This thread concerns the group that is termed the "White Helmets" in the Syrian Civil War.

This organization has become instrumental in achieving a Western intervention in Syria, which will
- prolong to Syrian Civil War
- assist in Western wepaonry sales to the KSA
- provide a boost to Al Qaeda - rebranded as Al Nusra - operating under the group called the FSA, who are driving the Civil War.

Who are these people that have been give enormous credibility, and a complete lack of scepticism, by the compromised media ?

.

The video is provided by Canadian independent news video producer, James Corbett.

Interesting commits
- the leader of the Whte Helmets is not permitted to enter the US, for undisclosed reasons. Even though he is presented in the media as a leader of a humanitarian movement.
- the group are described as "Syrian Civil Defence" even though there already is a "Syrian Civil Defence".
- the group have some rather dubious members, who have committed deeds in the civil war that are not in the category "humanitarian"
- the group was founded not in Syria, but in Turkey
- the founding of the group was guided by a former UK military intelligence organizer
- for some baffling reason, the mainstream media is not investigating this organization
- some members have been accused of being in Al Qaeda, and other murderous organizations.

The clip includes comments by independent journalists John Pilger and Vanessa Beeley.

In the words of Pilger, the White helmets are a "complete Complete propaganda construct".

The clip also references numerous other journalists, and former CIA operatives, who have accused the White Helmets of being a fraud, in their work.

Philip Geraldi - the fraud of the white helmets

The film, which was made by the White Helmets themselves without any external verification of what it depicts, portrays the group as “heroic,” an “impartial, life-saving rescue organization” of first responders. Excluded from the scenes of heroism under fire is the White Helmets’ relationship with the al-Qaeda affiliated group Jabhat al-Nusra and its participation in the torture and execution of “rebel” opponents. Indeed, the White Helmets only operate in rebel held territory, which enables them to shape the narrative both regarding who they are and what is occurring on the ground.

Also here is Max Blumental describing how they were founded, how are funded, and their history.

https://www.alternet.org/grayzone-pr...ng-us-military

It shows how careful people have to be when it comes to accepting what politians say.

The media is also complicit. They seem to work in tandem with governments to project only one side of a story. Often while they don't outright lie they do engage in propaganda. They are also experts in manipulating people's emotions.
If they want to regain trust it's incumbent on them to recognise their responsibility for the 'fake news' phonomenon rather than be scornful of it.

War is big business. I read an article recently that describes the money made by contractors in the aftermath of the Iraq invasion as running into hundreds of billions. In my opinion that is sheer evil.

I think one thing that has changed as an aftermath of the invasion of Iraq is the population of NATO countries has become more skeptical about taking the word of both politicians and the media. Long may it last.

To be clear: this is the “Hitler was a Rothschild sponsored by the West” James Corbett who thinks 9/11 and Bin Ladens death were conspiracies. That guy right?

But yeah, let’s give him credence. He seems smart. Look, he’s got a YouTube video and everything.

Originally Posted by Sync

To be clear: this is the “Hitler was a Rothschild sponsored by the West” James Corbett who thinks 9/11 and Bin Ladens death were conspiracies. That guy right?

But yeah, let’s give him credence. He seems smart. Look, he’s got a YouTube video and everything.

I know Pilger is credible though. The problem is that while many people are now skeptical of the traditional media some seem to trust complete charlatans as long as they say something different to the mainstream media. It isn't critical thinking. It's more idealogical.

Originally Posted by cracjerz

I know Pilger is credible though. The problem is that while many people are now skeptical of the traditional media some seem to trust complete charlatans as long as they say something different to the mainstream media. It isn't critical thinking. It's more idealogical.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...iracy-theories

This from that Neo-con bastion The Guardian. Pilger is a dyed in the wool loony left fraud who peddles bullshyt conspiracy theories.........as long as the West is the bad guy.

Rushing to Judgement Over Syria - some previous experiences - Peter Hitchens:

Did Syria use poison gas in Khan Sheykhoun last April?

And what if a belief about this event becomes fixed in the public mind, and the belief is not justified, will it be revived at some point for another dangerous purpose?

In July I provided this account of a fact-finding mission by the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) which (fascinatingly) didn’t actually go to the site of the alleged atrocity.

Who Gassed Whom in Syria? We don't Know. Please Don't be Rushed into War. - Mail Online - Peter Hitchens blog

The report contains links to the OPCW report. My conclusion was and remains that, even following this report, perhaps especially following it, we simply do not know enough to attribute responsibility for this event.

