Did you see Natalie Nougayrède’s latest humanity failure?
After bringing us the latest rumours about Putin’s health, the Guardian serves us with another bunch of hearsay, which carries as much credibility as the newspaper has managed to preserve since it became a neocon mouthpiece.
What is Ms. Nougayrède’s column based on? A SINGLE PR event by a “highly disinterested speaker” (“stark and eloquent defender of the Syrian revolutionaries”), providing unverifiable claims, wishful “what ifs”, and just plain misinformation. Like the suggestion that had Assad been ousted, the rag-tag opposition would have stabilized the country (by probably killing hundreds of thousands of alawites and Christians).
Back to “The west is appeasing Assad while he massacres Syrian civilians and spares the butchers of ISIS”. Read “Washington’s stooges can’t even stage a semblance of authenticity” as a viable and supportable opposition.
With Assad forces mounting ever more successful action against ISIS*, retaking cities from the terrorists, the lies in Western media grow stronger. Now that Aleppo seems the next anti-Assad fortress to fall, the drumbeat gets as deafening as possible.
Don’t underestimate the dark side of this noise. It often aims at concealing the truth about the degree to which Syria is contributing to the struggle against terror. Whatever the people and government of Syria are doing and suffering to that effect, Washington and its satellites are adamant: Assad must go.
And he just might. Only to get us back to a much more gruesome round of “what ifs”.
Thank God for Guardian’s much better informed audience. As usual, reading some of the comments is more educating than spending one’s time making it through the rather thick narrative of the masters of this world.
*This news link is another example of lame propaganda. A weasel would probably eat its tail out of envy, reading about the success of “the unidentified, probably Kurdish” anti-ISIS fighters. The picture, however is quite revealing.