Originally Posted by MFCT

The only thing this reporter is doing is telling a story. If he's going to take the time, trouble, and expense to travel to Syria to the alleged chemical attack site, and question people there at random, why not question them on camera? That way, we wouldn't have to merely take him at his word.

I mean, he may be honest and he may be telling the truth. But this is a pretty big news story to do all these dozens of interviews with people. And it just so happens that it slips his mind to get any of those interviews on film. Isn't that typically what reporters do?