Talk for Article "Renewed Syria shelling; Trump open to background checks on gun sales" Talk about this Article Cancel replyYou must be logged in to talk about this Article. ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) DU Deleted User 2018-02-20 14:01:36 “… The monitoring group Syrian Observatory for Human Rights …” It should be pointed out that this isn’t a group but one man living in a flat in the UK. There are strong rumours to suggest that he is in fact working for UK Intelligence. One should view the reports from him as suspect. Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) Jack Barton (talk | contribs) 2018-02-20 14:13:43 Hi Stephen, I have been interested for a while about the SOHR and why they are seen as very reliable by most well-informed people. There is a lot of contradictory info about them around, but they have not been responsive to inquiries (so far). If you could point me to where you have seen this information I will keep looking into it. Thanks, Jack Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) DU Deleted User 2018-02-20 14:22:04 Hi Jack: There aren’t many informed people in the Western Media Establishment when reporting on foreign affairs, anymore unfortunately. Most “reporters” regurgitate what they’re told to write or offered as “scoops” by sources close to the story the spooks. Ask yourself this, how many are reporting on the middle east without actually having travelled there, and interviewed independent sources? I’ve been following the “Arab Spring” for some time and now understand that it was an Intelligence operation to rebalance the middle east. It was supposed to include Iran and Syria – apparently it hasn’t gone to plan since Russia interceded on behalf of the Syrian Government and its people. I’ll dig up some of my sources for you – might be awhile, but I’ll get back to you. Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) Peter Bale (talk | contribs) 2018-02-20 14:43:21 Stephen, you may feel that but it simply isn’t the case. Reuters journalists in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and Syria and elsewhere along with colleagues from the AP, The Guardian and The Independent in country take immense risks. While there is plenty of armchair analysis and plenty of armchair reporters it is wrong to diminish the work of committed reporters — many of them local — who do their best to report what they see without conspiracies. Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) DU Deleted User 2018-02-20 15:01:26 Who specifically other than the Guardian reporter has actually been on the ground in Syria? I’ve been following very closely over the past 6 years and they definitely are the minority if more than 2 exist at all, at least from western media. Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) Peter Bale (talk | contribs) 2018-02-20 15:10:10 Since the murder of James Foley most of the big US names cannot go physically to Syria but the BBC, Reuters, AFP, Italian media, New Yorker have all had staff and stringers and photographers throughout. CNN reporters such as Ivan Watson and Arwa Damon have been extraordinarily brave in both Syria and Irag. BBC’s Barbara Plett Usher reported from Syria this week and Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen is frequently in Damascus and was shot during the Morsi overthrow in Egypt, BBC’s Lyse Doucet is also there frequently. The Syrian battlefield is so dangerous and reporters are now currency or kidnapping fodder now so it is much harder than it used to be. It is also extremely difficult — and not a conspiracy — to establish who is on whose side at the moment. Look at what is happening with the Kurds, for example, about to get totally screwed — again — by everyone. Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) DU Deleted User 2018-02-20 15:48:00 LOL CNN hasn’t been outside of Damascus. You’re right in that there are some local reporters and independent journalists that have been in Syria numerous times. The problem with such a conflict is that reporters who aren’t sympathetic to a particular side can’t go into that sides area officially. Now, since the US has been supporting the so called “rebels” (and lets be honest here – the only homegrown rebels are those belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood, the rest are Al-Qaeda [rebranded under various names throughout this conflict] and ISIS from outside Syria) SOME MSM journalists have been given access – I’m thinking particularly of the Guardian reporter Martin Chulov. I’m a former worker at one of those 3 letter agency. I know the area well and also know how my coworkers represented with those of the media. We fed the news media stories all the time – Think of the 1st Iraq war. Where were all you upstanding journalists then? My point is, that nothing is different now – Being too dangerous for reporters, doesn’t stop the real journalists. It’s just an excuse for white MSM journalists who haven’t been journalists for some time. But yeah, one has to be crazy to be say from the NYT and try to visit an ISIS area anywhere. But that hasn’t really changed from journalism ever – it’s always been dangerous. Yet some brave independent journalists are doing so. Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) Peter Bale (talk | contribs) 2018-02-20 15:59:30 First Gulf War I was in Saudi Arabia and then Kuwait City and went in with the Shahid Brigade of the Kuwaiti army. Watching colleagues having their heads chopped off on TV is a salutary experience. Being killed by the Syrians as Marie Colvin from the Sunday Times was also gives one pause. Martin is doing excellent work. Log in to Reply ⋮ Log in to Reply [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) DU Deleted User 2018-02-20 16:39:55 No, Martin is working for the deep state, regurgitating their tales, how to do you think he was able to interview ISIS and come back alive? Geez man, put your thinking cap on! I was worried about Wikitribune, now I see that it’s not going to be any different than MSM. I’m afraid you don’t seem much different than those of your ilk that expouse the White Helmets as being saints. Guess I won’t be recommending this website as a serious journalist centred medium. Log in to Reply ⋮ [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) JW Jimmy Wales (talk | contribs) 2018-02-20 18:46:56 Stephen, I suggest you rethink your entire approach to the facts of reality. If you are seriously suggesting that we should accept as fact – because you said so with absolutely no evidence whatsoever – that Martin Chulov of the Guardian is actually working for “the deep state” then I highly recommend that you simply move on. Evidence matters. Random conspiracy theorizing based on nothing is not welcome here. ⋮ [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show) DU Deleted User 2018-02-20 19:24:21 Jimmy, fine, I have moved on. Please delete my profile, for some reason there isn’t that facility there to so. BTW I have evidence, but was simply answering comments from your chief editor. Please don’t ask me for more donations and that goes for wikipedia as well. Been a longtime supporter, but didn’t think I’d ever see the day that Wikipedia/Wikitribune would follow the neoliberal agenda – Anyone that thinks war and colonialism is A-OK when it’s cloaked in Human Rights is woefully ignorant. You and your team are deeply ignorant when it comes to foreign affairs. I suggest your team stick to domestic stories. Do some goddamn research!