabricated in the UK by a virtual reality company “using 3D models, animations, and audio software, based on the admittedly baseless accounts of alleged witnesses who claim to have been in or otherwise associated with the prison.”

Well, the totally imaginary interior of Saydnaya now – according to US State Dept – has a totally imaginary “crematorium” added to it in which to dispose of all the totally theoretical corpses being generated by the completely unsubstantiated mass-murders. Here is the impressive and plausible Stuart Jones telling us all about it.

Yes, he lies about the “well-documented” chemical attacks. Yes, he manipulates and exaggerates and omits to the point of fraudulence in his summary of the “civil war.” Yes almost every detail of his claims about the goings-on in Saydnaya is based on Amnesty’s invented “report” and the completely unverified testimony of alleged inmates…

…but, but…they have satellite images!

In case you’re not getting the message WaPo kindly enhanced and simplified things:

See? That thing on the right that could be absolutely anything is actually a crematorium. The State Department “believes” it with all its heart and wants us to believe it too. As do the Guardian the WaPo and the BBC and every other mainstream outlet. They want us to ignore the total absence of any evidence whatsoever for any part of their narrative and simply take their word.

That’s a “crematorium”. And it’s being used to burn masses of bodies. Just like in the Holocaust.

Because Assad (and Russia) = Hitler.

We need to tear up the ceasefires and ignore the de-escalation zones and invade Syria.

Everyone got that?

BBC left red-faced after a desperate hunt for anti-Corbyn Labour voters leads directly into a trap @KatieHile @BBC bias

BBC left red-faced after a desperate hunt for anti-Corbyn Labour voters leads directly into a trap

Kerry-Anne Mendoza – The Canary May 10, 2017

The BBC has joined the wider media in amplifying the voice of anyone who claims to be a former Labour voter but refuses to vote for Jeremy Corbyn. But in a desperate hunt to find such voices, the BBC fell into a trap.

The ‘Silly Hat’ trap

It started with a voter from Manchester named Elliot (@langho), who sent a tweet parodying those ‘former’ Labour voters. He wrote that he would only vote Labour if Corbyn “wears a multicoloured cap with a propellor on top”.

But someone didn’t get the joke. Because very soon, he was approached by BBC Business and Economics Producer Katie Hile.

bbc email

Despite Elliot ratcheting up the parody in the messages, it was seemingly lost on Hile.

bbc email1

Click to enlarge

bbc email2bbc email3

Finally, after he could take it no more, Elliot filled Hile in on the joke.

bbc email4

According to her Linkedin profile, Hile has been Business Producer at the BBC‘s Business and Economics unit since November 2014. And she has served with the BBC since 2007. This was not a mistake by an eager newbie, but instead an example of how far the corporation is willing to push to support its narrative of Labour voters abandoning the party over Corbyn.

This is despite Labour’s membership rising to its highest levels, adding up to more than the membership of the other Westminster parties combined. And despite Labour winning by-elections and mayoral contests since Corbyn’s election as leader. But that may come as a surprise to the majority of voters, dependent on the BBC and other powerful outlets for their view.

BBC Bias

The problems with the BBC start at the top. The Director of News and Current Affairs at the BBC is James Harding, a former employee of the Murdoch press. He was editor of The Times newspaper when it exposed the identity of police blogger ‘NightJack’ by hacking the blogger’s email accounts. His legal team then covered up the hacking during a court case against the action. Harding has also gone on the record as ‘pro Israel‘.

Harding has presided over some of the worst years of BBC bias. When the BBC Trust found its own chief political editor Laura Kuenssberg guilty of misreporting on Jeremy Corbyn, Harding responded:

While we respect the Trust and the people who work there, we disagree with this finding.

And he went on to praise Kuenssberg as:

an outstanding journalist and political editor with the utmost integrity and professionalism.

