Thursday, February 23, 2012

Press sources and methods on Syria

This is what you read in the Western press:  "Communication between Syrian Army officers intercepted by Lebanese intelligence staff has revealed that direct orders were issued to target the makeshift press centre in which Colvin had been broadcasting.  If journalists were successfully killed, then the Syrians were told to make out that they had died accidentally in fire fights with terrorist groups, the radio traffic revealed."  First of all, which "Lebanese intelligence staff"?  This story did not even appear in the most biased Hariri media.  I mean, if the source is Lebanese it would have been in the Lebanese press opposed to the Syrian regime. Secondly, which Lebanese intelligence branch? There are tons of them: some are loyal to Syria and some are opposed.  And those who are opposed, will produce to you "interception" that can prove that Ahmadinajad personally shelled Homs and killed the journalists.  Thirdly, are there any serious and professional standards left in Western coverage of Syria?  Fourthly, let us say that the criminal Syrian regime deliberately killed those journalists (although it never knew that they were there), they would make sure to issue orders by radio KNOWING THAT THE ENTIRE WORLDS IS LISTENING ON?  I mean, how dumb can Western media be?  (thanks Badis)