Monday, February 15, 2016

Anne Barnard: when she explains the Syrian conflict to readers of the New York Times

"Syrian government forces and Iran-backed militias are trying to besiege the rebel-held section of Aleppo to starve the rebels into submission".  Of course, what she does not say is that ALL SIDES in the Syrian conflict use the same tactics in their wars. The only difference is what when Syrian rebels impose sieges, it is not a big story and there are no hue and cry in the Western media, and Western human rights organizations cheer the advancing rebels in those cases.
She also says: "The rebel groups that the West considers relatively moderate are strongest around Aleppo. But they are intertwined in places with the Nusra Front, "  So they are moderate rebels but they are aligned with Al-Qa`idah, which was behind Sep. 11. Is that what you are telling your readers? That moderates can be allies with Al-Qa`idah? And those moderate rebels: what names and slogans do they carry?
She says: "Both sides of the city have suffered indiscriminate shelling and water and electricity cuts. The rebel-held side is being pounded by government and Russian airstrikes and barrel bombs that have hit markets, schools and homes."  So both sides use indiscriminate shelling but you will only give examples about one side?
She says: "Coming from Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran itself, those forces recently broke an insurgent blockade around two isolated, pro-government towns, Zahra and Nubol."  She does not say how the last two towns were under tight sieges and starvation by the rebels. But by describing the towns as "pro-government towns", it erases the presence of civilians in the towns and justifies in the eyes of Anne Barnard the brutal and savage tactics of sieges--the same tactics used by the regime--against civilians.