Why I No Longer Support Newsbud
Two years ago, I was involved in the early stages of the development of Newsbud, an online news and media platform with the stated goals of being 100% people funded, unbiased, and non-partisan. My involvement, like that of many others, was short lived. Recently, I publicly made some comments about my change of heart regarding Newsbud, and I have also decided to remove nearly all content from this blog that promoted the organization*. As a result, I feel that I should explain why I no longer support Newsbud.
I have been hesitant to discuss my experience with Newsbud, and have told few people the details behind my decision to leave the team. It is not my intention now to pen a vindictive, personal attack on Newsbud or its founder, Sibel Edmonds. I know that I have readers who support Newsbud, and I’m not writing this with the goal of changing anyone’s mind based solely on what I have to say. People need to come to their own conclusions. I am writing this to explain why I no longer endorse the site, why it has lost credibility in my view, and why I feel guilty for promoting it and supporting it in its early stages.
Several years ago, the research I was doing for the novel I am writing led me to a series of interviews [no longer available at this link] posted on YouTube with James Corbett and Sibel Edmonds. That was how I first discovered Boiling Frogs Post, or BFP, and Sibel’s work. Her story in her book, Classified Woman, aligned really well with the sort of things happening in the plot of my novel, and I began to follow the work at BFP.
When Sibel announced the idea for Newsbud, I contacted her and offered to help any way that I could with the project. I explained that I didn’t have much to offer, I had no related experience, and wasn’t sure what I could do, but I wanted to help if I could. I knew that I can write, but at that point I had yet to even start my own blog. I don’t consider myself an expert of any sort, and I had never published anything.
I was surprised by the offer to be a regular contributor to Newsbud, and I jumped at the chance. First and foremost because I genuinely believed in the idea of what Newsbud was supposed to be, based on how it was presented. Also, because I was excited to get to know and work with Sibel Edmonds, who I had come to respect and admire greatly. And, of course, it was an opportunity to get published and earn some extra money.
Newsbud launched a series of Kickstarter fundraising campaigns, the first one on February 14, 2016. The goal of the campaign was nearly one million dollars, and ultimately it was unsuccessful. It was during this campaign that I experienced my first hint of doubt about the direction Newsbud was going.
It started with this article in which Sibel makes some startling claims. I was asked to do some research and fact checking on the suspicious letters discussed in the article after it was published. I researched, I made phone calls, I spoke by phone with an FBI spokesperson about the matter, I attempted to contact Sheriff Glenn Palmer. He never returned my phone call. I found a phone number for the person who sent the suspicious letters, and I passed the information on to Newsbud. I thought the logical next step would be to contact the letter sender but I was unwilling to do that from my private phone.
In the end, my research led me to the conclusion that there really was no more to the story than what had been reported in the local news, and with no comment from Sheriff Palmer, I couldn’t confirm his reported version of the event. I was unable to find any evidence that would prove his claims, or that there had been any sort of substance in any of the letters. I was also unable to find evidence that the letter sender was targeting Palmer specifically.
Pretty quickly I was informed that my conclusion wasn’t satisfactory and to stop researching the story. Shortly thereafter, this video of an interview with Dr. Fred Whitehurst was released. When that video aired, initially I felt that what I had reported to Sibel about my conversation with the FBI spokesperson was misrepresented. Much later, when I watched it again, I also felt as though Dr. Whitehurst was manipulated in the interview because he wasn’t given all the information. I didn’t understand why they did not mention any attempt to contact the letter sender, or Sheriff Palmer. So, I messaged my concerns to Spiro Skouras of Newsbud, and asked why they had pursued the story the way they did. I got no response from him that night.
Not long after, I received a request via email from Sibel to schedule a Skype conference call with her and Spiro. I don’t remember all of the ways in which I was informed that I had failed during that call, but I do remember the main point, that I had missed the big piece of the story. Sibel explained her reasons for that, and shared some links, and she was right, I hadn’t found what she had found online. Upon reflection, I didn’t see it as proof of her claims, though I didn’t say so.
Perhaps I did miss a smoking gun, perhaps Sibel knew much more than she had published in her article and video. However, what continued to bother me was that there was never any follow up, they never published any further evidence to support her startling claims. They never informed me, or publicly stated, that they ever tried to contact the letter sender. While attempts other than my own may have been made to contact Sheriff Palmer, there was no public mention of it from Newsbud.
After what felt to me like sensational claims that begged for further proof, that was basically the end of it. That left me feeling as though the purpose of the story was to draw clicks, to capitalize on the related media furor occurring at that time over the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation, and Sheriff Palmer himself. This would become a pattern I have since noticed repeatedly with stories discussed at Newsbud.
Unfortunately, I ignored my instincts. I still believed in Newsbud, and I didn’t want to admit that my faith in Sibel’s credibility had just taken a significant hit. I convinced myself that, with my lack of experience, I had screwed up, and I moved on. Newsbud launched a second Kickstarter campaign for a significantly lower goal, and with a very different team, because many on the original team had already left for reasons I didn’t fully learn until later. This time it was successful. This is when I began receiving payment from Newsbud, and I published an article a week for about two months.
Around this time, the attempted coup in Turkey took place, and Newsbud launched its “Confront NBC” campaign. I was supportive and helped to promote this because I felt (and still do) that it is really important for news outlets and journalists to retract erroneous reporting. I also agreed that the timing of the false information was suspicious with regards to the coup attempt. (Not to mention this very real problem.) But, the entire thing began to feel like a publicity stunt. Looking back, it felt like a publicity stunt that went too far, and felt uncomfortably too pro-Erdogan. And, it led to this attack on FAIR.org.
I was asked to email FAIR, and follow up with a phone call, requesting comment from them on the Confront NBC story, and also information about their sources of funding (something I would like to see more transparency on from Newsbud). I truly did not want to do this. I have a lot of respect for FAIR.org and other organizations that work to hold news outlets and journalists accountable. I was embarrassed to be involved in an attack on them. However, I made the call, and I’m sure I sounded like a complete idiot to the man at FAIR that I spoke with.
A Way Out
This was the point that I finally began to lose, or let go of, some of my belief in Newsbud. I realized I no longer wanted to tell anyone that I wrote for Newsbud. I increasingly felt that, in order to fit the mold, I had to find some sort of “conspiratorial angle” to everything I wrote for Newsbud, and even here on my blog. I was going along with things I didn’t always agree with, in order to stay with Newsbud. It felt dishonest, like I was putting on an act. I wasn’t being honest with myself. I wasn’t being honest to all the people I was promoting Newsbud to. I wasn’t being honest with Newsbud or Sibel either, because I didn’t address these concerns with them.
The final straw (or straws) came after I published this story here on my blog. I submitted a shorter version of the story to Newsbud, and initially was told it would be published. Later, I was told that it wouldn’t be published for several reasons. I was disappointed, but I understood that Sibel didn’t like the story and she had the ultimate say on what was published on Newsbud. I moved on. However, shortly after that, I received an email that finally ended my willingness to remain on the team.
In that email, Sibel questioned my recent sharing of a GoFundMe campaign by someone that she didn’t like, and she informed me that I shouldn’t be following a certain journalist on social media. Basically, what it came down to was that my behavior was reflecting negatively on Newsbud, and I was damaging Newsbud’s credibility.
I replied that I had no desire to cause Newsbud any harm, and if she didn’t want me on the team that was fine. It was a way out, and I took it with relief. I would be lying if I said that I wasn’t hurt by the things Sibel said to me, but I did not, and do not, have any desire to argue with her, or defend myself to her. It wasn’t worth it to me to be told who I could or could not follow, who I could or could not share support for, who or what I could write about. I had already watched other team members leave, even just disappear from the team, with no explanation. What Newsbud had become was absolutely not what I supported in the beginning.
Ironically, after I responded that I didn’t want to harm Newsbud, I was told my behavior not only reflected negatively on Newsbud, but on myself, that it would hurt my credibility. That was indeed true, but not about the behavior Sibel was referring to. What would reflect negatively on me would be to continue to support what I no longer believed in. Continuing to work with and promote Newsbud would hurt my credibility.
It is my opinion that Newsbud has gone the way of another well-known alternative media (infotainment) site that thrives on click bait, unsupported sensational claims, and false information. I know Newsbud has deleted negative and oppositional comments from their site in what looks like attempts to shield their supporters from anything contradictory. I know they asked numerous dissenting commenters to unsubscribe. I see no integrity in this. There are other things I could point to, but that and skepticism born out of my own brief experience working with Sibel, are the most important reasons why I no longer support Newsbud.
