'The Lone Gladio' by Sibel Edmonds

voyageur said:
Siberia said:
I unfollowed Sibel Edmonds and NewsBud on Twitter when she started her crusade against Vanessa and Eva. What she is doing is utterly ridiculous, to say the least. And this is not the first time when she is attacking anti-establishment and anti-war journalists and activists, apparently. She also attacked Glenn Greenwald (as a "junk" source) and Tim Anderson (likened him to a "terrorist').

I recalled James discussing Edmonds attack on Tim Anderson (the so called terroist of a bombed out building screen shot) and she seems to be talking about this Anderson: Behind the Headlines: Interview with Tim Anderson: The truth about the Dirty War on Syria I'm assuming? If so, jiminy crickets, that's insanity!

Here is Tim Anderson's twitter account and his comment about Sibel's attack on Eva and Vanessa:
https://twitter.com/timand2037/status/978507252586790912

As for the attack on Tim, it starts at 44:00 in Sibel's allegedly 'exposé' video:
_https://www.newsbud.com/2018/03/21/newsbud-exclusive-report-syria-under-siege-guarding-against-wolves-in-sheeps-clothing/
 
I watched some snippets from Edmonds' video just to see what it was about, but it was so horrible that I skipped large parts. At one point she even claimed that the Syrian government had launched an investigation into Vanessa and Eva. :evil:
I didn't see any (triple checked) proof, though. I will see whether I can find it.

She also called them ugly, although I can't find that tweet on her page now. A very childish, petulant and unprofessional ad hominem attack on these two journalists.

Added: No, sorry, Edmonds didn't say that, I should have watched this video more carefully. It was another accusation levelled at Beeley and Bartlett. She did say however (at 46ish): "we are also in touch with our sources within Syrian government". As if.
 
I ended up watching the whole thing by Corbett. He did a splendid job in digging out the discrepancies in Edmond's reasoning. Kudos to Corbett!

As others have said, Edmonds seems like a very disturbed person.
 
I watched a couple of days ago and spread it on social networks. Very disgusting attack and Sibel even gets very personal on Vanessa, saying she needs psychological help since she is 54 years old and not in a relationship :evil: :O

It made me think that one will have to look twice at what she has written all along, thinking that she must have had strong backers to protect her and promote those interests groups that she represents. Who did she happily expose while protecting others? Perhaps she herself is one of the 'lone gladios'?
 
Beau said:
Anthony said:
One of Sibel's former associates has also been disillusioned by her actions, here's a radio show from last year about it if anyone wants to listen

Did you listen to it? Could you summarize what his main issues with Sibel were?

I listened to it yesterday. The whole Sibel issue is discussed in the first hour but spills into the second as well. I forgot the guys name already but he was drawn in by Sibel to help with a million dollar fund raiser which of course is unrealistic. But the guy still put quite a lot of effort into it and never even got so much as a thank you. He said Sibel ran Boiling Frogs in a way that had a cult feel to it. When bringing people in she would tell them up front that they would have freedom of expression but when it came down to it, she was extremely controlling and would spend hours on Skype calls going over what was she wanted presented and discussed. She wanted and expected the guy to uproot from where he was living and move to Seattle and she was angry with him when he refused. After the million dollar fundraiser flopped, she started another for $250,000 and just unceremoniously left him out of it all together after which point he politely told her he had other things to focus on for now but tried to leave the door open to work again with her in the future.

He basically said that at first on the surface everything seems legit, but as soon as one realizes things seem off and starts to look deeper absolutely nothing holds up. He ends up strongly implying that although she did whistle blow on State secrets, she was set up to do so (whether consciously part of or not I wasn't clear on) but he seemed to rather strongly suggest she has an agenda one way or another. Either she's an agent or she's just trying to run game on the alt world for personal gain. I don't think he knows for sure but it doesn't look good.

