All you really need to know to see the falseness of the basic premises (that what is happening in Syria is a 'civil war', and that the US didn't play a key role in starting it) is encapsulated in the coverage of the effects,and reaction to, the various battles for control over cities. If it is the Syrian government forces, all the reportage is about the destruction caused by the battles, the suffering of the captive population, and not a single mention of the celebrations when the city is no longer in the control of those who fought their way into the cities in the first place. If it is the forces that pay lip service to Washington that are doing the fighting, the reportage is about the oppression and worse visited on the captive population by those who fought their way into the city, and (see the other story on this page) the celebrations of the liberation of the city is prominently covered.
Of course don't let the presence of not only large numbers of Sunnis in the SAA, and the formation of (volunteer) Sunni militias to back the SAA stop you from spouting off like someone absolutely certain that the Iraqis would 'welcome American troops as liberators'.
It should be noted that despite many searches of two separately gathered databases of basically every commercial or public radio broadcasts in the region (the one gathered and maintained by the BBC on behalf of British Intelligence, the other gathered and maintained by the CIA) during the time in question, no one, not even the supporters of the Israeli regime, has been able to document calls by Arabs for nonJewish Palestinians to leave Central Palestine.
When the man who was OK with deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, military trials for occupied civilians, population transfer into occupied territories, and brutal, often deadly responses to people trying to exert their human rights says that the regime he has done all that for has 'become' extremist, one has to wonder about the sanity of anyone who tries to portray the regime as moral, normal, or declares that opposition to the regime is immoral or rooted in ignorance.
From the point of view of the Apartheid regime, Iran's lobbying for international law to be applied to the regime does make it the sort of threat that Daesh is. And, from the point of view of the US and its ME axis of oppressive, anti democratic regimes, its support of pro democracy movements, and modelling of a democratic government that serves the interests of its population, rather than Washington Lobbies, is a plan and active campaign to take over the world, or at least a significant portion of it. So, despite the deranged nature of Netanyahu's (and the Republican 'leadership' in the US) positions and comments, they do resonate with significant parts of the American population, the same way that Roof's deranged positions and comments once would have.
Also Iran's substantial investments in solar, wind, and hydro power. That if one wanted to build a wind farm, using the closest source for the parts, anywhere in the ME, one would be buying from Iran, sort of makes the 'they have oil, the only real reason for developing non-oil power they have is as a front for weapons development' meme sound idiotic, doesn't it.
But, wouldn't you say a country that stuck to its principles that WMDs were so evil that even the threat of immenent destruction could not justify their creation even when faced with that threat of immenent destruction has earned a great deal of trust when it comes to possessing knowledge that could, theoretically, and with much effort that can be fairly easily detected, be turned into a WMD? If so, I will remind you that Iran had all the knowledge and equipment,as well as almost certainly a still to be destroyed remnant of the Shah's stockpile of chemical weapons, to answer in kind the WMD attacks by Saddam (attacks that were fully approved of by the US)at a time when it was fully reasonable to predict that Iran could not stand up to Saddam's army equipped and backed by the 'civilised world' unless it adopted similar weapons/tactics and refused to do so.
Does anyone see echoes of the Honduran 'judicial coup' in this Egyptian one? At least in Egypt the people are being given an opportunity to vote for someone other than merely another face for the same unresponsive system (though they no doubt suspect that the odds of their preferences not being reflected in the vote count are fairly high)
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
All you really need to know to see the falseness of the basic premises (that what is happening in Syria is a 'civil war', and that the US didn't play a key role in starting it) is encapsulated in the coverage of the effects,and reaction to, the various battles for control over cities. If it is the Syrian government forces, all the reportage is about the destruction caused by the battles, the suffering of the captive population, and not a single mention of the celebrations when the city is no longer in the control of those who fought their way into the cities in the first place. If it is the forces that pay lip service to Washington that are doing the fighting, the reportage is about the oppression and worse visited on the captive population by those who fought their way into the city, and (see the other story on this page) the celebrations of the liberation of the city is prominently covered.
Of course don't let the presence of not only large numbers of Sunnis in the SAA, and the formation of (volunteer) Sunni militias to back the SAA stop you from spouting off like someone absolutely certain that the Iraqis would 'welcome American troops as liberators'.
It should be noted that despite many searches of two separately gathered databases of basically every commercial or public radio broadcasts in the region (the one gathered and maintained by the BBC on behalf of British Intelligence, the other gathered and maintained by the CIA) during the time in question, no one, not even the supporters of the Israeli regime, has been able to document calls by Arabs for nonJewish Palestinians to leave Central Palestine.
When the man who was OK with deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, military trials for occupied civilians, population transfer into occupied territories, and brutal, often deadly responses to people trying to exert their human rights says that the regime he has done all that for has 'become' extremist, one has to wonder about the sanity of anyone who tries to portray the regime as moral, normal, or declares that opposition to the regime is immoral or rooted in ignorance.
From the point of view of the Apartheid regime, Iran's lobbying for international law to be applied to the regime does make it the sort of threat that Daesh is. And, from the point of view of the US and its ME axis of oppressive, anti democratic regimes, its support of pro democracy movements, and modelling of a democratic government that serves the interests of its population, rather than Washington Lobbies, is a plan and active campaign to take over the world, or at least a significant portion of it. So, despite the deranged nature of Netanyahu's (and the Republican 'leadership' in the US) positions and comments, they do resonate with significant parts of the American population, the same way that Roof's deranged positions and comments once would have.
Also Iran's substantial investments in solar, wind, and hydro power. That if one wanted to build a wind farm, using the closest source for the parts, anywhere in the ME, one would be buying from Iran, sort of makes the 'they have oil, the only real reason for developing non-oil power they have is as a front for weapons development' meme sound idiotic, doesn't it.
I would imagine the IAEA reports about where Iran's enriched material is.
But, wouldn't you say a country that stuck to its principles that WMDs were so evil that even the threat of immenent destruction could not justify their creation even when faced with that threat of immenent destruction has earned a great deal of trust when it comes to possessing knowledge that could, theoretically, and with much effort that can be fairly easily detected, be turned into a WMD? If so, I will remind you that Iran had all the knowledge and equipment,as well as almost certainly a still to be destroyed remnant of the Shah's stockpile of chemical weapons, to answer in kind the WMD attacks by Saddam (attacks that were fully approved of by the US)at a time when it was fully reasonable to predict that Iran could not stand up to Saddam's army equipped and backed by the 'civilised world' unless it adopted similar weapons/tactics and refused to do so.
Does anyone see echoes of the Honduran 'judicial coup' in this Egyptian one? At least in Egypt the people are being given an opportunity to vote for someone other than merely another face for the same unresponsive system (though they no doubt suspect that the odds of their preferences not being reflected in the vote count are fairly high)