Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source (May 23, 2019)

Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source

Posted by George Brennan on May 23, 2019, 7:28 pm



https://www.facebook.com/MediaLensUK/posts/2210771538959990?__tn__=-R I am gormlessly uncertain whether that link will work but I have cut and posted most of it.gb Media Lens 7 hrs · Our response to Alison Banville of BSNews who has commented here: https://bsnews.info/jon-snow-and-the-murdered-children-his…/ Hi Alison. You write: ‘Thanks for asking Chris but we think you'll wait a long time for a reply on this [from Media Lens]. The Davids have been bitterly disappointing in their silencing of @VanessaBeeley when others like Pilger have spoken up for her. Radioactivity cowed even them it seems. Ironic and very sad.’https://twitter.com/bsnews1/status/1130952488482410496 Far from waiting ‘a long time for a reply’, we have repeatedly answered you on our supposed ‘silencing’ of Beeley via email (at length in May 2018) and Twitter. Despite these responses, you have been restating your criticism every few weeks for more than a year now. We are not aware that you have been publicly shaming the likes of Noam Chomsky (https://chomsky.info/search/?find=beeley), Scott Ritter and particularly Nafeez Ahmed in this way. Ahmed doesn’t just fail to cite Beeley’s work – our sin – he is highly critical, writing of Beeley and Eva Bartlett: 'Apart from openly admitting that they support Bashar al-Assad and his military actions in Syria, a stance which in itself undermines their claims to be undertaking serious journalism (in much the same way that the impartiality of Western reporters who rely uncritically on rebel sources can be questioned), compelling evidence shows that when they report from Syria they do so in a context that is entirely embedded in Syrian government and military forces.' http://statecrime.org/…/Nafeez-Ahmed-State-Propaganda-in-Sy… So why are we, who have never said a word against Beeley or BSNews, being criticised in this way? Beeley is indeed open in her support for the Syrian government and the Syrian army. For example, both BSNews and Beeley retweeted this from a Syrian tweeter: ‘I as a Syrian state that, We, the SYRIAN PEOPLE, stand by our democratically elected president, he's our beloved leader, protector and savior.’https://twitter.com/WissamSliman…/status/1128787222076055552 BSNews and Beeley also retweeted this: ‘We stand by the secular heroic Syrian Arab Army where the soldiers come from each and every religion and sect of Syria and which is fighting against a one color, extreme Wahhabi terrorist head choppers and heart/liver-eaters.’ https://twitter.com/WissamSliman…/status/1128787360739725313 We understand that there’s a moral case for supporting the Syrian government against the prospect of the country being over-run by Western-armed, fundamentalist militia who would reduce Syria to a Libya-style hell. But like many other dissidents, our approach has always been to criticise the violence and illegality of Western foreign policy without siding with governments targeted by that aggression. The great claim of the massed ranks of state-corporate propagandists is to insist, of course, that dissidents like us are ‘deniers’ and ‘apologists’ for Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi and Assad; that we are morally depraved ‘useful idiots’ and ‘traitors’. But in fact, we have always relied on highly credible, expert and above all undeniably impartial sources. As we wrote to you one year ago, on Iraq, we have relied heavily on former chief UN weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, on former high-level UN diplomats Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, who actually ran the UN sanctions programme that devastated Iraq. On Libya, we have relied on a UK parliamentary committee report, on Amnesty backtracking, on Professor Max Forte, Gareth Porter et al. On Syria, we have relied on Robert Fisk, Seymour Hersh, Professors Ted Postol and Richard Lloyd, Peter Ford, Ritter and others. A key part of their credibility is that they are either neutral, or in fact pro-Western. Ritter, for example, is an ex-Marine, Republican-voting war supporter. Because of that, his criticism of US-UK positions carries more, not less, weight. Halliday and von Sponeck powerfully countered Western propaganda claims on Iraq, openly recognising when the Iraqi government was factually correct without siding with Saddam Hussein or his army. They would never have dreamed of backing Saddam supporters who hailed ‘our beloved leader, protector and savior’. This would have instantly undermined their credibility with a public propagandised to accept a Manichean, ‘us and them’ view of the world. Impartiality made their arguments extremely robust and almost impossible for the propaganda system to handle – ‘MSM’ were forced to ignore them. In our view, this combination of expertise, factual accuracy and impartiality is the most effective way of throwing a spanner in the war works. We’re perfectly happy for other people to take a different approach, but we think this approach works, certainly for us in doing what we’re doing. And in fact, we have cited and retweeted numerous articles mentioning Beeley’s work with approval. And as you say, Pilger wrote a foreword praising her work in our latest book – something we agreed to and had no problem with. So, what you consider our ‘shameful’ ‘silencing’ of Beeley (we really don’t have the desire or ability to silence anyone - to not cite people is not to silence them) - which you deem a sign that we’ve been ‘cowed’ by ‘radioactivity’, which is ‘ironic and very sad’ -