Added: He's doesn't think Gladio B actually even exists
 
I did a little digging, read through the comments of Corbett's video on Edmonds, and found that a number of people who worked with Sibel Edmonds have not-so-glowing feedback of what it was like. I think this might be more than just SE being a 'plant' to attack Beeley and Bartlett. There seems to be personality disorder issues with her, and possibly the hormones of menopause intensifying her personality issues. So I'll post the full articles of what I found. Here's the first, from Katie Aguilera who worked with SE early on in Newsbud's creation.

When You Don’t Make the Cult
Why I No Longer Support Newsbud


Katie Aguilera

Two years ago, I was involved in the early stages of the development of Newsbud, an online news and media platform with the stated goals of being 100% people funded, unbiased, and non-partisan. My involvement, like that of many others, was short lived. Recently, I publicly made some comments about my change of heart regarding Newsbud, and I have also decided to remove nearly all content from this blog that promoted the organization*. As a result, I feel that I should explain why I no longer support Newsbud.

I have been hesitant to discuss my experience with Newsbud, and have told few people the details behind my decision to leave the team. It is not my intention now to pen a vindictive, personal attack on Newsbud or its founder, Sibel Edmonds. I know that I have readers who support Newsbud, and I’m not writing this with the goal of changing anyone’s mind based solely on what I have to say. People need to come to their own conclusions. I am writing this to explain why I no longer endorse the site, why it has lost credibility in my view, and why I feel guilty for promoting it and supporting it in its early stages.

The Beginning

Several years ago, the research I was doing for the novel I am writing led me to a series of interviews posted on YouTube with James Corbett and Sibel Edmonds. That was how I first discovered Boiling Frogs Post, or BFP, and Sibel’s work. Her story in her book, Classified Woman, aligned really well with the sort of things happening in the plot of my novel, and I began to follow the work at BFP.

When Sibel announced the idea for Newsbud, I contacted her and offered to help any way that I could with the project. I explained that I didn’t have much to offer, I had no related experience, and wasn’t sure what I could do, but I wanted to help if I could. I knew that I can write, but at that point I had yet to even start my own blog. I don’t consider myself an expert of any sort, and I had never published anything.

I was surprised by the offer to be a regular contributor to Newsbud, and I jumped at the chance. First and foremost because I genuinely believed in the idea of what Newsbud was supposed to be, based on how it was presented. Also, because I was excited to get to know and work with Sibel Edmonds, who I had come to respect and admire greatly. And, of course, it was an opportunity to get published and earn some extra money.

Newsbud launched a series of Kickstarter fundraising campaigns, the first one on February 14, 2016. The goal of the campaign was nearly one million dollars, and ultimately it was unsuccessful. It was during this campaign that I experienced my first hint of doubt about the direction Newsbud was going.

First Doubt

It started with this article in which Sibel makes some startling claims. I was asked to do some research and fact checking on the suspicious letters discussed in the article after it was published. I researched, I made phone calls, I spoke by phone with an FBI spokesperson about the matter, I attempted to contact Sheriff Glenn Palmer. He never returned my phone call. I found a phone number for the person who sent the suspicious letters, and I passed the information on to Newsbud. I thought the logical next step would be to contact the letter sender but I was unwilling to do that from my private phone.

In the end, my research led me to the conclusion that there really was no more to the story than what had been reported in the local news, and with no comment from Sheriff Palmer, I couldn’t confirm his reported version of the event. I was unable to find any evidence that would prove his claims, or that there had been any sort of substance in any of the letters. I was also unable to find evidence that the letter sender was targeting Palmer specifically.

Pretty quickly I was informed that my conclusion wasn’t satisfactory and to stop researching the story. Shortly thereafter, this video of an interview with Dr. Fred Whitehurst was released. When that video aired, initially I felt that what I had reported to Sibel about my conversation with the FBI spokesperson was misrepresented. Much later, when I watched it again, I also felt as though Dr. Whitehurst was manipulated in the interview because he wasn’t given all the information. I didn’t understand why they did not mention any attempt to contact the letter sender, or Sheriff Palmer. So, I messaged my concerns to Spiro Skouras of Newsbud, and asked why they had pursued the story the way they did. I got no response from him that night.

Not long after, I received a request via email from Sibel to schedule a Skype conference call with her and Spiro. I don’t remember all of the ways in which I was informed that I had failed during that call, but I do remember the main point, that I had missed the big piece of the story. Sibel explained her reasons for that, and shared some links, and she was right, I hadn’t found what she had found online. Upon reflection, I didn’t see it as proof of her claims, though I didn’t say so.


Perhaps I did miss a smoking gun, perhaps Sibel knew much more than she had published in her article and video. However, what continued to bother me was that there was never any follow up, they never published any further evidence to support her startling claims. They never informed me, or publicly stated, that they ever tried to contact the letter sender. While attempts other than my own may have been made to contact Sheriff Palmer, there was no public mention of it from Newsbud.

After what felt to me like sensational claims that begged for further proof, that was basically the end of it. That left me feeling as though the purpose of the story was to draw clicks, to capitalize on the related media furor occurring at that time over the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation, and Sheriff Palmer himself. This would become a pattern I have since noticed repeatedly with stories discussed at Newsbud.

Staying In

Unfortunately, I ignored my instincts. I still believed in Newsbud, and I didn’t want to admit that my faith in Sibel’s credibility had just taken a significant hit. I convinced myself that, with my lack of experience, I had screwed up, and I moved on. Newsbud launched a second Kickstarter campaign for a significantly lower goal, and with a very different team, because many on the original team had already left for reasons I didn’t fully learn until later. This time it was successful. This is when I began receiving payment from Newsbud, and I published an article a week for about two months.

Around this time, the attempted coup in Turkey took place, and Newsbud launched its “Confront NBC” campaign. I was supportive and helped to promote this because I felt (and still do) that it is really important for news outlets and journalists to retract erroneous reporting. I also agreed that the timing of the false information was suspicious with regards to the coup attempt. (Not to mention this very real problem.) But, the entire thing began to feel like a publicity stunt. Looking back, it felt like a publicity stunt that went too far, and felt uncomfortably too pro-Erdogan. And, it led to this attack on FAIR.org.

I was asked to email FAIR, and follow up with a phone call, requesting comment from them on the Confront NBC story, and also information about their sources of funding (something I would like to see more transparency on from Newsbud). I truly did not want to do this. I have a lot of respect for FAIR.org and other organizations that work to hold news outlets and journalists accountable. I was embarrassed to be involved in an attack on them. However, I made the call, and I’m sure I sounded like a complete idiot to the man at FAIR that I spoke with.

A Way Out

This was the point that I finally began to lose, or let go of, some of my belief in Newsbud. I realized I no longer wanted to tell anyone that I wrote for Newsbud. I increasingly felt that, in order to fit the mold, I had to find some sort of “conspiratorial angle” to everything I wrote for Newsbud, and even here on my blog. I was going along with things I didn’t always agree with, in order to stay with Newsbud. It felt dishonest, like I was putting on an act. I wasn’t being honest with myself. I wasn’t being honest to all the people I was promoting Newsbud to. I wasn’t being honest with Newsbud or Sibel either, because I didn’t address these concerns with them.

The final straw (or straws) came after I published this story here on my blog. I submitted a shorter version of the story to Newsbud, and initially was told it would be published. Later, I was told that it wouldn’t be published for several reasons. I was disappointed, but I understood that Sibel didn’t like the story and she had the ultimate say on what was published on Newsbud. I moved on. However, shortly after that, I received an email that finally ended my willingness to remain on the team.

In that email, Sibel questioned my recent sharing of a GoFundMe campaign by someone that she didn’t like, and she informed me that I shouldn’t be following a certain journalist on social media. Basically, what it came down to was that my behavior was reflecting negatively on Newsbud, and I was damaging Newsbud’s credibility.

I replied that I had no desire to cause Newsbud any harm, and if she didn’t want me on the team that was fine. It was a way out, and I took it with relief. I would be lying if I said that I wasn’t hurt by the things Sibel said to me, but I did not, and do not, have any desire to argue with her, or defend myself to her. It wasn’t worth it to me to be told who I could or could not follow, who I could or could not share support for, who or what I could write about. I had already watched other team members leave, even just disappear from the team, with no explanation. What Newsbud had become was absolutely not what I supported in the beginning.

Ironically, after I responded that I didn’t want to harm Newsbud, I was told my behavior not only reflected negatively on Newsbud, but on myself, that it would hurt my credibility. That was indeed true, but not about the behavior Sibel was referring to. What would reflect negatively on me would be to continue to support what I no longer believed in. Continuing to work with and promote Newsbud would hurt my credibility.

It is my opinion that Newsbud has gone the way of another well-known alternative media (infotainment) site that thrives on click bait, unsupported sensational claims, and false information. I know Newsbud has deleted negative and oppositional comments from their site in what looks like attempts to shield their supporters from anything contradictory. I know they asked numerous dissenting commenters to unsubscribe. I see no integrity in this. There are other things I could point to, but that and skepticism born out of my own brief experience working with Sibel, are the most important reasons why I no longer support Newsbud.

Coming Clean

It has taken me a long time to decide to write about all of this. It took some time to admit to myself that the entire experience felt very cultish, and even longer to feel ready to admit it publicly. I held a cult-like faith in Sibel, and that affected my judgement. I don’t blame Sibel or Newsbud, I blame myself. At the time, as I was still trying to make sense of the overwhelming information I was searching through online, I was especially susceptible. But, I know that I have learned a lot from this experience. In the chaos of today’s news cycle, the fake news, the social media trolling and bot manipulation, and endless sites spreading misinformation for profit, my experience at Newsbud, even though I regret it, does have value for me.

The following, from an International Cultic Studies Association article titled, Characteristics of Cults and Cultic Groups, describes how I feel about my experience with Newsbud perfectly:

“…the group claims to pursue lofty goals (e.g., salvation, bringing enlightenment to the world for the sake of peace, or solutions to specific world problems and injustices), …but a close look at the group’s accomplishments will invariably show that these publicly proclaimed goals are not reached, or that they mask less noble goals, such as massing monetary wealth, gaining power and control over the followers, and feeding the leader’s need for adulation.”

So, when I saw this tweet which reads, “they’ve been throwing fits due to not making the cut when it comes to Newsbud,” I laughed. I knew immediately that I had the perfect title for this story. I didn’t make the cult, and for that, I am so thankful.

**********

*This decision was made because I can’t in good conscience keep content posted that promotes Newsbud. If that bothers you and you want to know what those posts contain, just ask me. I’ve kept copies of them all. Also, I recently noticed that all of my work has been removed from Newsbud’s site, for which I am grateful. I have reposted most of the articles here on Seeking Redress.
 
This is an excerpt from a much longer post by Mike Raddie. The excerpt will deal specifically with the personality style of Sibel Edmonds, but the entire article is definitely worth checking out as it, like the Corbett video, easily destructs Newsbud's pathetic hitpiece against Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett.

Movie Review ‘The Damp Squibel’: Cult hit or hit cult?

Edmonds’ Crumbling Inner Circle
Over the past few days I have also heard of how dissent within Edmonds’ own inner circle was simply not tolerated. This explains why none of the original Boiling Frogs Post (Edmonds original media outlet) team are still around at NewsBud – they had either been sacked or left due to serious concerns over the management of what some described as a cult.

According to one former BFP team member, Edmonds was obsessed with producing output tailored to what she considered her ‘true base’ – retired, white, male libertarians. Another former colleague has written about how Edmonds even told her which journalists she was permitted to follow on social media. Is it any wonder that in such a toxic atmosphere with a such ludicrously warped editorial policy the original team disintegrated?

