Sunday, August 07, 2016

How the Guardian newspaper reports about Syrian war: cheerleading for Jihadis

Notice that Guardian instead of the referring to the Jihadis by the Jihadi names of their groups, as in Nusrah (which did most of the fighting in Aleppo) refers to them simply as "rebels":  "Soon the rebels were sharing pictures of abandoned artillery and a smashed portrait of President Bashar al-Assad on Twitter".  They almost want to call them "secular Jihadi rebels".  And then they quote a guy who does not report a chemical attack but he predicts a chemical attack: "“We expect revenge bombing by the regime, including, possibly, chemical weapons,” said Zaher Sahloul, a Syrian-American doctor who coordinates medical aid in the city."...And notice the tone of coverage: "Still, for the rebels, it has been a remarkable triumph against the odds.".  If those Jihadi rebels were fighting Israel, such language would have led to the dismissal of the reporters using such language.  And then the paper has a tribute to Al-Qa`idah: "That rebranding put the group in a strong position to capitalise on last week’s campaign, particularly if it can consolidate a victory that casts it as a champion of Aleppo’s battered civilians."  And then the reader is invited to not judge the Jihadi terrorist groups because the Guardian wants them to know that the regime is worse: "has set disturbingly extreme opposition groups against an ever more brutal government."  And the paper tells readers that Syrian regime bombs indiscriminately but can't get itself to say the same about the Syrian rebels: "Rebels have deployed “hell cannons” – crude artillery using gas cylinders – that have also been called indiscriminate."   Have also been called? They can't get themselves to call them indiscriminate?  And then the Guardian introduces a new term for Jihadi terrorists: they are merely conservative: "But many of the groups fighting there are conservative Islamists, and moderates are worried that for this assault they have gathered around Jolani’s group."   And notice that in the brief sections about parties of the war in Syria it does not mention that Ahrar Ash-Sham had a major role by Al-Qa`idah in the founding.