Eva Bartlett's border crossing journalism showed at long last the people’s perspective of the Syrian war against terrorism. Bartlett talks figures and proportions, and expands your desk research with facts that she documented as a witness on site. Her stark observations have upset an entire media industry. But she engages in dialogue, and she documents her observations in detail; a stress test for integrity and coherence. Bartlett is outspoken about social injustice and inaccurate media. Such candid engagement can be seen as a bonus. An heretic in journalism will be challenged and has to work hard. Taking position means you invite the scrutiny of critics. The transparency of partisanship helps any curious critic find the full spectrum of insights for a comparison to effectively find consistency and facts between inconsistency and falsehood.

Bartlett has exposed a tradition of lazy research and poor journalism in prominent mainstream-media of this century, the Neo-liberal era. But now she seems to be subjected to a smear campaign for lack of a better argument. Observe her fact finding ability and analysis, while she politely shatters a bastion of pretentiousness:

Compare this well-documented single engine press mosquito to a corporate newscaster from CNN where fact-checking is often entirely absent, as the news is served as it was delivered by media affiliates or special interest groups - often through an uneducated mouthpiece or an establishment associate. (Who knew for instance Mrs. Amanpour married a US State dept. PR-professional? That Anderson Cooper was trained by the CIA? That Mr. (big media) Murdoch himself (and Dick Cheney, …) has a stake in occupied Golan - co-owning mining firm Genie.) Who’d thought state agencies took such a deceptive role.)

Mind you, a free press is also free to ignore the truth. A free market does not guarantee a balanced flow of relevant information in public channels especially if the public is the product - for the advertisers. Our corporate media have too often parroted the War party (Neocons), and their afilliates in the military-industrial complex. That is exactly how the Iraq war could develop and be waged on faulty intelligence (…according to regretful WashPo and CBS journalists, 2004). Unfortunately that failure is not a thing of the past.

Bartlett’s reports of Syria have countered a media narrative that has been leaning on assumptions for lack of reliable source contacts. For lack of insurance Western media would not send journalists to Syria. Her determination to go off-limits to find the facts, and her measured, nuanced choice of words seem to reveal a passion for truth. What is credible or not credible was explained by Eva Bartlett herself when she scoured a media colleague for ‘'Building conclusions on allegations, citing dubious and unknown sources, time and again… One, two times maybe, but every time? Not credible."

I’d say, hats off for a courageous investigator who has shed a light on an issue littered with deception, perhaps as complex as the Vietnam war was in the time of Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon papers (1971).

What is the norm ‘credible’ mean here, in the context of a war zone and ongoing propaganda war? How ‘credible’ are MSM reports? In fact, most of what we hear or see about Syria is one or other form of propaganda. The point is that many people are not aware of it, and think that MSM presents them ‘credible’ reports. But in most cases, there aren’t reporters inside Syria, and their actual sources are activists or people linked to militants involved in the struggle, who want to paint a negative picture about the Assad government, and often make false accusations (chemical attacks, attributed by them to Assad army, while most evidence points to militants themselves having used and fabricated chemical weapons, etc.).

As has been exposed by Vanessa Beeley and other, the ‘White helmets’ are actually a fake organisation. This can now be substantiated and proven by witness reports of people from liberated Aleppo. They were siding with the terrorists (Al Nusra) and were only occupied with filming footage for their propaganda, and never cared about the people. There have been witness reports about how the terrorists mistreated the population and that medical and food supplies were kept for themselves and not distributed amongst the people in need.

Because Vanessa Beeley and Eva Barlett (and also lookup Tulsi Gabbard, a US democrat respresenter who went to Syria and spoke to many Syrians) actually have been in those conflict zones, I find their reports more credible then those of the MSM who base themselves on the propaganda of the terrorists or organisations allied with them (‘White Helmets’).

They DO report that part of the conflict (the conflict as seen from the perspective of the Syrian population), that the MSM has simply neglected, and since the media reports are so biased, their focus is on providing evidence of how these media reports were false and/or biased, because we have often been mislead, and they have provided credible evidence for their claims. More credible at least as the MSM coverage of the Syrian conflict.

So, in light of this, the real question should be: How credible is the news coverage by the MSM on Syria?

Eva are not really one to promote and be proud about.

… I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

She has no relevant education. She is known for spreading conspiracy theories long before SMO. She is pro-syria, pro-north Korea, pro-russia. So in other words she hates the US. She is labeled as fake news on social media. She have been outed as being paid partially or fully by Russia. She have no meaningful awards that I can find… and this is the source some are proud of sharing? The total lack of source critic is disturbing.

