Newsbud Exclusive Report- Syria Under Siege: Guarding Against Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing

Vanessa Beeley & Eva Bartlett vs. Ethical Journalism & Human Decency in the Age of Social Media Reporting

Syria is a cultural, ethnic and religious mosaic of a country, with Sunnis, Shias, Druze, Christians. Additional ethnicities include Syrian Kurds, Turkmens, Armenians, Circassians, Turkmens, Greeks, Yezidis, and Shabaks.

Syria is a nation under siege with multiple forces involved, from many sides, by multiple factions and nations. We have Assad’s Forces, Syrian Kurds, FSA, Al-Nusra, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Ahrar ash-Sham, Faylaq Al-Sham. And we have multiple nations and their bases: Turkey, Iran, Russia, US-NATO, Israel.

With so many factions involved, so many divided geographical areas, and so many diverging foreign interests, how do journalists go about factual and unbiased reporting on Syria? How can this be done through ethical journalism, but most importantly with human decency? How can outsiders sift through information and misinformation bombardment and detect facts versus agenda and biased-based reporting?

*Follow us here at Newsbud Twitter

**Subscribe here at BFP-Newsbud YouTube Channel

Watch Full Video - Open to All

Show Notes

Richie Allen rips apart alt-media Duginoid frauds

There's More Propaganda than News Coming Out of Aleppo This Week

A Journey “Inside Assad’s Syria”

Q&A: How Foreign Journalists Operate in Syria

Swedish Journalist Expelled from Syria

We Are Journalists Not Terrorists

U.S. Peace Activists Should Start Listening to Progressive Syrian Voices

Syria Hospital Airstrike: Are the Rules Of War Breaking Down?

Top Syria Cleric Threatens Attacks on U.S.

Fake Experts on Syria Exposed

Controversial Freelance Journalist to Deliver Lectures on Syria in Hamilton

Eva Bartlett’s Claims About Syrian Children

Syrian Children’s Trauma Is A Laughing Matter—If You Are Vanessa Beeley

Victim Blaming

Who Is Doing What To Whom In Syria, And Why

Sydney Hilton Hotel Bombing Happened on This Day in 1978

Video: Vanessa Beeley Gets Destroyed on Assad's "Anti-Imperialism"!

How the White Helmets Became International Heroes While Pushing U.S. Military Intervention and Regime Change in Syria

Inside the Shadowy PR Firm That’s Lobbying for Regime Change in Syria

Yet another video shows U.S.-funded white helmets assisting public-held executions in rebel-held Syria

Additional Notes

*Note: Kelly Makdissy’s father was a general in the Syrian Military.

*Note: The quote from Ahmad Badreddin Hassoun, the Syrian Grand Mufti, was obtained from US main stream media outlet CBS. For another more objective perspective, see

*Correction: Some of the anti-Assad comments posted by Vanessa Beeley on twitter are still available (not all were scrubbed.)

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. Sam Bissonnette says:


  2. Truth is the second victim of war. The first is trust.

    Disappointing to hear that Beeley and Bartlett have damaged their good work with personal attacks, unprofessionalism and hostile language. I hope they will respond to any factual errors in this report and put their case. Especially given that Beeley was not afforded a right of reply when The Guardian did an ad hominem piece on her.

    This report lost me for a moment when I heard the words ‘Snopes, MSM and debunk’ used in the same sentence to make its case. Are Snopes and MSM reliable sources now? Debunking is the domain of the Sceptics Club, not journalism.

    Shirley Maclaine knew what she was talking about when she spoke at a National Press Club luncheon gently telling a room full of journalists that no matter how hard you try, you can not be objective. You bring your personal biases, your history, your experience to every story you tell. Do your best to report factually, but don’t kid yourselves that you’re ever 100% objective.

    This is a disturbing report and a reminder of why war should never be an option on the table. No matter where it is being inflicted, the stain of war is on all of us. It destroys and deranges.

    • spiro skouras says:

      Hi Thorny,
      Beeley was provided with an opportunity to respond to the Guardian piece. We have all the evidence to back this up and even included a comment from the author of that piece, in this report. There are other outlets we communicated with that all said the same thing, beeley and bartlett did not respond to any opportunity that was extended to them, this includes the multiple invitations extended by Newsbud, Sibel Edmonds and myself. If you add those up, that is at least 6 separate attempts to seek comment for this report as we always try to include both sides.

      • Thanks, Spiro. The report levels some pretty serious allegations, so I would have thought they would respond in some way. But maybe that’s not how journalists/bloggers/activists do these things.

        People are struggling to sort out the grey hats from the white from the black hats here. Maybe we will have a better understanding after your further reporting. I think the confusion is coming from MSM stories being linked to as supportive evidence, sources that usually tear alt media sites like Newsbud a new one for questioning the status quo.

        I am confused by Sibel referring to the pair being Syrian govt funded and ‘Israel-backed’. Or did I read that wrong? I thought Israel wants Assad gone? So why are they funding pro-Assadists? You guys have been immersed in this for two months, the rest of us amateurs are having to play a fast catch-up, make sense of it all. Doesn’t mean we condone profanity, threats, opaque funding etc.

        Maybe now is a good time for the Newsbud members to come together in a live chat with the rest of the Newsbud team. It’s been a while since you did a roundtable. Context is all, I am curious what Peter, Filip, Kurt make of it all. People have questions, but are perhaps reticent to raise them for fear of appearing stupid.

        • spiro skouras says:

          Hi Thorny,
          Yes there are still serious questions about their funding, what we have uncovered so far already shows that they have not been open and transparent about this, they claim that all of their trips were self funded and even held fundraisers, also claiming they stayed in the cheapest accommodations and even slept on the floors at airports due to lack of funding. We have evidence this is not entirely accurate as some of their funding been documented along with 5 star hotels, etc. There will be more follow up reports as there is still information pouring in.

          • Thanks, Spiro. There is a lot to digest with this story. Grey hats take more processing than the usual suspects.

      • spiro skouras says:

        Yes we were approached by Bartlett for an interview, Sibel covered this in the video report. At the time we were not sure about her and declined to have her on. After conducting research, our findings were alarming and we then invited Bartlett and Beeley to be our guests for this report. Both ignored our multiple requests.

        • Spiro, thank you for responding. I believe we had all that, with the actual e-mail and website/twitter, in the video report. No, Ms. Wright? (BTW: I have lived half a century as well, and one thing I have learned: there is no correlation between age and maturity; that, for the record). We are not going to repeat what we have diligently shown in this report with limited time and resources. What does she think an in-depth and lengthy 80-min video with all these documents shown as b-roll/footage was for???!! I truly detect unsatisfactory tone by Ms. Wright, and we are not here to play bloggers, and keep repeating ourselves. She knows where our ‘membership cancelation’ button is located (and our contact button to request refund. And I truly understand her farewell. Also please refer to my lengthy response to Jerry. We have received several warnings on the ‘gang’ summoning for attack at this site- and I will gladly terminate 100, for the sake of our 4000-member solid community. We have our measures in place. Enough said.

  3. peace365 says:

    Confused. Concerned. Disappointed. Disillusioned. I had bought the Beeley/Bartlett narrative. I had listened to a lot of their interviews. 21st Century Wire’s coverage of Henningsen and Beeley’s trip to Syria had compelling narratives. Your close associate (friend), James Corbett, recently interviewed Vanessa Beeley.
    And now this bombshell. I feel really let down. I really don’t know who to believe anymore! Who can one trust? Who are the wolves in sheep’s clothing?

  4. Theo Iskra says:

    Very disappointed to hear they use profanities and attack people, and even that they exploit and take advantage of their trips to Syria, but I’m not sure that retweeting mainstream media stories and rewriting the headlines means that they supported the Western lie. Are you guys sure about that one?

    • spiro skouras says:

      We have on record, multiple people who have known these two for years, these are first hand accounts who have stated and backed up their statements with documentation, that they did not have a clue about what was going on, that they were no experts or analysts. Yes they have traveled to Syria, ok, great! But these same sources, as well as others have all stated, again backed up with solid documentation, that these two were not sleeping on the floors of airports as claimed, instead, they enjoyed 5 star accommodations, and the full protection of the Syrian military, while having their supporters believe they were in danger on the front lines, add to that their their funding, how can we ever expect any source to report the facts fairly when they have received support from a side with vested interests? Its no secret they are in love with the Syrian government, every wonder why their reports never showcase any Syrian who does not support Assad? If they are mentioned, they are called “not real Syrians”, or “terrorists” etc.

      • William Field says:

        Spiro…well it seems to me if they do support Assad Govt in them trying to regain order is this not better than what is going on now?.. (& may do so now for many more yrs as we have seen with these other “regime change agenda interventions”). And also, what are you and Sibel proposing ought be done otherwise ATM given so many factions?……Who can stop it but USA? (i.e. Us!)….As I see it the only thing that can be done to stop this intervention is for 100’s of thousands or more in the West & Unions & others/whoever to come out against continuing this US/Israel agenda “Status Quo”…. I suppose there is a chance Trump might act (as he said) but seems he is surrounded by very lethal sharks in “the swamp” at the moment. Lastly, I also think we all need to stop “playing the man & not the ball” always…we can all always be wrong!….Anyway Spiro, I’d appreciate your views. Cheers.

        • spiro skouras says:

          Anyone who has followed Sibel Edmonds, or anyone on the Newsbud team should be well aware that we in no way have ever supported regime change in Syria, or any other nation. Actually, we have condemned it time after time in our various articles and video reports. In fact, Sibel Edmonds was the first one in the western media to break the story sounding the alarm bells that militants were being trained, and were about to be unleashed on Syria to destabilize the sovereign nation. In my opinion, Trump will not do anything to disrupt the “Status Quo” in fact, as we have seen throughout recent history, each consecutive administration is progressively getting worse. Our sources were vetted, we gave them a platform to tell their story. As you can see in the report all information is documented, and where it wasn’t, we clearly state as such. Personally, I think it was very brave of the people who came forward, knowing full well they would come under heavy attack, many people do not have the courage to speak out.

