BBC Caught Staging FAKE News Chemical Attack To Drag Britain into Syrian War

By Graham Vanbergen – Most people should be aware that mainstream news has been the conduit government’s around the world use to fabricate circumstances through fake news and convince a largely reluctant population to follow it into war. National conscription in 1916-18 was brought about because there were not enough volunteers to fight a war.  To the working man, conscription was yet another theft of their rights by rich capitalists. The only telling counterargument the government could offer was absolute necessity. Workers must be convinced that there were too few volunteers to meet the need, so they would lose the war, which would mean the end of Britain. To that end, a huge propaganda exercise took place followed up with no choice – fight or go to prison.

Mainstream media have ever since been routinely creating fake news reports to convince citizens to support politicians desire for the en-masse killing of people in other places around the world, usually on ‘humanitarian’ grounds.

Tony Blair’s misinformation, disinformation, propaganda and fake news campaign to attack Iraq has been a huge blot on Britain’s foriegn policy choices. But it was supported by a mainstream media who did not question the legitimacy of the counterfeit information fed to parliament and its people. The result is over one million dead innocent civilians and a region under siege by terrorrists, thugs and gangsters. David Cameron’s lies did the same in Libya – again supported by a media that questioned nothing. The result – death and destruction.

The West was warned by Gaddafi – Libya was the cork to the African immigration bottle. Cameron, ignorant of reason, bereft of logic and dismissal of facts, desperate for US recognition (and no doubt future personal wealth) attacked a sovereign nation without provocation. What resulted was mass immigration to Europe, which caused his own downfall and the probable breakup of the United Kingdom and quite possibly the European Union.

Cameron went on to convince parliament that Britain had to attack Syria after failing first time around in 2013. George Osborne lied through his teeth saying the campaign would cost in the ‘lows tens of millions.’ Even the BBC reported the cost a few months  later at £100million whilst imposing austerity at home driving poverty to new highs. Hundreds of millions would now be closer to truth.

You may well have seen this video and various accompanying articles from the non establishment media. If not, it is well worth watching. VIDEO – BBC News caught staging FAKE chemical attack news

 

To get the public and more importantly, parliament on side, the BBC reported on a chemical attack by Syrian forces on its people that was proven to be fake news. The report, even though on RT and includes a showing of George Galloway may make you think this is all Russian propaganda, it isn’t.

A “world changing atrocity happens when the BBC is invited to a remote hospital” says the report. Two doctors were being filmed when victims from a school playground were brought to the hospital. A British doctor was quite openly being interviewed when the dead and dying arrived. The BBC shows exact same footage of two separate incidents but, according to the report digitally alters the words, one a napalm attack and the other a chemical weapons attack – to suit the situation.

BBC’s Panorama programme “Saving Syria’s Children” is attacked as disinformation and propaganda from another source – “Analysis of the 30 September 2013 BBC Panorama documentary ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ and related BBC News reports, contending that sequences filmed by BBC personnel and others at Atareb Hospital, Aleppo on 26 August 2013 purporting to show the aftermath of an incendiary bomb attack on a school in Urm Al-Kubra are largely, if not entirely, staged.”

The doctor in the BBC report so concerned for these injured teenagers turns out to be the daughter Syrian rebel Mousa al Kurdi.

Craig Murray, ex-British Ambassador sacked by the government for reporting that torture was being used to gain intelligence for the ‘war-on-terror” said of the BBC fake news video:

“The disturbing thing is the footage of the doctor talking is precisely the same each time. It is edited so as to give the impression the medic is talking in real time in her natural voice – there are none of the accepted devices used to indicate a voiceover translation. But it must be true that in at least one, and possibly both, the clips she is not talking in real time in her own voice. It is very hard to judge as her mouth and lips are fully covered throughout. Perhaps neither of the above is what she actually said.

Terrible things are happening all the time in Syria’s civil war, between Assad’s disparate forces and still more disparate opposition forces, and innocent people are suffering. There are dreadful crimes against civilians on all sides. I have no desire at all to downplay or mitigate that. But once you realise the indisputable fact of the fake interview the BBC has put out, some of the images in this video begin to be less than convincing on close inspection too.”

In September 2015 the BBC reported that “The BBC has won a case against Russian TV channel RT, which claimed the corporation faked a report on Syria. The station said the BBC had “staged” a chemical weapons attack for a news report, and digitally altered the words spoken by an interviewee. The BBC complained to Ofcom, saying the “incredibly serious” allegations struck “at the heart” of its obligations to accuracy and impartiality. Ofcom ruled that elements of the programme were “materially misleading”. It also said the BBC had been treated “unfairly” by programme, called The Truthseeker, as it was not given a opportunity to address the allegations before the programme was broadcast.”

The same Ofcom also found the BBC of a much wider propaganda campaign. The regulators claim BBC World News has breached sponsorship rules 20 times by airing ‘propaganda films’ promoting charities, NGO’s and foreign governments. A 112-page report from media regulator Ofcom censures the broadcaster for what has been called a “blatant breach” of broadcast rules.

Of recent times the BBC has been accused of peddling distorted news countless times on all manner of subject matter.

Craig Murray again – “Richard Bilton of the BBC today exposed himself as the most corrupt and bankrupt of state media shills – while pretending to be fronting an expose of corruption. There could not be a more perfect example of the western state and corporate media pretending to reveal the Panama leak data while actually engaging in pure misdirection.”

In August 2016, the BBC undertook its own investigation into its coverage of the Scottish independence referendum. It found: “The Scottish public’s opinion of the BBC’s TV news coverage has barely improved since the country’s independence referendum, according to research by the corporation’s governing body. During the referendum BBC was repeatedly accused of bias, with those in favour of independence targeting specific journalists including then BBC politics editor Nick Robinson.”

“Not since Iraq have I seen BBC News working at propaganda strength like this. So glad I’m out of there” These are the words of the former economics editor of the BBC’s Newsnight show, Paul Mason, relating to the BBC’s coverage of the Scottish independence referendum. He went on to say: “the BBC has been blatantly warping, misrepresenting and omitting pertinent facts and narratives on numerous issues, from its coverage on Israel to its distortion on Ukraine.”

In 2014, Demonstrators marched outside the BBC’s London headquarters in protest over the broadcaster’s pro-Israel bias, condemning their news reports on Tel Aviv’s latest onslaught on Gaza as being “entirely devoid of context and background”.

In a 2012 article titled: ‘As Gaza is savaged again, understanding the BBC’s historic role is vital’, John Pilger, one of TruePublica’s most notable contributors illustrates how the BBC’s reporting can often give a fully distorted picture of the situation in Gaza to its viewers:

“This is notably true in the Middle East where the Israeli state has successfully intimidated the BBC into presenting the theft of Palestinian land and the caging, torturing and killing of its people as an intractable “conflict” between equals. Standing in the rubble from an Israeli attack, one BBC journalist went further and referred to “Gaza’s strong culture of martyrdom”. So great is this distortion that young viewers of BBC News have told Glasgow University researchers they are left with the impression that Palestinians are the illegal colonisers of their own country.”

I could go on. The point is that the mandatory annual license fee is not paid to the BBC for producing propaganda to convince citizens to go to war. The failed campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq has cost the country nearly £30billion with 75,000 seriously injured servicemen and women returning. We should not forget the mental scars that now leads to a suicide every two weeks – 400 additional families in mourning.

As Rori Donaghy from The Independent reported six months ago “Going to war is one of the most important decisions a country can take. The British people deserve to know where our Government is sending our troops, what the danger is, and what it is they hope to achieve by sending them into battle on our behalf.” His report was that British SAS troops may be fighting in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Libya – but Parliament hasn’t been told about any of these deployments, let alone been given the chance to debate them. The BBC should be reporting that not creating fake news and distributing propaganda.

In the meantime, the British government has just boosted the BBC World Service by £289million for the purposes of pushing its global agenda. Fran Unsworth, the BBC’s World Service director, said: “Through war, revolution and global change, people around the world have relied on the World Service for independent, trusted, impartial news. As an independent broadcaster, we remain as relevant as ever in the 21st Century, when in many places there is not more free expression, but less.” Having just been given nearly £300million by the state, the term ‘independent broadcaster’ hardly seems honest.

 

 

---