NYT Syria BashingBy Stephen Lendman
Times editors find new ways to disgrace themselves. Since conflict erupted in March 2011, they wrongfully blamed Assad for Obama's war.
He's vilified for US-backed death squad atrocities. He's held responsible for terrorists blocking aid to hundreds of thousands of displaced or entrapped Syrians.
Times policy is consistent. It's outrageous. It points fingers the wrong way. It's standard practice.
Managed news misinformation substitutes for honest reporting and opinion. Legitimate journalism is sacrificed in the process. It's verboten.
Syria bashing continues. On February 10, Times editors headlined "The Message from Homs," saying:
Evacuating "mostly women, children and the elderly (is) pathetically incomplete." UN officials brokered a humanitarian pause in fighting.
"At best, the evacuation is likely to save only a fraction of the civilians in danger."
"Thousands more remain in Homs, and millions more around the country are under attack and being denied food, medicine and other necessities."
Syrian Red Crescent workers are deliberately attacked. Terrorists bear full responsibility.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman AK Lukashevich blamed "militants for attacking aid convoys and ceasefire violations. Times editors blame both sides.
They largely blame Assad. They've done so consistently throughout three years of conflict.
They blame "Russia's slavish allegiance" supporting him. They discussed a Security Council resolution aimed at "pressur(ing) (both sides) to allow organizations delivering humanitarian aid to operate freely."
They left unexplained what matters most. Syria is Obama's war. He launched it. He continues it. He bears full responsibility for mass slaughter, destruction, and humanitarian crisis conditions.
Assad is wrongfully blamed. He's gone all out to protect Syrians. He's battling thousands of US-supported terrorists. Blaming him for their crimes doesn't wash.
An estimated nine million Syrians are displaced. They're in dire need of aid. Assad wants it supplied. Terrorists block it in areas they control. Don't expect Times editors to explain.
They want Assad ousted. They want Syrians having no say. They want pro-Western transitional governance.
They want Syria turned into another US-controlled puppet state. They want its sovereignty destroyed. They endorse an outrageous Security Council resolution.
It addresses humanitarian aid. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said:
"It is absolutely scandalous that there have been discussions for quite a while and that people are still being starved every day, and so along with a number of other countries, we will present a resolution at the UN along those lines."
Russia justifiably condemned it. Its UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin voiced confidence it won't pass.
"This text won't have any practical or encouraging effect on the situation, and, on the contrary, it will undermine humanitarian efforts," he stressed.
It largely targets Assad. It escalates political tensions. It threatens sanctions. It obstructs delivering vital aid. It risks direct US intervention.
It presents a 15-day deadline to comply with Western demands. According to Churkin:
"They tried to convene a meeting but we didn't find it necessary."
"They thought the meeting was to be devoted to discussions of precisely this text but we think it's hopeless."
Blaming Assad for insurgent crimes obstructs humanitarian efforts.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov condemned the Security Council resolution. He called it one-sided.
It's detached from reality, he said. Washington and Western allies want Russia and China pressured. At the same time, they avoid condemning "terrorist activity," Lavrov added.
The draft resolution was leaked to the press. Doing so targeted Russia and China.
It one-sidedly "condemns the widespread violations of human rights and humanitarian law by the Syrian authorities..."
It downplays US-supported death squad crimes. It's "all parties" language largely blames Assad. It does so wrongfully.
It "demands that all parties immediately put an end to all forms of violence (and) violations of international humanitarian law and abuses of human rights..."
US-backed death squads bear full responsibility. The resolution ignores what demands stressing.
It "demands that the Syrian authorities cease all aerial bombardment in populated areas..."
It wrongfully claims they "indiscriminate(ly)" use weapons in civilian areas. It ignores Assad's responsibility to protect Syrians from terrorist invaders.
It "demands that all parties, in particular the Syrian authorities, immediately end the sieges of" Homs, Aleppo, Yarmouk, and other areas.
It ignores death squad terrorists' full responsibility. It turns a blind eye to Assad's efforts to help entrapped Syrians. He's going all-out to liberate them. It lies claiming otherwise.
It "condemns the continued arbitrary detention and torture of civilians in Syria, notably in the prisons and detention facilities of the Syrian authorities, as well as (their) kidnappings, abductions and forced disappearances..."
It wrongfully blames Assad for US-supported death squad crimes.
It high-mindedly wants "impunity for violations of international humanitarian law" ended. At the same time, Western drafters bear full responsibility for gross violations of what they condemn.
It wants Assad held responsible in the International Criminal Court. They want him wrongfully charged. They want Western perpetrators absolved.
They want business as usual continued. They want what Russia and China won't tolerate. Or Syrians dependent on Assad for protection.
Samantha Power is Washington's UN ambassador. She's one of many Obama scoundrel officials.
She's morally and ethically unfit to serve. Her husband Cass Sunstein is an unapologetic neocon.
She consistently points fingers the wrong way. She ignores genocidal US crimes. She endorses them. She backs Obama's war on humanity.
She supports ravaging and destroying Syria. She's ideologically over-the-top. She disgraces the office she holds. She's pushing for passage of a resolution from hell.
Doing so would endorse force against flouting parties. It would target Assad. It would be pretext for US lawless aggression.
Waging it would entirely ravage and destroy Syria. Russia is going all-out to prevent it.
The University of Denver's Center for Middle East Studies endorses policies demanding condemnation. Nader Hashemi serves as director. Danny Postel is associate editor.
Times editors gave them feature op-ed space. They took full advantage headlining "Use Force to Save Starving Syrians."
They blame "(m)ilitary forces - mainly the army of (Assad)..." They wrongfully call him largely responsible for "preventing food and medicine from reaching trapped civilians."
"This moral obscenity demands action by the international community," they say. They urge "coercive measures."
They wrongfully call Vladimir Putin "a major obstacle." They blamed him for three Security Council resolution vetoes. They ignored his determination to prevent likely US-led aggression.
They maliciously said his "geostrategic calculations and Mr. Assad's coldblooded recalcitrance cannot be allowed to stand in the way of thousands of Syrian civilians eating."
They ignored US-supported death squads' responsibility. The urge military intervention against Assad. They endorse lawless aggression.
They're mindless of escalated slaughter and destruction. They ignore making crisis conditions far worse.
They don't care. They want "sieges...broken by any means necessary." They outrageously call some anti-government insurgent groups "democratically oriented."
They want air power supporting them. They want all-out war. They couch it in "Responsibility to Protect" mumbo jumbo.
The way invoking it ravaged and destroyed Libya. They want Syria mauled the same way. They want Assad put on notice. They want him given 48 hours to agree to Western demands.
They want bombs away if he balks. They want US-backed death squads largely left unaccountable.
Imagine Times editors publishing this trash. Imagine permitting what demands condemnation. Imagine featuring it. Imagine supporting wrong over right. Imagine backing imperial aggression.
Imagine turning a blind eye to death squad invader crimes. Imagine consistently pointing fingers the wrong way.
Imagine endorsing greater Syrian suffering. Imagine supporting genocidal war. Imagine defending the indefensible. Don't expect Times editors to explain.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at email@example.com.
His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
|Donate to Rense.com Support Free And Honest Journalism At Rense.com||Subscribe To RenseRadio! Enormous Online Archives, MP3s, Streaming Audio Files, Highest Quality Live Programs|