      • William Field says:

        PS And furthermore, how can NB be sure their “multiple sources” have not been biased or wrongful..? ….Surly we all know the Empire has endless ways of “influencing” people and “experts” & creating fictitious &/or one sided reports.

  5. Gerald Hines says:

    Thanks so much for this update. I’ve been waiting for Newsbud to address this situation for around a month+ as to some of the other info I had been reading on the web. I hope to also see this hashed out by James Corbett, by what I viewed with his interview with Eva Bartlett. As for Beeley, straight off I labeled her as disinfo-agent, so no surprise with her. But as for their crude language, let then dig they’re own hole, because TRUTH, ALWAYS SURES UP THE NOOSE.

    • Thank you, Gerald. Since we didn’t want to go for a too long a video we did not include several cases (documented). Hope we will soon. For example: We obtained their travel documents/log (via our sources in Syria & Lebanon): They spent 75% of their time in Beirut and Damascus, staying in the most expansive 5 star hotels (we have the hotel bills;-) and very expansive dining; and we have them on record telling people they pay for these trips out of their own pocket, and sleep on the floors in airports and very cheap motels (all documented interviews). It may sound petty but it tells you a lot. Also, SSM raised $1.5 million in the past few years and funded this two big time (that out of picket nonsense is pure lie), additionally, a former NATO pilot from Croatia (Morina), a staunch Israel supporter, gave them money (This man lives in Syria, with a house in Lebanon as well; he made millions of dollars in 3 years from ‘Unknown’ pilot activities). Anyhow, much more out there- and we have limited resources. I thank you gain for your supportive response. Corbett usually is very good and thorough with checking backgrounds for his guests and fact-checking. This was very uncharacteristic for him. We sent him a long e-mail, and hope he does the right thing: issue disclaimer and or retraction. For the sake of his site’s credibility. We value him as a partner.

      • William Field says:

        Sibel, Hotels? Who gave her money? Mostly in Damascus? Dining out? …..with all due respect, what does any of this really prove?…I don’t understand, if are you saying she has no credibility because she is backed by or supporting Assad Govt what is so wrong with that under these current circumstances? …At least if I am right in presuming the alternative is another Iraq.

        • spiro skouras says:

          When any news site or journalist is funded by a government, this automatically removes objectivity of the reports, this is pretty fundamental. Example, would RT, a Russian state funded news site ever publish a report critical of the Russian government? If so, it would have to be reviewed and approved by the state, and it would be with a specific purpose, that would ultimately help the state, maybe by removing an opponent etc. As far as the 5 star hotels are concerned, this is another example of the women in question not being open, honest and transparent. The behavior resembles that of a charlatan. Example William, these women have in the past had fundraisers, and claimed they only stayed at the cheapest places if they even got a place to begin with. Stating that they would even sleep on the floors, when in reality, they were wining and dining at 5 star hotels in Damascus, claiming they were putting themselves in danger.

          • William Field says:

            Thankyou Spiro, I do appreciate your response. However I don’t understand or agree with your premise, if the Assad Govt. “is the victim & under dreadful attack” (and they are perhaps looking at the same fate as Saddam!)…don’t we need to hear the other side of the storey? And how is being helped to get by information on the ground by that Govt so Bad?…Does that really mean all this reporting thereafter will be biased?… Also, as you know going into areas needs Military protection…?…Also, if they spent “how many nights” in 5 Star Hotels, considering they were also possibly in danger at some other times does this really matter….? Sorry to persist, but I truly don’t understand & don’t want to spend another 90mins listening to the report. I guess I am asking exactly what has she/they really done wrong?….& how can you & Sibel be so sure the sources you have are telling the whole storey?

  6. Theo Iskra says:

    Angie I very much agree, I suspect it’s a little more mixed than either party is willing to admit. There is some good work that Vanessa and Eva have done, very good work, as I have seen much of their videos and interviews of Syrian citizens. It is probable, however that they have concealed some things that they wish not come under daylight, but I wouldn’t call them outright frauds, as their overall premise and narrative as to what is happening in Syria technically isn’t false, even if there are a few holes and conflicts of interest.

  7. Edward Rutland says:

    Dear Sibel
    Thank you for your work. This was very enlightening.
    Please stay safe and strong.
    Edward Rutland

    • Edward, thank you so very much for your encouraging words- when needed the most. We have so much more, many more documents and witnesses to interview, yet so very little time. I have to say I am amazed (despite many years being in activism related fronts) how polarized and one-sided people can be: Either with us or against us. For me, even more than ‘ethical journalism’, it is the ‘Human Decency.’ Even with our team members at Newsbud. Sure, I carefully look for expertise and credentials, but more than anything I look for that ‘decency.’ We are so fortunate. I can say, and with 100% confidence, that every one of our partners, from Nimmo to Kocavecic and all, they are decent-good human beings. Again, thank ‘you.’

    • Edward Rutland says:

      But like I said when you first got into a scrap with Patrick Henningsen “you picked a very unfortunate battle to engage” and in this case you have done yourself no favors.

  8. Angie, they expressed their wish to ‘unsubscribe’ and we fulfill our subscribers’ requests diligently and promptly. When you unsubscribe your latest comment(s) gets deleted automatically. Now, please let us know if you wish to unsubscribe, and I will immediately cancel your account and refund you. Thanks:-)

    • Anne Harries says:

      Sibel, it seems my brother has had his account mistakenly withdrawn from Newsbud. He wishes his paid for account to be reinstated asap. Thank you.

      • Dear Anne, Those who have been with Newsbud for a while know that we respect people offering different views than those presented by our producers. On the other hand, posting comments based on opinion but without the facts, or not being able to offer counter facts (documented) is considered not constructive but destructive comments. Your brother made it clear that he has a formed personal opinion, and has accused Newsbud of nonfactual reporting (which we have never done; our track record is clear). There is no reason for your brother to pay (hard-earned dollars) and subscribe to a site he stands against. Therefore: we are sending him an e-mail to offer a full refund. I would be more than happy to do that with you as well if you wish. This is not one of those internet forums were people join to attack and criticize documented facts without offering documented counter facts. It never was. It never will. We are honest and have integrity- thus we are fully refunding your brother’s subscription. He can donate that to those sites/people he believes in and supports. Please let me know about your account as well. Thank You.

    • Anne Harries says:

      Dear Sibel
      I had the opportunity last night to read my brother Bernard’s response to your report on the freelance activists/journalists on the ground in Syria. Bernard raised some very pertinent facts overlooked in your report about that conflict, well known facts articulated in very many of the articles produced by your journalists.
      Bernard could have also added other facts about our family’s personal life but probably would have thought it inappropriate to do so. However, I would like to mention those facts now as a way of responding to the large segment in your video where you spoke about your father. Bernard’s and my father was also a doctor who worked under similar difficult oppressive regimes.
      During our childhood our father worked under the South African Apartheid regime. From a medical point of view he was renowned as a very good practitioner who, like your father, would never have personally discriminated between patients. And, as you have said, this is true of course of most doctors. Like your father, our father was also a man of great integrity, so much so that he felt compelled to work actively to encourage his fellow doctors and the South African AMA to use their unique position to counter the injustices of the apartheid regime. For his efforts he was eventually discretely thrown out of the country with the following ultimatum. He was told that he and his family should either accept free passage back to England or be prepared to face a trumped up malpractice charge which would have invariably lead to his deregistration as a doctor, most likely with a period of imprisonment. He could not allow this to happen to his wife and eight children and so decided to accept the AMA funded emigration back to the UK (the AMA of course did not want the negative publicity). Our family later emigrated from the UK to Australia.
      My brother Bernard is a man who understands the issue of integrity. Our father taught us to carry a deep social conscience into whatever field of work we chose. It was his firmly held belief right up until his death that doctors need to be aware not only of their duty to medically help whichever patients come their way, but also to act politically in standing up for the heath and welfare of citizens denied proper access to appropriate medical care under the political regime they work under. It is in this context that he regarded most of his white colleague doctors as collaborators with apartheid – unwittingly or otherwise as terrorists in this sense – duty bound to channel most of their medical efforts to the white elite. Similarly, what the journalist in Syria were pointing out was the fact that foreign doctors in Aleppo etc were constrained in providing medical care equally to injured terrorists and other citizens, thereby unwittingly or otherwise embedded with the terrorists – the exact same situation that our father found himself in. I believe that these are the political facts that outside activists/journalists in Syria have been so desperate to point out.
      I have written the above both as a direct response to the segment of your video that dwelt on your personal story and as a defence of my brother’s integrity. Like your other member who got involve (Angie), he is now in his late sixties and has no problem whatsoever in distinguishing between the concepts of fact and opinion.
      I consider that Bernard was wrongfully eliminated as a Newsbud member. His considered response was simply deleted and his account cancelled, leaving him with no avenue to further respond. To make matters even worse Newsbud then chose to state that Bernard had requested to have his account cancelled. This was untrue and you should acknowledge this error.
      Both Bernard and I love reading and listening to the reports produced by your fantastic crew of journalists. Bernard tells me that you have given him no other option other than accepting a reimbursement of his subscription fee.
      I ask you to please reconsider your decision re Bernard’s membership – and I reiterate that I do not want my membership cancelled.

