BBC Caught In Syria Massacre Propaganda Hoax

page: 1
80
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+48 more 
posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   

BBC Caught In Syria Massacre Propaganda Hoax


www.infowars.com

The British media has been caught yet again with its pants down in the effort to sell a NATO-led attack on Syria, with the revelation that BBC News used a years-old photo of dead Iraqi children to depict victims of an alleged government assault on the town of Houla.
In a report issued hours after the massacre, the BBC used a photo that was first published over nine years ago and taken in Al Mussayyib, Iraq. The image shows a child skipping over the dead bodies of hundreds of Iraqi children who have been transported from a mass grave to be identified.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk
static.prisonplanet.com
www.youtube.com
edit on 28-5-2012 by seenavv because: (no reason given)



+6 more 
posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
I am totally unsurprised by this... just another routine propaganda piece for NWO news outlets. We saw the same thing happen in Libya with the fake demonstrations and using protest footage from a different country. From my research... the uprising happening in Syria is being instigated by Al-Ciada proxies


www.infowars.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 28-5-2012 by seenavv because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   

The BBC is facing criticism after it accidentally used a picture taken in Iraq in 2003 to illustrate the senseless massacre of children in Syria.

www.telegraph.co.uk...
I appreciate the telegraph is also covering this... but this is FAR from an accident! BBC did this because it fit the agenda of its backers

Examples of deliberate dishonesty and illegitimate reporting




www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 28-5-2012 by seenavv because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
propaganda is always an agenda with state run TV.


+19 more 
posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Here we go again....did the Enquirer merge with BBC?
Maybe we can add this image to above:



The Hearst legacy lives on -
Remember the Maine!



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by seenavv
 


I often wonder if we should blame the media outlets or the government for forcing them to censor them self.

I know in WW2 there something called a DA Notice basically volunteer censorship.

most media complied because who didn't want to support there country?
Well i think most can agree in WW2 that type of stuff was necessary its nothing like it is today.


I think it still goes on today but it may be getting less and less voluntary and more compulsory.
journalist them self may not completely realize it, but there editors are the one who pass on the order from the top.
that way we will truly never get to the top as there are alot of scapegoats on the way up.

Despite all of this i still see the BBC as the best in world. off course that doesn't mean I eat up there words blindly
edit on 28-5-2012 by Bixxi3 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by definity
 


Unfortunately the BBC gets a lot of respect and little missteps like this are not going to change anybodies opinions. There have been plenty of documented cases of Western media either outright using actors or unrelated footage and nobody seems to care.
edit on 28-5-2012 by QQXXw because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Bixxi3
 


they are the best in the world, best in the world at propaganda.
edit on 28-5-2012 by QQXXw because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
double post.
edit on 28-5-2012 by QQXXw because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
I guess now we can confirm that the "Alphabet Agencies" such as FBI, CIA can also include CNN, BBC, FOX, and so on.

Have you been "programmed" lately?


+23 more 
posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
you know, just the mere fact of the BBC reporting the fall of building #7 too early, live, right on TV, should be enough to call for another INDEPENDENT investigation.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
I guess now we can confirm that the "Alphabet Agencies" such as FBI, CIA can also include CNN, BBC, FOX, and so on.

Have you been "programmed" lately?


reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 


That's what I've been saying for a while. At least in the case of CNN. And The Weather Channel. That's right, I said The Weather Channel.

S+F



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Jeez, BBC just cant get the propaganda going on their side.


Who could forget their shining moment when they reported WTC 7 collapsing before it was brought down? It was STILL standing in the flippin' background.


Poor BBC. Guess they are not as refined as American media yet who are EXPERTS at feeding the public BS with very little errors for the most part. Except Fox of-course.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
it looks more like "activist" punk'd the BBC with that photo, which they clearly distance themselves from labelling it with words like "believed to be" and "cannot be verified"

they ran with a scoop and pic and now look bad

I bet a lower level manager gets canned for it
edit on 28-5-2012 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
They don't have magical way of knowing where every image on earth has been taken. What a load of bs. from infowars.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


The picture you post is a simple one. News agencies will often green-screen a "live" scene's background (to make it seem as though their reporter is there). It makes sense from a logistical standpoint... why pay legions of reporters to sit around within an hours' distance from likely news locations when you can simply use some footage (from perhaps a few hours ago) to make it appear as though they are present there?

That said - the OP's issue is a much more damaging act of deception. It's become typical for the media to use images that garner attention from the viewers as opposed to using actual images from the scene. The reasoning behind it is simple - and dangerous; particularly in instances like this.

The BBC may have received a report of what they describe as a massacre - but lacking images of it - use a picture they believe will "illustrate the idea." I see it often in poorly written articles about technology or other such areas where sub-humans are put in charge of writing articles that make them feel intellectually relevant for a brief period. Not that 80% of the population is intellectually relevant enough to catch the farce (which is why they remain employed, unfortunately). Anyway - they decide to supplement their article with something that grabs attention and is "related" as opposed to documented.

This is the result.

Which makes one have to question the legitimacy of the reports of violence in Syria, to begin with - or at least, to the extent that it is reported by various news agencies.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
it looks more like "activist" punk'd the BBC with that photo, which they clearly distance themselves from labelling it with words like "believed to be" and "cannot be verified"


I think putting a picture of dead children and claiming it to be that of Syrian children at least warrents a little investigation, if you truly were an independent media source. Putting that picture up and then using every method to clear your name if anything isn't true is a clear propaganda tactic.

Look at all these dead kids! We gotta do something!

*We have no idea where these pictures came from, we are just assuming things.

Gimme a break!



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
They can feed me all the propaganda they want, i still think they are all full of s##t. It won't change a thing though, they will be doing this again somewhere down the track and most likely getting away with it.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
They don't have magical way of knowing where every image on earth has been taken. What a load of bs. from infowars.


BBC has a documented history of manipulating reports to fit their agenda, this was no accident. They are doing anything and everything to justify foreign intervention in Syria and they just caught with their pants down

and who cares if its from Infowars, I interpret news from a place where no other can, MY BRAIN



www.facebook.com...

and litterbaux put it pretty well with the post above

Look at all these dead kids! We gotta do something!

*We have no idea where these pictures came from, we are just assuming things.
edit on 28-5-2012 by seenavv because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Okay so if they don't have a way of knowing then why post the image in the first place? I don't know about anyone else but when I look at an article the first thing my eyes advert to is the picture. Then I will read the article.
They know this and that is why they put such a horrifying scene with a small disclaimer at the bottom. Why wasn't the disclaimer in red if they were that uncertain?

"This image - which cannot be independently verified - is believed to show the bodies..." The key words here are "believed to show".
They believe it right? So why wouldn't anyone else who skims over the article. It's the disclaimer wording that fires me up the most.





new topics
top topics
 
80
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join