Responses Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by ceemac666 on May 23, 2019, 8:32 pm, in reply to "Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" Thanks for that George but I don,t buy it. The Davids attitude may carry some weight when it comes to opinion but in matters of fact it is impossible to justify. " A key part of their credibility is that they are either neutral, or in fact pro-Western. Ritter, for example, is an ex-Marine, Republican-voting war supporter. Because of that, his criticism of US-UK positions carries more, not less, weight." Radioactivity indeed. Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by George Brennan on May 24, 2019, 2:49 pm, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" The two Davids are very great men, IMO, because they are the only journalists, apart from the specialists, who for years have shown the appropriate response to impending Climate Disaster, which should be one of panic bordering on hysteria. They are also a bit cracked, as is shown by their judgment that this is still an excellent forum. No doubt they accept with buddhistic serenity the fact that none of today's regular contributors regard the following, as I do, as a self evident truth " A key part of their credibility is that they are either neutral, or in fact pro-Western. Ritter, for example, is an ex-Marine, Republican-voting war supporter. Because of that, his criticism of US-UK positions carries more, not less, weight."  The argument from authority is the most pervasive argument we can and do deploy when we argue matters of fact. We can directly prove very little of what we know. Nearly everything we believe, even everyday things, we believe because we were told it was so by someone whose word we take on trust because they are not likely to be mistaken and have no visible grounds for partiality. Ie an unbiased expert, or better yet an expert who is arguing against his bias. Such have to be our cited authorities when we are hoping to persuade someone else rather than just ourselves. gb gb. Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by brooks on May 24, 2019, 3:48 pm, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" I think these things are matters of tactics and tentative judgement calls, not principle. Without getting into whether one has a moral obligation to use particular sources - and I say this as someone with deep respect and admiration for both Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett who are both journalistic heroes in my book - I do think it's hyperbolic to say someone is being "silenced" because a tiny, two-person media analysis site doesn't use them as sources. CNN, BBC, Murdoch, etc, all contribute to silencing these two brave women. But it's a classic example of a circular leftist firing squad to make such charges against two superb journalists in the alternative online media world who have also been "silenced" in any meaningful sense by the establishment media, and who have also done extensive and stellar work exposing the lies and distortions of the propaganda system that helped destroy Syria and so many other countries. Doesn't that vastly outweigh what they are being criticized for here? Agree completely ceemac Posted by mike on May 24, 2019, 6:40 pm, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" In his faux academic paper cited by the ML, Nafeez Ahmed argues that not all armed opposition should be considered jihadi extremists "... overstating the claim of no distinction between moderate and extremist rebel groups, and thereby oversimplifying the dynamics of the conflict." As we know from talking to civilians in the country, ordinary Syrians don’t make that distinction. We never heard anyone say: ‘Thank goodness for those ‘moderate rebel' terrorists; no parent should have to see their child blown to pieces immoderately’ This is one of my major gripes with corporate media types, including Ahmed, who’ve never set foot in the country and spoken with people there face to face; they have no idea what most civilians think and when people like Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlet, Alison Banville, David Macilwain, Mark Taliano and so many other honest and honourable journalists bring back voices from Syria, Ahmed and the anglozio media mouthpieces are more than happy to ignore them or worse to snidely suggest their testimonies were coerced. Many have the unforgivable audacity to go further and attack the messengers. Silencing ordinary Syrians whose testimony and personal experience does not conform to the western narrative serves only to prolong their suffering. ML must know this deep down. Here's an interview I did last year with a resident of Aleppo discussing how soldiers from the Syrian Arab Army did not see their families for 3-4 years while they were protecting the ancient citadel. Ahmed would have us believe this interview was given under duress or that Abdul was 'toeing the government line' now that Syrian forces have liberated the city. Also note the story of how the inmates of the prison to the north of Aleppo fought alongside their guards and SAA soldiers and were even given weapons to help fight off terrorist attacks. Imagine that!!! Did we read about this in the Guardian? Many inmates were pardoned for their efforts but sadly many more died either in the fighting or from preventable