      • Thank you for this note, Anne. And I truly appreciate you sharing your personal story with me, and Newsbud here. Truly honored to know and have you with us here at Newsbud. I am going to check on your brother’s status. Our admin forwarded several (at least 15-16) e-mail communications with various people (the majority were B-B gang members who subscribed in the last 3 days in order to bring their threats and ugly attacks to Newsbud), and I don’t even remember which ones were his. And I assure you if/when I receive and read an e-mail that I consider respectful, sincere, and rational, the last thing I’d do: eliminate the membership. Certain e-mails were worded with very harsh and demanding language such as : “Why didn’t you have these women on this report??!Why didn’t you show their sides?”- That tells me: 1- The person has not even watched this video report, because not only we covered the fact that multiple invites/inquires been submitted to both, we actually showed all the e-mails and social media posts; 2- The entitled attitude and harsh language (I never tolerate that with any one- period)

        Anyhow, on the positive front: we have gained several new community members as well. Frankly, every 6-months or so, based on one report or another (Let’s say with the interview we had on Greenwald), we get to the ‘House Cleaning’ point. On average 5-6 Close-mided, biased members realize that this is not a home for them, and we let them go, and gain new ones. It is very natural; it is expected. It happens with any news sites. There are so many who are rigid with certain beliefs, and no matter how many documents, how many witnesses, you present them with they’d look the other way and argue in circular fashion. I do NOT tolerate those people. And finally: we have limited resources, limited time (I am a wife for 26 ears, I am amother to a 9 yr old, I have Newsbud to run, I have multiple projects I juggle simultiniously … Same with all our team, members), we don’t have the time and energy to sit and keep typing responses, and engage in circular junk back and forth. We have work to do (lots of it) and families. I am not sure who it was (Angie), but that tone that says, ‘Where is my response?! Its’ been 2 hours- why no body is responding to me?! Answer the question now?!’ Well: Those people do NOT belong here. Maybe some of them are retired and with nothing else to do. But most importantly: We will not entertain that kind of entitled attitude and tone here at Newsbud. It is wrong. It is rude. And ‘I’ do not want a community with whoners like that. Anybody who does not like this: They have the freedom go else where … There may be sites, or people, who sweet-talk, converse, engage constantly with each commenter; well, I ain’t one of them. Not allowed. Period.

        Regards, Sibel

        • spiro skouras says:

          I completely agree Sibel, we will not tolerate anyone who tries to disrupt Newsbud by joining all of the sudden just so they can post garbage in the comments. Any legitimate conversation including differences of opinion however, is always welcome.

  9. Anne Harries says:

    First, let me state clearly that I do NOT wish to unsubscribe to Newsbud.
    My brother, Bernard Harries, a member of Newsbud posted the comment last night that has been deleted. His account has also been suspended which he did NOT ask for. He has also sent a messaged to Newbud this morning asking for his account to be reinstated. He has not heard back. You can reach him on his email

  10. Please refer to our latest post (a short video) at our YouTube channel. It is a 2-min video: documented. Eva Bartlett, during her UN talk said: “The Hospital Was Never Bombed.’ Later, when exposed, she spun that, and said: ‘I did not say that- what I said was the hospital was not completely grounded turned into rubble.’ That is called a LIE. Spinning. Journalistic ethics dictates that: You issue retraction and correct that. That is if that was by mistake. In this case, it was not a mistake but a deliberate misinformation, because SSM had already warned her about ‘The hospital 60% destroyed due to mistaken Russia bombing.’ Every single case in this report was documented, with multiple witnesses, and triple fact-checked, so, unless you bring in a document that (fully documented) challenges the facts we presented (There won’t be any hole: 3 people spent 8 weeks researching, interviewing witnesses, documenting every single case) go back watch the report, and conduct your research (those based on multiple legitimate and ethical sources). Here is the link:

  11. Thank you, Angie. As I said in response to Neil’s comment: every case was thoroughly researched, documented, and many witnesses (including pro Gov Syrians in Syria)were interviewed. Just want to make sure that you understand the difference between facts and opinion. With facts (as in scientific and non-emotional) vs personal feeling/deduction/opinion. For example: if we post an ‘editorial’ piece stating one’s opinion/analysis, then responding with a differing opinion is perfectly valid (no matter how opposing). On the other hand, to challenge a fact, an entity first has to concretely debunk that fact, and offer the ‘real’ fact based on legitimate/credible sourcing and documentation.

  12. I followed these two ladies for a while, appreciated their videos from Aleppo because so little actual decent material was available at that time, ignored the ugly twitter battles, wondered a bit about their business model and took their writings with a grain of salt, because both are evidently activists and bloggers, not trained journalists. Nothing wrong with that per se. So I started watching the newsbud report, but gave up around the 1h mark. Not because the revelations were so shocking, but because it felt like newsbud was using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It felt inappropriately dramatized and emotional in relation to the topics and persons at hand. If newsbud wants to start a crusade against dishonest, unethical, distorting journalism, then why start with the two smallest fish in the pond? Is there any major MSM journalist reporting on Syria who is any less culpable of distorting or misrepresenting facts? At least E&V got some key aspects of this conflict right, eventually. Their general gist is not so different from newsbuds own few articles on Syria. Maybe they are bankrolled by some organization, but I cannot see what this organization would get out of this deal – it’s not as if they reached millions. And yet they are presented here like the reincarnation of the Antichrist, with dramatic music and maximum disgust and indignation, in a feature length installment. So I wonder how much of Sibel’s and Spiro’s valuable time, budget and effort has gone into the research and video production, and if there really were no worthier causes or more interesting actual contents to invest in.
    (Talking of research: If it is actually true that Tim Anderson is referred to here as a “convicted terrorist”, I begin to seriously worry about the quality of said research and expect an apology to him.)
    In the big picture, all of this is much ado about very little. How exactly is this supposed to help Syrians? Judging on FB comments, some people even use your video as an argument that the MSM story got everything right.
    Will newsbud actually sacrifice their reputation just for taking two second rate bloggers down a notch? Newsbud is my beacon in a dark media world, I would be sad to see it reduced to such petty squabbles.

    • Well- I don’t even know where to begin. For someone to say, ‘Oh, they have done some things ok, so what if they use profanity, so what if they use threat and actual violence against people even their children, so what if they have caused a lot of pain, so what if they have caused a lot of pain and destruction and divide within antiwar Syrian activist communities, so what if they get money from Israel-backed NGO(s), so what if they lie, so what …’
      That is like saying: ‘Okay, so we know Hitler has done a lot of bad things, but he did a few good things for Germany, he built some modern roads, he allocated a lot of money for science and Research and development (and so what if some of those scientific research concentrated on Eugenics’ goals).

      I may be old fashioned and traditional (and even old), but I not only believe in ‘Human Decency’ and exercise it with my own family/kid/friends/colleaguews, but I also carry that into my organization’s values and activism. There is a huge difference between ‘Freedom of Speech vs. Violent and profanity-ridden online terrorism.’There is a huge difference between ethical and factual journalism vs. false reporting with serious/grave consequences (Just as we fault MSM for).

      It is extremely hypocrisy-ridden for someone to claim that ‘It is Okay for these two call all doctors, call all sides other than Pres. Assad terrrorists, call many journalists, refer to 6+ Million refugees as anti-Assad terrorists …’ Yet, for the same person to criticize the mainstream media when they do it (calling this nation or that group terrorists)? It is very hypocratic to accuse Gov and Mega corp funded media of bias due to their funders (aka controllers), yet, for you to have NO issue with 30% of funding coming from another gov for another biased entity. That is repulsive. Doublestandard is disgusting. If we want to counter the mainstream media we must remain true and clean and honest and ethical. Well, none of these adjectives apply to this duo: false info, gov funded (Syriam Gov), Shady-NGO funded, numerous lies and false info cases, profanity-ridden, one-sided …

      I have to say I truly wonder why you are here, subscribing to Newsbud. Because you have zero in common with this site’s objectives, mission statement, and the track record it has established. With that, if you believe exposing and outing fraudulent info sources is ‘Damaging My, and Newsbud’s’ credibility, mam, you are in awrong place, with the wriong people. I always welcome differences of opinion. I am always open to alternative views. BUT, I will never (EVER) tolerate or accept soimeone who is not a strong believer in ‘HUMAN DECENCY.’ And that includes you. My daughter, currently 9, is learning at this age: ‘People who use profanity and bullying and violence should be outed, and excluded from decent people’s circle’ That’s right, even a 9 yr old who is being raised with values and standardes of human decency knows this.

      I believe before you spend another monthly contribution on this site of irate minority, you should say a polite good bye, and join a ‘Community’ that shares your lax standards, and your low expectations. Because this is a community. A community of people with many different views, many different outlooks, and many different political beliefs. BUT, one rule we have: A strick adherence to ‘Human Decency.’ I will have our admin send you a form to get you on your way. I have maintained my credibility for 16 years in the public’s eye. And I have gotten rid of people like you in the past: In 2013 when we exposed Glenn Greenwald (the first to do that publicly) I said good bye, and removed 62 people exactly. You know why? Because just like you they began warning our news site, and saying ‘How could you hurt your credibility by attacking this hero alternative journalist?’ Well, fast forward 4-5 years: They are licking what they spat. They found out too late. You’ll receive our e-mail shortly.

    • real jeffersonian says:


      I’m not sure what I can add that Sibel has not already said. But it is not trivial, it is not unimportant to take to task those who knowing falsify reporting, pretending to be journalists. Who threaten and intimidate publicly online with vile, vicious language. Who are we anyway, if knowingly we accept this and do nothing about it? Rather than Newsbud sacrificing its reputation by taking on these two vicious, despicable, pretentious characters, I believe it elevates its reputation in the long run – just as it did by taking on Greenwald. As I see it, this is anything but a petty squabble, this goes to the heart of what alternative journalism is. If we can’t police ourselves, which it seems is what this is all about, then we’re doomed to end up as bad as, or probably worse than, MSM.