I guess that people as her deliberately target conspiracy theorists, since they do not care who you are as long as you say what they want to hear. An easy target to rip-of.

The only people who would list her as credible, are the ones desperate for somebody who tells them what they need to hear in order to live with themself.

Eva Bartlett is not a journalist, at least not a serious one. She´s an activist who defends Assad and Maduro´s brutal regimes. She purports to give an “alternative” coverage of the crisis in Syria, Venezuela and Palestina, but there´s no “alternative” coverage there, it´s just biased support for those regimes. She peddles conspiracy theories about the “MSM” (main stream media) while collaborating with RT, as if RT were not a “MSM”, which it is, and also a propaganda outlet of Russia. I was pretty disgusted by her claims of a young girl being used by White Helmets, Channel 4, Snopes and others have debunked her lies and exposed her for what she is, a manipulator of news to serve the Assad regime.

She is credible when it comes to her coverage on Syria and Palestine. But she is completely wrong on her approach to Venezuela, worst is that when you confront her with evidence, she just blocks you, so she doesnt like to be confronted, just applauded.

Here's my story , shes been my heroe for the last 3 yrs. , I have defended her views and her statements fiercely about Assad, Syria and Palestine and I still do. I support the BDS movement. I dont support nor like what USA did in Syria, Irak nor Lybia . I dont support nor like Israel . I don’t follow MSM , I stopped paying attention to MSM since they lied about WMD in Irak long time ago.

I'm a costarican, I've been close to Venezuela all my life (40yrs.), I have Venezuelan family, had Venezuelan classmates, Venezuelan friends and my country had welcome hundreds of thousands of them through out the last 20 yrs. She defends Venezuela current government with the same passion she defended Assad and blames ‘the empire' for the Venezuelan crisis.

I'm not a left nor a right , I have a brain and my brain will tell me without fanaticism what position to take each time . I'm 1000% democratic and will always fight for the right of the people to choose their government, through clean , free and legitimate elections.

It's just not the same. Latinoamerica is not the Middle East , we have a factor in LA call Cocaine. A gram of cocaine cost $100 or more in USA and Europe, it costs less than $5 in our countries (and who buys only one gram of cocaine ? Nobody) . Then the tele evangelists scammers and ‘prosperity churches’ everywhere washing $ and brains, while getting their hands deeply in politics (my country almost elected one of them as president, and Brasil’s new president won because of them.) . Then we have corruption, wich is usually the right and the left making dark deals together .The line between left and right political views in Latinamerica is extremly blurry. There're a lot of examples where the left and the right are best friends when it comes to corruption and/or drugtrafiking. There re the drug cartels in Colombia , Venezuela, Central America and Mexico and those guys are the real rulers , they are behind the governments independently if they are right or left.

She blocked me just because I was trying to confront her position on Venezuela with evidence and facts , not to defend USA of course but to make her understand that the reality in Venezuela had a lot to do with corruption and drug trafficking from their own government. She went from being my hero to being a simplistic close minded fanatic in one second, even though I still think her work on the middle east is legit.

Venezuelans had been lied for 20 yrs, they dont believe in lies anymore . I used a twitter link she provided on a post where one of Maduros guys explains (lies) on how the power outage was supposedly produced , so I pointed out that 100% of all the comments in that post/link she provided ( roughly a thousand ) , were Venezuelans demanding the guy to stop lying. Sorry but a 1000 comments cant be all trolls and out of 1000 comments I couldnt find any that supported the guy or what he was saying.

Another fact is they(chavez/maduro) always talked about an ‘anti-empire' revolution but it happens that USA had always been their #1 oil buyer, isn't that contradictory ? Other fact Chavez daughter, Maria Gabriela, is the richest woman in Venezuela and one of the richest in the world, is that a coincidence? Other fact , Chavez closed “radio Caracas tv" on 2007 along with other TV and radio outlets which provoked the student movement in 2007. Other fact Chavez expropriated and broke almost 1400 companies and about 500K had to close or leave Venezuela in the last 10 yrs. Other fact , Venezuelans claims their electric power system dont get the proper maintenance by the government. Other fact , Venezuela oil production is now 1/3 than 20 yrs ago. Economic and social indexes , Venezuela has the highest hyperinflation and 2nd murder rate in the whole world . A Venezuelan dies every 20 mins through violence and around 4millions had left most of them with nothing. The largest most dangerous neighborhood in LA is in Caracas, Petare and they also protest and die protesting against Maduro. Other fact the Lima Group which my country and US are part of , is not supporting a US intervention in any way , so this “us intervention” idea it's probably another game of words by Maduro. Cuba owns the electoral list of voters and also their intelligence. The ‘economic' sanctions of USA, I read all the sanctions and they were targeted to specific persons on the Vzla. government that were being prosecuted internationally for drug trafficking and/or crimes against humanity, it said nothing about not letting food or medicines in. They have ‘El Helicoide’ a dark prision where they torture people who's against the government, something in the lines or worst than Guantanamo. From April to August of 2017 after more than 6500 protests in the streets (huge ones) against the government, through 134 days and almost 200 dead, the people were able to elect the National Assembly and Guaido as its president.

Her and a lot of her followers view is of a world divided on left vs right , rich vs poor, white vs black , etc.. in LA the large majority is mestizo (we all have white, native and black in our blood) , large majority of us have to struggle to make it, we don't have food stamps nor unemployment benefits as ppl in USA, Canada and Europe have. Left and right are the same sh when it comes to drugtrafiking and corruption.

She and a lot of her fans are simplistic because if you criticize Maduro then automatically they think you support an USA intervention, and that's silly. People with a brain dont need to support A just cause they are against B. World at least in LA is not black and white it's all gray. She is also simplistic to think that LA is the same or play under the same rules as the regions she knows better. If she wants to be credible she needs to be open to confront facts and evidence. She says Guaido is a US puppet ignoring he is a socialist, president of national assembly, elected by the Venezuelans, doing what the constitution written by Chavez demands him to do, in art. 233., to be in charge of the country temporarily while legit elections can be held.

A follower she had from Venezuela (who as most Venezuelans are against Maduro) gave her specific hospital names for her to go visit while in Caracas and she didnt want to go just because he was against Maduro , so at least in LatinAmerica , while she keeps on ignoring facts and blocking people in social media who confront her with facts , she is NOT credible.

VENEZUELA LA MAYOR BENDICION

There are some journalists who have provided nuanced coverage of the Syrian conflict: covering stories harshly critical of the role of jihadists and Assad, in the war. Eva Bartlett with her vocal support for the Syrian government isn’t one of them. Her work falls in the activism side of the spectrum of reporting, like a whole bunch of ‘commentators’ who are mistakenly referred to as “independent journalists”.

In the above photo she is seen shaking hands with, Syria’s ambassador to the UN.

She focuses on representing only one side of the conflict rather than the other sides, often peddling questionable claims. Here are some links if you’re interested in hearing an alternative point of view.

FactCheck: Eva Bartlett’s claims about Syrian children

FACT CHECK: Syrian War Victims Are Being 'Recycled' and Al Quds Hospital Was Never Bombed

Not in the slightest. Just another biased tool who LOVES Assad, Putin and the like and carries water for them ad nauseum just because they’re anti-US, while pretending to be “big-time anti-imperialist leftists” lol

One of the most-reflexive, EASY “positions” in this day and age. Hell, Grayzone and dumbshits like Max Blumenthal have probably “made a good living” w/ this knee-jerk nonsense. I’m a leftist myself, but I will *never* carry water for a neoliberal, far-right AUTHORITARIAN ASSHOLE like Assad or Putin! Like, if “terrorists” in Syria kill civilians, that’s one thing, but… to pretend like “only” certain militant groups ‘do that’, while acting like Russian and Assad military forces “are always the good guys”, is just comical and NAIVE as all hell!

A true leftist doesn’t ‘carry water’ for far-right, neoliberal, authoritarian regimes just because, “Well, the enemy is the US or some groups supported by the US (at least, at one time).” At the very least, you CALL OUT BOTH! BOTH suck. Fuck em. Don’t ‘pick sides.’ It’s not “class analysis” nor “communist” in the slightest.

Also.. insofar as the notion that practically ALL of the rebel groups- esp. in the beginning- fighting Assad in the SCW are/were “far right terrorists and Islamists” lmfao. Not even close, esp. if you count the FSA! Of course, in latter years, it may well be true that, to one degree or another, the more-brutal, less-scruply groups like ISIS “subsumed” or “weakened/took over” the moderate groups, but.. this is far diff. from claiming, “Everyone who takes up or took up arms against Assad is just a chaotic right-wing shit-disturber, since MOST-EVERYONE in Syria LOVES ASSAD and has no problems w/ him whatsoever” (citation needed). And if “everyone” loves Assad at him, then… why does he so clearly need to DEFRAUD every upcoming election, with *ridiculously-high reported “electoral win percentages”*, such as 90% or 97%. lol. Obvious bullshit… Even Putin’s election authorities don’t dare report *that* much margin.