Loading...

The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria.

Loading...
The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria. - Hallo friend SMART KIDS, In the article you read this time with the title The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria., we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article baby, Article care, Article education, Article recipes, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria.
link : The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria.

see also


The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria.

      I have stated several times before that the conflict in Syria was World War iii. A blood bath that brought all the major powers into open conflict. The only difference between this world war and the other two was the fact the the slaughter was more or less contained to one specific region. The result was much the same, the major powers readjusted their areas of influence. Of course, as usual, this was at the expense of the civilian population, who suffered unimaginable misery, death and deprivation, as well as the total destruction of a country's infrastructure.
      Most of us agree that the reporting of this slaughter of civilians was distorted, massaged and trimmed to suit the western power mongers. We know or should know, that the mainstream media is the propaganda mouth piece of the rich and powerful, to facilitate their grotesque and greed driven agenda. It is always heartening when you find a reporter that ignored the handed out script and pried for themselves to find out what was really happening in this well orchestrated slaughter for power.
      The following are two extracts from a very detailed and informative article on the Syrian conflict. If you are interested in the truth of that crime against humanity, I can't emphasise enough, this is an article you must read in full.

The Secret History Of America's Defeat In Syria.
 
After years covering the "main battlefield in World War III," Narwani says everything you think you know is wrong.
By Patrick Lawrence.

As you’ve just suggested, Syria has long seemed to be a different kind of war, a new kind — a war fought with images, information and disinformation, true and false portrayals of events, people, organizations, and so on. Based on what you’ve written over many years — and from inside Syria, on the ground — I would think you agree with this.
In some ways, Syria wasn’t that different. All modern Western wars have been fought with manipulated imagery and disinformation. We call it propaganda and accuse the Nazis and Soviets of doing it, but the U.S. does it better than anyone. It’s literally the main tool in America's military kit: Otherwise, Americans would never accept the never-ending wars. There used to be laws forbidding the U.S. government from propagandizing the American people. The Obama administration undid many of those legal barriers. If you ever have a chance to read the U.S. Special Forces’ Unconventional Warfare manual, you will see how fundamental propaganda is to U.S. efforts to maintain hegemony. Everything starts and ends with “scene-setting” and “swaying perceptions” to prepare a population to support invasion, occupation, drone wars, “humanitarian interventions,” rebellion, regime change.
It was no different in Syria. The U.S. government imposed key narratives from day one — that Assad was indiscriminately killing civilians in a popular, peaceful revolution. Was this true? Not particularly. Eighty-eight soldiers were killed across Syria in the first month of protests. You never heard that in the Western media. That information would have altered your perception of the conflict, wouldn’t it?
The Syrian opposition used to burn tires on the tops of buildings to simulate shelling for TV cameras. Did you see that footage here? The only reason Syria seems like a “different kind of war” is because we had Twitter and Facebook and alternative media punching holes in Washington’s storyline every day — and because Syrians had the audacity to resist for eight years. You can’t keep up an act for eight years. People catch on.------
      ----  


Another area of interest is the question of when and how the opposition — supposedly unarmed at the start — came to be armed. The question of proportionate responses to violence comes into this, as you’ve just suggested.  
Elements of the opposition were armed from the very start of the conflict. We have visual and anecdotal evidence of weapons caches, armed gunmen infiltrating the Lebanese border, and “foreign” gunmen appearing in Daraa, the city [in southern Syria] where protests first manifested. In the early days, it was hard to prove this because efforts were made to hide evidence that the opposition had weapons — and anyone claiming so was instantly marginalized. But then the Arab League (which had suspended Syria and was therefore viewed as an impartial body) sent in an observer team that produced a stunning report — one you did not read about in the Western press. The observer mission detailed the opposition’s bombings and terrorism and attacks on infrastructure and civilians. 
I also know the opposition was armed from the start [March 2011] because of my own investigation and discovery that 88 Syrian soldiers were ambushed and killed across Syria in the first month of the conflict…. I have their names, ages, ranks, birthplaces — everything. Then in June 2011, over 100 Syrian soldiers were murdered in Jisr Shughour, in Idlib Province, many with their heads cut off, and nobody could dispute this anymore. Yet we continued to hear “the opposition is unarmed and peaceful” in the media for a good long while.
But you asked about proportionality, and to that I would simply ask: What if there were armed men in Washington who killed a few cops in the last week of December? In January, these unknown shooters began a campaign of ambushing American servicemen coming and going from their bases in Fairfax, Newport News, Arlington, killing 88 in total. Then, in March, over 100 U.S. soldiers are killed in a single day, half with their heads cut off. What is a “proportionate” response for you…? That answer about proportionality will be different for different people, I can assure you.
The next question is obvious. Who armed the opposition? Are we able to say?
We know today the U.S., U.K., France, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E. and Turkey are the main countries that armed, trained, financed and equipped the militants, and that they found intricate ways to avoid detection, especially at the beginning. Weapons came into Syria from all five border countries at different parts of this conflict — Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq, Israel — but I would say the most weapons probably arrived via Turkey, arms transfers that were very much coordinated with its NATO partners.
Read the full article HERE: 
Visit ann arky's home at https://radicalglasgow.me.uk


thus Article The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria.

that is all articles The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria. This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria. with the link address https://onechildsmart.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-wests-fiction-narrative-on-syria.html

Subscribe to receive free email updates:

0 Response to "The West's Fiction Narrative On Syria."

Post a Comment

Loading...