RT claims BBC stages Syria chemical attack to propagate war. [BBC Responds]

dirk100 said:

I've not mentioned nationality but I have about acting. And further points above which have not been answered. How exactly is the authenticity of footage not relevant? Especially with a backdrop of fakery that has already been exposed. I've merely asked for people to view it and give their opinion. But to those who would rather deflect they will always pull out the indignation card.

Click to expand...

by all means challenge eth authenticity of the footage - but as far as I can tell the authenticity has been determined and there is no actual doubt about it other than people saying they don't believe it - which is not actually evidence that it is faked.

No one mentioned the people playing dead in this video?

One guy was supposed to be injured yet he is acting more like a zombie than an injured person. Terrible acting


The other guy is supposed to be dead in his coffin, until he starts laughing and gets out the coffin. Faking a funeral... you couldn't make this stuff up

MikeC said:

by all means challenge eth authenticity of the footage - but as far as I can tell the authenticity has been determined and there is no actual doubt about it other than people saying they don't believe it - which is not actually evidence that it is faked.

Click to expand...

Is determining the authenticity even possible? Who do you think proved it to be genuine?

Although, I would agree this isn't the right kind of thread for this forum.

Dunno - but if you don't' know either way then how can you adopt either position??

"I don't know" is sometimes the accurate answer!

Geko said:

No one mentioned the people playing dead in this video?

Click to expand...

What about them?

Geko said:

One guy was supposed to be injured yet he is acting more like a zombie than an injured person. Terrible acting

Click to expand...

Have you seen a victim of a white phos or napalm attack before? How is he 'supposed' to look?

Geko said:

The other guy is supposed to be dead in his coffin, until he starts laughing and gets out the coffin. Faking a funeral

Click to expand...

Is that part of a BBC report and passing it off as a funeral? Are there a lack of actual corpses and funerals in Syria to the extent that the BBC need to stage some...?

What exactly are you claiming?

Landru said:

The opening post IMO violates the PGs

Click to expand...

In order to avoid this in future could you tell me what was wrong with the OP?

screamingwelp said:

In order to avoid this in future could you tell me what was wrong with the OP?

Click to expand...

Posting videos with no explanation or summary of contents or time-stamps for pertinent points is not helpful.

Here are the posting guidelines for reference:

https://www.metabunk.org/posting-guidelines.t2064/

1. Videos must be accompanied by a description of the video, identifying the claim made in it, with time location if longer than 1 minute. See the No Click Policy.

Thread title was "RT claims BBC stages Syria chemical attack to propagate war. [BBC Responds]" which I presumed both described the video and identified the claim?

I need to put this in the actual post as well do you mean?

screamingwelp said:

Thread title was "RT claims BBC stages Syria chemical attack to propagate war. [BBC Responds]" which I presumed both described the video and identified the claim?

I need to put this in the actual post as well do you mean?

Click to expand...

the title is pretty vague for people not familiar with the subject. one thing i would strongly encouarge is to quote the "person' you are accusing directly in the OP. I think quoting RTs exact words is the fairest way to go about things.

and as Pete said, a brief synapsis about what's happening in the video. as the "no click policy" says, people shouldnt have to click a link or watch a 12 mintue video to get the jist of what the claim and thread are specifically about.

the claim should include the evidence, didnt read the thread that close but if the "evidence" is that the reporter was edited that should be in the OP.

basically just keep readers in mind, very few of us will click on a 12 minute video (like i dont). but you want me and the other readers to know what your thread is specifically about and why RT is claiming what you put in the title.

you also want to write the 'debunk' in the OP if there is a debunk in that video or you have debunked the claim.

screamingwelp said:

Thread title was "RT claims BBC stages Syria chemical attack to propagate war. [BBC Responds]" which I presumed both described the video and identified the claim?

I need to put this in the actual post as well do you mean?

Click to expand...

We are looking for specific claims of evidence rather than general claims of hoax's etc...that and the "no click policy".

So, a quick summary of the video, including the specific claims therein would be useful.