by Phil Greaves

It is now well over two years since the Syrian conflict began. I for one, will no longer give credibility to the falsehood that this brutal conflict simply aroused itself from the Syrian Government’s oppression of peaceful protest. There were many peaceful protests in Syria, there was, and still is a widespread call for reform and change within the Syrian government. No doubt, there was also brutal oppression. But the critical element that has been dutifully removed from the narrative by our subservient western media: is the fact that radical Sunni militia (Some affiliated with “the west’s biggest enemy” Al Qaeda no less.) were attacking the Syrian Arab Army from day one. Those attacks greatly intensified; as US/Gulf propagated “opposition” elements conflated the two separate dynamics for their own political benefit.

Since over 100 Syrian Army troops (Named in state media, unmentioned in western press.) were killed in April 2011 alone it begs the question; who was killing them at this early stage? Once one delves a little deeper, and beyond the usual outlet it is easy to find evidence of armed gangs and attacks on checkpoints, convoy’s and military installations throughout the early stages of the conflict. Long ago many analysts (Not attached to dubious Washington or London-based “NGO’s”.) and a few politicians were warning of the ramifications of allowing Wahhabi propagating theocracy the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; with the archaic, oppressive, misogynistic, and outright autocratic promoters of the Muslim Brotherhood Qatar: the prominent role in supporting the so-called “rebels” in and outside of Syria.

These states (US clients), alongside NATO member Turkey; who has mainly facilitated the distribution of arms and funds, whilst harbouring said “rebels” on Syria’s border: were given “the green light” by the US to arm and determine who waged war in Syria in a supposed fight for “freedom and democracy”. A supposed future democracy which neither of these US clients has ever practiced themselves, or plan to in the future. Many knew this would only lead to a dramatic increase in the conflict and in turn spur the sectarian tensions within Syria. Why would western media deem it necessary, or in the publics interest to omit these vital facts? Simply because the vast majority of western “news” media is subservient to its corporate financiers, ergo: government. In the realm of Foreign Policy and ‘National Security’, to give western media any more credence than state media within the ‘axis of evil’; (Constantly ridiculed in western media.) is to omit (Or conveniently forget?) the barefaced, constant falsehoods that have plagued our so-called ‘independent media’, and in turn led us into wars of aggression. When in reality, these wars are about nothing other than hegemony and resource: not human rights and democracy.

The same few public voices that raised these concerns at the time were dutifully whitewashed from the public sphere. Media plays an ever more vital role in promoting the west’s wars of aggression. As governments and corporations start to fear mass unrest and upheaval within their own societies; alongside the huge rise in public communication and media sharing. ( Thanks to the internet, which currently every “developed” western government is trying to obliterate.) It is becoming ever harder for Governments to dupe populations into overt aggressive, hegemonic military operations against sovereign nations. This is not to say the publics opinion will dissuade western powers to enter such wars. On the contrary, several polls in the UK have shown that in the majority, the public are against arming “rebels” or intervening in Syria. A recent binational YouGov-Cambridge poll showed that only 16% of both US and UK voters were in favour of supplying munitions to the opposition. This is not a consideration with either Whitehall, or the Guardian’s editorial team.

With ever-expanding covert armies, unaccountable private military contractors and paramilitary intelligence agencies that western nations are building, and continue expanding. Alongside the growing encroachment into what becomes public knowledge: under “National Security” grounds. Western governments are adapting their subversion and have added small-scale insurgencies as a pertinent strategy, which now primarily fall under the doublespeak auspices of “the Right to Protect” or “Humanitarian Intervention.” These small-scale insurgencies are referred to in the western media as “rebels”, “revolutionaries”, “freedom fighters”, etc when attacking a Government and its apparatus our leaders would like removed. Yet when these same “freedom fighters” turn their western/GCC provided arsenal’s on western friendly targets: they are immediately labelled as “terrorists”. Indeed, there are many recent examples of this.

