Seeing the government in Damascus as too far to the left, Washington has been trying to orchestrate a regime change in Syria since at least 2003
February 9, 2016
By Stephen Gowans
Documents prepared by US Congress researchers as early as 2005 revealed that the US government was actively weighing regime change in Syria long before the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011, challenging the view that US support for the Syrian rebels is based on allegiance to a “democratic uprising” and showing that it is simply an extension of a long-standing policy of seeking to topple the government in Damascus. Indeed, the researchers made clear that the US government’s motivation to overthrow the government of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad is unrelated to democracy promotion in the Middle East. In point of fact, they noted that Washington’s preference is for secular dictatorships (Egypt) and monarchies (Jordan and Saudi Arabia.) [1] The…
View original post 4,188 more words
The Wall Will Fall 
Stephen Gowans’ impressive article should be essential reading for the newsrooms of the BBC and all journalists of the corporate media.
The former sentence brings a sardonic grin even to my face, and I wrote it.
Like almost every other major corporate media outlet, an editorial in today’s Guardian effectively calls for a pause in the bombing of Aleppo on ‘humanitarian’ grounds so the ‘opposition’ forces can be re-armed with better weapons, without seeing the irony.
What is particularly noteworthy is that the editorial does not call for an immediate halt to hostilities by all sides, which one might have thought at least one media outlet should do, despite its impracticability. Nevertheless, calling on just one side to stop is just as futile.
It also trots out same Western bomb good; ‘barrel’ bomb bad propaganda, even though the Russian military does not use barrel bombs.
Link to Guardian editorial: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/10/the-guardian-view-on-the-battle-for-aleppo-a-rebuke-to-america-and-the-world
LikeLike