  13. Richard Ross says:

    Thank you, Sibel for shedding light on these two, obvious, bitter women, who go about spreading their lies, posing as serious journalists. I don’t know how all this mess started in Syria, however, if I were a gambler, I would place my money on the CIA. It makes me sad to see the Middle East continually in a state of war and killing those who don’t agree with their religion or politics. I image that this area was once a beautiful place to visit with it’s ancient history, but, sadly, it is now mostly rubble. Keep reporting the truth.

    • Richard, and thank you for your encouraging words. Syria was beautiful, secular, thriving economy, pretty decent higher education system … It is truly sad (and bewildering). I watch in horror Turkey’s recent invasion from the North: Horror. From multiple fronts.

      Yes, in my 16 years of activism, and then journalism I have never seen anything like this fraudulent duo: Simply vile and despicable.

      Interestingly, in the last 2 days, since we published this video we have had (This: for the first time ever!) 8 Trolls who have been trying to smear and cause division among our community members (We’ve never had that before). Interestingly 6 out of 8: subscribed to our site in the last 48 hours! And of 6, 5 are ‘hysterical WOMEN’; Seriously! One of this duo’s old supporters who still remains in their ‘secret e-mail list’ notified me that: The latest fatwa is 1- launch ‘simultaneous’ attacks against Newsbud and Sibel Edmonds on Facebook and Twitter, 2- Begin approaching Newsbud Team, offer them ‘money’ to quit Newsbud, including their producers (At least 1 Newsbud Team member has been approached); 3-Subscribe to Newsbud, attack the report, and cause division, then ‘sue them for silencing you’!!. This is what I mean: I have not seen anything like this. This is what all their targets have been saying: Mafia Style, Thug Style, attacks, death threats … and the list goes on. We have already identified and removed 6. There may be more. Please keep your eyes open, everyone. I am watching a couple for further ‘signs.’

      • spiro skouras says:

        This type of behavior mentioned by Sibel is completely unacceptable and totally nefarious! Literally trying to sabotage Newsbud, disgusting!

  14. Newsbud,

    Dig a little deeper on the Tim Anderson angle. There is much more there than what you reported that may make your characterizations of him inaccurate. There have been many reports of ASIO involvement in the Sydney Hilton Hotel bombing, and it is by no means a settled question.

    Also, did you speak to the Corbett Report on any research it had on the issues you raise?

    • Orenda, thank you for this comment. You are so right. Our sources had a lot on Tim Anderson. We kept stopping them, and said: ‘In order to make it very focused and in-depth we cannot introduce other parties involved at this point, but we will do a follow up report.’

      Now here is a question for you (we need your opinion): I was contacted by Ryan Dawson, and has been communicating with him on Tim Anderson as well. He has researched Anderson thoroughly. In fact, he was in Sydney Australia for a lecture (University), and he got to continue his investigations (including going to Anderson’s residence, etc.) while there. We will be interviewing him on this soon. Have you heard his podcast(s) on this? Also, any links/sites you deem legitimate on Anderson will be greatly appreciated. As of now: I know very little about him (haven’t had the time to thoroughly research him). And yes: The Australian Intel was a major factor in his pardon (That we have 3 sources for), and he’s been working with them (On ‘what’ I don’t know at this point). Thank you!

    • Orenda, I have sent him an inquiry e-mail. I have received nearly 100 e-mails from our team members and community members asking the same thing. Some of them have written to him as well. So far we have hear nothing. He is usually very good in checking out his sources’ background. I have no idea what happened in this case. Also, he has always been anti-social media attacks/bickering, yet, a few weeks ago he openly started rewetting/liking some of B-B’s vicious and ugly attacks against Newsbud. So very uncharacteristic for Corbett. I am fairly sure he didn’t have a clue on this duo’s background/history, and their nefarious online operations (As I said Corbett is not one of those 24 X 7 social media junkies). HOpe he’ll watch the report, conduct his additional research and then issue public warning, retraction/disclaimer … I don’t want to see his reputation destroyed.

    • Steven Howard says:

      There are a number of online articles concerning the two (apparently wrongful) convictions and subsequent exonerations of Tim Anderson in relation to involvement in the 1978 Sydney Hilton Bombing. These are documented in the Wikipedia item regarding the event and the article about Prof Anderson
      As documented here ( the three convicted of the crime, “Mr Paul Alister, Mr Ross Dunn and Mr Tim Anderson are each reported to have received $100,000 by way of ex gratia payment from the New South Wales Government for their wrongful convictions and imprisonment for conspiracy to murder and attempted murder.”
      The article on the event–Timothy-.html quotes the cause of his conviction as being “Erroneous testimony by special branch member named Richard Seary who was described by Supreme Court Justice Lionel Murphy as “the most unreliable person ever presented as the principle prosecution witness on a serious crime”.”

  15. Vignesh Sekar says:

    Thank you for this incredibly detailed episode. I’m pretty shocked, safe to say, since I’ve quoted these two in arguments multiple times as “independent journalists.”

    Being wrong is really not what I am peeved about. I originally got into conspiracies to “debunk” them, but in the process realized how little I actually knew, and how much I knew was actually false. It’s just that it’s almost impossible for someone like me, a recent college grad going about his life and career, to properly fact check and vet independent journalists like B&B. Hell, even Corbett got it wrong, and in my mind he (and Newsbud, of course 😉 ) are the best examples of factual and largely unbiased reporting.

    I will admit that I was a little concerned when I heard “Snopes,” “MSM,” and “debunk” in the same sentence to prove your point. I agree that what this duo has said and done is despicable. Calling for the death of doctors and activists is inexcusable. But I hope you are not propping up the MSM in the process, which in my humble opinion has done far more damage than these two ever could. I know your history and your numerous exposes on MSM lies, though, which is why it was only a slight concern.

    My question is: what sources can I go to that is largely unbiased? I will definitely check out the journalists mentioned in this segment. I am also a fan of Mint Press News and Consortium News. What other journalists and news outlets would you recommend?

    Thank you so much again for what you do. You probably get this all the time, but it needs to be said repeatedly: the world needs organizations like Newsbud to shine a light in this ever-expanding fog of disinformation.

    PS. The behavior of the comments field gets really weird if you expand the text box. You should get a web designer to look at it. 🙂

    • Dear Vignesh, thank you for this sincere and open-minded response. You are not alone. All of us, including me, face the same difficulties: In this age of ‘instant’ news, social media reporting, 10000s of self-proclaimed journalists … it gets very hard to discern between Factual Info, Dis-info and Mis-info. As we all know, a fake White Helmet propaganda photos gets to be disseminated among millions and ‘believed’ all in a matter of minutes.

      In Beeley-Bartlett case we did not rely on Mainstream Media. We consulted with our own independent forensic experts (On the photos they falsely reported on), video-photo experts, several alternative media journalists, academics (On journalism & ethics), their former associates and colleagues, etc. And there were so many cases (very disturbing) we did not include t=in this report due to 1- time limit; 2-not being able to obtain multiple documents/witnesses. So we limited it to 4-5 cases/topics, each one thoroughly researched and examined, and triple fact-checked.

      Sites I recommend: hmmmmmm. This is very complicated (Why?!). It depends on the topic/area. For example: On Middle East issues, since I speak 4 languages, I read dozens of sites in order to arrive at the middle ground decent understanding of any case. For example: when I am reading the Turkish news/analyses published in Turkey I keep in mind (and am fully aware of) their biases/agenda (let’s say Turkey’s illegal invasion of Syria-Afrin Operation), then I go read the Iranian’s (all state owned;-), then some of the culprit MSM (to see who they are vsupporting for which agenda) … You see what I mean? On the other hand if you ask me: How about China? Hmmmm- not knowing their language, or having in depth knowledge of the history/domestic politics, I read Asia Times, Xinhua, …. and of course listen to Peter Lee (And I’d never claim expertise in anything China).

      For editorials and analyses: I go to so many sites, a mix bag of MSM, alternative: From Eurasia Review (NeoLeb-opperatedl; great site to find out what the enemies are saying, plotting), Al Monitor (Deep State as well) and RT (State Owned and completely biased; same as BBC or Syria’s SANA: one-sided state-owned info sites), to, alternatives such as Intel News, Consortium News, Global Research, Tech Dirt, Technocracy, Duran, Shadow Proof (Great coverage of Prison Industrial Complex by their reporter Brian), Open Secrecy (Yes: Soros funded: I frind dirt on the Republicans there; they don’t report dirt on the Democrats;-), Tru Publica, ….

      What I am trying to say: I spend 4-5 hours a day speed reading nearly from 100 sites. I just found out about Mint Press. I really like Whitney Webb. That lady is amazing with her thoroughness, fact-checking, and comes across as nonpartisan and independent (also very polite, respectful). She is the only one I know over there. I am disappointed that they gave coverage to this fraudulent duo (In every way opposite of Webb).

      Again, thank you for being sincere, a critical thinker, and for seeking the truth in the midst of smoke and mirrors.

      • Vignesh Sekar says:

        Awesome response, and I completely agree in finding info from multiple sources, even deep state. I’ll definitely check out those other sites; thank you!

  16. Sibel, I have known you for many years and always appreciated your dedication to truth and human decency. In my opinion, you have gone way ‘above and beyond’ in your quest for both – often putting your self in trying situations with those pushing the government line, (like all the classified and gaged attempts to shut you up). I have come to trust the information you include in Newsbud presentations as real, well documented journalism, even while not always pleasant to learn about. Today, where so-called truth is spewed forth in social media with absolutely no oversight, we are expected to believe everything we see there? To me this seems like the conditioning present in 1930’s Germany where disagreeing with the government line also made one a domestic terrorist.
    Please keep on doing what you do so well. I don’t think there is anyone else who ties all the pieces together as you have with Newsbud. Thanks to you and all of your partners!