It has taken me a long time to decide to write about all of this. It took some time to admit to myself that the entire experience felt very cultish, and even longer to feel ready to admit it publicly. I held a cult-like faith in Sibel, and that affected my judgement. I don’t blame Sibel or Newsbud, I blame myself. At the time, as I was still trying to make sense of the overwhelming information I was searching through online, I was especially susceptible. But, I know that I have learned a lot from this experience. In the chaos of today’s news cycle, the fake news, the social media trolling and bot manipulation, and endless sites spreading misinformation for profit, my experience at Newsbud, even though I regret it, does have value for me.
The following, from an International Cultic Studies Association article titled, Characteristics of Cults and Cultic Groups, describes how I feel about my experience with Newsbud perfectly:
“…the group claims to pursue lofty goals (e.g., salvation, bringing enlightenment to the world for the sake of peace, or solutions to specific world problems and injustices), …but a close look at the group’s accomplishments will invariably show that these publicly proclaimed goals are not reached, or that they mask less noble goals, such as massing monetary wealth, gaining power and control over the followers, and feeding the leader’s need for adulation.”
So, when I saw this tweet which reads, “they’ve been throwing fits due to not making the cut when it comes to Newsbud,” I laughed. I knew immediately that I had the perfect title for this story. I didn’t make the cult, and for that, I am so thankful.
*This decision was made because I can’t in good conscience keep content posted that promotes Newsbud. If that bothers you and you want to know what those posts contain, just ask me. I’ve kept copies of them all. Also, I recently noticed that all of my work has been removed from Newsbud’s site, for which I am grateful. I have reposted most of the articles here on Seeking Redress.
Update 4/29/2018: the above link to the Dr. Whitehurst video no longer works. Here is a link to Newsbud’s report about the video. The video isn’t available there either.
If you liked this article and would like to support the author, click here.
33 thoughts on “When You Don’t Make the Cult”
“I know Newsbud has deleted negative and oppositional comments from their site in what looks like attempts to shield their supporters from anything contradictory.”
“I know they asked numerous dissenting commenters to unsubscribe.”
To be fair, my comment this past summer was a scathing one which I left after witnessing one too many times the dictatorial tongue-lashing she unleashed on numerous commenters who had legitimate questions or complaints. It mattered not the tone of those; with her, it’s all about control. So yes, using the term “cult” is spot on accurate and deserved. That those financial contributors had the audacity to question anything was wholly unacceptable. And believe it or not, I recently learned from one currently banned commenter that he’s still a paying subscriber!! So, they’ll take his $$$, but HIS voice is specifically unwelcome….and he’s okay with that. Wow. Oh well, such is the nature of cults, their charismatic leaders and the poor souls who trust them.
Thanks for the comment. I wonder if your comment at nb was part of the thread I watched disappear as I was reading through them. And banning comment from a paying subscriber is ridiculous.
Maybe so! At that time there were a couple dull threads coming to life due to unsanctioned opinions running rampant over some other conspiracy guy I’d never heard of. The scrubbing crew was busy, for sure. Regardless, kudos to the guy who started it and didn’t back down from voicing his frustration and sense of loss as to how the once-spirited atmosphere of BFP degraded into the lifeless, strictly-controlled Newsbud headed by an indignant queen bee and her obedient drone “Admin” (I’m paraphrasing, btw).
Yeah, the comments I watched disappear involved numerous responses from ‘admin’. I was amazed that others didn’t call that out at the time, but maybe anyone who might’ve was already banned, lol.
“[…]I recently learned from one currently banned commenter that he’s still a paying subscriber!! So, they’ll take his $$$, but HIS voice is specifically unwelcome….and he’s okay with that. Wow. Oh well, such is the nature of cults, their charismatic leaders and the poor souls who trust them.”
As awareness of Sibel/Newsbud’s shameful behavior reaches its saturation point necessarily aided by this, your account of your own unpleasant, learning experience, I have to say that re-reading this part of my comment months later makes me ill when I consider the hurt I may have caused this gentleman. A friend and I were talking the other day about it, and she suggested that he may have hung around simply because he valued and wanted access to the other reports. Duh. I can’t believe it didn’t occur to me. Perhaps it’s because every single audio/video report issued by Newsbud failed to load on my computer/device, preventing me from recognizing their appeal. Or maybe it’s my own uber-sensitivity to controlling behaviors I experienced and witnessed within evangelical christianity, and being disgusted with myself for being so easily impressed and even follow Sibel on the heels of my recent exodus. Whatever – it’s ugly and I regret those callous words. In the likely event he reads my harsh judgment, I hope he will also receive my sincere apology.