Despite the absence of the original lineup and the repeated requests from former BFP and Newsbud associates to have their bios removed, Edmonds maintains a list over at boilingfrogspost.com which contains all those former colleagues who have long since jumped ship and swam to editorially calmer waters. The Newsbud_Associates list still includes:

Peter B. Collins
Pepe Escobar
Professor Filip Kovacevic
Guillermo Jimenez
Pearse Redmond
Tom Secker
Christoph Germann
Katie Aguilera

None of those above have anything good to say about Edmonds and many have expressed their deeply held concerns for all those still spellbound and deceived, hoodwinked yet fawning, sacrificing their hard-earned at the altar of Cult Edmonds.

NewsBud Funding
Edmonds’ first attempt to crowdfund NewsBud (Feb 14 2016 – Apr 14 2016) had what some people described as a ludicrously ambitious target of $950,000. By the end of the campaign it had fallen short by over $750,000 with each of the 1,792 backers pledging an average of just over $100.

The next attempt, called Phase 1 (May 8 2016 – Jun 22 2016) exceeded its $150,000 target and raised $171,755 from 1,330 backers (averaging approximately $130 each)

Phase 2 (Oct 23 2016 – Nov 27 2016) which also aimed to raise $150,000 failed with 1,015 backers promising a total of $137,811 or an average of $135 each.

The most recent attempt to crowdfund, Phase 3 (Apr 30 2017 – Jun 14 2017) missed its target by more than 50% seeing a mere $65,568 pledged from 620 backers ($105 per backer).

By my reckoning, and going solely by the Kickstarter records, Edmonds has secured just over 12% of the funding she’s asked for over the past couple of years. Is it any wonder she’s so enraged when she sees other alternative news outlets not only adequately financed but producing valuable and effective output? No wonder she aggressively demands to know how other people are funded, how they manage to survive and fund trips to war zones. Meanwhile back at NewsBud HQ Edmonds is still harping on about the meaningless ‘Gladio B’ while repeatedly failing to raise money from a dwindling pool of backers.

What Others Have Said

Caitlin Johnstone
@caitoz
At a time of rapidly increasing cold war escalations between nuclear superpowers, with more and more signs that this administration is preparing for a major hot war, Sibel Edmonds has been devoting her life to wedging two valuable antiwar journalists out of alternative media. https://twitter.com/NewsBud_/status/978386300981067776 …

Caitlin Johnstone
@caitoz
The fact that @sibeledmonds has continued her laser-focused crusade to wedge @VanessaBeeley and @EvaKBartlett out of alt media circles following Bolton's horrifying addition to the Trump admin tells you everything you need to know about who she is and what she really cares about. https://twitter.com/sibeledmonds/status/977620589430046720 …

tim anderson
@timand2037
1 @sibeledmonds at #Newsbud has made a great effort to smear the most effective critical journalists on the war againt Syria, @EvaKBartlett and @VanessaBeeley . Whether through petty jealousy or worse, Sibel is proving herself both a poor journalist and an enemy of #Syria. https://twitter.com/ricksterling99/status/977232825794482176 …

There are many people with intimate knowledge of Edmonds’ suspicious operation. Here are some of their concerns – its a short sample of a long and growing list:

I could never shake the feeling with Sibyl Edmonds that she was too good to be true. She promised so much and never really delivered.
I am disgusted by Edmonds’ attacks. They lack substance, facts, and are, in fact, fucking deranged.

I think that when Sibel Edmonds first became a public figure, her motives were good. But frankly, I grew tired of her constant hints that world-changing revelations were a-comin’ any day now. As a cult of expectation formed around her, she began to remind me of Joanna Southcott or Melanie Calvet. In the end, I decided that Sibel simply likes attention. So I decided never to write about her again, unless circumstances forced the issue, as they do now.

