Finally! The BBC Suggests a False Flag Hit in Lebanon
Yes, they buried the lede. That's two things I learned in the newspaper business: Don't bury the lede, and don't spell it "lead". "Lede" is an inside-newspaper term. So the BBC buried the lede about the Lebanon hit, but in this case they had no choice. This article falls under my theory of how news organizations really work to put topics out there that the reporters suspect are true, but can't address openly. Why? The powers that be in their own corporate structures don't want them to go there.
Read this BBC story and you'll see a text book example. It discusses the strange lack of motive Syria had in this recent assassination in Lebanon. Could this have been a false flag hit by the Neo-Cons? They sure advanced their agenda more than Syria did. Of course, using the term "false flag" would imply too much knowledge of this dark world, so the BBC reporters didn't bother. But they did imply it, which is all the freedom most corporate services are allowed.
That's the real news in this story: "Absent a Syrian Motive, Lebanon Hit Seen as False Flag Operation". Now read the article and see how carefully the BBC is with this topic. It's buried so far down that it's almost comical. I can just see the editor saying, "All right lads. You buried the lede, and that was wrong. But it's better to bury the lede than lose our bloody jobs. At least we've put the story out there. Now let's see what happens.
BBC NEWS | Middle East | Killing plunges Lebanon deeper into crisis