  17. Thank you for this episode. Keep up the good work! I did not know it was that bad. It IS difficult to find good source(s).
    I must admit I did not know about white helmets before I eard it from them.

  18. spiro skouras says:

    Yes the Syrian people are the victims, you say you don’t care if they use profanity or express opinions we don’t agree with, you mean “opinions” like virtually all of the doctors in Syria are terrorists? Or maybe you mean that other journalists should be rounded up and declared terrorists and loose any rights they had? Or possibly you are referring to the pressure Beeley applied on Dr. McKinzie to censor facts from her article? There are countless examples of the way these people have harmed. Do not take lightly the abusive and harmful tactics employed by, what has been described to us from first hand witnesses as a gang! A gang which has threatened people including Syrians! Do you care about any of that Jerry?

    • Spiro, thank you for the response. I was taking a breather, trying to cool off before responding to Jerry’s comment. You made it easier for me- now I can respond the way I respond when we come across people like Jerry, who end up here, at Newsbud, mistakenly. Thank you.

  19. Robert Diggins says:

    For some of you, this might be the first time you have seen how serious Sibel Edmonds is, concerning her continuing efforts to expose corruption.

    Her journey began under very serious circumstances and she has continually received praise for exactly the direct, unambiguous, and most notably courageous stances she has taken, even while theses stances made her more vulnerable.

    People from across the spectrum of society, internationally, from hundreds of national security whistleblowers, to common people who have a wide variety of perspectives, skills, and interests, have used one word the most, to describe her actions to expose corruption and those who cover it up. Courage.

    I was lucky enough to start learning about Sibel and her story while she was still battling the FBI in court and donated a very modest amount to her legal defense fund. I say this because her courage captivated me. I have personal and family experience with efforts to fight corruption and “City Hall”, and I grew up learning that it was a very uncommon trait. So, I kept up with her efforts and public forums, where I learned quickly what the key to her courage was, at least in part.

    It has always been the decision to only speak about what she knows and what she can back up. To limit speculation and stick to the truth that is the real foundation of her desire to take a stance in the first place.

    Most of us play fast and loose with speculation, compared to Sibel.

    That said, I have confidence that the vast majority of this diverse community are individuals who value this rare vein of integrity that has produced multiple motherlodes of exposed corruption. I’m talking about historical significance. Think of the State Secrets Gallery, Gladio Plan B, COINTELPRO2 and the disgusting deeds of not only the former Speaker of the House and many other criminal government officials, but also the Hoover-on-steroids criminal government that benefits from recruiting, corrupting, and entrapping government officials who can be compromised and controlled.

    Many YouTubers are discussing “brownstone ops” and the like now, but think back to 15 years ago. 10 years ago. Even 5 or 3 years ago. It has been a terribly long wait for any kind of media to get the bigger picture that is not resolved to incompetence and blowback. Even after Sibel handed it to them on a silver platter, through extensive interviews of herself (with Corbett on Gladio Plan B for instance – how many of you have watched that entire series and seen just how blown away even Corbett was? It was quite the education for him as for all of us.) and of other national security whistleblowers, triple-checked front page magazine stories and appearances on shows like 60 Minutes and Democracy Now (until a democrat was elected), and through tesimony under oath and penalty of perjury (see the Krikorian Case Sibel Edmonds testimony on YT).

    Very few took the time to absorb the massive amount of detailed, backed up narrative. Even other producers at BFP during those times were slow on the uptake. And now? Many alt media figures are coming out with “bombshells”, which are not as accurate or complete as what Sibel disclosed so many years ago. And some are using her material without crediting her. But that’s not the big deal here.

    The big deal is that, when exposes, such as this one, cause some cognitive dissonance and confusion, we take our responsibilities, as members of this community, seriously.

    Again, it might be the first time some of you have seen some of the depth of Sibel’s seriousness, integrity, and courage. I hope you will allow yourselves to learn from it, and let it serve as one role model, in particular, for validating your emerging convictions and contemplating what is and isn’t speculation coming from a person such as Sibel. It might be helpful to take another look at her history in this respect.

    Please pay special attention to the clear notion that, during times like these, Sibel has never been concerned with being liked or popular. And she has paid a serious price for this conviction, while the rest of us have benefited.

    Thank you for considering this long expression of my perspective. I wasn’t able to take the time to make it more concise. My apologies for that.


    P.S. I would like to offer another seed for thought. We’re the Black Panthers, the American Indian Movement, and all the other anti-war and/or human rights activist groups infiltrated by COINTELPRO because they were stupid? Or is it possible that any of us can be fooled? We all know the irony of “It can’t happen here.”, but do we also consider “It can’t happen to me.”?

    • Robert,

      I don’t know what to say. Humbled. Thank you. And I can’t believe it’s been 16 years since I began doing this, nonstop. And you’ve been a supporter since the very beginning. Remember joining my dingy little site? Where did the time go?

      You see this is what I mean when I say: I never sought gathering a large community, knowing that people like us, pursuing the truth, the justice, totally independent from any particular party, particular NGO, particular leader, particular heroes, … happen to be the very minute minority. And for me that is a good thing. And by that I don’t mean group think. I don’t mean following a particular party/leader. What I mean: those very few who seek the truth no matter who it exposes, no matter from what party, or what ideology.

      People like you, Dennis, REMO, Roger Morris … you are that. I am honored to have you as a friend and as a partner in this long-haul battle for the truth. Thank ‘you’.

    • spiro skouras says:

      Thank you for your support Robert!

    • Robert Diggins says:

      FYI, for all of you BFP OG’s: I am Xicha. I briefly left BFP, after a misunderstanding and a heated discussion, some years ago. That didn’t last too long. Sibel is also a personal friend and we hashed things out in private and she asked me to come back to BFP. When I did, I chose to use my real name. It’s Robert Diggins. I know some of you thought I was a chick, LOL!!! But I’m not.

      I especially remember and like remo’s posts and his coining of “The Magic Bolt Theory” and know he’s an artist from NZ. I really dug some of the icons he’d use at BFP, which were original paintings he did, regarding 9/11 truth. I also enjoyed many conversations, a few “outings” of bad actors, and posts by Dennis and BennyB, who came on the scene from Boston, if I’m not mistaken. Please correct me, if I’m wrong.

      I didn’t post as much at BFP under Robert Diggins. And I really haven’t commented a lot at Newsbud. But, I have supported NB from behind the scenes and also tried to add to their campaigns with video statements. You can see me with my daughter, enjoying some Newsbud promotion in one of the videos. That’s me, Robert Diggins, Xicha.

      Xicha, the name, comes from the Dakota language name, Zica (I received this while studying Dakota with one of the last native 1st language speakers alive, and the woman who started the first American Indian Studies Department in higher ed, in the world. I had a lot of contacts in the community and became an honorary member of the Crow Tribe as well, after helping out a family, during their mother’s passing, and helping some tribal members get to Crowfair, probably the biggest pow-wow in the US, in Montana. The mom took a liking to me I guess, and after she died, my local contact presented me with the document and an eagle feather.

      In Dakota, which was not originally a written language, you always pronounce a “c” as a “ch” sound. So, I was being creative with my Dakota name, and hoping people would pronounce it correctly, by using Xicha. I think Blackwater’s name change at the time to Xi also inspired me, in an ironic way. Zica means wild turkey. That’s if you give weight to the first sylable. Spelled the same, but with weight on the second syllable, it means squirrel. Zica tanka means domesticated turkey, like the ones we eat on Thanksgiving. Tanka means big. Remember Tonka trucks anyone? Mne means water. Minnetonka means big lake. There are tons of names we have adopted, mispronounced, from Dakota, just as there are from different tribes all over the country.

      Dakota, Lakota, and Nakota are the 3 dialects spoken by the 7 main tribal groups – the Seven Council Fires. I grew up in a mostly Lakota area, and that dialect is surviving much longer than Dakota, which is a dying language. My good friend is working with our teacher to this day and just moved out to her reservation. They are updating a Dakota English dictionary and translating a lot of old newspaper articles, written in Dakota. Doing great work to preserve what they can.

      So, that’s the name background. But, when I came back to BFP, I felt like it was time to use my real name. It was possibly a result of being involved for so many years and losing my fear, to some degree. Not of the government, who we can hardly hide from, but from some wildcard. And, I think I just wanted to feel some of the limitations that a person would, when using their real name. Not as many insults thrown, for instance. I still get pissed off and show it. But, it’s more tempered, if you can believe that. People in a heated defensive posture can throw an insult. This isn’t big news.

      Now, I’ll tell you more about myself. I’ve got a broken back and multiple disc problems, a bad SI join, as well as a systemic issue I’m still tracking down. Had an MRI today. My health has gotten worse in the last few years. That’s part of the reason I haven’t commented at Newsbud much. I mostly have time and energy to do some Liking and Retweeting on Twitter, and the occassional YT comment. I’ve actually divulged my former display name, Xicha to a few people, in youtube comments. That was years ago though.

      To conclude, and to maybe explain why this is at all relevant:
      1) The first day I found Sibel having a twitter fight with the B’s, I was surprised, and I jumped in to her defense, after reading some of the comments. In fact though, earlier that same day, Sibel had left me a voicemail message, just checking in, because she knows my health has been especially bad lately. She didn’t mention this fight. And I think it had been going on for a long time by then. But, Sibel, who was also in the middle of working on a couple other stories, and very busy, as usual, had taken the time to call and check in ( I couldn’t answer, even though I knew who was calling, because I was in the middle of getting out of bed, and that’s not as simple as it sounds right now.) We’ve been friends for a while now and most people don’t get to see the side of her that is not a no-nonsense iron-spined serious person. The stakes and the costs she has paid in her journey have given her an edge, and it’s not a good idea to be attacking that edge, if you know her stats.

      She lost the battle with the FBI because the Supreme Court decided not to take the case, since they want to appear to be uncompromised, unlike creatures in black robes like Walton and others, who do their dirty work without much consternation. But, she has some very prominent TKO’s that anyone trying to figure out what to think, currently, should take another look at. You can refer to my comment above for more on that part of her character.

      But, most people don’t get to see the personal side of Sibel Edmonds, who is a sweetheart, softie, with many of the same challenges we all face, such as parenting. And the dehumanization I saw being attempted, that afternoon, after she had called out of the blue to check in on me, I thought I’d mention just a little of it, because she was being attacked by a troll army, along with getting real criticism, real support, and real confusion and questions. The immediate response from the B’s/C gang was “haha he thinks she’s his friend”. This is the kind of shit that Corbett is aligning himself with, actually. Not just the “fact check” that was a biased cherry picked attempt at “debunking” and an emotional cutting of ties. He may not have looked emotional when he said it, but take a look at the setup. The “Oh, the humanity!” moment when he almost cried about Sibel calling her enemy crazy, while in a heated defensive posture. I’ve said worse things I’m sure, in the heat of battle and I swear much more than she does. If you have watched Sibel for as long as I have, and known her, you would know that it’s not easy for her to swear, not as easy as it is for most people.

      2) My guess is that Corbett has some extra money right about now. In other words, his new stance on Sibel Edmonds, but maybe more particularly in support of the B’s, was bought and paid for. This is something that is going to be revealed, hopefully soon, and the best thing for him would be to do it himself. The bottom will fall out, but maybe honesty will save a more humbled, at least temporarily, career as a trusted, “smart” which I think people who are impressed by his “literacy” confuse with being “smart”. He’s also got glasses, but lacking a British accent, though he can hardly speak without at least a pinch of that Canadian facetious smart-ass degradation of others, and all these make him appear to be “smart”. Selling out, when you have a good thing going, and picking fights with Sibel Edmonds are two examples of not being smart. Though he is still able to appear smart, to people who confound all these characteristics, because they are ignorant or have low self-esteem. I’ve noticed a lot of authoritarian followers of this ironically anti-statist guy. I’m not saying he’s not smart at all, but … you get what I mean. He tries hard for that look, but his work is mainly organizing clips of other people’s work and then narrating about what the clips are supposed to mean. He has done a service for many people. And more than one disservice, IMO.

      One is his addiction to talking about his philosophy. The guy took more than 5 years to wake up about 9/11, and admitted making fun of truthers during that period. Once he’s “woke” he’s got this new cemented philosophy, and didn’t learn from the first time he needed to be awakened. You know the old “fool me once… ” advice? Convictions, it should be realized when one wakes up, are emergent. This means we aren’t supposed to cement new belief systems. That’s how cults and Galts Gulch get started.

      Another is selling out, if that’s what happened. Just a gut feeling…

      And another is picking a fight with Sibel and disparaging her reputation of substantial, real battles, being fought at personal risk and great cost to her, the recognition of this by hundreds of national security whistleblowers and people around the world, and her commitment to the vision of a publicly funded news organization. An ethical news organization with real integrity. And doing this while still fighting and exposing and making herself vulnerable. Especially after she supported him financially and helped him transition to doing his work full time. God this whole thing sucks and I really am shocked by this reveal from Corbett.

      3) I was recently threatened on Twitter and told by multiple trolls that they were sicking their information techs after me. That I should only “feel safe, until then”. While I’m not too worried about these clowns getting their guy to find out that I’m really Sibel and other stuff they accused me of, I did start to think just about anyone could figure out how to do some searching and find that I have, over the past years, mentioned once or twice to people in discussions on YT or elsewhere that “BTW, I’m Xicha from BFP”. So, I’m going to pre-empt any negative spin they can think up, by publicly letting you know the back story about why Xicha never returned to BFP, buy Robert Diggins did, and for some reason, Sibel’s like “you’ve been with us since the beginning” while some of the BFP OG’s are going “Who the hell is this?”

      So, that’s that. Enough about me. Please excuse my focus on myself. I wanted to stop any negative attacks on Sibel, and I wanted to humanize her, because I think she deserves it. She is human. Not a super-hero from Marvel Comics.

      Thanks. And, hi guys! It’s me! I’m not a chick! 🙂 (I remember people arguing about that once on BFP and I replied “It’s my voice isn’t it? It’s always my voice!”, which was a weird reference to Steve Martin’s “The Man with Two Brains” (when he was looking for a body for the brain he was in love with, a beautiful prostitute almost became his victim, until she spoke. When he walked out of the room, that’s what she said.)

      Peace! (rry if I missed anyone, in my personal reference. I meant all the people who weren’t afraid to have real, extended conversations, not just patting each other on the back, either. *Cu Cu, I’m sorry I called you “Crazy Train”, btw. 🙂

      • Robert Diggins says:

        BTW, I don’t usually say “chick”. Maybe it was because I was explaining that i was named after a bird. Didn’t want to offend anybody 😉

  20. Caius Mundus says:

    I love the original research on Newsbud and recommend it as often as I can to my family and friends: you’re truly one of the best sources of news online.

    But as a 3-year (I think it’s been 3 years) Boiling Frogs / Caius Mundus subscriber, I don’t think it helps the antiwar movement to publish your hit piece on Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley, even if they have, on occasion, misbehaved. I agree with Moon of Alabama and others that your report does more harm than good and is divisive for an already weak antiwar movement. I still don’t think that EB and VB are as terrible as you portray them to be: their flaws notwithstanding, I still view their work as overall positive.

    That’s all I wanted to say. I’m certainly not asking to unsubscribe: I remain a big fan of Newsbud and am grateful for the outstanding work you create week in, week out (I’m a big fan of Prof. Kovacevic, Peter Lee, and all of you in fact). I just wanted my voice to be heard.

  21. Chris Melidis says:

    I’d like to add something for all the readers.

    We must not forget that we must protect the simple Syrian people who suffer from this war. And either some like it or not, there are simple people also among those who don’t like the Assad government. For example: I met and talked to tens of Syrians refugees here in Greece, some of them pro-Assad and most of them anti-Assad. When it was needed I didn’t make a distinction, I helped them carry their bags, I helped their kids in the super market with their shopping, and I didn’t care about their political views. Because, from what we still know and the info we have, most of these were simple people that never held a gun in their hands and just left the country to escape the bombings. To label these people as ”terrorists” I think is a huge mistake, both from a journalistic and a humanitarian point of view. And it is important to say that these people were against a foreign intervention in Syria.

    Also, from my experience based on facts I covered, a real terrorist who wants to hide among refugees never reveals his political views, especially to a journalist.

    • spiro skouras says:

      You are always on point, at the end of the day the Syrian people remain the victims here. That is exactly why it is so disturbing to see the actions of Beeley and Bartlett who have openly accused any Syrian who does not 100% support the Assad government terrorists! Imagine if this was applied in the US, those of you who do not support Trump are terrorists! Or, those of you who do not support Hillary are all terrorists! How is this objective reporting? Another commenter stated, so what if they are funded by the Assad government? Well this is another example of why this should be a concern, in their view anyone who does not support Assad is a terrorist. I personally am not saying Assad is good or bad, every government has their issues, and I am 100% against foreign intervention and regime change attempts, but this crosses a very important line!

    • Chris, precisely. I cannot understand (or respect) this type of insane double-standard approach by certain narrow-minded people who go nuts when MSM reports per bias and affiliation, yet, at the same time condone and support when other side does the same thing and worse. They think it is ok for these frauds to accuse all other sides as terrorists (The Kurds, the 6+ million refugees, the Turkmans, MSF, Red Cross … and all the kids and women … all our terrorists according to this pocketed fraudulent duo). It is simply insane. Shame on them.

  22. Sam Bissonnette says:

    If anyone is on minds DOT com, you can help me boost the report. We have over 3000 views, so far.

    • Hi Sam, Thank you. I am so tech-challenged, and so behind with these new sites. I don’t think we have anyone (Maybe Spiro?) with presence on ‘’

      • Sam Bissonnette says:

        Hi Sibel, I think I can cover minds. We have over 7000 views there. Not sure about any traffic from it. I posted on steemit, but I have no clue about promoting stuff there, so it is probably invisible to most. I someone knows that site or bitchute, those could help.

  23. Jeffrey Laubach says:

    Hi Sibel,
    As someone who is very much a part of the pro-Syrian internet community, I can vouch for much of your reporting. As I am good friends with several of the people you interviewed, including, Zak, Intibah, Ghassan, and Kelly, I can attest to the harassment that they have received at the hands of these two and their supporters. I too have been dragged through the mud a few times by their supporters over nothing more than the fact that I am friends with the others. Nevertheless, I have very much tried to stay above the fray and for my pains I felt I had to withdraw somewhat from my activism as it was getting just too vicious. Thank you so much for your reporting.

    • Hello Jeffrey, Nice to meet you, and have you as part of our community here at Newsbud. Thank you so very much for this comment. As I have said here before in 16 years of front-lines activism, whistleblowing journey and journalism I have never seen anything like this. This duo are charlatans, weaponized with social media tools to terrorize people, destroy the Syrian antiwar movement. They even sent 9 infiltrators (6 of them women) into this community to create divide, attack the integrity of our 100% documented and fact-based report, and even death threats via e-mail. Thank you for stepping in and adding your experience with this comment. I have made it my mission not only to expose them (which we have done, and will continue to do so), but with enough ‘decent’ people who believe in ‘Human Decency’, to stop this fraudulent and violent duo. Thank you.