If anyone is guilty of squeezing out information in drips and drabs, it’s Sibel Edmonds. If anyone is guilty of an unbecoming tendency toward self-aggrandizement, it’s Sibel Edmonds. And if anyone is guilty of relentlessly pushing hard-core libertarianism (a charge unfairly leveled at Greenwald), God knows it’s Sibel Edmonds: See here and here and…oh, hell, just see here. Her motive for dissing Greenwald is obvious: Edmonds runs a whistleblower organization and Snowden bypassed it. She’s jealous.

Another former colleague of Edmonds is James Corbett – I’ve not watched it all yet but am prepared to include the link to the Corbett Report where James dissects this latest inexplicable outburst from Edmonds – see for yourself here.

Sibel’s State of Mind
Throughout the past couple of months I’ve been wondering what it was exactly that led Sibel Edmonds to take this bizarre and ultimately self-destructive path. I feel that once she’s thrown the last of her toys out of the pram there will be no way back for NewsBud. They might just as well be swallowed up by a corporate media behemouth. Maybe she’ll sell out to NBC or Fox News. Who knows? What we do know (to borrow a phrase from the late Harold Pinter) is that this infantile insanity – the harassment, lies and fake news coupled with the malicious threats and endangerment of real truth tellers – is at the heart of present NewsBud political philosophy.

For some reason, impossible for us to apprehend at this moment, Edmonds seems to be defending herself against her own unconscious impulses by denying their existence in herself while attributing them to others. This is what’s known as psychological projection. Might this mean she has a ‘sugar daddy’ mysterious funder of her own like some have speculated and is attacking others to shield herself from closer scrutiny?

In calmer moments of reflection I often find myself feeling sorry for her – she must be going through some kind of emotional turmoil at this point in her life. That its manifestation is evidently so destructive must have close colleagues and family members deeply concerned. If I were a friend I would consider discussing with her next of kin the option of involuntary committal to a mental health institution where she might receive the professional help she clearly needs.
 
Thanks Beau.

From what you posted, this one stands out, too:

I could never shake the feeling with Sibyl Edmonds that she was too good to be true. She promised so much and never really delivered.
 
genero81 said:
I listened to it yesterday. The whole Sibel issue is discussed in the first hour but spills into the second as well. I forgot the guys name already but he was drawn in by Sibel to help with a million dollar fund raiser which of course is unrealistic. But the guy still put quite a lot of effort into it and never even got so much as a thank you. He said Sibel ran Boiling Frogs in a way that had a cult feel to it. When bringing people in she would tell them up front that they would have freedom of expression but when it came down to it, she was extremely controlling and would spend hours on Skype calls going over what was she wanted presented and discussed. She wanted and expected the guy to uproot from where he was living and move to Seattle and she was angry with him when he refused. After the million dollar fundraiser flopped, she started another for $250,000 and just unceremoniously left him out of it all together after which point he politely told her he had other things to focus on for now but tried to leave the door open to work again with her in the future.

He basically said that at first on the surface everything seems legit, but as soon as one realizes things seem off and starts to look deeper absolutely nothing holds up. He ends up strongly implying that although she did whistle blow on State secrets, she was set up to do so (whether consciously part of or not I wasn't clear on) but he seemed to rather strongly suggest she has an agenda one way or another. Either she's an agent or she's just trying to run game on the alt world for personal gain. I don't think he knows for sure but it doesn't look good.

Added: He's doesn't think Gladio B actually even exists

So that's Pearce Redmond basically backing up the same stories that Katie Aguilera shared.
 
Stumbled across Corbett’s video just now - what an eye opener!

I had some sympathies for Sibel a few years back when she published her first book “Classified Woman”. To me this booked seemed an honest account of what was going on in intelligence circles at that time. I felt she was genuine. I followed her on and off the next few years but lost track of her until she got started with the Newsbud crowdfunding effort. I pledged a one-time moderate amount for her support, but the crowdfunding campaign didn’t reach the necessary threshold and failed.