A prominent example arises in Libya. The same radical Islamic groups western powers armed and funded to illegally and brutally overthrow Gaddafi’s government; (Along with a six month 3,000+ NATO air strike campaign.) have since turned on their main donors not only once, but three times. These predominantly extremist forces first attacked the British Ambassador; then attacked the US “consulate” in Benghazi: killing the US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stephens in a supposed CIA “safe house”. ( Widely believed to have been stockpiling arms in Libya to send to the next “revolution” in Syria) and, recently attacking the French embassy. This western moral expediency is but a continuation of our governments recklessness, and the continual use of primarily Gulf propagated, fomented and funded radical Islamic forces to subvert, leverage, and ideally remove Governments within the middle east that are outside, or; unwilling to become part of the west’s economic influence.

The western media apparatus is currently engulfed in a coordinated campaign, to use what is highly circumstantial and dubious ‘evidence’ (the crucial parts we the public are not privy to) that the Assad government has deployed chemical weapons: “on its own people” as a pretext for further intervention against the Syrian government. Yes, we have been here before, and over a million Iraqi civilians at least half of them children; (that is a conservative estimate of total deaths due to US/UK led war, economic or otherwise against Iraq.) alongside thousands of British and US military personnel: paid the ultimate price for our Governments and their compliant media’s malfeasance.

When we scrutinise these “reports” for the “evidence” our diplomats and politicians speak of, it is hard to find anything other than speculation. But the speculation will persist, evolve and grow tenfold. The language will become stark the images shocking, and within a couple of weeks (…days?) the majority of uninformed readers and headline watchers will ultimately believe the claim without the necessary evidence. This is the role western media and its apparatus plays in the middle east. It is not designed to inform the western public; it is certainly not designed to bring about any understanding. The media is a mere tool within the western Military Industrial Complex to further the “legitimacy”, or, more appropriately: the public apathy towards the rapacious, illegal, aggressive and outright imperialistic military ventures undertaken by our governments throughout the region.

One wonders why this media campaign has taken a dramatic increase in the last week or so? Indeed, it was only a few weeks ago that the Syrian Government itself was calling on the UN to investigate alleged opposition use of Chemical Weapons, in response to an alleged “terrorist” attack on Government forces in Aleppo. The UN reluctantly obliged, but under pressure from the US the UN decided it would only investigate all claims of chemical weapons use across the whole of Syria; including the rebel claims of Government use. Considering the CIA’s habit (and UN complicity) of infiltrating supposed UN investigations for the benefit of the US military and Administration, while also considering the US (CIA) is a prime belligerent in this conflict: I don’t think its hard to fathom the Syrian government may be suspicious of these attempts to send UN investigators all over the war-torn country.

Why would the UN choose not to investigate what was readily available and choose instead to add invasive pre-conditions? In relation to the timing of this current media campaign, it is obvious. The Syrian Arab Army is currently on a nationwide offensive, and it is succeeding. In areas all across the country the SAA has retaken vital towns, villages and checkpoints. The Army is also currently opening up the once restricted supply routes and highways to Government strongholds in Damascus, and the coastal enclave of Latakia and Tartous. In Homs and the town of Qusair close to the Lebanese border, fighting has greatly intensified and is in danger of spreading to Lebanon. Indeed just this week, two prominent Lebanese Salafi Sheikhs declared Jihad upon the Syrian Government. This was supposedly in response to Hezbollah’s ongoing support of the regime. Again, what is omitted in this simplistic western narrative: is that Salafi fighters have used Lebanon as a key route into Syria; they have indeed attacked Shiite villages and inhabitants in the region for months. These attacks were the initial reasoning given by Hezbollah for its limited involvement.

Of course, this does not sit kindly with the narrative of “rebels” good guys, Hezbollah/Assad Regime bad guys: so it must be spun. All to the benefit of the greatest military threat to Lebanon, and if we are to believe polls; the greatest threat to the whole region: The US and Israel.

-###-

http://notthemsmdotcom.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/western-media-and-the-war-machine/

by Philip Greaves
notthemsmdotcom An alternative to the mainstream.