I was simply unsubscribed, disappeared, erased after making one single comment defending Dan McAdams.
I add the word thief when I describe the many attributes of miz Edmonds.
The only thing I can hold against Corbett is that he introduced me to BFP aka Newsdud.
Yeah, I unsubscribed from her during all that garbage in which she dragged Mr. Corbett into her drama. That was also the only time I’ve ever seen him upset to any degree at all. The fun part was (for me anyway) was that I know she read his comment section during that debacle, because she indirectly responded to some of my comments in one of her crazy rants. I refused to watch her anymore after that, but I hope she got mental help. Outside of the big pharma circle anyway. Don’t think I want her on SSRIs!
Up to the old comment-deleting trick again. Too bad I didn’t archive the one that compared Newsbud to Alex Jones.
This comment section has changed drastically since March 23, 2018…
“Angie, they expressed their wish to ‘unsubscribe’ and we fulfill our subscribers’ requests diligently and promptly. When you unsubscribe your latest comment(s) gets deleted automatically. Now, please let us know if you wish to unsubscribe, and I will immediately cancel your account and refund you. Thanks:-)”
Which doesn’t seem to always be the case, based on comments left on Corbett’s video response to Newsbud.
Here is a more direct link to discussion about the Newsbud site comments on Corbett’s site, since that comment thread has grown very long…
Makes it much easier to find in the 300+ comments now posted there. Thanks to the reader who brought that to my attention.
Thank you for this blogpost…. it has been a great help to read it and I am sorry you had to go through that experience but you seem to have dealt with it very positively…chapeau to you. 🙂
Thank you. It was certainly a learning experience.
With you on this one Katie,I gave up & also some others…it was all getting too theatrical for me…& the latest just confirmed most of what I had felt..shame,but there it is.Trust you are well.New day tomorrow. You did well..I have not been around much,but I appreciated the above…Take care & don’t look back. 🙂
Thank you. I always appreciate your feedback.
I agree, it is a shame. But I have happily moved on. 🙂
Excellent post, thank you. We need ‘whistleblowers’ like you because people such as Sibel and co, who lack all integrity, are attempting to undermine serious, principled journalism of which Vanessa and Eva are true exemplars.
I have always been intrigued about Sibel Edmonds and her whistleblower story from the early Alex Jones days, and now I am wondering what Newsbud is really about. Katie’s post is interesting. I can tell she’s a considerate thinking and I am wondering how someone this down to earth could get sucked into such a negative situation but Katie you say it pretty clear, it’s like a cult. And at the center of the this cult is the leader. This is rather more than a mere “feud between alt media” as some fence-sitters are saying on Twitter, rather this is an attack by Sibel Edmonds against actual journalists like Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett. The more I see of Edmonds in this story, she seems like a vindictive person, very bitter and bent on destroying people without giving a second thought about whether or not what she is putting out there is true or not. I regret to say it but there seems to be something evil about all of this. The first most obvious problem is with her ‘report’ dubiously titled: “Syria Under Siege: Guarding Against Wolves in Sheep Clothing” (in case Sibel and her sidekick Spiro Skouras haven’t yet mastered basic English syntax, it’s supposed to be “Sheep’s Clothing” not ‘Sheep Clothing’. Scary), which contains some pretty ridiculous if not libelous material in it.
Firstly, I have to say this video is pretty cringe-worthy. Even Alex Jones could stitch together a Franenstein like this one. Edmonds goes to make a number of outlandish claims, including one that Vanessa Beeley has plagiarized other journalists in her White Helmets reporting, which seems to be pretty solid reporting by all accounts. Edmonds seems like she recruited a gaggle of Beeley-Bartlett haters and trolls online, and there are plenty out there because this issue of the war in Syria has split the antiwar/left movement (a job which Edmonds seems intent to finish off here). Newsbud appears to have been fed private IM chats between her “sources” and Beeley-Bartlett. These sources who look like they used to be friends with Beeley and Bartlett, and have been recording screen shots of all their personal conversations before they fell out, before handing the IM over to Edmonds, where Newbud breaks a basic rule of real journalism – which is that publishing private IM chats between private individuals is unfair when shown out of the full context of the conversation. Anyone can cherry pick any of our private chats and make anyone look bad – which is why ethical journalists do not stoop that low as Edmonds and Skouras have. But real journalists know that, so we can only assume here that Edmonds and Skouras do not really know what they are doing. This is borderline criminal behavior too on the part of Edmonds and Skouras.
This part is mega bad, proper wacko. Edmonds and her various sources including a very strange old Australian women named Barbara McKenzie and others who claim that Beeley has stolen the White Helmets story off of others including well known bloggers like Cory Morningstar from WrongKindofGreen.org. Just a little googling shows that Edmonds and McKenzie are in fact lying, as Beeley seems to have credited Morningstar many times and as far back as 2015:
The Newbud video also infers that Beeley lifted the White Helmets story from the son of Hillary Clinton’s advisor Max Blumenthal. This claim would be easy to check if you knew how to operate a search engine, which Newbud seems to struggle a little with. Here…
Blumenthal Oct 2016:
Beeley Sept 2015:
That’s brainer there (which means even a person with half a brain could work that out). At this point you have be wonder what exactly Sibel Edmonds and Spiro Skouras are trying to accomplish here.
This is perhaps the most shocking bit of libel and smearing in Sibel Edmonds and Spiro Skouras’s ‘report’ where it infers that Prof Tim Anderson was responsible for the Sydney Hilton Bombing in 1978. Again, just a simple Google search and you can see what happened: “It later emerged that Seary was a paranoid schizophrenic and drug addict, who had planted the explosives in the car. Alister, Anderson and Dunn were released after seven years in prison. It remains one of Australia’s worst miscarriages of justice.”
Now you can chalk this up to incompetence, but this is the sort of things even a high school blogger couldn’t screw up, and Edmonds and Skouras seem to be forever espousing their great “ethics” and “real journalism” even 10 seconds on Twitter and in their many videos. Anyone who engages in this kind of malicious libel against a victim of a miscarriage of justice – should not be allowed near a keyboard, much less call themselves ‘journalists’.
Edmonds seems to have recruited another internet personality, an Irish guy named Richie Allen, to help make more accusations against Beeley-Bartlett. A quick search shows that Richie Allen is in partnership with David Icke.com and was involved in massive crowd-funding controversy called “The Peoples Voice” which appears to have burned through somewhere between $1 million and $2 million and was only on air for a couple months. Maybe NewsBud’s crack team can do an investigation into what happened with that disaster and where all that money disappeared to:
There are so many other humdingers in this Edmonds screed, but perhaps the most idiotic claim in this video claim by Edmonds and Skouras is the ‘evidence’ of some cherry picked tweets by Vanessa Beeley from 2013 claiming she was ‘anti-Assad’. What the genius crack team at Newsbud did here is to show tweets with text from headlines in the article links in the said tweet – and then claim these were quotes by Beeley. Any idiot could work this one out, which begs the question of what is the average IQ of the Newsbud viewer (or Edmonds and Skouras for that matter). This is a special kind of stupid:
It gets even worse. Then Sibel Edmonds makes up a story that Beeley and Bartlett embezzled $1.5 million from a NGO:
Again, if these self styled journalists can operation the google machine, they could find the original claim here by what looks like a classic Soros and Gulf monarchy joint venture:
Then further down the google page you can see this smear piece was easily debunked:
Not exactly “ethical journalism” here by Edmonds, more like the opposite. Edmonds really comes off like a mental case. I heard the buds in Oregon are really good, but you sorta have to wonder what Sibel Edmonds and Spiro Skouras have been smoking.
If only it ended there. Edmonds then goes on to try and blackmail the Ron Paul Institute by threatening to mount a “Veterans petition” protest against the Texas Congressman’s org all because their director would not submit to the will of the Edmonds cult and disown Beeley who apparently was on his show recently:
Here is Sibel Edmonds promoting her new ‘veterans protest’ against Ron Paul:
I feel sorry for the poor veteran you lent his face to her latest nutty campaign, maybe he was wooed by her “FBI Agent” and “Silenced Whistleblower” and “16 years journalist etc” resume that she is forever reminding us of every 2 minutes.
So who is Sibel Edmonds? As far as writing goes, Edmonds only claim to fame seems to be a fictional novel called “The Lone Gladio”. So her expertise is in fiction, one might ask if there is anything in her long running saga called “GLADIO B”. Here’s an interview with one of Sibel Edmond’s many ex-employees (she seems to to have a very high attrition rate) Pearse Redmond :
Then I saw this blog post which challenges the cult of Edmonds:
And this too is worth a read:
Sad to see someone who can’t grasp the irony of their own situation. Everything which Edmonds and her partner Skouras are accusing Beeley and Bartlett and other media outlets of – are actually the things which Newsbud itself is doing and by far much worse and more dangerous. Making up lies and running public slander campaigns is not “journalism”. It’s more like an intimidation racket by these two.
Based on what I have seen so far, any reasonable person can come to only one conclusion: Sibel Edmonds is a pathological liar who will say anything to damage and defame anyone she doesn’t like. Based on this video and all these Twitter rants accusing everyone imaginable of doing evil, it seems that far being being a standard bearer for “ethic journalism”, Newbud is acting more like a crowd-funded disinformation outlet which seems determined to do the work of the MSM gatekeeper Mockingbirds.
You can judge a tree by its fruits, and what Newsbud is producing is quite franking rotten and out of date.
I think the real question is: who does Sibel Edmonds really work for?
Thanks for the comment. While I don’t want to get into this spat Edmonds has initiated, I will agree that Newsbud’s “expose” you mention is tasteless, unprofessional, embarrassing, and ridiculous.
As for how I was sucked in, it’s exactly the cult part. It was an unquestioning belief in what Edmonds claimed, without digging for the proof of such claims, which I have yet to see her provide. I naively accepted her claim to credibility based on her whistleblower days.
Fortunately for me, a pretty big, national story (Malheur Refuge occupation by Bundys and co.) happened here in my neighborhood and I got to watch what actually happened, and then see how Newsbud spun it (along with others). The response I got for questioning the Nb narrative opened my eyes for sure.
This is why I chose to write this piece. Perhaps it can help someone else from naively and unquestioningly believing the unsubstantiated claims of charismatic alt-media (or any media) personalities, as I did with Edmonds.
Thanks for the effort you put into this letter Scottie
I too was taken in by Sibel. I’m not a reporter, just someone who wants to stay informed, and I am shocked at how easily I was fooled by her. If it’s any consolation, James Corbett just did an excruciatingly detailed expose of her smear against Eva and Vanessa. It is painful, but very helpful, to watch; the only video James has made which has made me cringe. Needless to say, I think her cult is now done. She has lost all credibility and for what? It simply makes no sense at all. Thanks for your article, Jim
Scottie G linked to this already, and I have linked to this interview in another comment thread on this site, but I’m going to put it here too. This is the perspective of another former Newsbud contributor for those interested.
I’ll add that Redmond has a whole lot of excellent interviews and work that is much more interesting than the above linked interview. His work is well worth checking out. I’m simply linking to this one here since it’s relevant.
Hey, Pearl, what was the name of the conspiracy guy you never heard of?
Does anyone else get the impression that Sibel has been brainwashed to self destruct and discredit her early work? I had always wondered why they didn’t just off her. Maybe this was the plan all along?
Sorry, I’m racking my brain, but can’t recall.
James Corbett debunked her. The video about Vanessa and Eva is the beginning of Newsbud self destruction https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6IqyfDfImI
I appreciate, result in I discovered exactly what I used to be having
a look for. You have ended my four day lengthy hunt! God Bless you man. Have a nice day.
I read the comments and here is my story:
I donated $200.00 because i was very very impressed with Sibelius and her story.
Finally I was disgusted sudden support of Erdogan. I was shocked at the blaming of Gulen and his network. Although we do not need Gulen in this country we have one hell of a problem that the Clintons left us. I wrote my comments initially to Sibelius to discuss exactly what Gulen did to overthrow the government and what is the difference between Erdogan and Gulen. She never wrote me back!.. I questioned Sibelius on her comments”Turkey is a proud country and the USA cann’t mtreat Turkey like that etc etc etc. I wrote to Sibel and said everyone is proud Pfizer’s their country not just the Turks and what about the people of Erin who are the recent victims of Turkish agressioon don’t they count has human beings. Don’t they have the right to liven their lives in peace and not be attacked by Turkey. I got no answer from Sibel. Then I went public on her website. I asked her in public. And I sent links of muslim clerics who slammed Turkey. I posted articles by Turkish journalists one such “ISIS was in Turkey in 1974”. Then I questioned heron th pastor situation. I asked Sibel to give us real proof. Sibel answer back.