    • spiro skouras says:

      Hi Jeff,
      Thank you for having the courage to speak up. The people we interviewed were very genuine and were emotionally damaged by these attacks, I am proud they had the courage to come forward despite the fact they knew they were going to be targeted. Some of these people’s lives were even put at risk, not only by the death threats, but from their private information being published including addresses etc. I have great concern for those who easily dismiss these tactics. I bet they would not be so quick to dismiss if they were the ones who suffered these attacks.

  24. William Field says:

    I need to review this,….however for the moment I note, under the circumstances of the “Wests” “Regime change agenda” for Syria & the lies that have been relentlessly promulgated by “Academic” & “journo” shills in Western mainstream media… & the Millions killed & displaced & the damage done when Syrians were not trying to flee Assad before this “intervention” ….then to attack Beeley & Bartlett’s “accuracy in reporting” & “Journalistic integrity” & “lack of gentility” in language is insane. Seems, if I am right, Beeley et al take the view that order under Assad is better than the Status quo… & that those that oppose this are causing violence & it’s a “fight fire with fire” situation….In any case I feel Newsbud at least owes her a unedited right off reply… how can Sibel be so sure the “REPORTS & FACTS” she relies on are indeed truth?

  25. William Field says:

    PS By my comments above I mean I believe we need to remain focused on the solution, not mistakes, practices or even lies told by Beeley et al…….& I also think the best chance for all in Syria to end this violence ASAP is a change in US policy to support Assad to regain order, then cross bridges next,… with Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Ukraine, Somalia….with Syria, ANY differences can be negotiated without Militarism &/or funding & arming “Terrorists” …..& all of these “interventions” with all their harm have been unnecessary….. This is the important thing not “some past mistakes/Wrongs” of Beeley & Bartlett which are nothing compared to MSM….& I do suspect her report re White Helmets was credible.

    • Let me get this straight William: You are saying it is good (important and needed) to out and expose Mainstream media when they lie, engage in one-sided biased reporting, put out false info and engage in unethical journalism, YET, we need to give a pass when others, those outside the MSM, engage in the same tactics, pair it up with violence and profanity-ridden attacks on activists and journalists. Because? Because you happen to agree with the side they claim they support.

      This is one of the most outrageous things I have heard. It is 100% irrational. Frankly, it is so wrong. We at Newsbud believe false information and unethical reporting: All wrong- whether practiced by MSM or some blogger, whether it is Republican-sided or Democrat-sided, whether it is by communists or by religious conservatives. Period.

      We at Newsbud believe in ‘truth’ and in ‘integrity in reporting.’ We believe in fairness doctrine. We are against partisanship. And we believe that when those posing as independent reporters/alternatives put out easily debunked false information they inflict severe damage to all alternatives, including those who engage in ethical journalism.

      Now I have to say this: With your mentality expressed here, this site is ABSOLUTELY wrong for you. You want echo chamber? You believe in double standards? You find nothing wrong with false info dissemination if the disseminators bias matches yours? Then, you really need to run fast and use your kind/generous subscription on sites that conform to your expectations. Period. Enjoy echo chambers that fit this warped logic. It ain’t here. Have a good day.

  26. April Sanchez says:

    This is very painful for so many… I don’t know why a debate of some sort could not solve some of this, and I don’t know why they would not accept to come on to speak for themselves… This feels terrible…

  27. Will be interested to see a response from 21st Century Wire on this, since they’ve carried much of their reporting.

    • Hi Peter, Likewise. So far zero response from 21st Wire. Same with Ron Paul Institute. Bartlett put out a rebuttal post, linking to an obscure blog post she wrote just 2 months ago, in January 2018, more than 15 months after the false info she presented at UN (That is over 420 days), where she admits the ‘Hospital was actually bombed.’ The thing is: That is not ethical journalistic retraction. First of all, within a few hours the claim that the hospital was NOT bombed was de-bunked (Russia bombed it by mistake- they were bombing other buildings in the area, and this one supposedly hit the hospital by mistake); Yet, Beeley kept denying it publicly for months, later, she began spinning it saying: ‘I did NOT say it was NOT bombed. I said it was not 100% grounded/destroyed.’ That is maintaining and spinning the lie. When you watch her video she says: After investigating, researching, and interviewing people, she found out for sure that Al Qud hospital was NOT bombed. She never retracted her false photos claiming the same girl, Aya, was used in 3 different incidents over 3 months period. Anyhow, she went on many platforms for 15 months, repeating the same lie on Al Qud. She never informed those platforms issuing retraction- that renders those platforms as ‘disseminators’ of ‘False’ news in this case.

      Finally, their abuse and attacks against Newsbud began about a year ago when we refused to grant them interviews. Our reason for deciding against interviewing them: several false reports by them with no retraction, their refusal to answer our simple question re: their funding, and several cases of ‘Plagiarism’ (They took other people’s work without permission and went on interviews claiming the work as their own’ (That is the definition of ‘Plagiarism.’

      Here is the most important point: We can not engage in hypocrisy. We cannot accuse MSM of spinning, lying, disseminating false info, and then look the other way when the same operations are carries out by certain alternative outlets (In addition to unprofessional conduct, online threats and profanity, etc.). People like them end up discrediting and damaging dozens of solid journalists who have been countering MSM false propaganda on Syria with ‘Real’ reporting. This damages the cause: countering these imperialist wars of aggression (From Iraq and Afghanistan to Libya and Syria).

      Hope this helps:-)

    • Before I forget, one more point: We also researched and looked into Patrick (21st Wire Founder & Editor): We could not find anything that was nefarious or false- he’s been pretty consistent with his reports and activism (decent stuff), his former colleagues all spoke highly of him (including Dr. McKenzie), and he does not engage in profanity-ridden violent attacks online (At least we could not find any). I hope he will distance himself from this duo, issue retraction on numerous posts by this duo, and concentrate on solid alt reporting.

  28. Attention Newsbud Community: Vanessa Beeley & Eva Bartlett Issued this totally false and libelous report today:

    There is no interview, citing or sourcing of this gentleman, Mr. Daoud, in this Newsbud Investigative Report. Neither interviewed, nor cited, nor used as a source.
    For those community members who have been citing doubts (who also have ‘actually’ watched this report, and gone through our solid citation): This is one of 1000s of false allegation, false reports, all on record, by this disturbed duo.

    Also, our web admin has activated the ‘moderation’ function for Newsbud website. Meaning: All comments will be checked before they go live. Thank you for all our members who suggested this action to guard against ‘infiltrators’ who have been subscribing in the last 5 days, in order to gain access to Newsbud community and cause division and damage. Thank You!

  29. Thank you Sibel and Spiro,

    I appreciate the time taken here and attention paid to documenting statements made directly by Bartlett and Beeley (particularly those on Twitter) as well as statements from former colleagues of the pair who’d been caught off guard by instances in which both Bartlett and Beeley had strayed, in many ways quite recklessly, from standard journalistic practices.

    I must say these revelations come as a disappointment. Like many who’ve chimed in to the discussion here, I too have appreciated some of the work both Eva Bartlett and particularly Vanessa Beeley have done in combatting much the Western/Atlanticist agenda driven propaganda that’s been so prevalent, pervasive, and perverse in driving this horrific and tragic manufactured conflict.

    I wouldn’t go as far as to say that the work done by Bartlett or Beeley has been entirely without merit and I’m not under the impression that this is what’s meant to be implied either. Like many here have stated, I’ve particularly appreciated their efforts to expose the White Helmets for what they really are. Still, as has been carefully documented and exposed in this piece, in the process of doing this important work, each woman has taken egregious missteps which violate fundamental journalistic principals, not to mention basic personal standards of integrity and decency.

    In contrast with some of the views expressed here in the comments section which call into question the harshness of the rebuke of Bartlett and Beeley’s practices, I’d have to agree with Sibel and Spiro that the way these women have gone about providing coverage of the Syrian conflict, even if their work has been motivated by respectable intensions, has passed the threshold of what could be considered worthy of constructive criticism or debate to practices which warrant raising alarm on the grounds that both Bartlett and Beeley have crossed boundaries of professionalism and objectivity to a level of recklessness which is literally putting people’s lives at risk.

    I don’t doubt either woman’s passion or sincerity about their desire speak on behalf those who’ve suffered unspeakably over the course of this sick, shameful, and endless wart, but it seems pretty clear at this point that their passion and conviction in their own self-righteousness has pushed them in a direction where they’ve lost any of the necessary objectivity or sense of the need to adhere to basic journalistic practices (if that’s the role they seem to see themselves playing) to an extent where they’ve adopted a style of protecting their own self-image that they’re willing to undermine their own integrity in the sorts of ruthless attacks against anyone they perceive as threatening their status or questioning the “truth” as they see it, seemingly oblivious that in a conflict with so many layers of complexities, competing, and converging interests that, perhaps unwittingly, they’ve failed to recognize the extent that they’re perpetuating and fueling another side of the type of propaganda they’re attempting to combat.

    The main thing again though, is that they’ve gone well past the boundaries of what’s acceptable or safe practice for the roles they’re placing themselves in, presenting themselves as journalists, that a warning of this nature is a necessary public service which ought to be taken into consideration and acted on. Even if it’s not rejecting their work in its entirety, it’s probably those in particular who may hold some sway, such as Patrick Hensington at 21st Century Wire, who I generally feel does good work and follows responsible and ethical journalistic principals, to step in and point out that the nature of the criticism, like what’s expressed here, isn’t just competitive defamation but a call for alarm which merits serious consideration.

    I know that sparking controversy of this nature through this kind of exposure isn’t the type of situation Sibel relishes, but I know she’s a person who always puts integrity and principle before self interest more consistently and with a greater level of commitment than anybody else I’ve witnessed firsthand. I have less time to observe Spiro in this capacity, but he certainly seems to hold league with similar commitment in what I’ve witnessed thus far. Putting out this video and sparking this debate was a bold, but I believe necessary move, which I support even as I digest the situation and I observe how the information is received and digested by others in turn.

