Friday, 16 December 2016

Do not trust the mainstream media on Syria


Scepticism is a much under-rated virtue. I don't know what is happening in Aleppo but counsel you not to believe the papers and least of all The Economist.
Syria shows how the old Cold War ideas of left and right mean little. Vanessa Beeley, who is a self-financed independent journalist, recently returned to Damascus from Aleppo, is left--wing, passionately pro-Palestinian and opposed to US/UK/NATO policy in the Middle East. That means opposing the rebels. Not coolly objective then, but she is on the ground in Syria and not, as far as I know, a paid stooge.
We read yesterday claims that women in Eastern Aleppo are choosing suicide over rape. But what evidence is there of this? The claims smell like propaganda to me.
Miss Beeley is very sceptical, 
"Because in East Aleppo there is no 3G, there is no wi-fi, there is no electricity. So I’d like to know how these sources are able to get this information via Skype connection to organisations – I’ll use that term loosely – like CNN, BBC, Channel 4. I would very much like to know how they achieve it and how there’re able to do that in East Aleppo. Unlike the corporate mainstream media, I have been in East Aleppo for the last three days, therefore, I’m giving you eyewitness testimony unlike your mainstream media that has not been there and relies upon spurious activists – like the White Helmets, who are funded by every single nation that has a vested and declared interest in regime change in Syria. That is your reliable source. Or perhaps the ‘Aleppo Media Center’ – French Foreign Office funded…"

In The Independent, on the other hand, we read this.

"Non-combatant activists recorded their harrowing accounts and shared over social media, including Twitter and WhatsApp.
We spoke to the last activists in Aleppo. They're waiting to die. “We are [given] only two deadly choices: Death or displacement. Both of them are heartbreaking,” said English teacher Abdulkafi Alhamdo in a tweet at dawn. "

Why is displacing rebel activists shocking? This happens after your side is defeated in a battle. 

And why is the Independent relaying their line uncritically? Non-combatant activists are, by definition, propagandists for the rebels, part of the rebel forces, who are in many cases Al Qaeda or other Islamists.
Whatever the truth on the ground, the latest article in the Economist, "The lessons from Aleppo’s tragic fate: When interests triumph over values terrible things can happen", is also misleading propaganda. I quote:
GROZNY, Dresden, Guernica: some cities have made history by being destroyed. Aleppo, once Syria’s largest metropolis, will soon join their ranks. Its 1,000-year-old Muslim heritage has turned to dust; Russian aircraft have targeted its hospitals and schools; its citizens have been shelled, bombed, starved and gassed (see article). Nobody knows how many of the tens of thousands who remain in the last Sunni Arab enclave will die crammed inside the ruins where they are sheltering. But even if they receive the safe passage they have been promised, their four-year ordeal in Aleppo has blown apart the principle that innocent people should be spared the worst ravages of war. Instead, a nasty, brutish reality has taken hold—and it threatens a more dangerous and unstable world.
The Economist no longer seems reasonable, but ideological, idiotic and Neo-con. You'd think the rebels were simply brave democrats and liberals, but, though Assad is a tyrant, the rebels are not, any longer, heroes. 

Boris Johnson and the British government are as intellectually lazy as the Economist. Why?


  1. I have no idea of the truth but I just came across this. "During CNN’s coverage of newly liberated areas of East Aleppo on Wednesday afternoon, CNN anchor Kate Bolduan (who cried profusely over staged ‘Dusty Boy’ Omran image) spoke to her correspondent Fred Pleitgen by telephone (offering no real images, so it’s impossible to verify if Pleitgen was actually in East Aleppo as CNN claimed, more than likely he was not), and Bolduan refers to Pleitgen as “the first western journalist inside East Aleppo,” which is in itself a lie, as RT’s Lizzie Phelan (who is British and therefore western) was already reporting from the East-West green line in Aleppo since late Monday. CNN was characterizing the liberation of East Aleppo as a “humanitarian disaster” as theatrical Bolduan then gushes at the end of the segment to Pleitgen, another polemic along the lines of, “Thank you Fred, it’s so great we have brave journalists like you to show the world what’s really going on…” All that after CNN has, for the last 4 years straight, been spinning and completely misrepresenting events on the ground, and presenting reports by Clarissa Ward which appear to glorify terroist suicide bombers and various “rebel” terrorists (Al Nusra, Arar al-Sham, Nour al-din al-Zenki et all) occupying east Aleppo, effectively giving additional PR support to al Nusra-led efforts. Ward is flanked by another US asset promoting jihadist extremism, Bilal Abdul Karim, together producing what are clearly staged reports, alongside CNN’s endless airing of unvetted, staged White Helmets imagery – and passing it off to the viewing public as authentic video and photos supplied by nameless “Syrian activists”. Throughout the west’s proxy war against Syria, CNN has only ever reported the rebel/terrorist perspective, shamelessly portraying militant terrorists as “moderate rebels” and freedom fighters, while systematically demonizing any Syrian or Russian who is defending the nation state of Syria."

  2. Another good article. I like your narrative vooice

  3. "Do not trust the mainstream media..."

    Do not trust the mainstream media

    Enjoyed the article, too. Do not trust the mainstream media