She removed my access to the website by removing my ID. I wrote to news bud admin 5 times before I go an answer basic that I was removed.
Next I asked for my $200 back 5 time and no response from SIbel.
I consider Sibel is an agent of the Erdogan gov. And nothing else. I consider her a fraud and fake.
Someone in the comments above mentioned the fake conspiracy theorist person they never heard of- Pye Ian, is that the one? A quick google search shows him as being a Russian agent /having affiliations of that sort and he is a regular writer for Newsbud. That’s….rather… disturbing. All of that aside I enjoyed this post, thank you. There’s a dearth of information on Edmonds & how she ‘runs’ things on her site. I noticed on several occasions how appalling she was to a few people who deigned write comments on stories that weren’t a$$ kissing drivel. After an odd rant she asked more than one said subscriber to ‘cancel’ membership. Business must be that good, eh? Entirely unprofessional of her to do this. And , to be frank, trashy to have such a low brow emotional reaction to… a comment or two that didn’t even broach trash talking, definitely not violating bounds of decency? I will tell you this: She is a garden variety narcissist. Pure and simple. Don’t be too hard on yourself for being taken in by her glib superficial charm. But, like all narcissists, the mask invariably slips. And I’m glad when it does because watching her lose her temper over imaginary slights is quite sportive. She’s an utter joke as is her site. Anyone who considers writing for that site ‘work’ needs a real job.
I apologize, I seem to have missed your comment till now. I too saw her asking people to unsubscribe, some of that is linked to above in the comments, unless those threads on NB’s site have been removed entirely. Wouldn’t surprise me, that seems to be another standard NB operating procedure, delete things that call the site/editor-in-chief into question.
I’m wondering if the fake conspiracy person referred to in the comment might be George Webb, just based on the timing of that comment and other conversations happening at the time. I could be wrong. I don’t know anything about Pye Ian, he joined after I was gone. But to be honest, I find any Russian connections to sites like NB concerning.
As for people considering contributing to NB, I don’t think it’s much of an option anymore anyway. Seems it’s now just a one-woman-show there, for the same price as when it had multiple contributors.
Thanks for your comment.
I mention Newbud in a post I’m building for my blog (A Yappy Trade Barrier) and in that mention I refer to Sibel and Spiro specifically. Wanting to get the spelling of Spiro (or Spirou?) right, I visited the site. I don’t see him there. I’m curious whether he had had enough of Sibel’s fakery and left. Or maybe he didn’t. I am disappointed to see that Douglas Valentine is a supporter. Does he agree with Sibel about Eva Bartlett et al?
I appreciated the above story but I couldn’t follow it because it was not really explained. Links are fine, but we need explication.
I don’t know why Spiro Skouras (correct sp) left Newsbud. They parted ways around the time Edmonds moved to Turkey, I believe.
As for Valentine, I don’t know that he is actually a NB contributor. It is my speculation, based on observation not any inside knowledge, that it is standard MO at NB to keep people listed as contributors unless they publicly cross NB, or its editor-in-chief, or they ask to be removed from the website. It’s entirely possible Valentine doesn’t even know he’s still listed there.
I have no idea what his opinion is of Bartlett, etc. While I found Edmonds’ attack disgusting and lame, I don’t personally find Bartlett entirely credible either.
I’m not sure what further explanation I could offer in my story. I had no desire to get personal, I just wanted to point out what I saw as basically a grift so that others could hopefully avoid it. Incidentally, at some point, Edmonds changed NB up once again and it is apparently now basically a one-woman show, I believe for the same price as when it had multiple contributors.
Feel free to drop a link here when you post your piece, I’m interested in giving it a read.
Thanks for the reply. If I can find an email for Douglas, I’ll email him to enquire. Good point about him possibly not even knowing.
“Progressives – part 5” / https://arrby.wordpress.com/2020/02/01/progressives-part-5/