    Thanks again,

    • Dear Benny B. This comment is the most balanced, fair, and well-reasoned response I have read so far. Thank you so very much for taking the time to write and share this comment. You have been with us for so long (since the first days of BFP), thus, have seen our record over almost 10 years. Thank you, sir.

      • I have indeed seen your track record and, with that in mind, in the interest of shedding some light from my perspective for some of the newer members of the community who might feel uncomfortable or conflicted about how they feel in response to this presentation and the stance Newsbud has taken with respect to Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley’s conduct, I’d like to say this:

        Over the years that I’ve been a member of first the Boiling Frogs Post community and now Newsbud there have been a few instances where Sibel has taken a strong position in coming out against a few specific figures in the alt-media and whistle blower communities respectively which has proved to be somewhat controversial. I would certainly place myself within the ranks of those who’d taken part in conversations as someone who at times in the past felt torn about some of the figures who Sibel was speaking out against or, to some extent, felt uncomfortable about the force of the condemnation. (I won’t lie though, there have been far more instances where Mrs. Edmonds took the gloves off when the instance was called for, to spectacular effect, which I’ve most certainly enjoyed! 🙂 To be clear; there haven’t been many of these incidents in total, but the TKOs were accumulative ) Anyway, to get back on track…

        I think it’s worth stating that in each of these instances Sibel has been consistent and principled in who and what she’s chosen to speak out against and made it clear that the distinctions were based on matters of integrity and out of concern for the public good, never for personal vendettas or in line with any sort of political or social affiliation. Perhaps more importantly, I feel that at the end of the day, sometimes after a span of time, her initial position has consistently been vindicated through various forms of exposition.

        My point here is not to say you should feel compelled to reject whatever reservations you might feel if you’re not comfortable with the position Newsbud has taken with respect to Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley’s handling of reporting on the conflict in Syria. As I indicated, I’m still digesting the situation. Still, based on my personal experience with Sibel’s track record over the years, I feel comfortable supporting the call to flag the duo based on what’s been exposed in this presentation, even though, as I’ve indicated, I’ve supported some of the work they’ve done up to this point, knowing that the information has been thoroughly vetted, is being presented honestly and transparently by Newsbud, and having a pretty good sense based on my past experience that further exposition of what the duo has been up to and how they’re likely to respond to the situation will ultimately end up strengthening my view that this exposition was necessary and valuable, not the other way around.

        On a final note (for now), my aim in sharing this information is not intended to discourage debate or merely to bolster support for Sibel and Newsbud, I just feel that my perspective and my experience may be helpful to other community members who might find themselves torn or uncomfortable with this presentation and the subsequent interactions in the comments section here and elsewhere thus far.

        At the end of the day investing our energy in discussing these critical issues has to be done with the intent of being constructive to whatever extent we can, otherwise what’s the point?

  30. For the careful consideration of the Newsbud Community.

  31. kevin robinson says:

    Everything that is scripted, produced, directed and edited is by definition, theater- enjoy the performance but never believe it’s ‘true’- especially people you do not know and have never met

    All the world’s a stage,
    And all the men and women merely players;

  32. Julian Swan says:

    I’ve been following Sibel for years and have always respected her dangerous work, her tenacity, and her optimism in the face of the earth-shaking material she has uncovered. I bought and read The Lone Gladio and Classified Woman and both vastly deepened my respect for Sibel’s courage.
    This hit piece, however, has been shoddy at best. Calling Tim Anderson a terrorist shows a complete lack of understanding of Australian history and the dirty tricks of the Malcolm Fraser government. The Sydney hotel bombing was one of the most important false flags of the 70’s! For an organization keen on doing the incredibly important work of exposing false flags, this is a massive oversight and the first time (and hopefully the last time) I’ve heard newsbud parrot such an obvious bit of establishment propaganda. There are many other issues I noticed with this hit piece but as it turns out one of your former contributors, the incomparable James Corbett, has already explained them far better than I could.
    I would have much preferred a hit piece on some disengenuous journalists that actually have a sizable audience. I mean if you want to do hit pieces, there are far more deserving “journalists” out there than these two. A lot of their work, dare I say the overwhelming majority of it, has been quite positive.

    • spiro skouras says:

      Thank you for supporting Newsbud. Here is an excerpt from USU. ‘(Anderson) was convicted and served six years in prison for the attempted execution of a bomb plot. Following his release in 1985, due to a police informant’s testimony being deemed as unreliable, Anderson was re-arrested and convicted in 1990 for his alleged involvement in the Sydney Hilton Bombings of 1978, which killed two people. Evan Pederick in 1989 testified that Anderson had ordered him to plant bombs in the Hilton, though, in 1991, Pederick’s testimony was ruled as unreliable, and Anderson was once again acquitted.’ So Yes Anderson was arrested and convicted twice of what is widely considered to be terrorist actions, someone involved in bomb plots, or the equivalent of domestic terrorism. And yes he was acquitted twice on a technicality, just like OJ. Upon reflection I would have liked to include that, I find that extremely interesting, don’t you?

      • Julian Swan says:

        Julian Swan says:

        April 3, 2018 at 5:28 pm

        Your comment is awaiting moderation.

        Not really, no. I’d hardly call the prosecution’s star witness being shown to be a (bad) liar twice in a row in two separate trials a “technicality”, and I’m baffled by your comparing it to the OJ debacle.
        USU is also an extremely odd choice for your one source–their piece on Anderson is a fairly negative writeup despite the fact that he teaches there and he was hired _after_ being twice accused of terrorism. But then again it seems to not really be written with USU’s official imprimatur, it’s written by Pulp, which is what? A 2-year old student rag that seems to have trouble with what it dubs “conspiracy theories” as preposterous as the Syrian regime not being responsible for chemical weapons attacks on its own people, a fact which as far as I know has been proven beyond doubt. I mean come on Spiro, the fact that you chose that article as your one source I find to be pretty strange.

  33. Timur Aydin says:

    @Sibel Edmonds: If a country invades another country for imperialistic reasons, or just because it can (which fits pretty much all wars that the USA and the west has started in the past century), that would certainly be an illegal invasion. But it caught be by surprise when you called Turkey’s Afrin operation illegal … PKK is fighting a separatist war against Turkey for 40 years, and they will never make piece with Turkey, no matter what concessions it gets. They are funded (and recently armed with state of the art weapons) by the West against Turkey. So I am seeing a Turkey acting in self defence, not illegal invasion. Care to elaborate why the Afrin operation of Turkey is illegal?

    • Dear Timur: Turkey’s role on Syria started in 2011 when the US-NATO used Turkey to train Jihadis in Incirlik Base. I truly believe that was a bad decision by Turkey. Up until that point Turkey had zero issue/conflict with Syria. In fact. Pres. Erdogan and Pres. Assad had many positive and well-publicized meetings calling each other brothers (Just check their photo ops). It was truly sad to see Turkey, another Muslim nation, letting itself being used by US imperialistic agenda. After the attempted coup, I was hoping to see a reversal on this- but not really. Even with the Kurds and related conflict: It is one thing to protect the Turkish borders, but another to enter a sovereign nation, and keep moving inward. Both US and UK love to use third party (proxy) nations to implement their agendas. Before all this Turkey and Syria enjoyed mutually beneficial trade and relationship (as it’s been with Iran lately). Those relations should not be interfered with by Western imperialist agendas.

  34. diogenes says:

    This train wreck will become a classic among the tragic examples of internecine warfare withing the dissenter community. This entire situation could and should have been handled with much more respect, sensitivity and integrity, before activating the forces of personal destruction. A great deal of damage has been done, and I don’t see any way in which it can be repaired. I am truly and royally bummed.

    • Mintaka says:

      Well said.
      I was going to stay out of commenting on this whole, sorry saga, but will now anyway. Just this once.
      What has taken place here is quite unbelievable and I find Sibel’s attitude in the whole thing bizarre and puzzling. Not to mention self-destructive.
      I could say more, but won’t.
      I agree that the whole thing being played out so in the open was totally wrong and has all the hallmarks to me of a psyop to Divide & Conquer the alternative news-sites and community. If that was indeed the whole purpose of it, then “they” have certainly achieved some level of success.
      Just look at the comments, both here on Newsbud and over at Corbett Report.
      IMO, James Corbett made a big mistake to drag himself into this by doing such a lengthy fact-checking piece.
      What for?
      Just because Sibel had emailed him? All he had to do was email Sibel back in private and tell her that he did not want to get involved. That’s it. Period.
      All he has done now is throw fuel onto the fire and create even more division.
      Look at some of the comments on Corbett’s website where even Gladio B is now being questioned! Crazy…
      Gladio B is proven fact.
      Sibel simply provided many more details and context, for which we are grateful.

      I for one won’t change a thing and refuse to let myself be influenced by this whole sorry, childish saga.
      And I will continue to support Newsbud, simply because Newsbud is bigger than just Sibel, or at least let’s hope so.
      Newsbud has some great people on the team and would not want to miss their contributions. I sure hope that the Newsbud team itself has not been influenced by this either and will continue as per normal.

      If this was a psyop, then let’s not let it succeed.
      Continue your support for everyone involved in this, be it Newsbud, James Corbett, or Vanessa Beely and Eva Bartlett. They all contribute to our understanding of especially Middle Eastern affairs, something we would NEVER learn via the MSM.
      Let the MSM do the in-fighting.

  35. My two cents. loyalties and emotion aside, the outcome can be regarded as essentially positive.
    The gains made researching the charges and the responses to them, expands the knowledge base. Bruising, yes,. but Overall positive.
    I continue to support ALL news sources I did a month ago.
    It will doubtless make better journalists of all of us.

Speak Your Mind