Nov 3, 2011
"The  war on Iraq was portrayed in the U.S. as a war without casualties. Yet, on the first day of air strikes against Iraq (Jan. 17, 1991), the U.S. dropped explosives equivalent to the explosive power of the Atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Throughout the duration of the bombing, explosives equivalent to seven nuclear bombs were dropped, in addition to internationally banned biological and chemical weapons."
New York Times
, 28 February 1991
Flashback ... According to the London Evening Standard, a top British prosecutor has â€śwarned that Britons who travel to join the Syrian conflict will face prosecution and potential life sentences on their return.â€ť What the British prosecutor fails to address is that the British â€śfreedom fightersâ€ť are being recruited with the full support of the British government of Prime Minister David Cameron in defiance of UK laws. Does this mean that those who finance and recruit terrorists at the highest levels of the British government also â€śpotentially face life sentencesâ€ť as suggested by Crown Prosecutor Hemming? Or is Her Majestyâ€™s Government immune from prosecution? At no time in history the perversion of the truth has been so extreme. Once the NATO-led genocide on the people of Syria comes to an end, The Guardian and the entire British media establishment must be tried for crimes against humanity.
The ... Months after the events took place, Pulitzer prize winning journalists and others are finally reporting about the lies and manipulations of the US government regarding the recent chemical weapons attack in Syria. Far from shining a light on the true situation in the country, however, these reports continue to avoid the underlying causes and explanations for what is happening in Syria, and the forces that are behind it. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the Syrian war coverage of the mainstream media is not its underlying biasâ€”that was always to be expectedâ€”but how remarkably ineffective that coverage has been in convincing the public of the need for military intervention in the country. After nearly three years of relentless propaganda attempting to convince the public of the virtue of the terrorist insurgency and the incomparable evil of Assad, the seemingly inevitable march toward war in the wake of the Ghouta chemical weapons attack faltered after public opinion overwhelmingly came down on the side of non-interventionist policies. Perhaps reading public sentiment, many mainstream outlets even took to pointing out the media bias on the war and trying to retroactively position themselves against military intervention. This has to be credited to a remarkable, global, grassroots phenomenon of independent citizen media breaking through the layers of propaganda to provide true, cogent analysis of the situation on the ground in Syria. As the UN prepares to flood the Syrian conflict with another 6.5 billion dollars, tales of how â€śaid moneyâ€ť is ending up facilitating the activities of terrorists inside and along Syriaâ€™s borders suggest the UN is not trying to provide mercy for the Syrian people, but perpetuate the tragedy further still. Should the UN decide to truly care about ending the ongoing catastrophe that is the proxy invasion of Syria by foreign-backed terrorists, it could always point out the true nature of the conflict and hold those responsible for it, NATO and its regional axis, fully accountable. Anything less is but a criminal rouse meant to intentionally perpetuate the conflict and give the West yet another chance to end it on terms they find favorable.