Now I have obtained a copy of a further report. I am not sure if I can link to it, but here is an attempt. If not, I would be grateful if anyone knows of any other route to it:

http://www.securitycouncilreport.org...s_2017_904.pdf

This is from the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism, sent to the UN Security Council on 26 October 2017.This is extraordinarily confident in its judgments. In Pargarph 14 it admits that the OPCW investigating 'mechanism' never actually went to Khan Sheikhoun...

I find the discussion of the origin and nature of the crater inconclusive and am surprised at the apparent certainty of the un-named ‘experts’ quoted that it was definitely caused by an air-dropped bomb...

several points at which unidentified experts and witnesses are cited and we are left to take their word for it, as the report seems very willing to do....

Look in the area around “early warning ” and “air deployment” for more rather contentious claims and conclusions (in my view) supported by unidentified experts whose views seem remarkably unanimous and helpful to the belief that Syria did it, despite the absence of solid, objective certainties and despite the fact that no independent investigators have ever actually been to the site...

Emphasis added.

Interesting analysis by Peter Hitchens about the 'investigation' into last year's attack (which was also followed by a US attack on Syria).

Rather bizarre interview with Nikki Haley about the most recent alleged CW attack where she says that there are three analyses, one by the US, one by the UK and one by France, and they all agree in synchronized fashion. For all we know these 'analyses' are based on looking at social media and the 'testimony' of the White Helmets. Meaningless. What, we're all supposed to just trust them? Like in very recent history:

Originally Posted by Sync

To be clear: this is the “Hitler was a Rothschild sponsored by the West” James Corbett who thinks 9/11 and Bin Ladens death were conspiracies. That guy right?

But yeah, let’s give him credence. He seems smart. Look, he’s got a YouTube video and everything.

The whole lot of them are a parcel of rogues.

Originally Posted by Clanrickard

This from that Neo-con bastion The Guardian

The Guns of April : Are we in a pre-War era, right now? - Peter Hitchens

The Guardian Becomes the Warmonger’s Gazette

Remember, this is the Guardian, a newspaper which for decades was the house journal of ban-the-bombers and protestors against the Suez adventure and the Vietnam war, with very high proportions of Quakers, moth-eaten liberals and vegans among its readers. Yet now it has become a trumpet for armed intervention. Under the pious slogan ‘Comment is free…but facts are sacred’ first stated by its greatest editor C.P.Scott, the paper’s opinion column declares (again without the slightest qualification): ‘Syria's renewed use of chemical weapons against its own people at the weekend is shameless and barbaric. Dozens of people in the remaining rebel-held suburbs of Damascus were suffocated by Saturday's chemical attack on the Douma district. This is not the first time this has happened. Since the use of sarin at Khan al-Assal in 2013 there have been dozens of chemical attacks by the regime. These deliberate attacks on civilians show callous contempt for humanity and disregard for the laws of war. Official Syrian claims that the latest killings have been fabricated are beneath contempt.’

But if facts are sacred, how can the Guardian be so sure, given that it is relying on a report from one correspondent 70 miles away, and another one 900 miles away, however good they are at their jobs, and some anonymous quotes from people whose stories it has no way of checking?

Long-distance Psychiatry? A Breakthrough!

It recognises the problem that any such action by President Assad would be raving mad. Assad is on the verge of a highly significant victory in Ghouta, and a gas attack would provide the only realistic opportunity for an American intervention against him, about the only thing that could once again put his position in doubt. The Guardian isn't troubled by that. It argues: ‘Some may ask why, since the slow throttling of Damascus's eastern Ghouta suburbs seems to be approaching a grisly climax, the government feels any need to breach one of the oldest taboos in warfare once more. To answer that adequately it is necessary to delve into the darkest places of the psychology of a regime that celebrates the overwhelming use of force, the need to terrorise civilians and the right to punish opponents indiscriminately as a weapon of policy.’ In other words, yes, President Assad is mad. Well it is a point of view, but even if reporting of atrocities can be done accurately from a distance of 900 miles, I have heard of no attested experiments showing that psychiatry can be done at such distances.

https://peoplesmillion.whitehelmets..../?source=whweb

The White Helmets are an unlikely group of heroes. These former tailors, bakers, teachers and other ordinary Syrians banded together in 2013 to save the lives others were working so hard to take. They have now saved more than 114,431 lives. But for the work they do, White Helmet volunteers and their civil defence centres are often targeted. Russian and Syrian regime planes bomb civilians, and then they circle back bomb the rescue workers and medical workers who come to help.

Originally Posted by Sync

To be clear: this is the “Hitler was a Rothschild sponsored by the West” James Corbett who thinks 9/11 and Bin Ladens death were conspiracies. That guy right?

But yeah, let’s give him credence. He seems smart. Look, he’s got a YouTube video and everything.

To be clear - you never examined any of the evidence in the video, but you are certain that it is not possible useful.

Abundantly clear.