Growing numbers of people worldwide are turning their Facebook profile pictures into solid red squares in an attempt to call attention to a new, deadly phase of the Syria war. The latest round of violence was marked by the bombing of a refugee camp near the Syrian border with Turkey, which resulted in 28 deaths. That attack was probably the work of the Syrian regime of President Bashar Assad or its ally Russia.
On the surface an even handed comparison, so long as we omit the context. But if we add in the context we find ourselves comparing a walnut with a watermelon.
The missing context is:-
Syria is defending against the USA and its well fed terrorist proxies ISIS and AlNusra.
There would be no war whatsoever if not for the USA regime change efforts.
The USA has no right to invade Syria, where as the Syrian government has every right to defend its territory.
Let us change the hats here, and see how it may feel from the other side.
Imagine that the war is not in Syria, but in the USA.
Imagine that the war is primarilly being waged by ISIS fed USA weapons via convoys ond AlQueda being fed weapons by air drop via the so called "free syria army", but the war is being waged by Latinos who are being trained and armed via Russia weapons convoys through Mexico and by Blacks who are given weapons via air drop.
Further imagine that rebel attacks are backed up by air power supplied by Russian jets.
Imagine that the rebels have taken over most of the Southern states and are pushing towards Washington. For the first time ever, Washington is actually fighting for its survival.
Imagine that millions of USA refugees are fleeing the war into Canada.
Imagine that it is obvious that the so called civil war never could have happened if not for Russian meddling.
Under these circumstances would you now hold Russian violence in the USA as being equal to USA violence in actual self defence?
Is this a crazy guy?
Yes, didn't our govt. "choose" him over his better qualified and saner brother years ago (Syriana, the movie)?
This is how propoganda sells the best. The person will take a meme such as "the total hyprocisy of the USA" and weave into the same narrative "matter of fact" mentions of the brutality of the other side ascribing to them actions without any evidence.
The reader who might also be outraged at the hyprocrisy of the USA on the matter than accepts the rest of the article as fact. This very much like all of those articles that start "when Muslim terrorists attacked the USA on 9/11 , the US response inordinate leading to the death of tens of thousands of innocents..."
Those "white helmets" have already been exposed as a CIA/MI6 backed psyops.
There also something very odd about "Syrian refugee camp bombed near the border with Turkey" and that photo in the article above which claims it was VERIFIED.
That is the picture of a city after a bombing . not of a refugee camp near the Turkish border. They have done this sort of thing before when they showed pictures of bombed out cities from old stock photos. Something also looks odd about the photo itself namely the bright colors of the persons in the foreground contrasted to all the grey drab of the buildings cars and the like behind.
I have only had time to watch the first bit of it. I must take issue with the initial question by Charlie Rose:-
"We have seen since I last visited you, the rise of ISIS ... We have seen the United States become increasingly concerned about ISIS" - Charlie Rose to Bashar Assad.
Given that USA weapons were being supplied to ISIS via convoys through Turkey into Syria. Given that went on over several years, Charlie Rose's comment is thoroughly dishonest.
I dont regard Senator MCain as a dove. Seriously he is a hawk and a nasty one, but I do welcome the admission in the Senate Arms committee regarding ISIS weapons/fuel convoys:-
Who is being concerned? The USA public may have been concerned about the rise of ISIS, but the USA government is the one that has fed ISIS as part of its efforts to overthrow the Syrian government.
I guess it depends on what the definition of IS IS.
The first American revolution started in Boston. We desperately need a second American revolution to start in Boston, only I would hope the second American revolution would be non-violent. If Trump is the next POTUS I could see it happening, because Hillary like Obama fools so many people.
You're really "on your game" today. Good ones!
If it is any consolation about the reception of this current bs propaganda piece,
the comments at TruthDig are just as scathing as these at CD, AND there are 129 (!) of them at this moment~~so, it would appear that at least the readers of these "liberal" sites will call out the propaganda pieces like this garbage from Sonali, (who ought to be ashamed of herself for being such a tool of empire!).
So what? Didn’t the US embrace Saddam (literally!) and provided him with chemical weapons to attack Iran? Wasn’t Noriega helping the US for years before Panama was attacked and he was captured and imprisoned at Miami? Even “Uncle Joe” became a monster almost as soon as WW2 ended, and plans for preemptive nuclear strike at the Soviet Union considered (it was put off only when, before it could be implemented, the Soviets had their own atomic bomb as well). In short, it’s not something new, supporting a person or country at one time and doing the opposite when circumstances made it possible. It’s something learned from the British and the US mastered it exceptionally well.
Neither one of them are saints. Neither is Ehud Barack Obama.
Basing your assumptions on "news" reported by propagandist Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is not only lazy journalism, but is the epitome of irresponsibility. Jumping on the anti-Assad bandwagon may get you brownie points in the liberal media, but it will do nothing to enhance your integrity or intelligence. You are a tool of the establishment and really ought not to be writing serious journalism. Here's what you need to know about US propaganda machine known as The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights: