Shortly before 1PM EST,
Reuters headlined, "Russia, China veto UN resolution telling Assad to
The diplomatic "setback" came the day after "Syrian opposition
(elements) accused Assad's forces of killing hundreds of people (in)
Homs, the bloodiest night in the 11 months of upheaval in the
pivotal Arab country."
Like other pro-Western media, Reuters pointed fingers the wrong way.
Throughout the conflict, Assad was blamed for Western-backed
externally generated violence. In fact, he's more victim than
villain, but don't expect media scoundrels to explain.
Shortly before the Security Council vote, Obama called the Homs
violence "unspeakable," demanded Assad step down immediately, and
urged Security Council action against his "relentless brutality."
His public statement falsely claimed:
"Yesterday the Syrian government murdered hundreds of Syrian
citizens, including women and children, in Homs through shelling and
other indiscriminate violence, and Syrian forces continue to prevent
hundreds of injured civilians from seeking medical help."
"Any government that brutalizes and massacres its people does not
deserve to govern."
Since 1991 alone, Obama, Bush I and II, as well as Clinton, murdered
millions of Iraqis, Serbians, Kosovars, Afghans, Libyans, Somalis,
Yemenis, and many others ruthlessly and maliciously.
Today, Obama supports atrocities in Bahrain, Yemen, Somalia,
Colombia, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere, as well as Israel's
decades-long war on Palestine. Major media scoundrels ignore them.
Instead, they cheerlead imperial US wars. Power takes precedence
over truth and full disclosure.
John Pilger once called journalism the first casualty of war,
"Not only that: it has become a weapon of war, a virulent censorship
(and deception) that goes unrecognized in the United States, Britain
and other democracies; censorship by omission, whose power is such
that, in war, it can mean the difference between life and death for
people in faraway countries...."
In their book titled, "Guardians of Power,” Davids Edwards and
Cromwell explained why today's media are in crisis, putting free
societies at risk. It's because fiction substitutes for fact. News
is carefully filtered, dissent marginalized, and supporting wealth
and power replaces full and accurate reporting.
For over a century, The New York Times notoriously served as
America's lead print propaganda instrument. On February 4, it
headlined, "Russia and China Block UN Action on Syrian Crisis,”
Hours before the Saturday Security Council vote, "the Syrian
military attack the ravaged city of Homs in what opposition leaders
described as the bloodiest government assault" so far.
Hours later, "(t)he Security Council voted 13 to 2 in favor of a
resolution backing an Arab League peace plan for Syria, but the
measure was blocked by Russia and China (as a) potential violation
of Syria's sovereignty."
In fact, calling for "further measures" if Assad failed to comply
gave Washington and rogue partners enormous wiggle room for military
intervention. It also largely pointed fingers one way, absolving
Current Security Council members include the five permanent members
plus Azerbajan, Colombia, Germany, Guatemala, India, Morocco,
Pakistan, Portugal, South Africa and Togo.
On February 4, Russia Today (RT.com) reported:
"Russia and China were the only permanent Security Council members
opposing the draft, reminding others that it was not their place to
intervene in another country's domestic affairs."
Under international law, it's illegal. Russia's UN envoy Vitaly
"The co-sponsors of the resolution have not, in the wording of the
draft, taken into account that the Syrian opposition must distance
itself from extremist groups committing acts of violence or called
on states with the ability to use their influence to prevent such
As a result, "(t)he Russian delegation was forced to vote against
this draft resolution. We seriously regret this outcome of our joint
Attending a Munich security conference, Foreign Minister Sergey
Lavrov diplomatically condemned the resolution for making false
accusations and "taking sides in a civil war."
In response, US envoy Susan Rice said she was "disgusted" by vetoes
"prop(ping) up desperate dictators." French ambassador Gerard Araud
said "history will judge (Assad supporters) harshly."
In Munich, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a notorious war
goddess, said, "To block this resolution is to bear the
responsibility for the horrors on the ground in Syria."
Throughout his tenure as UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan was a
notorious imperial tool. So is Ban Ki-moon. He called vetoing the
Security Council resolution "a great disappointment to the people of
Syria and the Middle East, and to all supporters of democracy and
He said doing so "undermines the role of the United Nations and the
international community in this period when the Syrian authorities
must hear a unified voice calling for an immediate end to its
violence against the Syrian people."
Ban serves at the behest of Washington. He hasn't disappointed
supporting years of imperial crimes, as well as Israel's against
Palestine. No wonder Gazans pelted him with shoes during his
February 2 visit.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) UN director Philippe Bolopion called last
October's vetos by Moscow and Beijing "irresponsible," but today,
"after weeks of Russian diplomatic game-playing and in the middle of
a bloodbath in Homs, they are simply incendiary."
More often than not, HRW speaks for power, not human rights. Amnesty
International also falls far short of its founding principles.
Urging Russia's anti-Assad support, it called on Moscow to back
Security Council actions against him instead of blaming
perpetrators, not victims. It also falsely accused Gaddafi of
Western-backed crimes. Libya's now ravaged. Will Syria be next? Veto
power does little to stop it.
A Final Comment
On Press TV Saturday, this writer said Washington prefers diplomatic
cover for planned aggression. However, with or without it, imperial
wars aren't deterred. In 1999, it bypassed Security Council approval
against Serbia/Kosovo. It claimed NATO authorization alone mattered.
Obama plans regime change in Syria and Iran. As a result, expect a
similar scenario to unfold.
Perhaps a false flag incident will precipitate conflict. What
Washington wants, it gets, using whatever pretext fits the plan.
With major media support, getting away with murder is simple as
bombs away. Expect it.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to
cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the
Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network
Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon.
All programs are archived for easy listening.