And now this. I haven’t followed Vanessa very closely, more Eva’s work, which I always found well researched and balanced on many issues. I noticed that a few months back there were increased attacks on Eva mainly in respect to her economic outlook. I am not an economist by any stretch and just took notice of that, but again, what she was talking about mainly made sense to someone not very well read in things economic.

The whole saga has reinforced a few things for me:

1. As Corbett states: Don’t focus on the messenger, but on the verifiable facts. Everything else is fog and mirrors. Sibel may have started as a honest and factual reporter of things (but now I have to even question that assumption), but somehow turned or was turned (maybe this has to do with the failed crowdsourcing campaign, and she got some other funding with strings attached?). It seems to me that this is a bit of a common thread in the alt-news community - many start out honestly and factually, but at some stage get turned into some other things or get bought out, if they haven’t been aligned with someone in the background from the get go. As long as the information is verifiable, it doesn’t matter where it comes from - I already knew that before, but this has made it clear in a very direct and visceral way.

2. I am questioning my ongoing activity on Twitter. Every day I post some tweets about articles I find interesting (mainly SOTT, occasionally some other), but it seems to me to be a waste of time. I am seriously considering too, to just delete my account. I don’t like Twitter anyway, never liked it, but just continue posting out of a sense of duty. This might be misplaced. As far as I can see the impact my posts are having is about as close to zero you can get, and it feels like I am preaching to the choir anyway.

So all in all a very interesting saga, sad to be sure on one level, as infighting amongst those who claim to be the voices of reason and truth detracts from the reality out there, but on another level it is just the same old tired scheme of COINTELPRO, that nowadays seems just to be much more subtle and devious.

I used to sponsor the Corbett Report for many years, but pulled out a few years ago, because there were some things that I was not overly comfortable with, found odd and that to me sounded dubious. I didn’t have the time, the drive and the desire to investigate this further, so I simply cancelled my subscription. I think this is something I’ll have to reassess, maybe this time with a bit more due dilligence. But today I am glad the money didn’t go to Newsbud, so I might as well give it to Corbett.
 
Damage control by Sibel and Newsbud -Apr 3, 2018
Newsbud’s official response to James Corbett’s weak attempt to smear Sibel Edmonds and Newsbud.

дезинформация

Vladimir Putin’s Ghost Soldiers Inside Syria :pinocchio:
_Watch Vladimir Putin’s Ghost Soldiers Inside Syria Online | Vimeo On Demand
February 24, 2018
In this Newsbud report, we will examine what has been referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s shadow army, or Putin’s ghost soldiers, who played a significant role in the Ukraine conflict. Downing a Ukrainian military plane full of paratroopers, carrying out combat operations and conducting assassinations. This shadow army is currently on the ground inside Syria, but the Russian government is denying any involvement.
 
Last edited:
Newsbud increasingly appears to be a cointelpro operation to the benefit of the DeepState PTB.
 
Newsbud increasingly appears to be a cointelpro operation to the benefit of the DeepState PTB.

Those were my thoughts too. I was reminded of what Laura said (years ago) that 'no matter who you are, what your interests, what your beliefs are, there is a website set up just for you to take you in and vector your thinking and attention into the way they want you to think'. Something like that anyway.

I am pretty disgusted with Sibel and her attacks on Eva and Vanessa and others. I've unfollowed her and newsbud on twitter and facebook.
 
I didn't know much about Newsbud or Sibel Edmonds until this thread was started, but that seemed like a petty response from Newsbud. Almost half the video was spent focused on one clip from infowars and exposing Corbett's apparent hypocrisy in using that as example, which granted, does seem off - but comes across as nitpicking ONE example that had almost no impact on the overall context of his report, where he provided a backstory and history. Plus, they made a lot of statements of "fact" without much context, which they did in their first video attacking Beeley and Bartlett, showing videos of different speakers and instead of hearing what they had to say, except for Barbara McKenzie, simply inserted what they supposedly said while adding in their own dramatic flare.
 
Back
Top Bottom