Beyond Harding and Kuenssberg, multiple studies have supported the assertion that this bias exists. A 2013 content analysis of the BBC by Cardiff University found that:

  • The BBC consistently grants more airtime to the Conservatives, whichever party is in power.
  • On BBC News at Six, business representatives outnumbered trade union spokespeople by more than 5:1 in 2007 and by 19:1 in 2012.
  • BBC coverage of the 2008 financial crisis was dominated by stockbrokers, investment bankers, hedge fund managers and other City voices. Civil society voices or commentators critical of the finance sector were almost completely absent from coverage.

Studies by the London School of Economics and the Media Reform Coalition have since found serious imbalance in reporting of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Turn it off

Such coverage has real-world impacts. It encourages vast swathes of the UK electorate to vote against their own interests; and against the interests of their loved ones and communities. Skewed coverage distorts our view of ourselves, each other, and what’s possible for us as a country. And that’s why it’s time to turn it off.

Source

Clear BBC bias against Jeremy Corbyn @NickRobinson #Jewishlobby

BBC Bias is Clear and Indisputable

By Craig Murray | April 20, 2017

Unless the BBC takes firm disciplinary action against Nick Robinson for this, they cannot keep pretending that the UK any longer holds free and fair elections. For a state broadcaster to show this level of venom and bias against the opposition leader is utterly unacceptable.

It is indisputable that Robinson’s history is as a high ranking Conservative Party activist. They dominate BBC News, as a plain matter of fact. They have changed the culture of the BBC so they no longer feel any need to disguise their Tory cheerleading.

This is an Uzbek style election.

 

Google gets to decide what is real news and what is fakenews

Google’s Censorship Of Independent News – RINF Becomes Latest Victim

AFP Photo / Lionel Bonaventure

Mick Meaney

(RINF) – ‘Fake news’ is a term designed to fool the weak minded into believing the corporate media are the only reliable sources of information.

You and I both know that is a total lie.

Since you’re reading this, you already know that we’re living in a totalitarian society where anything that does not sit inside the tightly controlled margins of ‘acceptable debate’, is painted as an enemy of the people.

You might recall that late last year, following Hillary Clinton’s defeat, Google announced they were going to war against supposed ‘fake news’ websites.

This week I received an email from Google Adsense informing me that my account would be disabled if I didn’t comply with their demands to censor this website.

They demanded that I remove an article that exposed Israel’s corruption and crimes against humanity (there are hundreds of articles like this here).

In fact, it was merely a portion of an article with ‘read more’ link to TruthOut.

So I was faced with a tough decision:

Comply; delete the offending article, keep earning from Adsense and hope they don’t come back and demand that I remove more.

Or I could refuse to be bullied and lose 80% of RINF’s revenue.

So I decided to put Google to the test. I TEMPORARILY removed the article and told them it was gone. I waited patiently to see what their next move would be.

Then the next day, as I expected, I received another email telling me to delete a second article. This time it was an article about Donald Trump, written by Eric Zuesse.

Again, Google claimed the article had been ‘scrapped’ – code for stolen from somewhere else.

We have a strict editorial policy here, we never republish articles in full unless we have explicit permission or right to do so. In many cases an author will submit an article directly.

If we don’t have permission to publish an article in full, then a small portion of the article will be published and a ‘read more’ link to the source will be added.

This is called ‘content curation’ and is a widely accepted practise.

Eric publishes articles here himself, under his own RINF author account. Of all the places that article has appeared across the Internet, it was published on this website FIRST. Their advanced algorithm is smart enough to know when the article was published.

And of course I reinstated the article that triggered their initial censorship demand.

My choice is now; let Google dictate what information is acceptable, or significantly reduce the amount of time I spend devoted to RINF.

There are other ad networks out there, I’m currently using Media.net – but none can compete with the earnings of Adsense, it’s significantly higher than any other network. That’s why it’s so popular.

Either way Google wins, but they’re NOT going to control what kind of information we publish here. I refuse to be bullied by Google and the threat of losing my income isn’t enough to pressure me into compliance.