dietary related diseases after the prison was surrounded by terrorist groups for over 18 months with no access to outside help. See https://bsnews.info/epic-steadfastness-aleppo-central-prison/ NB. Reading this on the Citadel of Aleppo we can understand why it was so important to defend... One of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world, Aleppo preserves remnants of more than four millennia of Near Eastern history. The Citadel of Aleppo is a densely layered microcosm of this long and complex history. The majority of the structures on the citadel were erected by the Ayyubids in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, but substantial structures are also preserved from the Ottoman period (beginning in the sixteenth century). The citadel was built on a natural limestone outcropping rising some 100 feet (30 meters) above the level of the surrounding plain. Its high walls, imposing entry bridge, and great gateway remain largely intact and dominate the skyline of the city. Within its walls, the fabric of the citadel’s inner spaces has been compromised by a succession of invasions, earthquakes, and natural decay caused by exposure to the elements. Recent excavations uncovered substantial remains of an important Bronze Age neo-Hittite temple, in use for the most part of the third and second millennia B.C. The temple is decorated with an elaborate system of reliefs that depict deities and fantastic creatures and that are an important addition to the record of this early period in Syria’s history. This is a photo I took of Aleppo from steps of the citadel "Given the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof" John Kenneth Galbraithhttp://bsnews.info Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by Thomas Newfield on May 23, 2019, 10:41 pm, in reply to "Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" There are more slurs on Ms Beeley here. Hiding behind others' words merely compounds the dishonour. [V. Beeley] reports from Syria "in a context that is entirely embedded in Syrian government and military forces". Why, because she got a visa to visit the country legally? Because she interviews ordinary Syrians including those who were never asked if their story could be used to support the bombing of their country? She has interviewed White Helmets in southern Syria. Repeating this recalls the papering over of slaughter of civilians by terrorist bombs with the "casualities in government loyalist areas" meme. With similar effect. In fact this accusation as the Davids must know if they've read her work, that Vanessa Beeley is "embedded with the Syrian government" (what does that mean?) and forces, is simply false. Your penultimate paragraph in which you compare support for Saddam Hussain the western backed monster with Assad, the mild-mannered leader whose popularity has he's fought a defensive ware while seeking to heal his country's wounds, is nearly as shameful. You betray here a greater concern with perception than truth. But, yes David and David - I suspect you will read this -: you will indeed be further accused of being "Assad apologists" if you truly release yourselves from this spurious academic objectivity and engage with the best reporters whose names are dragged through the gutter but whose honour is unblemished. So, well done, you've managed to minimise that, well done. It is quite a shame thoughfor those of us that love your work. Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by Ed on May 23, 2019, 10:51 pm, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" Thomas you say and then quote: "There are more slurs on Ms Beeley here. Hiding behind others' words merely compounds the dishonour. [V. Beeley] reports from Syria "in a context that is entirely embedded in Syrian government and military forces"." I didn't like that bit, either and I speak as someone who has loved the work they do at ML, pretty much from day one, which is a lot more years than I care to remember.  Supporting Beeley et al. isn't an endorsement of the Assad regime Posted by Keith-264 on May 23, 2019, 10:56 pm, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" but it seems that The Daves tread carefully more than in the past. Perhaps that's why they blocked me? ;O) Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 The west always uses the term 'regine' for any government they want to overthrow- nm Posted by psingh  on May 23, 2019, 11:09 pm, in reply to "Supporting Beeley et al. isn't an endorsement of the Assad regime" Nm You're right ps... Posted by mike on May 24, 2019, 12:09 am, in reply to "The west always uses the term 'regine' for any government they want to overthrow- nm" When Lyse Doucet interviewed me on the way to Aleppo last year she called bs when I told her this. My friend who was listening live to BBC R4 in the UK when the interview was broadcast told me the very next news item used the phrase 'Assad regime' PS It was me who started the rumour that the president and first lady would be attending the event in Aleppo - just mentioned it to BBC producer in Damascus to see how far it would go ;-) "Given the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof" John Kenneth Galbraithhttp://bsnews.info Ha! Posted by Keith-264 on May 24, 2019, 7:33 am, in reply to "You're right ps..." I tried to set a rumour going at the bridge but it fell a bit flat. I must be losing my touch. ;O) Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 psing ... easy please. You just ended your header with nm nm Posted by Tomski on