BBC caught red handed faking Syrian NEws

[SBCY 10]

A video of a BBC interview with a doctor in Syria in the aftermath of a napalm-style attack appears to have been artificially dubbed to falsely make reference to the incident being a “chemical weapons” attack, a clip that represents “a stunning bit of fakery,” according to former UK Ambassador Craig Murray.

 

 

info wars have a story on it with full details:

 

http://www.infowars.com/bbc-caught-staging-syria-chemical-weapons-propaganda/

 

 

the Above video proves the editors of the BBC used a voice over and added the word chemical.

are they the best war propaganda merchants ?

[dosxuk 10]

are they the best war propaganda merchants ?

 

They have a long way to go to catch up with infowars on the propaganda scales

[SBCY 10]

They have a long way to go to catch up with infowars on the propaganda scales

 

BBC are the world leaders when it comes to propaganda, no other media comes close to their reach ,

 

my my using voice overs so they can have their war in Syria ,

using fake reports to push lies about how the regime used chemical weapons when in fact its William paid for terrorist who are the most likely culprits !

 

 

by the way the BBC wont acknowledge this clip exists.

[chalga 10]

HHHHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYyyyy........damn the BBC for saying there's chemical weapons when it's just a little old incendiary bomb,they are the real culprits in Syria,they're trying to ruin a great war.

[Penistone999 10]

Tinfoilhat time

[wildbilly2 10]

 

 

by the way the BBC wont acknowledge this clip exists.

 

BOTH clips can be found easily on the BBC website,

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-24288698

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-23892594

[erebus 10]

Well glad to know people are looking for a glimmer of truth. The media in the Uk toe a particular ideology, set by corporate interests of course.

 

The USA economy is predicated on war, in various forms, and without the defense, and security industries being paid for by the tax payer, with an ever increasing budget skewed for corporate profits, the is little else of value. America needs war, conflict like a junkie needs a fix, the two are intertwined, with the offshoot (pardon the pun), the offshoot, being crime as fraud cases against rigged and fixed prices have proved.

 

War as proved in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Syria prove is just a way of smashing up a country, and then with everything in pieces backing a group that sell the resources for million dollar bungs. Bribery is cheaper that an organised industry, as was previously practiced over South America.

 

Employment up, wages rising, worked out by mixing the rich amd their inflated wages with the poor, hence, or the millions with the few, and its all going up apparently together it seems.

[Vague_Boy 10]

They have a long way to go to catch up with infowars on the propaganda scales

 

Whatever the validity of the story, the fact that Infowars are running with it isn't going to help it in the credibility stakes.

 

If I was part of the establishment, I'd set up someone like Alex Jones as an "alternative voice", secure in the knowledge that most people would automatically dismiss what he had to say --- mainly because of the way he says it.

 

The truth could be hidden in plain sight and no one would care.

 

Cheers Alex, you bellicose windbag!

[Mecky 10]

Oh look, another public opinion thread

[angos 10]

A video of a BBC interview with a doctor in Syria in the aftermath of a napalm-style attack appears to have been artificially dubbed to falsely make reference to the incident being a “chemical weapons” attack, a clip that represents “a stunning bit of fakery,” according to former UK Ambassador Craig Murray.

 

 

info wars have a story on it with full details:

 

http://www.infowars.com/bbc-caught-staging-syria-chemical-weapons-propaganda/

 

 

the Above video proves the editors of the BBC used a voice over and added the word chemical.

are they the best war propaganda merchants ?

 

It sounds like the BBC changed the word Napalm to Chemical to better represent the facts. She didn't know what caused the burns, she guessed some kind of Napalm but admitted to not being sure, Chemical is a better description because it is less specific.

 

---------- Post added 09-10-2013 at 07:50 ----------

 

BOTH clips can be found easily on the BBC website,

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-23892594

 

Looking at the then the BBC did broadcast her saying Naplam or did they broadcast both clips.

Edited October 9, 2013 by angos

[Halibut 12]

It sounds like the BBC changed the word Napalm to Chemical to better represent the facts. She didn't know what caused the burns, she guessed some kind of Napalm but admitted to not being sure, Chemical is a better description because it is less specific.

 

 

Wonders will never cease. A post of yours I agree with.