Junk Journalism: The "Assad" E-mails

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

Guardian skewers own credibility with hamfisted Wikileaks knock-off aimed at Syria.

"It is impossible to rule out the possibility of fakes in the email cache, but..." "The Assad E-Mails," London Guardian, March 14, 2012.

This sentence right here should have immediately halted the publication of anything revolving around an alleged cache of e-mails provided to the Guardian by the obviously compromised "Syrian opposition." The source is clearly biased, politically motivated, and their information unconfirmed. Yet the Guardian decided to run with the story anyway, casting doubt on their own objectivity, journalistic integrity, and their true motivation, which now is clearly not "journalism."

The Guardian, in their explanation as to why they decided to publish unconfirmed information included the following statement, "we believe the more detailed picture of the workings of Assad's inner circle that emerges from the mails, and the extent to which he and his wife have managed to sustain their luxurious lifestyle, are also of public interest." A "more detailed picture" that is in fact unverified and most likely a politically motivated fabrication is indeed of "public interest" if you are trying to sell a particular narrative regardless of the actual facts.

The job of a journalist is to report the facts impartially to help inform the public and enable them to make accurate decisions in regards to a vast array of issues that affect their daily lives as well as the collective well-being of their communities and nations. A journalist is not to irresponsibly publish anything that comes across their desk, applying sensational headlines while making incredible innuendos only to post disclaimers halfway down the page that the information they are attempting to foist upon the public as fact and "truth," "may not be verified or true."

That is propaganda, deceit, manipulation, and above all, fraud. Of course, in the Guardian's quest to "verify" these alleged e-mails, they contact other propagandists within the same circle of corporate-media outfits, including ABC News (whose Barber Walters' interview with Assad was a humiliating disgraceful display of how far America's journalistic establishment has sunk.) Another source contacted to "confirm" whether or not at least some of the e-mails were genuine was former British Ambassador to Syria "Sir" Andrew Green, whose former employer, the British Foreign Ministry, is a viciously adamant opponent of Assad's government working directly with Syrian opposition harbored in London, with members of the notorious Syrian Observatory for Human Rights literally passing in and out of Foreign Secretary William Hague's office.

So in the Guardian's quest to verify what they claim "would be difficult for even the best resourced hoaxer or intelligence agency to gather or fabricate," they contact two vast organizations who just so happen to possess not only the capacity to fabricate such lies, but the motive and a demonstrative history of working actively against the Syrian government to undermine and ultimately oust it from power.

Both the Western corporate-media and the British Foreign Ministry are more than capable of using their official contacts with Bashar Al-Assad to bolster otherwise fabricated e-mails, as well as hand over the "cache" to activists they work with on a daily basis. In fact, it is most likely during these daily meetings that Syrian activists helped refine the cache's fabricated contents to ensure a credible narrative was produced to match what the Syrian public already knows about the Assad family.

Wikileaks performed a similar function during the onset of the Tunisian and Egyptian "Arab Spring" unrest. Now fully confirmed to be a US-engineered geopolitical destabilization planned years in advance, it is clear that Wikileaks is a creation and tool of the US State Department, leveraged by the corporate establishment-media with whom "anti-establishment" Julian Assange works so closely with, to help augment, not hinder the agenda of Wall Street and London. The impact of Wikileaks has been severely diminished by deceitful "journalists" and corporate lobbyists who have been exposed using the less than reputable word of the US State Department and its ambassadors to sell the US State Department's very own agenda to the public.

The Syrian opposition itself, has been mired from the very beginning in one scandal after another, as their attempts to manipulate the perception of the world in tandem with their foreign sponsors is exposed repeatedly, beginning with "Gay Girl in Damascus" who turned out to be a 40 year old American man living in the UK, to "Syrian Danny" who was recently caught staging fake gunfire off camera and getting into character before giving a hysterical casualty report to CNN's Anderson Cooper. Cooper would go on to admit that Western coverage of events in Syria is entirely based on unverified, biased accounts provided solely by the Syrian opposition and exposed liars like "Danny."

With cities being restored to order now in quick succession, and Russia and China steadfastly denying Wall Street and London another opportunity to repeat their craven atrocities committed in Libya, the stops are being pulled out and every imaginable gambit is being pursued, even rehashes of already worn-out gambits like Wikileaks-style e-mail caches.

Since the Guardian wants to play the game of speculation, we can in turn speculate about their latest reportage on "The Assad E-mails." It appears that the Guardian is working in tandem with other members of the Western media and the British Foreign Ministry to undermine the Assad family and his support across Syria which has just recently manifested itself in nation-wide pro-Assad rallies, bitterly renounced by the media who is supposed to simply report the facts.

The Guardian, by doing so, has resigned its journalistic integrity while their staff members, including Robert Booth, Luke Harding, Angelique Chrisafis, and Matthew Taylor who signed off on this "junk journalism," should never be considered, believed, trusted or labeled as anything but propagandists again. They have willfully violated the trust their credentials erroneously lend them and have further eroded Western journalism in what appears to be a process of irreparable decay.

Whether or not the e-mails are legitimate is not really even the issue - the issue is the untenable, unjournalistic process with which this alleged information was approached and handled. Would the Guardian give equal consideration to a cache of e-mails produced by the Assad government regarding Syrian opposition leaders actively collaborating with NATO, the US and British government as well as terrorists from Iraq and Libya?

Certainly not, especially when outright admissions by the opposition themselves are glossed over by Western propagandists. The Guardian has established they have an agenda, that is to undermine and remove Assad from power, with the truth being nothing more than another barrier to remove in the process.