May 24, 2019, 12:31 am, in reply to "The west always uses the term 'regine' for any government they want to overthrow- nm" nm Wish it was Keith... Posted by David Macilwain on May 24, 2019, 2:46 pm, in reply to "Supporting Beeley et al. isn't an endorsement of the Assad regime" which isn't why I support Vanessa, but I wholly support the Syrian Army and the President. Why wouldn't you? The idea of comparing Assad to Hussein is ridiculous, even though I believe there was more support for him than is credited. But there are many in Syria who still support Hafez al Assad... But now everything has changed; the UK government and its allies have committed murderous war crimes against Syria and have absolutely nothing to say at the ICC, along with all their media and activist puppets, who have now complained that the SAA has targeted them while they hang out with the terrorists! http://www.dumptheguardian.com/world/2019/may/23/sky-news-journalist-and-crew-shot-at-by-syrian-government  Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by dereklane on May 24, 2019, 7:23 am, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" I was going to comment yesterday and got sidetracked.. I would echo similar sentiment- it's painful to read squirming misdirection from some writers who were very good at their job. I don't know what the real reasons are but what they actually wrote doesn't strike me as good enough for two blokes with fine minds. I'm not angry about it, just disappointed... On a completely separate issue, and entirely unrelated (it is, because I don't know any of the facts), I've seen recently in my real life, people who once seem to have had a solid set of ethics abandon them all in the acquisition of just a little more power/money. My point in bringing this stuff up is a) it seems more and more prevalent in English society and b) it likely has little to do with dark forces state level and more likely to do with simple changes in outlook as individuals change with age, circumstance and the natural hypocrisy of humanity, particularly in judgement of others. In a roundabout way; they're probably still good people, they're probably still capable of good work, but not *as* good as if they retained the courage and fearlessness that set them on that track in the first place. I'm not relegating them to the scrap heap by any means but some question marks are hovering that weren't there before. I suppose I'll wait and see. Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by Keith-264 on May 24, 2019, 7:37 am, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" Yeah, I know that feelin'. The first two times I went to Ireland I found the arrogance of the wealthy towards poor people startling. On the third visit, when I had a pot to piss in and stayed at B 'n' B's instead of in a tent, the place seemed a lot more civilised. I wondered if things had changed or that I was moving in different society. Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by dereklane on May 24, 2019, 12:11 pm, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" I think it's possibly always the latter. My partner thinks the world has become harsher but I think the poor are just more visible to the rest now and the wealthy resent that. It's part of the reason behind the new laws moving homeless people on or fining/charging them. I think we notice it around us when we or others change circumstance, either upward or downward. There don't seem many that can retain their outrage against polite society and accumulated wealth when they're on the receiving end of good fortune/greed. I always come back to that excellent Jesus quote about the hypocrisy of the wealthy (the camel vs needle one) when I think of this. Obviously it's not impossible to be wealthy and good, but it obviously goes against human nature, and logic. Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne? Here? In Ireland? In a tent? What were they thinking? (nm) Posted by Ed on May 24, 2019, 8:08 am, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" nm "Diiiing dooong".... Posted by Keith-264 on May 24, 2019, 10:33 am, in reply to "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne? Here? In Ireland? In a tent? What were they thinking? (nm)" Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 But that's a quote from Ahmed, not the Davids! Posted by Willem on May 24, 2019, 11:13 pm, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" Medialens were quoting Nafeez Ahmed as an example of his open criticism of Beeley and wondering why he [Ahmed] is not being attacked by BS news. But now you're making it look it's the Davids speaking! Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source Posted by Tomski on May 24, 2019, 12:09 am, in reply to "Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" For me the case is clear cut, there is something rotten in the state ... when good journalists like D&D want to disassociate themselves from the citizen-activists-journalists, afraid to be called out as apologists. Afraid that their credentials will be tarnished. For what? So that their hard drives won't be examined by our best and brightest? Or even worse, that no-body will take them seriously because the gate keepers will point their fingers at them, as the minions of the Deep State tend to i.e. the rest of the MSM. After getting to read the interviews and articles by Doug Valentine, I am aghast that this squirming is afoot in our own backyard. Btw, I am equally critical of Chomsky and Ahmed on this issue. It is