Maybe that’s the nature of independent news; we are a target, something else that needs to be manipulated and controlled – because we’re a barrier between the propaganda laced mainstream media, and an informed population that won’t accept it.

Google have an agenda. They outright admitted it and now they’re enforcing it

This ISIS Video Proves White Helmets Work for ISIS

Source

This footage has NEVER been seen on YouTube, I had to do a lot of digging to find it. It shows CIA agent John Cantle in Halab (Aleppo) between 2014 and 2015 where rebels (ISIS) took over the city.

American drones are seen flying around the area so to check up that everything is in order and that ISIS is doing fine. Later that day Syrian military did an airstrike there but John Cantle assures us that “ISIS does not care”.

This footage also shows that the rebels and white helmets work together with ISIS and that the USA and UK governments (usual suspects) fund ISIS through the white helmets who all work together in the jihad against atheistic/secular governments.

CNN and BBC are paid good money by the CIA to keep this footage from surfacing.

Harvard’s Fake Guide to Fake News Sites

Harvard’s Fake Guide to Fake News Sites

by Stephen Lendman

Is this what parents pay $63,000 annually for tuition, room, board and fees – so their children can be ill-served and ill-taught?
Following the 2014 Obama administration Kiev coup, replacing democracy with fascist dictatorship, Harvard expressed concern about nonexistent “Russian aggression.” Some faculty members called for US military intervention.
Not a word about US-supported putschists seizing power. Nothing about the most brazen European coup since Mussolini’s 1922 march on Rome.
No explanation about a scheme orchestrated in Washington. Silence about a major crisis in Europe’s heartland still ongoing. Trump inherited Obama’s mess, so far not indicating clearly where he stands on Ukraine.
Harvard is at it again. It’s University Library published a fake guide to “fake news, misinformation, and propaganda.”
It recommends using FactCheck.org, Politifact, Snopes.com, Washington Post Fact Checker, and other self-styled fact-checkers, biased against truth-telling on all major issues, acting as censors, trashing reliable alternative sources of news, information and analysis.
It endorses sanitized content acceptable to America’s deep state, abandoning support for speech, media and academic freedoms.
It recommended “tips for analyzing news sources.” Ignore them. Common sense is the best guide, along with distrusting and avoiding media scoundrels. They’re paid to lie, deceive and feature fake news – what powerful interests want people to know, what’s most important suppressed.
Harvard published a list of hundreds of sites it calls “bias(ed),” “conspira(torial),” “unreliable,” “fake,” and otherwise mislabeled.
Some I’m familiar with are reliable sources, (polar opposite media scoundrels paid to lie), including:
21st Century Wire
Activist Post
Antiwar.com
Before Its News.com
Black Agenda Report
Boiling Frogs Post
Common Dreams
Consortium News
Corbett Report
Countercurrents
CounterPunch
David Stockman Contracorner
Fort Russ
Freedoms Phoenix
Global Research
The Greanville Post
Information Clearing House
Intellihub
Intrepid Report
Lew Rockwell
Market Oracle
Mint Press News
Moon of Alabama
Naked Capitalism
Natural News
Nomi Prins
Off-Guardian
Paul Craig Roberts
Pravda.ru
Rense
Rinf
Ron Paul Institute
Ruptly TV
Russia-Insider
Sgt Report
ShadowStats
Shift Frequency
SJLendman.blogspot.com – my alma mater recommends avoiding my writing; new articles posted daily; featuring truth-telling on major issues
Solari
Sott.net
South Front
Sputnik News
Strategic Culture.org
The Anti-Media
The Duran
The Intercept
The People’s Voice
The Saker
The Sleuth Journal
Third World Traveler
Voltairenet
What Really Happened
Who What Why
WikiLeaks
Zero Hedge
These and other sites Harvard’s Library urges avoiding are ones readers should rely on – avoiding The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and other fake news proliferators.
%d bloggers like this: