i had a very civil interchange witb baker last bread about the syria posts that appear regularly on the board
the poster responded too and suggested i check his sources so i did - which as other anons haveposted is "douthfront" - when one searches "southfront" for independant info and news scant info is available as almost ALL the results are links to and form and by southfront.
Ok anons though certainly not proof of bias we all know that is NOT a comforting sign. there was one independant review by https://mediabiasfactcheck.com
i checked the founder and he appears to be a full on establishment academic - however i checked several MSM orgs on his site and he did list CNN as "far left" and fox news as "center right" so that was accurate - he lists southfront:
CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Notes: South Front claims to be non-profit and non-partisan, but is mostly a right wing site that presents some biased conspiracies. Certainly not the worst conspiracy site as they balance with real news reporting, but not trustworthy enough to list anywhere but here. (8/1/2016)
So IMO opinion this supports my criticism and suspicion about these syria posts - that is they are too programmed slick and exhaustive and reported andposted too regularly to NOT have a specific agenda behind them - the best shills ALWAYS have mixed reporting - mostly credible but always with some "hidden" narrative - i called shill and stick with that - others anons have posted much the same so i far from alone on this.