Cyprus-Forum.com

by **Robin Hood** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 10:55 am

An interesting five minute read that explains why those that just skim the headlines to form an opinion always seem to get it wrong! They envisage the existence of a true story in one that is deliberately created for them, with no effort required on their part to ascertain the facts to support what they have been led to believe has any credibility. Their decision is decided by their source .......... not the facts.

Special Interests Create The "Good", The "Bad" And The "Compelling" Story- The Media Tell It

A thoughtful analysis by Amanda Taub of the New York Times describes why some wars get more "western" public attention than others:

“Reporting does not depend on the existence of good and bad or the existence of a compelling story. Such thinking is just idealized nonsense. It is the media that creates the ([i]often artificial) sides of a war on behalf of the interests. Good and bad are not inherent, they are constructs. A real compelling story is not needed. One can be created any time though it will likely not be a true one.”[/i]

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/10/special-interests-create-the-good-and-bad-and-the-compelling-story-the-media-just-tell-it.html#more

by **Maximus** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 11:01 am

Here you go;

" The Pentagon paid a UK PR firm half a billion dollars to create fake terrorist videos in Iraq in a secret propaganda campaign exposed by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism."

"PR firm Bell Pottinger, known for its array of controversial clients including the Saudi government and Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet’s foundation, worked with the US military to create the propaganda in a secretive operation."

"Both the White House and General David Petraeus, the former general who shared classified information with his mistress, signed off on the content produced by the agency."

https://www.rt.com/usa/361385-pentagon- ... st-videos/

It is obvious to some, when they read BS.

by **Robin Hood** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:38 pm

Or even ………

“White Helmets - Save Aleppo” Protest Proves How Easy It Is to Dress up Actors As “War Victims”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/white-helmet-save-aleppo-protest-proves-how-easy-it-is-to-dress-up-actors-as-war-victims/5549087

by **Robin Hood** » Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:50 pm

Another gem .......

This story appeared in the Daily Mail .... well for a while anyway and was then taken down. I looked up the source! :wink:

The source – Reuters; HEADLINE ..........

Aleppo aid convoy hit by air strike: U.N. expert

First paragraph:

Analysis of satellite imagery of a deadly attack on an aid convoy in Syria last month showed that it was an air strike, a U.N. expert said on Wednesday in remarks that were later toned down to say it was not a conclusive finding.

Confidence building:

"We had an image of that and could clearly see the damage there. With our analysis we determined it was an air strike and I think multiple other sources have said that as well," Lars Bromley, research adviser at UNOSAT, told a news briefing.

"For air strikes, what you are usually looking out for is the size of the crater that is visible and the type of crater," he said. A giant crater was caused "almost certainly (by) air dropped munitions" as opposed to artillery or mortars, he said.

Boss finds out ....... Oooops, somebody has just damaged their promotion prospects:

UNOSAT manager Einar Bjorgo, who took part in the briefing, contacted Reuters hours later to say it was not possible to be 100 percent. "There is significant damage, and we believe it may be air strikes, but it's not conclusive," he said.

"Our observations of the imagery show indications of it possibly being an air strike. But it's a very damaged area and we cannot definitely conclude that it's an air strike."

How about that for having to eat humble pie ...... the DM didn't even print an apology! :roll:

Reuters along with Associated Press is the source of most syndicated news stories .......... :oops:

by **Paphitis** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 2:07 am

LOL

Don't wish to interupt the big wankfest boys BUT...

Moonofalabama, Global Research and Russia Today! :lol:

Btw, you silly buggers are very naive to believe the Coalition doesn't have conclusive evidence as to who bombed the convoy. We would be all over it let me give you the tip.

by **Robin Hood** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 7:14 am

Paphitis wrote:LOL

Don't wish to interupt the big wankfest boys BUT...

Moonofalabama, Global Research and Russia Today!

Btw, you silly buggers are very naive to believe the Coalition doesn't have conclusive evidence as to who bombed the convoy. We would be all over it let me give you the tip.

I have no doubt the US has conclusive evidence. Unfortunately, it does not support the story they have fed dummies like you. They have this so called 'conclusive evidence' for every event but to date not once have they been willing to provide it. For you that is no problem, you don't need proof because you swallow anything you are told without even bothering to read either the article itself, any other opinions or check out other sources for evidence.

But you are not alone! The BBC World News ran with the same story about two hours after I posted this. They missed out ALL the inconvenient comments that said that the claim was not supported by irrefutable evidence, just some junior spouting his mouth off and that it was later retracted.

The BBC even went to a 'journalist' from the NYT in their Washington Studio, who went through the same routine and explained how she had been researching it and where she got all her evidence. Social media, including YouTube! Turns out she repeated the Bellingcat story and even flashed up their photos, which happen to be the same photos as this 'UN Expert' used. The journalist had never been to the area and more than likely couldn't find Aleppo on a map if asked ..... in fact I bet she doesn't even know where Syria is!

Even I could identify obvious views in the Bellingcat report thatvery clearly refuted their claims ..... anyone with average intelligence would draw the same conclusions as I did. The propaganda from the US and its coalition, is becoming more ridiculous day-by-day and your views supporting it is becoming a bigger joke every post you make ..... mind you, your speeches are a great source for a good laugh! :lol:

by **Paphitis** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 7:34 am

Oh don't worry. By now the UN know exactly who is responsible. We know who is responsible.

You don't have any evidence apart from made up baliney from Pootin's mouthpieces which you swallow hook line and sinker it seems even though you know very well that Pootin and Assad are indeed responsible! Just like MH17.

Our side is not as low as your side and never will be. Your side is committing War Crimes. Our side isn't! And never will!

by **Robin Hood** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 7:50 am

Paphitis wrote:Oh don't worry. By now the UN know exactly who is responsible. We know who is responsible.

You don't have any evidence apart from made up baliney from Pootin's mouthpieces which you swallow hook line and sinker it seems even though you know very well that Pootin and Assad are indeed responsible! Just like MH17.

Our side is not as low as your side and never will be. Your side is committing War Crimes. Our side isn't! And never will!

Illusions, illusions ....... :lol: