.. person, position - or policy? ...
.. Anne Barker is back ...
.. dare I say it: 'barking mad?'
Subtitle: The 3 Ps as above, then ¬P, ¬C & ¬R; let's see.
The 'Meister' MEP Anne Barker is back, apparently full of beans. Whether the beans are 'merely' metaphorical or of the musical-fruit variety is a question best answered on the evidence.
Another P and a C: so-called 'professionalism,' so-called 'credibility' as in gap; '¬' = not.
More (metaphorical!) map-wiping?
The trigger item:
Iran threatens to destroy Israel if attacked
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker
Posted September 29, 2009 08:02:00
«But Iran's Defence Minister Ahmed Vahidi has warned of Israel's demise if it does, saying the result would be "the Zionist regime's last breath".»
More detailed item:
Iran's missile test a warning against Western interference
Anne Barker reported this story on
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 07:19:00
«AHMED VAHIDI (translated): Definitely, if that happens which of course we don't predict, the only result of it would be the acceleration of the final breaths of the Zionist regime and its transient life which is already numbered will come to an end very soon.»
Possible Barker (intermediate) source item:
Iran: Attacking us will expedite Israel's last breath
By Haaretz Service and Agencies
«Vahidi, a former commander in the elite Revolutionary Guards, said that in the event of an Israeli attack its "lifespan, which is today coming to an end, would be speeded up."
He added that the "Zionist regime", the term Iran uses for Israel, was on a "slope of destruction."»
Probably Barker's actual, or root-source item:
Israel, Saudi Arabia, US, UK Join Forces As Iran Fires Nuclear Capable Missiles
By Joel Leyden
Israel News Agency
«Jerusalem, Israel ---- September 28, 2009 ..... As Iran test fires missiles on the Jewish Holy Day of Yom Kippur - nuclear missiles capable of hitting Israel, Saudi Arabia, Europe and US bases - Saudi Arabia has granted the use of their air space to Israel to take out Iran nuclear facilities.
Vahidi, a former Revolutionary Guards commander, said that in the event of an Israeli attack its "lifespan, which is today coming to an end, would be speeded up."
He added that the "Zionist regime", the term Iran uses for Israel, was on a "slope of destruction".»
[The Israel News Agency disseminates direct news feeds from the Israel Government Press Office, Prime Minister's Office, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Israel Ministry of Defense, the Israel Defense Forces, the Israel Ministry of Trade and the Israel Ministry of Tourism]
From Iran, possibly the true source item:
DM: Israel closing to its collapse
9/28/2009 4:46:49 PM
«IRI Defense Minister said the Zionist regime is closing to its collapse.
Gen. Ahmad Vahidi stated that Israeli officials threatening words of attacking Iran's nuclear facilities is a sign of their growing terror.
Gen. Vahidi ruled out possibility of an attack by the Zionist regime and said if this happened that would hasten collapse of the regime.»
As for the musical-fruit, Barker's veracity is a question best answered on the evidence.
Fazit: Speaking of credibility brings another word into play: responsibility. The last word here: vis-à-vis the sheople, and IMHO as usual and of course, Barker demonstrates *none*.
PS My own partial analysis (all should do their own):
In writing any headline, there should be some basis in fact.
Q: Is Barker's headline "Iran threatens to destroy Israel if attacked" justified on the info she provided? On any of the info cited? On any info at all? Or only on someone's sick fantasy?
As in proving a lie, one must provide checkable, accessible quotes.
Q: Are either of Barker's quotes checkable?
A: No; at least, not by me at time of writing. Of course I tried - that's how I built my 'evidence trail.'
In writing any item, any single lie puts the whole into (terminal!) doubt.
Q: Is this statement "As Iran test fires missiles on the Jewish Holy Day of Yom Kippur - nuclear missiles ..." - and here, we are looking especially at the last two words in their full context - true?
A: Absolutely not! Comment: This item comes direct from Z-propaganda central. As such, the info is not merely 'suspect,' as a 'default starting position,' any and all of it may be strongly suspected of being outright lies. That's exactly what the Zs do.
The 'best' one may say of any propaganda is that it is a distortion of the truth, when not outright lies. The only reason to lie or to deploy propaganda is to hide or distort some truth - inconvenient to or destructive towards some policy or action. It is only logical, that something hidden is not in the sheople's interest, otherwise why try to hide it? Ergo, both lies and propaganda are totally undemocratic. When the AusBC does so, they are being traitors to their remit – which is to honestly & completely inform us, we the voters.
The 'original' map-wiping, Holocaust-denying, the evil allegations made on or behalf of the so-called 'West,' via and/or by the corrupt & venal MSM, including publicly financed broadcasters like the AusBC, all have a similar modus operandi, being based as they are on deliberate falsification of the source materials or some crooked translation of same.
Q: Cui bono; who benefits?
 MEP = Middle East Propagandist.
 credibility n. 1 being credible. 2 reputation, status.
credibility gap n. apparent difference between what is said and what is true.
credible adj. believable or worthy of belief. [Latin: related to *credo]
Usage Credible is sometimes confused with credulous. [POD]
full of beans
1. Energetic; frisky: The children were too full of beans to sit still.
2. Badly mistaken: Don't believe him; he's full of beans.
AusBC & propaganda (Anne Barker)
Posted by IDHolm at 11:51