not a question of like/dislike, it's much more fundamental ... it is avoiding the central issue. In other words if there is a case to be answered by the Syrian government on issues of bad governance this should be aired, and equally the other side should be respectfully handled. Meanwhile, the silence is truly deafening ... there is no case for answering these fundamentals. It is very easy to see where Eva and Vanessa are coming from just by watching their vids of interviews with ordinary Syrian people ... don't need A-level in geography to see what is going on. Well, we know that the other watched MSM minions are in thrall of our 'services', so careful : ). Daves have shackles and their compassion doesn't seem to be enough to throw these chains away. Ah well, wish them best. Best  Response from Eva to ML FB thread Posted by mike on May 24, 2019, 4:33 pm, in reply to "Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source" When in June 2017 I went to Madaya, it was with a different friend acting as translator, in his car, no military or other escort even though areas of Madaya had not yet been cleared of potential mines, including this area we saw, a terrorist bomb factory: Interacting with people, the only sort of 'escort' the town mayor, which is appropriate since he knew how things played out in Madaya. https://www.mintpressnews.com/order-returns-to.../232380/ When I went to Daraa in May 2018, it was with one translator from the ministry of information, and yes military escort going to the national hospital—because al-Qaeda snipers lay 100 metres away https://www.facebook.com/EvaBoBeeva/posts/1925005744176077 https://www.facebook.com/EvaBoBeeva/posts/1925893510753967 https://twitter.com/EvaKBartlett/status/1011961517477113856 That said, military escort entailed one pickup truck or something driving ahead of our taxi, that's it. Dara'a was being shelled when I was there... When also in May 2018 I went to Hadar, southern Syria, my rented taxi was met by military escort (soldiers in a car...) the last leg because al-Qaeda were still occupying Jubatta al-Khashab 6 km away...and routinely firing on the road to Hadar. https://www.mintpressnews.com/welcome-to-hadar-a.../244569/ When in April 2018 I went multiple times to eastern Ghouta areas, it was solely with a translator from the ministry in a taxi I hired. No military escort. When in September 2018 I went to Mhardeh, days after a massive terrorist attack which killed 13 civilians, it was again in a rented taxi with a translator. https://www.mintpressnews.com/mhardeh-a-call-from.../250281/ So, while there have been instances in which the Syrian army has provided a one-car escort, many times I've been on my own with just a translator, or on my own period. I know Vanessa has had the same sort of experiences, exposing herself to danger with no protection, in order to share the voices corporate media deliberately excludes because they are in “regime” areas... Its revolting, actually, how people like Ahmed can dismiss the testimonies of millions of Syrians whose stories should be heard simply because they live in areas secured by the Syrian government. Further, if one scrolls through my uploads, you'll find many videos where I'm interacting one on one with the Syrians I'm filming / interviewing... http://www.youtube.com/user/InGazaUpdates/videos... Now with all that, I need to get back to subtitling footage I took in Petare, Caracas, where again I did not travel with anybody except a friend from Western Caracas on his motorcycle and a local woman from Petare who showed me around. Recently, I had some great people offer to translate my Venezuela content, which is fantastic. However, the subtitles were not up to standard, so I'm manually going thru and correcting everything... "Given the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof" John Kenneth Galbraithhttp://bsnews.info « Back to index [ The Lifeboat News ] Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - ceemac666 May 23, 2019, 8:32 pm Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - George Brennan Yesterday, 2:49 pm Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - brooks Yesterday, 3:48 pm Agree completely ceemac - mike Yesterday, 6:40 pm Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - Thomas Newfield May 23, 2019, 10:41 pm Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - Ed May 23, 2019, 10:51 pm Supporting Beeley et al. isn't an endorsement of the Assad regime - Keith-264 May 23, 2019, 10:56 pm The west always uses the term 'regine' for any government they want to overthrow- nm - psingh May 23, 2019, 11:09 pm You're right ps... - mike Yesterday, 12:09 am Ha! - Keith-264 Yesterday, 7:33 am psing ... easy please. You just ended your header with nm nm - Tomski Yesterday, 12:31 am Wish it was Keith... - David Macilwain Yesterday, 2:46 pm Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - dereklane Yesterday, 7:23 am Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - Keith-264 Yesterday, 7:37 am Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - dereklane Yesterday, 12:11 pm Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne? Here? In Ireland? In a tent? What were they thinking? (nm) - Ed Yesterday, 8:08 am "Diiiing dooong".... - Keith-264 Yesterday, 10:33 am But that's a quote from Ahmed, not the Davids! - Willem Yesterday, 11:13 pm Re: Why Media Lens don't use Vanessa Beeley as source - Tomski Yesterday, 12:09 am Response from Eva to ML FB thread - mike Yesterday, 4:33 pm « Back to index | View thread »