Tuesday, April 18, 2017

The New Allegations Against Syria Using Chemical Weapons

We had it before: red lines against the use of chemical weapons, certainty that the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad is responsible, and calls to punish him, or at least remove him from power, as if peace and democracy will flourish when we remove him...
Just like with many other issues before, we don't need evidence, we have to believe what the USA or other Western leaders are telling us. Even if there is no logic in any of the allegations, the Western mean-stream media (MSM) does an excellent job in convincing us that what they tell us is the truth. No matter how many times we have been lied to by, e.g CIA or pundits with obvious agenda and history of lies, we have to believe them because "they know", or they "have seen the evidence".
I am tired of arguing on issue after issue, in conversation after conversation, that we need evidence and we need proof before making judgments or rush into actions. I am tired of asking where the USA/Western actions lead us?
The hold of the MSM on the public opinion is so strong, that whenever I try to give another perspective, I find myself looking like a "conspiracy theorist" or an idiot. No matter how uninformed the other person is, or how well informed I feel on any issue, the reality is that the propaganda does its job - people form an opinion and accept the MSM "logic". Whatever argument or perspective I try to give, people fall in line behind the Western policies, and do not realize how all reasons for defending "our (Western) side" are loosing their meaning when we commit evil or illegal acts, such as wars...
OK, enough complaining. For those who can read, I will give a few links on the most recent use of chemical weapons in Syria. A good place to start is this article, which gives some historical background, summarizes the theories about the incident, and discusses the logic behind them. And here is an article that questions the legality of USA's rush into action. Isn't that the job of the MSM to ask these questions? Instead of asking these questions, the MSM proclaimed that Trump just became president after firing the 59 Tomahawks into Syria!
Why peace activist and anyone who questions the system and those in power have to go to the alternative media? What was the purpose of a free media? Why is the Western MSM so uniform on foreign policy issues? Why aren't we disturbed that the MSM acts as a propaganda outlet for those in power - justifying their illegal actions, instead of questioning them? Why is the European media so much in sink with the USA media giants? Why is Swedish media presenting so one-sided picture of the Syrian conflict, relying on information from the "moderate rebels", and ignoring or disbelieving the only Scandinavian peace activist that went to Syria?
When we listen to the Western MSM, pundits, or politicians, they often point to the the 2013 use of chemical weapons as the previous incident in which Obama showed weakness because he did not enforce his "red line". I have not met anyone, who knew that this incident was later proven to be a "false flag attack", i.e. an incident committed by the so-called "moderate rebels" on civilians in their territory in order to blame Assad and get the West involved in the conflict. Back then, the MSM did precisely what it does now - blamed Assad without proof, relying on people that wanted regime change in Syria for decades, and they repeated it so many times that it is the accepted "fact" nowadays. Back then, I relied on alternative, but reliable sources, like this one, and was saying to everyone that the truth might be different, but how can people believe me and disbelieve their favorite newspaper or TV news show?
Am I a "conspiracy theorist" for relying on alternative media? Yes, a lot of the alternative media promotes conspiracy theories, but that's why we have brains - to think and process the information we get. That's why I trust Consortiumnew.com instead of PropOrNot.
Can anyone read the sources I cite and call me a "conspiracy theorist"? How can any reasonable person read the articles I give above, compare them to any "analysis" or "report" on the same issues in the Western MSM and tell me that I rely on "fake news" websites, "conspiracy theories", or "Russian propaganda". I actually wonder how can any sane person continue to rely on the MSM after reading any of my sources? The articles I suggest are examples of serious journalism, or professional analysis, relying of facts, and presenting various points of view. The MSM on the other hand, are full of propaganda and bias. I wonder, how can people continue to rely on NYT, WaPo, and the rest, after being lied so many times?
For those who have the stomach for "Russian propaganda", here is Chris Hedges interview on RT, with Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton, who publish on Alternet - a site I've never heard before, but which we should follow, if we don't want to be blinded by the MSM.
I don't know what more to say. I am trying to read less news because I want to preserve my sanity, but whenever I go to the news, I keep my critical attitude because I have no doubt that we are living in very dangerous times and we are subjected to propaganda beyond anything I've seen during the Communist era.